Health and Safety Attitudes and Behaviours in the New ...

Health and Safety Attitudes

and Behaviours in the New

Zealand Workforce

A SURVEY OF WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS

2017 CROSS-SECTOR REPORT

JULY 2018

WorkSafe Health and Safety Attitudes and Behaviours research conducted by Nielsen in 2017. 2

CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 6

2 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 22

2.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 22

2.2 SURVEY METHOD AND SAMPLE SOURCES ................................................................................ 23

2.3 QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................ 23

2.4 SURVEY RESPONSES .................................................................................................................... 24

2.5 ANALYSIS AND REPORTING .......................................................................................................... 25

2.6 MARGIN OF ERROR ........................................................................................................................ 26

2.7 ACCESSING PAST SURVEY RESULTS ......................................................................................... 26

2.8 NOTES TO THE REPORT ................................................................................................................ 27

3 WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY IN CONTEXT ................................................... 29

3.1 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY ................................................ 31

3.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY ............................................................................. 35

3.3 PRIORITISING HEALTH AND SAFETY ........................................................................................... 38

3.4 BUSINESS DRIVERS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY .......................................................................... 45

4 WORKER ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION ........................................................ 49

4.1 WORKER ENGAGEMENT................................................................................................................ 52

4.2 WORKER PARTICIPATION: WORKPLACE PRACTICES ............................................................... 60

4.3 WORKER PARTICIPATION: WORK ENVIRONMENT .................................................................... 67

4.4 WORKER PARTICIPATION: TWO WAY COMMUNICATION ......................................................... 72

4.5 HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING .................................................................................................. 77

5 PERCEPTIONS, KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE OF RISK ..................................... 88

5.1 PERCEIVED RISK OF BEING HURT COMPARED WITH OTHER INDUSTRIES .......................... 90

5.2 PERCEIVED RISK OF WORKERS BEING SERIOUSLY HURT IN THEIR OWN

WORKPLACE OR BUSINESS .......................................................................................................... 92

5.3 FEELINGS OF SAFETY AT WORK .................................................................................................. 94

5.4 RESOURCES AND INFORMATION FOR DOING THE JOB SAFELY ............................................ 96

5.5 KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS TO DEAL WITH RISKS TO HEALTH AND SAFETY ......................... 98

5.6 RISKY BEHAVIOURS IN THE WORKPLACE ................................................................................ 100

5.7 POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PREVENT SERIOUS HARM IN THE WORKPLACE ............................. 108

6 EXPERIENCE OF WORKPLACE INCIDENTS AND RESPONSES............................. 116

6.1 OCCURRENCE OF SERIOUS HARM ............................................................................................ 118

6.2 OTHER TYPES OF HARM ............................................................................................................. 124

6.3 OCCURRENCE OF NEAR MISSES ............................................................................................... 126

6.4 ACTIONS TAKEN IN RESPONSE TO SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS AND NEAR

MISSES ........................................................................................................................................... 129

6.5 IDENTIFICATION OF NEW HAZARDS AND ACTIONS TAKEN AS A RESULT ........................... 134

6.6 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON MANAGEMENT OF

WORKPLACE INCIDENTS, NEAR MISSES AND NEW HAZARD IDENTIFICATION .................. 137


6.7 EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES ................................................. 139

7 APPROACHES TO HEALTH AND SAFETY IN THE NEW ZEALAND

WORKPLACE ............................................................................................................... 149

7.1 UNDERSTANDING OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES, RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS .................. 150

7.2 CHANGES TO WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY PRACTICES AND REASONS ................ 152

7.3 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON CONFIDENCE IN AWARENESS

OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES, RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ................................................... 156

8 ADVICE AND INFORMATION ON HEALTH AND SAFETY ........................................ 158

8.1 SOURCES OF ADVICE .................................................................................................................. 159

8.2 IMPACT OF TRAINING ON POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ADVICE................................................ 164

9 PERCEPTIONS OF, AND CONTACT WITH WORKSAFE .......................................... 166

9.1 AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE OF WORKSAFE .................................................................... 168

9.2 PERCEPTIONS, TRUST AND CONFIDENCE ............................................................................... 172

9.4 CONTACT WITH WORKSAFE ....................................................................................................... 179

9.5 ACTION TAKEN WHILE OR AFTER VISITING THE WORKSAFE WEBSITE .............................. 184

10 WHERE WORKSAFE SHOULD FOCUS TO IMPACT HEALTH AND

SAFETY ........................................................................................................................ 196

APPENDIX I: SURVEY METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 203

QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................ 203

OVERVIEW OF METHOD AND SAMPLE ................................................................................................ 203

SAMPLE SOURCES ................................................................................................................................. 204

SURVEY TIMING ...................................................................................................................................... 205

APPENDIX II: TOPICS IN THE 2017 SURVEY ......................................................................... 208

APPENDIX III: SAMPLE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 210

APPENDIX IV: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION .......................................................................... 214

APPENDIX V: WORKSAFE CONTACT AND COMMUNICATION PREFERENCES ............... 216

APPENDIX VI: SEGMENTATION QUESTIONS ....................................................................... 224

ABOUT NIELSEN ..................................................................................................................................... 229


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Nielsen would like to thank the large number of workers and employers who took the time to

respond to this survey.

CITATION

When citing this report please use the following reference:

Nielsen. (2018) Health and safety attitudes and behaviours in the New Zealand workforce: A survey of workers and employers. 2017 Cross-sector report. (A report to WorkSafe New Zealand). Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

5

SECTION 1:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

New Zealand has unacceptably high rates of workplace fatalities and serious harm injuries. WorkSafe

New Zealand (WorkSafe) regulates workplace health and safety and works with businesses and workers

to promote good work health and safety practice. The four sectors that are major contributors to workplace

deaths and injuries, the Agriculture, Construction, Forestry and Manufacturing sectors, have been a key

focus for WorkSafe in recent years.

The WorkSafe survey of workers and employers measures the attitudes and behaviours of workers and

employers towards health and safety. The workers’ grouping includes self-employed people who do not

employ other and employers who do the day-to-day work they also employ others to do. These groups

completed the survey from the viewpoint of someone working in their industry, rather than as an employer.

This survey was the fourth annual nationwide, self-completion survey of New Zealand workers and

employers aged 18 years old and over. Overall, 3,281 workers and 1,900 employers across six sectors

(Agriculture, Construction, Forestry, Manufacturing, Commercial Fishing and ‘Other’) were surveyed

between 30 October 2017 and 10 January 2018.

The following summary provides an overview of results by section and key findings for the four high-risk

sectors – Agriculture, Construction, Forestry and Manufacturing.

CHANGES OVER TIME

Many of the positive changes in results occurred between 2014 and 2015 as workplaces prepared for the

Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. There were increases in some engagement and participation metrics

in 2016, but in 2017 many of these results have plateaued or settled back to the levels observed in 2015.

Positive changes in attitudes and behaviours were more apparent among employers than workers. Worker

views have generally been stable over the four years, without significant gains. Some of the sustained

changes across the four high-risk sectors over the longer term (that is, between 2014 and 2017) include:

Attitudes:

More employers include health and safety in their top three considerations for their business (from

50% agreement in 2014 to 63% in 2017).

Increasing employer recognition of the damage to the business’s reputation from a poor health and

safety record (62% in 2014 to 70% agreement in 2017).

Increased employer confidence in their awareness of health and safety obligations (67% up to 71%)

and their understanding of how to comply with health and safety obligations (62% up to 67% feeling

confident).

Greater involvement of workers in decisions involving their health and safety (78% up to 85%

agreement among employers).

Increased belief among workers that everyone from the boss down is always trying to improve safety

(59% up to 64% agreement among workers).

More workers and supervisors have the information they need to work safely (84% up to 89%

agreement among employers).


Workers are more likely to agree that they are told everything they need to do their job safely (67% up

to 73% agreement), along with improved perceptions of the ease of understanding of health and

safety information (63% in 2015 up to 68%).

Behaviours:

More employers have made a significant change to their health and safety systems and practices

(40% up to 52% incidence in 2017).

More workplaces have a health and safety representative or champion (26% up to 41% agreement

among employers in 2017).

More employers have a regular system for health and safety communications in place (29% up to

39% agreement in 2017).

Increased positive workplace behaviours relating to machinery and equipment: including safety

devices fitted to machinery when they should be (67% up to 74% saying ‘always’ in 2017), machinery

and equipment being well maintained (64% up to 70%’ always’ in 2017) and machinery and

equipment fully checked before it is used (41% up to 48% ‘always’ in 2017).

Reduced perception of serious harm incidents among employers (21% in 2014 down to 16% in 2017)

– but no corresponding reduction in self-reported serious harm incidents among workers.

Familiarity and Contact with WorkSafe:

Increased awareness of and familiarity with WorkSafe among employers and workers (from 22% to

46% and 14% to 33% respectively from 2014 to 2017), while the proportion who have heard of them

but know nothing more, or have not heard of them has declined from 33% to 9% among employers

and from 45% to 18% among workers from 2014 to 2017).

Increased incidence of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months among employers and workers

(70% up to 90% and 63% up to 79% respectively between 2014 and 2017).

WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY IN CONTEXT

Prioritisation of health and safety: Prioritisation of health and safety relative to other

workplace/business considerations has remained relatively unchanged among workers. It increased

among employers between 2014 and 2015 but has plateaued in the years since. In 2017:

Around one in three workers and two in three employers included health and safety as one of their

three top priorities.

Forestry workers were more likely than workers in the other high-risk sectors to include health and

safety as one of their three top priorities in the workplace. Agriculture sector workers were less likely

to do so.

When asked which of a series of groups should take responsibility for ensuring workers stay healthy and

safe at work, over eight in ten workers and employers identified workers as having a ‘very big

responsibility’. The immediate boss or supervisor of the workers and top management have consistently

been ranked second and third most commonly identified groups.

Workers’ perceptions of their bosses’ commitment to health and safety have remained fairly constant over

the four years. While employers are considered to have genuine concern for their workers, there is

potential for greater prioritization of safety (over profit and/or getting the job done) and opportunity for

greater reward of workers’ safe behaviour.

Employers’ views of their safety prioritisation have consistently been more positive than those of workers.

Over eight in ten employers agreed that their business considers safety at least as important as

production and quality in the way work is done: but just over six in ten workers disagreed that their boss is


more interested in getting the job done or in profit than safety. These results have remained stable since

2014.

Differences between workers’ and employers’ views about rewarding and recognising workers who act

safely have been apparent. Just under half of workers agreed that the boss praises or rewards workers

who act safely, while seven in ten employers agreed that this occurs.

Forestry workers and employers were more likely than workers and employers overall to prioritise

health and safety and to agree safe behaviour receives positive recognition.

Business drivers of health and safety in business: What a business does in terms of Health and

Safety is influenced by a number of different drivers. While a very strong and genuine concern for the

welfare of workers may be a key influence, other drivers also come into play to a greater or lesser extent.

In 2017, as in 2014, employers were asked how much each of seven factors influenced what their

business did in terms of health and safety:

Concern for the welfare of workers was the biggest driver in 2017 as in 2014, with nine in ten rating it

a ‘strong’ or, ‘very strong’ influence.

After concern for the workers, the cost to the business in terms of loss of productivity was the second

strongest influence, with three in four saying this.

Two of the seven drivers increased in strength of influence:

the risk of damage to the business’s reputation of a poor health and safety record (seven in ten in

2017, up from six in ten in 2014)

the companies who sub-contract us or who use our products or services require good health and

safety practices (over five in ten in 2014, up to six in ten in 2017).

WORKER ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION

Worker engagement is how a business involves its workers in work health and safety matters and

decisions. Worker participation means ongoing ways for workers to contribute to improving health and

safety at work, including raising health and safety concerns, being part of making decisions that affect

worker health and safety, and offering suggestions for improving health and safety. Both involve two-way

communication about health and safety.

Worker engagement

Involvement in decisions: The majority of workers and employers (around eight in ten) have consistently

agreed workers are involved in decision making about health and safety matters. Employer agreement

has increased slightly since 2014 (from 78% agreement to 85%), suggesting employers are making

changes to the way they manage health and safety within their businesses.

Open discussion: While workers felt they are involved in decision making, there is opportunity for

employers to improve the quality of communication to enhance worker engagement, via more open

discussion. Workers were less likely than employers to agree that health and safety risks were always

discussed in an open and helpful way. Over half the employers said this ‘always’ happens compared with

only four in ten workers saying there is ‘always’ open and helpful discussion.

While Forestry sector workers had greater agreement about their involvement in decision making,

Manufacturing workers had lower levels of agreement than other high-risk sectors about their ability to

have a say in health and safety matters, or that there was ‘always’ open and helpful discussion.


Hazard, incident and near miss reporting: Engaged workers are more likely to report hazards, near

misses and accidents to bosses or supervisors. The proportion of workers who said hazards, near misses

and accidents were reported ‘always’ or ‘most of the time’ has fluctuated over time, but at least two in

three workers and three-quarters of employers said that workers report hazards, near misses and

accidents to bosses or supervisors ‘most of the time’ or ‘always’ in their workplace. The proportion who

said this happens ‘less than half the time’ or ‘never’ has not reduced, remaining at 15%.

Making a difference: Two in three workers consistently agreed each year that workers really do make a

difference to health and safety in their workplace.

Worker participation

Work practices: Over eight in ten workers and employers in the four high-risk sectors reported one or

more practices that encourage worker participation in place in their workplace/business.

While there has been some fluctuation in levels of mention of different worker participation practices over

the four surveys, the rankings of those practices has been stable, with consistency of opinion on the main

practices across workers and employers. The four most commonly mentioned practices for both workers

and employers each year were as follows:

health and safety being included as a regular team/group meeting item

regular health and safety meetings

having an elected health and safety representative

having a noticeboard or website about health and safety (workers) and having a regular system for

health and safety communications (employers).

Only the first two responses were mentioned by more than half of those responding to the survey.

The proportion of employers reporting one of the practices in place has increased from 76% to 86% since

2014, and there has been an overall increase in the proportion of employers saying each of the following

practices is in place at their workplace:

health and safety as a regular team/group meeting item


a regular system for health and safety communications e.g. noticeboard, website

an elected health and safety representative.

Worker participation practices were more widely embedded within Forestry sector workplaces and less

likely to be implemented within Agricultural workplaces, which tend to have fewer workers. Across the four

high-risk sectors, there remains a proportion of workplaces (between one and two in ten) saying that none

of these worker participation practices take place in their workplace. One in three Agriculture workers said

their workplace has none in place, while one in five Agriculture sector employers said their workplace has

none in place.

Work environment: Agreement was stronger among employers than workers for most worker

participation messages, and employers had a more favourable view of the supportiveness of their work

environment than workers’:

Workers generally agreed that everyone at their workplace from the boss down is always trying to

improve safety, and both they and employers agreed that boss and workers work together to make

sure everyone is safe at work (three in four workers agreeing compared with over nine in ten

employers agreeing).

Nearly nine in ten employers agreed that their business encourages workers to come up with new or

better ways to make the workplace safer, while only two in three workers agreed. Workers were also


less confident than employers that their boss would totally support them if they suggested work be

stopped because of a possible hazard.

Despite not feeling totally confident that they would be supported, the majority of workers said they

would feel confident about approaching their boss or site supervisor with a health and safety issue,

and only a minority felt they would get into trouble if they told their boss they had a near miss.

Speaking up: Almost all employers said that they encourage their workers to speak up if something is

unsafe, while three in four workers agreed that they are encouraged to speak up. The majority of workers

(over eight in ten) agreed they always tell their co-workers if they are not working safely, but employers

were less convinced about this (only seven in ten agreeing that this happens).

Information and feedback: Employers had a more positive view of information sharing than workers did.

They were more likely than workers to think that relevant health and safety information and updates

are always shared with workers (eight in ten employers agreeing compared with seven in ten

workers).

They were more likely than workers to agree that they provided information that is easy to understand

(nearly nine in ten employers agreeing, compared with seven in ten workers).

While eight in ten employers have consistently agreed that their business always lets workers know

how we have considered their views when decisions are made about workplace health and safety,

workers are less inclined to agree, with just over half agreeing that they are always told how their

views have been taken into account.

PERCEPTIONS, KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE OF RISK

Perception of risk of injury and safety at work: Nearly all workers felt safe at work, despite

acknowledging there was a higher risk of serious injury in their industry compared with other industries:

Just under half of workers and employers said the risk of getting seriously hurt in their industry was

‘higher’/’much higher’ than in other industries, while fewer than two in ten workers and fewer than one

in ten employers said there was ‘at least a moderate risk’ of a worker being seriously hurt in their

workplace or business in the next 12 months.

Workers were more likely than employers to perceive a risk of personal injury in their workplace.

Forestry sector workers and employers were more likely than respondents in the other high-risk sectors to

believe there is a higher risk of serious injury in their industry and a higher level of personal risk of

moderate injury than in other industries.

Having the resources and information to do the job safely: The majority of workers and employers

(87% and 93% respectively) agreed that workers had the tools and equipment to do their job safely. But

while the majority of employers (89%) also thought that their workers had all the information they needed

to work safely, workers were less likely to agree. Only three in four workers (73%) agreed that they were

told everything they needed to know to work.

Knowledge and skills to deal with health and safety risks: Workers had high levels of confidence in

their knowledge and skills overall, with only a small minority (less than 5%) expressing a lack of

confidence in their knowledge and skills.

More than nine in ten workers (94%) were confident in their knowledge and skills to keep safe at

work, but workers were slightly less confident (85% confidence) that they had the knowledge and

skills to avoid long-term health problems.

More than eight in ten workers (87%) were confident that they knew how to report a hazard, near

miss or accident to workmates and management.


Risky behaviours in the workplace: Despite workers saying that they have the knowledge and skills to

keep themselves safe at work, a considerable number of serious harm accidents continue to occur in New

Zealand workplaces. Hence workers have been asked each year about the frequency with which they or

their workmates act in a number of potentially risky ways, while employers have been asked a

corresponding question in relation to workers in their business.

Higher proportions of workers than employers across the four high-risk sectors said that each type of risky

behaviour occurred ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ in their workplace and employers were more likely to say

that each risky behaviour ‘never’ happens than workers were. This perceived difference of the amount of

risky behaviour occurring in the workplace echoes previous survey results.

Both workers and employers listed working when sick or injured (45% and 16% respectively) working

when overtired (43% and 20% respectively)and making a mistake by being careless or not having

their mind on the job (37% and 29% respectively) as the three most common risky behaviours.

However employers listed making a mistake by being careless or not having their mind on the job as

the most common risky behaviour (29%), whilst workers listed it as the third most common risky

behaviour.

There has been a significant decline in the number of workers and employers who say that workers are

‘never’ involved in nearly all listed risky behaviours. Results signal increased knowledge of the risks to

which such behaviours expose workers, particularly in terms of working when hung-over or stoned, unsafe

processes, inadequate supervision, lack of appropriate skills and working in inappropriate conditions.

Positive actions taken to prevent serious harm in the workplace: The proportions of workers in the

four high-risk sectors saying that each of five positive actions ‘always’ occurred in the workplace were not

particularly high (ranging from 38% to 64%) and from 48% to 74% for employers.

Having safety devices fitted to machinery and equipment, was the only action that was moderately

widespread between 2014 and 2017, with 64% of workers and 74% of employers saying it ‘always’

happens (and most common in the Forestry sector).

Action being taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified was second most common

action identified by workers, but only 53% of workers said this ‘always’ happens, compared with 69%

of employers saying it ‘always’ happens. There has been a small increase in the proportion of

employers saying action is ‘always’ taken straight away (from 64% in 2014 to 69% in 2017), but a

minimal increase among workers.

The greatest divergence of views between workers and employers was for machinery and equipment

being well maintained. While seven in ten employers (70%) said this ‘always’ happens, fewer than

half the workers (48%) said it ‘always’ happens. Linked with this, machinery and equipment being

fully checked before it is used was the preventative action least likely to ‘always’ take place (only 38%

of workers and 53% of employers). Manufacturing workers were less likely than other high-risk sector

workers to say that machinery is well maintained or fully checked.

Although there have been small increases over time in the proportions of workers and employers

saying that personal protective equipment is ‘always’ used, in 2017, only around half the workers and

employers (49% and 53% respectively) said that it is ‘always’ used.

Forestry workers were more likely than workers overall to say all of the preventative actions asked about

‘always’ occurred and Forestry employers were more likely than employers overall to say that four of the

five safety actions ‘always’ occurred.


EXPERIENCE OF WORKPLACE INCIDENTS (SERIOUS HARM, NEAR MISSES, HAZARDS) AND

RESPONSES

The results in this section need to be interpreted on the basis that they are self-reported experiences for

the listed types of harms. However, there has been consistency over time in the levels of serious harm

incidents and near misses reported.

Serious harm incidents: The self-reported occurrence of serious harm incidents in the last 12 months

has declined slightly since 2015. Fewer than two in ten workers and employers (15% and 16%

respectively) reported a serious harm incident in 2017 compared with 18% of workers and 21% of

employers reporting serious harm incidents in 2015.

The four main types of serious harm noted each year have been a deep cut or wound requiring

stitches, eye injury, injury from crushing or a broken bone/fracture, with the incidence ranging

between 2% and 3% mention among workers and 3% and 8% mention among employers.

Employers were more likely than workers to say they took action after a worker experienced a serious

harm incident, with the proportion taking any action also increasing from six in ten (59%) in 2014 to

over eight in ten (83%) doing so in 2017.

There has been little change in the proportion of workers taking action after a serious harm incident,

with around one in two workers saying they took action, each year (59% in 2014 and 63% in 2017).

Each year, a persistent one in ten workers said they did not report the incident, while a further one in

ten said they did report the incident to their manager/boss but no action was taken.

The prevalence of serious harm incidents was higher among the Manufacturing and Forestry sectors than

other high-risk sectors. Forestry workers were most likely to have taken action, and reported it.

Other types of harm: About four in ten workers and employers have recorded these each year:

Sprains, strains and dislocations were most frequently mentioned, with 27% mention by workers and

29% mention by employers in 2017, proportions consistent with previous years

Other types of harm that have been mentioned consistently include stress-related or mental illness,

skin conditions, or short term breathing problems from temporary exposure to particles, fumes,

smoke, spray or other harmful substances (each mentioned by around one in ten workers, but smaller

proportions of employers).

Suffering from heat strain or heat stroke was a new type of harm added in 2017, with 7% mention

among workers (mentioned particularly by workers in the Construction and Manufacturing sectors).

Near misses: About three in ten workers and employers said that there has been at least one or more

near misses at work. The proportion of workers saying they have experienced a near miss has remained

flat since 2015, but an increase was apparent among employers (up from 28% in 2014 to 32% in 2017):

The likelihood of taking action after a near miss was higher than after a serious harm incident, with six

in ten workers taking action each year (63% doing so in 2017), compared with only five in ten doing

so after a serious harm incident. The proportion of workers doing 'nothing after a near miss has

decreased from 18% in 2014 to 13% in 2017.

Higher proportions of employers than workers said that near miss incidents resulted in follow-up

action, with nine in ten (90% in 2017) reporting some follow-up.

Near misses were more prevalent in the Forestry sector than other sectors (four in ten Forestry workers

experiencing a near miss compared with three in ten across all four high-risk sectors). The incidence of

taking any action was also particularly high among Forestry and Construction sector employers.


Identifying a new hazard: Around seven in ten workers and employers (71% and 63% respectively)

noticed a new hazard at work in the last 12 months. The proportion identifying a new hazard has

fluctuated around the seven in ten mark each year:

The actions taken have been reasonably consistent among workers and employer over time. Over

four in ten workers (44% in 2017), compared with three in ten employers (33% in 2017) said they did

something immediately and at least three in ten workers and employers said they changed the way

they did something and/or wrote the hazard into a hazard board or register.

Appropriate action was more likely to be taken by Forestry workers and employers than people in other

high-risk sectors.

Exposure to loud noise and use of protective noise equipment: Workers’ perceptions of the

frequency of their exposure to loud noise were greater than employers’. One in four workers (24%) said

they were exposed to loud noise ‘most of the time’, whereas only one in ten employers (11%) said this

was the case. About seven in ten of both groups (78% of workers and 70% of employers) said that

workers were exposed to loud noise ‘some or most of the time’. The frequency of exposure was higher

among Forestry and Construction sector respondents than people in the other high-risk sectors.

While use of hearing protection was the most wide spread protective measure implemented (mentioned by

over eight in ten workers and around nine in ten employers), other protective measures were less

common.

IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING

Training is an important way of embedding and supporting health and safety practices in the workplace.

At least half the workers had received health and safety training in the last twelve months (the

proportion having training increasing from 44% in 2014 to 51% in 2017). Construction and Forestry

workers were more likely to have received training in the last twelve months.

One in five workers said they have never received any training, and this proportion has remained

much the same every year (23% in 2014 and 21% in 2017).

There were sectoral differences in the prevalence of training. Training is least likely to have taken

place within the Agriculture sector; nearly four in ten workers said they have ‘never’ received health

and safety training, and five in ten employers said ‘none’ of their workers have ever been trained.

Health and safety training was also less common in the Manufacturing sector; nearly one in four

workers said they had ‘never’ received health and safety training, while one in three employers said

‘none’ of their workers had ever received health and safety training.

Health and safety attitudes and behaviours were generally more positive among workers who had

undertaken formal health and safety training in the last 12 months. This has been a consistent pattern of

response in every survey:

Comparison of results for worker engagement by recency of health and safety training (workers) and

proportion trained (employers) highlight the value of training, in providing a forum in which workers

can discuss health and safety matters in an open and helpful way. Over eight in ten workers who had

received training in the last 12 months agreed this happens, compared with nearly seven in ten of

those who had never received training.

Giving workers health and safety training has a positive impact on their ability and confidence to

participate: it enhances their perceptions of being in an environment that is supportive of workers, a

workplace that will provide information about health and safety and indicates a culture in which

workers can feel confident raising and speaking up about health and safety matters.


One in three workers (35%) who have ‘never’ undertaken formal health and safety training said their

workplace has none of the nominated worker participation practices in place, compared to one in four

employers (26%) whose workers have ‘never’ received training.

While results about having the tools and equipment and being told everything they need to know to do

their jobs properly were similar regardless of health and training status, workers who had received

health and safety training had greater confidence that they knew how to report a hazard, near miss or

accident to workmates and management. They were also more likely to believe they had the

knowledge and skills to keep safe at work and avoid long-term health problems. Workers who had

never received health and safety training were less confident on all three measures. They were also

less likely to always report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors, or to feel that

things that put health and safety at risk are discussed in an open and helpful way.

Active responses to serious harm incidents and new misses (for example, reporting and/or recording

the event, or discussing what happened) were more common among those who have undertaken

training in the last 12 months.

Those who have never had training were less likely to identify a new hazard (only half doing so,

compared with over seven in ten of those who have had training). And they were less likely to take

any action to reduce the hazard in any way.

Workers who have undertaken training in the last 12 months had greater confidence in their

awareness of legal responsibilities and their rights as workers.

Providing health and safety training for workers also positively affects employer attitudes and behaviours.

Employers whose workers received training had a higher level of confidence in their obligations and how

to comply with their health and safety obligations. Employers who have trained staff were more likely to

have made changes to their health and safety systems and processes (six in ten having done so,

compared with only four in ten of those who had never trained their staff).

APPROACHES TO HEALTH AND SAFETY IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKFORCE

Two in three workers have been confident in their awareness of their legal responsibilities and rights both

before and since the implementation of the 2015 legislation. In 2017, 64% of workers expressed

confidence in their awareness of their legal responsibilities and 63% expressed confidence in their rights.

Employers’ confidence in their awareness of their legal obligations and how to comply with them was

stable from 2014 to 2016 before increasing in 2017, when seven in ten said they were aware of their

health and safety obligations and nearly seven in ten were confident that they knew how to comply.

Confidence was greater than average among Forestry sector workers and employers and lower than

average among Agriculture sector workers and employers.

At least half of the high-risk sector employers said their business had made significant changes to its

health and safety systems or practices in the last three years, with the incidence peaking at 65% doing so

in 2016, and 52% having done so in 2017. Making on-going improvements to workplace health and safety

was the main driver, along with employers learning more about best practice through education or

available information, or through improvements in industry practice.


ADVICE AND INFORMATION ON HEALTH AND SAFETY

Work related sources have consistently been the main sources of health and safety advice for workers.

The boss (43%) was the most commonly mentioned individual source followed by the health and safety

representative at their workplace (35%). Two other workplace-related sources workers listed were

someone else in management (21%) and a mentor (12%).

WorkSafe NZ was second most commonly mentioned source of advice overall among workers (38%

mention in 2017.) It was the leading source for employers, with two in three employers (64%) naming

WorkSafe as their most likely source of health and safety advice.

The internet/Google was the third main overall source of advice for employers and the fourth main source

of advice for workers (30% and 25% mention respectively in 2017).

Various industry related sources (including health and safety consultants, an industry organisation, or a

friend) were the fourth main group of sources of health and safety advice for workers. However, they were

the second most common group for employers after WorkSafe.

Sector specific sources (such as SiteSafe and Safetree) were more commonly mentioned by employers

than workers. For example, 43% of Construction employers mentioned SiteSafe while 54% of Forestry

employers mentioned Safetree. (The sector specific source was the second most prevalent source after

mention of WorkSafe in each case).

AWARENESS, PERCEPTIONS OF, AND CONTACT WITH, WORKSAFE

Awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: the level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe has

stabilised among workers and employers after year-on-year increases between 2014 and 2016. In 2017

94% of workers had heard of WorkSafe, as had 97% of employers.

Whilst most workers and employers were aware of WorkSafe, only three in ten workers and four in ten

employers knew a reasonable amount about them. Awareness and knowledge among Manufacturing

workers lagged somewhat behind the other three high-risk sectors.

Perceptions of WorkSafe: Perceptions of WorkSafe were generally positive among workers and

employers and have remained stable over the last year. Between a half and two-thirds of each group

agreed with statements about WorkSafe, while between two and three out of ten workers and employers

did not have a view about WorkSafe either way.

WorkSafe was rated most positively for helping workers understand the health and safety issues and risks

they face and for doing a good job helping workers to be safe/businesses improve workplace safety, with

at least six in ten workers and employers agreeing with each one.

About half the workers had trust and confidence in WorkSafe and/or agreed that WorkSafe is making a

real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand. Employers’ views of WorkSafe’s

trustworthiness and being an organisation they can have confidence in were similar to those of workers.

Similarly, half the employers agreed that WorkSafe is making a real difference to workplace health and

safety in New Zealand.

Employer agreement was weakest with WorkSafe working effectively with businesses like mine. Only four

in ten agreed with this and nearly one in five disagreed with this.

Contact with WorkSafe: Every year nine in ten workers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe were

aware that they can contact WorkSafe to ask for advice or information. Eight in ten of these workers knew


that they could contact WorkSafe to make a complaint, seven in ten were aware that they could ask for an

inspector visit, and two thirds were aware of the toll free number.

Results have been stable over the last two years, with the biggest increases in awareness occurring

between 2014 and 2015 for making a complaint and using a toll free number, and between 2015 and 2016

for asking for an inspector.

The majority of workers and employers aware of WorkSafe have had some form of contact with WorkSafe

in the last 12 months (around eight in ten workers and nine in ten employers) and the levels of contact

have been consistent over time.

Since 2015 the same four types of contact have been mentioned by more than 20% of workers and

employers. These were:

seeing materials and information produced by WorkSafe (seen by more than four in ten workers and

half of employers)

visiting WorkSafe’s website (the main contact method among employers, with use increasing year on

year to half in 2017, but only seen by a quarter of workers)

from media reports on WorkSafe (nearly three in ten workers and employers mentioned this)

as a result of WorkSafe’s advertising about being healthy and safe at work (mentioned two in ten

workers and three in ten employers).

Use of health and safety information/guidance and preferred formats among employers: Use of health and

safety guidance materials has increased among employers since 2015, with seven in ten using at least

one type of material. Four guidance materials were used by at least one third of employers: factsheets,

forms and templates, Best/Good Practice Guidelines and checklists.

The perceived usefulness of the various guidance materials varied significantly. More than seven in ten employers who used them rating Forms and Templates and Best/Good

Practice Guidelines as very useful

Checklists, H&S at Work Interpretive Guidelines, ACOPs, Toolkits, Factsheets and Quick reference

guides were all rated as very useful by between six in ten and seven in ten employers who used

them.

Employers rated posters and online tools (including online quizzes, animated videos and online

interactive tools), lowest in terms of perceived usefulness, with half or fewer rating them as very

useful.

Media preferences for the communication of health and safety messages were common to both employers

and workers, including by paper booklets/brochures, online training courses/learning modules, posters,

videos and mobile app formats. Preference for mobile app formats has increased from 2016.

Likelihood of WorkSafe inspector workplace visit: Three in ten workers and employers from the four

high-risk sectors thought it was likely that a WorkSafe inspector would visit their workplace or business in

the next 12 months. While the perceived likelihood of a visit increased in 2015 and 2016, it settled in 2017,

meaning there has been little overall change over the four survey years.


WHERE SHOULD WORKSAFE FOCUS TO IMPACT HEALTH AND SAFETY?

Half of the workers and half of the employers surveyed chose to make a comment when asked what could

make the most difference to improve health and safety in their industry.

The main themes have been consistent since 2015, and included:

the importance of encouraging personal responsibility and the need for workers to use their common

sense on the job (rather than solely relying on health and safety rules)

the ongoing need to keep health and safety at the forefront, and pay attention to safe work practices

proper and relevant training for the job, to ensure that workers have the skills and familiarity with

machinery and equipment and knowledge to work safely

having a clear, workable health and safety policy (employers particularly mentioned the value of

having a policy that is concise and easy to understand and apply in the workplace)

(more) visits and mentoring by health and safety representatives. Employers particularly talked of the

value of visits on-site by WorkSafe, providing informal opportunity for review of their processes and

documentation, and encouraging positive practices seen on-site.


2017 CONCLUSIONS Results since the 2014 benchmark survey show some positive changes in worker and employer attitudes

and behaviours. Many of the improvements occurred between 2014 and 2015 as workplaces prepared for

the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. Increases in some engagement and participation metrics were

apparent in 2016, but results have generally plateaued in 2017 or settled back to the levels observed in

2015.

For example, the number of employers who said they had made significant changes to their health and

safety systems increased from 40% in 2014 to 65% in 2016, but this partially reverted to 52% in 2017.

