The latest government in New Zealand has some wild ideas and policies. Surprisingly, some involve reforming occupational health and safety (OHS) laws. Reform is usually positive as it progresses laws and fixes errors, oversights, or shortcomings, but this NZ activity is different. To start, it is necessary to look at the policies and some of the media statements from the current Prime Minister and Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety.
The Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council‘s report on OHS sentencing received minimal media coverage. Perhaps more will come when the government responds to the recommendations. However, the coverage focused on the recommendation for a substantial increase in financial penalties for those who breach occupational health and safety (OHS) laws. The report contained much more than financial penalties, but the political climate will likely stifle any significant reforms.
Australia’s occupational health and safety (OHS) has improved over the decades. Yet, preventable injuries and fatalities persist—over 180 quad bike deaths since 2011, for example, with rollovers leading the charge. We have regulations, campaigns, and a national body in Safe Work Australia, but something’s still missing. Why aren’t workplace redesign efforts—like fitting rollbars on quads or rethinking production systems—more widespread? The answer might lie in a hidden barrier: the WHS profession’s shaky grasp of financial literacy, compounded by the stranglehold of financial underwriting models and capital market expectations. Maybe it’s time we admit that the safety game isn’t just about risk assessments—it’s about money, and we’re not playing it well enough.
My great uncle dug into coal mine tailings with his bare hands to try and rescue the school children and teachers buried during the Aberfan disaster. His own grandchildren died. Both of my grandfathers suffered from lives spent underground; they both died young, one from lung cancer and silicosis.
For me, all safety is political. It always has been. It’s not party-political – but it can be. It’s political in the sense that all decisions in every aspect of our lives are a function of power and authority.
New information about the need to prevent psychosocial hazards at work keeps coming. Victoria will join the workplace mental health train a little later than planned. It went from engine to caboose in four years. SafeWorkNSW has released guidance on Designing Work to Manage Psychosocial Risks and an enforceable undertaking by a New South Wales mine from a psychosocial incident.
Michael Belzer and Michael Quinlan have outlined the economics of occupational health and safety (OHS) in the editorial of the latest edition of The Economic and Labour Relations Review. This contrasts with earlier research about the business case for OHS as it broadens the pool of influences more broadly. They write:
“The economic approaches to OHS in the papers in this issue identify externalities and suggest that incomplete market analysis has created an inappropriate permission to ignore uncompensated costs in labour, product, and service markets; these incomplete markets lead to greater social risk as well as inefficiency. More integrated understandings of OHS are challenging but research performed without them leads to narrow and partial understandings.” (page 483)
The most common question occupational health and safety (OHS) consultants receive from clients is, “Do I comply with the law?” This request is telling because the client starts from a legal rather than a safety base. This is not surprising, as OHS commentary is dominated by lawyers whose focus is on minimizing their clients’ exposure to prosecution.
