The challenge in addressing psychosocial hazards at work comes not from the dangers posed but from the executives’ willingness to change. Recently, David Burroughs reflected on his years of advising executives on this hazard. Burroughs’ experience of corporate responses to workplace bullying is indicative of the challenge of organisational change.
Two major Australian media outlets are continuing to focus on the issue of working from home (WFH), criticising the concept and some local political moves. WFH offers some significant mental health benefits that are being largely ignored. The front page of The Australian newspaper for September 1, 2025, provides the latest example.
Discussion about workplace psychosocial hazards seems to be everywhere. This is a good thing, as everyone needs a better understanding of the risks workers face and what prevention mechanisms are expected from employers and business owners. But that discussion needs to be measured and accurate. A recent article written about this issue for accountants is slightly inaccurate about occupational health and safety (OHS).
Australia’s Economic Roundtable recycled the same institutions and failed metrics that have long masked our productivity crisis. As Amy Remeikis notes, those who shaped past policy failures now feign surprise at the fallout. Meanwhile, important drivers of productivity, such as safe and quality work, remain ignored. OHS is treated as a compliance chore, rather than a strategic asset. If the Albanese government truly wants productivity reform, it must stop listening only to the “profit class” and start measuring what matters: worker health, dignity, and contribution.
I have attended many memorials for deceased workers. Usually, a local or State politician makes a speech about the importance of occupational health and safety (OHS), and how every worker has a right to return home safely and healthily at the end of the working day. The speeches are usually clichéd, even though these words are heartfelt and sometimes sound like they have been written from a template.
So I asked an artificial intelligence program to write a speech for International Workers Memorial Day by a senior Australian politician. Below is the remarkable result.
The Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) legislation states that employers must eliminate hazards as far as is reasonably practicable. If you start your safety journey from this point, you will forever be frustrated in your OHS achievements and disappointed in your job. OHS may be forever linked with laws and regulations, but the safety and health of ourselves, colleagues and others is based on our personal moral code and the values we bring to our actions. OHS satisfaction comes from accepting that OHS laws are only part of our purpose
Companies are being urged to increase their attention on the human impacts of incidents. This is a much-needed and delayed focus that existed decades ago but went out of fashion. Companies can achieve these changes after a lot of hard work and expense, but very little attention has been given to the institutions and government policies that perpetuate the “individual pathology” of workplace incidents. Some recent sociological research helps us see the immorality behind the status quo.
