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 <mitchkell...@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 <ja...@leschnik.me 
<mailto:ja...@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@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net> 
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
<https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog> 
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Reply via email to