It is possible that many workplaces have reached a situation in which they have implemented worker

participation practices, upskilled their workforce and do not see a need to do anything further at this point.

But the survey findings indicate there is still opportunity to do more, particularly in terms of ensuring that

preventative behaviours are always practised and machinery and equipment are well maintained and

checked before use.

Other responses have shown similar trends, including the number of workers who received health and

safety training the past year, the proportion confident in approaching the boss about a health or safety

issue, or the proportion of workers confident that they know how to report a hazard, near miss or accident.

All of these showed improvements between 2015 and 2016 before reverting to the 2015 level in 2017.

Positively, employers say concern for the welfare of their workers is a key influence on health and safety.

Work environments are generally positive with participatory dialogue taking place and workers feeling

confident that they can raise health and safety issues. Both workers and employers acknowledge that

responsibility for health and safety lies with workers themselves, and many suggestions for the future

focused on the need for personal responsibility and use of common sense in the workplace. Workers look

to workplace sources for advice about health and safety and they acknowledge that they do make a

difference to health and safety.

Workers who are involved in health and safety decisions tend to have more positive attitudes and

behaviours in relation to health and safety, as do employers whose workers are involved in decisions.

Gains have been made in the implementation of worker participation practices among high-risk sector

businesses (with nominated health and safety representatives, health and safety being a part of regular

meetings and visibility on business noticeboards and websites). But a proportion of employers (primarily in

the Agriculture high risk sector) still have none of these participation practices in place.

A small but significant decline is apparent in the incidence of serious harm incidents between 2015 and

2017, but there has been no decrease in the self-reported incidence of near misses. Decreases in nearly

all risky behaviours have been reported between 2014 and 2017, although the consistent practice of

preventative health and safety behaviours is not wide spread. For example, fitting of safety guards (where

necessary) happens in only two in three businesses, and only one in two workers are always using

personal protective equipment when they should.

There are some disconnects between employer and worker perceptions on key worker engagement and

participation attitudes and behaviours. This could be a function of differences in the worker and employer

samples and business sizes. But these differences signal a potential lack of understanding of what is

happening day-to-day for workers. For example, employers have a more positive view of their reward and

recognition for workers who act safely and the level of open discussion about health and safety, and they

are more inclined than workers to blame risky behaviours on worker carelessness, whereas workers see

the main drivers of risky behaviour as working when sick or injured or when overtired. Closing these gaps

will require open and honest dialogue between employers and workers.


Sector differences

There are significant differences across the four high-risk sectors, with Forestry leading in the

implementation of positive health and safety initiatives.

Forestry: Forestry is the stand-out high-risk sector, with strong positive results across most attitudinal

and behavioural measures. While employers and workers acknowledge that there is higher risk of serious

injury within their industry than others (borne out by the higher level of serious harms and near misses)

employers place high priority on keeping their workers healthy and safe at work, and nearly all workers

feel safe at work. Workers and employers have higher confidence in their knowledge and skills; training is

more frequent and widespread and worker participation practices are embedded within businesses.

Workers are more likely to be practising preventative behaviours than in other high–risk sectors, and they

are more likely to be identifying and taking action around new hazards. For example, while Forestry

workers have frequent exposure to loud noise, around seven in ten always wear hearing protection. There

are still opportunities for improvement, in the delivery of information to workers about how to do their jobs

safely. With the increasing mechanization in the Forestry sector, ensuring that machinery and equipment

maintenance and checking are a routine part of health and safety is critical, as this is the least widespread

of the positive behaviours within the sector.

Construction: There have been positive shifts in attitudes and behaviours within the Construction sector

over the four survey years. Employers say that keeping workers safe is a key focus and around six in ten

have made significant changes to their safety systems or practices within the last 12 months. Most have at

least one worker participation practice in place and two in three businesses have a process for ensuring

workers are briefed on health and safety for every site they visit. There has been a comparatively high

incidence of worker training in the last twelve months (two in three workers having received health and

safety training in that time). While workers feel confident approaching a boss about a health and safety

issue, they are not highly confident about their health and safety rights and responsibilities, and they do

not always find the information they receive about health and safety to be easy to understand.

The Construction sector has the second highest self-reported level of near misses after Forestry.

Construction workers are exposed to a range of hazards, and they are less likely to report hazards, near

misses and accidents to bosses or supervisors than workers in other high-risk sectors. Nearly one in ten

said they experienced heat strain and/or been exposed to asbestos. They have frequent exposure to loud

noise (eight in ten at least some of the time). While nine in ten have hearing protection, relatively few have

been trained in its use and fewer than half wear it all the time. Fewer than half say that machinery and

equipment is checked before use. An ongoing focus on addressing and reducing such hazards to workers

on site is important, to minimize the risks of injury.

Manufacturing: There is opportunity for improvement within the diverse manufacturing sector. Of all the

sectors, manufacturing workers are less likely to feel they have a say in health and safety in their

workplace, and more likely than other sector workers to consider open and helpful discussion is lacking.

At the same time, one in four believe there is a moderate risk that they could be seriously injured at work,

and they feel less safe at work than workers in other high-risk sectors. Manufacturing sector workers are

exposed to a range of work pressures and hazards (including machinery that is not necessarily well

maintained or checked before use), leading them to take risks and to experience a comparatively high

level of serious incidents and near misses.

Agriculture: Although health and safety is less likely to be prioritized as a top three business issue within

the Agricultural sector, both employers and workers agree that boss and workers work together to make

sure everyone is safe at work. Some increases are apparent over the four years of surveying, but worker

participation practices are not strongly embedded and are not formalized. Only one in three employers, for

example, said that formal safety audits are carried out regularly, and between two in ten and three in ten


agricultural workplaces still have no worker participation practices in place. Workers are less likely to have

received training (between four and five in ten have never received health and safety training), and

employers and workers have lower than average confidence in their knowledge of legal responsibilities

and rights (workers) and obligations and how to comply (employers).

Compared with other high-risk sector workers, Agricultural workers are less likely to feel that there is a

moderate risk of injury in their industry. However, one in three Agriculture workers say that they have

talked about safety more often with people who work on or visit the farm and nearly one in two say they

make an effort to use the right equipment for the job. Use of the Safer Farms website is not high

(mentioned by just over one in ten Agriculture workers compared with one in seven Agricultural workers

visiting the WorkSafe website). Continued emphasis on ways to connect effectively with a geographically

dispersed workforce will help to achieve positive attitudinal and behavioural shifts within the sector.

Looking to the future

Based on the survey results over the four years, WorkSafe appears well placed to support workers and

employers. Since 2014, it has achieved significant gains in awareness and familiarity among employers

and workers in the four high-risk sectors. Only a small minority is unaware of WorkSafe, perceptions are

generally positive, with reasonable trust and confidence in WorkSafe and belief that WorkSafe is making a

difference to health and safety. However, WorkSafe was rated more positively for helping workers to be

safe at work than to be healthy at work.

A high proportion of workers and employers have contact with WorkSafe, and use of WorkSafe resources

and materials is increasing, although there is opportunity to improve the usefulness of individual

resources. Workplace visits are valued and provide opportunity for WorkSafe and employers/industry

groups to discuss health and safety matters in an informal way. There is a need to find ways to work

effectively with businesses in the high-risk sectors other than Forestry, as WorkSafe was not highly rated

on this aspect other than by Forestry sector respondents.

Looking to the future, encouraging wider and more regular practice of safe working behaviours is vital, to

help reduce health and safety risks within high-risk workplaces. Encouraging worker participation in

refresher health and safety training is important as survey results highlight that this results in improved

worker and employer confidence, and it provides a workplace forum for discussion about health and safety

matters.

Given the proportions of workers who say they are involved in risky behaviours when working while sick,

injured or over tired, and the perception that WorkSafe has been more focused on worker safety than

worker health, health related initiatives merit a higher priority.

21

SECTION 2:

INTRODUCTION


2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 BACKGROUND

New Zealand has unacceptably high rates of workplace fatalities and serious harm injuries. WorkSafe

New Zealand (WorkSafe) regulates workplace health and safety and ensures that businesses are

securing the health and safety of workers and workplaces. WorkSafe works collaboratively with

businesses, undertakings, workers and their representatives to embed and promote good work health and

safety practices.

WorkSafe was established as a stand-alone workplace health and safety regulator in December 2013. Its

mandate from the Government is to lead New Zealand to an at least 25 percent reduction in workplace

fatalities and serious harms by 2020. A focus of WorkSafe is the four sectors that are major contributors to

New Zealand’s workplace death and injury toll – Agriculture, Forestry, Construction and Manufacturing.

WorkSafe has also significantly increased managerial and inspectorate capability and capacity in the high

hazards sectors – extractives, and petroleum and geothermal. WorkSafe is also responsible for regulating

adventure activities and other aspects of workplace safety.

In 2014, Nielsen was commissioned to implement a three-year survey programme, with the 2014 survey

providing baseline research. The overall purpose of the research was to:

provide baseline measures of workers’ and employers’ attitudes and behaviours around health and

safety that can be tracked over time

inform the design and development of interventions to improve workplace health and safety, both at

an overall level and within each of the four sectors: Agriculture, Construction, Forestry and

Manufacturing (referred to as the four high-risk sectors).

Qualitative research was conducted in March 2014 to provide in-depth information and insights about

attitudes and behaviours relating to health and safety in New Zealand and about how best to communicate

with the high-risk sectors.

Annual quantitative surveys have been undertaken in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017. While the 2014 and

2015 surveys took place before the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 came into effect, the 2016 survey

took place around six months after the new Act was in effect, providing the first opportunity to assess

behaviours and views in the new legislative environment.

This report describes the findings of the 2017 survey and compares the results with those for the previous

years, to understand any significant changes in health and safety attitudes and behaviours across time. It

focuses on the four high-risk sectors and describes:

findings of the 2017 survey

differences between workers and employers

differences across the sectors.


SECTOR COVERAGE

The Commercial Fishing sector, which also has high levels of workplace fatalities and injuries, was

included in the 2014 survey, as Maritime New Zealand, the regulator for the maritime industry, partnered

with WorkSafe to measure behaviours and attitudes towards health and safety in this sector. The

Commercial Fishing sector was not included in 2015 and 2016 but was included in the 2017 survey.

Workers and employers from outside the four high-risk sectors and the Commercial Fishing sector were

also surveyed across all four years to provide a point of comparison. This sector is labelled the 'Other'

sector. Appendix III provides information about the industries included in the 'Other' sector and the

location at which respondents worked.

2.2 SURVEY METHOD AND SAMPLE SOURCES

A self-completion written survey method was used for the workers’ and employers’ surveys, providing

respondents with the opportunity to complete the survey either online or in hard copy. A series of four

communications with the selected sample was used to encourage participation in a written, self-

completion survey, with the option to complete online being strongly promoted. This method provided a

cost-effective, repeatable means of obtaining a robust sample of the target audiences.

Different sample sources were used for the workers’ and employers’ surveys.

The workers sample was sourced from the Electoral Roll, which lists the names, addresses and

occupations of the majority of New Zealanders aged 18 years and over, who are eligible to vote.

The ACC Levy Payers’ database (a list of all the organisations that pay ACC levies) was used to

select a sample of employers from each of the sectors. The ACC database was supplemented by a

WorkSafe database for the Forestry sector, and by Maritime New Zealand’s Commercial Fishing

database for the Commercial Fishing sector.

Further details about the survey method and sample sources are included in Appendix I. A comprehensive

technical report, which discusses the benefits and limitations of this research approach in more detail and

elaborates on all the technical aspects outlined, is published separately. (See: Nielsen. (2017) Health and

safety attitudes and behaviours in the New Zealand workforce: A survey of workers and employers. 2017

Technical report.)

Survey fieldwork took place between 30 October 2017 and 10 January 2017.

2.3 QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT

In 2014, structured questionnaires were designed for workers and employers based on extensive

consultation with WorkSafe and on the insights provided by the qualitative research. International research

was used to frame up the question areas included in the quantitative stage, particularly the research

carried out for Safe Work Australia by Valerie Braithwaite and reported in Motivations, Attitudes,

Perceptions and Skills: Pathways to Safe Work.

The key dynamics that underlie co-operation and progress on workplace Health and Safety were identified

in her report as:

Appreciation among workers of risk: workers being aware of safety issues and prioritizing their own

safety above other considerations (with this being developed and nurtured within the work context)

Strong leadership: where bosses value safety for its own sake and prioritise it above everything else.

Responsive dialogue: where open and timely communication across all levels leads to identifying

problems and fixing them.


Participatory structures: formal avenues that are in place (for example, regular meetings) that ensure

safety is not overlooked and that give workers a say.

Work safety authorities that are present and that are fair, seen to be doing their jobs and that are

respected and trusted.

The presence and effectiveness of these five factors impact on safe routines being institutionalised in the

workplace and also on the ability of individual workers to manage their own health and safety and that of

others.

Most of the survey questions have remained identical across all four years, so changes could be tracked.

However several new questions have been added or wording altered, with these being reported only for

the relevant years. The questionnaires will be available on WorkSafe’s website in the 2017 Technical

report. See Appendix II for a summary of question topics.

Separate versions of the questionnaire were prepared for employers and for workers. These

questionnaires were adapted for the five sectors included (ten versions in total).

2.4 SURVEY RESPONSES

WORKERS

The targeted number of completed workers’ questionnaires was 500 in the Agriculture, Construction and

Manufacturing sectors, 400 in each of Forestry and Commercial Fishing (due to the relatively small

number of businesses in these industries), and 900 in the ‘Other’ sector.

A total of 1,885 valid completed questionnaires were received from workers across the four high-risk

sectors, 365 from workers in Commercial Fishing and 1,031 from workers in the ‘Other’ sector.

Overall, the targeted number of questionnaires was exceeded in the Agriculture and Manufacturing

sectors, but it was not met in the other sectors, with 90% achieved in the Construction sector, 91% in the

Forestry sector and the Commercial Fishing sector.

EMPLOYERS

The targeted number of completed employers’ questionnaires was 400 in the Agriculture, Construction

and Manufacturing sectors, 300 in each of Forestry and Commercial Fishing, and 400 in the ‘Other’ sector.

A total of 1,307 valid completed questionnaires were received from employers across the four high-risk

sectors and 429 questionnaires from employers in the ‘Other’ sector.

Overall, the targeted number of interviews was not met in any of the high-risk sectors, with 94% achieved

in the Agriculture sector, 84% in the Construction sector, 75% in the Forestry sector, 91% in the

Manufacturing sector and 54% in the Commercial Fishing sector. The targeted number was exceeded in

the ‘Other’ sector.


RESPONSE RATES OVER TIME

Comparison of the response rates for the workers’ and employers’ surveys over time shows a decline in

response rates over the four years. There are a number of reasons for this, the most likely one being the

timing of the survey. Fieldwork for the 2014 survey was conducted from July to September, and 2015

fieldwork from September to November. In 2016 and 2017, fieldwork was conducted in the October to

December period.).

2.1 Achieved Samples and Response Rates from 2014 to 2017

Appendix III provides details of worker and employer respondents by sector, while Appendix I provides

further details of the response rates for the individual sectors in 2017.

2.5 ANALYSIS AND REPORTING

Analysis and reporting is structured as follows:

Most measures are reported at a summary level (i.e. by combining the results for WorkSafe’s four

high-risk sectors). Summary and other data were weighted, to ensure that the survey respondents are

representative of the populations from which they are selected.

Adjustments for workers were based on age within each of the relevant occupational sectors in

the Electoral roll

Adjustments for employers were based on size of business within the occupational sectors in

the ACC Levy Payers’ database.

The Technical report contains more details of these adjustments.

Results are reported at an individual sector level, so the four high-risk sectors can be compared with

each other and with the ‘Other’ sector. The ‘Other’ sector includes those workers and employers who

did not fall into one of WorkSafe’s four high-risk sectors; workers in the Commercial Fishing sector

are also excluded.

Findings from the four survey years have been presented and discussed in this report where possible

(question was included) and practical.

In the ‘By sector’ sections of this report where comparisons have been made between one of the

high-risk sectors and the overall result, these comparisons are with the four high-risk overall result. In

ACHIEVED SAMPLES AND RESPONSE RATES

ALL RESPONDENTS

2014 2015 2016 2017

WORKERS 3237 2922 3256 2916

RESPONSE RATE (METHOD 2)

33% 31% 28% 27%

EMPLOYERS 1756 1909 1604 1736

RESPONSE RATE (METHOD 2)

36% 37% 25% 26%

NOTE: Results are based on the five sector total (Four high risk sectors + Other sector)


the few cases where the ‘Other’ sector has been compared with the overall result, this is the

five sector overall result.

Further points are outlined in Section 2.8 – Notes to Report.

2.6 MARGIN OF ERROR

All sample surveys are subject to sampling error, which is the measure of uncertainty arising from survey

estimates because only a sample of the population is observed.

The maximum sampling error for each respondent group in the four WorkSafe high-risk sectors is as

follows:

Workers: total sample size of 1,885 respondents. Survey results are subject to a maximum sampling

error of plus or minus 2.3% at the 95% confidence level.

Employers: total sample of 1,307 respondents. Survey results are subject to a maximum sampling

error of plus or minus 2.7% at the 95% confidence level.

That is, there is a 95% chance that the true population value of a result of 50% actually lies between

47.7% and 52.3% for workers and between 47.3% and 52.7% for employers. The margin of error

increases, as the result moves further away from 50%.

The maximum error margins for the individual sectors are outlined in Appendix I.

2.7 ACCESSING PAST SURVEY RESULTS

Reports from the qualitative and quantitative 2014 research can be found on WorkSafe’s website at

http://www.worksafe.govt.nz/worksafe/research/research-reports/health-and-safety-attitudes-and-

behaviours-survey. For results for the Commercial Fishing sector, contact Maritime NZ at:

[email protected].


2.8 NOTES TO THE REPORT

KEY DEFINITIONS • Workers include self-employed people who do not employ others and employers who do the day-to-day work they also employ others to do.

STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE

• All sub-group differences and changes over time mentioned in this report are statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval. This means that the difference is a true difference, statistically and not due to random variation.

• Statistically significant differences for figures that are less than or equal to 3% have not been reported, even where the base size is greater than 30.

• The exception to the above is that low proportions in Section 6.1 and 6.2 (for harm) have been statistically adjusted using the Jeffrey’s adjustment, to allow for significance testing.

• The effective base was used for significance testing as a safeguard against making statistical conclusions from a sample that has been drastically adjusted up or down (using weights) to match the population. Formula: Effective base = (sum of weight factors) squared/sum of the squared weight factors.

COMPARISONS MADE

• Given the large quantity of detailed data across sectors and from both workers and employers, this report provides high level analysis with a specific focus on significant differences between sectors.

• Sub-groups: Differences in sub-groups (for example, differences between sectors) mentioned are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Where a result is significantly different from the total result, it is usually reported as being significantly higher or lower than the overall result.

• Significant differences (increases/decreases, more/less, higher/lower) are shown in bold text in the body of the report.

• Workers / Employers: Obvious differences between workers and employers are described in the report, but these have not been subject to statistical significance testing, with a few exceptions. Direct comparisons between workers and employers are not always possible, as the groups come from different sources and question wording differs slightly.

• ‘By sector’ comparisons are generally between the four high-risk sectors and the four high-risk overall result., but also with the “Other’ sector.

OVER TIME • Arrows have been used to show significant increases or decreases between two consecutive years. Where the chart presents data for the 2017 year, comparisons are with 2016.

EXCLUSIONS • All bases in the charts and tables exclude those participants who did not answer the question. A question might not have been answered because:

• The survey was self completion• Some sensitive questions (for example whether serious harm occurred) were optional.

• Some bases may also exclude ‘not applicable’ responses. (For example, it was not relevant to ask a self-employed person about their boss. )

• Question base sizes are noted in the description at the chart or table base.

REPORT NOTATION

• Statements from the questionnaires are shown in italics while response options in the questionnaire are in bold.

• Where there were no responses to a question or response category, this has been shown as a dash '-'. Low proportions (i.e. those up to 0.49%) have been shown as <0.5%.

INTERPRETING RESULTS

• Results are often presented in summary form (for example, the percentage who agreed with a statement) rather than showing every possible data point. Note that the remaining respondents did not necessarily disagree with a statement but includes those who disagreed, were non-committal (neither agreed nor disagreed) or were uncertain.

• Large companies are more likely to be found in some sectors than in others. Differences in results between sectors may be partly explained by the greater presence of larger companies in a sector.

MORE INFORMATION

• More information about the survey method, weighting and respondent profile are provided in Appendix I, or refer to the 2017 Technical Report.

SECTION 3:

WORKPLACE HEALTH AND

SAFETY IN CONTEXT


3 WORKPLACE HEALTH AND

SAFETY IN CONTEXT

INTRODUCTION This section of the report provides context for workers’ and employers’ behaviours and attitudes to

health and safety in the workplace, and focuses on the extent to which health and safety is prioritised.

It considers:

where health and safety sits in the priorities of workers and employers, relative to other

workplace and business considerations

the extent to which workers take personal responsibility for their own health and safety and

which groups of people and organisations with influence in the workplace are seen by workers

and employers as having a very big responsibility for workplace health and safety

workers’ and employers’ views on whether employers (bosses) prioritise worker health and

safety by examining concern for worker health and safety, the priority given to health and safety

in relation to production and the extent to which safe actions and behaviours are rewarded.

KEY FINDINGS Prioritisation of health and safety: Prioritisation of health and safety relative to other workplace and

business considerations has remained relatively unchanged among workers, but increased among

employers between 2014 and 2015, plateauing since then.

Around a third of workers (36%) and two thirds of employers (63%) included health and safety

as one of their three top priorities.

Forestry workers were more likely than other high-risk sector workers to include health and

safety as one of their three top priorities in the workplace. Agriculture sector workers were less

likely to do so (53% and 26% respectively).

When asked which of a series of groups should take responsibility for ensuring workers stay healthy

and safe at work, over eight in ten workers and employers (83% and 87% respectively) identified

workers as the number one group with a ‘very big responsibility’. The immediate boss or supervisor of

the workers and top management have consistently been ranked second and third.

Workers’ perceptions of their bosses’ commitment to health and safety have remained fairly constant

over the four years. While employers are considered to have genuine concern for their workers, there

is potential for greater prioritisation of safety (over profit and/or getting the job done) and opportunity for


Employers’ views of their safety prioritisation have consistently been more positive than those of

workers. Over eight in ten employers (84%) agreed that their business considers safety at least as

important as production and quality in the way work is done: while nearly six in ten workers (58%)

disagreed that their boss is more interested in getting the job done or in profit than safety. These

results have remained stable since 2014.



safely have been apparent. Just under half the workers (48%) agreed that the boss praises or rewards

workers who act safely, while seven in ten employers (71%) agreed that this occurs.

Forestry workers and employers were more likely than workers and employers overall to

prioritise health and safety and to agree safe behaviour receives positive recognition.

Business drivers of health and safety in business: What a business does in terms of health and

safety is influenced by a number of different drivers. While a very strong and genuine concern for the

welfare of workers may be a key influence, other drivers also come into play to a greater or lesser

extent. Employers were asked in 2017, as in 2014, how much each of seven factors influenced what

their business did in terms of health and safety.

Concern for the welfare of workers was the biggest driver in 2017 as in 2014, with nine in ten

(90%) rating it a ‘strong’ or, ‘very strong’ influence.

The cost to the business in terms of loss of productivity was the second strongest influence

after concern for worker welfare, three quarters (75%) rating it as a ‘strong’ or ‘very strong’

influence.

Two drivers have increased in strength of influence since 2014:

the risk of damage to the business’s reputation of a poor health and safety record (62% in

2014, up to 70% in 2017)

the companies who sub-contract us or who use our products or services require good health

and safety practices (54% in 2014, up to 60% in 2017).


3.1 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY

Workers were asked to choose the three aspects (from a list of 14) that were most important to them in

their work, while employers were asked the same question in relation to their businesses. Appendix IV

includes the results for all aspects across the four survey years.

There has been no real change in the prioritisation of staying healthy and safe while at work among

workers over the four years, with a consistent proportion across the four WorkSafe high-risk sectors

identifying it as one of their top three priorities in 2017 (36% doing so in 2017).

Every year, employers have been more likely than workers to prioritise health and safety, with over six

in ten (63%) identifying keeping workers healthy and safe while at work as one of their three most

important business priorities. Prioritisation among employers increased between 2014 and 2015, but

has plateaued in 2016 and 2017.

3.1.1 Proportion putting health and safety in their three most important work/business

considerations: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

NOTE: the arrows in the chart above (and in subsequent charts in this section) indicate significant increases or

decreases between two consecutive years. In this instance, the change in the employer result is a statistically

significant increase between 2014 and 2015.

WORKERS

By sector

Across the four high-risk sectors, as in earlier years, workers in the Forestry sector were most likely to

include staying healthy and safe while at work in their top three most important work considerations

(53% cf. 36% overall), while workers in the Agriculture sector were least likely to do so (26% cf. 36%

overall).

50%60% 63% 63%

2014(n=1351)

2015(n=1501)

2016(n=1234)

2017(n=1307)

33% 35% 39% 36%

2014(n=2296)

2015(n=2097)

2016(n=2183)

2017(n=1881)

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q30 (W)What three things are most important to you in your work right now?

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q24 (E)What three aspects are the most important considerations for your business right now?


3.1.2 Proportion including health and safety in their three most important work

considerations: Workers


decreases between two consecutive years. For the Agriculture sector, there was a statistically significant

increase between 2015 and 2016, with a statistically significant decrease between 2016 and 2017.

The relative priority of health and safety compared with other work considerations in each sector is

shown in Table 3.1.3, which lists the three most important considerations for workers. The 2014

qualitative research indicated that pride in doing a job well is a shared cultural characteristic1. It has

ranked in the top three priorities for high-risk and ‘other’ sector workers every year.

Staying healthy and safe while at work was the most frequently mentioned priority among Forestry

workers, the second most frequently mentioned priority for workers in Manufacturing sector and the

third most frequently mentioned priority for workers in the Construction sector. It was not a top three

priority for workers in the Agriculture or ‘Other’ sectors.

A number of changes in the top three priorities have occurred across the sectors since 2015:

In the Forestry sector, staying healthy and safe at work has risen from being the second

priority (behind pride in doing a good job in 2014 and 2015) to being the most frequently

mentioned priority in 2016 and 2017.

In the Construction sector, staying healthy and safe at work has ranked as the third top priority

each year, behind pride in doing a good job and good work/life balance.

In the Agriculture sector, staying health and safe at work was only a top three priority in 2016

(at 31% mention).

1 Culture was defined in the qualitative study as ‘having shared beliefs and values about what is normal, and having

common characteristics, practices and activities that shape and enforce actions’. Workplace culture was highlighted as having a huge impact on health and safety practice in high-risk sectors.

18%

43%

53%

40%

26%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

31% 25% 23%

42% 40% 37%

49% 51% 51%

41% 40% 40%

19% 17% 20%

2017

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=599; 2015 n=536; 2016 n=690; 2017 n=511) Construction (2014 n=617; 2015 n=526; 2016 n=561; 2017 n=447) Forestry (2014 n=377; 2015 n=389; 2016 n=319; 2017 n=366) Manufacturing (2014 n=703; 2015 n=646; 2016 n=613; 2017 n=557) Other sector (2014 n=916; 2015 n=821; 2016 n=1065; 2017 n=1031) Q30 (W)What 3 things are most important to you in your work right now?


In the Manufacturing sector, the top three work considerations have fluctuated year on year,

with staying healthy and safe at work appearing in the top three in 2015 (in third position at

40%) and 2017 (in second position at 43%).

Good work/life balance has consistently been the most important consideration for ‘Other’

sector workers, while staying healthy and safe at work has not ranked in the top three priorities

in any year.

3.1.3 Top 3 work considerations: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

Analysis of results over the four years of surveying shows increases in the proportion of employers

including health and safety in their top three priorities in all sectors except the Forestry sector.

However, prioritisation was already much higher in the Forestry sector; over eight in ten employers in

the Forestry sector included keeping workers healthy and safe while at work in their top three priorities

every year, with 84% doing so in 2017.

Sector increases over the four years were as follows:

the Agriculture sector (up from 44% in 2014 to 59% in 2017)

the Construction sector (up from 57% in 2014 to 68% in 2017) and

the ‘Other’ sector (up from 30% in 2014 to 51% in 2017).

AGRICULTURE(n=511)

CONSTRUCTION(n=447)

FORESTRY(n=366)

MANUFACTURING(n=557)

OTHER(n=1031)

1 47%Pride in doing a good job

50%Pride in doing a good job

53%Healthy and safe at work

47%Regular income

48%Good work/life balance

2 40%Good work/life balance

42%Good work/life balance




3 30%Enjoying my work


37%Regular income


39%Regular income

Base: Workers Q30 (W)What 3 things are most important to you in your work right now?


3.1.4 Proportion putting health and safety in their three most important work/business

considerations: Employers

Keeping workers healthy and safe while at work was the most frequently mentioned business priority

by employers in all four high-risk sectors, and it has been the most frequently mentioned business

priority since 2015. The 2017 survey is the first time employers in the ‘Other’ sector have placed

worker health and safety as a first priority over and above being a respected and trusted business.

3.1.5 Top 3 business considerations: Employers, 2017

2016 2015 2014

60% 57% 44%

67% 65% 57%

89% 86% 87%

60% 55% 48%

46% 42% 30%51%

57%

84%

68%

59%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=380; 2015 n=412; 2016 n=361; 2017 n=379) Construction (2014 n=345; 2015 n=392; 2016 n=274; 2017 n=338) Forestry (2014 n=269; 2015 n=269; 2016 n=230; 2017 n=226) Manufacturing (2014 n=357; 2015 n=428; 2016 n=369; 2017 n=364) Other sector (2014 n=322; 2015 n=403; 2016 n=366; 2017 n=429) Q24 (E)What 3 aspects are most important considerations for your business right now?

2017

AGRICULTURE(n=379)

CONSTRUCTION(n=338)

FORESTRY(n=226)


OTHER(n=429)

1 59%

Keeping workers healthy and safe at work

68%


84%


57%


51%


2 45%

Looking after the health and welfare of the animals

53%

Being a respected and trusted business

40%

Ensuring the business complies with laws and regulations

48%

Producing excellent products and/or services

47%


3 33%

Growing / improving the profitability of the business

33%


36%


37%


39%


Base: Employers Q24 (E)What 3 aspects are most important considerations for your business right now?


3.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY

The extent to which everyone takes responsibility for health and safety has a major influence on the

creation of safer workplaces. Workers and employers were asked to indicate how much responsibility

they thought workers and each of a number of other groups should take for making sure workers stay

healthy and safe while at work. A 5-point response scale was used, where 1 represented ‘no’

responsibility at all and 5 represented a ‘very big’ responsibility.

The three groups considered to have a ‘very big’ responsibility (and their relative rankings) have been

mentioned consistently since 2014.

Workers themselves have been identified as the number one group with a ‘very big’

responsibility for their own health and safety by both workers (83%) and employers (87%).

The immediate boss or supervisor ranked a close second in terms of their perceived

responsibility for workers’ health and safety. Seven in ten workers and nearly eight in ten

employers (70% and 77% respectively) considered the immediate boss or supervisor has a

‘very big’ responsibility for workers’ health and safety in 2017.

Top management (e.g. Chief Executive, Board) ranked third in 2017. Around six in ten workers

(59%) and employers (58%) thought that top management has a ‘very big’ responsibility.


3.2.1 Proportion indicating each group has a ‘very big’ responsibility for workplace health and

safety: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

WORKERS

By sector

Workers in all sectors most commonly selected workers themselves as having a ‘very big’ responsibility

for workers’ health and safety. The immediate boss or supervisor was the second most frequently

mentioned group across three of the four high-risk sectors, with the business owner receiving second

most mentions in the Manufacturing and ‘Other’ sectors. The business owner received the second

most number of mentions. The third most frequently mentioned group differed across the sectors.

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2227-2281; 2015 n=2028-2081; 2016 n=2112-2166; 2017 n=1798-1862) Q47 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1325-1354; 2015 n=1472-1501; 2016 n=1215-1233; 2017 n=1287-1303) Q44 (E)

*Owner - each sector asked individually; Agriculture – farm/property owner, Construction-property owner, Forestry-forest owner,

Manufacturing-business owner. The results shown are the totals for the four high-risk sectors.

How much responsibility should each of the following groups take for making sure workers stay healthy and safe at work?

(5 point scale where 1= no responsibility and 5 = very big responsibility)

WORKERS

83%

70%

59%

46%

49%

45%

36%

34%

31%

The workers themselves

The immediate boss or supervisor…

Top management (e.g. Chief…

*Farm/property/forest/business…

Companies in the industry

Machinery and vehicle…

The Government

Industry bodies

Workers' unions

87%

77%

58%

58%

40%

43%

28%

29%

24%

The workers themselves

The immediate boss or supervisor…

Top management (e.g. Chief…

*Farm/property/forest/business…

Companies in the industry

Machinery and vehicle…

The Government

Industry bodies

Workers' unions

2016 2015 2014

84% 86% 86%

71% 74% 76%

54% 57% 58%

52% 52% 57%

38% 34% 39%

43% 39% 42%

26% 24% 23%

27% 24% 26%

21% 19% 20%

2017

2016 2015 2014

83% 81% 84%

69% 66% 71%

59% 54% 57%

45% 45% 48%

47% 43% 47%

45% 41% 44%

38% 35% 36%

34% 30% 35%

32% 29% 32%

2017

EMPLOYERS


The ranked order of the responsible groups has remained the same since 2014 for each of the four

high-risk sectors.

3.2.2 Groups thought to have a ‘very big’ responsibility for workers’ health and safety:

Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

Assessment of the groups responsible for workers’ health and safety has remained consistent across

the four years of surveying for employers in the four high-risk sectors.

Results for employers mirrored those of workers for the four high-risk sectors and the ‘Other’ sector.

Employers most commonly identified workers themselves as the group with a ‘very big’ responsibility

for workers’ health and safety.

The second and third most frequently mentioned groups differed across the sectors. Among those in

the Agriculture, Construction and Forestry sector the workers’ immediate boss or supervisor was the

second most commonly mentioned group, while in the Manufacturing and ‘Other’ sectors, the

immediate boss/supervisor ranked third behind the business owner.

