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.
Category: hazards
What is the most persistent barrier to employers preventing psychosocial hazards?
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….”
Tough questions about psychosocial safety and health
Over the next week or so, SafetyAtWorkBlog will be focusing on the issue of psychosocial hazards and psychological risks at work, as we cover the Psych Health and Safety Conference in Sydney. These risks and hazards are the most pressing topic in occupational health and safety (OHS) at the moment, with an increased demand for solutions from workers and the community, as well as heightened expectations for regulatory compliance. I apologise for this intense focus, but I welcome your comments and participation.
I will start by posing this question:
“The Australian approaches to psychosocial hazards and psychological safety in Human Resources and Work Health and Safety have been siloed in the past. Are the approaches getting closer? Is there more cooperation between the two or are the two disciplines’ aims still too different?”
From Work to Incident to Harm to Hurt to Repair to Work
I. David Daniels has gained prominence in Australia through his association with FlourishDx and his appearances at the Psych Health and Safety conferences. Recently, he has published a book on psychosocial hazards and risks. All of this collateral adds authority to his thoughts, but he remains a work in progress for me, a work that I am starting to value and enjoy. Recently, in one of his LinkedIn conversations, he seemed to be implying a new and fresh timeline of workplace mental health, which got me thinking about “harm”, “injury”, “hurt, “damage”, and “trauma”. Daniels wrote:
NZ OHS reform is all sticks and carrots of questionable quality
Recently, New Zealand’s Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, Brooke Van Velden, was interviewed for almost half an hour by Jack Tame on her government’s proposed changes to occupational health and safety (OHS) laws. The interview was informative and entertaining, as it explained some aspects of the OHS changes, but also showcased a Minister who was uncomfortable with being questioned.
OHS questions remain after Jumping Castle owner freed
A Magistrate has said there is insufficient evidence to find Rosemary Gamble guilty of a criminal offence over an incident involving an inflatable jumping castle that resulted in the deaths of six children at Hillcrest in Tasmania. The prosecution may have ended, but a Coronial inquiry remains scheduled, and a civil class action against the state of Tasmania and Ms Gamble was launched in 2024. This article looks at the occupational health and safety aspects of the incident.
Australia needs an “OHS for HR” book
SafeWorkSA has published fascinating information about preventing “harmful workplace behaviours.” The webpage’s eye-catching part is the Hierarchy of Controls for Managing the Risk of Harmful Workplace Behaviours, but the article is curious.
The audience for information from occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators is supposedly everyone, but it is rarely read by anyone other than OHS advocates. However, any information about psychosocial risks and hazards needs to be written in a tone that attracts the attention of those in businesses who have established ownership of these hazards, primarily the Human Resources (HR) person. SafeWorkSA’s page fails to reach this target.






