Solving Psychosocial Harm at Work: The Upcoming Global IAWBH Conference in Canberra

Workplace bullying, harassment and other psychosocial risks are no longer fringe issues – they are central to how we think about safety, fairness and dignity at work. One forum that has been shaping this conversation for more than two decades is the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH) and its much‑anticipated biannual conference. This year’s event brings researchers, regulators and practitioners together in Canberra to tackle some of the most difficult problems in working life, with a strong emphasis on practical solutions, especially pertaining to sexual harassment and gender-based violence.

Professor Carlo Caponecchia, who is presenting at the conference, made some time for a couple of questions.

Continue reading “Solving Psychosocial Harm at Work: The Upcoming Global IAWBH Conference in Canberra”

Why Blood Tests Won’t Fix Burnout in Roles Designed to Harm

The most effective way to prevent psychological harm at work is to redesign work and its systems, especially the workload. What is often overlooked is the need to redesign the workload of and the expectations we have for senior executives. The Australian Financial Review published an article on this issue, drawing on the personal experience of marketing executive, Roni Millard.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

When Values Become Weapons in Politics and Workplaces

I don’t believe that all occupational health and safety (OHS) principles, risk assessment tools, or values are relevant to the non-work culture, but there is sufficient overlap for OHS to offer a framework for hazard identification, incident investigation, and potential risk control options. The current political debate in Australia about “Australian values” and immigration offers an illustration of this overlap; an overlap and debate that is being echoed in the United Kingdom.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

A Workplace Death. An Upheld Conviction. And a Standard Every C-Suite Officer Should Understand.

A post written by Wade Needham (April 15, 2026), and reproduced with permission.

Two judgments totaling 75,000 words were handed down across 2024 and 2026. Not everyone will read them. Everyone should understand what they establish.

Years ago, during commissioning work at Port Hedland for the Roy Hill project, someone asked me how I knew the night shift crew were following the isolation procedure for livening the sub stations. I could name the critical risk. I could point to the training records, the procedure, the sign-off sheet, the safety advisor on shift. And when they asked how I knew it was being followed at 2am when nobody was watching, I paused. Long pause. Then I said something like “Well, the reports don’t show any issues.”

I have never forgotten that pause. Because I knew, in that moment, that I was describing paperwork. Not reality.

That is the most dangerous sentence in safety governance. The reports don’t show any issues. It is the sentence that sat underneath everything that went wrong at the Port of Auckland. I wanted to distil down elements of the judgement I found insightful.

But first, a too-long, don’t-want-to-read summary for those short on time.

Continue reading “A Workplace Death. An Upheld Conviction. And a Standard Every C-Suite Officer Should Understand.”

The Future of Work Looks a Lot Like the Past, Only Faster

Australian lawyer Michael Tooma is always worth listening to, and he recently participated in a webinar titled “When AI Watches Work: Monitoring Workers and Psychosocial Risks!” hosted by the Global Initiative for Industrial Safety. Tooma reinforced warnings about overreliance on artificial intelligence (AI) in occupational health and safety.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

Australian Advice for Eliminating Psychological Harm at Work

It still surprises me that treating work‑related mental harm as something prevented through job design, rather than as a personal failing, is seen as a revelation. Humans are infinitely variable, if not from genetics, then from our socialisation. Humans may still be considered as little more than interchangeable parts in a production process, but only if one denies their humanity.

[Editor’s Note: This article uses blunt language to describe a reality many workers experience but struggle to name. It does not encourage impulsive resignations or dismiss the importance of organisational duty under OHS law. Rather, it recognises that when employers refuse to address psychosocial hazards, workers may be forced to prioritise their own health. Leaving a job should never be the first control considered—but for some, it becomes the only effective one available.]

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

Dr Kat Page’s Good Work Book Is A Blueprint for Preventing Harm

LinkedIn is an enormously inhumane software, but it does have some positive uses. One of them is being invited to meet people who might find you interesting or admire your work. Earlier this year, I jumped at the chance to have coffee with Dr Kat Page, who lived only a few suburbs away, as an exercise in mutual admiration. Last week, Page released her book called “Good Work: Transform Your Work from the Inside Out“. Finally, a book by an organisational psychologist on redesigning work, aimed at preventing harm.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here