TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND Review undertaken by Doug Martin and WorkSafe New Zealand s Response

Transcription

1 TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND Review undertaken by Doug Martin and WorkSafe New Zealand s Response WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND S RESPONSE TO TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW 1 Introduction 1 WorkSafe s engagement approach 1 WorkSafe s understanding of its maturity model 6 The perception of WorkSafe as a regulator 7 WorkSafe s readiness for the implementation of the Working Safer reforms 8 WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND: TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW 10 Introduction 11 Part 1: Overview and summary of recommendations 13 Part 2: WorkSafe s engagement approach 16 Part 3: WorkSafe s understanding of its maturity model 24 Part 4: The perception of WorkSafe as a regulator 27 Part 5: WorkSafe s readiness for the implementation of the Working Safer reforms 32 Appendix 1: Summary of individual business survey results 36 Introduction 38 Summary of survey results 41 Participants prior perceptions of engagement versus the actual experience 43 Ratings for overall interaction with WorkSafe 49 Comments on overall experience 53 Awareness of the Health and Safety at Work Act

2 WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND S RESPONSE TO TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW Introduction We would like to thank Doug Martin and MBIE staff for undertaking the WorkSafe New Zealand Targeted Independent Review, focusing on our engagement approach. We would also like to acknowledge everyone who has contributed to the Review. WorkSafe has been operating for two years charged with leading the improvement of New Zealand s workplace health and safety performance. This Review acknowledges the good progress we have made during our transitional establishment phase: we are performing well and are on track to becoming a high performing state sector organisation. WorkSafe has recently developed its four-year excellence horizon, defining what future success looks like for the organisation, our current state, and the critical capabilities we need to build. Organisational success means we are competently undertaking our roles of health and safety system leader/influencer, educator and enforcer, while working in an engaged, smart and targeted way. We need to concurrently apply these capabilities at system, sector, regional and company levels. This strongly aligns with the Government s vision for a capable regulator that uses a range of education, engagement and enforcement levers to deliver health and safety system outcomes. The Review usefully highlights our engagement current state and where we need to increasingly turn our attention to ensure we continue to mature and achieve sustainable health and safety improvement. WorkSafe welcomes this feedback and agrees with the recommendations. We are pleased that most of the issues identified we have already identified ourselves and have initiatives in train or planned to address them. Our response to the Review is set out below. WorkSafe s engagement approach A. Develop a more proactive and systematic approach to engaging with government agencies at all levels of the organisation and ensure WorkSafe is, where appropriate, leading work central to the work health and safety system. As the Review notes, we have initially been focused on establishing and maintaining relationships with key government partners across the health and safety system that are critical to effectively implement the Government health and safety new legislation and systems changes. This has included: working with ACC on joint initiatives in agriculture, manufacturing, construction, forestry, the Safety Star Rating Scheme and within Canterbury 1

3 working with MBIE (including NZ Petroleum and Minerals), Maritime NZ and Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to develop and implement the new health and safety legislation working with the Environmental Protection Authority on the transfer of hazardous substances functions and how we work together; and improving joint working arrangements with Maritime NZ, CAA and Police. We have also been working with SSC and MBIE to prepare public sector agencies for the new law. This includes supporting high risk agencies by convening a group of CEs to facilitate learning and sharing about their common risks and control/mitigation strategies; supporting SSC in developing a government CE community of interest on how to exercise effective H&S leadership; and visiting public sector senior leadership teams. We agree that over time there is more that we can and will do to engage at all levels with government agencies, taking a systematic approach and leveraging connections. We will take a differentiated approach to our level of effort, balancing resources and priorities based on whether agencies are partner health and safety regulators; regulators with areas of potential health and safety synergies (e.g. MBIE s labour inspectorate, immigration; and IRD);agencies that conduct high risk activity, or have considerable influence over supply chains. Our level of engagement is determined by whether it is appropriate for WorkSafe to lead, or whether we can leverage off work or strengths of other Government agencies to affect change. Our objective is to create a self-sustaining health and system where the initiatives for improvement are not always led by the primary regulator. A collective cross-agency commitment is vital. Examples of agencies that have been naturally positioned, willing and capable to lead health and safety issues are MBIE (leading procurement across government), NZTA (leading road safety) and EPA (leading on the hazardous substances part of the regime). Some of the work we have under-way to expand or consolidate work with government agencies over the next months includes: continuing to maximise engagement opportunities presented by the new legislation, and work with SSC and MBIE, to support Government agencies with the new legislation developing the joint Injury Prevention Action Plan (IPAP) with ACC (due July 2016) progressing the development of a broader engagement / communications strategy, including a comprehensive picture of the health and safety system, leverage points, opportunities and how to engage at multiple levels, including with other government agencies 2

4 developing a strategic framework to support agency MOU arrangements, ensuring clarity around respective lead, partner, and support roles, and strong connections and leverage points developing shared health and safety system goals and measures that matter with our key partner agencies, as we work towards a new health and safety strategy (required two years after the new legislation comes into effect) looking for opportunities to work with MBIE s labour inspectorate, including as part of the IPAP maximising opportunities to share regulatory practice e.g. through the government regulatory practice initiative. B. Seek to widen its current influence in areas outside of its targeted industries, particularly in light of the new HSW Act. We agree with this recommendation. WorkSafe takes a smart and targeted, risk-based approach. We aim to ensure that we have, and share, access to data, research and evaluation to help focus effort on the areas and interventions for greatest impact. To date WorkSafe has primarily concentrated on higher risk areas with high injury, illhealth and fatality numbers and rates such as forestry, agriculture, construction and manufacturing along with areas with potential for catastrophic harm (extractives, petroleum, and major hazards). A further 20% of WorkSafe s assessments have been outside key focus areas (e.g. ports, healthcare, warehousing and transport). Given the fatalities, serious injuries and harm, and occupational health statistics in high risk sectors a focus on these areas remains critical. However, we are unlikely to achieve targets for reducing harm by focussing on these sectors alone. We are currently working with ACC using data to identify high risk businesses outside these sectors, or health and safety system issues which impact on areas beyond our key risk sectors. We are developing cross-cutting initiatives (including occupational health and hazardous substances) across all sectors to reduce harm. This includes looking at how, and where, WorkSafe and ACC collectively spread our effort and use our skills and capacity to get broader reach. We agree that critical to achieving outcomes will be making the most of the new legislation opportunity. Supporting initiatives include: developing the IPAP with the right combination of activities at the right level (system, sector, regional, company level. This includes how we can encourage better safety in design). The IPAP considers the right mix of interventions - i.e. how we best use our proactive assessments; education; promotion of behaviour change in targeted and wider workforce markets; sector-support initiatives; and ACC and WorkSafe incentives 3

5 developing a workforce development strategy which looks to address health and safety capability gaps across the education and skills system considering how we can focus on particular demographics which have high rates of injury (for example developing a Maori strategy to inform how we work effectively with Maori on health and safety issues) implementing an education and engagement campaign on the new legislation (see recommendation K below) implementing a range of occupational health initiatives, and developing a more longer-term occupational health strategy continuing to develop our operational intelligence capability to inform environmental scanning and emerging risk. C. Improve communications and sharing of knowledge across the organisation and address any elements of siloed outlooks and approaches. We agree with this recommendation. Initiatives underway that will support improved internal communications and knowledge sharing include: the broader engagement / communications strategy being developed increased face to face WorkSafe strategic leadership team communication with staff across New Zealand, including ensuring senior managers take responsibility and are adept at communicating the bigger health and safety picture including the inspectorate and their managers in the strategic business planning process (including developing our 4-year organisational strategy) regular Managers Forum and operational meetings to communicate organisational direction and updates, share information and best practice, and work on issues collaboratively more tactical and operational communication e.g. communicating to frontline staff what risk identification/control/mitigation methods are working and the impact of wider sector interventions piloting online collaboration tools to promote and enable improved cross-staff partnerships / problem-solving more extensive operational practice and support for inspectors embed and use the inspectorate champion structure more consistently and effectively across the organisation to share knowledge and best practice and improve consistency. 4