AGRICULTURE(n=478-505)

CONSTRUCTION(n=423-444)

FORESTRY(n=351-360)

MANUFACTURING(n=538-553)

OTHER(n=993-1021)

1 81%Workers themselves 86%

Workers themselves 89%



Workers themselves

2 62%

Immediate boss or supervisor

73%Immediate boss or supervisor 78%


76%Business owner 72%

Business owner

3 56%

Farm or property owners

70% Site Manager 65%Companies in the industry 73%


71%


Base: Workers Q47 (W)How much responsibility should each of the following groups take for making sure workers stay healthy and safe at work?(5-point scale where 1= no responsibility and 5 = very big responsibility)


3.2.3 Groups thought to have a ‘very big’ responsibility for workers’ health and safety:

Employers, 2017

3.3 PRIORITISING HEALTH AND SAFETY

Qualitative research undertaken in 2014 found that a worker’s immediate boss sets the tone in terms of

how health and safety is regarded in the workplace. If the boss or supervisor is seen to prioritise health

and safety above other considerations, then workers will be influenced by this.

The majority of employers attributed a ‘very big’ responsibility for workers’ health and safety to the

immediate managers or supervisors of the workers, as shown in Section 3.2. Whether

managers/supervisors or bosses actually do take that responsibility can be partially assessed by

asking workers about their employer’s commitment to worker health and safety.

Workers (excluding those who said they were self-employed) were asked the extent to which they

agreed or disagreed (using a 5-point scale from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’) that:

my boss is genuinely concerned about the health and safety of the workers

my boss sometimes seems more interested in getting the job done or making a profit than in

safety

my boss praises or rewards workers who act safely.

Employers were asked two similar questions, that is, the extent to which they agreed or disagreed that:

this business considers safety at least as important as production and quality in the way work is

done

those who act safely receive positive recognition.



FORESTRY(n=224-226)


OTHER(n=424-427)

1 86%Workers themselves 88%




Workers themselves

2 76%

The immediate managers or supervisors

78%


86%


85%Business owner 80%

Business owner

3 70%

Farm or property owners

76%The site manager 67%

Companies in the industry 78%


75%


Base: Employers Q44 (E)How much responsibility should each of the following groups take for making sure workers stay healthy and safe at work? (5 point scale where 1= no responsibility and 5 = very big responsibility)


Workers’ perceptions of their bosses’ commitment to health and safety have remained fairly constant

over the four years. Employers are considered to have genuine concern for their workers, but there is

potential for greater prioritisation of safety (over profit and/or getting the job done) and opportunity for


The majority of workers considered that their boss is genuinely concerned about the health and safety

of workers; (with three quarters having agreed every year since 2014). There is no equivalent

statement for employers.

High-risk sector employers’ views of their safety prioritisation have consistently been more positive

than those of workers, as seen in Table 3.3.1. Over eight in ten employers (84%) in the four high-risk

sectors agree that their business considers safety at least as important as production and quality in the

way work is done, while just 6% disagree. This result is more positive than that of workers: almost six

in ten (58%) disagree that their boss is more interested in getting the job done or in profit than safety,

and only 24% agree that getting the job done or profit are more important than safety for their boss.

These results have remained stable since 2014.

Overall, recognising and rewarding safe actions and behaviours remains the least positive of the three

indicators of employer commitment to worker health and safety.


safely have been apparent over time. Fewer than half the workers (48%) agree that the boss praises or

rewards workers who act safely, compared with seven in ten (71%) of employers. Furthermore the

proportion of employers saying that they reward their workers has increased since 2014 (from 65% to

71% in 2017), whereas the proportion of workers saying their boss praises or rewards workers for

acting safely has not changed.


3.3.1 Commitment to health and safety: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk

sectors

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed: (2014 n=1560-1562; 2015 n=1407-1414; 2016 n=1412-1417; 2017 n=1231-1249) Q49 R7-9 (W)

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

GENUINE CONCERN

Boss is genuinely concerned about the health and safety of the workers

76%agree

74%agree

79%agree

78%agree

SAFETY AS PRIORITY

Boss sometimes seems more interested in getting job done or profit than safety

63%dis-

agree

60%dis-

agree

63%dis-

agree

58%dis-

agree

SAFE BEHAVIOUR REWARDED

Boss praises or rewards workers who act safely

45% agree

45% agree

49% agree

48% agree

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

SAFETY AS PRIORITY

This business considers safety at least as important as production & quality in the way work is done

80%agree

83%agree

83%agree

84%agree

SAFE BEHAVIOUR REWARDED

Those who act safely receive positive recognition

65% agree

69% agree

70% agree

71% agree

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1345-1350; 2015 n=1492; 2016 n=1229 -1231; 2017 n=1297-1300) Q43 (E)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?


WORKERS

GENUINE CONCERN

By sector

Perceptions of genuine concern from bosses have been greater in the Agriculture, Construction and

Forestry sectors than the Manufacturing sector. There have been incremental increases in the

perceptions of genuine concern among Construction and Forestry workers since 2014.

3.3.2 Proportion agreeing boss shows genuine concern for health and safety: Workers

Base: Workers excluding self-employed in Agriculture (2014 n=255; 2015 n=202; 2016 n=259; 2017 n=188) Construction (2014 n=381; 2015 n=309; 2016 n=336; 2017 n=277) Forestry (2014 n=301; 2015 n=317; 2016 n=266; 2017 n=289) Manufacturing (2014 n=625; 2015 n=586; 2016 n=556; 2017 n=495) Other sector (2014 n=744; 2015 n=687; 2016 n=857; 2017 n=809) Q49 (W) R8 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

76%

71%

85%

81%

79%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

82% 74% 80%

80% 75% 76%

86% 81% 81%

74% 72% 71%

75% 77% 71%

2017


HEALTH AND SAFETY IN RELATION TO PRODUCTION AND PROFIT

By sector

Over six in ten workers (63%) have constantly disagreed that the boss sometimes seems more

interested in getting the job done or in making a profit than in safety in the Agriculture, Construction

and Forestry sectors. Each year, between 21% and 24% of workers in these three high-risk sectors

have agreed that getting the job done and/or making profit have been prioritised over safety.

The greatest shift in perceptions has been apparent among workers in the Manufacturing sector. In

2014, six in ten (59%) disagreed that their boss is more interested in production and profit than in

health and safety, but this has decreased over time to half (49%) disagreeing in 2017. Workers in the

Manufacturing sector have been more likely than those in the other high-risk sectors to agree that

production and profit are prioritised over safety, with three in ten (30%) agreeing in 2017. This has

also increased from 23% agreeing in 2014.

Agriculture sector workers’ belief that their boss is more interested in production and profit has also

increased incrementally, with 23% agreeing with this in 2017 cf. 16% in 2014.

3.3.3 Proportion disagreeing boss sometimes seems more interested in getting the job done

or profit than in safety: Workers

Base: Workers excluding self-employed in Agriculture (2014 n=252; 2015 n=202; 2016 n=259; 2017 n=185) Construction (2014 n=381; 2015 n=309; 2016 n=336; 2017 n=274) Forestry (2014 n=301; 2015 n=316; 2016 n=266; 2017 n=287) Manufacturing (2014 n=626; 2015 n=585; 2016 n=556; 2017 n=492) Other sector (2014 n=743; 2015 n=687; 2016 n=858; 2017 n=776) Q49 (W) R9To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

66%

49%

69%

59%

67%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

69% 63% 70%

64% 60% 61%

71% 63% 69%

54% 59% 59%

69% 67% 58%

2017


REWARDING SAFE BEHAVIOUR

By sector

The Forestry sector stands out as a positive leadership example. Since 2015, the proportion of workers

in the Forestry sector who agreed that their boss praises or rewards workers who act safely has

increased (up from 54% in 2014 to 66% in 2017).

Less change is apparent across the other three high-risk sectors, with only about half or fewer than half

of workers agreeing that their boss praises or rewards workers who act safely over the four years.

3.3.4 Proportion agreeing boss praises and rewards workers who act safely: Workers

Base: Workers excluding self-employed in Agriculture (2014 n=253; 2015 n=202; 2016 n=258; 2017 n=184) Construction (2014 n=380; 2015 n=308; 2016 n=335; 2017 n=273) Forestry (2014 n=301; 2015 n=315; 2016 n=265; 2017 n=286) Manufacturing (2014 n=626; 2015 n=582; 2016 n=554; 2017 n=488) Other sector (2014 n=745; 2015 n=687; 2016 n=855; 2017 n=754) Q49 (W) R7 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

44%

43%

66%

50%

49%

2017

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

52% 40% 46%

49% 47% 45%

61% 56% 54%

45% 43% 44%

45% 42% 39%


EMPLOYERS

HEALTH AND SAFETY PRIORITISATION OVER PRODUCTION AND QUALITY

By sector

A higher proportion of Forestry and Manufacturing employers than other high-risk employers agreed

that the business considers safety at least as important as production and quality. Increases have

been apparent within the Manufacturing and ‘Other’ sectors since 2014.

3.3.5 Proportion agreeing business considers safety at least as important as production and

quality: Employers

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=378; 2015 n=406; 2016 n=361; 2017 n=376) Construction (2014 n=346; 2015 n=391; 2016 n=272; 2017 n=337) Forestry (2014 n=268; 2015 n=270; 2016 n=231; 2017 n=226) Manufacturing (2014 n=358; 2015 n=425; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=361) Other sector (2014 n=317; 2015 n=399; 2016 n=365; 2017 n=425) Q43 (E) R3To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

82%

90%

90%

79%

85%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

82% 80% 81%

84% 86% 78%

93% 90% 90%

84% 84% 80%

80% 76% 75%

2017


REWARDING SAFE BEHAVIOUR

By sector

Forestry employers have been more likely than employers in the other high-risk sectors to agree that

workers who act safely receive positive recognition (over eight in ten agreeing each year, compared

with about seven in ten of other employers agreeing).

The proportion of employers in the Construction and ‘Other’ sectors agreeing that safe behaviour is

rewarded has fluctuated over time.

3.3.6 Proportion agreeing those who act safely receive positive recognition: Employers

3.4 BUSINESS DRIVERS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY

What a business does in terms of health and safety is influenced by a number of different drivers.

While most employers say a very strong and genuine concern for the welfare of workers is a key

influence, other drivers also come into play. For example, some businesses may be worried about the

damage to their reputation of a poor health and safety record, others might be motivated by a desire to

attract and retain good staff.

In the 2014 and 2017 surveys, employers were asked to identify the extent to which each of seven

aspects influenced what their business did in terms of health and safety, using a 5-point scale (‘no

influence’, ‘slight influence’, ‘moderate influence’, ‘strong influence’, ‘very strong influence’).

A very strong concern for the welfare of workers was the biggest driver in 2017 as in 2014 (90%

‘strong’, ‘very strong’ influence in 2017 and 88% in 2014). The cost to the business in terms of loss of

productivity was the second strongest influence, with 75% saying this.

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=375; 2015 n=405; 2016 n=360; 2017 n=372) Construction (2014 n=345; 2015 n=390; 2016 n=272; 2017 n=337) Forestry (2014 n=269; 2015 n=271; 2016 n=230; 2017 n=226) Manufacturing (2014 n=356; 2015 n=426; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=362) Other sector (2014 n=316; 2015 n=394; 2016 n=364; 2017 n=425) Q43 (E) R7To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

66%

69%

82%

74%

69%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

69% 63% 68%

72% 75% 69%

81% 82% 82%

66% 70% 57%

65% 62% 64%

2017


Two drivers have increased in strength of influence since 2014:

the risk of damage to the business’s reputation of a poor health and safety record (70% in

2017, up from 62% in 2014)

the companies who sub-contract us or who use our products or services require good health

and safety practices (54% in 2014, up to 60% in 2017).

3.4.1 Proportion strongly or very strongly influenced by each driver of health and safety:

Employers, 2014 and 2017

Base: All Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding Not answered. ((2014 n=1335-1348; 2017 n=1288-1298 Q45 (E)

How strongly does each of the following aspects influence what your business does in terms of

health and safety?

2017

90%

75%

70%

67%

62%

60%

47%

A very strong concern for the welfare of theworkers

The cost to the business in terms ofproductivity if we have serious harm incidents

The damage to our business's reputation ifwe have a poor health and safety record

To avoid being found at fault, fined orprosecuted

A good health and safety record helpingattract and retain good staff

The companies who sub-contract us or whouse our products or services require good

health and safety practices

A good health and safety record helping thebusiness win contracts

2014

88%

73%

62%

64%

58%

54%

43%


Table 3.4.2 illustrates the three strongest (very strong or strong) influences on business practice in

each of the high-risk sectors. As can be seen:

concern for workers’ welfare was the greatest influence for all high-risk sectors

the damage to reputation of a poor health and safety record was a strong influence for Forestry

sector employers (ranked second), but also for Construction and Agriculture (ranked third)

productivity concerns appeared as the second most prevalent influence for Agriculture,

Construction and Manufacturing employers

a good health and safety record helping to attract and retain good staff was the third most

prevalent influence for Forestry employers

a desire to avoid being found at fault, fined or prosecuted was more frequently in the top three

influences of employers in the Manufacturing sector.

3.4.2 Three strongest influences on business practice: Employers, 2017



FORESTRY(n=224-225)


OTHER(n=422-426)

1 90%Concern for welfare of workers

89%Concern for welfare of workers




2 75%Cost to business in productivity

76%Cost to business in productivity

84%Damage to reputation



3 66%Damage to reputation


81%

Goodrecord helps attract and retain staff

67%

Avoiding being at fault, fined or prosecuted


Base: Employers Q45 E: How strongly does each of the following aspects influence what your business does in terms of health and safety (5-point scale of no influence, slight, moderate, strong, very strong influence)

48

SECTION 4:

WORKER ENGAGEMENT

AND PARTICIPATION


4 WORKER ENGAGEMENT AND

PARTICIPATION

INTRODUCTION This section of the report covers aspects of worker engagement and participation in health and safety

matters in the workplace, as well as workplace health and safety training.

Worker engagement refers to how a business involves its workers in work health and safety matters

and decisions.

Worker participation refers to ongoing ways for workers to contribute to improving health and safety at

work, including raising health and safety concerns, being involved in making decisions that affect

worker health and safety and offering suggestions for improving health and safety.

Workers and employers were asked questions about:

worker involvement in decision making involving health and safety

effectiveness of worker engagement in health and safety matters

communication about health and safety issues

worker participation practices (e.g. health and safety committees, mentors, representatives)

provision of health and safety information to workers

workers and employers working together to create a safer workplace

speaking up about health and safety matters

health and safety training.

KEY FINDINGS

Worker engagement

Involvement in decisions: The majority of workers and employers (around eight in ten) have

consistently agreed workers are involved in decision making about health and safety matters.

Employer agreement has increased since 2014, but worker responses have not changed.

Open discussion: While workers felt they are involved in decision making, there is opportunity for

employers to improve the quality of communication to enhance worker engagement, via more open

discussion. Workers were less likely than employers to agree that health and safety risks were always

discussed in an open and helpful way. Over half of employers (54%) said this ‘always’ happens

compared with only four in ten workers (42%) saying there is ‘always’ open and helpful discussion.

Forestry workers were more likely to agree that they were involved in making decisions and were part

of an open discussion compared to other sectors. Manufacturing workers were less likely to say they

had a say in health and safety matters and that things were discussed in an open and helpful way

compared to other sectors.

Hazard, incident and near miss reporting: The proportion of workers who said hazards, near misses

and accidents were reported ‘always’ or ‘most of the time’ has fluctuated over time, but at least two in

three workers and around three in four employers (67% and 78% respectively in 2017) said that

workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses or supervisors ‘most of the time’ or


‘always’ in their workplace. The proportion of workers who said this happens ‘less than half the time’ or

‘never’ has remained stable (16% in 2014 and 15% in 2017). One in ten employers (9%) said it

happens ‘less than half the time’ or ‘never’ in 2017, compared with 14% in 2014.

Making a difference: Around two in three workers have agreed each year that workers really do make

a difference to health and safety in their workplace.

Worker participation

Work practices: The majority of workers (83%) and employers (86%) in the four high-risk sectors

reported one or more practices that encourage worker participation in their workplace/business. The

proportion of workers saying that any practices are in place has not increased since 2014, but the

proportion of employers reporting one of the practices in place has increased from 76% in 2014 to 86%

in 2017.

While there has been some fluctuation in levels of mention of individual worker participation practices

over the four surveys, the rankings of those practices has been stable, with consistency of opinion on

the main practices across workers and employers. The four practices most commonly mentioned by

both workers and employers were:

health and safety being included as a regular team/group meeting item


having an elected health and safety representative

having a noticeboard or website about health and safety (workers) and having a regular system

for health and safety communications (employers).

Note: only the first two practices were mentioned by at least half the workers and employers.

There has been an overall increase in the proportions of employers saying each of the following

practices is in place at their workplace:

health and safety as a regular team/group meeting item (47% in 2014 up to 53% in 2017)

regular health and safety meetings (36% in 2014 up to 52% in 2017)

a regular system for health and safety communications e.g. noticeboard, website (29% in 2014

up to 39% in 2017).

However, in all cases the proportion of workers saying these practices occurred was the same in 2014

and 2017. Improvements were seen in 2015 or 2016 for some practices, but these reverted to

baselines in 2017.

Worker participation practices were more widely embedded within Forestry sector workplaces and less

likely to be implemented within Agricultural workplaces, which tend to have fewer workers. Across the

four high-risk sectors, there remains a proportion of workplaces (between one and two in ten) saying

that none of these worker participation practices take place in their workplace. One in three Agriculture

workers (31%) said their workplace has none in place, while one in five Agriculture sector employers

(21%) said their workplace has none in place.

Work environment: Employers viewed their work environment as being more supportive than workers

did, and agreement was stronger among employers than workers for most worker participation

messages:


Three quarters of workers (76%) agreed that the boss and workers work together to make sure

everyone is safe at work, fewer than the nine in ten employers (92%) who agreed that the boss

and workers work together to make sure everyone is safe at work.

Nearly nine in ten employers (87%) agreed that their business encourages workers to come up

with new or better ways to make the workplace safer, while two in three workers (68%) agreed.

Workers were less confident than employers that their boss would totally support them if they

suggested work be stopped because of a possible hazard (68% and 92% respectively).

Despite not feeling totally confident that they would be supported, the majority of workers (87%)

said they would feel confident about approaching their boss or site supervisor with a health and

safety issue, and only a minority (13%) felt they would get into trouble if they told their boss

they had a near miss.

Speaking up: While nearly all employers (96%) said that they encourage their workers to speak up if

something is unsafe, workers were less likely to agree, with three in four workers (75%) across the

high-risk sectors agreeing that they are encouraged to speak up. In contrast, the majority of workers

(78%) agreed they always tell their co-workers if they are not working safely, but employers were less

convinced about this (69% agreeing that this happens in 2017).

Information and feedback: Employers had a more positive view of information sharing than workers.

Employers were more likely than workers to:

Think that relevant health and safety information and updates are always shared with workers

(82% of employers agreeing compared with 70% of workers)

Agree they provide information that is easy to understand (86% of employers agreeing,

compared with 68% of workers).

Agree that their business always lets workers know how we have considered their views when

decisions are made about workplace health and safety (81% of employers agreeing, whereas

only 53% of workers (53%) agreed that they are always told how their views have been taken

into account.

Health and safety training:

Training is an important way of embedding and supporting health and safety practices in the

workplace:

At least half the workers have received health and safety training in the last twelve months (the

proportion having training increasing from 45% in 2014 to 51% in 2017). Construction and

Forestry workers were more likely to have received training in the last twelve months than other

workers.

One in five workers (21%) said they have never received any training and this proportion has

remained much the same from 2014 (23%). There were sectoral differences. Training is least

likely to have taken place within the Agriculture sector. Nearly four in ten Agricultural workers

(39%) said they have ‘never’ received health and safety training while five in ten Agricultural

employers (50%) said ‘none of their workers’ have ever been trained. The incidence of health

and safety training was also lower than average in the Manufacturing sector. Nearly one in four

workers (22%) said they had ‘never’ received health and safety training, while one in three

employers (36%) said ‘none of their workers’ had ever received health and safety training.

A similar pattern of responses was apparent among both workers and employers.


4.1 WORKER ENGAGEMENT

INVOLVEMENT IN DECISIONS

Workers were asked whether they always have a say in decisions that affect their health and safety,

while employers were asked if their workers are always involved in making such decisions.

Workers’ opinions as to whether they always have a say in decisions that affect their health and safety

have been stable year on year, with almost eight in ten workers in the four high-risk sectors agreeing2

that they do (79% agreeing in 2017). A slightly higher proportion of employers have agreed that

workers are always involved in decisions affecting their health and safety. The proportion of employers

agreeing with this statement has increased between 2014 and 2017 (up from 78% to 85%).

It should be noted that, while around eight in ten workers and employers agreed that workers are

involved in decisions, fewer than six in ten workers (56%) and employers (53%) strongly agreed that

workers are involved. The proportion of workers and employers ‘strongly agreeing’ has not changed

since 2014.

4.1.1 Proportion agreeing that workers are always involved in decisions about health and

safety: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors


decreases between two consecutive years. The employer result shows a statistically significant increase

between 2014 and 2015 and between 2016 and 2017.

WORKERS

By sector

Relatively high proportions of workers in all sectors agreed they have their say about health and safety

decisions.

Forestry workers have consistently been more likely to agree that they always have a say in decisions

affecting their health and safety. The proportion of Forestry workers agreeing that they always have a

say in these decisions has increased from 82% in 2014 to 88% in 2017.

2 The extent of agreement is measured on a 5-point scale where 1=’strongly agree’ and 5=’strongly disagree’. In the

analysis agree is responses 4 and 5 on the scale and disagree is responses 1 and 2.

81%agree

Workers are always involved in decisions affecting their health and safety

82%agree

78%agree

79%agree

I always have a say in decisions that affect my health and safety

201620152014

77%agree

77%agree

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

79%agree

2017 201620152014

85%agree

2017

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply (2014 n=2239; 2015 n=2013; 2016 n=2122; 2017 n=1807) Q48 (W) R11

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1355; 2015 n=1500; 2016 n=1235; 2017 n=1305) Q43 (E) R5

How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?


In contrast, workers in the Manufacturing and ‘Other’ sectors have been less likely to agree that they

have a say in the decision making process than workers in the other high-risk sectors (with only around

two in three agreeing).


safety: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

Differences across the high-risk sectors are less marked for employers than for workers. But Forestry

sector employers have remained more likely than employers in the high-risk sectors overall to agree

that workers are always involved in decisions affecting their health and safety (90% cf. 85% overall).

There were increases between 2014 and 2015 in the proportion of employers in the Construction

sector (from 77% in 2014 to 86% in 2015) and the Manufacturing sector (up from 76% to 84%) who

agreed that workers are always involved in the decision making process, but no increases in any

sector since 2015.

Agriculture sector employers have been consistently a little less likely than employers in the other

three high-risk sectors to agree that workers are always involved.


safety: Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=477)

CONSTRUCTION(n=437)

FORESTRY(n=355)


OTHER SECTOR(n=968)

I always have a say in decisions affecting health and safety

83% 82% 88% 65% 62%

Base: Workers excluding doesn’t apply Q48 (W) R11 To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?

AGRICULTURE(n=375)

CONSTRUCTION(n=337)

FORESTRY(n=226)


OTHER SECTOR(n=426)

Workers are always involved in decisions affecting their health and safety

81% 87% 90% 87% 82%

Base: Employers Q43 (E) R5 To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


OPEN DISCUSSION

Open communication between workers and employers is required for workers to be fully engaged on

health and safety matters. Workers and employers were asked if things that put health and safety at

risk (such as hazards, near misses and accidents) are discussed in an open and helpful way.

Findings over the four years indicate that open communication does generally exist within high-risk

sector workplaces.

A higher proportion of employers than workers have consistently said things that put health and safety

at risk are discussed in an open and helpful way ‘always’ or ‘most of the time’ (88% of employers

compared to 76% of workers in 2017). Over 54% of employers said that it ‘always’ happens, compared

to 42% of workers.

4.1.4 Proportion saying that things that put health and safety at risk are discussed in an open

and helpful way always/most of the time: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk

sectors

WORKERS

By sector

Seven in ten workers in each sector said that things that put health and safety at risk are discussed in

an open and helpful way ‘always’ or ‘most of the time’. Workers in the Forestry sector were more likely

to say this every year while Manufacturing workers were less likely to say so.

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply (2014 n=2138; 2015 n=1923; 2016 n=2026; 2017 n=1736) Q52 (W)

41%

42%

42%

42%

33%

33%

37%

34%

NET % Always or mostly

76%

79%

75%

74% 52%

49%

48%

54%

37%

38%

41%

34%

ALWAYS MOSTLY

How often does each happen in your workplace/business (never, less than half the time, half the time, most of the time, always, don’t know)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply (2014 n=1323; 2015 n=1473; 2016 n=1211; 2017 n=1270) Q49 (E)

2017

2016

2015

2014


88%

89%

86%

89%

MOSTLY ALWAYS

WORKERS EMPLOYERS



and helpful way always/most of the time: Workers


decreases between two consecutive years. The Forestry worker result shows a statistically significant increase

between 2014 and 2015.

EMPLOYERS

By sector

High proportions (over eight in ten) of employers in each sector thought that things that put health and

safety at risk are discussed in an open and helpful way ‘always’ or ‘most of the time’.

As with Forestry workers, employers in the Forestry sector were more likely than high-risk sector

employers overall to think health and safety matters are discussed in an open and helpful way (96% cf.

88% overall).

70%

70%

88%

76%

81%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Workers excluding doesn’t apply in Agriculture (2014 n=497; 2015 n=426; 2016 n=586; 2017 n=424) Construction (2014 n=581; 2015 n=485; 2016 n=529; 2017 n=421) Forestry (2014 n=367; 2015 n=384; 2016 n=312; 2017 n=354) Manufacturing (2014 n=693; 2015 n=628; 2016 n=599; 2017 n=537) Other sector (2014 n=815; 2015 n=724; 2016 n=949; 2017 n=940) Q52 (W)How often would you say each of the following happens in your workplace?Frequency scale (never, less than half the time, half the time, most of the time, always)

2016 2015 2014

81% 79% 79%

79% 74% 73%

90% 91% 85%

73% 72% 68%

73% 72% 69%



and helpful way always/most of the time: Employers

MAKING A DIFFERENCE

WORKERS

From 2015 onwards, workers were asked if they thought they make a difference to health and safety

where they work.

Around two thirds of workers agreed each year that workers really do make a difference to health and

safety, where they work.

4.1.7 Proportion agreeing that, where they work, workers really do make a difference to health

and safety: Workers in the four high-risk sectors

87%

92%

96%

88%

85%

Base: Employers excluding doesn’t apply in Agriculture (2014 n=367; 2015 n=402; 2016 n=352; 2017 n=359) Construction (2014 n=343; 2015 n=385; 2016 n=272; 2017 n=332) Forestry (2014 n=269; 2015 n=270; 2016 n=231; 2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2014 n=344; 2015 n=416; 2016 n=356; 2017 n=354) Other sector (2014 n=296; 2015 n=367; 2016 n=351; 2017 n=391) Q49 (E)How often would you say each of the following happens in your business?Frequency scale (never, less than half the time, half the time, most of the time, always)

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017 2016 2015 2014

88% 82% 91%

89% 89% 88%

94% 98% 98%

91% 88% 88%

86% 85% 84%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed(2015 n=1414; 2016 n=1418; 2017 n=1247)Q49 (W) R15To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

65%agree

69%agree

Where I work, workers really do make a difference to health and safety

WORKERS 2015 2016

67%agree

2017


By sector

Forestry workers have had highest levels of agreement every year, with nearly eight in ten agreeing

(79% in 2017, compared with 67% across all the high-risk sectors). This result has remained fairly

constant since 2015.

4.1.8 Proportion agreeing that, where they work, workers really do make a difference to health

and safety: Workers

REPORTING OF HAZARDS, NEAR MISSES AND ACCIDENTS

The exchange of information between workers, their workmates, bosses and management about

hazards, near misses and accidents that occur in the workplace is an important part of engaging with

health and safety.

Workers and employers were asked how frequently workers report hazards, near misses and accidents

to bosses/supervisors, using the scale ‘never’, ‘less than half the time’, ‘about half the time’, ‘most of

the time’, ‘always’. Responses of ‘most of the time’ or ‘always’ were combined into the often category.

Two thirds (67%) of workers from the four high-risk sectors said that hazards, near misses and

accidents were often reported in their workplace. Since 2014, there have been minor fluctuations in the

proportion who said that workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses or supervisors

‘always’, with a small incremental increase over time (26%, up from 23% in 2014). The proportion

saying that near misses and accidents are reported ‘less than half the time’ or never has remained

unchanged (16% in 2014 and 15% in 2017).

64%

69%

79%

65%

66%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Workers excluding self-employed in Agriculture (2015 n=202; 2016 n=260; 2017 n=190) Construction (2015 n=308; 2016 n=336; 2017 n=278) Forestry (2015 n=318; 2016 n=266; 2017 n=286) Manufacturing (2015 n=586; 2016 n=556; 2017 n=493) Other sector (2015 n=687; 2016 n=857; 2017 n=788) Q49 (W)To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?

2016 2015

66% 61%

70% 64%

82% 81%

69% 67%

63% 62%


Nearly eight in ten (78%) employers in the four high-risk sectors thought that workers often reported

hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors. There has been a small increase in the

proportion saying these are ‘always’ reported since 2014, but there has been no significant decline in

the proportion saying that workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors

‘less than half the time’ or ‘never’ (12% in 2014, down to 9% in 2017).

4.1.9 Proportion saying that reporting of hazards, near misses and accidents happens often:

Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply Q52 (W)

42% 40% 46% 41%

23% 28%24%

26%

2014(n=2086)

2015(n=1874)

2016(n=1981)

2017(n=1701)

Workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses or supervisors


65% 68% 70% 67%

ALWAYS MOSTLY

How often would you say each of the following happens in your workplace/business?(never, less than half the time, half the time, most of the time, always, don’t know)

45% 46% 48% 46%

29% 31% 29% 32%

2014(n=1317)

2015(n=1469)

2016(n=1201)

2017(n=1257)

74% 77% 77% 78%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply Q49 R1 (E)

ALWAYS MOSTLY

WORKERS EMPLOYERS


WORKERS

By sector

Across the four high-risk sectors the proportion of workers saying that hazards, near misses and

accidents were reported ‘most of the time’ or ‘always’ has remained relatively high, with over six in ten

workers saying this. However, Construction workers were less likely than other high-risk sector

workers to say they are reported often (62% saying so, cf. 67% overall). Agriculture and Forestry

workers were more likely than others to say these are reported often (75% and 77%, respectively, cf.

67% overall).


Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

Forestry employers were more likely than other high-risk sector employers to say that workers report

hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors often (89% cf. 78% overall). Manufacturing

employers were also more likely to say that these are reported often (84% cf. 84%overall).


Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=392)

CONSTRUCTION(n=414)

FORESTRY(n=352)


OTHER SECTOR(n=929)

Workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors

75% 62% 77% 66% 70%

Base: Workers excluding doesn’t apply Q52 R1, (W)How often would you say each of the following happens in your workplace?

AGRICULTURE(n=352)

CONSTRUCTION(n=328)

FORESTRY(n=225)


OTHER SECTOR(n=389)

Workers report hazards, near misses and accidents to bosses/supervisors

74% 79% 89% 84% 80%

Base: Employers excluding doesn’t apply Q49 R1, (E)How often would you say each of the following happens in your business…?Level of frequency on 5-point scale where 1= never and 5= always


4.2 WORKER PARTICIPATION: WORKPLACE PRACTICES

Ideally all workplaces and businesses will have:

a range of work practices that help to engage workers and to manage health and safety risk

an environment and culture that encourage workers to speak up when they see hazards or

risks and fosters a spirit of collaboration allowing everyone to work together to make their

workplace safer

two-way communication – workers are comfortable speaking up and information from

management is shared widely and is easy to understand.

The majority of workers (83%) and employers (86%) in the four high-risk sectors reported one or more

practices that encourage worker participation in their workplace/business (excluding ‘none’ and ‘don’t

know’ responses). While the proportion of employers reporting one of the practices in place appears to

have increased (from 76% in 2014 to 86% in 2017), the proportion of workers reporting one of the

practices in place has not changed (83% in 2014 and in 2017), although there were fluctuations in the

intervening years.

Differences in the extent to which workers and employers report having formal practices in their

workplaces may be due to formal practices being more common in larger businesses, and a smaller

proportion of large businesses in the employers’ survey (because most businesses in New Zealand are

small businesses) than in the workers’ survey.

While there has been some fluctuation in levels of mention of individual worker participation practices

over the four surveys, the rankings of those practices has been stable. There is consistency of opinion

on the main practices across workers and employers.

The four most commonly mentioned practices for both workers and employers each year were:

health and safety being included as a regular team/group meeting item - mentioned by 53% of

workers and employers in 2017

regular health and safety meetings - mentioned by 52% of both workers and employers in 2017

having an elected health and safety representative – mentioned by 43% of workers and 35% of

employers in 2017

having a noticeboard or website about health and safety (41% of workers in 2017) and having a

regular system for health and safety communications (39% of employers in 2017).

There has been an increase in the reported presence of three practices among employers:

health and safety as a regular team/group meeting item (up from 47% in 2014 to 53% in 2017)

regular health and safety meetings (up from 36% to 52% in 2017)

a regular system for health and safety communications e.g. noticeboard, website (up from 29%

in 2014 to 39% in 2017).


4.2.1 Proportion of workers and employers with worker participation practices in

workplaces/businesses: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2014, n=1913; 2015, n=1718; 2016, n=1807; 2017, n=1868) Q54 (W)Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014, n=1351 ; 2015, n=1493; 2016, n=1231; 2017, n=1300) Q51 (E)Which, if any, of these, happen at your workplace/does your business have?

53%

52%

43%

41%

37%

32%

14%

17%

Health and safety is included as aregular team / group meeting item

Regular Health and Safety meetings

We have an elected health and safetyrepresentative

Our workplace has a noticeboard orwebsite about health and safety

Formal safety audits are carried outregularly

There is a Health and Safetycommittee in our workplace

I have been given a health and safetymentor

None of these

53%

52%

39%

35%

27%

19%

10%

14%

Health and safety is a regular item atteam/group meetings

Regular Health and Safety meetings

A regular system for health and safetycommunications

An elected health and safetyrepresentative

A process to make sure staff arebriefed on health and safety for…

A formal mentor system - people withexperience that other workers trust…

A health and safety committee

None of these

2016 2015 2014

56% 46% 47%

51% 40% 36%

33% 28% 29%

32% - -

- - -

21% 21% 23%

10% 9% 12%

14% 23% 24%

2017

2016 2015 2014

64% 59% 51%

63% 58% 50%

53% - -

49% 44% 44%

45% 40% 38%

35% 39% 35%

16% 15% 14%

10 14 17%

2017

WORKERS

EMPLOYERS

%%


Note: In 2014 and 2015 ‘health and safety representatives and champions’ were asked about in the

same response option. In 2016 and 2017, having ‘an elected health and safety representative’ and ‘a

health and safety champion’ were treated as separate options. Hence, these results are not directly

comparable.

