Document {{ORG_PREFIX}}-009
Communication, Consultation & Participation Procedure¶
1. Purpose¶
This procedure defines how {{ORG_NAME}} plans and runs the communications the
IMS needs — internal and external, for both the quality and OH&S disciplines —
and how workers are consulted and participate in the decisions that shape
their own work and the system around it: how a job is set up, what controls
and training it runs under, how {{ORG_NAME}} checks whether that is holding,
and what it changes afterwards. It operationalises the commitments in
quality-ohs-policy, which this procedure
implements: that the policy and the system are communicated to everyone
working under {{ORG_NAME}}'s control, and that workers genuinely shape the
decisions that affect their health and safety rather than being told about
them afterwards.
The end state this procedure exists to maintain: every planned communication lives as a matrix row that names its content, owner, channel, audience, timing, and aim; every OH&S message arriving from outside gets a log entry, the right routing, and a reply; and worker consultation happens before decisions are made, with committed records proving it.
2. Scope¶
This procedure applies to:
- Internal communication about the IMS across all levels and functions of {{ORG_NAME}} — roughly 25 people, so channels are deliberately few and direct.
- External communication on IMS matters with contractors and their workers, visitors, clients, regulators, and other interested parties — including receiving, documenting, and responding to what they send us.
- Consultation and participation of all workers — employees and contractors' workers working under {{ORG_NAME}}'s control — and of the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} as their standing representative.
Boundaries: per-job customer communication about products and services
(enquiries, orders, feedback, complaints) is run under the customer
requirements and contract review process; communication duties specific to
emergencies (emergency roles, information to emergency services) are defined
in the emergency preparedness and response plan; statutory incident
notification is executed under incident-reporting-investigation-procedure.
This procedure defines the framework those specific channels sit inside.
Audiences, roles, and contact points are always resolved from the People register — no document, including this one, hardcodes personal contact details.
3. Procedure¶
3.1 Communication matrix¶
3.1.1 Planning rules¶
Every communication the IMS needs is a row in one of the matrices in §3.1.2 and §3.1.3, and a row is complete only when every column is filled: the content being sent, the aim it serves, the audience it reaches, the timing it runs on, the channel that carries it, and the role that owns delivery. Adding, changing, or removing a matrix row is a change to this document and goes through the PR lifecycle, with worker consultation per §3.2 where the change affects what workers are told or how.
Three rules apply to every row:
- Nothing the system cannot back. Every message, internal or external, must square with the controlled documents, the registers, and the obligations the compliance obligations process has identified. Nobody communicates a safety rule, a capability claim, or a compliance position that the system itself does not support.
- Written for the people who actually receive it. Plain language comes first, and anything safety-critical is delivered verbally as well as in writing. Beyond that, each communication carries the adjustments and formats its own audience needs; the needs themselves are read off the actual makeup of the People register, never assumed. The same holds for anything put to workers for their view under §3.2: consultation material carries the same plain language, the same verbal delivery alongside the written, and the same format adjustments as anything else {{ORG_NAME}} sends. [ORG-DECISION: the languages, accessible formats, and delivery adjustments the workforce requires, determined at instantiation from the People register.]
- Defined aim, checked later. Each matrix row states its aim; §3.1.5 defines how the organisation checks the aim was met.
