A bold new bill proposed by the government has sparked controversy and divided opinions within the work safety community. The bill aims to reduce workplace harm and costs by focusing on critical risks, but a leading safety group warns that this approach could actually increase harm and confusion.
The Core Issue: Prioritizing Critical Risks
The proposed amendment bill, the first major change to health and safety laws in a decade, sets out to tackle death and injury rates by targeting the most serious risks. However, the Institute of Safety Management argues that this narrow focus ignores the majority of workplace harm, which often stems from less critical but more common issues.
"The back injuries, psychological harm, and aggression that are the most prevalent and costly wouldn't meet the definition of critical risk," says Mike Cosman, spokesperson for the Institute.
The Controversy: Ignoring the Common Causes
The bill's definition of critical risk, which businesses must self-assess, could lead to increased compliance costs for firms trying to determine their eligibility. Cosman highlights that this approach may provide an easy way out for some businesses, especially smaller ones, who may now have less obligation to provide essential worker protections unless it relates to a critical risk.
"For those firms seeking an excuse, this bill offers one," he adds.
The Government's Perspective
The government aims to strengthen approved codes of practice within high-risk industries, like forestry, to better manage risks. Minister Brooke van Velden has spoken about shifting Worksafe's culture from punishment to education. However, critics argue that Worksafe has been too lenient, failing to hold company directors accountable.
The Missed Opportunity
Cosman believes the bill reflects a dogmatic view that compliance costs are inherently negative, rather than accurately addressing the concerns raised during the nationwide review.
"We see this as a chance missed to enhance New Zealand's health and safety record," he states. "These changes may lead to increased harm and financial burdens for workers, families, businesses, and the government."