Health and safety representatives or champions

Having an elected health and safety representative was more widespread than having a health and

safety champion. Workers were more likely than employers to say that their workplace has an elected

health and safety representative and/or a health and safety champion. But fewer than half have either.

Comparison of the combined response over time shows that under half of businesses had a health and

safety representative or champion (46% of workers saying this cf. 41% of employers in 2017).

4.2.2 Health and safety representatives and champions: Workers and Employers from the four

high-risk sectors

WORKERS

By sector

Forestry workers have consistently reported a higher prevalence of health and safety practices. Three

practices have been particularly widespread in the Forestry sector:

regular health and safety meetings (83% cf. 52% overall)

health and safety is included as a regular team/group meeting item (77% cf. 53% overall)

formal safety audits carried out regularly (78% cf. 37% overall).

Over half of Forestry workers also reported having an elected health and safety representative (58% cf.

43% overall) and a noticeboard, website or other area with good up-to-date information about health

and safety (56% cf. 41% overall).

An elected health and safety representative

A health and safety champion

NET: Health and safety representative or champion

EMPLOYERSWORKERS

201620152014 2014 20162015

53%

19%

56%

-

-

46%*

-

-

43%*

- -

-

26%*

-

28%*

32%

12%

39%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2014 n=1913; 2015 n=1718; 2016 n=1807; 2017 n=1868) Q54 (W)Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1351; 2015 n=1493; 2016 n=1231; 2017 n=1300) Q51 (E)Which, if any, of the following things happen at your workplace?*Original response option that asked about both health and safety representatives and champions rather than the NET in 2016 and 2017

2017

43%

16%

46%

2017

35%

10%

41%


Nine in ten (89%) Manufacturing sector workers reported having at least one health and safety

practice at their workplace in 2017. Four practices were reported by more than six in ten Manufacturing

workers:

elected health and safety representative (71% cf. 43% overall)



health and safety committee (61% cf. 32% overall).

Nearly nine in ten (88%) of Construction sector workers reported having at least one health and safety

practice in their workplace, with lower mention of many individual practices than in 2016. Only two

practices were reported by more than half of workers:


regular health and safety meetings (57% cf. 52% overall).

Health and safety practices were less well embedded within Agricultural workplaces, with only 69% of

Agricultural workers saying that any of these practices were in place. (79% said at least one was in

place in 2016, compared with 68% saying any were in place in 2014). The incidence of individual

reported practices was lower than in the other high-risk sectors. The most commonly reported

practices mentioned by Agricultural workers were:

health and safety is included as a regular team/group meeting item (38% cf. 53% overall, and

down from 49% in 2016)

regular health and safety meetings (35% cf. 52% overall).


4.2.3 Worker participation practices: Workers, 2017

Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q54 (W) Which, if any, of the following things happen at your workplace?¹ Note: In 2016 separate response options were provided for elected health and safety representatives and champions. Previously, both of these options were combined. As such, no changes over time are presented.

AGRICULTURE(n=506)

CONSTRUCTION(n=445)

FORESTRY(n=361)


OTHER SECTOR(n=1029)

Health and safety is included as a regular team/group meeting item

38% 59% 77% 62% 47%

Regular health and safety meetings 35% 57% 83% 66% 47%

There is a health and safety committee in our workplace 12% 33% 36% 61% 49%

¹ We have an elected health and safety representative 23% 44% 58% 71% 53%

¹ We have a health andsafety champion 9% 17% 33% 24% 25%

Our workplace has a noticeboard or website about health and safety

27% 43% 56% 59% 48%

Formal safety audits are carried out regularly 18% 40% 78% 53% 43%

I have been given a health and safety mentor 10% 15% 24% 19% 12%

Informal discussions about heath and safety 5% 2% 3% 0.5% 1%

Other ways to discuss or give feedback on health and safety in your workplace

2% 1% 2% 2% 3%

None of these 31% 12% 6% 11% 15%


EMPLOYERS

By sector

The proportion of employers having any health and safety practices in their workplace did not change

between 2016 and 2017. The sector based pattern of results observed among workers was consistent

among employers.

As with their workers, Forestry employers were more likely to report having at least one practice in

place in both 2016 and 2017. The three most common practices in Forestry were:




The incidence of Forestry employers having a formal mentor system in place increased to 46% in

2017 from 33% in 2016.

Around nine in ten Construction employers (91%) have had at least one health and safety practice in

their workplace in 2016 (90%) and 2017 (91%), up from 86% in 2014. The most prevalent practice was

a process to make sure staff are briefed on health and safety for every site they work on, reported as

present by two thirds of employers (66%). This statement was added for the Construction sector in

2017, so comparisons of the incidence of having health and safety practices in place are not directly

comparable with earlier years. The next three most common practices reported were:




Nine in ten (89%) of Manufacturing employers reported having at least one practice in place, similar to

2016 (87%), but an increase from 79% in 2015. The most common practices reported by

Manufacturing employers were:




Around eight in ten employers (79%) in the Agriculture sector reported having at least one practice in

place in 2016 and 2017, an increase from 69% in 2015. As in previous years, no single worker

participation practice was reported by more than half the Agricultural employers. However, encouraging

increases were apparent for three of the four most widespread participation practices:

health and safety is included as a regular team / group meeting item (47% cf. 53% overall)


formal safety audits carried out regularly (36% cf. 47% overall)

a regular system for health and safety communications (33% in 2017 an increase from 26% in

2016, cf. 39% overall).


4.2.4 Worker participation practices: Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=374)

CONSTRUCTION(n=338)

FORESTRY(n=225)


OTHER SECTOR(n=425)

Health and safety is a regular item at team/group meetings

47% 55% 85% 60% 44%

Regular health and safety meetings 39% 60% 92% 54% 37%

A health and safety committee 4% 11% 16% 21% 15%

¹ We have an elected health and safety representative

25% 41% 50% 41% 33%

¹ We have a health andsafety champion 7% 10% 30% 15% 17%

A regular system for health and safety communications (e.g. noticeboard, website)

33% 43% 62% 42% 34%

Formal safety audits are carried out regularly* 36% 53% 84% 52% 47%

A formal mentor system 16% 20% 46% 21% 18%

A process to make sure staff are briefed on health and safety for every site they work on

- 66% - - -

General/ ongoing discussions (incl informal , at smoko, while working, on site)

6% 4% 3% 6% 6%

Other ways to discuss health and safety with your workers or get feedback from them

1% 1% 4% 1% 2%

None of these 21% 9% 6% 11% 21%

Base: Employers Q51 (E) Which, if any, of the following does your business have?*Note: responses for ‘Formal safety audits are carried out regularly’ come from Q43. Formal safety audits at regular intervals are a normal part of our business¹ Note: In 2016 separate response options were provided for elected health and safety representatives and champions. Previously, both of these options were combined. As such, no changes over time are presented.


4.3 WORKER PARTICIPATION: WORK ENVIRONMENT

This section looks at the extent to which workers and employers think that they work together on health

and safety matters to create a safer workplace.

WORKING TOGETHER TO CREATE A SAFER WORKPLACE

Workers were asked if they think that everyone in the workplace is trying to improve safety; both

workers and employers were asked if the boss/management and workers work together/in partnership

to make sure everyone is safe at work.

Nearly two in three workers (64%) in the four high-risk sectors agreed that everyone from the boss

down is always trying to improve safety, an increase from 2014, and consistent with the 2016 result.

Employers were more likely than workers to think that management and workers work together to

ensure everyone is safe at work. Over nine in ten employers (92%) said that this working partnership

happens, compared to three quarters of workers (76%).

4.3.1 Proportion agreeing that boss and workers are working together: Workers and

Employers from the four high-risk sectors

76% agree

201620152014WORKERS EMPLOYERS2017 201620152014 2017

EVERYONE TRYING TO IMPROVE SAFETY

MANAGEMENT AND WORKERS WORK TOGETHERBOSS AND WORKERS WORK TOGETHER

My boss and the workers work together to make sure everyone is safe at work

73%agree

72%agree

76%agree

Management and workers work in partnership to ensure everyone is safe at work

91%agree

90%agree

92%agree

92%agree

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors, excluding self-employed (2014 n=1559 – 1562; 2015 n=1413 - 1419; 2016 n=1417 - 1419; 2017 n=1245-1250) Q49 (W) R4 / Q49 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1354; 2015 n=1501; 2016 n=1236; 2017 n=1295) Q47 (E)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?

Everyone from the boss down is always trying to improve safety

59%agree

60%agree

66%agree

64%agree


WORKERS

By sector

Overall, Forestry workers were more likely to agree than workers in the other high-risk sectors that

everyone from the boss down is always trying to improve safety (80% in 2017, cf. 64% overall). The

proportion agreeing has increased from 73% in 2014.

Forestry workers were also more likely than workers in the other high-risk sectors to agree that the

boss and workers work together to make sure everyone is safe (87% cf. 76%), while Manufacturing

workers were less likely to agree (71% in 2017, down from 74% in 2016, cf. 76% overall).

There has also been an increase in agreement within the Construction sector. The proportion of

Construction workers agreeing that everyone from the boss down is always trying to improve safety

increased from 55% in 2014 to 65% in 2017.

Results within the other two high-risk sectors have fluctuated year-on-year, but have not significantly

increased.

4.3.2 Proportion agreeing that boss and workers are working together: Workers, 2017


CONSTRUCTION(n=277)

FORESTRY(n=287)


OTHER SECTOR(n=789-799)


67% 65% 80% 60% 60%


79% 77% 87% 71% 75%

Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q49 (W) R4,R1To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


EMPLOYERS

By sector

The majority of employers in each high-risk sector agreed that management and workers work in

partnership to ensure everyone is safe at work. These results have been consistently high.

4.3.3 Proportion agreeing that workers are encouraged to work together: Employers, 2017

SUPPORTIVE CULTURE

Employers had a more positive view about the supportiveness of the work environment than workers.

For example:

Two in three workers (68%) agreed that workers are encouraged to devise new or better ways

to make the workplace safer, compared to nine in ten employers (87%) who agreed that their

business encourages workers to do this.

Only two in three workers (68%) said their boss would totally support them if they suggested

work be stopped because of a possible hazard, while over nine in ten employers (92%) agreed

that a worker who suggested work should be stopped because of a risk to health and safety

would be supported.

There has been little change in either result over time.

Despite not all workers feeling confident that they would be supported if they suggested stopping work

because of a possible hazard, nearly nine in ten workers in the Construction, Manufacturing and

Forestry sectors said they would feel confident about approaching their boss or site supervisor with a

health and safety issue.

Few workers (13%) worried that they would get into trouble if they told their boss they had a near miss.

This has not increased significantly since 2014.

AGRICULTURE(n=373)

CONSTRUCTION(n=335)

FORESTRY(n=225)


OTHER SECTOR(n=426)

Management and workers work in partnership to ensure everyone is safe at work

91% 93% 94% 92% 88%

Base: Employers Q47 (E) R4, R2To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


4.3.4 Proportion agreeing that workers are encouraged to create a safer workplace: Workers

and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

68%agree

201620152014WORKERS EMPLOYERS2017 201620152014 2017

ENCOURAGED TO HAVE NEW IDEASENCOURAGED TO HAVE NEW IDEAS

CONFIDENT APPROACHING BOSS

My boss encourages us to come up with ideas for how to make our work safer

66%agree

66%agree

68%agree

Our business encourages the workers to come up with new or better ways to do things that will make our work safer

86%agree

86%agree

85%agree

87%agree

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2014 n=1560; 2015 n=1413-1414; 2016 n=1414-1417; 2017 n=1239 - 1243) Q49 (W) R6CONFIDENCE: Base: Workers from Construction, Forestry and Manufacturing Excluding doesn’t apply (2015 n=1469; 2016 n=1429; 2017 n=1301) Q48 (W) R12, R13

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1353; 2015 n=1502; 2016 n=1236; 2017 n=1298) Q47 (E) R5,


I would feel confident about approaching the boss about a health and safety issue

85%agree

91%agree

87%agree

-

My boss would totally support me if I suggested we stop work because of a possible hazard

Our business would totally support a worker who suggested work should be stopped because of a possible risk

69% agree

72% agree

66% agree

91% agree

91% agree

89% agree

68 % agree

SUPPORT FOR STOPPING WORKSUPPORT FOR STOPPING WORK

92% agree

I would worry I would get into trouble if I told my boss I had a near miss

12% agree

12% agree

13% agree

WORRY TELLING BOSS ABOUT A NEAR MISS

10% agree


WORKERS

By sector

Measures of the supportiveness of the work environment have fluctuated over time in all four high-risk

sectors. However, each year Forestry workers have been more likely than other high-risk sector

workers to agree that they are encouraged to come up with new ideas to make their work safer (81%

cf. 68% overall) and that their boss would support their suggesting work be stopped because of a

possible hazard (77% cf. 68% overall).

As in previous years, the majority of workers said they felt confident about approaching their boss or

site supervisor.

Forestry workers were more likely to agree that they were confident about approaching their

boss or site supervisor with a health and safety issue (92% cf. 87% overall).

Manufacturing workers were less likely to agree that their boss would totally support me if I

suggested we stop work because of a possible hazard (60% cf. 68% overall) and more likely to

agree that they would worry about getting into trouble if they told their boss they had a near

miss (16% cf. 13% overall).

4.3.5 Proportion agreeing that workers are encouraged to create a safer workplace: Workers,

2017



FORESTRY(n=286-345)




63% 70% 81% 67% 61%


69% 73% 77% 60% 67%

I would feel confident about approaching the boss/site supervisor on the site I am working on now about a health and safety issue

- 88% 92% 83% -


10% 12% 7% 16% 11%

Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q49 (W) R3, Base: Workers from Construction, Forestry, Manufacturing excluding doesn’t apply Q48 (W) R12Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q49 (W) R3, Q48 (W) R13To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


EMPLOYERS

By sector

As with workers, agreement about a supportive work environment was highest among employers in

the Forestry sector, but views were positive across the four high-risk sectors.

4.3.6 Proportion agreeing that workers are encouraged to create a safer workplace:

Employers, 2017

4.4 WORKER PARTICIPATION: TWO WAY COMMUNICATION

SPEAKING UP

The majority of workers in the four high-risk sectors said they feel able to speak to their bosses and co-

workers about risks to their health and safety. The results have been consistently positive overall,

but differences between workers’ and employers’ perceptions remain:

Three in four workers (75%) agreed that their boss encourages them to speak up if something

is unsafe and this result has increased a little over time (up from 72% in 2014). In comparison,

almost all (96%) employers said that they encourage workers to speak up if they feel

something is unsafe.

Nearly eight in ten workers (78%) said they always tell their co-workers if they are not working

safely, but employers were slightly less confident that this was the case, with nearly seven in

ten employers (69%) saying this occurs. These results have remained stable over time.



FORESTRY(n=225)



Our business encourages the workers to come up with new or better ways to do things that will make our work safer

84% 88% 94% 89% 86%

Our business would totally support a worker who suggested work should be stopped because of a possible hazard

90% 94% 96% 91% 90%



4.4.1 Proportion agreeing that workers are encouraged to speak up about health and safety:


WORKERS

By sector

Worker agreement was high across all four high-risk sectors with statements about speaking up if

something is considered unsafe. Again, Forestry workers were more likely to agree that:

my boss encourages us to speak up if we feel something is unsafe (87% cf. 75% overall)

I always tell my co-workers if they aren’t working safely (86% cf. 78% overall).


Workers, 2017

I always tell my co-workers if they aren’t working safely*

My boss encourages us to speak up if we feel something is unsafe

I am confident our workers always tell a co-worker if they aren’t working safely (e.g. not wearing PPE)

Our business encourages our workers to speak up if they feel something is unsafe

75% agree

79% agree

79% agree

72% agree

82% agree-

94% agree

68% agree

94% agree

93% agree

66% agree-

2014 2015 2016WORKERS 2014 2015 2016EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2014 n=1562; 2015 n=1415; 2016 n=1415; 2017 n=1243) Q49 (W) R6 *Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply (2015 n=1911; 2016 n=2020; 2017 n=1720) Q48 (W) R13

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1352-1353; 2015 n=1498-1502; 2016 n=1234-1236; 2017 n=1294-1300) Q47 (E) R3, R9

WORKERS ENCOURAGED TO SPEAK UPWORKERS ENCOURAGED TO SPEAK UP

75% agree

78% agree

2017

CO-WORKERS TOLD IF NOT WORKING SAFELYCO-WORKERS TOLD IF NOT WORKING SAFELY

96% agree

69% agree

2017



FORESTRY(n=287-349)




73% 77% 87% 73% 76%

I always tell my co-workers if they aren’t working safely*

78% 78% 86% 77% 62%

Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q49 (W) R2, *Base: Workers Q48 (W) R13To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


EMPLOYERS

By sector

Results were consistently high (more than nine in ten employers agreeing) across the four high-risk

sectors that our business encourages our workers to speak up if they feel something is unsafe.

Forestry sector employers were more likely to agree that they are confident workers always tell a co-

worker if they are not working safely (82% cf. 69% overall), while employers in the Agriculture sector

were less likely to agree with this (61% cf. 69% overall).

As was the case for workers, most of the results were similar to 2015 and 2014 results, with some

minor fluctuations.


Employers, 2017

INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK

In addition to encouraging workers to speak up, keeping them informed is essential. This section

discusses workers’ and employers’ views on the information provided about health and safety.

A significant difference has been apparent each year in the extent of perceived information sharing

between workers and employers, indicating the need for employers to ensure that workers are

receiving understandable information about health and safety.

At least seven in ten workers (70%) in the four high-risk sectors agreed each year that their boss

always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with workers. A higher proportion of

employers in the four high-risk sectors (over eight in ten) agreed that sharing information occurs, with

an increase in agreement between 2016 and 2017.

Almost seven in ten workers (68%) agreed that their boss always gives workers health and safety

information that is easy to understand, while nearly nine in ten employers (86%) agreed that the

information provided is easy to understand. Both worker and employer agreement about this have


CONSTRUCTION(n=336)

FORESTRY(n=225)



Our business encourages our workers to speak up if they feel something is unsafe

96% 96% 98% 95% 93%

I am confident our workers always tell a co-worker if they aren’t working safely (e.g. not wearing PPE)

61% 74% 82% 69% 70%



increased since 2015 (worker agreement increasing from 63% in 2015 to 68% and employer

agreement increasing from 82% in 2015 to 86%).

While the majority of employers (81% in 2017) have consistently agreed that their business always lets

workers know how we have considered their views when decisions are made about workplace health

and safety, workers have been less inclined to agree. Each year only just over a half of the workers

surveyed (53% in 2017) have agreed that they are always told how their views have been taken into

account.

4.4.4 Proportion agreeing that health and safety information is always shared and easy to

understand, and that workers’ views are considered: Workers and Employers from the

four high-risk sectors

WORKERS

By sector

As in 2016, workers in the Forestry sector were more likely than workers in the other high-risk sectors

to agree that their boss always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with workers

(83% cf. 70% overall), that their boss always gives workers health and safety information that is easy to

understand (78% cf. 68%) and that they are told how their views about health and safety have been

considered (67% cf. 53% overall).

EMPLOYERS 2015 2016 2017

Our business always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with our workers

79%agree

78% agree

82% agree

I am confident we always give our workers health and safety information that is easy to understand

82% agree

83% agree

86% agree

Our business always lets workers know how we have considered their views when decisions are made about workplace health and safety

78% agree

79% agree

81% agree

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2015 n=1413-1416; 2016 n=1415-1418; 2017 n=1234-1243)Q49 (W) R12, R13, R14

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=1501-1502; 2016 n=1234-1235; 2017 n=1296-1297) Q47 (E) R6 & R7 Q47 (E) R8


WORKERS 2015 2016 2017

My boss always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with workers

70%agree

73% agree

70% agree

My boss always gives workers health and safety information that is easy to understand

63% agree

67% agree

68% agree

When my boss makes decisions about workplace health and safety, workers are always told how their views have been considered

52% agree

53% agree

53% agree


The level of agreement was lower among Manufacturing workers than among the other three high-risk

sectors. Only 66% agreed that their boss always shares relevant health and safety information and

updates with workers (cf. 70% overall), that their boss always gives workers health and safety

information that is easy to understand (64% cf. 68%) and that they are told how their views about

health and safety have been considered (49% cf. 53% overall).


understand and that workers’ views are considered: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

These results have remained relatively constant since 2015.

Agreement was greatest among Forestry sector employers, with over nine in ten Forestry employers

agreeing that health and safety information is always shared (96% cf. 82% overall) and easy to

understand (93%, cf. 86% overall) and that they tell their workers how their views have been

considered (89% cf. 81% overall).

Agriculture employers were less likely than other high-risk sector employers to agree that their

business always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with their workers (78% cf.

82% overall) and that they tell their workers how their views have been considered (77% cf. 81%

overall).


CONSTRUCTION(n=274)

FORESTRY(n=284-288)



My boss always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with workers

73% 72% 83% 66% 71%

My boss always gives workers health and safety information that is easy to understand

69% 69% 78% 64% 68%

Workers told how views about health and safety have been considered

54% 55% 67% 49% 48%

Base: Workers excluding self-employed Q49 (W) R12, 13 / Q49 (W) R14To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?



understand and that workers’ views are considered: Employers, 2017

4.5 HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING

Training is an important means of embedding and supporting health and safety practices. Workers

were asked when they last had some formal training on health and safety (e.g. did a course, online

training, induction training). Employers were asked what proportion of their workers had undertaken

formal training relating to health and safety in the last 12 months. Survey participants were asked not to

include first aid courses as part of health and safety training.

WORKERS

At least half the workers in the four high-risk sectors have received some health and safety training in

the last 12 months in each of the last three years, with an increase from 45% in 2014 to 51% in 2017.

A further quarter (27%) had undertaken training, but not in the last 12 months.

Participation in health and safety training was more common among recent industry entrants; 60% of

those who had been in the sector between zero and five years had received training in the last 12

months, compared with 54% of those in the sector for six to nineteen years and 46% of those who had

been in the sector for twenty plus years.

Every year, around one in five workers have ‘never’ had any formal training (21% in 2017 cf. 23% in

2014).


CONSTRUCTION(n=335)

FORESTRY(n=225)


OTHER SECTOR(n=426)

Our business always shares relevant health and safety information and updates with our workers

78% 86% 96% 82% 81%

I am confident we always give our workers health and safety information that is easy to understand

83% 88% 93% 85% 83%

Business always letsworkers know how views about health and safety have been considered

77% 84% 89% 82% 80%

Base: Employers Q47 (E) R6, 7 / Q47 (E) R8To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


4.5.1 Last time formal health and safety training was undertaken: Workers in the four high-risk

sectors


decreases between two consecutive years. At the total level, there were statistically significant increases in the

2014 to 2015, and 2015 to 2016 years, with a decrease between the 2016 and 2017 years.

By sector

Each year, workers in the Construction and Forestry sectors were more likely to have undertaken

formal health and safety training in the last 12 months (66% and 58%, respectively, cf. 51% overall).

A comparatively low proportion of Agriculture workers have undertaken formal training in the last 12

months, with fluctuations each year between 28% (2015 and 2017) and 35% (2016), cf. 51% overall.

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q55 (W)When was the last time you had some formal training on health and safety (e.g. did a course, online training, induction training )?

23% 22% 20% 21%

17% 15%10% 13%

16%13%

11%14%

17%19%

23%20%

27% 32% 35% 31%

2014(n=2291)

2015(n=2084)

2016(n=2168)

2017(n=1866)

In the last 6 months

6 - 12 months ago

13 months - 3 years ago

More than 3 years ago

I've never had formal training

44% 51% 58% 51% Total in the last year


4.5.2 Proportion of workers who have undertaken formal health and safety training in the last

12 months, Workers

Analysis of responses for workers saying they have ‘never undertaken formal training on health and

safety’ over time highlights that there is a core group of workers within each high-risk sector (variable

across sectors) who have received no formal training over the last four years. This proportion has not

reduced significantly within the four high-risk sectors (23% in 2014 had ‘never’ received training cf.

21% in 2017).

Nearly four in ten Agricultural workers say they have ‘never’ received formal health and safety training,

compared with only 10% of Construction workers and 12% of Manufacturing workers saying this in

2017.

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=596; 2015 n=531; 2016 n=684; 2017 n=511) Construction (2014 n=615; 2015 n=526; 2016 n=560; 2017 n=445) Forestry (2014 n=376; 3015 n=388; 2016 n=316; 2017 n=357) Manufacturing (2014 n=704; 2015 639; 2016 n=608; 2017 n=553) Other sector (2014 n=913; 2015 n=820; 2016 n=1063; 2017 n=1029) Q55 (W) When was the last time you had some formal training on health and safety (e.g. did a course, online training, induction training )

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

AGRICULTURE 22% 28% 35% 28%

CONSTRUCTION 59% 64% 70% 66%

FORESTRY 53% 66% 66% 58%

MANUFACTURING 48% 54% 57% 53%

OTHER 39% 42% 46% 47%


4.5.3 Proportion of workers who have ‘never’ undertaken formal health and safety training,

Workers

EMPLOYERS

When asked what proportion of their workers had undertaken formal health and safety training in the

last 12 months, nearly a quarter (23%) said ‘all’ their workers had undertaken formal training in the last

12 months. This proportion has ranged between one in five and one in four employers saying this over

the last four years.

Over four in ten employers (44%) from the four high-risk sectors said that at least ‘half’ of their workers

had undertaken training in the last 12 months.

Over a third of employers (36%) said that ‘none’ of their workers had undertaken health and safety

training in the last 12 months.

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=596; 2015 n=531; 2016 n=684; 2017 n=511) Construction (2014 n=615; 2015 n=526; 2016 n=560; 2017 n=445) Forestry (2014 n=376; 3015 n=388; 2016 n=316; 2017 n=357) Manufacturing (2014 n=704; 2015 639; 2016 n=608; 2017 n=553) Other sector (2014 n=913; 2015 n=820; 2016 n=1063; 2017 n=1029) Q55 (W) When was the last time you had some formal training on health and safety (e.g. did a course, online training, induction training )

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017



FORESTRY 17% 9% 8% 12%


OTHER 33% 33% 32% 28%


4.5.4 Proportion of employers saying at least half of their workers had undertaken formal

health and safety training in the last 12 months: Employers from the four high-risk

sectors

By sector

The proportion of employers in each high-risk sector who said that ‘at least half’ of their workers had

undertaken some formal training in the last 12 months has stayed consistent year on year within

sector.

Formal training was more likely to occur in the Construction sector (54% cf. 44% overall) and the

Forestry sector (58% in 2017 cf. 44% overall), and less likely in the Agriculture sector (34%).

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q52 (E)In the last 12 months, what proportion of your business’s workers have had formal training relating to health and safety (e.g. training course, online training, induction training)?

6% 4% 3% 6%

39% 39% 35% 36%

14% 13%13%

15%

5% 6%8%

6%

15% 16%14% 15%

21% 22% 26% 23%

2014(n=1351)

2015(n=1498)

2016(n=1233)

2017(n=1300)

All

Most of them

Half

Some, but less than half

None

Don't know

41% 43% 49% 44% Total in the last year


4.5.5 Proportion saying at least half of their workers had undertaken formal health and safety

training in the last 12 months, Employers

As with workers, analysis of employers’ responses over time in terms of workers ‘never’ having had

formal training on health and safety highlights that there is a core group of employers within each high-

risk sector (variable by sector) whose workers have never received formal training over the last four

years.

Nearly half the Agricultural sector employers have consistently indicated this, but fewer than one in five

Forestry employers said this.

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=380; 2015 n=408; 2016 n=360; 2017 n=374) Construction (2014 n=346; 2015 n=391; 2016 n=273; 2017 n=338) Forestry (2014 n=268; 3015 n=271; 2016 n=232; 2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2014 n=357; 2015 n=428; 2016 n=368; 2017 n=363) Other sector (2014 n=322; 2015 n=403; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=426)Q52 (E): In the last 12 months, what proportion of your business’s workers have had formal training relating to health and safety (e.g. training course, online training, induction training)?

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017



FORESTRY 56% 56% 49% 58%


OTHER 26% 26% 43% 34%


4.5.6 Proportion whose workers have ‘never’ had formal health and safety training, Employers

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=380; 2015 n=408; 2016 n=360; 2017 n=374) Construction (2014 n=346; 2015 n=391; 2016 n=273; 2017 n=338) Forestry (2014 n=268; 3015 n=271; 2016 n=232; 2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2014 n=357; 2015 n=428; 2016 n=368; 2017 n=363) Other sector (2014 n=322; 2015 n=403; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=426)Q52 (E): In the last 12 months, what proportion of your business’s workers have had formal training relating to health and safety (e.g. training course, online training, induction training)?

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017



FORESTRY 13% 16% 18% 15%


OTHER 53% 52% 40% 46%


4.6 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON WORKER ENGAGEMENT AND

PARTICIPATION PRACTICES

WORKER ENGAGEMENT

Comparison of results for worker engagement by recency of health and safety training (workers) and

proportion trained (employers) highlight the value of training, in providing a forum in which workers can

discuss health and safety matters in an open and helpful way. Over four in five workers (82%) who had

received training in the last 12 months agreed that things that put health and safety at risk are

discussed in an open and helpful way often, compared with only 68% of those who had never received

training.

4.6.1 Worker engagement by involvement in formal health and safety training: Workers and

Employers, 2017

WORKER ENVIRONMENT AND TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION

Giving workers health and safety training has a positive impact on their ability and confidence to

participate: it enhances their perceptions of being in an environment that is supportive of workers, that

will provide information about health and safety, and indicates a culture in which workers can feel

confident raising health and safety matters and speaking up about issues.

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Worker engagementIn last 12 months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half

workers in last 12 months

Less than half in last 12months

Never had

training

I always have a say in decisions that affect my health and safety

80% 78% 77% 89% 84% 81%

When my boss makes decisions about workplacehealth and safety workers are always told how their views have been considered

59% 45% 45% 88% 84% 75%

Where I work, workers really do make a difference to health and safety

71% 61% 57% - - -

Things that put health and safety at risk are discussedin an open and helpful way always/most of the time

82% 71% 68% 90% 89% 85%

Base: Workers Q48, Q49, Q52 (W)Base: Employers Q43, Q47, Q49 (E)


4.6.2 Worker participation by involvement in formal health and safety training: Workers and

Employers, 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Work practices, work environment and two-way

communication

In last 12 months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half



Never had

training


69% 55% 56% - - -


81% 68% 67% 96% 90% 90%


77% 54% 52% 92% 86% 82%


75% 58% 57% 95% 90% 90%

I would feel confident about approaching the boss / site supervisor on the site I’m working on now about a h & s issue (C, F, M)

91% 79% 80% - - -


12% 14% 14% - - -


82% 64% 65% 98% 96% 95%

I always tell my co-workers if they aren’t working safely

81% 79% 69% 74% 70% 62%

My boss always shares relevant h & s information and updates with workers

76% 65% 57% 92% 86% 71%

My boss always gives workers h & s information that is easy to understand

73% 59% 57% 92% 86% 78%

When my boss makes decisions about workplace health and safety, workers are always told how their views have been considered

59% 45% 45% 88% 84% 75%

Base: Workers Q48, Q49, (W)Base: Employers Q47 (E)


WORKER PARTICIPATION PRACTICES BY INCIDENCE OF TRAINING

Comparison of the incidence of practices that encourage worker participation in the business by

recency of training and proportion of workers trained, highlight that having formal worker participation

practices in place goes hand-in-hand with worker training taking place.

One in three workers (35%) who have ‘never’ undertaken formal health and safety training said their

workplace has no formal practices in place, while one in four (26%) employers whose workers have

‘never’ received training said none of these practices are in place. This pattern has been consistent in

every survey.

4.6.3 Information sharing, working together and speaking up, by participation in formal health

and safety training: Workers and Employers, 2017

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2017, n=1868) Q54 (W)Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2017, n=1300) Q51 (E)Which, if any, of these, happen at your workplace/does your business have?

53%

52%

43%

41%

37%

32%

26%

17%

Health and safety is included as aregular team / group meeting item

Regular health and hafety meetings

We have an elected health and safetyrepresentative

We have a noticeboard or websiteabout health and safety

Formal safety audits are carried outregularly

There is a health and safety committeein our workplace

We have a process to make sure staffare briefed on health and safety for…

None of these

53%

52%

39%

35%

27%

19%

12%

22%

Health and safety is a regular item atteam/group meetings

Regular health and safety meetings

A regular system for health and safetycommunications

An elected health and safetyrepresentative

A process to make sure staff are briefedon health and safety for every site they…

A formal mentor system

A health and safety committee

None of these

Over half Less than half

Never

66% 69% 37%

67% 59% 32%

50% 54% 24%

43% 56% 20%

39% 33% 15%

26% 20% 12%

14% 17% 4%

6% 2% 26%

2017

Last 12 months

Less recently

Never

70% 42% 27%

69% 38% 30%

58% 29% 24%

56% 29% 23%

53% 21% 15%

45% 21% 15%

20% 10% 7%

7% 24% 35%

2017

WORKERS

EMPLOYERS

SECTION 5:

PERCEPTIONS,

KNOWLEDGE AND

EXPERIENCE OF RISK


5 PERCEPTIONS, KNOWLEDGE AND

EXPERIENCE OF RISK

INTRODUCTION

This section of the report discusses several aspects of risk including:

workers’ and employers’ views about the perceived level of risk in their industry compared with

other industries

the perceived risk of serious harm occurring in their own workplace/business

workers’ feelings of safety in the workplace

whether workers have the resources and information (tools, equipment, advice) to deal with risk

workers’ level of confidence that they have the knowledge and skills to keep healthy at work,

safe at work and know how to report a hazard, near miss or accident

risky behaviours occurring in the workplace

communication about hazards, near misses and accidents

positive actions taken to minimise risk.

Appendix IV contains additional results from questions relating to risk that were used for a

segmentation analysis in 2014 and 2015.

