SafeWork investigates University

SafeWork NSW is investigating the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) following allegations that a major restructure caused psychological harm to staff. The investigation is a clear reminder that outside of a regular cadence of risk assessments, events such as organisational change can create foreseeable psychosocial risks that must be managed.

‍

In this article, we cover:

* A summary of the UTS case and SafeWork’s investigation

* Impact for employers and their obligations

* Events that should automatically trigger a risk assessment

* Practical consultation methods that don’t require a long process

* Example questions to ask staff and how to document the process

‍

Key facts:

‍

* UTS is implementing a restructure that may cut up to 400 roles.

* The restructure is part of a cost-cutting plan known as the “Operational Sustainability Initiative.” KPMG was engaged to lead the program at a cost of $4.8 million.

* SafeWork NSW issued UTS a “notice to give information” under the WHS Act 2011 (NSW), following an anonymous complaint.

* The complaint alleges “wilful and negligent mismanagement” and identifies psychological harm including anxiety and depression.

* SafeWork is investigating how UTS identified and managed psychosocial risks, and whether staff were meaningfully consulted.

* In response, UTS has stated it is “keenly aware of the potential impacts on the health, wellbeing and safety of our staff” and that it has been engaging in consultation throughout the process.

* UTS confirmed it is cooperating fully with SafeWork’s investigation.

‍

Impact for employers:

‍

* Restructures and major change initiatives are considered foreseeable psychosocial hazards under WHS law.

* Even if no formal incident occurs, a failure to assess and control foreseeable risks can trigger regulatory action.

* SafeWork NSW is expanding its focus to include white-collar environments and knowledge-sector employers.

‍

What events should trigger risk assessments?

‍

Examples include but not limited to:

* Organisational restructures or job cuts

* Mergers, acquisitions or leadership changes

* Major IT or process overhauls

* Rapid expansion or contraction of services

* Changes to job demands, reporting lines, or workload intensity

‍

Methods to consult and be able to evidence it

‍

* Short-form digital check-ins or anonymous pulse surveys

* Focus groups or facilitated feedback sessions

* Consultative meetings with representative employee groups

* Documented summaries of consultation outcomes

* Clear communication plans outlining what was raised and how the organisation is responding

‍

You don’t need to run a 6-month consultation process but you do need to consult, and document it. Failing to do so under time pressures is not a defence.

‍

‍

Skodel's risk reporting template PDF and PPT

‍

Last week we offered our risk reporting template, which can help with this process. Given the number of requests, it seems an area of focus for employers. Simple reporting templates to be able to verify your processes.

‍

It includes:

* A risk radar to assess prevalence and impact

* Guidance on analysing staff sentiment and comments

* Practical summaries of suggested controls

* A monitoring and review plan aligned to the Code of Practice

‍

Want the template?

‍Fill out this form and we’ll send it through.

‍

Example questions to ask during consultation

‍

To ensure you are identifying foreseeable psychosocial risks during change, questions should capture how staff are feeling and provide them space to express concerns. A simple combination of statement-style and open-ended questions works well.

‍

Statement of agreement (e.g. Strongly Agree → Strongly Disagree)

* I feel I have been adequately informed about the proposed changes.

* I understand how the changes will impact my role or workload.

* I feel there has been a genuine opportunity to provide input or raise concerns.

* I have the support I need to manage my work during this transition.

‍

Note: interpreting results can be done by averaging the scores to see if there is general agreement or disagreement. E.g. on a 5 point scale, anything below 3 can start to indicate more disagreement with the statement than agreement.

‍

Open-ended questions

* What, if any, concerns do you have about the proposed changes or their impact on your work?

* What suggestions do you have that could help make this process more supportive or effective?

‍

Spotlight on psychosocial risk - Tony Morris

Our friend, Tony Morris recently covered this topic and you can see more on that HERE at his LinkedIn post.

‍

We hope you found this insightful and as always, thank you for reading.