So Ben Carroll is the new Premier of Victoria. He has made the obvious and unavoidable decision to call for a Royal Commission into that state’s construction sector and the government’s “Big Build” project. But Carroll was also the Minister for WorkCover for several years. He spoke at safety awards nights, conferences, seminars and Workers’ Memorial events. At those events, he made several clear statements about the importance of occupational health and safety (OHS).
Farm Safety Messaging Works Best When It Confronts Risk Honestly
Every year, Australia conducts a Farm Safety Week. The latest has just closed. Every year, the safety information is fundamentally the same: deaths, serious injuries, tractors or quad bikes, middle- to old-aged workers, mental health, the protection of children and more. But there are a couple of interesting variations this year from WorkSafe Victoria.
Why Some Bosses Fight Working From Home Harder Than the Evidence
Australian business media, especially the Australian Financial Review (AFR), continues to oppose the Victorian (Labor) government’s intention to make working from home (WFH) a formal right and entitlement. Every week, the mainstream media report on the latest research that criticises the move on the basis of productivity impacts, restrictions on career progress and other business negatives; occasionally, very occasionally, some positives are reported – better mental health, reduced living and commuter costs, flexibility for family duties and obligations.
Brodie’s Law, national inquiries and the confusion over prevention
Brodie Panlock’s death did not lead to just one law change, or one policy response or one neat public conclusion. It led to several overlapping reactions such as OHS prosecution, political campaigning, criminal law reform, a parliamentary inquiry, media campaigns, union submissions, employer resistance, and a long-running argument about whether workplace bullying should be treated as a discrete hazard or as part of the broader family of psychosocial risks. That complexity has often been mistaken for progress.
Please note that this article discusses suicide and mental trauma.
Brodie Panlock, workplace bullying and the limits of outrage
Workplace bullying has a habit of becoming visible only after harm has already occurred. In 2010, the 2006 death of 19-year-old Brodie Panlock became the point at which many Australians first understood that bullying at work was not merely a Human Resources (HR) irritant, or a personality weakness, or one of those unfortunate things that happens in a rough workplace somewhere else. It was an occupational health and safety (OHS) issue.
Please note that this article discusses suicide and mental trauma.
20th Anniversary of Significant Workplace Bullying Fatality
I am old enough to remember the work-related suicide of Brodie Panlock in 2006, meaning this year is the 20th anniversary. Her death, the findings of the Victorian Coroner and the prosecution by WorkSafe Victoria are pivotal to how workplace bullying and mental health at work are seen and managed today. But there is a generation of young workers who may be unaware of her case.
This series of articles trace that failure of prevention across three stages: the immediate OHS significance of the Café Vamp prosecution, the public and legal response through Brodie’s Law and national inquiries, and the continuing relevance of psychosocial hazard prevention under modern OHS duties.
The articles are based on the original SafetyAtWorkBlog articles from 2010 onwards. Today, here is a brief reminder of what Brodie Panlock experienced.
Please note that this article and those following discuss suicide and mental trauma.
The Potential of Safety Impact Assessments
For decades, countries around the world have required that major projects undergo an assessment before they can proceed. Australia has gone further, with the once‑in‑a‑generation reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 passing Parliament in November 2025 and rolling out through 2026. These reforms introduced legally binding National Environmental Standards and a new National Environmental Protection Agency. So here’s the question we keep dodging: why don’t we also have Safety Impact Assessments (SIA)?