6 Part of this improvement will be delivered by the operational information component of our new ICT system being developed. The new system will facilitate better quality information about workplaces, and our engagement with them, which can be readily accessed by inspectors and their managers to plan and monitor their work. This will enable full visibility of WorkSafe s interactions with firms across a range of activities. The aggregation of this data will enable more sophisticated analyses of trends and patterns which can further inform operational priorities and more individual customer focussed engagement. D. Continue to develop indirect influencing tools, such as through the clients of construction projects, banks, trusted advisers and so forth. We agree with this recommendation. Our engagement / communications strategy will include key influencing groups and a plan for how we engage with them. There are already good examples of this happening in Canterbury and work as part of support around the new legislation. We will extend current approaches. Current work in this area includes: working with the Institute of Directors and Business Leaders forum on due diligence and safety governance initiatives encouraging effective professional advice by supporting HASANZ, and the development of an accreditation framework with NZISM working with business leaders developing lead health and safety indicators identifying key and trusted advisors and ensuring they have sufficient information, particularly about the new law and the approach of the regulator. E. Review with MBIE the operation of the call centre including, but not limited to, the effectiveness of the after-hours service. WorkSafe acknowledges industry feedback of the time taken to contact appropriate inspectors to release scenes following notification of serious harm after hours. We understand the strong desire for businesses to return to operation as soon as possible (noting they may not always understand the gravity of the situation). The immediate needs of the firm need to be considered alongside their regulatory responsibilities and the need to preserve the integrity of potential evidence. A review of the contact centre operations began in November with MBIE, including improving reporting (retagging calls) and better call routing (through reviewing the setup of the current IVR system). WorkSafe will also review with MBIE the effectiveness of the after-hours service. This will consider the time taken for site preservation from a range of cases and assess reasonable release times to help understand the scale of the issue. We will then be in a position to assess the desire for businesses to get back to normal operation against the cost of a more comprehensive response capability from WorkSafe (noting WorkSafe needs to carefully use its resources for the greatest needs). 5

7 In the meantime, we will also clearly communicate why scenes are preserved and will work with businesses to clear scenes as soon as practicable. WorkSafe s understanding of its maturity model F. Give priority to bedding in its whole-of-organisation functions so that it can reach a steady state by the end of We agree with this recommendation. As the organisation matures it is important to have seamless integration between the design of our regulatory functions and their delivery, all informed by a clear strategic direction. The extent of the build and consolidation of these functions is dependent on addressing cost pressures and the level of funding available, which will be confirmed by the fees and funding reviews. Initiatives underway include: building our strategy (including occupational health), stakeholder engagement, and research and evaluation functions implementing a review of our national programmes team to provide greater focus throughout the programme lifecycle and better support stakeholder leadership considering the four-year future state for our operational policy and design, guidance and standards, intelligence, and practice support functions to ensure they support delivery of our strategic objectives. An important step is determining our internal operating arrangements across WorkSafe s educator functions (embedded in most parts of the organisation) to ensure they are wellaligned and supporting outcomes taking the opportunity of the Health and Safety Funding Review being led by MBIE (due November 2016) to ensure we have the right mix of resource in the right areas to deliver on Government and WorkSafe objectives. G. As part of this, review its corporate structure with a view to consolidation and identifying any scope for reducing overheads. We agree with this recommendation. Now that we are nearing completion of our transitional phase and are heading towards a steady operating state, the time is right to do this. We acknowledge that all government organisations, whatever their size, need sufficient infrastructure and support to provide effective governance across areas such as finance, HR, audit and risk, reporting and accountability. Our challenge is ensuring that this resource is nimble and efficient. To this end, some WorkSafe corporate functions like HR have already reduced reflecting the slowdown in recruitment and consequent training load as we get to steady state. The Funding Review will examine both the effectiveness and efficiency of WorkSafe s functions, including corporate services. The Funding Review will also look at how the shared services model with MBIE is working and will identify any efficiencies and 6

8 improvements. We will consider economies of scale where appropriate, alongside any services that need tailoring towards WorkSafe s needs. H. Broaden its focus to more fully embrace occupational health, and better communicate its strategy in this regard. We agree with this recommendation. We recognised from the outset that occupational health needed to be a priority but we were starting from a very low capability and capacity base to support this work. In the first two years of establishment our focus has been on working with our external Occupational Health Advisory Group (OHAG) to determine our priority areas, build an occupational health evidence base (including accurate data) and create targets, develop our occupational health structure and resource, and strengthen our occupational health capability. We also made a deliberate decision not to wait until we had finalised our supporting strategy before starting to deliver occupational health interventions. Where there was already sufficient evidence of a problem such as silica dust and asbestos in construction and manufacturing, we started to equip our inspectors with the capability to tackle them. Now that we have strengthened our occupational health capacity, we are determining how we communicate our occupational health approach to internal and external stakeholders and any strategy that needs to be developed as part of the broader health and safety strategy. WorkSafe has extended the term of OHAG for another year and will work closely with these technical experts over the next six months to ensure our plans are clear, well-publicised, and effective. The perception of WorkSafe as a regulator I. Continue to support inspectors by creating clear expectations through training and mentoring on the way in which they engage with organisations. J. Be vigilant in addressing instances of inconsistency in approach through additional training and shared learnings. We agree with these recommendations. It has been a key priority for us from the outset, especially as many of our inspectors are relatively new. We are providing on-going support and training to our inspectorate to ensure both consistency of style (the way inspectors interact with stakeholders) and consistency of decision-making. We expect our managers to provide quality assurance as a core part of their role and as a critical ingredient to ensuring the qualitative aspects of inspectorate work. We will continue to invest in inspectorate professional development. In terms of consistency of style, WorkSafe s core roles are being an educator (what good health and safety looks like and how to take action), engaging with those who influence the workplace, and enforcing (to ensure duty-holders are held accountable). We expect all our interactions with stakeholders to include an element of education and positive engagement, even if enforcement action is required. We recognise that at times there can be a tension between WorkSafe s educator and enforcer roles; our challenge is to ensure they are not seen as mutually exclusive but both integral to our work. We know 7

9 that businesses value the regulator itself providing education because it helps them to understand when and why that same body may take enforcement action. With regard to consistency of decision-making, our new inspectorate practice framework will support guided discretion and consistent, proportionate practice. An enforcement decision-making tool has been rolled out to inspectors which helps ensure that they use consistent criteria for matching their response (from advice through to prosecution) to the nature, scale, and potential for harm; the way this relates to legal requirements; and local factors, such as the history and overall performance of the duty holder. We are also working with the inspectorate to develop more meaningful performance measures to help drive a focus on quality outcomes rather than a purely output driven approach. This approach will feature in our business plan and expand thereafter. We note the areas of concern identified on page 20 of the Review that can contribute to inspectorate inconsistency. These relate to inspector retention, inspector coaching, access to experienced inspectors, sharing lessons learned and internal learning, communication about changes to guidance and best practice, and inspectorate specialisation within sectors. We agree that there is merit in considering these areas to strengthen inspectorate consistency and will develop specific actions as part of our 2016 strategic business plan. The review s feedback that external stakeholders are willing to assist with developing more industry specific knowledge is helpful in this regard. This will support our programme of development training underway to support inspectorate capability in our priority industry sectors. Level one modules have already been completed for construction, forestry and hazardous substances. WorkSafe s readiness for the implementation of the Working Safer reforms K. Take the opportunities afforded by the new HSW Act to give emphasis to its educational role, particularly over the transition. We agree with this recommendation. The new legislation provides an important opportunity to work with business around health and safety to ensure a proportionate and effective approach is taken to managing risk. We are currently reviewing the way we develop and deliver the critical education part of our role, including whether we need to focus and resource more the development of innovative and accessible education tools. While this is underway, our transition work over the next six months includes: WorkSafe leading, co-hosting, and supporting a large number of workshops, seminars and roadshows with different businesses, sectors and groups on the legislation developing a range of educative tools and support, as well as formal guidance. This includes dedicated HSWA website pages which host a growing range of tools and information (including FAQs, case studies, fact sheets, posters, videos, pocket guides, interactive apps, articles, worksheets and interpretive guides) 8

10 working with key sectors on what good practice looks like in their sectors and codesigning educative support so that business sectors can also play a key role in disseminating messages in their sectors a proactive media campaign working through other channels to reach different audience segments, including through industry and professional associations, advisors, and other government agencies (e.g. business.govt to create additional content and leverage their distribution channels) ensuring we are transparent about our enforcement approach, by developing and publishing our enforcement policy and enforcement decision-making model providing extensive training to all WorkSafe staff so that they can explain to stakeholders the meaning of key new concepts in the legislation clearly and consistently, and implement the new law effectively working closely with our social partners and expert advisory groups. WorkSafe itself of course is only one of several health and safety education levers. An important part of our strategy is to upskill New Zealand s workforce on health and safety. Fundamental to this is the delivery of a workforce development plan. The plan s deliverables are two-fold. First, through stakeholder consultation and engagement, it will identify the work health and safety capability and capacity gaps correlating to serious harm and injuries at work. Second, it will outline how WorkSafe can influence and/or work with other chief stakeholders in the system to implement education and trainingcentric interventions to bridge work health and safety gaps. L. Review how best to balance the immediate demands of the HSW Act with business as usual requirements, and the potential impact on the more self-contained areas of WorkSafe as these are integrated with centralised core functions. We agree with this recommendation. The communication and engagement strategy to support the HSW Act has been closely aligned with our national programmes and BAU engagement activity by leveraging off roadshows, field days, industry forums, presentations and assessments. In terms of firmly moving out of an establishment phase, the IRF programme will be closed-out by the end of June 2016 enabling integration of ongoing work with our core functions. This will help to embed servicing of the legislation across the organisation as part of normal business. We are aware of the need to balance the demands of developing guidance to support the new legislation with guidance required to support other parts of the business (such as energy safety, extractives and petroleum). WorkSafe has prioritised and phased its guidance and standards work programme according to legislative needs (including new concepts and duties), the level of risk and complexity involved, and sector-demand. 9