3.1.2 Communication matrix (internal)¶
| What | Aim | Audience | When | How | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality & OH&S Policy and each approved revision | Policy understood and applied | All workers | At induction; on each approved revision | Induction; all-hands announcement; acknowledgement campaign | {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} (announcement); {{ROLE_DOCUMENT_CONTROLLER}} (campaign) |
| IMS objectives and progress against them | Everyone knows the targets and where we stand | All workers | [ORG-DECISION: cadence, e.g. quarterly all-hands] | All-hands briefing | {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} |
| Hazards, risks, and controls relevant to current work | Work done with current controls understood | Workers doing the affected work | At toolbox talks; before non-routine tasks | Toolbox talk; pre-start briefing | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| Incident outcomes and lessons | Recurrence prevented; reporting reinforced | All workers; {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} | After each investigation closes | Toolbox talk plus written summary, per incident-reporting-investigation-procedure |
{{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| Approved document changes that alter how work is done | Affected people work to the current version | Roles named in the changed document | On approval (merge) | [ORG-DECISION: the announcement channel, e.g. team chat or email digest] | {{ROLE_DOCUMENT_CONTROLLER}} |
| Management review outcomes relevant to workers | Decisions and system changes known to those they affect | All workers; {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} | After each management review | Summary at next toolbox talk or all-hands | {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} |
| Internal audit findings relevant to workers | Findings and fixes visible, not hidden | Affected workers; {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} | After each audit slice | Summary at next toolbox talk | {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} |
| Quality performance and customer feedback themes | Delivery quality issues surfaced and owned | All workers | [ORG-DECISION: cadence, e.g. quarterly] | All-hands briefing | {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} |
| Consultation outcomes — what workers raised and what was done | Input visibly answered (see §3.2.5) | Workers who raised the matter; all workers where relevant | Within the §3.2.3 response timeframe | Toolbox talk; direct response; written summary | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
3.1.3 Communication matrix (external)¶
| What | Aim | Audience | When | How | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site hazards, applicable controls, and IMS requirements binding contractors | Contractors' workers protected and compliant before work starts | Contractors and their workers | Before first work; on any change to hazards or requirements | Contractor induction; pre-start briefing | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| Site rules and emergency arrangements for visitors | Visitors safe and accounted for | Visitors | On arrival | Visitor briefing by the host; signage | Host worker; {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} maintains the briefing content |
| Quality & OH&S Policy availability | Policy accessible to interested parties | Relevant interested parties | On request; [ORG-DECISION: whether also published, e.g. on {{ORG_DOMAIN}}] | Published copy or copy on request | {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} |
| Statutory notifications (e.g. notifiable incidents) | Legal duties met in full and on time | Regulator | Within the timeframes identified by the compliance obligations process — never assumed | Executed under incident-reporting-investigation-procedure |
{{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| Emergency information to emergency services and neighbours | Responders informed per the emergency plan | Emergency services; neighbours where relevant | Per the emergency preparedness and response plan | Per that plan | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| OH&S matters raised with or by clients (site access, shared workplaces, client safety requirements) | Both parties' duties clear at shared workplaces | Clients | At engagement start; on change | Written confirmation as part of the engagement record | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} with {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} |
| Product/service communication (enquiries, orders, feedback, complaints) | — boundary row — | Customers | Per the customer requirements and contract review process | Per that process | {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} |
3.1.4 Receiving, documenting, and responding to external OH&S communications¶
Inbound communication is handled as deliberately as outbound:
| Step | Action | Responsible role | Output / record |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Intake: any worker who receives an external OH&S communication (regulator contact, client OH&S requirement, contractor concern, neighbour or public complaint) passes it to the {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} within one working day. | Any worker | Forwarded communication |
| 2 | Log: capture what arrived, from whom, when, and its substance, with the originating material preserved. | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} | Logged inbound communication, filed with the record stream it belongs to (step 3) |
| 3 | Route: a raised hazard enters the Hazard Register; a reported incident enters incident-reporting-investigation-procedure; a new or changed requirement enters the compliance obligations process; a matter affecting workers is taken to consultation per §3.2 and recorded in docs/records/consultation/. |
{{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} | Register entry or record in the relevant stream |
| 4 | Reply: tell the sender what {{ORG_NAME}} has done or decided. [ORG-DECISION: response timeframe, e.g. 10 working days; statutory response timeframes identified by the compliance obligations process always take precedence.] | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}}; {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} for regulator correspondence | Response retained with the step 2 documentation |
| 5 | Weigh in: where an external interested party's view is pertinent to an OH&S decision (a client's site concern, a contractor's control suggestion), feed it into the relevant risk assessment, consultation, or management review input rather than closing it with the reply alone. | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} | Input visible in the receiving process's record |
3.1.5 Evaluating communication effectiveness¶
Each matrix row's aim is checked, not assumed. The {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} (OH&S rows) and {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} (quality rows) evaluate annually as an input to management review, using evidence such as: acknowledgement campaign completion rates, questions and comprehension at toolbox talks and inductions, the volume and quality of hazard reports (a healthy reporting rate is evidence the channel works; silence is evidence it does not), and whether audits find people working to superseded information. Rows that fail their aim are revised through the PR lifecycle, in consultation with workers per §3.2.
