Not safe for work – the Government's Worksafe reforms

The balance isn’t right – but not in the way that the government thinks

During his Morning Report interview on changes to Worksafe Christopher Luxon used the word ‘balance’ or ‘rebalance’ 5 times in 5 minutes. According to the government the problem with current health and safety practice in New Zealand is that there is “a fundamental concern that WorkSafe can be heavy-handed in applying punishment when something goes wrong, but not always sufficiently supportive in providing advice to PCBUs (Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking) on how to manage their risks”. Worksafe will now focus instead on “helping duty-holders do what is proportionate to the risks and avoiding over-compliance”.

As part of this new approach, Minister Brooke Van Velden said “Changes begin with today’s launch of WorkSafe’s road cone tipline to look into and provide guidance on instances of over-compliance in temporary traffic management”. Our Workplace fatality rate is 60% higher than Australia and over 500% higher than the UK. Our serious injury rate is 35% higher than Australia and more than 330% higher than the UK.

These are not serious people.

Maya Angelou is often quoted as saying “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time”. This is a government that is showing us who it is. In New Zealand, there were workplace 62 deaths in the last measured year. There were between 750-900 “Work-related health deaths”. These are “caused by long-term exposure to hazards and illness caused by acute injury”. That’s a work-induced death every nine hours. 18 deaths a week.

In the last full year of measurement, there were more than 35,000 injuries at work resulting in more than a week away from work. That’s one less than every 15 minutes. We have no corporate manslaughter offence in New Zealand, common around the rest of the world. In 2024, the Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum Report found that “When we compare our performance to that of Australia, we can also see that New Zealand has:

- fewer proactive and reactive workplace visits

- fewer inspectors

It also found that “In 2024, “if we were to match the United Kingdom's (UK) performance, we would save $3.4 billion per year” in costs due to lost lives, lost earnings, serious injury costs to ACC, and health issues.

When faced with statistics like these, a government that had retained even the tiniest sliver of a moral compass would be putting more resources into Worksafe to make sure that it was working. Instead, Worksafe lost 15% of its staff in the 12 months to December 2024, when it was asked to cut a further another 54 roles. At the Budget last month no new funding for Worksafe was provided – but a $7m contingency was returned from Worksafe as savings to government.

So instead of tackling this problem head-on, the government cuts the funding, fires the experts, and then tells the public that it's time to ‘rebalance’ the risks of prosecution further away from employers.

It’s difficult to put into words just how poor policy this is. If the problem was engagement with employers, then more staff to deliver that engagement would be crucial. If the problem was poor legislation, then why do the UK and Australia – with essentially identical legislation – manage this better? If the problem was funding, then why take money away? As the Minister Van Velden said of Worksafe this week “No, there won't be any new funding. I've heard from people who have suggested there does need to be new funding, and I disagree”. If the problem was one of focus, then why set up a road cone hotline when workers are dying?

Instead, we have now moved to a universe in which health and safety is now a problem of education rather than a problem that needs multiple lines of engagement. This is in marked contrast to other areas of government. In welfare, we are taking an increasingly punitive approach. The Minister for Social Development put out a press release after the Budget saying “New sanctions drive benefit accountability”. The ability to access Jobseekers Support is being curtailed for 18 and 19-year-olds. Act leader David Seymour says there will “almost certainly” be prosecutions against parents of absent students this year as the Government intensifies its crack down on school truancy.

In opposition, Mr. Luxon said of ram-raids that "Labour just hasn't got the balance right ... the primary job of Government is to protect its citizens…We just clearly haven't got the appropriate consequences in place for serious offending”. Does the primary job of the Government not extend to health and safety at work? Or does that sort of leadership only apply when you aren’t in office?

This a proposal that makes no sense. We have a recognised problem in New Zealand with health and safety. Everyone should come home from work safely. Everyday. Nothing less should be our goal. This is another change without a Regulatory Impact Statement so we can’t see who it will affect. No proper consultation with workers and their representatives.

It’s a change on top of:

- Removing Fair Pay Agreements

- Removing Pay Equity Claims

- Changing Contractor Reforms

- Proposed Changes to Sick Leave

- Removing Protections for Living Wage in Government Contracts

- Cutting the Minimum Wage for Two Years in a Row

- Bringing Back 90 Day Trials

- Pay Deductions for Partial Strikes

- Removing Access to Personal Grievance Claims

If ‘rebalancing’ means anything, it means that the costs have been rebalanced onto the shoulders of working people. The government is trying to distract us with talk of road cones. Workers are paying that cost with their lives.