I don’t know which professional discipline has had the most effect on the management of work health and safety in Australia, but I do know that accounting has been neglected. Accounting and its companion discipline, Governance, have several research concepts that Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) should consider.
In just over a month, Treasurer Jim Chalmers will hand down the 2026 Federal Budget. While political attention will focus on cost‑of‑living pressures and international instability, the Budget also presents an opportunity to rethink how Australia could treat occupational health and safety (OHS) as an economic lever instead of just a business cost.
One of the most important resources for occupational health and safety (OHS) advocates worldwide is the HESAMag, produced by the European Trade Union Institute (ETUI). There are several important articles in the current issue, including an interview with Giulio Romani, the Confederal Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation.
One of his areas of concern is the challenges faced in OHS advocacy, an issue that may be better resolved with some out-of-the-box creative thinking. He said:
Safe Work Australia has just published a summary report of its review into best practice. It is a curious document, essentially a summary of the perspectives of many organisations interested in occupational health and safety (OHS), particularly regarding OHS laws. It is an important distinction that this review was not about OHS but the laws that we use to provide safe and healthy work.
Australian occupational health and safety (OHS) is moving from a focus on interventions at the individual worker level to examination of the operational and managerial systems that may cause or encourage harm and incidents, especially in relation to psychological safety at work.
Although a new book from the United States does not address OHS specifically, its long title indicates its relevance – “It’s On You – How the Rich and Powerful Have Convinced Us That We’re to Blame for Society’s Deepest Problems”.
For the last few years in Australia, occupational health and safety (OHS) laws have required that the prevention of psychosocial hazards be given the same prominence as the prevention of physical hazards. The most effective recommendation for change is the redesign of work, but very few employers seem to be applying this control. Many employers are still asking (their Human Resources officer) what this psychosocial stuff is all about.
Examining organisational culture at one Australian institution that failed to prevent and may have generated psychological harm in the 1970s provides some context for contemporary OHS struggles.
We like to pretend OHS begins with a regulation or a checklist, but the truth is far less glamorous: it starts with the basic childhood lesson of “don’t hurt people.” Everything else is just the paperwork society builds around that idea. Part of that “paperwork” is the process of socialisation.
There are several definitions of socialisation:
Occupational health and safety (OHS) is part of all three (the third is more debatable). Socialisation is often seen as a personal experience, but in most instances, socialisation is imposed on us.
