OHS remains invisible in political debate unless people die. Politicians will talk about productivity, investment, innovation and community renewal, but they rarely talk about preventing workers from being killed, injured or psychologically harmed. When OHS does appear, it is usually framed as a cost burden rather than a social benefit. Yet every political promise about fairness, renewal, or community well-being carries an implied OHS benefit if anyone bothers to look.
Category: change
Maximum Workplace Temperatures: A Political Fix Searching for an OHS Problem
The United Kingdom and Europe are again struggling through dangerous summer heat. In Australia, it’s tempting to feel a little smug. We’ve spent decades adapting our houses, cities and work practices to heat: wide‑brimmed hats in schools, backyard pools, ventilation, shade, job rotation, and a long list of practical controls that employers and regulators understand well. None of this makes heat safe, but it does make working in excessive heat manageable.
Into this UK heatwave steps Greens MP Hannah Spencer, proposing a Private Member’s Bill to establish a maximum workplace temperature.
Redesigning Risk — Quinlan and Mazzucato Unite to Make Work Safer
Whenever Mariana Mazzucato publishes a new book, she appears in the press everywhere as part of book tours and promotions. Her latest book, The Common Good Economy, is likely to be as influential on government and international policymakers as her other books have been. Australia’s Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, pays close attention to her perspectives. These perspectives relate to the management of occupational health and safety (OHS) because they present a different or tweaked sense of corporate morality, under which workers should be safe and healthy.
This article is not a review of the Common Good Economy book, although it is very good. Instead, I compare Mazzucato’s approach on work to Professor Michael Quinlan‘s take on precarity.
Beyond Training – Designing Work to Prevent Harm
If the first lesson from IAWBH2026 was that psychological risks must be treated as system hazards, the second is that most organisations remain structurally ill-equipped to manage them. Despite years of policy development and training initiatives, the evidence presented at the recent International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment conference in Canberra showed persistent gaps between intention and outcome.
When Consultation Fails, Psychosocial Safety Fails With It
The Human Resources and Human Rights sectors in Australia are increasingly realising how useful the occupational health and safety (OHS) structures, laws and processes can be to preventing harm related to bullying, sexual harassment and gender-based violence. Recently, a joint presentation by Dr Rachel Cox from Canada and Associate Professor Belinda Smith from Australia (pictured above) highlighted this cross-sectoral awakening.
Seeing Productivity Differently = Social Maturity
The impact of announcements made by the Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers in his 2026 Budget is settling, even though some media outlets will not let the supposed injustice die. But a core argument of the Treasurer’s was to improve Australia’s productivity, and occupational health and safety (OHS) is inseparable from productivity. And perhaps how we measure productivity needs to be redefined.
Generational Change is Coming for OHS Whether We Like It or Not
Occupational health and safety (OHS) in Australia frothed up big time about Hollnagel‘s Safety II approach and the Safety Differently movement. But as with most things OHS, the general approach was self-confined to the immediate systems of work, rather than considering the system of work as integral to the system of business or society generally. This conveniently sidestepped many of the generational differences and approaches to work that need to be faced, incorporated and managed. John F. Kennedy’s grandson, Jack Schlossberg, may be an interesting subject of study.






