Proudly Australian Owned and Operated
The review at a glance
Safe Work Australia released the final report of its Best Practice Review of the model WHS laws in October 2026, with 21 recommendations to strengthen and modernise them. It is the first national review of the model laws since 2018, and it examined how states and territories have varied the laws as well as the findings of recent government reviews and inquiries.
Source: Safe Work Australia, Best Practice Review of the model WHS laws, final report, October 2026.
Note: Each recommendation takes effect only if WHS ministers agree and each state and territory then amends its own legislation. Victoria sits outside the model framework, so the changes would not flow directly into Victorian law.
Even so, the report is the clearest signal in years of where regulators expect employers to be heading, particularly on psychosocial risk.
The big picture
The review found broad support for keeping the laws harmonised across industry, unions and regulators, so that workers have the same protections and businesses the same obligations wherever the work is done. It also records growing frustration that the states have drifted further apart, with more differences between jurisdictions every year. Its overarching recommendations are:
- A renewed national commitment to harmonisation, with a clearer and more transparent process for managing future state variations
- A National Compliance and Enforcement Policy to make enforcement more consistent and predictable, backed by an annual scorecard of how each jurisdiction varies from the model laws
- National strategies for artificial intelligence, climate change and harmful workplace behaviours, including work-related violence and harassment
- A more modern framework where current protections are falling short, including in high-risk industries, in worker consultation and through practical, industry-based Codes of Practice
Info: An annual scorecard would make differences between jurisdictions far more visible. For employers working across several states, that points towards a more consistent standard everywhere they operate.
Psychosocial risk moves into the core of WHS duty
For the employers we work with, this is the part of the review that matters most. Mental health conditions made up 12.2% of serious workers compensation claims in 2024-25, with a median of 34.8 weeks off work, and the review proposes treating the hazards behind those claims the same way as any physical risk. Our breakdown of Safe Work Australia's 2026 claims data has the full picture.
Harmful behaviour would become an express safety duty
The review recommends naming harmful workplace behaviours in the primary duty of care. In practice, bullying, harassment and violence would stop being only an HR matter. They would need to be identified, assessed and controlled through your WHS system, with the same records you keep for a physical hazard.
The hierarchy of controls would apply to psychosocial risk
The structured approach used for physical risks would apply to psychological ones, and the risk management process would be written into the model WHS Act so it clearly covers all work. Some jurisdictions already take this approach.
For most employers, this is the biggest shift. A policy, an EAP and a training session sit low on the hierarchy, so you would need to show you first looked at changing the work itself, such as workloads, rostering, role clarity and how customer aggression is handled.
Tip: Map each psychosocial hazard on your register to the control you rely on for it. If most of them point to training or the EAP, that is where a regulator is likely to push first.
New rules on violence, harassment and facilities
New model regulations are proposed on preventing work-related violence and harassment, including gender-related violence, and on access to facilities, including female-designated toilets. Customer-facing and frontline workforces, from health care to retail and transport, should expect specific, enforceable obligations rather than general guidance.
Limits on non-disclosure agreements
The model WHS Act would be amended to limit NDAs that stop a worker from raising a WHS concern, making a complaint to a regulator or taking part in a WHS investigation. The change follows Victoria's Restricting Non-disclosure Agreements (Sexual Harassment at Work) Act 2025. Settlement and confidentiality templates may need rewording so they can't be read as silencing a worker on safety.
Consultation and representation
Stronger roles for HSRs and committees
Changes are proposed to health and safety representative elections, powers, functions and training, to health and safety committees and consultation processes, to the right to cease unsafe work and to union right of entry. Consultation would become much harder to treat as a formality.
Tip: Check your HSRs are elected, trained and involved in decisions about psychosocial risk, not just physical hazards. Their input is often the earliest sign that work pressure is building in a team.
A WHS Information Statement for every worker
Employers would give workers a statement setting out the fundamentals of WHS, modelled on the Fair Work Information Statement, with a separate version for small business owners. Expect it to become part of standard onboarding, alongside your pre-employment and induction processes.
New and emerging hazards
Climate-related regulations
New model regulations are proposed for extreme heat, air quality and vector-borne diseases. Employers with outdoor, remote or non-air-conditioned workforces would need documented controls for each, and matching workers to the physical demands of hot environments becomes a bigger part of hiring and return to work planning.
