Significant amendments to Model WHS Act and Regulation

Safe Work Australia has amended the Model WHS Act and Regulations, and while some changes may appear technical, they represent a significant shift in how serious harm, particularly psychological harm, is recognised and reported

The concept of a “notifiable incident” is being broadened and reframed. Notification will now extend beyond traditional physical injuries to include serious psychological harm, violent incidents (including sexual assault, physical assault, and credible threats), and in defined circumstances, suicides and attempted suicides. Importantly, prolonged work-related absence, i.e., absence of 15 or more consecutive days will trigger notification obligations where reasonably attributable to the business. This marks a clear move from focusing only on visible injury to recognising serious harm and serious risk.

The amendments also expand the definition of serious injury and dangerous incidents. Certain fractures, serious brain and spinal injuries, serious crush injuries, and treatment within 48 hours following substance exposure are now expressly included. Dangerous incidents are clarified to capture mobile plant events, serious falls, and electrical or arc flash explosions. In effect, the reporting net is widening — and the threshold for regulator visibility is shifting.

From a psychosocial risk perspective, the direction is unmistakable. Serious psychological harm is no longer indirectly inferred; it is explicitly within scope. Long recovery periods are now regulatory signals. Organisations will need systems capable of identifying, assessing, and documenting harm early, not after escalation or crisis.

Although these amendments will only take effect once adopted by each jurisdiction, the regulatory trajectory is clear. Boards, Officers, and Directors should now be asking:

• Do our incident reporting systems capture serious psychological harm?

• Can we identify when a 15+ day absence is reasonably work-related?

• Are our psychosocial risk controls documented, reviewed, and defensible?

• Would our processes withstand regulatory scrutiny under this expanded framework?

The reforms reinforce a critical message: WHS governance is no longer confined to physical injury management. Psychological health, prolonged absence, and serious psychosocial events are now squarely within regulatory oversight.

If you would like support reviewing your notification procedures, psychosocial risk systems, or due diligence framework in light of these changes, feel free to reach out.