WorkSafe's focus moves from enforcement to advice
The government is shifting its work and safety regulator's priorities from enforcement to advice, saying this will help address concerns about underfunding and a "culture of fear".
First steps include updating more than 50 guidance documents and launching the hotline - announced in March - for reporting excessive road cones.
The restructure goes much deeper than that, though, with Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden issuing a new letter of expectations, rearranging the regulator's finances and redefining its main purpose in legislation.
The government has cut $2.2 million from the agency's funding since 2023 - a 1.6% cut from $141.1m to $138.9m - with heightened inflation over that time further increasing costs.
The government also set aside $7m for restructuring the regulator - paid for out of the Health and Safety at Work levy - this year's Budget confirming that "while WorkSafe progressed with its proposed restructure, this funding was not ultimately required".
About 124 permanent roles have been cut since 2023 - from 724 to 600, a more than 17% trim - although a spokesperson said the agency was now approved for 675 staff and was recruiting for those roles, including new inspectors.
Van Velden said she expected the regulator to review its enforcement and prosecution decision-making to focus on "clear breaches and causation", and being even handed. This would include "strengthening its approach to worker breaches of duty".
"I've been hearing there is a real culture of fear of people around WorkSafe, and I want people to feel like if they ask for help they will get that help - and so for any business or any worker who wants to know what it is that they should be doing to keep their workers safe, they will know where to go."
She denied that this could mean slowing down the rate of prosecutions, however.
"No, prosecutions will still remain. I think it's important that we do have enforcement, but we do need to balance that correctly with the upfront guidance."
The agency would now have a stronger focus on critical risk and providing consistent, practical advice and guidance for employers to comply with.
Van Velden also set out expectations for greater use of codes of conduct. While WorkSafe would continue to work on these, industries would now be invited to draft their own for approval by the minister, making up the majority of new codes in future.
"A culture where the regulator is feared for its punitive actions rather than appreciated for its ability to provide clear and consistent guidance is not conducive to positive outcomes in the workplace," she said.
Her proposal taken to Cabinet said the changes would shift WorkSafe "from an enforcement agency to one that engages early and well to support businesses and individuals to manage their risks".
"I want to see a shift from a regulator that has a safety at all cost mentality, to a regulator that focusses on helping duty-holders do what is proportionate to the risks, including rooting out over-compliance."
To support this and "increase fiscal transparency", the regulator's finances would be split into four categories:
• Supporting work health and safety practice
• Enforcing work health and safety compliance
• Authorising and monitoring work health and safety activities
• Energy safety
WorkSafe's other functions identified in the law would become secondary, with Van Velden saying this would help it "articulate the cost and effectiveness of its activities".
The moves were prompted in part by feedback from businesses, collected during a series of roadshow meetings in 11 towns and cities and over 1000 submissions provided in response to a discussion document consulted on over five months.
"For too long, businesses and employers have asked for more guidance and help from WorkSafe on how to comply with health and safety legislation, only to be told it's not WorkSafe's job," van Velden said.
"WorkSafe has started slashing outdated guidance documents from its website and will be updating guidance where necessary. Fifty documents have already been removed and more will follow. These documents were identified as being no longer relevant, nor reflecting current practice and technology, or containing content that is covered by other more up-to-date guidance."
Her Cabinet paper stated the changes would also "help address concerns heard during the consultation that WorkSafe may be underfunded" by making clearer where its resources were being spent.
She confirmed the changes would not come with any new funding.
"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 ... WorkSafe has been funded well, but it's very difficult to find where exactly that money is going within WorkSafe," she told RNZ.
"It's been very clear over a number of reviews into WorkSafe over the years that they have not been structuring their appropriation correctly. They got into a very big deficit. They've now pulled themselves out of that deficit and are in surplus. But there are still many, many questions as to, where are they spending that money."
Her letter to the board set out an expectation the regulator would foster the use of Approved Codes of Practice. WorkSafe would need to provide advice to industries on how to develop and submit these for ministerial approval, while also conducting its own and starting new ones in industries "where there is no clear industry body representation".
"While most future ACOPS will be industry-led, I still expect WorkSafe to develop ACOPs where appropriate."
WorkSafe would also be expected to strengthen its oversight of other regulators, including "comprehensive monitoring of the third parties framework and addressing stakeholder concerns about inconsistent interpretations by third party certifiers".