A national approach to AI and digital technology
The review notes that the current WHS laws already apply to AI-powered systems. It stops short of adding the digital work system duty that NSW introduced into its WHS Act in February 2026. Instead, Safe Work Australia would develop a broader strategy on AI and emerging technology, with new regulations or Codes of Practice wherever it finds gaps.
For employers, that means AI tools are already inside your WHS duty today. Digital rostering, performance monitoring and workload tools can create work pressure of their own, so they belong in your psychosocial risk assessment now, and NSW employers have a specific duty to meet.
Codes of Practice and compliance
Codes of Practice as a safe harbour
An employer that complies with a Code of Practice would be taken to have met its duty on the matters the Code covers. New industry Codes are planned, starting with retail, education and training, agriculture and construction, alongside more support and guidance for small business, including dedicated toolkits. Model Codes could also become national Codes that apply automatically once WHS ministers agree to them.
That makes the Codes your clearest defence. Closing the gaps between your procedures and the Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work Code is the most practical place to start.
Changes to reviews and infringement notices
The time to seek an internal review of a regulator's decision would be extended from 14 to 21 calendar days, with further extension by agreement with the regulator. Workers, HSRs and unions involved in a matter would gain standing in external reviews, and failing to pay a WHS infringement notice would become an offence. A nationally consistent infringement notice scheme would also be developed.
Officers, boards and prosecutions
WHS prosecutions already end in a financial penalty almost every time, and the average penalty reached a record $147,985 in 2025, as our analysis of the prosecutions data shows. Three changes would raise the stakes for leaders further.
No insurance for prosecution legal fees
Insurance contracts and indemnities could no longer cover the legal fees of anyone prosecuted for a WHS offence. This could be one of the most significant changes for leaders, because officers would carry their own defence costs. Boards should review their insurance and indemnity arrangements and make sure every officer understands what the change would mean personally.
Anyone could bring a prosecution
General standing would allow any person or organisation, such as a union, to bring a WHS prosecution where the regulator has decided not to, informed by the NSW and New Zealand approaches. A regulator's decision not to act would no longer be the end of the matter.
Penalties scaled to the size of the business
Safe Work Australia is also reviewing how the current penalty scheme applies to corporations, drawing on recent updates to Commonwealth civil penalty regimes. The aim is to give courts more flexibility to set penalties according to the size of the business, so that WHS risk carries the same weight in the boardroom as other business priorities.
Tip: Officers have a personal duty to exercise due diligence. Ask for evidence that the controls for your critical risks work on the ground, not only a report that they exist.
Other changes still in train
Amendments to the model WHS Act announced last year, including significant changes to incident notification requirements, are yet to be enacted. Separately, the Australian Government announced in May 2026 that all mandatory Australian Standards, including WHS standards, will be made free to access. Between those changes and this review, WHS law is set to keep moving for some time.
What happens next
The recommendations will now go through Safe Work Australia's tripartite Member process, where representatives of governments, employers and workers assess and consult on them. Any changes that are agreed would then be considered and implemented by the Commonwealth, states and territories in their own laws. We will update this article as that process moves forward.
Our take
Read alongside this year's claims and prosecutions data, the review confirms what we are already seeing with clients. Psychosocial risk is moving out of HR policy and into the core of WHS duty, the hierarchy of controls will be the test, and leaders will be held more personally accountable for whether controls work.
The recommendations still have a long way to go, but employers who start now won't be scrambling once their state adopts them. Where we would start:
- Map every psychosocial hazard on your register to the control you rely on, and move any that rest on training alone higher up the hierarchy
- Compare your procedures with the Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work Code and close the gaps
- Review settlement and confidentiality templates so none could stop someone raising a safety concern
- Brief your board on the proposed insurance change and what evidence of due diligence it would expect to see
How Actevate can help
Actevate helps employers identify and control psychosocial risk across the whole employee lifecycle. Our mental health training builds managers' confidence to act early, our Employee Assistance Program supports your people, and our pre-employment health assessments match workers to the demands of their role. To talk through what the review means for your workplace, call 1300 663 155 or get in touch.
Sources
- Safe Work Australia, Best Practice Review of the model WHS laws, final report, October 2026
- Safe Work Australia, Key Work Health and Safety Statistics Australia 2026
- Safe Work Australia, WHS prosecutions dashboard
Disclaimer
This article is general information only and does not constitute legal or health and safety advice. The Best Practice Review recommendations described are proposals and are not yet law, and they may change as they are assessed and consulted on. Safe Work Australia has not reviewed or endorsed this article. Please refer to the original report and seek advice on your specific situation before acting.