KEY FINDINGS

Perception of risk of injury and safety at work: Nearly all workers felt safe at work, despite

acknowledging there was a higher risk of serious injury in their industry compared with other industries.

Just under one in two workers and employers (49% and 47% respectively) said the risk of

getting seriously hurt in their industry was ‘higher’/’much higher’ than in other industries, while

only 15% of workers and 5% of employers said there was ‘at least a moderate risk’ of a worker

being seriously hurt in their workplace or business in the next 12 months.

Workers were more likely than employers to perceive a risk of personal injury.

Forestry sector workers and employers were more likely than respondents in the other high-risk

sectors to say there is a higher risk of serious injury in their industry and a higher level of personal risk

of moderate injury.

Having the resources and information to do the job safely: While most workers and employers

(87% and 93% respectively) agreed that workers had the tools and equipment to do their job safely,

workers were less likely to agree that they had all the information they needed to work safely (73% of

workers compared to 89% of employers).

Knowledge and skills to deal with health and safety risks: Workers were confident they had the

knowledge and skills to keep safe at work (94% confident), that they knew how to report a hazard,

near miss or accident to workmates and management (87% confident), and that they had the

knowledge and skills to avoid long-term health problems (85% confident). Confidence in knowledge

and skills to avoid health problems was slightly weaker than in how to keep safe, but was still high,

with over eight in ten workers expressing confidence about this. Only a small minority (less than 5%)

expressed lack of confidence in any of these matters.


Risky behaviours in the workplace: Despite workers saying that they have the knowledge and skills

to keep themselves safe at work, a considerable number of serious harm accidents continue to occur in

New Zealand workplaces. Hence each year, workers have been asked about the frequency with which

they or their workmates act in a number of potentially risky ways, while employers have been asked a

corresponding question in relation to workers in their business.

Both workers and employers listed working when sick or injured (45% and 16% respectively),

working when overtired (43% and 20% respectively) and making a mistake by being careless

or not having their mind on the job (37% and 29% respectively) as the three most common

risky behaviours.

However employers listed making a mistake by being careless or not having their mind on the

job (29%) as the most common risky behaviour, while workers listed it as the third most

common risky behaviour.

Higher proportions of workers than employers across the four high-risk sectors said that each

type of risky behaviour occurred ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ in their workplace and employers

were more likely to say that each risky behaviour ‘never’ happens than workers were. This

perceived difference in the amount of risky behaviour occurring in the workplace echoes

previous survey results.

There has been a significant increase in the number of workers and employers who say that workers are

‘never’ involved in nearly all listed risky behaviours. Results signal increased knowledge of the risks to

which such behaviours expose workers, particularly in terms of working when hung-over or stoned, unsafe

processes, inadequate supervision, lack of appropriate skills and working in inappropriate conditions.

Positive actions taken to prevent serious harm in the workplace: The proportions of workers in the

four high-risk sectors saying that each of five positive actions ‘always’ occurred in the workplace were not

particularly high (ranging from 38% to 64%) and from 48% to 74% for employers.

Having safety devices fitted to machinery and equipment was the only moderately widespread

action between 2014 and 2017, with 64% of workers and 74% of employers saying it ‘always’

happens (and most common in the Forestry sector).

Action being taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified was second most

common action identified by workers, but only 53% of the workers said this ‘always’ happens,

compared with 69% of employers saying it ‘always’ happens. There has been a small

increase in the proportion of employers saying action is ‘always’ taken straight away (from

64% in 2014 to 69% in 2017), but a minimal increase among workers.

The greatest divergence of views between workers and employers was for machinery and

equipment being well maintained. While seven in ten employers (70%) said this ‘always’

happens, fewer than half the workers (48%) said it ‘always’ happens.

Linked with this, machinery and equipment being fully checked before it is used was the

preventative action least likely to ‘always’ take place (only 38% of workers and 53% of

employers). Manufacturing workers were less likely than other high-risk sector workers to say

that machinery is well maintained or fully checked.

Only around half the workers and employers (49% and 53% respectively) said that personal

protective equipment is used ‘always’, although there have been small increases in the

proportions of workers and employers saying it is ‘always’ used.


Forestry workers were more likely than workers overall to say all of the preventative actions asked

about ‘always’ occurred and Forestry employers were more likely than employers overall to say that

four of the five safety actions ‘always’ occurred.

5.1 PERCEIVED RISK OF BEING HURT COMPARED WITH OTHER INDUSTRIES

Workers and employers were asked to compare the risk of people getting seriously hurt in their

industry with the risk in other industries using a 5-point scale ranging from ‘much lower risk’ (1 on the

scale) through to ‘much higher risk’ (5 on the scale).

Chart 5.1.1 shows the proportion of those who thought the risk in their industry was higher (4 or 5 on

the scale) than in other industries.

Workers’ and employers’ views have been a reasonably close match, with just under one in two

considering the risk in their industry was higher (4 or 5 on the scale) than in other industries.

A small decline in the perceived risk of being seriously hurt is apparent among workers (down from

54% in 2014 to 49% in 2017). Consistently, almost half of employers (47% in 2017) thought that the

risk of getting seriously hurt in their industry was higher than in other industries.

5.1.1 Proportion thinking the risk of getting seriously hurt in their industry was ‘higher’ than

in other industries: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors


decreases between two consecutive years. For Workers, for example, there was a significant decrease

between 2014 and 2015, with a significant increase between 2015 and 2016.

WORKERS

By sector

While workers in the Forestry sector were more likely than those in the other high-risk sectors to say

that there was a higher level of risk in their particular industry (70% cf. 49% overall), the proportion of

workers rating the risk as higher has decreased since 2014 (down from 85%).

48% 43% 48% 47%

2014(n=1346)

2015(n=1500)

2016(n=1231)

2017(n=1301)

EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q33 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectorsQ27 (E)

How does the risk of someone getting seriously hurt in your industry compare with other industries or types of work? (5-point scale where 1= much lower and 5= much higher)

54%46%

53% 49%

2014(n=2274)

2015(n=2078)

2016(n=2165)

2017(n=1860)

WORKERS


Six in ten workers in the Construction industry said that there was a higher level of risk in their

particular industry (59%, cf. 49% overall), a perception which has remained the same over the last four

years.

Perceptions of relative risk have decreased among workers in the Agriculture sector. In 2017, 42%

thought that their industry had a higher level of risk (cf. 49% overall), compared with 50% thinking this

in 2014.

Workers in the Manufacturing sector were less likely than other high-risk sectors to think that there was

a higher level of risk in their industry. There has been a decrease in perceived risk over the four years

of surveying (down to 35% in 2017, from 39% in 2014).


in other industries: Workers

`

EMPLOYERS

By sector

As with Forestry workers, employers in the Forestry sector were more likely to consider the risk of

being seriously hurt in their industry to be ‘higher’ or ‘much higher’ than other high-risk sectors. The

relative perceived risk has also decreased among employers since 2014 (down from 81% in 2014 to

73% in 2017).

Just over one in two employers in the Construction industry said that there was a higher level of risk in

their particular industry (53% cf. 47% overall), a perception which has remained the same over the last

four years.

Perceptions of relative risk have decreased among Agricultural employers (from 56% in 2014 to 48%

in 2017).

2017

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=595; 2015 n=533; 2016 n=684; 2017 n=508) Construction (2014 n=612; 2015 n=516; 2016 n=558; 2017 n=442) Forestry (2014 n=369; 2015 n=384; 2016 n=316; 2017 n=360) Manufacturing (2014 n=698; 2015 n=645; 2016 n=607; 2017 n=550) Other sector (2014 n=913; 2015 n=822; 2016 n=1062; 2017 n=1029) Q33 (W) How does the risk of someone getting seriously hurt in your industry compare with other industries? (5-point scale where 1= much lower and 5= much higher)

19%

35%

70%

59%

42%

2016 2015 2014

47% 37% 50%

61% 56% 62%

75% 77% 85%

34% 32% 39%

15% 13% 15%

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER



in other industries: Employers

5.2 PERCEIVED RISK OF WORKERS BEING SERIOUSLY HURT IN THEIR OWN

WORKPLACE OR BUSINESS

In addition to the general risk of being hurt in their particular industry, whether workers think they are

personally at risk in their own workplace is also important. Therefore, workers were asked how they

rated the risk of themselves or someone they work with being seriously hurt at work in the next 12

months. Employers were asked the same question about workers in their business being seriously

hurt. They responded using a 5-point scale ranging from ‘very low risk’ (1 on the scale) to ‘very high

risk’ (5 on the scale).

Workers were more likely than employers to think that there was at least a moderate risk that they or

one of their fellow workers would be seriously hurt at work in the next 12 months. The majority of

workers and employers did not think that there was even a moderate risk of workers in their workplace

or business being seriously hurt at work in the next 12 months.

In the four high-risk sectors, 15% of workers and just 5% of employers said that there was at least a

moderate risk (3, 4 or 5 on the scale) of a worker being seriously hurt in their workplace or business in

the next 12 months. These results have remained stable since 2014.

13%

32%

73%

53%

48%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=376; 2015 n=412; 2016 n=360; 2017 n=377) Construction (2014 n=344; 2015 n=392; 2016 n=272; 2017 n=337) Forestry (2014 n=268; 2015 n=270; 2016 n=232; 2017 n=224) Manufacturing (2014 n=358; 2015 n=426; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=363) Other sector (2014 n=321; 2015 n=403; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=428) Q27 (E)How does the risk of someone getting seriously hurt in your industry compare with other industries? (5-point scale where 1= much lower and 5= much higher)

2016 2015 2014

50% 45% 56%

54% 50% 52%

77% 74% 81%

33% 29% 31%

13% 9% 11%


5.2.1 Proportion thinking there is at least a moderate risk of workers being seriously hurt in

their own workplace/business: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

WORKERS

By sector

Workers in the Manufacturing and Forestry sectors were more likely than workers in the other high-risk

sectors to think that they or a workmate were at risk of being seriously hurt at work in the next 12

months (24% and 21%, respectively, cf. 15% overall). This result has been stable over time.

5.2.2 Proportion thinking there is at least a moderate risk of being seriously hurt in their own

workplace: Workers

6% 5% 5% 5%

2014(n=1351)

2015(n=1500)

2016(n=1228)

2017(n=1303)

17% 15% 14% 15%

2014(n=2292)

2015(n=2094)

2016(n=2179)

2017(n=1872)

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q46 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q40 (E)

How would you rate the risk that you or someone you work with/one of your workers in your business will be seriously hurt at work in the next 12 months? (5-point scale where 1= very low

risk and 5= very high risk)

11%

24%

21%

13%

12%

2017

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=594; 2015 n=535; 2016 n=688; 2017 n=509) Construction (2014 n=615; 2015 n=525; 2016 n=561; 2017 n=445) Forestry (2014 n=377; 2015 n=389; 2016 n=318; 2017 n=363) Manufacturing (2014 n=706; 2015 n=645; 2016 n=612; 2017 n=555) Other sector (2014 n=916; 2015 n=821; 2016 n=1063; 2017 n=1029) Q46 (W)How would you rate the risk that you or someone you work with/one of your workers in your business will be seriously hurt at work in the next 12 months? (5-point scale where 1= very high risk and 5= very low risk)

2016 2015 2014

9% 9% 11%

13% 14% 18%

22% 21% 27%

23% 23% 26%

10% 10% 12%

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER


EMPLOYERS

By sector

Forestry employers were more likely than employers in the other high-risk sectors to think that one of

their workers was at risk of being seriously hurt in their business in the next 12 months (9% cf. 5%

overall). Unlike Manufacturing workers, employers in the Manufacturing sector were no more likely than

other high-risk sector employers to think that one of their workers was at risk of serious hurt (5%

mention in 2017).

5.2.3 Proportion thinking there is at least a moderate risk of being seriously hurt in their own

workplace: Employers

5.3 FEELINGS OF SAFETY AT WORK

Workers were asked how safe they felt at work and answered by selecting a response from a 4-point

scale of ‘very safe’, ‘safe’, ‘unsafe’ and ‘very unsafe’.

Despite about half the workers (49%) in the four high-risk sectors acknowledging that there was a

higher level of risk in their industry (see Section 5.1), nearly all workers (95%) felt safe (‘safe’ or ‘very

safe’) at work. Just 5% felt unsafe at work, a stable proportion since 2014. There has been a small but

consistent increase in the proportion feeling ‘very safe’ year on year, with 52% feeling ‘very safe’ in

2017, up from 48% feeling ‘very safe’ in 2014.

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=380; 2015 n=412; 2016 n=358; 2017 n=378) Construction (2014 n=346; 2015 n=391; 2016 n=272; 2017 n=338) Forestry (2014 n=267; 2015 n=270; 2016 n=232; 2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2014 n=358; 2015 n=427; 2016 n=366; 2017 n=362) Other sector (2014 n=322; 2015 n=403; 2016 n=367; 2017 n=429) Q40 (E)How would you rate the risk that one of your workers in your business will be seriously hurt at work in the next 12 months? (5-point scale where 1= very high risk and 5= very low risk)

4%

5%

9%

6%

5%

2016 2015 2014

3% 5% 6%

6% 6% 8%

10% 9% 8%

5% 5% 4%

3% 2% 3%


5.3.1 Feelings of safety at work: Workers in the four high-risk sectors

By sector

As in the previous years, the Manufacturing sector had the lowest proportion of workers who felt ‘very

safe’ (43% cf. 52% overall) at work and a slightly higher proportion who felt unsafe at work (7% cf. 5%

overall).

5.3.2 Feelings of safety at work: Workers, 2017

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2296; 2015 n=2094; 2016 n=2181; 2017 n=1875) Q45 (W)Overall, how safe do you feel at work?

46% 45% 43% 43%

48% 50% 51% 52%

2014 2015 2016 2017

Very safe

Safe

Unsafe

Very unsafe

Don't know

2014 2015 2016 2017

NET Safe% very safe or safe

94% 95% 94% 95%

NET Unsafe% unsafe or very unsafe

5% 5% 5% 5%

Unsafe 3% 2% 2% 2%

Very unsafe 2% 3% 3% 3%

Don’t know 1% 1% 1% <0.5%

Base: Workers Q45 (W)Overall, how safe do you feel at work?

AGRICULTURE(n=509)

CONSTRUCTION(n=446)

FORESTRY(n=364)



% Very safe 57% 53% 57% 43% 61%

% Safe 37% 44% 37% 50% 31%

% Unsafe & very unsafe 6% 3% 5% 7% 8%


5.4 RESOURCES AND INFORMATION FOR DOING THE JOB SAFELY

To do their jobs safely, workers need the right tools and equipment for the job and they need

appropriate information. Workers and employers were asked to what extent they agree3 that this is the

case.

A high proportion of workers (87%) across the four high-risk sectors agree that they have the tools and

equipment they need to do their jobs safely. These results have remained stable since 2014. A lower

proportion agree that they are told everything they need to know to perform their jobs safely but this

has increased from 67% 2014 to 73% in 2017.

Employers were more likely than workers to agree that everyone in the business has the tools and

equipment they need (93%) and workers and supervisors have the information they need to work

safely (89%). As with workers, the proportion saying they have the information they need to work safely

has increased since 2014 (89% in 2017, up from 84% in 2014).

5.4.1 Proportion agreeing that they have the tools and equipment and information to do the

job safely: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

3 The extent of agreement was measured on a 5-point scale where 1=’strongly agree’ and 5=’strongly disagree’. In

the analysis, agree includes responses 4 and 5 on the scale and disagree includes responses 1 and 2.

-

87%agree

201620152014WORKERS EMPLOYERS2017 201620152014

93%agree

2017

TOOLS & EQUIPMENTTOOLS & EQUIPMENT

INFORMATIONINFORMATION

88%agree

86%agree

84%agree

I have the tools and equipment I need to do my job safely

69%agree

71%agree

67%agree

I am told everything I need to know to do my job safely

73%agree

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply (2014 n=2167-2247; 2015 n=1958-2043; 2016 n=2050-2142; 2017 n=1757-1816) Q48 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1350-1353; 2015 n=1491-1492; 2016 n=1229-1231; 2017 n=1301-1302) Q43 (E)

How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

90%agree

92%agree

89%agree

Everyone has the tools and/or equipment they need to complete their work safely

88%agree

88%agree

84%agree

Workers and supervisors have the information they need to work safely

89%agree


WORKERS

By sector

At least eight in ten workers in each of the four high-risk sectors agree that they have the tools and

equipment they need to do their job safely and around seven in ten workers agree that they are told

everything they need to know to do their job safely.

Forestry sector workers were more likely to agree that they have the tools and equipment to do their

job safely (92% cf. 87% overall), with 76% ‘strongly agreeing’ (cf. 60% overall), while Manufacturing

workers were less likely to agree with the statement (82% cf. 87%).

Forestry workers were also more likely to agree that they are told everything they need to know to do

their job safely, with 53% ‘strongly agreeing’ (cf. 42% overall). Forestry workers’ responses have

remained relatively constant since 2015.

Construction workers were more inclined to agree that they are told everything they need to know to do

their job safely (72% in 2017, up from 62% in 2014).


job safely: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

At least nine in ten employers in each of the four high-risk sectors agree that everyone has the tools

and equipment they need to complete their work safely. There was an incremental increase in

agreement among employers in the Construction sector (with 94% saying this was the case in 2017,

cf. 89% in 2016).

Employers in the five sectors surveyed also had high levels of agreement with the statement that

workers and supervisors have the information they need to work safely. Again, employers in the

Construction sector who agree that workers and supervisors have the information they need to work

safely has increased (up from 84% in 2014 to 91% in 2017).



FORESTRY(n=351-355)



Have the tools and equipment to do job safely

88% 88% 92% 82% 81%

Told everything they need to know to do job safely

75% 72% 79% 74% 73%

Base: Workers excluding doesn’t apply Q48 (W)To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?



job safely: Employers, 2017

5.5 KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS TO DEAL WITH RISKS TO HEALTH AND SAFETY

Workers require knowledge and skills to help them deal with risks they may encounter in the

workplace, as well as having the information and resources to deal with risk. Workers were asked

about the extent to which they felt confident that they have the knowledge and skills to keep healthy

and safe at work. They responded using a 5-point response scale ranging from ‘not at all confident’ (1

on the scale) through to ‘very confident’ (5 on the scale).

More specifically, workers were asked how confident (a rating of 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale) they

were:

about reporting a hazard, near miss or accident to workmates and to management

that they have the knowledge and skills to keep safe at work

that they have the knowledge and skills to make sure they don’t get long-term health problems

from their work.

WORKERS

Very few workers expressed a lack of confidence in their knowledge and skills to stay healthy and

safe at work (only 4% were not confident about reporting hazards, near misses and accidents, 3%

were not confident about staying healthy and 1% were not confident about keeping safe). These

proportions have been consistent over time.

Ninety four percent of workers were confident that they had the knowledge and skills to keep safe at

work.

They had high levels of confidence in the other two aspects also, with over eight in ten agreeing with

each one: 87% of workers said they were confident that they know how to report a hazard, near miss

or accident to workmates and or management and 85% said they had the knowledge and skills to

avoid long-term health problems. There has been no real shift in the level of confidence since 2014.


CONSTRUCTION(n=337)

FORESTRY(n=226)



Everyone has the tools and equipment they need to complete their work safely

91% 94% 94% 95% 90%

Workers and supervisors have the information they need to work safely

86% 91% 93% 92% 87%

Base: Employers Q43 (E)To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?


Workers’ strength of confidence in their ability to avoid long-term health problems has consistently

been weaker than the strength of confidence in their knowledge of how to report a hazard. While nearly

two-thirds said they were ‘very confident’ (66%) about staying safe at work and reporting incidents

(65%), only one in two said they were ‘very confident’ that they had the knowledge and skills to avoid

long-term health problems (51% in 2017)

5.5.1 Proportion who are confident about their knowledge and skills: Workers in the four high-

risk sectors

By sector

In each of the four high-risk sectors surveyed, workers’ levels of confidence were higher in their

perceived knowledge and skills to keep safe, than in how to report a hazard, near miss or accident or

to ensure they do not get long-term health problems at work. Confidence levels varied slightly by

sector:

Forestry workers had a very high level of confidence that they have the knowledge and skills to

keep safe at work (98% cf. 94% overall) and they were particularly confident that they know

how to report a hazard, near miss or accident (96% cf. 87% overall).

Manufacturing sector workers were less confident that they have the knowledge and skills to

either keep safe at work (90% cf. 94%) or to make sure they do not get long-term health

problems at work (81% cf. 85%).

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

Know how to report a hazard, near miss or accident to workmates and to management

87%confident

87%confident

91%confident

87%confident

Have knowledge and skills to keep safe at work

92%confident

93%confident

94%confident

94%confident

Have knowledge and skills to avoid long-term health problems

81% confident

83% confident

84% confident

85% confident

Base: Reporting incidents-Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply(2014 n=2142; 2015 n=1938; 2016 n=2052; 2017 n=1740)Base: Keeping Safe & Staying Healthy-Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2273-2276; 2015 n=2078-2083; 2016 n=2174-2175; 2017 n=1852-1859) Q51 R2-R4 (W)How confident are you that …?(Level of confidence using 5-point scale where 1=not at all confident and 5=very confident)

REPORTING INCIDENTS

KEEPING SAFE

STAYING HEALTHY


The very strong result observed about knowing how to report a hazard, near miss or accident

among Construction workers in 2016 has settled again to the level observed in 2015 (87% in

2017 cf. 86% in 2015 and 92% in 2016).

5.5.2 Proportion who are confident about their knowledge and skills: Workers, 2017

NOTE: the arrows in the chart above (and in subsequent charts that show 2017 data) indicate significant

increases or decreases between 2017 and 2016.

5.6 RISKY BEHAVIOURS IN THE WORKPLACE

To determine the extent to which risky behaviour occurs in New Zealand workplaces, workers were

asked the frequency with which they or their workmates act in a number of potentially risky ways.

Employers were asked a corresponding question in relation to workers in their business. Both groups

answered using a scale of ‘never’, ‘hardly ever’, ‘from time to time’, ‘a lot’.

Higher proportions of workers than employers across the four high-risk sectors said that each type of

risky behaviour occurred ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ in their workplace. This difference in perception of

the amount of risky behaviour occurring in the workplace was also found in previous surveys.

While the top three behaviours were the same across both workers and employers, employers

attributed the most risky behavior to workers making a mistake by being careless or not having their

mind on the job (29%), whereas workers considered that working when sick or injured or when they are

overtired (45% and 43% respectively) were the two most common risky behaviours in their workplace.

A new risky behaviour was added to the survey in 2017: getting put at risk by not using the right

personal protective equipment. This ranked ninth in perceived riskiness among workers and seventh

among employers (19% and 10% respectively).



FORESTRY(n=351-360)



Know how to report a hazard, near miss or accident to workmates and management

87% 87% 96% 88% 87%

Have knowledge and skills to keep safe at work

93% 95% 98% 90% 89%

Have knowledge and skills to avoid long-term health problems at work

87% 86% 88% 81% 79%

Base: Workers (First statement excludes doesn’t apply) Q51 (W)How confident are you? (5-point scale where 1= not at all confident and 5= very confident)


5.6.1 Proportion of workers and employers saying that workers are involved in risky

behaviour in their workplace/business ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’: Workers and

Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

Comparison of results for 2014 and 2017 for the proportion of workers and employers saying that

workers are ‘never’ involved in the nominated risky behaviours in their workplace shows significant

decreases in nearly all risky behaviours, across both groups.

Employers were more likely than workers to say that each risky behaviour ‘never’ happens.

% FROM TIME TO TIME OR A LOT WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Percentage point difference

between workers’ and employers’

responses

Work when sick or injured 45% 16% 29

Work when they are overtired 43% 20% 23

Make a mistake by being careless or not having their mind on the job

37% 29% 8

Take a risk or short-cut on purpose (e.g. to save time) 33% 16% 17

Make a mistake from being under pressure by the boss to get the job done

25% 13% 12

Make a mistake because they have been working too long or too hard without a break

24% 7% 17

Get put at risk by working in conditions when work should have been stopped (e.g. bad weather, not enough people on the job)

21% 7% 14

Get put at risk by something outside of their control (e.g. a freak accident)

19% 13% 6

Get put at risk by not using the right personal protective equipment

19% 10% 9

Do a risky job that they don't have the right skills for 16% 3% 13

Get put at risk because our processes or ways we are told to do things are not safe

13% 4% 9

Work when hung-over or stoned 12% 3% 9

Get put at risk from not having proper supervision 12% 5% 7

Get put at risk by a machinery or equipment fault or breakdown

12% 4% 8

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1837-1859) Q36 (W)Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1302-1305) Q30 (E)How often does someone in your workplace/ your business…? (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know)


Results signal increased understanding of the risks to which such behaviours expose workers:

particularly in the areas of working when hung-over or stoned, unsafe processes, inadequate

supervision, lack of appropriate skills and in inappropriate conditions.

5.6.2 Proportion saying that workers are involved in risky behaviour in their

workplace/business ‘never’: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors,

2014 and 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

% NEVER 2014 2017 2014 2017

Work when hung-over or stoned 49% 57% 63% 73%

Get put at risk because our processes or ways of doing things are not that safe

47% 52% 61% 66%

Get put at risk for not having proper supervision

44% 49% 58% 63%


40% 46% 57% 60%

Do a risky job that they don’t have the right skills for

39% 48% 60% 72%


35% 41% 56% 61%

Make a mistake by being put under pressure by the boss to get the job done

31% 36% 30% 39%


25% 30% 46% 58%


22% 27% 25% 26%

Take a risk or short-cut on purpose (e.g. to save time)

21% 26% 29% 40%

Work when sick or injured 15% 20% 29% 42%

Work when they are overtired 14% 19% 24% 33%


12% 18% 11% 19%


- 42% - 57%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors 2014 (n=2266-2280); 2017 (n=1837-1859) Q36 (W)Employers from the four high-risk sectors 2014 n=1342-1349); 2017 (n=1302-1305) Q30 (E)How often does someone in your workplace/ your business…? (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know) your business while they were at work?


WORKERS

Working while sick or injured (45%), working while overtired (43%) and making a mistake by being

careless or not having their mind on the job (37%) were the three most common risky behaviours

occurring in workplaces ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’. These three potentially risky behaviours were

consistently most frequently mentioned in 2014, 2015 and 2016, and with similar response levels.

Taking a risk or short-cut on purpose ranked a consistent fourth (33% mention).

Comparison of results from 2014 to 2017 shows that the decreases apparent across risky behaviours

occurred between 2014 and 2015. Results have remained reasonably stable since then.

5.6.3 Proportion saying that workers are involved in risky behaviour in their

workplace/business ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’: Workers in the four high-risk sectors

% FROM TIME TO TIME OR A LOT 2014 2015 2016 2017




43% 33% 35% 37%

Take a risk or short-cut on purpose (e.g. to save time)

41% 33% 33% 33%

Make a mistake from being under pressure by the boss to get the job done

31% 24% 28% 25%


30% 23% 22% 24%


26% 20% 21% 21%


20% 17% 18% 19%


- - - 19%

Do a risky job that they don't have the right skills for

22% 15% 17% 16%

Get put at risk because our processes or ways we are told to do things are not safe

17% 12% 14% 13%


Get put at risk from not having proper supervision

17% 12% 15% 12%


16% 12% 14% 12%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2266-2280; 2015 n=2056-2077; 2016 n=2155-2165; 2017 n=1837-1859) Q36 (W)How often does someone in your workplace/ your business…? (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know)


By sector

Across all of the four high-risk sectors, the most common risky behaviours that workers said happened

‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ were working when sick or injured and working when they were overtired.

There have been minor fluctuations in the rankings of specific risky behaviours within each sector each

year. In 2017, the following differences were apparent for the top three most common risky behaviours:

Over half the workers in the Manufacturing sector said that workers worked when overtired or

when sick or injured ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ (53% and 51% respectively). Just a half (49%)

said that being careless or not having their mind on the job occurred ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’

(cf. 37% overall). These results were higher than for Agriculture and Construction workers.

Half the workers (53%) in the Forestry sector said that workers worked when sick or injured (a

slightly higher proportion than in 2016, 48%). Taking risks or short-cuts on purpose ranked third

among Forestry workers (32% cf. 33% overall).

Among Construction sector workers, working when sick or injured was most prevalent as in

2016 (45% cf. 43% in 2016). The second ranked risky behaviour was being careless or not

having their mind on the job (39% cf. 37% overall). A similar proportion (38%) worked when

overtired (cf. 43% overall).

5.6.4 Three most common risky behaviours that happen ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’: Workers,

2017



FORESTRY(n=360-363)



1 44%Work when overtired

45%Work when sick or injured


53% Work when overtired


2 41%Work when sick or injured

39%

Being careless or not having mind on job

46%Work when overtired



3 27%Take risk or short-cut on purpose


32%Take risk or short-cut on purpose

49%


34%Been working too long or too hard without a break

Base: Workers Q36 (W)How often does someone in your workplace (you or anyone you work with)…? Frequency scale: (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know)


EMPLOYERS

The four most commonly observed risky behaviours mentioned by employers in the four high-risk

sectors were the same every year:

workers making a mistake by being careless or not having their mind on the job (29% in 2017)

workers working when overtired (20% in 2017)

workers working when sick or injured (16% in 2017)

taking a risk or short-cut on purpose (e.g. to save time) (16% in 2017).

As with workers, the incidence of most risky behaviours decreased between 2014 and 2015. The only

decrease in 2017 was in employers saying that workers working when sick or injured (16% down from

21% in 2016).

5.6.5 Proportion saying that workers are involved in risky behaviour in their business ‘from

time to time’ or ‘a lot’: Employers from the four high-risk sectors

% FROM TIME TO TIME OR A LOT 2014 2015 2016 2017


38% 30% 30% 29%


Take a risk or short-cut on purpose (e.g. to save time) 27% 18% 19% 16%


Make a mistake from being under pressure to get the job done

22% 15% 16% 13%


15% 12% 12% 13%


- - - 10%


11% 7% 7% 7%


10% 7% 6% 7%

Get put at risk from not having proper supervision 6% 4% 4% 5%

Get put at risk because our processes or ways of doing things are not that safe

6% 4% 3% 4%


6% 4% 3% 4%


Do a risky job that they don't have the right skills for 7% 3% 4% 3%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1342-1349; 2015 n=1493-1501; 2016 n=1229-1236; 2017 n=1302-1305) Q30 (E)How often does someone in your workplace/ your business…? (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know)


By sector

Making a mistake by being careless or not having their mind on the job was the risky behaviour that

employers said most often happened ‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ in all four high-risk sectors. It was

most prevalent within the Manufacturing sector, with 38% of employers saying that this happened

‘from time to time’ or ‘a lot’ (cf. 29% overall). There was a slight increase (though not-significant) in the

proportion of employers in the Manufacturing sector saying this (up from 31% in 2016 to 38% in 2017).

The second and third most risky behaviours for Manufacturing employers - working when overtired and

being under pressure to get the job done (both 20%), were different from those for the other three high-

risk sectors. This pattern was similar in 2016.

5.6.6 Three most common risky behaviours by workers that happen ‘from time to time’ or ‘a

lot’: Employers, 2017

Base: Employers Q30 (E)How often does a worker in your business….?Frequency scale: (never, hardly ever, from time to time, a lot, don’t know)



FORESTRY(n=224-225)


OTHER(n=426-429)

1 27%


27%


29%


38%



2 26%Work when overtired





3 20%Take a risk or short-cut on purpose


19%Take a risk or short-cut on purpose

20%

Being under pressure to get the job done

18%



WORKERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF EMPLOYERS’ REACTIONS TO RISK TAKING

Workers who had a boss were asked how their boss reacts when a worker is seen taking a risk or

short-cut, to determine the extent to which workers agree or disagree that their boss sometimes says

nothing when he/she sees a worker taking a short-cut or risk (A high level of disagreement with the

statement indicates a positive response).

Nearly two in three workers (65%) disagree that their boss sometimes says nothing when a worker

takes a short-cut or risk. Less than two in ten workers (17%) agree that the boss sometimes says

nothing. These results have remained stable since 2014.

5.6.7 Proportion disagreeing that the boss says nothing if a worker takes a short-cut or risk:

Workers in the four high-risk sectors

By sector

Forestry workers were more likely than other workers to say that bosses speak up when they see risky

behaviours occurring. Forestry workers were more likely than other high-risk sector workers to

disagree that their boss sometimes says nothing when he/she sees a worker taking a short-cut or risk

(78% cf. 65% overall) and least likely to agree that their boss sometimes says nothing (13% agree cf.

17% overall).

There has been an increase among the proportion of Construction workers disagreeing that the boss

sometimes says nothing (71% in 2017 up from 62% in 2014). This suggests that Construction bosses

are increasingly likely to speak up when they see risky behaviours occurring.

In contrast, workers in the Agriculture and Manufacturing sectors were less likely to disagree (59% cf.

65% overall) and more likely to agree that their boss sometimes says nothing when he/she sees a

worker taking a short-cut or risk (19% and 20% respectively). There has been little real change in these

results.

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding self-employed (2014 n=1557; 2015 n=1411; 2016 n=1415; 2017 n=1235) Q49 R10 (W) To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

My boss sometimes says nothing when he/she sees a workertaking a short-cut or risk

64%disagree

63%disagree

64%disagree

65%disagree


5.6.8 Proportion disagreeing that the boss says nothing if a worker takes a short-cut or risk:

Workers

5.7 POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PREVENT SERIOUS HARM IN THE WORKPLACE

Workers and employers were asked about which of a range of preventative actions were undertaken,

each of which can help prevent workplace accidents:

wearing of personal protective equipment

fitting of safety devices to machinery and equipment

maintenance of machinery and equipment

checking of machinery and equipment before use

action taken when a potential hazard is identified.

Workers’ and employers’ views about the frequency of these actions in the workplace were measured

on a 5-point scale (‘never’, ‘less than half the time’, ‘about half the time’, ‘most of the time’, ‘always’).

Given the importance of preventative actions in reducing serious harm, this report focuses on the

proportion of those who say these positive actions ‘always’ occur, noting that high proportions of both

workers and employers thought that the five preventative actions occurred ‘most of the time’ or ‘always’

(80% to 91% range among workers and 90% to 98% range among employers).

The proportions of workers in the four high-risk sectors who said that positive actions ‘always’ occurred

in the workplace are not particularly high (ranging from 38% to 64%), and ranging from 48% to 74% for

employers.