She expected cultural change to be reflected in its new statement of intent due out in October.
Legislative change would be included in a Health and Safety at Work Reform Bill to be introduced later this year.
In a statement, a WorkSafe spokesperson said it was working closely with the government on the changes.
"We are well placed to deliver on the minister's expectations, via our new strategy and new leadership. WorkSafe is concentrating on the sectors where the most serious harm occurs - agriculture, forestry, construction and manufacturing - and on well-known causes of harm such as vehicles, machinery, working at height and harmful exposures.
"Our Statement of Performance Expectations, due out in the coming weeks, will outline our strategic direction, budget, activities, and performance indicators for the 2025-26 year. Our most recent Impacts and Effectiveness Monitor report found 75 percent of businesses surveyed identified health and safety improvements due to their interactions with WorkSafe."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Will changes to Working for Families leave people worse off?
By Susan Edmunds of RNZ An organisation representing financial mentors around the country is worried that proposed changes to the Working for Families scheme could leave some families worse off. As part of the Budget, the government said it would look at options to help avoid the issue of Working for Families debt. In the 2022 year, only 24 percent of households receiving weekly or fortnightly Working for Families payments and who were squared up by IRD at the end of the tax year had received the right amount of money. People who earned more than expected can end up with an overpayment debt that that they struggle to pay back. There is almost $300 million owed in Working for Families debt. A discussion document, on which submissions were sought, said the government's current thinking was that a quarterly assessment of Working for Families eligibility could strike the right balance between responsiveness, certainty and recipient effort. This would adjust what people were paid much more frequently. But Fleur Howard, chief executive of FinCap, said in a submission in response that she was worried that some families could be left without enough money. A shorter quarterly assessment period would be an improvement, she said, but it needed to be refined. "Aspects of the proposed design appear to suit some whānau situations better than others. We are concerned that in its current state, this design would have a disproportionally negative impact on those who are already experiencing financial instability due to more fluctuations in payment amount." She said FinCap's internal data showed most financial mentor clients had a weekly budget deficit even after they had received help. "More often than not, this deficit is due to whānau trying to pay for essentials, and commonly going into debt to do so. "This, among other markers, points to the fact that government support is not currently adequate to cover living expenses. We have concerns that some of the proposed changes would exacerbate income inadequacy in certain scenarios, particularly for whānau who need that money week to week." She said an example used in the discussion document, outlining a situation where a woman on the sole parent benefit went into additional work for a short period of time, highlighted a potentially unacceptable outcome. In that case, the woman's Working for Families credits would be reduced by $130 a week for the quarter after her temporary work, even though she was no longer in work, because the calculation was based on the higher income from the previous quarter. "We can see that the 'lagged income' mechanism makes sense from the perspective of achieving accuracy, however the potential for a decreased payment below what a whānau is entitled to poses real risk for wellbeing and social participation. "There is also a real concern over the dynamic whereby a quarterly period of higher income followed by a quarterly period of low income would see increased hardship within the low-income period, due to those payments reflecting the past higher income. "While this could be squared up during the end of year process, our data tells us that most whānau living week to week need that money as part of their weekly payments." Howard said mentors were also concerned something similar could happen if someone lost a job and went on the benefit, because their reduced income would not show up in the Working for Families calculation for another quarter. "Whānau need every cent they are entitled to in a timely manner when events such as job loss occur." A solution could be for the quarterly assessment period to look forward, rather than backwards, she said.
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Will Working for Families changes leave people worse off?
