By EMA Manager of Employment Relations & Safety Paul Jarvie
Health and safety in New Zealand workplaces has been a major focus for the current government.
Prior to the 2023 election, the ACT Party campaigned on a promise to reform New Zealand’s health and safety laws.
Two years on, progress is being made, but simple law reform was never going to be the solution.
Last year, the EMA, along with other industry associations and health and safety bodies, prepared a brief for Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden. In that brief, we argued that the Health and Safety at Work Act (HSWA), which is based on the UK and Australian models, remains fit for purpose but requires significant refinement.
The real issue lies in the regulations that sit beneath it. Many are outdated, inconsistent, or too narrow to reflect the realities of modern workplaces. That is where our health and safety system is letting the manufacturing sector down.
The statistics tell their own story. Despite our legislative similarities to the UK and Australia, serious injury and fatality rates in New Zealand manufacturing remain significantly higher.
The Harm Reduction Action Plan for Manufacturing, which we developed with ACC in 2024, highlighted an estimated $1.23 billion annual cost to the New Zealand economy from work-related injuries in the sector. However, ACC has since decided not to continue this work.
In September, MBIE asked the EMA to bring manufacturing businesses together to consider proposals for regulatory improvements that would provide more options and greater certainty around machine guarding.
Significant harm continues to arise from the use of machinery in the workplace – 16 deaths over the past five years, and 450–500 serious injuries each year, resulting in at least a week off work.
Concerns include outdated regulations for woodworking and abrasive grinding machines, which are based on 1995 standards and are widely regarded as inflexible and out of step with modern technology such as presence-sensing devices.
One business reported receiving conflicting advice from three different WorkSafe inspectors, resulting in a $20,000 expense to meet unclear expectations.
There are also concerns about second-hand or non-compliant machines entering New Zealand without adequate checks.
Through engagement with MBIE, there was consensus that regulation 18, covering woodworking and abrasive grinding machines, should be revoked and replaced with a risk-based, performance-oriented approach.
For all machine guarding, adopting a dual pathway for compliance would offer flexibility – allowing manufacturers either to follow recognised technical Type C standards, or to take a tailored, risk-based approach suited to their specific processes or innovations, provided they can demonstrate that risks are managed to an equivalent or better level.
Improving guidance and education is also essential, such as promoting awareness of Type C standards, safe machinery use, and legal duties under the HSWA.
Other priorities include strengthening WorkSafe’s capability, addressing machinery importation risks, and future-proofing regulations to account for emerging technologies.
At the meeting, MBIE heard loud and clear the preference for industry-led solutions. The new ability for sectors to develop their own Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) was widely welcomed.
This is just one example of the consultation MBIE is currently undertaking; it has also sought proposals for regulatory improvements relating to working at heights.
This is a genuine opportunity, but only if industry steps up. As the saying goes, “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain.” The same applies here.
Regulations are not always the best tool. Once developed, they are rarely reviewed for many years, if ever. Other instruments, such as ACOPs or guidance, may offer more flexibility and be easier to update in response to new technologies and work systems.
The government is making a genuine effort to engage with business on improvements, and we need to meet them halfway. That means health and safety managers, engineers, and operators contributing their knowledge and experience now, while the rules are still being written.
Machine guarding is just one part of a broader package of reforms, but it’s a telling example. The consultation is genuine, and your feedback will directly shape clearer, safer, and more workable regulations.
In short: don’t sit on the sidelines. If these reforms are to improve safety without adding unnecessary cost, the voice of business must be at the table.
If you’d like to be involved in MBIE consultations relevant to your business, please contact paul.jarvie@ema.co.nz, and we’ll add you to our database.