3.2 Consultation and participation¶
Workers at {{ORG_NAME}} sit on both sides of a decision. On the work itself and what governs it day to day, they are part of making the call (participation); on every other matter bearing on their health and safety, they see it while the outcome is still open and their views are weighed before anyone decides (consultation). {{ORG_NAME}} works this way because the people doing a job hit its problems first and carry the consequence when a call goes wrong. That holds from the shape of a single job up to the shape of the system around it: how work is set up and controlled, what {{ORG_NAME}} measures and audits to see whether that is holding, and what it changes afterwards. Wherever a decision sits and whoever makes it, it reaches the workers affected directly and reaches the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}}, and §3.2.2 says how each standing matter runs. At ~25 people, direct consultation with the people who do the work is the default; the representative channel supplements it, never replaces it.
3.2.1 Mechanisms¶
| Mechanism | What it is for | Cadence / availability | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Toolbox talks | The standing two-way forum: hazards and controls for current work, incident lessons, proposed changes, anything workers raise | [ORG-DECISION: cadence — e.g. weekly or fortnightly, set to match the tempo of operations] | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} leads; any worker contributes agenda items |
| {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} | Standing representative channel: raises matters on workers' behalf, joins investigations and risk assessments, reviews worker-facing documents | Continuous; [ORG-DECISION: how the representative is chosen by workers, and the arrangement's term — decided by workers, not management] | {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} |
| Hazard & Incident Report form | The low-friction channel: any worker raises a hazard or incident in under a minute, without needing Git or Airtable access; entries land in the Hazard Register for triage | Always open, to everyone | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} triages every submission |
| Pre-approval document consultation | Workers review and comment on every worker-facing document (those with worker_consultation_required: true — including this one) before it can be approved |
Per document change | Document owner runs it; {{ROLE_DOCUMENT_CONTROLLER}} checks the record exists before merge |
| Direct raise | Any worker raises any IMS matter directly with the {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}}, the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}}, or {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} | Always open | Receiving role responds per §3.2.3 |
3.2.2 Where non-managerial workers get extra emphasis¶
The matters below are the ones {{ORG_NAME}} will not settle from an office.
Each of them lands on the people holding the tools, and they see where it
will bind before anyone else does, so the workers who do the affected work
are in the conversation alongside the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}}. When one comes
up, the role owning the matter runs the §3.2.3 steps while the outcome is
still open, and the ask leaves a record in docs/records/consultation/.
| What comes up | How {{ORG_NAME}} runs it |
|---|---|
| A hazard is raised, or a job is assessed before it starts | Workers raise hazards themselves through the Hazard & Incident Report form and sit in the risk assessment for any job they will do, so what gets identified and how it is rated carry first-hand knowledge of the work; the {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} triages every submission into the Hazard Register |
| A control is chosen, trialled, or bedded into the work | Options for getting rid of a hazard, or driving its risk down, are worked through at a toolbox talk with the people who will use the result; the workers a control applies to help choose it, trial it in the real work, and settle how it is applied day to day before it is locked in, because a control they cannot work with is one that quietly stops being used |
| Training is planned, or has just been delivered | Workers say what their work requires them to be able to do and what training gets them there, and afterwards say whether it worked; the Training Curriculum is built and revised from what they say |
| What workers are told about the work, or how they are told it, changes as a row of §3.1.2 or §3.1.3 | Workers help settle the content, the channel, and the timing that reach them; how well it lands comes back through the §3.1.5 evaluation |
| A contractor is engaged, a process is outsourced, or plant, materials, or services are bought | The controls that will apply go to the workers who will share the site, the plant, or the material, before the engagement or the purchase is locked in |
| An incident or nonconformity is investigated | Workers involved in the event join the investigation and help set the corrective actions, per incident-reporting-investigation-procedure |