11 WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND: TARGETED INDEPENDENT REVIEW Doug Martin 18 December

12 Introduction 1 This report has been prepared by Doug Martin for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), who commissioned the review at the request of the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety. 2 The review focused on WorkSafe New Zealand s (WorkSafe) engagement, assessing the quality of its interactions with stakeholders given WorkSafe s education, engagement and enforcement roles. It is noted that WorkSafe engages both internally and externally and this report addresses both elements. 3 The terms of reference required particular assessment of: WorkSafe s progress in relation to its engagement approach. The state of the work health and safety regulatory system prior to the establishment of WorkSafe has been taken into account in assessing progress in this regard. How well WorkSafe understands where it is in relation to its maturity model around engagement and the plans it has in place to address any development issues or gaps identified. Whether WorkSafe s perception of itself as a regulator aligns with the perceptions held by stakeholders and others WorkSafe engages with. WorkSafe s readiness for implementation of the Worker Safer 1 reforms once the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSW Act) comes into force on 4 April The issues identified in this report are not necessarily isolated to one particular area of assessment. Rather, the majority are cross-cutting and interconnected and should be considered in this light. 5 The approach to the review involved: an examination of relevant written material provided by WorkSafe on the particular assessment areas and more general information within the scope of the review. a series of interviews, including with: the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety. the Chair and Deputy Chair of WorkSafe. the Chief Executive and senior leadership team of WorkSafe. WorkSafe s national programme leaders and a selection of managers. members of the inspectorate, including Chief Inspectors, assessment and investigation inspectors and specialist inspectors from the high hazards unit. 1 Working Safer: A blueprint for health and safety at work (August 2013) contains the Government s response to the recommendations of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety. It focuses on three key areas working smarter; targeting risk, and working together. Refer 11

13 representatives of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, Business New Zealand and Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum. a selection of key industry stakeholders, both industry associations and individual companies (predominantly large businesses), that WorkSafe proactively engages with as part of its national programmes and identified targeted industries. 2 key government agencies, including the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), MBIE (including a representative of the Labour Inspectorate) and the State Services Commission. the Chair and members of the Small Business Development Group. a random selection of 39 individual businesses were also surveyed about their recent experiences engaging with WorkSafe inspectors. 3 6 Interviews were conducted in a flexible and relatively informal way. While tailored interview frameworks were provided to interviewees, these were intended to provide a general overview and assist them in thinking about WorkSafe s engagement. 7 The review is based on the information and observations of those people interviewed and surveyed. As such, the comments made and issues identified in this report need to be viewed within that context. 8 The report is structured as follows: Part 1: Overview of the report and summary of recommendations. Part 2: Assessment of WorkSafe s engagement approach. Part 3: Assessment of WorkSafe s understanding of its maturity model. Part 4: Assessment of the perception of WorkSafe as a regulator. Part 5: Assessment of WorkSafe s readiness for the implementation of Working Safer, in particular the coming into force of the HSW Act. Appendix 1: A summary of the individual business survey results. 2 3 This included stakeholders from the identified high incident industries of agriculture, construction, forestry, manufacturing as well as those with high potential for catastrophic harm, namely extractives (eg mining), petroleum and major hazards facilities. Survey participants were contacted from a randomly selected list of organisations whose most recent interaction with a WorkSafe inspector concluded in October While randomly selected it is noted that a high number of participants identified themselves as from within the construction industry (17 of the 39 surveyed) and regionally the majority of participants where from the Auckland or Canterbury regions (11 from the Auckland and 8 from Canterbury). 12

14 Part 1: Overview and summary of recommendations 9 WorkSafe was established on 16 December 2013 following the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy and the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety New Zealand s work health and safety regulator, WorkSafe also holds regulatory functions under the Electricity Act 1992 and Gas Act 1992 relating to the safe supply and use of electricity and gas. 5 As a Crown Agent under the Crown Entities Act 2004, WorkSafe must give effect to Government policy. 11 WorkSafe recognises a need for a tailored approach to its regulatory role, one that effectively mixes education, engagement and enforcement to help achieve its goals. One of the on-going challenges for WorkSafe, as with all regulators, is to continually ensure that the right balance is struck between these roles. The new HSW Act will, of itself, require WorkSafe to place greater emphasis on education, particularly initially. On-going consideration of how best to meet its educational role is also needed. 12 Overall, given WorkSafe s current stage of development, it is performing well and is on track to becoming a high performing state sector organisation. 13 Stakeholders expressed a high level of support for WorkSafe being a stand-alone regulatory agency. On the whole, key stakeholders consider that WorkSafe has, or is in the process of, delivering on their expectations in this regard. WorkSafe has considerably sharpened the focus on work health and safety at all levels: national, sectorial, and enterprise. 14 WorkSafe has been an organisation in transition for the two years since its inception. The transition period is drawing to a close and the organisation must move to a steady state by the end of This will need to be reflected in a consolidation of its corporate structures and identification of any scope for reducing overheads. 15 At a general level, the issues identified in this report are not uncommon and are entirely expected within an organisation that is transitioning. The issues are also not disproportionate as compared to other organisations at a similar level of development. 16 This was acknowledged by stakeholders who generally saw WorkSafe as a maturing organisation whose performance, overall, has been improving and is expected to continue to improve. This was particularly relevant to views about the inspectorate. Stakeholders at all levels recognised WorkSafe has gone through a capacity building phase which has resulted in more, but less experienced, inspectors. Comments were often prefaced by this acknowledgement. Stakeholders were also quick to stress improvement and this was expected 4 5 Completed in October 2012 and April 2013 respectively, the Royal Commissions report can be found at and the Report of the Independent Taskforce at It is noted that Maritime New Zealand and the Civil Aviation Authority are designated agencies (ie the regulators) for work health and safety matters in the maritime and aviation sectors. 13

15 to continue as the inspectorate gained in experience. On the whole, the quality of the new inspectors has been high. 17 WorkSafe recognises a collective effort is needed for real and sustainable improvement in the health and safety system. Its approach is to work with industry collaboratively with an aim to influencing behaviour. There is recognition from those WorkSafe engages with of a substantive and noticeable shift from earlier engagement approaches to real consultative approaches. 18 Overall, those that interact with WorkSafe consider the organisation is doing a good job and provided positive comments about its engagement. This is particularly apparent in relation to engagement at Chief Executive, senior leadership and management level. Further down in the organisation some issues begin to emerge of instances of poor and ineffective engagement and inconsistent approaches, although these are diminishing over time. 19 Externally, WorkSafe has been focused on establishing relationships with industry, primarily within its targeted industry areas, 6 and with key stakeholders in the health and safety system generally. 7 Targeting high incident industries is appropriate. However, WorkSafe needs to ensure it is strategically and proactively interacting with organisations in a systematic way outside of its targeted industries. This will assist in meeting its injury reduction targets. 8 The new legislation provides a good platform for this and it is acknowledged that work in this area is being undertaking and is in development which WorkSafe can also build upon. 20 As noted above, WorkSafe s prime focus has been on engaging with its targeted industries and it has done this very effectively. While WorkSafe is engaging and working with other government agencies, generally it appears to have paid less attention to fully leveraging its cross-government connections. 9 It is now timely for WorkSafe to be more proactive and systematic in leveraging these connections. Internally, attention needs to be paid to ensuring that lessons and innovations in the targeted industry areas are shared across the organisation. 21 WorkSafe s initial organisational priorities were developing essential services, such as the rapid recruitment of large numbers of new inspectors. This required a high corporate overhead. It is now in the process of building whole-of-organisation functions, such as strategy and stakeholder engagement and operational policy. Bedding these functions in is a priority. There has been considerable recent investment in its research and intelligence capabilities, including on a causative and cross-industry analysis basis. This is crucial if WorkSafe is to continue to grow as a credible, evidence-based and trusted regulator These targeted industries are focused on due to high incident levels within these sectors and, in part, have been carried over from WorkSafe s legacy agencies through the national programmes. Currently these targeted industries are agriculture, construction, forestry and manufacturing. Also included is the Canterbury rebuild and industries with high potential for catastrophic harm, namely extractives, petroleum and major hazard facilities. This includes government agencies central to the health and safety system such as ACC, MBIE and the designated agencies Maritime New Zealand and the Civil Aviation Authority. The government has set a target of reducing work death and serious injury rates by 25 per cent by 2020, and WorkSafe is leading the effort to achieve this target Discussions with stakeholders indicated that this may be particularly relevant with other regulatory agencies such as the New Zealand Transport Agency and the labour inspectorate. 14