Only one action could be considered to be moderately widespread: having safety devices fitted to

machinery and equipment, with 64% of workers and 74% of employers saying it ‘always’ happens. This

has achieved the most positive response every year. The greatest divergence of views was apparent

for machinery and equipment being well maintained. While 70% of employers said this ‘always’

happens, fewer than half the workers (48%) said it ‘always’ happens. Linked with this, the preventative

2016 2015 2014

65% 57% 68%

66% 65% 62%

75% 70% 69%

60% 63% 65%

63% 62% 54%

Base: Workers excluding self-employed in Agriculture (2014 n=253; 2015 n=202; 2016 n=258; 2017 n=185) Construction (2014 n=380; 2015 n=309; 2016 n=336; 2017 n=273) Forestry (2014 n=301; 2015 n=316; 2016 n=267,2017 n=285) Manufacturing (2014 n=623; 2015 n=584; 2016 n=554,2017 n=492) Other sector (2014 n=745; 2015 n=688; 2016 n=857; 2017 n=749) Q49 R10 (W)To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

66%

59%

78%

71%

59%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017


action least likely to ‘always’ take place is machinery and equipment being fully checked before it is

used (only 38% of workers and 48% of employers).

From workers’ perspective, action being taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified was

the second most common action, but only 53% of workers said this ‘always’ happens, compared with

nearly seven in ten employers (69%) saying it ‘always’ happens. There has been an increase in the

proportion of employers saying action is ‘always’ taken straight away (from 64% in 2014 to 69% in

2017), but a much smaller non-significant increase among workers (50% up to 53%).

Only half the workers (49%) and employers (53%) said that personal protective equipment is used

‘always’. However, small increases in the ‘always’ proportions are apparent for both workers and

employers (from 45% in 2014 up to 49% in 2017 for workers and from 48% in 2014 up to 53% for

employers).


5.7.1 Frequency with which positive health and safety actions occur in the workplace

‘always’: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply

(2014 n=2187-2265; 2015 n=1992-2057; 2016 n=2076-2158; 2017 n=1750-1841) Q53 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding doesn’t apply

(2014 n=1304-1343; 2015 n=1431-1493; 2016 n=1173-1226; 2017 n=1221-1290) Q50 (E)

How often does each of the following happen in your workplace?

64%

53%

49%

48%

38%

Safety devices are fitted to machineryand equipment when they should be

Action is taken straight away when apotential hazard is identified

Personal protective equipment is usedwhen it should be

Machinery and equipment is wellmaintained

Machinery and equipment is fullychecked before it is used

74%

70%

69%

53%

48%

Safety devices are fitted to machineryand equipment when they should be

Machinery and equipment is wellmaintained

Action is taken straight away when apotential hazard is identified

Personal protective equipment is usedwhen it should be

Machinery and equipment is fullychecked before it is used

2016 2015 2014

70% 69% 67%

64% 65% 64%

64% 65% 64%

49% 49% 48%

41% 43% 41%

2017

2016 2015 2014

61% 61% 58%

55% 56% 50%

52% 51% 45%

52% 50% 47%

39% 38% 35%

2017WORKERS

EMPLOYERS


WORKERS

By sector

Forestry workers were more likely than workers in the other high-risk sectors to say that all five

preventative actions ‘always’ occurred in their workplace, with particularly positive results for having

safety devices fitted to machinery and equipment when they should be (73% ‘always’) and using

personal protective equipment when they should (72% ‘always’).

In contrast, fewer than half of the Agriculture workers (44%) ‘always’ use personal protective

equipment when they should and fewer than half (47%) ‘always’ check machinery and equipment

before it is used.

Results among Construction and Manufacturing workers were comparatively lower for ‘always’ having

machinery and equipment that is well maintained (44% and 36%, respectively, cf. 48% overall) and

checking machinery before it is used (33% and 35%, respectively, cf. 38% overall).


‘always’: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

Across the four high-risk sectors, results have remained relatively stable since 2015.

Forestry employers, like Forestry workers, were more likely than those in the other high-risk sectors to

say that the following preventative actions ‘always’ occurred in their workplace:



FORESTRY(n=327-354)



Safety devices are fitted to machinery and equipment when they should be

66% 62% 73% 63% 58%

Action is taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified

57% 54% 63% 46% 51%

Personal protective equipment is used when it should be

44% 51% 72% 52% 52%

Machinery and equipment is well maintained

61% 44% 58% 36% 49%

Machinery and equipment is fully checked before it is used

47% 33% 50% 35% 43%

Base: Workers excluding doesn’t apply Q53 (W)How often does each of the following happen in your workplace?


safety devices are fitted to machinery and equipment when they should be (91% cf. 74%

overall)

personal protective equipment is used when it should be (84% cf. 53% overall)

action is taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified (82% cf. 69% overall).

However, results relating to machinery maintenance and machinery checking before use were weaker

than for the three preventative actions above (69% cf. 70% overall for machinery maintenance and

61% cf. 48% overall for machinery checking).

Increases in positive health and safety actions were apparent in the Construction sector, with 75% of

employers saying that action is taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified ‘always’ (75%

in 2017, up from 68% in 2014) and that machinery and equipment is well maintained ‘always’ (71% in

2017, up from 61% in 2014).

Agriculture employers’ views lag behind those of employers in other sectors, particularly for using

personal protective equipment when it should be used (46% cf. 53% overall – although this increased

from 37% in 2016).

Fewer than half the employers in the Agricultural, Construction and Manufacturing sectors said that

machinery and equipment is checked fully before use ‘always’.


‘always’: Employers, 2017



FORESTRY(n=212-225)



Safety devices are fitted to machinery and equipment when they should be

73% 77% 91% 70% 78%


71% 71% 69% 64% 71%

Action is taken straight away when a potential hazard is identified

60% 75% 82% 70% 67%

Personal protective equipment is used when it should be

46% 57% 84% 57% 60%

Machinery and equipment is fully checked before it is used

48% 49% 61% 47% 52%

Base: Employers excluding doesn’t apply Q50 (E)How often does each of the following happen in your workplace?


5.8 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON MANAGEMENT OF WORKPLACE

INCIDENTS, NEAR MISSES AND NEW HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

Being trained in the past 12 months made no difference to workers’ opinions about whether they had

the tools, equipment and information they need to know to do their jobs properly. However, training

improved worker confidence in knowing how to report a hazard, near miss or accident to workmates

and management, and their perceived knowledge and skills to keep safe at work and avoid long-term

health problems.

Workers who have never been trained were less likely to ‘always’ report hazards, near misses and

accidents to bosses/supervisors, or to feel that things that put health and safety at risk are discussed in

an open and helpful way.

5.8.1 Having resources and information to do work safely, by training practices: Workers and

Employers, 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Risk management: having resources and

information to do work

In last 12 months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half



Never had

training

Risk of getting seriously hurt is higher in my industry than other industries

55% 48% 36% 46% 53% 47%

Moderate risk of workers being seriously hurt in my own workplace / business

15% 12% 17% 5% 8% 4%

I have the tools and equipment I need to do my job safely –

88% 85% 87% 95% 92% 91%

I am told everything I need to know to do my job safely

76% 68% 73% 94% 88% 86%

I am confident I know how to report a hazard, near miss, or accident to workmates and to management

92% 84% 80% - - -

I have the knowledge and skills to keep safe at work

95% 95% 88% - - -

I have the knowledge and skills to avoid long-term health problems

88% 84% 80% - - -

My boss sometimes says nothing when he/she sees a worker taking a short-cut or risk

16% 19% 23% - - -

Base: Workers Q33, Q46, Q48, Q49, Q51 (W)Base: Employers Q27, Q40, Q43 (E)


Positive actions to prevent harm in the workplace were widespread, regardless of the recency of

workplace health and safety training.

5.8.2 Positive actions to prevent serious harm, by training practices: Workers and Employers,

2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Positive actions to prevent serious harm

In last 12

months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half



Never had

training

Safety devices are fitted to machinery and equipment

when they should be95% 86% 85% 98% 94% 95%

Personal protective equipment is used when

should be94% 90% 81% 98% 97% 92%


91% 86% 85% 99% 99% 98%

Machinery and equipment is fully checked before it is

used83% 76% 76% 92% 89% 88%

Action is taken straight away when a potential hazard is

identified91% 84% 85% 98% 98% 96%

Base: Workers Q53 (W)Base: Employers Q50 (E)

115

SECTION 6:

EXPERIENCE OF

WORKPLACE INCIDENTS

AND RESPONSES


6 EXPERIENCE OF WORKPLACE

INCIDENTS AND RESPONSES

INTRODUCTION This section includes information about workers’ and employers’ experiences of workplace incidents,

including serious harm, near misses and hazards. It also describes the types of harm that occurred

over the last 12 months and the responses to those incidents.

In 2014, respondents were shown one list of injuries and types of harm based on the definition of

serious harm from the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992. Other types of harm, such as

sprains and strains, also were included in the list.

Workers were asked which types of harm they had personally experienced from their work in the last

12 months. Employers were asked about all types of harm that had happened to anyone working in

their business while they were at work in the last 12 months, including employees and contractors.

From 2015, the types of harm were separated into two lists – one focusing on permanent and serious

types of harm, and one listing other injuries, that included types of harm such as short-term breathing

problems and sprains and strains.

In 2016 and 2017, workers and employers who had experienced a serious harm event in the last 12

months were also asked which event was their most recent incident.

In 2017 a new set of questions were asked about noise. Results have been included in this section.

KEY FINDINGS Results need to be interpreted on the basis that they are self-reported experiences for the listed types

of harms. But there has been consistency over time in the levels of serious harm incidents and near

misses reported.

Serious harm incidents: Self-reported occurrence of serious harm incidents in the last 12 months has

declined slightly since 2015, with fewer than two in ten workers and employers (15% and 16%

respectively) reporting a serious harm incident. Over eight in ten employers said in 2016 and 2017 that

there have been no serious harm incidents occurring in their workplace.

The four main types of serious harm noted each year have been a deep cut or wound requiring

stitches, eye injury, injury from crushing or a broken bone/fracture, with the incidence ranging

between 2% and 3% mention by workers and 3% and 8% mention by employers.

Employers were more likely than workers to say they took action after a worker experienced a

serious harm incident, with the proportion taking any action increasing from six in ten in 2014

to over eight in ten in 2017.

There has been little change in the proportion of workers taking action after a serious harm

incident, with around one-half of workers saying they took action each year. Each year, a

persistent one in ten workers said they reported the incident but took no action at all after the

incident, while a further one in ten did nothing at all.


The prevalence of serious harm incidents was higher among the Manufacturing and Forestry sectors

than other high-risk sectors. Forestry workers were most likely to have taken action, and reported it.

Other types of harm: Commonly mentioned types of harm mentioned by workers and employers

were:

Sprains, strains and dislocations were most frequently listed (with 27% mention by workers and

29% mention by employers in 2017), proportions consistent with previous years.

Other types of harm that have been mentioned consistently include stress-related or mental

illness, skin conditions, or short term breathing problems from temporary exposure to particles,

fumes, smoke, spray or other harmful substances (each mentioned by around one in ten

workers, but smaller proportions of employers).

Suffering from heat strain or heat stroke was first asked about in 2017. It received 7% mention

among workers, but was more prominent among workers within the Construction and

Manufacturing sectors.

Near misses: About three in ten workers and employers have said that there has been at least one or

more near miss at work. The proportion of workers saying they have experienced a near miss has

remained flat since 2015, but an increase was apparent among employers (up to 32% in 2017 from

28% in 2014).

The likelihood of taking action after a near miss was higher than after a serious harm incident,

with six in ten workers taking action each year, compared with only five in ten doing so after a

serious harm incident. The proportion of workers doing nothing after a near miss has

decreased from 18% in 2014 to 13% in 2017.

Higher proportions of employers than workers said that near miss incidents resulted in follow-

up action, with nine in ten reporting some follow-up.

Near misses were more prevalent in the Forestry sector than other sectors (over four in ten Forestry

workers experiencing a near miss compared with around three in ten across all four high-risk sectors).

The incidence of taking any action was also particularly high among Forestry and Construction sector

employers.

Identifying a new hazard: Around seven in ten workers (71%) and over six in ten employers (63%)

noticed a new hazard at work in the last 12 months. The proportions identifying a new hazard have

fluctuated around the seven in ten mark year on year.

Four in ten workers (44%) and three in ten employers (33 %) said they did something immediately in

response to a new hazard, and at least three in ten workers and employers (29% and 39%

respectively) said they changed the way they did something and/or wrote the hazard into a hazard

board or register. These numbers have remained consistent over time.

Appropriate action was more likely to be taken by Forestry workers and employers than people in other

high-risk sectors.

Exposure to loud noise and use of protective noise equipment: Workers’ perceptions of the

frequency of their exposure to loud noise were greater than employers’. One in four workers (24%) said

they were exposed to loud noise ‘most of the time’, whereas only one in ten employers (11%) said this

was the case. About seven in ten of both groups (78% of workers and 70% of employers) said that

workers were exposed to loud noise ‘some or most of the time’. Exposure levels were higher in the

Forestry and Construction sectors.


While use of hearing protection was the most wide spread protective measure implemented

(mentioned by over eight in ten workers and around nine in ten employers), other protective measures

were less common.

6.1 OCCURRENCE OF SERIOUS HARM

As in 2016, about one in six workers (15%) in the four high-risk sectors personally experienced a

serious harm incident at work in the last 12 months. A similar proportion of employers (16%) said that

at least one of their workers had been seriously harmed while at work in the last 12 months.

There has been a reduction in reported serious harms among employers since 2015.

6.1.1 Proportion of workers experiencing serious harm in the workplace in the last 12 months:


By sector

There have been annual fluctuations in the proportions of workers in the high-risk sectors saying they

have experienced serious harm. In 2017, results were flatter across the high-risk sectors than in 2016.

Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely than other workers to say they have experienced

serious harm, although there was a small reduction (not statistically significant) between 2016 and

2017.

Employers in Forestry and Manufacturing more likely than the other sectors (24% cf. 16% overall) to

say that workers in their business have experienced serious harm in the last 12 months. There was a

decrease in the proportion of Agriculture employers saying that their workers have experienced

serious harm in the last 12 months (down from 17% in 2016 to 11% in 2017).

16%

15%WORKERS

EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered(2015 n=2052; 2016 n=2142; 2017 n=1860) Q38 (W)In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered (2015 n=1484; 2016 n=1223; 2017 n=1298) Q31 (E)In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?

2017 2016

15%

19%

2015

18%

21%


6.1.2 Proportion of workers experiencing serious harm in the last 12 months: Workers and

Employers, 2017


decreases between two consecutive years. In this chart, the data are for the 2017 year, so the reported

decrease among Agriculture sector employers relates to a decrease between the 2016 and 2017 years.

TYPES OF SERIOUS HARM

Mention of specific serious harms was higher among employers than workers.

In 2017, both workers and employers mentioned the same four serious harms most often. They were:

a deep cut or wound requiring stitches (3% of workers and 8% of employers)

an eye injury (3% of workers and 4% of employers)

an injury from crushing (3% of workers and 4% of employers)

a broken bone /fracture (2% of workers and 3% of employers)

These results were similar to 2016.

AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MANUFACTURING OTHER SECTOR

SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS

WORKERS 12% 15% 14% 17% 8%

EMPLOYERS 11% 17% 24% 24% 11%

Base: Workers (Agriculture n=510; Construction n=437; Forestry n=361; Manufacturing n=552; Other sector n=1014) Q38 (W) In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?Base: Employers (Agriculture n=376; Construction n=337; Forestry n=225; Manufacturing n=360; Other sector n=427) Q31 (E) In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?


6.1.3 Types of serious harm occurring in the workplace: Workers and Employers from the four

high-risk sectors, 2016 and 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

2016 2017 2016 2017

An eye injury 2% 3% 4% 4%

An injury from crushing 2% 3% 3% 4%

A deep cut or wound that required stitches

4% 3% 8% 8%

Permanent loss of hearing from exposure to noise

2% 2% <0.5% <0.5%

Temporary, but serious loss of hearing from exposure to noise

3% 2% 1% <0.5%

Long-term breathing problems 2% 2% 1% <0.5%

Broken bone/fracture 1% 2% 4% 3%

Burns requiring medical attention <0.5% 1% 1% 2%

Other serious temporary damage 2% 1% 1% 1%

A body part amputated <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Became unconscious as a result of physical injury or lack of oxygen

<0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Serious head or brain injury, including concussion

1% <0.5% <0.5% 1%

Been hurt or became sick and was hospitalised

1% <0.5% <0.5% 1%

Other permanent health problem 2% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Would rather not say 1% 1% <0.5% <0.5%

None of these 84% 84% 80% 83%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors 2016 (n=2142); 2017 (n=1860) Q38 (W)Employers from the four high-risk sectors 2016 (n=1223); 2017 (n=1298) Q31 (E)In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?


WORKERS

As mentioned, 15% of workers have experienced serious harm in their workplace and this proportion

has changed slightly since 2015. There have been small fluctuations in the specific harms experienced

each year. The ‘most recent’ harm follows similar patterns to the serious harms experienced in the last

12 months.

6.1.4 Types of serious harm occurring in the workplace and most recent event: Workers from

the four high-risk sectors

WORKERS 2015 2016 2017MOST

RECENT (2016)

MOST RECENT (2017)


4% 4% 3% 2% 2%

An eye injury 3% 2% 3% 2% 3%

An injury from crushing 2% 2% 3% 2% 2%


3% 3% 2% 2% 1%

Long-term breathing problems 2% 2% 2% 2% 1%


2% 2% 2% 1% 1%

Broken bone/fracture 2% 1% 2% 1% 1%

Burns requiring medical attention

1% <0.5% 1% <0.5% 1%

Been hurt or became sick and was hospitalised

1% 1% <0.5% 1% <0.5%

Serious head or brain injury <0.5% 1% <0.5% 1% <0.5%

A body part amputated <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Became unconscious because of physical injury/lack of oxygen

<0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Other serious temporary damage

2% 2% 1% 2% 1%

Other permanent health problem

1% 2% <0.5% 1% <0.5%

Would rather not say 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

None of these 82% 84% 84% 85% 85%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=2052; 2016 n=2142; 2017 n=1860) Q38 (W)Most recent (2016 n=2108; 2017 n=1847) Q38b (W)In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?Which of the following has most recently happened to you while at work?


By sector

Main serious harm mentions by workers within the high-risk sectors were as follows:

Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely to have experienced temporary, but

serious loss of hearing from exposure to noise (4% cf. 2% overall).

Deep cuts requiring stitches were also more prevalent among workers in the Construction

sector (4% cf. 3%).

3% of Forestry workers reported temporary, but serious loss of hearing from exposure to noise

(cf. 2% overall).

4% of Agriculture workers received an injury from crushing (cf. 3% overall).

EMPLOYERS

A deep cut or wound requiring stitches was the most common serious harm experienced within

employers’ workplaces, both in the last 12 months and most recently (8% and 6% respectively).

Minor fluctuations are apparent in employers’ reporting, although around eight in ten employers noted

no serious harms occurring in their workplaces in 2016 and 2017.


6.1.5 Types of serious harm occurring in the workplace and most recent event: Employers

from the four high-risk sectors

By sector

Serious harms were more prevalent in the Manufacturing and Forestry sectors, with one in four

employers (24%) saying that one of their workers had experienced a serious harm in the last 12

months. However these sectors differed in types of harm reported in both 2016 and 2017:

12% of Manufacturing employers said one of their workers had experienced a deep cut, while

10% had experienced an eye injury, 4% experienced a burn and 6% had a crushing injury.

9% of Forestry employers said one of their workers had broken a bone and 9% said a worker

received a deep cut or wound requiring stitches.

EMPLOYERS 2015 2016 2017MOST

RECENT (2016)

MOST RECENT (2017)


10% 8% 8% 7% 6%

An eye injury 4% 4% 4% 3% 3%

An injury from crushing 4% 3% 4% 2% 2%

A broken bone/fracture 5% 4% 3% 3% 2%

Burns requiring medical attention 1% 1% 2% <0.5% 1%

Been hurt, or became sick and was put in hospital for more than 48 hours

1% <0.5% 1% <0.5% <0.5%

Serious head or brain injury, including concussion

<0.5% <0.5% 1% <0.5% <0.5%


1% 1% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Became unconscious as a result of physical injury or lack of oxygen

<0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%


<0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

A body part amputated <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Long-term breathing problems <0.5% 1% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Other serious temporary damage 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Other permanent health problem <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

Would rather not say <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5%

None of these 78% 80% 83% 81% 84%

Don't know 1% 1% <0.5% 1% <0.5%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n= 1298; 2016 n=1223; 2015 n=1484) Q31 (E)Most recent (2017 n=1292; 2016 n=1199) Q31b (E)In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?Which of the following has most recently happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?


6.2 OTHER TYPES OF HARM

Over four in ten workers (43%) in the four high-risk sectors had experienced some other type of harm

in their workplace in the last 12 months. Almost four in ten employers (38%) said someone in their

business had experienced some other type of harm in the last 12 months. The reported incidence of

other types of harm has been relatively stable since 2015.

6.2.1 Occurrence of other types of harm, Workers and Employers from the four high-risk

sectors

Sprains, strains and dislocations were the most frequent type of harm experienced, as in previous

years (mentioned by 27% of workers and 29% of employers). In addition to sprains, strains and

dislocations, more common other harms were:

a stress-related or mental illness (mentioned by 11% of workers and 7% of employers)

skin conditions (mentioned by 9% of workers and 8% of employers)

short-term breathing problems from temporary exposure to particles, fumes, smoke, sprays or

other harmful substances (mentioned by 10% of workers and 4% of employers)

There have been minor fluctuations in the prevalence of these other harms.

Suffering from heat strain or heat stroke was added in the 2017 survey. In total, 7% of workers across

the sectors mentioned this, with higher mention among Construction and Manufacturing workers.

Workers and employers in the Construction and Manufacturing sectors were asked whether they or

their workers had been exposed to asbestos in the last 12 months. Nearly one in ten Construction

workers (8%, as in 2016) said they had been exposed, while 5% of Construction sector employers said

38%

43%WORKERS

EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered (2015 n=2085; 2016 n=2170; 2017 n=1871) Q115 (W)In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered (2015 n=1496; 2016 n=1232; 2017 n=1304) Q106 (E)In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?

2017 2015

46% 42%

38% 40%

2016


that workers in their business had been exposed. Only 1% of Manufacturing workers and employers

said that workers had been exposed.

6.2.2 Other types of harm experienced in the workplace: Workers and Employers from the

four high-risk sectors

By sector

The incidence of experiencing other types of harm was slightly higher among Manufacturing and

Construction workers (50% and 45% respectively), than workers in other high-risk sectors, though the

difference was not statistically significant.

A different pattern of responses was apparent among employers, with Forestry employers (47% cf.

38% overall) more likely to say that another type of harm had happened to someone working in their

business while they were at work. Additionally:

Manufacturing workers mentioned higher prevalence of several types of harm than other

workers, particularly sprains, strains or dislocations (30%), breathing problems (15%), skin

conditions (14%), stress (16%) and/or heat strain (7%). Manufacturing employers made

greater mention of skin conditions (12%) and stress (10%).

For Construction workers, the more prevalent types of harm were heat strain (9% - not

statistically significant) and asbestos exposure (8%).

In the Forestry sector, employers made mention of sprains and strains (37%).

Mention of any other harm was lower among Agricultural workers and employers.

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=2085; 2016 n=2170; 2017 n=1871) Q115 (W)Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=1496; 2016 n=1232; 2017 n=1304) Q106 (E)*Exposure to asbestos was only asked of those in the Construction and Manufacturing industries.In the last 12 months, which of the following have happened to you because of your work?In the last 12 months which of the following has been experienced at work by anyone who works in your business?

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017

Sprain, strain or dislocation 27% 30% 27% 31% 29% 29%

Skin conditions (e.g. rashes, eczema, dermatitis)

11% 11% 9% 7% 8% 8%

A stress-related or mental illness

9% 11% 11% 5% 6% 7%

Short-term breathing problems 9% 12% 10% 5% 4% 4%

Exposure to asbestos* 3% 5% 4% 1% 3% 2%

Suffered from heat strain or heat stroke

- - 7% - - 2%

Would rather not say 1% 1% 2% <0.5% 1% <0.5%

Don’t know NA NA NA 3% 3% 2%

None of these 57% 53% 54% 57% 59% 60%


6.2.3 Occurrence of other types of harm by sector, Workers and Employers, 2017

6.3 OCCURRENCE OF NEAR MISSES

Workers were asked to say how many times in the last 12 months they personally had a near miss at

work where they could have been seriously hurt. Employers were asked to say, to the best of their

knowledge, the number of times in the last 12 months someone working in their business had

experienced a near miss where they could have been seriously hurt at work.

The occurrence of near misses was flat across the four survey years from the worker perspective, but a

slight increase was apparent in employer responses. Views of workers have aligned reasonably well

with those of employers.

Three in ten workers (29%) said they had a near miss in the last 12 months, compared with just over

three in ten employers (32%) saying that a worker or workers had experienced a near miss at work in

the last 12 months.


OTHER TYPES OF HARM

WORKERS 37% 45% 39% 50% 37%

EMPLOYERS 30% 44% 47% 43% 31%

Base: Workers (Agriculture n=509; Construction n=444; Forestry n=365; Manufacturing n=553; Other sector n=1025) Q115 (W) In the last 12 months, which of the following have you had from your work?Base: Employers (Agriculture n=378; Construction n=338; Forestry n=225; Manufacturing n=363; Other sector n=427) Q106 (E) In the last 12 months which of the following has happened to anyone who works in your business while they were at work?


6.3.1 Proportion of workers having one or more near miss incidents in the last 12 months:


WORKERS

In terms of the number of near misses, nearly two in ten workers (17%) said they had had one near

miss, with over one in ten (12%) having more than one near miss. These results have been stable

since 2014.

6.3.2 Proportion experiencing near misses in last 12 months: Workers from the four high-risk

sectors

28% 24%33% 32%

2014(n=1299)

2015(n=1457)

2016(n=1202)

2017(n=1271)

30% 30% 31% 29%

2014(n=2252)

2015(n=2063)

2016(n=2129)

2017(n=1840)

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q41 (W)In the last 12 months, how many times have you personally had a near miss at work where you could have been seriously hurt?

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q36 (E)In the last 12 months, as far as you know, how many times has someone working your business had a near miss where they could have been seriously hurt at work?

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q41 (W) In the last 12 months, how many times have you personally had a near miss at work where you could have been seriously hurt?

Near miss

5% 5% 4% 4%13% 13% 14% 12%

16% 18% 17% 17%

65% 65% 65% 67%

2014(n=2252)

2015(n=2063)

2016(n=2129)

2017(n=1840)

NONE

ONE NEAR MISS

MORE THAN ONE

DON'T KNOW


By sector

Near misses were more prevalent in the Forestry sector than in other sectors (45% experiencing one

or more cf. 29% overall). Agriculture sector workers were less likely than workers across the high-risk

sectors to have experienced a near miss, with only 25% having done so.

6.3.3 Proportion experiencing near misses in last 12 months: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

The proportion of employers reporting that their workers had one near miss has increased from 11% in

2015 to 17% in 2017 and more than one near miss incident from 13% in 2015 to 16% in 2017.

6.3.4 Occurrence of other types of harm in the workplace: Employers from the four high-risk

sectors


NEAR MISSES n=503 n=433 n=360 n=544 n=1016

% None 70% 67% 52% 63% 81%

% One 15% 18% 22% 16% 9%

% More than one 11% 11% 22% 16% 7%

Base: Workers Q41 (W)In the last 12 months, how many times have you personally had a near miss at work where you could have been seriously hurt?

10% 9% 8% 7%

13% 13% 16% 16%

15%11%

16% 17%

62% 67%59% 60%

2014(n=1299)

2015(n=1457)

2016(n=1202)

2017(n=1271)

NONE

ONE

MORE THAN ONE

DON'T KNOW

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q36 (E)In the last 12 months, as far as you know, how many times has someone working in your business had a near miss where they could have been seriously hurt at work?

Near miss


By sector

Near misses were more prevalent in the Forestry sector (consistent with findings among workers), with

over half the Forestry employers saying their workers had experienced one near miss or more in the

last twelve months (57% cf. 45% mention among Forestry workers). There was a higher proportion of

‘more than one near miss’ in the Forestry sector (40% reported, cf. 16% across the four high-risk

sectors). But the proportion of near misses reported by Forestry sector employers was lower than in

2016, when 61% of employers reported one or more near misses among their workers.

The proportion of Manufacturing employers reporting a near miss has increased from 28% in 2016 to

34% in 2017.

6.3.5 Proportion of employers whose workers experienced near misses in the last 12 months:

Employers, 2017

6.4 ACTIONS TAKEN IN RESPONSE TO SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS AND NEAR

MISSES

WORKERS

Workers who had experienced a serious harm or near miss incident were asked what happened after

the most recent incident. Behaviour has not changed substantially since 2014, with the likelihood of

taking action after a near miss continuing to be higher than after a serious harm incident.

Action was taken after just over half of serious harm incidents (53%), similar to in 2014

(56%). Over four in ten reported the incident (45%) and/or recorded it (40%). And 11% of

workers said they did nothing, a level similar to 8% in 2014.

Action was taken after six in ten near miss incidents (63%), a small increase on the 59%

noted in 2014. The proportion of workers who did nothing after a near miss incident has

decreased since 2014 (13%, down from 18%). Over four in ten reported the serious harm

incident (46%) and/or recorded it (42%).



% None 64% 57% 39% 61% 79%

% One 17% 16% 17% 18% 7%

% More than one 11% 19% 40% 16% 9%

Base: Employers Q36 (E)In the last 12 months, as far as you know, how many times has someone working in your business had a near miss where they could have been seriously hurt at work?


6.4.1 Actions taken on the last occasion a serious harm incident or near miss occurred:

Workers from the four high-risk sectors

By sector

Forestry workers were more likely to have taken action (69% cf. 53% overall), or reported a serious

harm incident (61% cf. 45% overall). Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely to have

recorded their serious harm incident than other workers (55% cf. 40% overall).

2014 2015 2016 2017

SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS n=493 n=365 n=257 n=260

Nothing, I didn’t tell anyone 8% 4% 7% 11%

Reported to boss but no action taken 10% 9% 13% 9%

Workers blamed 2% 4% 3% 1%

Any Action Taken (Net)

Recorded (e.g. in hazard register, on hazard board)

37% 39% 33% 40%

Reported (e.g. to boss/manager, with action, to other workers)

45% 47% 48% 45%

Action taken (e.g. Discussed to stop happening again, changed the way we did something, more training)

56% 54% 51% 53%

ACC claim made - 41% 34% 38%

NEAR MISSES n=717 n=643 n=692 n=569

Nothing, I didn’t tell anyone 18% 15% 9% 13%

Reported to boss but no action taken 11% 7% 10% 10%

Workers blamed 1% 1% 2% 1%

Any Action Taken (net)

Recorded (e.g. in hazard register, on hazard board)

31% 32% 40% 42%

Reported (e.g. to boss/manager with action, to other workers)

46% 43% 50% 46%

Action taken (e.g. Discussed to stop happening again, changed the way we did something, more training

59% 62% 60% 63%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors who have experienced a serious harm incident or health problem/near miss at work in the last 12 monthsQ40 (W): And what happened the last time you were seriously hurt or unwell at work?Q43 (W): What happened the last time you had a near miss at work?

Total four high-risk sectors


Workers in the Forestry sector were more likely to have recorded their near miss incident (64% cf. 42%

overall), and less likely to have done nothing. Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely to

have reported their near miss incident (60% cf. 46% overall).

Agriculture and Construction workers were more likely to have taken action after a near miss than a

serious harm incident (63% and 67% respectively taking action in relation to a near miss, but only 48%

and 54% doing so following a serious harm incident).

6.4.2 Action taken on last occasion a serious harm incident or near miss occurred: Workers

from the four high-risk sectors, 2017


SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS n=61 n=52 n=49 n=98 n=82

Nothing, I didn’t tell anyone 12% 12% 4% 7% 7%

Reported to boss but no action taken

6% 6% 7% 16% 16%

Workers blamed - 1% 2% 2% 4%

Action Taken (net)

Recorded (e.g. hazard register /board)

27% 39% 56% 55% 34%


31% 45% 61% 59% 51%

Action taken (e.g. Discussion, changed the way we did something, training)

48% 54% 69% 55% 51%


Nothing, I didn’t tell anyone 12% 13% 7% 12% 16%

Reported but no action 6% 8% 6% 19% 14%

Workers blamed 2% - 1% 4% 3%

Action Taken (net)

Recorded (e.g. hazard register / board)

35% 45% 64% 41% 35%


36% 44% 57% 60% 52%

Action taken (e.g. Discussion,changed the way we did something, training)

63% 67% 67% 56% 55%

Base: Workers who have experienced a serious harm incident or health problem/near miss at work in the last 12 monthsQ40 (W): And what happened the last time you were seriously hurt or unwell at work?Q43 (W): What happened the last time you had a near miss at work?


EMPLOYERS

Employers whose workers had experienced a serious harm or near miss incident were asked what

happened after the most recent incident. Employers were more likely to report having taken action

than workers were.

Over eight in ten (83%) employers took action after a serious harm incident (cf. 53% of

workers). This is an increase from 59% taking action in 2014. A range of actions were taken:

77% sought medical advice, 53% filed an ACC claim and 50% investigated the incident.

Nine in ten (90%) employers took action after a near miss (cf. 63% of workers doing so).

Seven in ten recorded the near miss. While the overall taking action after a near miss has not

increased since 2014, the incidence of recording has increased from 51% in 2014.

Discipline was taken against a worker in about one in ten serious harm incidents (9%) and near misses

(11%).

6.4.3 Actions taken on last occasion a serious harm incident or near miss occurred:


2014 2015 2016 2017

SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS n=503 n=418 n=326 n=291

Nothing 5% 5% 5% 2%

NET recorded 57% 68% 75% 79%

NET action 59% 72% 72% 83%

NET investigated 31% 39% 35% 50%

Discipline against worker 6% 5% 7% 9%

Medical assistance sought 71% 76% 70% 77%

ACC claim filed - 45% 51% 53%

NEAR MISSES n=549 n=551 n=539 n=516

Nothing 6% 2% <0.5% 2%

NET recorded 51% 65% 68% 71%

NET action 86% 91% 91% 90%

Discipline against worker 10% 10% 12% 11%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors whose business has experienced a serious harm incident or health problem/near miss in the last 12 monthsQ35 (E): What happened after the most recent incident when a person or people were seriously hurt at work?Q38 (E): What happened after the most recent near miss at work?

