Cobar Management has entered into a $1,000,000 Enforceable Undertaking after two worker complaints triggered a series of inspections from the regulators. There were no physical injuries, the two injuries were psychological injuries. Details and key insights are below:
Details of the case
- Two workers suffered psychological injuries linked to excessive workload, lack of support, and unclear job roles.
- Worker 1 formally complained to the NSW Resources Regulator.
- The Regulator issued a Section 155 notice to CMPL on 29 December 2022, requesting documents.
- CMPL provided documents 43 days later and additional documents 8 months after.
- CMPL received six additional Section 155 notices (Dec 2022 - Feb 2024).
- During this time, CMPL invested $1,251,511.10 in psychosocial safety improvements (initiatives listed below).
- Despite this, CMPL eventually entered into an Enforceable Undertaking (EU) with a financial commitment of $1,031,060.
Key insights from the case
The case highlights the danger of waiting for the regulator to turn up before addressing psychosocial safety and compliance. If there is a strong case against you for a breach, reactive compliance actions (even significant investments) can't erase the initial breach. Evidence of action prior to the inspection is what is required.
The question is, what actions might a regulator want to see from you? Section 12 of the EU outlines actions CMPL took after the alleged breach and it's very possible these were formed in response to what the regulator was expecting. While a list like this likely isn't expected of everyone and can be influenced by the scrutiny they were facing, there are insightful actions for you to consider. Below is an overview of the key actions and a cost breakdown:
Two must haves from that list are evidence of consulting workers and evidence of training. Reach out here for a compliance check-list. In addition to the above list, the EU itself proposes 3 projects and there is something that stands out.
Project 1, deliverable a is another psychosocial risk survey with data informing future WHS strategies. In both the immediate response to the initial inspection and the proposed plan forward, the survey has been the starting point for a way forward.
We believe, if a psych risk survey is one of the first steps in a company's regulatory response as an EU commitment, it should be one of the first steps for your proactive compliance strategy. Here is a psych risk survey template you could use.
I'd like to finish by highlighting a key element regulators consider when deciding on enforcement and why it matters - public interest. Martyn Campbell outlined how regulators decide charges:
"There are 20 elements to consider before laying a charge, arguably one of the most important is to determine whether a prosecution is in the public interest."
This is particularly relevant now as psychosocial risk is a public safety issue and a key regulatory focus. While proactive compliance is best, if your workplace is under scrutiny for a psychosocial safety breach, regulators could be open to an EU instead of a prosecution to support wider public safety, as seen with Fortescue's $1.47 million EU and now CMPL. Martyn Campbell shares more on how EU's work here and why they might be a viable strategy. Importantly, an EU is triggered by the PCBU, not the regulator.
Thank you for reading, we hope this was helpful.
KEEP AN EYE ON: CMPL (as part of their EU) is running a one day interactive workshop in Dubbo, NSW around November 2025 and it will cover psych risk assessments.
