Ensuring safe handling practices across operations depends on how effectively the hierarchy of controls is applied and integrated on-site.
Moving and storing material may sound like a relatively simple task, but seasoned operators know it’s where numerous incidents occur on mine sites. From the moment ore hits a truck bed all the way through to its final destination at the processing plant, every transfer point carries risk that needs to be actively managed.
While advancements have been made to progress safety initiatives across the process, handling-related injuries such as strains, sprains and crush injuries remain stubbornly common.
Data from Safe Work Australia shows that ‘body stressing’ – physical injuries such as musculoskeletal disorders, strains and sprains caused by repetitive, strenuous work, or awkward, sustained postures – is the leading cause of workers’ compensation claims nationally, accounting for 32.7 per cent of all serious claims. It also accounts for a $28.6 billion cost to the economy every year.
With these numbers forming the backdrop of mine safety, mining operators are now required to ensure their hierarchy of controls is more than just a regulatory checkbox exercise; it is a key blueprint for creating safe working environments.
Applied rigorously and honestly, the hierarchy is a practical framework for material handling that helps decide where to invest, what to prioritise, and how to measure whether safety efforts are working.
Elimination: Start at the top
Establishing a hierarchy of controls is mandatory under Australia’s work health and safety laws. Controls are ranked from most to least effective, and the expectation is clear: work down from the top, not up from the bottom.
At the top sits elimination, which focuses on removing the hazard entirely. In material handling terms, this means taking people out of hazardous interactions while moving materials wherever possible. It’s the most effective control available, and it’s where the national mining sector has made its most significant advances, especially concerning autonomous haulage.
According to GlobalData, as of July 2025, Australia had the world’s second-largest fleet of autonomous trucks, with 1024 units, up from 927 in 2024, reflecting steady growth in the country’s adoption of self-driving freight technology.
These trucks remove operators from cabs entirely, eliminating fatigue-related incidents and human errors that account for a significant proportion of heavy-vehicle incidents, with major miners backing the switch.
BHP’s South Flank mine in the Pilbara completed its autonomous transition in 2023, converting 41 Komatsu 930E trucks and 185 additional pieces of equipment. Rio Tinto reports its autonomous trucks operate around 1000 more hours per year than conventional fleets, and Fortescue has reported productivity improvements of around 30 per cent from its autonomous operations.
Safety and productivity, in this case, move in the same direction.
Substitution: The second rung
Where elimination isn’t feasible, substitution offers the next best option, replacing a hazardous process or material with a less dangerous alternative. This often means redesigning work so heavy or awkward lifts are replaced with mechanical alternatives.
Equipment such as vacuum lifters, manipulator arms, and powered trolleys substitute human effort for mechanical assistance, reducing both the frequency and severity of musculoskeletal strain.
When it comes to hazardous substances, substitution requires careful evaluation. Replacing a dangerous processing chemical with a less hazardous alternative can significantly reduce risk, but only if the replacement doesn’t introduce new hazards of its own. State regulations require operators to document these assessments and demonstrate that substitution decisions genuinely reduce overall risk rather than simply shifting it.
A notable example here is the work BHP has done across its Australian operations under a maintenance redesign program aimed at reducing musculoskeletal injuries. The miner has rolled out more than 400 safety initiatives, which stem from the operations services maintenance redesign team (MRDT), which was established in 2020 to address the physical strain faced by maintenance crews handling heavy equipment.
One of the most visible outcomes of the program has been the introduction of lightweight sling and shackle sets, developed after a maintenance worker was injured lifting a 30kg shackle overhead. The incident prompted a redesign led by frontline teams, with the MRDT partnering with Queensland-based supplier Soft Rigging Solutions to produce equipment made from lightweight materials.
The new sling and shackle sets reduced the lifting requirement from 30kg to just 3kg, significantly lowering musculoskeletal risk. It demonstrated how thoughtful design can help to safeguard workers and strengthen operational excellence across mine sites.
Isolation: Designing risk out of the system
Engineering or isolation controls don’t eliminate the hazard but put a physical barrier between the hazard and the worker. They’re more effective than administrative controls in that they don’t rely on human behaviour to function.
In conveyor systems, engineering controls include physical guarding over pinch points and moving components, pull-cord emergency stop systems along the full belt length, and pre-start warning systems that activate before the belt moves. Ground support in underground operations relies on engineered controls almost entirely.
Rock bolts and mesh screens physically hold geological structures in place. Real-time monitoring systems like extensometers and acoustic emission sensors can detect movement that precedes failure, allowing intervention before a hazard develops into an incident.
For manual handling tasks that can’t be eliminated or substituted, engineering design can still reduce risk substantially. Fixed-height work platforms, load-assist devices and purpose-built transfer equipment reduce the physical demands on workers while maintaining productivity.
Administration: Managing what remains
Sitting fourth in the hierarchy are administrative controls, procedures, training, scheduling and supervision. Because they depend on consistent human behaviour to work, consideration must be made to ensure limitations are adequately assessed.
Australia’s state-based regulatory framework sets the floor for administrative requirements, with site operators needed to implement safety management systems and have their hazard management plans reviewed annually. WorkSafe Victoria, for example, requires mine operators to review and revise safety controls at least every three years.
Well-designed administrative controls acknowledge human factors rather than work against them. Fatigue management programs that align shift patterns with physiological limits, pre-task risk assessments that prompt workers to think through hazards before starting, and clear communication protocols for traffic management all reduce incident risk by making safe behaviour easier.
PPE: The last resort
Personal protective equipment (PPE) sits at the bottom of the hierarchy because it doesn’t control the hazard, but rather reduces the consequences if everything else fails. Hard hats, high-visibility vests, safety boots and gloves are non-negotiable on any mine site, but they should never be the primary response to a material-handling risk.
Over-reliance on PPE is that it can mask the absence of higher-order controls. For example, an operation that issues cut-resistant gloves to workers regularly handling sharp materials has addressed the symptom, not the problem.
The right question is why those workers are manually handling sharp materials in the first place and whether elimination, substitution or an engineering control could remove or reduce that exposure.
The hierarchy of controls isn’t a one-time exercise. Reiterating Australia’s workplace health and safety laws, operators have an ongoing duty to eliminate risks so far as is reasonably practicable, and to minimise them where elimination isn’t possible. That means regularly revisiting control decisions as technology, operating conditions and best practices evolve.
The hierarchy offers a clear direction – start at the top.
This feature appeared in the May-June edition of Safe to Work.