TOTAL FOUR HIGH-RISK SECTORS


By sector

The incidence of taking action following a serious harm incident was high across all four high-risk

sectors, noting that employers in the Construction and Manufacturing sectors were more likely to have

taken action following a serious harm incident (85% cf. 76% in Agriculture):

Forestry employers were more likely than others to have investigated the incident. (In contrast,

only 26% of Agriculture employers investigated a serious harm incident.)

Employers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely to have recorded (88% cf. 79%

overall) a serious harm incident and to have taken disciplinary action against a worker (16%).

The proportion of Agriculture employers who recorded a serious harm incident has shown a

positive shift since 2015 (68%, up from 53% in 2015).

The proportion of employers across the high-risk sectors taking action after a near miss was very high,

ranging from 88% of Agricultural employers to 95% of Manufacturing employers.

6.4.4 Actions taken on the last occasion a serious harm incident or near miss occurred:

Employers, 2017


SERIOUS HARM INCIDENTS n=44 n=79 n=54 n=114 n=80

Nothing 3% 2% 6% <0.5% 4%

NET recorded 68% 80% 82% 88% 66%

NET action 76% 85% 78% 85% 82%

NET investigated 26% 58% 74% 58% 44%

Discipline against worker 1% 8% 7% 16% 9%


Nothing 6% 1% 1% - 2%

NET recorded 66% 74% 89% 71% 73%

NET action 88% 90% 90% 95% 85%

Discipline against worker 12% 12% 10% 9% 9%

Base: Employers whose workers have experienced a serious harm incident or health problems/near miss in the last 12 monthsQ35 (E): What happened after the most recent incident when a person or people were seriously hurt at work?Q38 (E): What happened after the most recent near miss at work?


6.5 IDENTIFICATION OF NEW HAZARDS AND ACTIONS TAKEN AS A RESULT

Workers and employers were asked what happened on the last occasion they noticed a new hazard in

their workplace or business.

WORKERS

Over seven in ten workers (71%) across the four high-risk sectors said they had noticed a hazard

recently, a proportion that has remained constant since 2014 (68%).

Over four in ten workers (44%) said something was done immediately.

Three in ten (29%) said changes were made to the ways things were done.

Three in ten (29%) said the hazard was written into a hazard register or hazard board. The

incidence of writing the hazard into a register or on a board has increased since 2014 (22%

said they did so in 2014).

6.5.1 Actions taken on the last occasion a hazard was noticed: Workers from the four high-

risk sectors

By sector

Workers in the Forestry sector and Construction sector were more likely to have noticed a new hazard

(85% and 79% respectively, cf. 71% overall), and to say that something was done immediately (57%

and 51% respectively, cf. 44% overall). Forestry workers were more likely to say that the hazard was

written into a hazard register or hazard board (57% cf. 29% overall).

Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely than others to say they reported a hazard but

nothing happened as a result (10% cf. 5% overall).

2014 2015 2016 2017

HAZARDS n=2287 n=2084 n=2172 n=1862

Haven’t noticed any 32% 32% 26% 29%

Did something Immediately (e.g. Stopped work till hazard removed)

42% 40% 46% 44%

Changed way we did something (e.g. Changed process to eliminate hazard)

28% 26% 31% 29%

Written into hazard board/register

22% 24% 31% 29%

Reported but no action 5% 5% 4% 5%

Nothing, I didn’t tell anyone 1% 1% <0.5% 1%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q44 (W)What happened the last time you noticed a new hazard at work?


As in previous years, workers in the Agriculture sector were less likely to say they had noticed any new

hazards (59% cf. 71% overall in the four high-risk sectors). The likelihood of any action following that

hazard identification was consistent with their responses in 2016.

6.5.2 Actions taken on the last occasion a new hazard was noticed: Workers, 2017


HAZARD n=501 n=444 n=362 n=555 n=1027

Haven’t noticed any 41% 21% 15% 28% 46%

Did something immediately (e.g. Stopped work till hazard removed)

31% 51% 57% 42% 32%

Changed way we did something (e.g. Changed process to eliminate hazard)

29% 32% 42% 21% 17%


23% 32% 57% 28% 21%

Reported but no action 2% 5% 3% 10% 6%

Nothing 0.5% 2% 0.5% 1% 1%

Base: Workers Q44 (W)What happened the last time you noticed a new hazard at work?


EMPLOYERS

Nearly two in three employers (63%) had noticed a new hazard at their business recently. One in three

employers (33%) said that something was done immediately in response, while four in ten (39%) said

processes were changed to eliminate, isolate or minimise the hazard. 2017 survey results were

reasonably consistent with 2016 results, in terms of employer hazard identification and action taking.

6.5.3 Actions taken on the last occasion a new hazard was noticed: Employers from the four

high-risk sectors

By sector

Employers in the Forestry sector were more likely to notice a new hazard (87% cf. 63% overall). They

were more likely to have taken immediate action (58%), changed the way they did something (56%)

and/or to have written something onto a hazard board/register or changed the way they did something

(64%).

2014 2015 2016 2017

HAZARDS n=1350 n=1502 n=1222 n=1300

Haven’t noticed any 44% 41% 35% 37%


34% 31% 35% 33%

Changed our processes (to eliminate, isolate or minimise the hazard)

35% 37% 43% 39%


22% 30% 35% 32%

Nothing 1% 1% <0.5% 1%

Base: Employers Q39 (E)What happened the last time you noticed a new hazard at your business?


6.5.4. Actions taken on the last occasion a new hazard was noticed: Employers, 2017

6.6 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON MANAGEMENT OF WORKPLACE

INCIDENTS, NEAR MISSES AND NEW HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

Comparison of results for actions taken in relation to serious harm incidents and near misses by

recency of health and safety training (workers) and proportion trained (employers) indicates that those

who have undertaken training in the last 12 months are more likely to have taken action than those

who have never had training. Such actions include reporting the event and recording it, along with

discussions about actions within the workplace.

Those who have never had training were less likely to identify a new hazard (only half doing so,

compared with over seven in ten of those who have had training), and they were less likely to have

taken any action to reduce the hazard in any way.


HAZARDS n=375 n=337 n=225 n=363 n=428

Haven’t noticed any 39% 34% 13% 40% 50%


29% 35% 58% 37% 31%

Changed way we did something (e.g. Changed our process to eliminate hazard)

33% 43% 56% 41% 31%


32% 31% 64% 31% 23%

Nothing 1% <0.5% <0.5% <0.5% 2%

Base: Employers Q39 (E)What happened the last time you noticed a new hazard at your business?


6.6.1 Impact of health and safety training on management of workplace incidents: Workers

and Employers, 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

WORKPLACE INCIDENTS,NEAR MISSES AND NEW

HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

In last 12 months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half in last 12 months


Never had

training

EXPERIENCED SERIOUS HARM INCIDENT

13% 16% 13% 19% 25% 10%

• Took action following a serious harm incident

60% 51% 39% 90% 88% 61%

• Reported serious harm 52% 42% 32% - - -

• Recorded serious harm 52% 34% 20% 87% 91% 50%

OCCURRENCE OF NEARMISSES

31% 33% 18% 42% 41% 21%

• Took action following a near miss

67% 66% 39% 92% 92% 83%

• Reported near miss 49% 44% 36% - - -

• Recorded near miss 57% 24% 21% 76% 82% 55%

IDENTIFIED A NEW HAZARD 80% 70% 52% 70% 75% 53%

• Did something immediately 55% 38% 22% 38% 44% 25%

• Changed way things were done

32% 31% 21% 45% 46% 32%

• Written into hazard register/board

37% 20% 20% 38% 46% 20%

Base: Workers Q36, Q38, Q40,Q41, Q43 (W)Base: Employers Q31, Q36, Q39 (E)


6.7 EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES

EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE

A short set of questions about exposure to loud noise was added in 2017, as the previous surveys had

indicated that a proportion of workers experienced temporary or permanent hearing loss from exposure

to noise. Workers and employers in the four high-risk sectors were asked whether workers are ever

exposed to loud noise in their everyday work (that is, where they would have to raise their voice to

speak to someone a meter (3 feet) away from them).

Workers’ perceptions of the frequency of their exposure to loud noise were greater than employers’.

One in four (24%) workers said they were exposed to loud noise ‘most of the time’, whereas only one

in ten (11%) employers said this was the case. Around seven in ten of both groups (78% of workers

and 70% of employers) said that workers were exposed to loud noise ‘some or more of the time’.

6.7.1 Exposure to loud noise: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

By sector

Forestry sector workers’ and employers’ views of the frequency of workers’ exposure to loud noise

were better aligned than other sectors, and perceptions of frequency within the Forestry sector were

greater than in other sectors. About four in ten (40% of workers and 37% of employers) said that

workers are exposed to loud noise ‘most of the time’.

A high proportion of Construction sector workers and employers indicated exposure to loud noise at

least ‘some or more of the time’ (83% and 80% respectively).

22%

54%

24%

2017(n=1836)

Yes, Most of the time

Yes, Some of the time

No

30%

59%

11%

2017(n=1287)

Yes NET 70%78%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1351) Q120 (E)

Base: Workers /from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1836) Q125 (W)

Are you (W) … any of your workers (E) ever exposed to loud noise in your everyday work? That is, noise to a level where you would have to raise your voice to speak to someone a metre away from you?


Although a lower proportion of Manufacturing workers indicated being exposed to loud noise, over four

in ten (44%) indicated that this happened ‘most of the time’. Manufacturing employers’ views were not

well aligned with workers’ perceptions on the frequency of loud noise.

Agriculture sector workers had less frequent exposure to noise than other sector workers, with one in

three workers (33%) and four in ten employers (40%) saying they were not being exposed to loud

noise at all.

6.7.2 Exposure to loud noise ‘most’ or ‘some of the time’: Workers and Employers, 2017

PROTECTION AGAINST LOUD NOISE EXPOSURE

Workers and employers who indicated that workers were exposed to loud noise were asked which of a

series of protective measures were used in the last 12 months.

Provision of hearing protection (whether ear muffs or ear plugs) was the most common

protective measure used (mentioned by over eight in ten (84%) workers and nine in ten (91%)

employers.

Nearly half the workers (46%) and six in ten employers (62%) said that noise had been

identified as a hazard in their workplace that needs to be managed as part of health and safety.

About one in four workers (24%) and employers (27%) said training or information was

provided about how to manage noise as a hazard.

Around one in five workers (21%) and employers (22%) said training or information was

provided about how to avoid hearing loss.

Nearly one in ten workers (8%) said no actions had been taken, but only 2% of employers said nothing

had been done.

37%

43%

58%

58%

44%

40%

25%

10%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2017 n=499) Construction (2017 n=443) Forestry (2017 n=354) Manufacturing (2017 n=540) Q125 (W)

WORKERS

51%

46%

66%

55%

16%

37%

14%

4%

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2017 n=371) Construction (2017 n=332) Forestry (2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2017 n=359) Q120 (E)

EMPLOYERS

Are you (W)… any of your workers (E) ever exposed to loud noise in your workplace?


6.7.3 Actions taken in last 12 months to protect workers against exposure to loud noises:

Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

By sector

The provision of hearing protection was widespread across all four high-risk sectors. But other

measures, such as providing hearing tests from a qualified person were more prevalent in the Forestry

and Manufacturing sectors (mentioned by 60% and 57% of workers in those sectors respectively).

Agriculture sector employers were less likely than other sector employers to have undertaken

protective measures, reflecting the fact that exposure to loud noise was less frequent than in the other

high-risk sectors.

Base: Workers from the 4-high risk sectors (excluding not answered) (n=1836) Q126 (W) Q: During the last 12 months which, if any, of the following have you done, or has your employer done to protect you against exposure to loud noise:Base: Employers from the 4-high risk sectors (excluding not answered) (n=930) Q121(E)Q: During the last 12 months which, if any, of the following has your business done to protect workers against exposure to loud noise?

84%

46%

28%

24%

21%

14%

13%

9%

8%

7%

0%

8%

2%

91%

62%

16%

27%

22%

15%

7%

6%

10%

11%

5%

2%

1%

Provided hearing protection (e.g. ear plugs or ear muffs)

Identified 'noise' as a hazard in our workplace that needsto be managed as part of health and safety

Provided a hearing test carried out by a qualified person

Provided information or training about how to managenoise as a hazard

Provided information or training about how to avoidhearing loss

Made changes to reduce noise (e.g. modifying theequipment or changing the processes, such as reducing…

Undertaken a noise assessment to identify the areaswhere noise is a hazard

Made changes to isolate noise (e.g. soundproofing areasor using noise absorption materials)

Made changes so that noisy activities are not in aconfined work space

Replaced noisy equipment with a quieter option

Applied a policy to buy quieter options when newequipment is replaced

None of the above

Don't know

WORKERS EMPLOYERS



Workers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=335)

CONSTRUCTION(n=360)

FORESTRY(n=287)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=437)


79% 82% 89% 92%

Identified ‘noise’ as a hazard in our workplace that needs to be managed as part of health and safety

34% 50% 51% 51%

Provided hearing test/s carried out by a qualified person

9% 25% 60% 57%

Provided information or training about how to manage noise as a hazard

13% 27% 25% 29%

Provided information or training about how to avoid hearing loss

13% 22% 27% 26%

Made changes to reduce noise (e.g. modifying equipment or changing processes)

16% 13% 9% 15%

Undertook a noise assessment to identify the areas where noise is a hazard

4% 12% 16% 28%

Made changes to isolate noise (e.g. soundproofing areas or using noise absorption materials)

5% 9% 9% 12%

Made changes so that noisy activities are not in a confined work space

9% 8% 5% 7%


6% 8% 6% 7%

None of the above 13% 7% 3% 3%

Q126 (W)In the last 12 months, which of the following has your employer/business done to protect you/workers against exposure to loud noise?



Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=219)

CONSTRUCTION(n=273)

FORESTRY(n=190)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=248)


90% 90% 95% 98%

Identified ‘noise’ as a hazard in our workplace that needs to be managed as part of health and safety

47% 66% 69% 76%

Provided hearing test/s carried out by a qualified person

3% 16% 59% 34%

Provided information or training about how to manage noise as a hazard

16% 30% 36% 35%

Provided information or training about how to avoid hearing loss

11% 25% 37% 29%

Made changes to reduce noise (e.g. modifying equipment or changing processes)

14% 11% 16% 25%

Undertook a noise assessment to identify the areas where noise is a hazard

3% 8% 15% 13%

Made changes to isolate noise (e.g. soundproofing areas or using noise absorption materials)

3% 6% 8% 12%

Made changes so that noisy activities are not in a confined work space

5% 13% 5% 12%


9% 11% 12% 17%

Applied a new policy to purchase quieter options when new equipment is replaced

3% 5% 7% 7%

None of the above 3% 2% 1% 1%

Q121 (E)In the last 12 months, which of the following has your employer/business done to protect you/workers against exposure to loud noise?


USE OF HEARING PROTECTION

Worker and employer perceptions of how often hearing protection was worn were reasonably well

aligned. Nearly half of both groups (46% and 45% respectively) said that workers ‘always’ wear hearing

protection.

Fewer than one in ten said workers would wear hearing protection ‘less than half the time’.

6.76 Frequency of wearing hearing protection: Workers and Employers in the four high-risk

sectors, 2017

By sector

Workers in the Forestry sector were more likely than other sector workers to ‘always’ wear

hearing protection, reflecting the high proportion of the time to which they were exposed to loud

noise. Seven in ten (71%) Forestry workers said they ‘always’ wore hearing protection,

compared with 84% of Forestry employers saying this.

Workers in the Manufacturing sector were more likely than employers to say that they ‘always’

wore hearing protection (62% cf. 54%).

Agriculture workers were less likely than other high-risk sector workers to wear hearing

protection ‘always’, reflecting their lesser exposure to loud noise.

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q122 (E)How often would you say your workers wear hearing protection (e.g. ear plugs or ear muffs) when exposed to loud noise in your workplace?

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q127 (W)How often would you say you wear hearing protection (e.g. ear plugs or ear muffs) when exposed to loud noise in your workplace?

5%7%8%

34%

46%

2017(n=1419)

Always

Most of the time

About half of the time

Less than half the time

Never

2%6%7%

41%

45%

2017(n=929)

Always

Most of the time

About half the time

Less than half of the time

Never


6.7.7 Wear hearing protection always: Workers and Employers from the four high-risk sectors,

2017

Workers and employers who used hearing protection were asked which of a series of actions relating

to the fitting, training and maintenance of that hearing protection applied to hearing protection for

workers.

Generally, hearing protection was replaced when worn out or damaged (around seven in ten workers

and employers said this happened).

Six in ten workers (60%) said that they had the right level of hearing projection for the noise level they

were exposed to, but fewer than two in ten (17%) said their hearing protection was individually fitted to

them. Fewer than two in ten (17%) received training and/or supervision in the use of hearing protection.

Employers’ views of having the right level of hearing protection selected and provided were slightly

more positive than workers’ impressions (26% saying individual fitting occurred), and their views of

frequency of maintenance were much more positive than workers (41% saying that hearing

protection is regularly maintained cf. 24% of workers saying this).

62%

71%

47%

33%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

Base: Workers excluding does not apply, in Agriculture (2017 n=336) Construction (2017 n=359) Forestry (2017 n=287) Manufacturing (2017 n=437) Q127 (W)

WORKERS

Base: Employers excluding does not apply, in Agriculture (2017 n=218) Construction (2017 n=273) Forestry (2017 n=190) Manufacturing (2017 n=248) Q122 (E)

EMPLOYERS

54%

84%

47%

34%

How often would you say you (W) … your workers (E) ever exposed to loud noise in your everyday work? That is, noise to a level where wear hearing protection (e.g. ear plugs or ear muffs) when exposed to loud noise in your workplace?


6.7.8 Hearing protection support: Workers and Employers in the four high-risk sectors, 2017

By sector

Selection of the appropriate hearing protection, individual fitting, regular maintenance and replacement

of hearing protection when worn out were more prevalent in the Forestry sector than other high-risk

sectors. But even within the Forestry sector, training in the use of hearing protection was not

widespread (18% of workers saying training took place cf. 30% of employers).

69%

60%

24%

17%

17%

6%

4%

75%

48%

41%

26%

18%

2%

4%

It is replaced when it becomes worn out ordamaged

The right level of hearing protection is providedfor the noise level exposed to

It is regularly maintained

It has been fitted to you/workers individually

Training and/or supervision received/provided inthe use of hearing protection

None of these

Not applicable - I don't use hearing protection

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors 2017 (n=1422) Q128 (W)Employers from the four high-risk sectors 2017 (n=928) Q123 (E)In the last 12 months, which of the following has your employer/business done to protect you/workers against exposure to loud noise?


6.7.9 Hearing protection support: Workers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

6.710 Hearing protection support: Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=336)

CONSTRUCTION(n=361)

FORESTRY(n=288)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=437)

It is replaced when it becomes worn out or damaged

63% 71% 78% 69%

Have the right level of hearing protection for the noise level exposed to

51% 64% 78% 62%

It is regularly maintained 20% 24% 56% 27%

It has been fitted individually 9% 19% 30% 20%

Training and/or supervision received in the use of hearing protection

7% 19% 18% 24%

None of these 9% 4% 2% 6%

Hearing protection not used 6% 3% 1% 5%

Base: Workers with hearing protection, Agriculture (2017 n=336) Construction (2017 n=361) Forestry (2017 n=288) Manufacturing (2017 n=437) Q128 (W)Which of the following applies to your hearing protection?

Base: Employers whose workers have hearing protection, Agriculture (2017 n=218) Construction (2017 n=273) Forestry (2017 n=190) Manufacturing (2017 n=247) Q123 (E)In the last 12 months, which of the following applies to your workers’ hearing protection?

AGRICULTURE(n=218)

CONSTRUCTION(n=273)

FORESTRY(n=190)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=247)

It is replaced when it is worn out or damaged

73% 71% 85% 86%

Select and have the right level of hearing protection for the noise level exposed to

37% 46% 69% 68%

It is regularly maintained 37% 36% 68% 56%

Fitted to each worker individually 16% 30% 44% 31%

Training and/or supervision provided in the use of hearing protection

10% 19% 30% 27%

None of these 5% 1% 1% 1%

Hearing protection not used 3% 7% 4% 1%

148

SECTION 7:

APPROACHES TO HEALTH

AND SAFETY IN THE NEW

ZEALAND WORKPLACE


7 APPROACHES TO HEALTH AND

SAFETY IN THE NEW ZEALAND

WORKPLACE

INTRODUCTION The government uses legislation to regulate health and safety in workplaces. Workers have legal

responsibilities in relation to workplace health and safety and their rights are protected in law.

Employers have legal obligations for health and safety and must know both what these obligations are

and how to comply with them.

The 2014 and 2015 surveys were undertaken before the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 came

into effect (4 April 2016). The new legislation was being drafted when the 2015 survey was undertaken

and was the subject of discussion and media interest. 2015 responses should be considered with this

context in mind. The 2016 and 2017 surveys were undertaken after the Act came into effect.

This section of the report discusses workers’ awareness of their legal responsibilities and rights and

employers’ awareness of their health and safety obligations and their understanding of how to comply

with these obligations.

KEY FINDINGS

Two in three workers have consistently been confident in their awareness of their legal responsibilities

(64% in 2017) and rights (63% in 2017) both before and after the implementation of the 2015

legislation.

Employers’ confidence in their awareness of their legal obligations and how to comply with them was

stable from 2014 to 2016 and has increased in 2017, with seven in ten (71%) saying they were aware

of their health and safety obligations and nearly seven in ten (67%) confident that they knew how to

comply.

Confidence was greater than average among Forestry sector workers and employers and lower than

average among Agriculture sector workers and employers.

At least half of the high-risk sector employers said their business had made significant changes to its

health and safety systems or practices in the last three years, with the incidence peaking at 65% in

2016 and 52% having done so in 2017. Making on-going improvements to workplace health and safety

was the main driver, along with employers learning more about best practice through education or

available information, or through improvements in industry practice.


7.1 UNDERSTANDING OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES, RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

Workers and employers were asked how confident they were about their responsibilities, rights and

obligations, using a 5-point scale ranging from ‘not at all confident’ (1) through to ‘very confident’ (5).

The results assess perceived knowledge not actual knowledge, as claimed level of knowledge was not

tested in any way. Note however, that the 2014 qualitative research suggested that, few respondents

would have been able to list their legal responsibilities, rights and obligations, if asked to do so.

Worker confidence that they knew their responsibilities and rights was consistent before and after the

2015 legislation took effect, with nearly two thirds saying they were confident (4 and 5 on the scale)

that they knew their responsibilities (64%) and their rights (63%). In contrast employer awareness of

their obligations as an employer has increased from 67% in 2014 to 71% in 2017, and their

understanding of how to comply with these obligations increased from 62% to 67% in 2017.

7.1.1. Awareness of health and safety responsibilities, rights and obligations: Workers and



decreases between two consecutive years. In this chart, increases are apparent in employer results between

2016 and 2017.

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1346-1353; 2015 n=1495-1502; 2016 n=1233; 2017 n=1295-1297) Q48 (E)

How confident do you feel that …?(5-point scale where 1= not at all confident and 5= very confident)

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

LEGAL OBLIGATIONS

You are fully aware of yourhealth and safety obligations as an employer

67% conf

65% conf

66% conf

71% conf

HOW TO COMPLY

You understand how to comply with these health and safety obligations

62% conf

59% conf

61% conf

67% conf

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES

You are fully aware of your legal responsibilities as a worker, in terms of workplace health and safety

63%conf

63%conf

67%conf

64%conf

LEGAL RIGHTS

You are fully aware of your rights as a worker, in terms of workplace health and safety

65% conf

65% conf

67% conf

63%conf

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2272-2274; 2015 n=2081-2085; 2016 n=2174-2175; 2017 n=1853-1856) Q51 (W)


WORKERS

By sector

Worker confidence was higher in the Forestry sector than other high-risk sectors, with 81% saying that

they were confident that they were fully aware of their legal responsibilities (cf. 64% overall) and their

rights (cf. 63% overall). Workers in the Agriculture sector were less likely than workers in the high-risk

sectors overall to say they were confident that they were fully aware of their legal responsibilities (58%

cf. 64% overall) or were fully aware of their rights (55% cf. 63%).

7.1.2. Confidence in awareness of health and safety rights and responsibilities: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

By sector

The same pattern was apparent among employers, with Forestry employers more confident and

Agricultural employers less confident about their obligations or that they knew how to comply than

other sectors.

7.1.3. Confidence in awareness of health and safety obligations and compliance: Employers,

2017


WORKERS n=502 n=444 n=358-359 n=549-551 n=1026-1028

Confident about responsibilities

58% 66% 81% 69% 66%

Confident about rights 55% 65% 81% 70% 67%

Base: All Workers Q51 (W)Level of confidence felt (5-point scale where 1= not at all confident and 5= very confident)


EMPLOYERS n=375 n=335 n=223-224 n=362-363 n=427-428

Confident about obligations

67% 72% 89% 73% 74%

Confident know how to comply

64% 70% 86% 67% 73%

Base: All Employers Q48 (E)Level of confidence felt (5-point scale where 1= not at all confident and 5= very confident)


7.2 CHANGES TO WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY PRACTICES AND

REASONS

Employers were asked whether they had made any significant changes to their health and safety

systems or practices in the last twelve months and their reasons for making these changes.

CHANGES TO HEALTH AND SAFETY SYSTEMS OR PRACTICES

Just over half the employers (52%) said they had made a significant change to their business’s health

and safety systems or practices in 2017. This is a reversion to 2015 levels following a higher result in

2016.

7.2.1. Proportion saying they have made significant changes to their health and safety

systems or practices in the last 12 months, Employers from the four high-risk sectors

By sector

The same pattern of increases from 2014 until 2016, with a reversion in 2017, was apparent across

the high-risk sectors. Each year, employers in the Agriculture sector were less likely than employers in

the other high-risk sectors to say that they had made significant changes to their health and safety

systems or practices, with 46% doing so in 2017.

40%

50%

65%

52%

2014(n=1330)

2015(n=1490)

2016(n=1218)

2017(n=1292)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (excluding not answered) Q41(E)In the last 12 months, has your business made any significant changes to its health and safety systems or practices?


7.2.2. Proportion saying they had made significant changes to their health and safety systems

or practices in the last 12 months: Employers

REASONS FOR CHANGES TO HEALTH AND SAFETY SYSTEMS OR PRACTICES

The most common reason employers gave for making significant changes to health and safety systems

or practices have been consistent over the four survey years. They were:

on-going improvements to your workplace health and safety (mentioned by 82%)

learning more about best practice through information or education (54%)

improvements in industry practice (41%).

Worker inputs ranked fourth and fifth in mention, with 16% of employers making a change because of a

worker’s suggestion and 10% doing so because a worker raised a problem.

Base: Employers whose business made significant changes to health and safety practices in last 12 months:Agriculture (2014 n=369; 2015 n=408; 2016 n=354; 2017 n=375) Construction (2014 n=342; 2015 n=389; 2016 n=273; 2017 n=333) Forestry (2014 n=265; 2015 n=271; 2016 n=228; 2017 n=225) Manufacturing (2014 n=354; 2015 n=422; 2016 n=363; 2017 n=359) Other sector (2014 n=314; 2015 n=401; 2016 n=364; 2017 n=422) Q41 (E)

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017



FORESTRY 76% 72% 69% 57%


OTHER 22% 25% 50% 45%

In the last 12 months, has your business made any significant changes to its health and safety systems or practices?


7.2.3. Reasons for making significant changes in health and safety systems or practices:

Employers from the four high-risk sectors who made a change

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors who made significant changes to health and safety systems or practices in the last 12 months (2014 n=721; 2015 n=879; 2016 n=824; 2017 n=702) Q42 (E)Thinking about the changes made to your health and safety systems or practices in the last 12 months, why did the business make this change? Was this in response to..?

82%

54%

41%

16%

10%

8%

7%

5%

3%

82%

59%

46%

12%

8%

7%

5%

4%

5%

77%

61%

43%

0%

0%

11%

5%

5%

4%

78%

56%

44%

0%

0%

8%

7%

5%

4%

On-going improvements to your workplace health andsafety

Learning more about best practice through information oreducation

Improvements in industry practice

A change one of my workers suggested to improveworkplace health and safety

A health and safety issue/problem raised by one of myworkers

A workplace inspection by a Health and Safety inspector

A near miss

An accident

Any other reason

2017

2016

2015

2014


By sector

The reasons given for making any significant changes were similar across the four high-risk sectors.

One notable difference was mention of improvements in industry practice. Forestry employers were

much more likely to give this as a reason for making changes than were other employers (58% cf. 41%

overall).

7.2.4. Reasons for making significant changes in health and safety systems or practices:

Employers who made a change, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=174)

CONSTRUCTION(n=204)

FORESTRY(n=130)


OTHER SECTOR(n=208)

On-going improvements to your workplace health and safety

79% 82% 88% 86% 82%

Learning more about best practice through information or education

54% 55% 48% 50% 60%

Improvements in industry practice

42% 45% 58% 31% 31%

A change one of my workers suggested to improve workplace health and safety

14% 14% 18% 21% 22%

A health and safety issue/problem raised by one of my workers

6% 12% 17% 12% 18%

A workplace inspection by a Health and Safety inspector

8% 5% 10% 18% 5%

A near miss 5% 7% 12% 8% 9%

New/impending legislation changes

3% 2% 4% 2% 3%

An accident 2% 5% 13% 10% 6%

Base: Employers who made significant changes to health and safety systems in the last 12 months Q42 (E)Thinking about the changes made to your health and safety systems or practices in the last 12 months, why did the business make this change? Was this in response to..?


7.3 IMPACT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAINING ON CONFIDENCE IN AWARENESS OF

LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES, RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

Both worker and employer results indicated that workers who have undertaken training in the last 12

months had greater confidence in their awareness of legal responsibilities and their rights as workers.

Employers who had trained workers had a higher level of confidence in their obligations and how to

comply with their health and safety obligations. Employers who have trained staff were also more likely

to have made changes to their health and safety systems and processes (62% having done so,

compared with only 40% of those who had never trained their staff).

7.3.1. Impact of training practices on confidence and business changes: Workers and

Employers, 2017

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

LEGAL OBLIGATIONSIn last 12 months

Less recently

Never trained

At least half



Never had

training

Confident that fully aware of legal responsibilities (W) / Obligations (E)

73% 59% 50% 80% 78% 58%

Confident that fully aware of rights as a worker (W) / How to comply (E)

73% 55% 49% 78% 73% 54%

Business has made significant changes to health and safety systems or practices

- - - 62% 59% 40%

Base: Workers Q51 (W)Base: Employers Q48, Q41(E)

157

SECTION 8:

ADVICE AND INFORMATION

ON HEALTH AND SAFETY


8 ADVICE AND INFORMATION ON HEALTH

AND SAFETY

INTRODUCTION This section describes:

the sources of advice workers and employers use for information about health and safety

use of information and guidance (employers only)

preferred formats for information and guidance.

KEY FINDINGS

Work related sources have consistently been the main sources of health and safety advice for workers.

The boss (43%) was the most commonly mentioned individual source followed by the health and

safety representative at their workplace (35%). Two other workplace-related sources workers listed

were someone else in management (21%) and a mentor (12%).

WorkSafe NZ was second most commonly mentioned source of advice overall among workers (38%

mention in 2017.) It was the leading source for employers, with two in three employers (64%) naming

WorkSafe as their most likely source of health and safety advice.

The internet/Google was the third main overall source of advice for employers and the fourth main

source of advice for workers (30% and 25% mention respectively in 2017).

Various industry related sources (including health and safety consultants, an industry organisation, or a

friend) were the fourth main group of sources of health and safety advice for workers. However, they

were the second most common group for employers after WorkSafe.

Sector specific sources (such as SiteSafe and Safetree) were more commonly mentioned by

employers than workers. For example, 43% of Construction employers mentioned SiteSafe while 54%

of Forestry employers mentioned Safetree. (The sector specific source was the second most prevalent

source after mention of WorkSafe in each case).


8.1 SOURCES OF ADVICE

Workers and employers were asked who they would go to if they needed advice in the next few weeks

about something to do with health and safety.

Response options were updated over the survey years, which means that results from the 2014 and

2015 surveys are not directly comparable with the 2016 and 2017 surveys. Changes to response

options:

2017: ‘A health and safety consultant’ and ‘Training advisor or ITO’ were added

2016: ‘Safetree’ and ‘Business.govt.nz’ were added

2015: ‘WorkSafe’ and ‘internet/Google’ were added

In 2014, respondents were asked if they had sought advice from ‘a Government agency (e.g.

WorkSafe)’. In 2015, ‘WorkSafe’ was a separate option and the ‘Government agencies’ option

was modified to ‘a Government agency other than WorkSafe (e.g. ACC)’.

Some response options have been tailored for specific sectors (sector-specific response options have

been flagged in charts):

the list for the Agriculture sector included an industry organisation (e.g. Federated Farmers)

the list for the Construction sector read an industry organisation (e.g. Master Builders, Master

Plumbers). Sector-specific response options have been flagged in the charts below

options were asked only of the relevant sector. For example, SiteSafe was provided as an

option only for Construction sector respondents.

WORKERS Work related sources were the main sources of advice mentioned by workers, with my boss (43%)

being most commonly mentioned source. Other common sources included the health and safety

representative at their workplace (35%), someone in management other than their boss (21%) and a

mentor (someone they work with whom they trust) (12%).

WorkSafe NZ and government agencies were the second main group of potential sources. Nearly four

in ten (38%) mentioned WorkSafe specifically (the second most commonly mentioned source), 5%

mentioned other government agencies and few mentioned Business.govt.nz.

The internet/Google was the fourth individual source mentioned overall (25%), consistent with the 2015

result.

Various industry related sources were the third main group of sources workers would look to for advice.

A health and safety consultant or a friend who works in the same industry were the two main sources

mentioned (17% and 16% respectively).


8.1.1 Sources of advice about health and safety: Workers from the four high-risk sectors


decreases between two consecutive years. In this chart, increases and decreases are apparent in some

sources between 2016 and 2017 and increases apparent in some sources between 2015 and 2016.

Sector specific sources were key for Construction and Forestry workers:

Construction sector workers were asked about SiteSafe (a national, not-for-profit organisation

that focuses on health and safety culture in construction and related industries). Use of this

source has been declining since 2014: While 34% said they would use it as a source in 2014,

only 20% said they would use it in 2017 (down from 26% in 2016). SiteSafe was the sixth most

popular source among these workers.

