Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill

By Tracey Murphy.

The Health and Safety Amendment Bill was finally introduced in the second week of February this year, bringing months' long speculation to an end.

In my opinion, changes like providing more explanation about what a notifiable injury or illness is and defining critical risks are simple and reasonable. The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill also clarifies the officer role as one of governance, not operation.

PCBUs (person conducting a business or undertaking) who manage or control a workplace that includes open space do not owe any duties to those lawfully accessing the land for recreational purposes, unless the recreation is connected with the PCBU's work or the PCBU has other work happening at the same place and at the same time as the recreational users are present.

The Bill's Biggest Change Causing Concern...

The biggest change that causes concern regards small PCBUs. These have been defined as a PCBU with fewer than 20 workers (including casuals or seasonal workers, and contractors).

PCBUs that use seasonal workers must have fewer than 20 workers for at least nine months of the year.

The proposal is that small PCBUs are required to manage only the critical risks in their organisation.

Whilst this sounds reasonable at first reading, it raises considerable concern for the workers of some of these PCBUs. Although we would like to believe that all employers and managers are responsible, the reality is that I still hear “people need to take responsibility for themselves” or “use common sense”, or even, “they’ll figure it out”. This approach almost certainly results in poor worker protection and poor quality. Harm from non-critical risks currently makes up around 75% of ACC’s works-related claims. How much might it grow when the PCBUs responsibility is removed?