If the first lesson from IAWBH2026 was that psychological risks must be treated as system hazards, the second is that most organisations remain structurally ill-equipped to manage them. Despite years of policy development and training initiatives, the evidence presented at the recent International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment conference in Canberra showed persistent gaps between intention and outcome.
This week saw the release of an inquiry into the workplace culture of the New South Wales police force. The findings were damning, but even though all Australian jurisdictions have police forces, the report received little attention beyond NSW, perhaps because we have heard it before. Coincidentally, this report was published one week after Carlo Caponnechia told an international workplace bullying and harassment conference that similar inquiries around the world have found similar cultural faults.
To address contemporary occupational health and safety (OHS) and community expectations, many businesses need to redesign their operations and organisational structures. The emergency services organisations should be given top priority.
I am not sure that the “Why” was discussed enough at this global conference. The discussions in the sessions I sat in were dominated by people trying to clarify what bullying and harassment are and what variations nor subcultures there are, or what sections of the community are most affected by workplace bullying and harassment. And I am not sure that all the presenters were targeting the workplace, even though the association and conference titles specify this.
This year, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has released excellent information on psychosocial hazards at work to support the World Day for Safety and Health at Work. (Australian researchers seem to have been instrumental in the report) I read the report, looking for more upstream concerns, such as political and socioeconomic factors that lead employers to create or allow work overload, the most significant contributor to work-related stress. This is what I found.
Business management advisers keep calling everyone a “leader”, but the term has become so vague it obscures who actually holds the power — and therefore the accountability — to prevent work-related harm. Psychosocial hazards aren’t fixed by slogans or culture talk; they’re shaped by decisions about workload, staffing, supervision and resources.
This article is based on my presentation to the Central Safety Group members on May 12, 2026, about leadership and occupational health and safety (OHS).
As I walk to local cafes for weekend breakfasts or to the gym (yes, I do exercise), I listen to interesting podcasts that may be relevant to occupational health and safety (OHS). (I know, I should turn off, but I can’t) A recent podcast was American Friction, which discussed President Trump (you may have heard of him). Three-quarters through, Mike Duncan discussed the “Great Idiot in History Theory”, which seems to me to offer a useful perspective on corporate executives and their approach to the work health and safety of their employees.
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.”