16 22 Generally the issues identified in this review are recognised in one form or another by WorkSafe. Internally there has been considerable high level strategic thinking about what type of regulator WorkSafe wants to be. WorkSafe is also proactively taking steps to measure and understand how external and internal parties view its progress through avenues such as the Chief Executives survey, service excellence survey and commissioning a series of internal audits. The issues identified in this report are well understood by WorkSafe and I am confident that plans are, or will be, in place to address them. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 23 It is recommended that WorkSafe: A. Develop a more proactive and systematic approach to engaging with government agencies at all levels of the organisation and ensure WorkSafe is, where appropriate, leading work central to the work health and safety system. B. Seek to widen its current influence in areas outside of its targeted industries, particularly in light of the new HSW Act. C. Improve communications and sharing of knowledge across the organisation and address any elements of siloed outlooks and approaches. D. Continue to develop indirect influencing tools, such as through the clients of construction projects, banks, trusted advisers and so forth. E. Review with MBIE the operation of the call centre including, but not limited to, the effectiveness of the after-hours service. F. Give priority to bedding in its whole-of-organisation functions so that it can reach a steady state by the end of G. As part of this, review its corporate structure with a view to consolidation and identifying any scope for reducing overheads. H. Broaden its focus to more fully embrace occupational health, and better communicate its strategy in this regard. I. Continue to support inspectors by creating clear expectations through training and mentoring on the way in which they engage with organisations. J. Be vigilant in addressing instances of inconsistency in approach through additional training and sharing of learnings. K. Take the opportunities afforded by the new HSW Act to give emphasis to its educational role, particularly over the transition period. L. Review how best to balance the immediate demands of the HSW Act with business as usual requirements, and the potential impact on the more self-contained areas of WorkSafe as these are integrated with centralised core functions. 15

17 Part 2: WorkSafe s engagement approach 24 The focus of WorkSafe s proactive engagement effort to date has been in establishing external relationship with key influences within its targeted industries and the health and safety system more generally On the whole, external stakeholders (including survey participants) provided positive comments about WorkSafe and its engagement. This was particularly apparent in relation to engagement at Chief Executive and senior leadership levels. 26 WorkSafe s engagement approach is generally viewed as positive and constructive. Many stakeholders expressed the view that WorkSafe had, and would continue to, improve in this area. WorkSafe s approach is more about advising people and giving them information, guiding them in the right direction rather than pointing fingers and trying to pin you for something you perhaps didn t know anything about. Survey Participant 14, from the wholesale trade industry in Auckland 27 There was also an appreciation by stakeholders of WorkSafe engaging early on in a process. Guidance, for example, is now more readily seen as being developed with industry rather than industry having limited or after the fact ability to contribute. 28 Strategically, WorkSafe recognises that all levels of the organisation, from Board to inspectorate, need to effectively engage. Where key WorkSafe management interfaces with external parties, engagement is very effective. 11 Further down in the organisation some issues begin to emerge of instances of poor and ineffective engagement and inconsistent approaches. 29 Inconsistency at inspectorate level was identified as an issue, though stakeholders and survey participants considered that this was improving over time. There was also acknowledgement that inspectorate inconsistency was an expected symptom of the substantial recruitment Recommendations and further discussion on this point are contained in part 4 of this report. 30 WorkSafe is a willing and active participant in initiatives promoted by other government agencies but needs to take a more proactive and systematic approach to this. While WorkSafe has led or partnered with other agencies on a range of work, as it matures it needs to pay more attention to these cross-government relationships. Where it is appropriate WorkSafe, as the work health and safety regulator needs to ensure it is leading work central to the health and safety system For example ACC, the Council of Trade Unions, Business New Zealand and Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum. Namely at Board, Chief Executive and senior leadership levels and at the level of the targeted industry area managers, national programme leaders and chief inspectors. 16

18 31 At lower levels, connections with government appear to be made on a project-by-project basis. Making and maintaining key relationships outside of these times is left more to regional and individual inspector discretion. 32 Generally WorkSafe could be more proactive and assertive in making connections and maintaining systematic relationships within government at all levels of the organisation, even where there may not appear to be an immediate shared interest. 33 For example, in the overall area of labour market regulation, there is a lot of scope for the sharing of information and where appropriate for joint initiatives with the labour inspectorate and immigration. Connections, mainly at lower regional levels, appear to have been weakened where immigration officers and labour inspectors no longer share office premises with WorkSafe inspectors WorkSafe s focus on high incident industries has been entirely appropriate. However, WorkSafe needs to strategically and proactively interact with organisations in a systematic way outside of, and across, its targeted industry areas. WorkSafe needs to ensure that it has effective strategies in place to widen its current influence in those areas outside of its targeted industries, particularly in light of the new the HSW Act. Recommendations and further discussion on this point are contained in part 5 of this report. 35 A minority of stakeholders also raised concerns with the call centre, particularly the after-hours service. The call centre will often be the first point of engagement people have with WorkSafe and its effective operation and ability to meet the reasonable expectations of those that interact with WorkSafe at that level are essential. 36 WorkSafe needs to be able to assure itself that the call centre is operating effectively and efficient arrangements can be maintained to deal with any expected increased demand for both general and more specific information on the new HSW Act. 37 Internally greater connection and leverage between the targeted industry areas could be made. There is also some disconnect with sharing of information to, and between, lower levels of the organisation, particularly at inspectorate level. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 38 It is recommended that WorkSafe: A. Develop a more proactive and systematic approach to engaging with government agencies at all levels of the organisation and ensure WorkSafe is, where appropriate, leading work central to the work health and safety system. B. Seek to widen its current influence in areas outside of its targeted industries, particularly in light of the new HSW Act. 12 This appears to vary regionally with WorkSafe and MBIE still sharing office premises in some areas of the country. It is acknowledged that prior to WorkSafe s establishment the sharing of office premises varied regionally but that generally, while different regulators were within the same government agency, there was a level of shared office space which fostered regular interaction 17

19 C. Improve communications and sharing of knowledge across the organisation and address any elements of siloed outlooks and approaches. D. Continue to develop indirect influencing tools, such as through the clients of construction projects, banks, trusted advisers and so forth. E. Review with MBIE the operation of the call centre including, but not limited to, the effectiveness of the after-hours service. COMMENT WorkSafe s willingness to engage is highly regarded by government agencies but it could be more proactive in making and leveraging its relationships 39 During its establishment phase WorkSafe has been focusing on developing essential services and building key relationships with industry and government agencies central to the health and safety system, rather than on making wider and more systematic cross-government connections. 40 Government agencies speak highly of engagement with WorkSafe and acknowledge the willingness of WorkSafe to engage and assist when approached. Engagement at government level though appears to be more reactive WorkSafe actively works with and maintains relationships with those agencies central to its operation and when asked. There is less evidence of a wider proactive and systematic approach to government agency engagement or wider consideration of leveraging of these connections. 41 In addition, there is a perception that WorkSafe is not necessarily being seen as the lead agency in some government initiatives that affect work health and safety. Notably some stakeholders seem to consider that the New Zealand Transport Agency is being more active around road construction than WorkSafe. This is not necessarily a problem but can diminish WorkSafe s leadership role. 42 While WorkSafe has a recognised partnership approach, 13 consideration of how to be more assertive and seen clearly as the leading government agency (where appropriate) in work health and safety initiatives is needed. 43 As it matures, WorkSafe needs to pay more attention to a broader range of cross-government relationships and ensure it is, where appropriate, leading work central to the work health and safety system. 13 It is noted that the Canterbury Charter, which stakeholders highly regard, was an initiative that started from a partnership approach between WorkSafe and the construction industry. 18