| A requirement identified by the compliance obligations process is turned into a rule for someone's job, or that rule changes | The workers it lands on see how {{ORG_NAME}} proposes to meet it in their work and say whether it will hold up in the real job, before the rule is written |
| {{ORG_NAME}} sets or changes what it monitors, measures, and evaluates | Workers are asked what would actually show whether the work is safe and the system is working, before the measures are fixed |
| The internal audit programme is drawn up or reshaped for the cycle | {{ROLE_QUALITY_MANAGER}} asks workers what they want looked at, and when audits can run without cutting across the work, before the programme for the cycle is settled |
| OH&S objectives are set or revised | Workers are asked while both the targets and the plans that will deliver them are still open |
A document carrying worker_consultation_required: true heads for approval |
Workers review and comment before the approver can merge, this procedure and the Quality & OH&S Policy included; the way {{ORG_NAME}} runs continual improvement lives in controlled documents too, so reshaping it reaches workers by the same route |
| An IMS role moves to a different person, or what the role covers changes | The workers affected are asked before {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} settles who holds the role and the duties and authority that go with it |
| {{ORG_NAME}} re-examines who its interested parties are and what they need and expect | Workers meet clients' site staff, subcontractors, neighbours, and regulators face to face, so they are asked what they need from the system themselves and what they hear those parties expecting of it |
| The mechanisms in §3.2.1 are up for change | A proposed change to the consultation machinery itself is worked out with workers at a toolbox talk before anything changes, and reaches everyone again as a document change through the approval row above |
Those are the standing triggers. Beyond them the rule in §3.2 holds: any other decision bearing on workers' health and safety goes to the workers it affects while the outcome is still open, and their views are weighed before it is made.
3.2.3 Running a consultation¶
| Step | Action | Responsible role | Output / record |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Trigger: a matter in §3.2.2 arises — a worker-facing document change, a new or changed control, a proposed change to work, an objective, an investigation, or a matter workers themselves raise. | Role owning the matter | Consultation initiated |
| 2 | Inform first: give the affected workers the relevant information in advance, in plain language, with enough time to actually consider it — not at the moment of decision. | Role owning the matter | Material shared (linked in the step 5 record) |
| 3 | Consult: run the discussion through the fitting mechanism (§3.2.1) — toolbox talk for operational matters, direct review for documents, the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} in every case touching worker health and safety. | Role owning the matter; {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} | Worker views captured |
| 4 | Consider and decide: weigh the input in the decision. Where worker input is not followed, the decision-maker explains why — silently discarding input is treated as non-response, a §3.2.5 barrier. | Role owning the matter; {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} where the decision is theirs | Decision with rationale |
| 5 | Record: commit a consultation record to docs/records/consultation/YYYY-MM-<slug>.md stating the matter, who was consulted (roles, plus People-register links — never bare contact details), what was raised, and what the decision was. |
Role owning the matter | Record in docs/records/consultation/ |
| 6 | For document approvals where worker_consultation_required: true: the consultation record must be committed before the approver merges — the {{ROLE_DOCUMENT_CONTROLLER}} checks for it as part of the lifecycle, and an approval without it is a nonconformity. |
{{ROLE_DOCUMENT_CONTROLLER}}; approver | Pre-approval consultation record referenced from the PR |
| 7 | Close the loop: feed the outcome back to the workers consulted, per the consultation-outcomes row of the internal matrix (§3.1.2). | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} | Outcome communicated |
3.2.4 Time, resources, and access to information¶
A consultation a worker has to fund out of their own time, work out for themselves, or argue their way into is one that will not happen. {{ORG_NAME}} clears each of those out of the way in advance:
- Paid hours: toolbox talks, document reviews, involvement in investigations, and the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}}'s duties all happen inside paid working hours. They are work, and the schedule makes room for them. A consultation people have had no time to engage with is treated as not having happened.
- Knowing how: induction teaches every worker to use the §3.2.1 mechanisms, including the Hazard & Incident Report form, and the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} is trained for the role. [ORG-DECISION: the representative training provided and its refresh cycle.]
