From July 2026, the official Australian Standards for occupational health and safety (OHS) management will become freely available. According to page 142 of Budget Papers Number 2, the Australian government will
“…. provide $55.2 million over four years from 2026–27 (and $11.6 million per year ongoing) to support implementation of reforms to increase productivity.”
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.
In the 1990s, there was a significant discussion about “Big Data”. Organisations had begun working digitally due to rapid technological growth and the digitisation of historical records. But the data was so large at the time that its usefulness was questionable. Big Data was of only historical and archival importance until artificial intelligence (AI) tools were developed. Now organisations can turn their Big Data into commercial products and services. International law firm Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer may be a model of the future.
Most countries and regions seem to have a sport of cultural significance. Australia has several, but all professional sports are played in workplaces, the players are employees, and the sporting clubs are employers. Most have a supervisory and administrative body. Recently, an Australian Rules Football player, Elijah Hollands, displayed signs of a mental health condition during a match. Some spectators noticed that “something was wrong”; some players noticed this at the time, but Hollands played three-quarters of the game, offering only one direct contribution to play, before he was taken off, to only return later in the last quarter. The ABC and 7News provide a good background to the situation
The questions that remain unanswered are why Holland’s employer did not remove a clearly unwell player earlier, and whether the Carlton Football Club breached its duty of care.
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.
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.