20 WorkSafe needs to remain conscious of making and maintaining connections at all levels of the organisation 44 At senior leadership and management level, there is an active and strategic approach to making and maintaining effective external relationships. There is a clear recognition at this level of the potential benefits for WorkSafe from these relationships. Lower down the organisation approaches appear to be more reactive and focused around identifying common ground. Where long standing relationships do exist this seems largely dependent on regional approaches and the initiatives of individual inspectors. 45 It is acknowledged that engagement and relationships will naturally ebb and flow as shared interests change. What is needed is continuing and active maintenance of these relationships at all appropriate levels of WorkSafe and that everyone remains conscious of these connections and knows how to make them. 46 This is particularly important at inspectorate level where regular contact with other regulators such as the labour inspectorate, immigration and Police, provide a means of sharing information and identifying industry practice or rising issues relevant to the work health and safety system. Wider consideration of potential connections would also be beneficial; for example engagement with building inspectors and councils. 47 Where these relationships are established and working well, there is evidence that on-going interaction - even at an informal level - has been of assistance to, and is valued by, inspectors in undertaking their jobs. 48 There is evidence that relationships are being maintained at a regional level but this appears more erratic than a deliberate overall engagement strategy. These connections appear largely dependent on existing individual relationships (often of a long standing nature) or working environments, such as shared office premises. Continuing reliance on this type of approach depends on the history of the area and the individuals involved, including them remaining with the organisation. There is benefit to a more deliberate and systematic approach to establishing and maintaining these types of connections. 49 The shift of WorkSafe into its own office premises in a number of regions appears to have limited the potential for future relationships to develop. This is especially important given the level of new inspectors who may have only briefly or never shared office premises with the labour inspectorate and/or immigration officers. It also seems to have diminished the on-going maintenance of these relationships. Separate locations means a conscious effort is now required to maintain connections where this may have previously occurred more organically through office interactions. 50 Generally inspectors and other regulators spoken to noted that businesses that did not perform well under one regime were likely to be failing in others, including within health and safety. Widening consideration of interaction with other government agencies would also ensure greater knowledge and understanding of businesses and their operations generally and regionally. 19

21 51 It is acknowledged that other organisations may be less inclined to establish relationships where they see no direct benefit or connection with their immediate work and it may be beneficial in such situations to approach engagement at all levels. Separation of the inspectorate into assessment and investigation inspectors is working well but better communications at inspectorate level across the organisation is needed 52 Having separate assessment and investigation inspectors is recognised by stakeholders and internal parties as a good approach that is generally working well. Internally the connections between the two groups, including basic information sharing requires more attention. 53 By way of example, it appears that there have been situations where assessment inspectors have visited sites without prior knowledge that active investigations were underway. There is also some concern over being able to actively and with confidence obtain full information about a business s prior interaction history with WorkSafe. 54 It is understood that limitations in existing ICT systems do not readily assist in addressing these concerns. There would be considerable benefit at inspectorate level in having ready and easy access to detailed business history, including about cumulative issues that may not have necessarily resulted in inspector interaction in the past. 55 The new ICT system being developed is anticipated by WorkSafe to enable more effective access to wider information and greater visibility between the work of assessment and investigation inspectors. Appropriate staff expectations and requirements around the new system should be considered to ensure information is inputted at appropriate times or in ways that the benefits of the new system can be adequately realised. 56 In addition, more general consideration around ways to develop and maintain greater connection and sharing of information between the two inspectorate groups is advised. The theoretical stuff is Wellington driven and then interpreted at each office. WorkSafe inspector 57 Wider consideration of sharing of information and learnings throughout the inspectorate as a whole would also be of benefit, particularly given there is a slight concern of siloed and regional approaches. This is further discussed in part 4 of this report. Connections and potential cross-leveraging between WorkSafe s targeted industry areas could be more effectively made and utilised 58 Internally, the structured focus on identified high incident industries appears to result in somewhat siloed approaches to industry engagement, particularly the further down the organisation you go. Connections between industries and ability to potentially cross-leverage WorkSafe s connections across the targeted industry areas could be more effectively utilised. 59 This approach can also result in a lack of wider consideration of potential levers from outside the targeted industries which could have substantive influence on those within it. For example, 20

22 engaging with large suppliers within the construction industry could enable a much wider educational avenue where a number of smaller construction companies rely on and obtain substantive information from free talks and seminars building supply companies hold. From an agricultural perspective engagement with bank managers or accountants could enable an educate the advisor type of approach. These types of connections, and the role they could offer as a conduit for WorkSafe, were mentioned by survey participants. 60 It is acknowledged that WorkSafe has undertaken this kind of approach already within the Safer Farm programme, partnering with FMG to assist in educating and distributing information throughout the farming community. It is also possible that a number of these connections already exist in some way within WorkSafe but are not necessarily obvious. For example, energy safety maintains effective relationships with retailers and suppliers which it engages with routinely for matters of product safety. 61 Incorporating wider approaches to engagement with the existing targeted industries focus would give WorkSafe a broader educational impact across the workforce as a whole. This would assist in meeting injury reduction and occupational health targets as there is concern that these cannot be meet from reductions within WorkSafe s targeted industry areas alone. 62 Within its targeted industries, WorkSafe needs to ensure that it gets the balance right between working with large, medium and small business. This would help to address potential concerns raised that engaging primarily with larger businesses means smaller organisations, particularly in supply chains or contracting arrangements, simply do not do anything about health and safety as they know larger organisations will deal with this for them. 14 There is some indication that increased interaction with assessment inspectors could be positively impacting this, particularly in the construction industry. 63 Another comparable approach may be to also focus on highly respected individuals within industries who may not necessarily be within the larger organisations. Respected individuals within industries could have the potential to impact across industries in a way large organisations alone cannot Concerns were also raised about under-utilisation of connections and identification of potential cross-cutting issues between the targeted industry areas. Moving forward greater consideration of ways to utilise learning between these areas as well as leveraging across them. 65 By way of example: stakeholders spoke highly of the Canterbury Safety Charter and considered that it has worked well at bringing together businesses and providing industry wide leadership of the issue. It has also produced useful, user-friendly resource developed by and shared between Charter members. While it is acknowledged that there are difficulties in obtaining industry wide commitment, aspects of the approach could be adapted for and applied to other areas, such as the growing Auckland construction industry It is noted that this concern was primarily raised by larger organisations and that medium and small businesses are likely to have their own view on this matter but what this may be was not something that was overtly apparent from discussions had as part of the review. WorkSafe advises that it is undertaking work of this nature in conjunction with ACC and in the forestry industry and wider consideration of applying such approaches in other industries could be advisable. 21

23 connections between forestry and agriculture could be explored to best reach those farmers who do not identify themselves as being within the forestry sector but have large quantities of trees that will be ready for harvest in the near future. Wider connections could also be available relating to farmers and quarrying activity. 66 At industry association level there is an acknowledgement that WorkSafe cannot do it all by itself. The more we can be seen to be aligned and working in the same direction the better. Key stakeholder, from the agricultural industry 67 More active consideration of partnerships with industry associations or membership groups and individual businesses may be beneficial as the indication is that there are avenues available to WorkSafe that it is perceived as under-utilising. Current engagement approaches may not be readily adaptable to address cross-cutting issues within the work health and safety system 68 There are also wider concerns of the impact the focus on targeted industry engagement potentially has on other industries, cross-cutting issues and medium and low-risk work. The development and delivery of initiatives relating to cross-cutting issues necessitates engaging with and bringing together multiple industries. Current engagement approaches need to be adapted to ensure this. 69 WorkSafe has a good understanding of how to target based on high incidents in particular industries. What appears to be less clear is the overall strategy of how to make connections and engage, when the issues require, across these industries and with the wider workforce as appropriate. WorkSafe needs to know how sectors outside its targeted industries operate and be more systematic and deliberate in making connections across industries. 70 It is acknowledged that WorkSafe has been doing cross-cutting work, for example the clean air programme, but there is some internal indication of a lack of appropriate organisation around engagement with these types of cross-cutting initiatives. Wider workforce involvement in, and knowledge of, cross-cutting issues is considered necessary for such initiatives to be effective in educating and improving work health and safety. 71 Failure to appropriately make broader connections and engage widely across industries and the workforce, to the extent appropriate to the issue or situation identified, has high potential for negative consequences when addressing cross-cutting issues. WorkSafe needs to consider activities in its targeted industries as well as cross-cutting issues to ensure that connections are made and potential issues do not fall through the gaps. 22

