[AusNOG] Understanding the WHS responsibilities when served a LAAN by a Telco

[Nick Brown]

Even if the relationship between the carrier & the land or site owner is amicable, the carrier should still be issuing a LAAN as part of their pack in every instance. In fact, a LAAN (or the Act) facilitates recourse for damage caused by the carrier. I appreciate though that only works if the carrier isn’t broke. 

Further, a freestanding tower of substance is unlikely to be considered a low impact facility if challenged. 

To the OP, everyone knows if you’ve prepared a SWMS, listed your controls, and the receiving party ticks their compliance box without even reading it, it’s impossible for there to be a WHS issue! /s

I’d suggest an approach of if it were a customer site charge any induction platform or contractor management fees back to the customer (perhaps indirectly), though I appreciate this is easier when building high value services. If installing network infra onto a site, cop the fees. 

While site contacts should be relied on to inform of site specific hazards, the onus is on the carrier to identify and implement controls for risks, and that even if there is an opportunity for recourse the onus is on the carrier the to work safely. They want their team to make it home at the end of the day, appointing responsibility or fault should secondary. I am sure Workcover would agree. 

Plus you know, public liability insurance! 

*My views are personal, but based on experience in fibre & microwave construction. 

Nick.





On 20 May 2024, at 11:43 am, Mitch Kelly <mitchkelly24 at gmail.com> wrote:


Hi,

Note: None of the following should be taken as legal advice This is a real world scenario from Mid 2018.

Ive dealt with a similar issue on an LIN (Low Impact Notice) being served on a rural property owner. The issue arose when the owner refused entry to the Telco and did not negotiate (Not the right thing to do) The best thing we found (From Legal Advice) Was to advise YES, You can install your equipment on this property, The Fee Per Month will be 200k. 

You haven't Refused entry
and,
You've provided a compensation amount for the installation/inconvenience on the property.

On the topic of the LIN and Safety, Due to the location of the installation, There was overhead HV Lines (12m), (6.4m clearance generally required) across the entryway to the property, The owner of the property had a duty of care to advise to the best of their knowledge hazards that may exist (Loose ground, sinkholes, unstable ground, overhead wires, etc) to the Telco entering the property of the LIN The Telco was responsible for their own SWIMS/JHA and complying with WHS laws, The Property owner distanced himself from any liability (He had a pretty good lawyer)

The Property owner gave all the information to the telco to the best of his knowledge, Yet they still managed to knock down a power pole and pole pig (transformer) causing the OWNER of the property to have to pay Horizon power to fix it along with Horizon stating that further damage may be brought upon the owner if other customers were impacted (The lawyer got onto this pretty quick smart)

The tower eventually fell over in Mid 2021 due to salinity issues in the soil, The Telco went insolvent in late 2022.
The owner never saw a cent from the Telco for damages to the power infrastructure and likely never will.

Stay well clear, Seek legal advice. If they have issued a LIN then they are probably already disgruntled.


On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 9:12 AM Jason Leschnik <jason at leschnik.me <mailto:jason at leschnik.me> > wrote:
Hi all,

NB: This is not a request for legal advice.

This a hypothetical situation where a Team (Network Communications Group) and more indirectly a Maintenance Group are served LAANs by Telcos. This group operates Public infrastructure (say Hospital sites). For the Network group, The LAANs are generally served for new circuits that have been requested, for the Maintenance group, they are for establishing or accessing Services on Tower Blocks (Mobile Antenna).

Currently, said business has an Internal Contractor Management System operated by an External Vendor (Championed by an Asset Management and WHS group), this requires the Telcos to enroll and pay a yearly account fee (say $600). One could imagine that the Telcos would push back against this, being well within their rights to refuse a "fee to enter".

I have a concern/question that I'm struggling to get clear answers to based on this hypothetical situation: If they refuse to enroll in the SYSTEM (Possibly invoking their Powers to access the site via. the correct channels) or possibly it's agreed they do not need to enter into the SYSTEM and the LAAN is accepted (based on reviewing of their SWMS and Liability Insurances) by a site owner. Is the onus on the site owner to manage/own the WHS risks while they are operating onsite? Or does that fall under the Telco?

Regards,
Jason.
-- 
Personal Email Account
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net> 
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog <https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog> 
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20240520/c64b222c/attachment.htm>