- Open information: the controlled documents, the register views that bear on a worker's own work, and the plain-language training material are there for workers to read when the question arises, and they are written to be understood the first time. A worker who cannot find, reach, or make sense of something raises it, and it is fixed as a barrier per §3.2.5.
3.2.5 Removing barriers to participation¶
A quiet workforce is the warning {{ORG_NAME}} watches for. The {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} and {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} sit down together at least once each management review cycle, work out what is stopping people from speaking up or taking part, and fix what they find; anything they cannot clear away outright they cut down, and the consultation record says what is left of it and why. These hold whatever else changes:
- No reprisals. Raising a hazard, an incident, a concern, or a criticism of the system never disadvantages the person raising it — {{ORG_NAME}} treats any act of reprisal or discouragement as a serious matter for {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}}. A worker who prefers not to raise a matter directly raises it through the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}}.
- No non-response. Every hazard report, consultation input, and direct raise gets an answer (§3.1.2 consultation-outcomes row; §3.2.3 step 7). Input that disappears teaches people to stop offering it.
4. Records and Registers¶
| Activity | Register (index) | Record (evidence) |
|---|---|---|
| Resolving audiences, roles, and contact points for any communication | People | — (the register is the live index; no separate record) |
| Hazards raised through the Hazard & Incident Report form | Hazard Register (submissions land as Reported rows for triage) | The register row is the index; incidents re-entered and evidenced under incident-reporting-investigation-procedure |
| Consultation and participation events — toolbox talks with consultation outcomes, pre-approval document consultation, investigation participation, mechanism and barrier reviews | — | docs/records/consultation/YYYY-MM-<slug>.md, one record per consultation |
| Inbound external OH&S communications and responses (§3.1.4) | Hazard Register where the inbound matter is a hazard | Documentation and response filed with the record stream the matter is routed to (consultation, incidents, or compliance streams) |
| Communication effectiveness evaluation (§3.1.5) | — | Input to the management review record for the cycle |
Honest status: in this template, docs/records/consultation/ is empty and the
Hazard Register has no rows. The consultation and participation requirements
are only honestly met once consultation has actually run and its records are
committed — including the pre-approval consultation on this very procedure at
instantiation. Until then, an empty folder is the correct and honest state.
5. Exceptions¶
An exception to this procedure (for example, compressing the §3.2.3 information-in-advance step during an urgent operational change) is requested in writing to the {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}}, who assesses it with the {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} and refers it to {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} for approval. An approved exception is noted in the affected consultation record and is valid for at most [ORG-DECISION: exception validity period, e.g. 90 days] before re-review.
No exception is available to: the no-reprisals commitment; responding to
worker input; pre-approval consultation records for documents with
worker_consultation_required: true (an urgent change may shorten the
consultation window, never skip the consultation); or statutory notification
timeframes, which are legal duties outside this procedure's power to vary.
6. Related Documents¶
quality-ohs-policy— the policy this procedure implements (implementsfrontmatter); its commitments to communication and to worker consultation and participation are given effect here, and its own communication is the first row of the internal matrix (§3.1.2).incident-reporting-investigation-procedure— executes statutory incident notification (§3.1.3), receives incidents triaged from the Hazard & Incident Report form (§3.2.1), involves workers in investigations (§3.2.2), and supplies the incident outcomes communicated per the internal matrix.schemas/registers.schema.yml— the specification of the People and Hazard registers and the Hazard & Incident Report form (a schema, not a controlled document).
7. Revision History¶
| Version | Date | Author | Description of Changes | Reviewed By | Review Date | Approved By | Approval Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 2026-07-16 | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} | Initial draft | — | — | — | — |
8. Document Control
| Document | {{ORG_PREFIX}}-009 |
|---|---|
| Type | Procedure |
| Version | 0.1 |
| Status | Draft |
| Owner | {{ROLE_OHS_COORDINATOR}} |
| Reviewer | {{ROLE_WORKER_REP}} |
| Approver | {{ROLE_TOP_MANAGEMENT}} |
| Next Review | 2026-08-15 |
| Classification | Internal |
Held in the document frontmatter, mirrored to the Document Register.