24 Widening the business hours of the response support officers and after-hours arrangements of the call centre 72 The call centre will often be the first point of engagement people have with WorkSafe. There has been some feedback from industry of unreasonable delays in contacting appropriate inspectors to release scenes following notification of serious harm after business hours. There was no indication that this is a large or systemic problem. 73 There was also indication from one small business owner that the ability to contact WorkSafe to ask a question was not something they had known was available to them. 74 Presently the call centre operates so that general enquiries are addressed by the appropriate team at MBIE s call centre. Notifications of serious harm and more technical matters are automatically diverted to WorkSafe response support officers upon election of the appropriate option by the person ringing in. Procedures also appear to be in place for matters to be escalated through the call centre to response support officers as appropriate. 75 At an operational level the separation of general from specialist appears to be functioning well and is monitored appropriately from an organisational perspective. There are plans in place to ensure the necessary training and knowledge of the HSW Act is shared with both call centre and response support officers. However, there may be some benefit in further analysis of how the call centre operates and how stakeholders consider it is working to determine whether more work in this area needs to be done to improve this service generally. 76 The response support officers currently work within traditional business hours 16 with phone tree type arrangements operating outside of these times. Consideration of this and the effectiveness of the current after hour s arrangement is advisable. 77 Modern working arrangements do not necessarily lend themselves to a traditional business hours approach and people often work outside of these hours given increased shift-based arrangements. Also, given notification requirements under the HSW Act and the connected duty to preserve sites, 17 there is potential for people to over comply for a period as they come to understand the new legislation and its requirements. 78 WorkSafe needs to be able to assure itself that call centre arrangements are operating effectively and that efficient arrangements can be maintained to deal with any expected increase in demand for both more specialist matters and general enquiries Currently Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm. The duty to preserve sites at which a notifiable event has occurred requires the taking of all reasonable steps to ensure the site where the event occurred is not disturbed until authorised by an inspector. A similar obligation exists under the current Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 where guidance and discussions at the call centre stage assist in determining whether an investigation of the serious harm incident is appropriate and action, where appropriate, is taken to release the scene. 23

25 Part 3: WorkSafe s understanding of its maturity model 79 For the purposes of this review, assessment of WorkSafe s maturity model focuses on where WorkSafe is in its organisational development based against the objective measure of where an organisation, of WorkSafe s age, would be expected to be. How aware WorkSafe is of its own development, and where it should be as an organisation, also forms part of the consideration of this part of the review. 80 As noted earlier, since its inception WorkSafe has been externally focused on establishing relationship with key influences within its targeted industries and the health and safety system more generally. 18 This has meant that wider cross-government connections have not been developed to the extent they could have. As it matures WorkSafe needs to broaden its focus and become a leader in the realm of work health and safety. 81 Internally WorkSafe has been in transition, staging growth and development around the necessity of ensuring essential services. In particular, this has necessitated a relatively quick and extensive staff recruitment and training phase, particularly at inspectorate level. This has required a high corporate overhead. It has also meant that areas of the organisation, notably in the high hazards area, shifted into the new organisation as somewhat self-contained units and are only now being integrated into centralised core functions. 19 Whole-of-organisation functions such as strategy and stakeholder engagement and operational policy are of relatively recent origin and still building (including research and intelligence). 82 Moving forward, WorkSafe needs to give priority to bedding in its whole-of-organisation functions and look to achieve a steady state by the end of This will provide the platform for reviewing the corporate structure and identifying any scope for reducing overheads. 83 A number of people, both externally and internally, commented on the need to give greater priority to occupational health. Internally WorkSafe s strategy on occupational health is not well understood and is perceived as being haphazard. This is a longstanding issue and one that WorkSafe is well aware of. 84 WorkSafe is actively developing its strategy and building its capability in the occupational health area. Its approach is constrained by a lack of evidence base worldwide, which is why it is focussing on particular areas that have an evidence base. However, WorkSafe s occupational health strategy could be better communicated, both externally and internally. 85 As previously noted, overall the issues identified in this review are recognised in one form or another by WorkSafe and plans are, or will be, in place to address them As noted earlier, this includes government agencies central to the health and safety system such as ACC, MBIE and the designated agencies Maritime New Zealand and the Civil Aviation Authority It appears that areas of the high hazard unit are now being integrated into centralised core functions such as guidance and standards, but that energy safety still remains substantively self-contained. 24

26 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 86 It is recommended that WorkSafe: F. Give priority to bedding in its whole-of-organisation functions so that it can reach a steady state by the end of G. As part of this, review its corporate structure with a view to consolidation and identifying any scope for reducing overheads. H. Broaden its focus to more fully embrace occupational health, and better communicate its strategy in this regard. COMMENT As WorkSafe matures it needs to pay attention to the internal development of the organisation 87 Necessary prioritising of development and resource has meant whole-of-organisation functions have only been in place for a relatively short period of time. 20 Most notably are the areas of strategy and stakeholder engagement and operational policy. 88 While key stakeholders, particularly at government level, have acknowledged improvements due to the establishment of a centralised approach and oversight of engagement and operational policy, the internal integration of these functions needs careful consideration. In particular, where areas of WorkSafe have operated historically in a self-contained manner such as the high hazards unit. 89 The bedding in of these whole-of-organisation functions will lead to better identification and sharing of knowledge and connections across WorkSafe and reduce any silos. This is now a priority for the organisation. As WorkSafe matures it should consider consolidating its current corporate governance structure in As noted previously, the rapid establishment stage of WorkSafe and the focus on building the inspectorate has required a significant corporate overhead. There is clearly scope to review the corporate structure with a view to consolidating it in 2016 and identifying any scope for reducing overheads. WorkSafe needs to be clearer about its occupational health strategy 91 WorkSafe appears to have adopted an approach of taking tactical initiatives to raise inspector and industry awareness and skill around occupational health, while taking time to develop its broader strategy in the occupational health area. The significant evidence base needed to be developed and work to be done in this area has likely influenced this more staged approach. 20 It is acknowledged that these functions, though potentially underdeveloped, did exist in one form or another within the organisation prior to WorkSafe s current organisational structure. 25

27 92 There was a general scepticism by stakeholders around WorkSafe being able to adequately address occupational health and inspectors considered that the approach taken to date has been haphazard. In making these comments the difficulties associated with gaining the attention of everyone concerned and necessary to address long-latency illness was recognised. 93 Increased focus on occupational health is a central element of Working Safer and it is noted that WorkSafe is actively doing work in this area. Despite this there appears to be a general lack of understanding about what WorkSafe is, and intends to do, in occupational health area. They don t seem to do much on health, a lot of focus on safety. Survey participant 15, from the professional, scientific and technical services industry in Auckland 94 There would be considerable benefit, both externally and internally, in WorkSafe being clearer about how it will address occupational health moving forward. Working in partnership with ACC 95 ACC plays a significant role in the health and safety system and an effective working relationship between WorkSafe and ACC forms an important element in achieving the aims of Working Safer. 96 Having the Chair of the WorkSafe Board operating as a full ACC Board member is a good move towards achieving alignment and is reflective of the fact the two organisations should be working in partnership, as equals. 97 At senior management level the relationship between WorkSafe and ACC is working well. The view of both agencies is that promising progress has been made on some joint initiatives. Work on the future focussed joint business plan and joint Injury Prevention Action Plan is underway. These will be key vehicles for taking forward the agencies respective roles and activities. 98 Ongoing attention will be needed to ensure that these initiatives and the partnership approach of the organisations is operating effectively. 26

28 Part 4: The perception of WorkSafe as a regulator 99 On a whole, WorkSafe s view of itself as a regulator aligns with the perceptions held by stakeholders and those it engages with, including engagement at inspectorate level. 100 WorkSafe aims to be a fair, consistent and proportionate regulator and this is recognised by stakeholders. There is a general acknowledgement more work in this area is needed to ensure WorkSafe is widely perceived as a firm but fair and proportionate regulator. 21 In particular, there is some perception of inconsistent behaviour and lack of industry-specific knowledge at the inspectorate level Strategically, WorkSafe appreciates the ability and need to effectively balance its engagement, education and enforcement roles. While language and terminology may differ at lower levels of the organisations, there is an understanding of the role education plays within the work the inspectorate does Externally there remains a tension about whether the balance between education and engagement has been realised. Recommendations and further discussion on this point are contained in part 5 of this report. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 103 It is recommended that WorkSafe: I. Continue to support inspectors by creating clear expectations through training and mentoring on the way in which they engage with organisations. J. Be vigilant in addressing instances of inconsistency in approach through additional training and sharing of learnings. COMMENT Misconceptions and fear of the unknown are contributing to negative perceptions of WorkSafe 104 As part of the review a telephone survey was undertaken to identify, compare and measure trends in the performance of WorkSafe inspectors when engaging at individual business level. 105 Thirty-nine individual businesses were surveyed and a summary of the survey results is contained in Appendix This was also reflected in the survey results. For example, when asked to rate the statement I was treated fairly on a scale of 1 to 5, with five being strongly agree, 81% of participants gave a rating of 4 or 5. On the statement the response from WorkSafe was proportional 72.9% of participants gave a rating of 4 or 5. Refer Appendix 1. This feedback was generally limited to businesses operating in highly technical industries, including construction. As is to be expected there is a greater acknowledgement and understanding of the educational element of the role of assessment inspectors than investigation inspectors given the differing focuses of these roles. 27

