Business newspapers and websites often report on executives revealing their own burnout and how they have changed their lives as a result. The changes they make indicate their decisions that led to their mental health crises and epiphanies. But executives lead by example, so how many of the employees are emulating the executives’ mistakes? Shouldn’t the executives redesign their companies’ systems of work to prevent anyone else from suffering from burnout?
Australia now has a Rural Media Farm Injury Dashboard, which shows the location of agricultural injuries and deaths from 2020 onwards. This is the type of publicly available information required to help reinforce an awareness of the dangers of farm work and demystify and destigmatise occupational health and safety (OHS) in this sector.
There are limitations, though, so one must be careful not to hyperbolise the data.
Note: This article mentions suicide.
Recently, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an extraordinary article that seems to endorse the exploitation of the mental health of workers. (Although the article is paywalled, it is getting a run in some local Australian newspapers) The article reports that companies like Shopify, Solace Health, and Rilla are bluntly marketing roles that involve extreme hours, a relentless pace, and minimal downtime.
One job post literally reads: “Please don’t join unless you’re eager to work 70 hours a week.”
If the job ads for these prominent North American companies were posted in Australia, the unsafe working conditions would likely be deemed illegal.
One of the most significant safety challenges for any employer is determining when a new employee is ready to work independently, without direct supervision. When do you trust that they can undertake a task without being hurt? That focus should not be solely on the worker’s ability, though; it should also be on the systems of work that you have in place to keep that worker safe. Is the job or task too much for them? Or does the job require another person to be present for it to be done safely?
We want our workers to be competent and confident. We want to trust them to do the job properly, i.e., safely, on time, and to a good quality. However, some jobs and tasks cannot or should not be done properly by only a single worker, and we should not expect a single worker to handle all tasks.
Occupational health and safety (OHS) is the central theme of this blog, but it is essential to remember that not all workplace health and safety actions are governed by a single set of laws or a single regulatory agency. Safety in the retail sector offers a good example.
The 2025 Psych Health and Safety (PHS) Conference, held in Sydney and hosted by FlourishDx, marked a significant evolution from its inaugural event. With over 200 delegates, a larger venue, enhanced facilities, and a more polished exhibition space, the conference built on its foundational success. Centred around four key themes—evidence-based practice, leading mentally healthy workplaces, inclusive work design, and international perspectives—the event delivered a robust platform for professionals from occupational health and safety (OHS) and human resources (HR) to converge on the critical topic of psychosocial health and safety.
Two prominent experts on psychosocial hazards at work, featuring at the Psych Health and Safety Conference later this week in Sydney, Mary Ann Baynton and I. David Daniels, responded to my question to them (and other speakers) listed in the title above.
Mary Ann Baynton’s response first:
“The two most persistent barriers to employers preventing psychosocial hazards are a misunderstanding of what is required and the belief that it would cost too much in terms of time and effort….”