By Susan Edmunds of RNZ An organisation representing financial mentors around the country is worried that proposed changes to the Working for Families scheme could leave some families worse off. As part of the Budget, the government said it would look at options to help avoid the issue of Working for Families debt. In the 2022 year, only 24 percent of households receiving weekly or fortnightly Working for Families payments and who were squared up by IRD at the end of the tax year had received the right amount of money. People who earned more than expected can end up with an overpayment debt that that they struggle to pay back. There is almost $300 million owed in Working for Families debt. A discussion document, on which submissions were sought, said the government's current thinking was that a quarterly assessment of Working for Families eligibility could strike the right balance between responsiveness, certainty and recipient effort. This would adjust what people were paid much more frequently. But Fleur Howard, chief executive of FinCap, said in a submission in response that she was worried that some families could be left without enough money. A shorter quarterly assessment period would be an improvement, she said, but it needed to be refined. "Aspects of the proposed design appear to suit some whānau situations better than others. We are concerned that in its current state, this design would have a disproportionally negative impact on those who are already experiencing financial instability due to more fluctuations in payment amount." She said FinCap's internal data showed most financial mentor clients had a weekly budget deficit even after they had received help. "More often than not, this deficit is due to whānau trying to pay for essentials, and commonly going into debt to do so. "This, among other markers, points to the fact that government support is not currently adequate to cover living expenses. We have concerns that some of the proposed changes would exacerbate income inadequacy in certain scenarios, particularly for whānau who need that money week to week." She said an example used in the discussion document, outlining a situation where a woman on the sole parent benefit went into additional work for a short period of time, highlighted a potentially unacceptable outcome. In that case, the woman's Working for Families credits would be reduced by $130 a week for the quarter after her temporary work, even though she was no longer in work, because the calculation was based on the higher income from the previous quarter. "We can see that the 'lagged income' mechanism makes sense from the perspective of achieving accuracy, however the potential for a decreased payment below what a whānau is entitled to poses real risk for wellbeing and social participation. "There is also a real concern over the dynamic whereby a quarterly period of higher income followed by a quarterly period of low income would see increased hardship within the low-income period, due to those payments reflecting the past higher income. "While this could be squared up during the end of year process, our data tells us that most whānau living week to week need that money as part of their weekly payments." Howard said mentors were also concerned something similar could happen if someone lost a job and went on the benefit, because their reduced income would not show up in the Working for Families calculation for another quarter. "Whānau need every cent they are entitled to in a timely manner when events such as job loss occur." A solution could be for the quarterly assessment period to look forward, rather than backwards, she said.
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Will Working for Families changes leave people worse off?
Fleur Howard, chief executive of FinCap, says some families could be left without enough money week to week. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King An organisation representing financial mentors around the country is worried that proposed changes to the Working for Families scheme could leave some families worse off. As part of the Budget, the government said it would look at options to help avoid the issue of Working for Families debt. In the 2022 year, only 24 percent of households receiving weekly or fortnightly Working for Families payments and who were squared up by IRD at the end of the tax year had received the right amount of money. People who earned more than expected can end up with an overpayment debt that that they struggle to pay back . There is almost $300 million owed in Working for Families debt . A discussion document, on which submissions were sought, said the government's current thinking was that a quarterly assessment of Working for Families eligibility could strike the right balance between responsiveness, certainty and recipient effort. This would adjust what people were paid much more frequently. But Fleur Howard, chief executive of FinCap, said in a submission in response that she was worried that some families could be left without enough money. A shorter quarterly assessment period would be an improvement, she said, but it needed to be refined. "Aspects of the proposed design appear to suit some whānau situations better than others. We are concerned that in its current state, this design would have a disproportionally negative impact on those who are already experiencing financial instability due to more fluctuations in payment amount." She said FinCap's internal data showed most financial mentor clients had a weekly budget deficit even after they had received help. "More often than not, this deficit is due to whānau trying to pay for essentials, and commonly going into debt to do so. "This, among other markers, points to the fact that government support is not currently adequate to cover living expenses. We have concerns that some of the proposed changes would exacerbate income inadequacy in certain scenarios, particularly for whānau who need that money week to week." She said an example used in the discussion document, outlining a situation where a woman on the sole parent benefit went into additional work for a short period of time, highlighted a potentially unacceptable outcome. In that case, the woman's Working for Families credits would be reduced by $130 a week for the quarter after her temporary work, even though she was no longer in work, because the calculation was based on the higher income from the previous quarter. "We can see that the 'lagged income' mechanism makes sense from the perspective of achieving accuracy, however the potential for a decreased payment below what a whānau is entitled to poses real risk for wellbeing and social participation. "There is also a real concern over the dynamic whereby a quarterly period of higher income followed by a quarterly period of low income would see increased hardship within the low-income period, due to those payments reflecting the past higher income. "While this could be squared up during the end of year process, our data tells us that most whānau living week to week need that money as part of their weekly payments." Howard said mentors were also concerned something similar could happen if someone lost a job and went on the benefit, because their reduced income would not show up in the Working for Families calculation for another quarter. "Whānau need every cent they are entitled to in a timely manner when events such as job loss occur." A solution could be for the quarterly assessment period to look forward, rather than backwards, she said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