29 106 One element of the survey focused on whether people s perceptions about how WorkSafe inspectors would engage and behave changed following the actual interaction. As a means of attempting to determine this, survey participants were asked to rate seven statements about WorkSafe inspectors, first on what they thought engagement would be like and then based on their actual interaction with an inspector; overall ratings improved following actual interaction. They were quite pleasant to deal with. I was surprised about the approach given what I had heard. Survey participant 13, from the manufacturing industry in Auckland 107 Survey participant s identified feedback from other businesses in their industry and other industries, as well as the general unknown of WorkSafe as a new regulator, as being key reasons behind their more negative perceptions. Prior interactions with WorkSafe was the next most commonly cited reason but it is noted that there was confusion by some over this as participants were not necessarily clearly distinguishing between WorkSafe and its legacy agencies. There is benefit to WorkSafe more fully understanding why people hold, and what shapes peoples, negative perceptions of it. 108 Where ratings increased, the predominant reason identified was the individual inspector the participant engaged with. The knowledge, expertise, constructive engagement and professional manner of inspectors were all identified and commented on. 109 Where ratings decreased, a substantive reason was also the individual inspector the participant engaged with. This illustrates that the nature of the engagement is a substantive factor in forming people s opinions about an organisation and what they do A wider understanding of WorkSafe and its approach, particularly at inspectorate level, could help to address misconceptions and fear of the unknown. From the perspective of the new HSW Act this could also be a means of enabling wider understanding of the obligations which will come into force on 4 April From the inspectorate s view point, a better understanding of WorkSafe was identified as being a helpful element to their job - when they turn up at a site where there is some prior knowledge of WorkSafe this improved engagement with the business. Inspectorate inconsistency has improved but more work is needed 112 There is a perception of some inspectorate inconsistency in both the approach and what equates to best practice in certain industries or situations. However, this does not appear disproportionate or at a level that would be unexpected given WorkSafe s current organisational development and the fast and intensive inspectorate recruitment that has been undertaken. 24 It is noted that only two survey participants advised that enforcement action resulted from their interaction with the inspector (one improvement and one prohibition notice were issued). A minority of participants noted that inspectors had made recommendations for improvements. 28

30 Number of responses 113 WorkSafe aims to have consistency of approach by inspectors and has focused on training and making available inspectorate practice frameworks, including enforcement decision-making models. These frameworks act to provide clear expectations and a means for inspectors to approach and understand the enforcement tools available to them to address situations. At inspectorate level there is support for these frameworks and how they assist inspectors to perform their jobs effectively. 114 From those inspectors that were previously with WorkSafe s legacy agencies a marked difference in the support and expectations on how inspectors approach situations is seen, with one chief inspector summarising the difference as now inspectors undertake assessment by conversation where before this was assessment by observation. 115 Inspectorate consistency is an area identified at all levels as an on-going issue requiring continual consideration for improvement. Regional differences also influence consistency as well as differences between offices within a region. This was increasingly apparent from discussions with businesses with a national presence but was also raised at inspectorate level in relation to businesses that operate across a region and are inspected by different offices. 116 Stakeholders readily acknowledge improvements with inspectorate consistency. There is recognition that the rapid recruitment of inspectors is a causative factor. 117 Stakeholders generally consider consistency will continue to improve as the inspectorate grows in experience. This was also reflected in the survey results where there was an positive increase in ratings based on actual experience given to the statement WorkSafe staff are consistent in their decisions : After engagement with an inspector Perception prior to engagement Rating 118 Some stakeholders attributed the lack of general experience and practical industry knowledge to approaches by inspectors they considered to be less engagement orientated and more confrontational or unprofessional. 119 There was a view by some stakeholders and individual inspectors that lack of practical experience meant that inspectors where more likely to approach situations from a purely enforcement viewpoint. 29

31 In the past younger and newer inspectors had no grey area and just followed the book without considering the most appropriate way of addressing the problem. Survey participant 24, form the construction industry in Auckland 120 On-going consideration of how to address and improve inspectorate inconsistency is advised. By way of example, the following were identified as areas of concern: Retention of inspectors to maintain high experience levels moving forward. The inspector coaching system where an inexperienced inspector is paired with a more experienced inspector does not appear to be working as intended. Means of ensuring inspectors can identify and locate more experienced inspectors, whether this is general or industry based experience. Such internal connections appear to be self-driven and often word of mouth with the main support network potentially being between inspectors who trained together. The inspectorate considers technical and legal support to be at a good level but the sharing of lessons learned widely between inspectors is lacking. In particular, while matters arising from prosecutions are shared, there are technical or legal positions that are arrived at following specific consultation with individual inspectors that could have wider ramifications to the inspectorate as a whole. There does not appear to be any readily available mechanism or expectation that these become widely available to inspectors. Sharing of internal learning appears to be widely reliant on a champion arrangement. An individual inspector at office level is tasked with compiling the concerns of the inspectors and pushing them through organisational channels. For example, concerns with guidance. This system does not appear to be working as well as intended and relies heavily upon the available time of the individual champion. At inspectorate level there is a consideration that the same matters keep coming up and that this is indicative that the system is not achieving what it is intended to. At the guidance and standards level there appears to be increased solicitation of inspectorate knowledge but there is some indication that this is a bit after the fact or reliant on individual inspectors showing an active interest. It was considered that there could be more communication about changes in best practices and updates to guidance as these do not appear to be communicated effectively. This can cause confusion and tension with businesses, especially when new guidance is issued but the old guidance is still available and being relied on by business. 121 Concerns associated with the generalist based knowledge of inspectors were also raised. Stakeholders identified a lack of practical industry knowledge as a factor in inconsistent information about best practice and approaches taken by inspectors. In areas such as construction and agriculture survey participants indicated a higher level of respect for inspectors that had, and demonstrated knowledge of, their industry when engaging with them. 30

32 122 WorkSafe s inspectorate operates on a mixed model of generalist and some industry specific inspectors. Industry specific inspectors exist where it is considered necessary and appropriate given the nature and specialisation of the work, notably within the high hazard unit and for forestry. It may benefit WorkSafe to consider the extent to which it is practical and cost effective to move towards developing a higher level of specialisation within identified priority and emerging high incident areas, for example construction or the port industry. 123 A greater level of specialist knowledge could add consistency across industry and also provide a direct means of giving more inexperienced inspectors a direct internal avenue to seek advice about industry best practice. Alternatively, considering ways of how to develop practical industry knowledge and experience at inspectorate level may assist in addressing these concerns. There is indication that some industry sectors may be open to a partnership based approach to support inspectors obtaining practical experience within their industry. 31

33 Part 5: WorkSafe s readiness for the implementation of the Working Safer reforms 124 While it is acknowledged that a large amount of work is currently underway with both an internal and external aim of upskilling and educating about the requirements of the new HSW Act, concerns have been raised over WorkSafe s readiness to meet the needs and expectations of stakeholders around the new legislation. 125 A view was expressed by some stakeholders that there was a need for a more supportive and educative focus over pure enforcement immediately after the HSW Act comes into force a type of grace period to address concerns over the readiness of WorkSafe in supporting business, and business in being able to immediate meet the standards of the new legislation. 126 WorkSafe needs to ensure it is appropriately recognising this current demand for information about the HSW Act (a demand that is likely to only increase) and consider, to the extent possible, how to meet this. WorkSafe does have plans in place to provide information around the new Act but it may be prudent for WorkSafe to reconsider whether its current approach will sufficiently address the immediate and on-going demand for information. 127 It is acknowledged that WorkSafe cannot be all things to all people, but moving forward greater consideration of how to address people s educational needs is advisable. While this is pertinent to the coming into force of the HSW Act, WorkSafe also needs to consider its on-going educative role and ensure it has a strategic and deliberate approach which covers all areas of the workforce. 128 In addition how best to balance the operational demands of the new legislation with business as usual elements of the organisation should also be considered in light of the need to firmly move out of WorkSafe s establishment phase in As previously noted, a concern with WorkSafe s ability to adequately address occupational health - an increased focus on which is a large element of Working Safer was also raised by stakeholders. Recommendations and comment on this has been discussed in part 3 of this report. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 130 It is recommended that WorkSafe: K. Take the opportunities afforded by the HSW Act to give emphasis to its educational role, especially over the transition period. L. Review how best to balance the immediate demands of the HSW Act with business as usual requirements, and the potential impact on the more self-contained areas of WorkSafe as these are integrated with centralised core functions. 32

34 COMMENT Balancing WorkSafe s education and enforcement roles 131 WorkSafe approaches its educational role from a number of avenues. From a proactive point of view there is a focus on the use of its engagement with industry leaders and associations and through business interaction with the inspectorate. 132 Internally there appears to be differing levels of knowledge about the HSW Act at inspectorate level, though there is a general understanding that training on this will be occurring early in Ensuring that inspectors have a good understanding of, and are comfortable talking about, the new legislation is crucial. 133 While the inspectorate has a role to play in education, their ability to do this can be hindered by the enforcement perception people can have of WorkSafe. This education versus enforcement tension is necessary - an effective regulator needs this to operate. The issue is in ensuring the right balance is met. WorkSafe needs to give people advice without fear of reprisal. Small business stakeholder 134 Generally, at the key stakeholder level, where there is high level of on-going engagement, this tension is less present than with survey participants where engagement was solely at inspectorate level and often only the first or second time the participant had dealt with WorkSafe. 135 A level of enforcement tension is necessary to ensure WorkSafe is an effective regulator and the ability for individual businesses to divorce education from enforcement at the inspectorate level requires a mature outlook and often an on-going and trusted relationship with the regulator. As such, while the inspectorate has an educational role to play, a clear and continuing programme of education is necessary. 136 As previously noted, WorkSafe should consider how best to more widely approach engagement and leveraging of its external relationships. This would have an on-going benefit to WorkSafe s educational role. Health and safety is about every workplace not just certain workplaces and we need to be mindful of this. WorkSafe Chief Inspector 137 Discussions with stakeholders and others identified a need for more information about the HSW Act and practical advice about how to meet it requirements. Information in varying forms, which 33

35 is easily understandable and adaptable for the different needs of individuals, was identified as important. There was also a view that an active WorkSafe presence was effective, whether this be assessment inspectors, workshops or partnering with business. In addition, there was some view from small business that an effective way to reach a wider audience was to have WorkSafe be part of another industry-based event or talk. 138 Generally it was considered that the information WorkSafe is providing was good but that more is needed. While there was a need for general information about concepts, those that had obtained this general understanding considered wider information about aspects of the new legislation was now needed. The time to highlight the changes is now. Key stakeholder, from the construction industry 139 There was a view by some stakeholders that the level of general interaction WorkSafe had previously had about the HSW Act had reduced and that WorkSafe needed to be active about the new legislation sooner rather than later. WorkSafe needs to recognise this demand, which is likely to only increase, for information about the HSW Act and consider, to the extent possible, how best to meet it. 140 Educational avenues such as workshops were seen as needing to continue (or in some instances re-start) as an active WorkSafe presence was viewed as an effective means of ensuring people paid attention. There was also some comment on the need to have transparency around causative issues behind incidents and that these be quickly and readily made available to the affected industries. People may not turn up for WorkSafe but may stay if they turned up for something else. Small business stakeholder 141 Some industry stakeholders expressed the view that WorkSafe was not taking up opportunities available to partner with industry or industry associations. It is sensible to focus on large industry players and those that can actively influence others but, as previously noted, WorkSafe needs to ensure it is strategically and proactively interacting with organisations in a systematic way outside of its targeted industries. 142 A type of scare mongering by industry advisors was identified by some stakeholders, particularly in small business. Moving forward, if WorkSafe is unable to meet the demand for information and effectively address misconceptions, there is potential that, in the absence of this, people will seek and potentially obtain incorrect information about the work health and safety implications for their businesses. Viewpoints about legal requirements or best practice 34

36 will be potentially harder to correct or shift where people have already formed a firm perspective, even where this may be based on misleading or incorrect information. 143 It is acknowledged that WorkSafe cannot be everywhere at once and that there will be legitimate constraints on the extent to which it can physically participate at firm or association level. However, an active and transparent programme around education and consideration of how to ensure WorkSafe is utilising its physical presence effectively may be needed. This will be particularly important for the coming into force of the HSW Act. 144 It is also acknowledged that WorkSafe is actively addressing misconception and incorrect information. In addition to this reactive function, a more proactive focus on raising awareness, such as wider media and web based campaigns are understood to be planned. It may be necessary to consider whether the campaigns around the HSW Act are effectively timed and how general awareness can be maintained in the longer term. One of the elements of good engagement that was identified, particularly by small business, was a need for continued and regular interaction. 145 As previously noted, a greater understanding of what influences peoples perceptions and views would further assist in ensuring WorkSafe can proactively and effectively take steps to address misconceptions and incorrect assumptions. Balance increasing operational demands around the HSW Act with business as usual operations 146 The HSW Act is central to WorkSafe s operations moving forward and it is to be expected that substantive effort and consideration is being placed on this by the organisation. In addition, WorkSafe needs to address how best to manage existing relationships and demands from a business as usual perspective. 147 As WorkSafe continues to mature and fully integrate its centralised core functions with those elements of the organisation that have operated on a more self-contained basis, such as the high hazards unit, consideration of how best to manage the expectations of stakeholders in those areas is needed. For example, potential issues have already arisen with delays in industry specific guidance and active relationship management, at all levels of the organisation, will be required moving forward. 35

37 Appendix 1: Summary of individual business survey results 36

38 SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS SURVEY RESULTS Doug Martin 18 December

39 Introduction 1 As part of the Targeted Independent Review of WorkSafe 25 being undertaken by Doug Martin, a series of telephone-based surveys were undertaken in November Survey participants were selected from a randomly generated list of businesses whose interaction with WorkSafe inspectors was completed in October The purpose of the survey was to identify, compare and measure trends in the performance of WorkSafe inspectors when engaging at individual business level. One element of this focused on whether people s perceptions about how WorkSafe inspectors would engage and behave changed following the actual interaction. 3 This document provides an overview of the survey responses received and provides more detailed information on questions asked about: participants prior perceptions of what engagement with WorkSafe would be like, against their actual experiences. the approach to the interaction taken by inspectors. the coming into force of the Health and Safety at Work Act Approach of the survey 4 The survey was conducted via telephone. It was 30 questions long and generally took between 10 to 15 minutes for participants to complete. 5 In addition to a number of demographic based questions, participants were asked about: the number of interactions they had had with WorkSafe. any perceptions they had about how inspectors would engage with them prior to their interaction and how these aligned with the actual engagement they experienced. the approach inspectors took to the engagement, as well as what happened during and as a result of the interaction. their awareness for the new Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 and what they thought WorkSafe should be doing to support them in preparation for the Act coming into force on 4 April Approach to analysis 6 The survey collected nominal and ordinal data, as participants were given the opportunity to provide comment as well as rate statements about the approach and performance of the inspectorate on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly disagree). Don t know or does not apply were also available answers for participants. 26 As would be The review focused on WorkSafe s engagement, assessing the quality of its interactions with stakeholders given its education, engagement and enforcement roles. In recording responses no distinction was made between answers of don t know and does not apply. 38

40 expected, the number of participants electing this option fluctuated between questions and between whether they were answering based on their perception or actual experience with an inspector. When presenting data graphically don t know/does not apply responses are not included. 7 To assist analysis of qualitative data, where participants commented on specific themes, this was assigned a code relating to that theme. Participants covering multiple themes were assigned multiple codes. Attempting to quantify qualitative submissions does, however, have limitations. As a result, this document seeks to provide qualitative comment on general participant opinions were possible to complement this analysis. Demographic overview of participants 8 39 businesses took part in the survey. Demographic information was compiled and a summary of this can be seen in the following graphs. Participants by industry Transport, Postal and Warehousing Retail Trade (2.7%) (5.4%) Professional, Scientific and Technical Services (2.7%) Other Services (2.7%) Mining (2.7%) Manufacturing (2.7%) Wholesale Trade (5.4%) Agriculture (16.2%) Forestry (5.4%) Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services (5.4%) Education and Training (2.7%) Construction (45.9%) 39

41 Number of companies Participants by region Otago (5.1%) Southland (2.6%) Auckland (28.2%) Canterbury (20.5%) West Coast (2.6%) Nelson (2.6%) Tasman (7.7%) Wellington (5.1%) Manawatū- Wanganui (2.6%) Waikato (2.6%) Bay of Plenty (7.7%) Hawke's Bay (5.1%) Taranaki (7.7%) 9 Most participants were in senior positions within the business, with a number identifying themselves as director, owner or manager. 10 The size of the businesses varied and was measured by employee number. It is noted that a number of participants stated that they routinely engaged contractors but amounts fluctuated and were not captured for the purposes of the survey. 11 Several participants identified themselves as sole operations, with the largest business surveyed having 400 employees. The average size of the businesses surveyed was 52, with a median size of 11. Participants by size based on employee numbers to to to to to and higher Number of employees 40