Forestry sector workers were asked if they would seek advice from Safetree. Over a quarter

said they would use this source (28% mention in 2017, cf. 23% mention in 2016). Safetree was

the sixth most common source for Forestry workers.

43%

35%

21%

12%

38%

5%

2%

25%

17%

16%

10%

6%

4%

3%

2%

4%

3%

My boss

The health and safety rep at my workplace

Someone in management (other than my boss)

My mentor / someone I work with that I trust

WorkSafe NZ

A Government agency other than WorkSafe NZ(e.g. ACC, Maritime NZ)

Business.govt.nz

Internet /Google

A health and safety consultant

A friend who works in the same industry

An industry organisation

A trade supplier

A union / a union representative

Training advisor or ITOs

My accountant or my lawyer

I don't really know who I would go to

I wouldn't go to anyone

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2289; 2015 n=2092; 2016 n=2174; 2017 n=1875) Q56 (W)If you need advice in the next few weeks about something to do with health and safety, who would you go to?Note: Use with caution: details of response options vary between sectors

2016 2015 201445% 44% 45%

38% 31% 33%

21% 18% 18%

15% 11% 12%

44% 39% 0%

8% 9% 25%

4% - -

30% 26% -

2% 2% 1%

22% 20% 18%

16% 16% 16%

9% 10% 9%

5% 5% 6%

0% 0% 0%

3% 3% 3%

2% 4% 5%

1% 3% 0%

2017


By sector

Their boss was the first or second ranked source of health and safety advice across the four high-risk

sectors. Workers in the Forestry sector were particularly likely to nominate their boss as a key source.

WorkSafe NZ ranked as the most common source of advice for Agriculture workers (40%), second for

Construction (40%) and Forestry (49%) workers but only fourth for Manufacturing sector workers

(28%).

Workplace health and safety reps were a common source across the Construction, Forestry and

Manufacturing sectors.

In contrast, Agriculture workers more frequently said they would seek advice from the internet/Google

(third most prevalent at 26%).

8.1.2 Top three health and safety sources of advice: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

WorkSafe was the primary source of advice about health and safety among employers (64% in 2017,

cf. 66% in 2016).

Industry sources ranked second and third, with 36% mentioning health and safety consultants and 34%

mentioning an industry organisation. Level of mention of an industry organisation has declined since

2014 (down from 40% to 34%)

The internet/Google was the fourth single most commonly mentioned source of advice (30% mention in

2017), but this was a decrease from 2015 and 2016.

Sector specific sources were more important for employers than for workers:

Construction sector employers were asked about SiteSafe; over four in ten (43%) said they

would seek advice from SiteSafe. This has fluctuated slightly, with 46% saying so in 2016.

AGRICULTURE(n=511)

CONSTRUCTION(n=447)

FORESTRY(n=364)



1 40% WorkSafe 45% My boss 70% My boss 59%The health and safety rep at my workplace

51% My boss

2 32% My boss 40% WorkSafe 49% WorkSafe 57% My boss 47%The health and safety rep at my workplace

3 26%Internet /Google

38%The health and safety rep at my workplace

43%The health and safety rep at my workplace

29%


28% WorkSafe

Base: Workers Q56 (W)If you need advice in the next few weeks about something to do with health and safety, who would you go to?


Forestry sector employers were asked about Safetree. Just over a half (54%) said they would

seek advice from this source, compared with 48% in 2016.

8.1.3 Sources of advice about health and safety: Employers from the four high-risk sectors

By sector

WorkSafe was the top source of advice about health and safety for employers in each of the four high-

risk sectors.

SiteSafe ranked second among Construction employers (as in 2016), while Safetree ranked second

among Forestry employers (not one of the top three in 2016).

Industry related sources rated second in the Agriculture and Manufacturing sectors, with the

internet/Google ranking third among Manufacturing sector employers.

64%

12%

10%

36%

34%

10%

8%

3%

14%

30%

6%

3%

WorkSafe NZ

A Government agency other than WorkSafe NZ…

Business.govt.nz

Health and safety consultants


A trade supplier


Hazard Co

Other employers

Internet/Google



Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1352; 2015 n=1501; 2016 n=1235; 2017 n=1300 ) Q53 (E)If you need advice for your business in the next few weeks about something to do with health and safety, who would you go to?Note: Use with caution: details of response options vary between sectors.

2016 2015 2014

66% 59% -

15% 17% -

14% - -

39% 37% 36%

36% 39% 40%

21% 22% 11%

- - -

4% 3% 1%

21% 19% 19%

42% 40% 2%

8% 12% 6%

3% 3% 6%

2017


8.1.4 Top three places health and safety advice would be sought: Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=375)

CONSTRUCTION(n=336)

FORESTRY(n=226)

MANUFACTURING (n=363)

OTHER SECTOR(n=426)

1 58% WorkSafe 66% WorkSafe 82% WorkSafe 70% WorkSafe 64% WorkSafe

2 47%An industry organisation

43% SiteSafe 54% Safetree 43%Health and safety consultants

43%Internet/Google

3 34%Health and safety consultants

34%Health and safety consultants

47%An industry organisation

42%Internet/Google

37%Health and safety consultants

Base: Employers Q53 (E)If you need advice for your business in the next few weeks about something to do with health and safety, who would you go to?


8.2 IMPACT OF TRAINING ON POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ADVICE

Comparison of the likely sources of advice about health and safety by recency of worker training

indicates that high-risk sector workers who have ‘never’ received any health and safety training had a

lower awareness of where to go for health and safety advice. Such workers were less likely to

approach anyone at their workplace, and less likely to approach WorkSafe. Over one in ten did not

know who they would approach for advice.

8.2.1 Sources of advice about health and safety: Workers by participation in formal health and

safety training, 2017

43%

35%

21%

12%

38%

5%

2%

25%

17%

16%

10%

6%

4%

3%

2%

4%

3%

My boss

The health and safety rep at my workplace


My mentor / someone I work with that I trust

WorkSafe NZ

A Government agency other than WorkSafe NZ(e.g. ACC, Maritime NZ)

Business.govt.nz

Internet /Google

A health and safety consultant

A friend who works in the same industry


A trade supplier

A union / a union representative




I wouldn't go to anyone

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1875) Q56 (W)If you need advice in the next few weeks about something to do with health and safety, who would you go to?Note: Use with caution: details of response options vary between sectors

Last 12

months

Less

recently

Never

56% 33% 28%

49% 21% 17%

29% 15% 10%

16% 9% 7%

40% 40% 29%

6% 6% 4%

3% 2% 1%

23% 28% 23%

21% 15% 12%

14% 20% 18%

8% 11% 13%

6% 8% 5%

5% 3% 2%

5% 2% 2%

1% 3% 3%

1% 5% 9%

0.5% 2% 8%

2017

165

SECTION 9:

PERCEPTIONS OF, AND

CONTACT WITH, WORKSAFE


9 PERCEPTIONS OF, AND CONTACT WITH

WORKSAFE

INTRODUCTION This section discusses awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe, and details of contact with WorkSafe.

KEY FINDINGS

Awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: the level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe has

stabilised among workers and employers after year-on-year increases, with the proportions who are

aware of WorkSafe having increased to 97% of employers and 94% of workers.

While over nine in ten workers were aware of WorkSafe, only three in ten (34%) knew a reasonable

amount about them. Awareness and knowledge among Manufacturing workers lagged somewhat

behind the other three high-risk sectors. Over four in ten employers (45%) considered they knew a

reasonable amount about WorkSafe.

Perceptions of WorkSafe: Perceptions of WorkSafe were generally positive among workers and

employers and have remained stable over the last year. Between a half and two-thirds of each group

agreed with positive statements about how well WorkSafe is fulfilling its role, while between two and

three out of ten workers and employers were neutral.

WorkSafe was rated most positively for helping workers understand the health and safety issues and

risks they face and for doing a good job helping workers to be safe/businesses improve workplace

safety, with at least six in ten workers and employers agreeing with each one.


real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand. Employers’ views of WorkSafe’s

trustworthiness and being an organisation they can have confidence in were similar to those of

workers. Similarly, half the employers agreed that WorkSafe is making a real difference to workplace

health and safety in New Zealand.

Employers were least likely to agree that WorkSafe is working effectively with businesses like mine,

with four in ten agreeing with this and nearly one in five disagreeing.

Contact with WorkSafe: Nine out of ten workers who knew at least a little bit about WorkSafe were

aware that they could contact WorkSafe to ask for advice or information. Eight in ten knew that they

could contact WorkSafe to make a complaint and seven in ten were aware that they could ask for an

inspector visit; fewer were aware of the toll free number.

Results have been stable over the last two years, with the biggest increases occurring between 2014

and 2015, for making a complaint and using a toll free number and between 2015 and 2016 for asking

for an inspector visit.

The majority of workers and employers aware of WorkSafe have had some form of contact with

WorkSafe in the last 12 months (around eight in ten workers and nine in ten employers) and the levels

of contact have been consistent over time.


Since 2015, more than 20% of both workers and employers have mentioned the same four types of

contact:

seeing materials and information produced by WorkSafe (seen by more than four in ten)

visiting WorkSafe’s website (main contact method among employers, with use increasing year

on year, but less widely used among workers)

from media reports on WorkSafe (nearly three in ten mentioned this)

as a result of WorkSafe’s advertising about being healthy and safe at work (mentioned by one

in four).

Use of health and safety information/guidance and preferred formats among employers: Use of

health and safety guidance materials has increased among employers since 2015, with seven in ten

using at least one type of material in 2017. Four guidance materials were used by at least one in three

employers: factsheets, forms and templates, Best/Good Practice Guidelines and checklists.

The perceived usefulness of the various guidance materials varied significantly, with six in ten

considering them ‘very useful’. Materials that employers rated lower in terms of perceived usefulness

included posters and online tools, including online quizzes, animated videos and online interactive

tools, with half their users or fewer rating them as ‘very useful’.

Preferred formats for communicating health and safety messages were common across workers and

employers. They included paper booklets/brochures, online training courses/learning modules, posters,

videos and mobile app formats. Preference for mobile app formats has increased since 2016.

Likelihood of WorkSafe inspector workplace visit: Three in ten workers and employers from the

four high-risk sectors thought it was likely that a WorkSafe inspector would visit their workplace or

business in the next 12 months. While the perceived likelihood of a visit increased in 2015 and 2016, it

settled in 2017, meaning little overall change over the four survey years.


9.1 AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE OF WORKSAFE

Every year, workers and employers were asked the following questions about WorkSafe:

If they were aware of WorkSafe before the survey and how much they knew about them

What, if any, types of contact they had with the organisation in the last 12 months

How likely it was that a WorkSafe inspector would visit their workplace/business in the next 12

months

Workers only were asked if they knew that they could contact WorkSafe about a variety of

matters.

In 2016 and 2017, workers and employers who had accessed WorkSafe’s website were also asked

what, if anything, they did as a consequence.

Respondents answered using a 5-point scale (where 1 represented ‘never heard of them before this

survey’ and 5 represented ‘I know a lot about them’). Those who knew at least ‘a little bit’ were asked

about their perceptions of WorkSafe and their confidence and trust in the organisation.

One in three workers (34%) and over four in ten employers (45%) in the four high-risk sectors said they

know about WorkSafe (‘know a lot’ or ‘quite a lot’), a similar result to 2016. Less than two in ten

workers (18%) and one in ten employers (9%) said that they had ‘never’ heard of WorkSafe or had

‘heard of them but don’t know anything about them’.

Increases in awareness and perceived knowledge for workers occurred between 2014 and 2015, with

2017 results being consistent with those noted in 2016. A similar pattern was apparent among

employers.


9.1.1 Level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: Workers and Employers from the four

high-risk sectors

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

14% 25% 35% 34%

Know about them (NET)

22% 34% 43% 45%

Know about them (NET)

2% 2% 2% 1%

17%8%

4% 5%

28%

19%

13% 13%

39%

46%

46% 46%

11%

18%

26% 24%

3% 7% 9% 9%

2014 2015 2016 2017

I know a lot aboutthem

I know quite a lotabout them

I know a little bitabout them

Have heard of thembut don't knowanything about them

Never heard of thembefore this survey

Not sure2% 2% 2% 2%

10%4% 1% 1%

23%

12%9% 8%

43%

48%

45% 45%

15%

26%

29% 31%

7% 8%14% 15%

2014 2015 2016 2017


I know quite a lotabout them

I know a little bitabout them

Have heard of thembut don't knowanything about them

Never heard of thembefore this survey

Not sure

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=1335; 2015 n=1496; 2016 n=1231; 2017 n=1293) Q66 (E)

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2014 n=2260; 2015 n=2077; 2016 n=2161; 2017 n=1861) Q70 (W)

Before this survey what, if anything, did you know about the organisation called WorkSafe NZ?


WORKERS

By sector

There have been significant gains in awareness in the four high-risk sectors since the benchmark

survey in 2014, with awareness and perceived knowledge typically doubling over that time.

There have been no real changes in awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe across the four high-risk

sectors between 2016 and 2017, except among Manufacturing workers. However, the proportion of

Manufacturing workers who say they know about WorkSafe still lags behind that in the other high-risk

sectors, a quarter (25%) said that they knew WorkSafe in 2017, compared with 34% across the four

high-risk sectors and over half the Forestry workers (56%).

There remains a small proportion of workers in each sector who have ‘never heard of’ or were ‘not

sure’ about WorkSafe. A higher proportion of Manufacturing sector workers had not heard of WorkSafe

(11% cf. 5% overall).

9.1.2 Level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: Workers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=510)

CONSTRUCTION(n=440)

FORESTRY(n=360)



I know a lot about them 8% 10% 24% 10% 7%

I know quite a lot about them

26% 27% 33% 15% 15%

I know a little bit about them

49% 48% 33% 41% 45%

Have heard of but don’t know anything about them

12% 11% 6% 21% 22%

Never heard of them 3% 4% 3% 11% 9%

Not sure 2% 1% 2% 2% 1%

2017 NET: Know a lot/quite a lot

34% 37% 56% 25% 22%


32% 40% 58% 22% 21%


24% 27% 49% 20% 16%


12% 17% 30% 10% 10%

Base: Workers Q70 (W)Before this survey, what, if anything, did you know about the organisation WorkSafe NZ?


EMPLOYERS

By sector

Employers in all sectors were significantly more likely to know about WorkSafe in 2017 than in 2014,

but most of this change occurred before 2015, and there were no significant changes between 2016

and 2017.

In 2017, as in previous years, employers in the Forestry sector were more likely than to say they know

about WorkSafe (79% cf. 45% overall).

There have been increases in the proportion of employers in Agriculture (up from 26% in 2015 to 42%

in 2017) and the ‘Other’ sector (up from 22% in 2015 to 36% in 2017) who ‘know a lot’ or ‘quite a lot’

about WorkSafe.

9.1.3 Level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=374)

CONSTRUCTION(n=334)

FORESTRY(n=226)


OTHER SECTOR(n=421)


11% 15% 39% 18% 10%


31% 29% 40% 32% 26%


49% 44% 19% 40% 48%

Have heard of but don’t know anythingabout them

8% 8% 2% 7% 11%

Never heard of them 0.5% 1% - 2% 4%

Not sure 2% 2% - 0.5% 1%

2017 NET: know a lot/quite a lot

42% 45% 79% 51% 36%


39% 43% 80% 48% 36%


26% 37% 82% 42% 22%


18% 29% 66% 18% 15%

Base: Employers Q66 (E)Before this survey, what, if anything, did you know about the organisation WorkSafe NZ?


AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE OF WORKSAFE BY INCIDENCE OF TRAINING

As would be expected, awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe are greater than average among

workers who have received health and safety training in the last 12 months, than among those who

have ‘never’ received any training. Only 18% of those who had ‘never’ received training said they knew

WorkSafe, compared with 42% of those who had received training. A similar pattern was apparent

among employers.

9.1.4 Level of awareness and knowledge of WorkSafe: Incidence of training, 2017

9.2 PERCEPTIONS, TRUST AND CONFIDENCE

In 2016 and 2017, workers and employers were asked about their perceptions of, and trust and

confidence, in WorkSafe. Workers were asked to what extent they agree WorkSafe:

helps workers in your industry understand the health and safety issues and risks they face

is doing a good job helping workers to be safe at work

is doing a good job helping workers to be healthy at work

is making a real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand

is a trustworthy organisation

is an organisation I can have confidence in.

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

In last 12

months

Less recently

NeverAt least

half

Less than half

None

I know a lot about them

12% 7% 4% 20% 17% 8%


30% 22% 14% 33% 36% 27%


44% 48% 50% 41% 41% 51%

I have heard of, but don’t know anything about them

8% 16% 22% 5% 3% 12%

Never heard of them 4% 5% 8% 1% 2% 1%

Not sure 1% 1% 2% 1% 0.5% 1%

NET: know a lot / quite a lot

42% 30% 18% 53% 54% 35%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1293) Q66 (E)

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2017 n=1861) Q70 (W)

Before this survey what, if anything, did you know about the organisation called WorkSafe NZ?


Similarly, employers were asked to what extent they agree WorkSafe:

• helps businesses understand their health and safety issues and risks

• is doing a good job helping businesses improve workplace safety

• is doing a good job helping businesses keep people healthy at work

• is making a real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand

• works effectively with businesses like mine

• is a trustworthy organisation

• is an organisation I can have confidence in.

WORKERS

Attitudes towards WorkSafe have changed little between 2016 and 2017. Workers had a positive view

of WorkSafe, with between half and two-thirds agreeing (‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’) with each

statement. Disagreement levels ranged between 9% and 14%, with ‘don’t know’ ratings ranging

between 6% and 15%. But between two and three out of ten workers did not have a view about

WorkSafe either way (neither agreeing nor disagreeing with each statement).

WorkSafe was rated most positively for helping workers understand the health and safety issues and

risks they face (63% agreement) and for doing a good job helping workers to be safe at work (58%

agreement). Slightly lower proportions agreed that WorkSafe is doing a good job helping workers be

healthy at work (50% agreement).


real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand (51% agreement).


9.2.1 Perceptions of WorkSafe: Workers from the four high-risk sectors, 2016 and 2017

By sector

Workers in the Forestry and Manufacturing sectors had a more positive view of WorkSafe than

workers in the Agriculture and Construction sectors. Their views were particularly positive about

WorkSafe for:

helping workers understanding the health and safety issues and risks they face (71% cf. 63%

overall)

doing a good job helping workers to be safe at work (65% and 69% respectively, cf. 58%

overall)

being a trustworthy organisation (63%, 64%, respectively, cf. 54% overall).

Agriculture workers had less positive views than the other sectors.

9%

13%

11%

15%

8%

9%

8%

10%

6%

8%

3%

6%

12%

12%

9%

10%

11%

12%

13%

14%

9%

11%

11%

9%

25%

25%

23%

22%

29%

28%

25%

26%

25%

23%

22%

22%

54%

50%

56%

54%

53%

51%

54%

50%

60%

58%

64%

63%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors 2016 (n=1673-1683), 2017 (n=1447-1455) Q120 (W) To what extent do you agree or disagree that WorkSafe:Note: Some of the figures in the text do not match with the sum of the strongly agree/agree figures in the chart due to rounding.

Helps workers in your industry understand the health and safety

issues and risks they face

Is doing a good job helping workers to be safe at work

Is doing a good job helping workers to be healthy at work

Is making a real difference to workplace health and safety in New Zealand

Is a trustworthy organisation

Is an organisation I can have confidence in

2017(n=1453)

2016(n=1681)

2017(n=1455)

2016(n=1683)

2017(n=1448)

2016(n=1678)

2017(n=1453)

2016(n=1673)

2017(n=1447)

2016(n=1675)

2017(n=1448)

2016(n=1676)


9.2.2 Perceptions, trust and confidence in WorkSafe: Workers, 2017

EMPLOYERS

Employers’ attitudes towards WorkSafe showed little change between 2016 and 2017 and were

generally similar to workers’ attitudes.

Between half and two-thirds agree (‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’) with all statements except that

WorkSafe is working effectively with businesses like mine, (with 41% agreeing and 18% disagreeing).

Agreement was strongest for helping businesses understand the health and safety issues and risks

they face (69% agree) and for doing a good job helping businesses improve workplace safety (61%

agree).

Slightly fewer employers agreed that WorkSafe is doing a good job helping businesses keep workers

healthy at work (57%), is trustworthy (55%) and is an organisation they can have confidence in (51%).

Half (52%) of the employers agreed that WorkSafe is making a real difference to workplace health and

safety in New Zealand.

As with workers, between twenty and thirty percent of employers were neutral about WorkSafe.

Disagreement levels ranged between 7% and 18%, with ‘don’t know’ ratings ranging between 4% and

12%.



FORESTRY(n=311-314)



Helps workers in your industry understand the health and safety issues and risks they face

61% 62% 71% 71% 59%

Is doing a good job helping workers to be safe at work

53% 58% 65% 69% 58%

Is doing a good job helping workers to be healthy at work

46% 49% 54% 61% 47%


46% 51% 57% 60% 52%

Is a trustworthy organisation 45% 56% 63% 64% 62%


43% 51% 59% 60% 57%

Base: All respondents (excluding not answered) Q120 (W)To what extent do you agree or disagree that WorkSafe:


9.2.3 Perceptions of WorkSafe: Employers from the four high-risk sectors, 2016 and 2017

By sector

Forestry sector employers were more positive about WorkSafe than employers in the other high-risk

sectors and Forestry was the only sector in which over half the employers agreed that WorkSafe works

effectively with businesses like theirs. Their views were particularly positive about WorkSafe for:

helping businesses understand their health and safety issues and risks (80% agreed in 2017,

an increase from 70% agreement in 2016 cf. 69% overall in both years)

doing a good job helping businesses improve workplace safety (70% cf. 61% overall)

12%

11%

15%

12%

10%

11%

11%

12%

7%

8%

6%

7%

3%

4%

13%

13%

10%

11%

20%

18%

11%

9%

9%

10%

9%

9%

8%

7%

25%

25%

22%

21%

30%

29%

28%

27%

26%

25%

26%

24%

20%

20%

50%

51%

53%

55%

41%

41%

50%

52%

57%

57%

59%

61%

69%

69%Helps businesses understand

their health and safety issues and risks

Is doing a good job helping businesses improve workplace

safety

Is doing a good job helping businesses keep people healthy

at work

Is making a real difference to workplace health and safety in

New Zealand

Works effectively with businesses like mine

Is a trustworthy organisation


2017(n=1187)

2016(n=1128)

2017(n=1184)

2016(n=1127)

2017(n=1186)

2016(n=1128)

2017(n=1182)

2016(n=1127)

2017(n=1178)

2016(n=1124)

2017(n=1182)

2016(n=1123)

2017(n=1182)

2016(n=1126)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors 2016 (n=1123-1128); 2017 (n=1178-1187) Q112 (E) To what extent do you agree or disagree that WorkSafe:Note: Some of the figures in the text do not match with the sum of the strongly agree/agree figures in the chart due to rounding.


works effectively with businesses like mine (68%, up from 52% in 2016, cf. 41% overall in both

years)

is a trustworthy organisation (69% cf. 55% overall)

is an organisation I can have confidence in (67% cf. 51% overall).

Trust and confidence in WorkSafe were lower among Agriculture sector employers. Fewer than half

agreed that WorkSafe is a trustworthy organisation (47% agreement cf. 55% overall) or that WorkSafe

is an organisation they can have confidence in (42% agreement cf. 51% overall). Only one in three

Agriculture sector employers (37%) considered that WorkSafe works effectively with businesses like

theirs.

9.2.4 Perceptions, trust and confidence in WorkSafe: Employers, 2017

9.3 WORKER KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CONTACTING WORKSAFE

Workers who knew ‘at least a little bit’ about WorkSafe were asked if they knew that they could contact

WorkSafe to ask for advice or information, to make a complaint about health and safety or to request

an inspector visit. They were also asked if they knew they could contact WorkSafe using an 0800

number.

Knowing that WorkSafe can be contacted for information and advice about health and safety was most

widely known, with nearly nine in ten (88%) being aware of this. Knowing about the toll free number

was least well known, but nearly two in three workers (65%) were aware of this.



FORESTRY(n=219-221)


OTHER SECTOR(n=362)

Helps businesses understand their health and safety issues and risks

69% 69% 80% 71% 74%

Is doing a good job helping businesses improve workplace safety

57% 64% 70% 60% 61%

Is doing a good job helping businesses keep people healthy at work

56% 58% 64% 58% 57%


50% 55% 66% 52% 50%

Works effectively with businesses like mine

37% 45% 68% 41% 31%

Is a trustworthy organisation 47% 60% 69% 60% 63%


42% 56% 67% 56% 59%

Base: All employers Q112 (E)To what extent do you agree or disagree that WorkSafe:


Results have been stable over the last two years, with the biggest increases occurring between 2014

and 2015, for making a complaint and using a toll free number and between 2015 and 2016 for asking

for an inspector visit.

9.3.1 Knowledge about contacting WorkSafe: Workers who know at least ‘a little bit’ about

WorkSafe

By sector

Generally, knowledge of contact options was high across the high-risk sectors. Manufacturing

workers’ knowledge lagged slightly behind other sectors’ knowledge.

Base: Workers from four high-risk sectors who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe (2014 n=1134-1155; 2015 n=1446-1470; 2016 n=1652-1668; 2017 n=1444-1454) Q74 (W)Did you know that you can contact WorkSafe NZ to…?

52%

65%

71%

85%

62%

67%

77%

87%

63%

72%

80%

87%

65%

71%

80%

88%

THROUGH A TOLL-FREENUMBER

TO ASK FOR AN INSPECTORVISIT

TO MAKE A COMPLAINT

TO GETINFORMATION/ADVICE

2017

2016

2015

2014


9.3.2 Knowledge about contacting WorkSafe: Workers from the four high-risk sectors who

know at least ‘a little bit’ about WorkSafe, 2017

9.4 CONTACT WITH WORKSAFE

Workers and employers who knew ‘at least a little bit’ about WorkSafe were asked about the ways they

had contact with WorkSafe or heard about them in the last 12 months. It was assumed that those who

had never heard of WorkSafe or had only heard the name would not have contacted them.

The majority of high-risk sector workers and employers had had some type of contact with WorkSafe in

the last 12 months, with employers more likely to have done so than workers. In 2017:

nearly eight in ten workers (79%) had had contact, compared with 84% in 2016.

nine in ten employers (90%) had had contact, compared with 91% in 2016.

Levels of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months have been reasonably consistent over the last

three years. But contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months was lower in 2017 for workers in the

Agriculture sector (from 82% in 2016 to 75% in 2017 cf. 79% overall) and the Manufacturing sector:

(from 82% in 2016 to 76% in 2017, cf. 79% overall).

Forestry sector workers and employers were more likely than those in the other high-risk sectors to

have had contact with WorkSafe:

Forestry workers (86% cf. 79% overall)

Forestry employers (96% cf. 90%).

% YES AGRICULTURE(n=407-409)


FORESTRY(n=311-316)



To get information or advice on health and safety

92% 87% 91% 85% 85%

To make a complaint about health and safety

81% 79% 85% 79% 74%

To ask for an inspector to visit a workplace if you thought it was unsafe

76% 70% 82% 64% 54%

Through a toll-free 0800 phone number

74% 60% 67% 64% 59%

Base: Workers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe Q74 (W)Did you know that you can contact WorkSafe NZ…?


9.4.1 Proportion having contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Workers

9.4.2 Proportion having contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Employers

69%

76%

86%

82%

75%

2017 2016 2015 2014

82% 81% 63%

84% 83% 64%

92% 95% 83%

82% 85% 59%

73% 74% 49%

Base: Workers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=316; 2015 n=382; 2016 n=540, 2017 n=412) Construction (2014 n=349; 2015 n=392; 2016 n=471, 2017 n=364) Forestry (2014 n=237; 2015 n=330; 2016 n=270, 2017 n=315) Manufacturing (2014 n=275; 2015 n=380; 2016 n=392, 2017 n= 361) Other sector (2014 n=354; 2015 n=446; 2016 n=654, 2017 n=686 ) Q72 (W) In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?

AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

77%

88%

96%

92%

87%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Employers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe in Agriculture (2014 n=252; 2015 n=328; 2016 n=317, 2017 n=332) Construction (2014 n=225; 2015 n=344; 2016 n=245, 2017 n=297) Forestry (2014 n=244; 2015 n=262; 2016 n=222, 2017 n=218) Manufacturing (2014 n=237; 2015 n=370; 2016 n=333, 2017 n=331) Other sector (2014 n=186; 2015 n=304; 2016 n=300, 2017 n=358) Q68 (E)In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?

2016 2015 2014

91% 91% 63%

91% 91% 83%

98% 99% 93%

92% 90% 65%

82% 83% 60%


TYPES OF CONTACT

Respondents who knew at least a little bit about WorkSafe and had contact with the organisation in the

last 12 months were asked about the type of contact. There have been six main types of contact since

2015 among workers and employers, with some differences in the relative frequency of mention.

Seeing materials or information produced by WorkSafe is the main contact type for workers (44% in

2017 cf. 46% in 2016). One in five workers (21%) said they have had no contact. Lack of contact was

greater than average among Agriculture workers (25%) and Manufacturing workers (24% mention).

Visiting their website was the main method for employers (50% mention in 2017 and 2016) and/or

seeing materials or information produced by WorkSafe (50% in 2017). One in ten employers who knew

at least a little about WorkSafe said they have had no contact in the last 12 months, a proportion

consistent with 2015 and 2016. Employers in the Agriculture and Manufacturing sectors (13% and 12%

respectively) had a higher level of no contact than those in Construction (8%) and Forestry (4%).

Having an inspector visit their workplace was mentioned by 21% of workers and 18% of employers.

57% of Forestry workers said they had had contact with WorkSafe via an inspector’s visit, while 52% of

Forestry employers mentioned this, higher than any other sector.

Specific events (such as fieldays, trade events) figured in contact types for both groups.

9.4.3 Main types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Workers and Employers from

the four high-risk sectors who know at least ‘a little bit’ about WorkSafe, 2017

Most recent contacts with WorkSafe among workers and employers show overall consistency of

response from 2015 onwards, with some fluctuations in individual contact types year on year.

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

MAIN TYPES OF CONTACT WITH WorkSafe NZ 2017 2017

Seen materials or information produced by WorkSafe NZ 44% 50%

Through media reports on WorkSafe NZ 28% 27%

I visited their website 23% 50%

As a result of WorkSafe’s advertising about being healthy and safe at work

21% 29%

An inspector has visited my workplace 21% 18%

Through my… workmates/colleagues (W)… business contacts or industry information (E)

18% 23%

Have not had contact with WorkSafe NZ 21% 10%

Base: Workers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe Q72 (W)Base: Employers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe Q68 (E): n the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?


Details of contacts with WorkSafe in the last 12 months for the four high-risk sectors for workers and

employers are contained in Appendix V.

9.4.4 Types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Workers from the four high-risk

sectors who know at least ‘a little bit’ about WorkSafe

TYPE OF CONTACT WITH WorkSafe NZ 2014 2015 2016 2017

I have seen materials or information produced by WorkSafe NZ

41% 37% 46% 44%

Through media reports on WorkSafe NZ - 30% 28% 28%

I visited their website 14% 20% 27% 23%

An inspector has visited my workplace 16% 21% 22% 21%

As a result of WorkSafe NZ's advertising about being healthy and safe at work

- 21% 21% 21%

Through my workmates/colleagues - 18% 18% 18%

During National Fieldays 6% 5% 4% 6%

At a trade event or other event - 9% 8% 6%

At a workshop or roadshow organised by WorkSafe NZ

5% 8% 10% 6%

I have phoned them for advice or information 4% 5% 8% 5%

At a training session/workshop/course/seminar - - 1% 1%

Through me notifying them of an event - - 1% 0.5%

Other - 3% 2% 2%

Have not had any contact with WorkSafe NZ 37% 17% 16% 21%

Base: Workers who know a little bit/quite a lot/a lot about WorkSafe NZ (2014 n=1177; 2015 n=1484; 2016 n=1673, 2017 n=1452) Q72 (W)In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?


9.4.5 Types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Employers from the four high-risk


TYPE OF CONTACT WITH WorkSafe NZ 2014 2015 2016 2017

I visited their website 32% 39% 50% 50%


49% 53% 58% 50%

I have seen WorkSafe NZ's advertising relating to being healthy and safe at work

- 27% 32% 29%

Through media reports on WorkSafe NZ - 31% 34% 27%

Through my business contacts or industry information

- 27% 25% 23%

Been visited by a WorkSafe NZ inspector 16% 19% 20% 18%

I have phoned them for advice or information 11% 14% 14% 14%

At a trade event or other event - 13% 15% 13%


- 10% 13% 9%

During National Fieldays 7% 8% 8% 8%

Contact by email 0.5% 0.5% - 1%

Reporting an incident/notifiable event - - 0.5% 1%

During conferences/workshops/seminars/forums/attended a Road Show

3% 1% - -

Other 2% 1% 1% 2%

Have not had any contact with WorkSafe NZ 30% 9% 9% 10%

Base: Employers who know a little bit/quite a lot/a lot about WorkSafe NZ (2014 n=958; 2015 n=1304; 2016 n=1117; 2017 n=1178) Q68 (E)In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?


9.5 ACTION TAKEN WHILE OR AFTER VISITING THE WORKSAFE WEBSITE

In 2016 and 2017, workers and employers who had visited the WorkSafe website were asked what, if

anything, they did while or after their visit to the website. A pre-coded list of 17 options was provided,

some of which were sector specific. For example, where online interactive tools were asked about,

those in the Agriculture and Forestry sectors were given the example of ‘Safer Farms map showing

risks on farms and how to manage them’, while those in the Construction and Manufacturing sectors

were given the example of ‘Animated floorplans for managing risk’.

Mentions of actions taken were typically higher among employers than workers. The most common

actions related to documents, rather than video, interactive or contact.

Downloading a document to read and/or save was the most common action taken (59% of workers

and 70% of employers), Printing a document was second most common (36% of workers and 54% of

employers) and followed by using a template (22% of workers and 43% of employers). 24% of

employers and 16% of workers said they read a case study about how businesses mange health and

safety.

Actions taken detailed by the four high-risk sectors are included in Appendix V.


9.5.1 Actions taken while or after visiting the WorkSafe website: Workers and Employers,

2016 and 2017

Base: All respondents (excluding not answered) from the four risk sectors (Workers 2016 n=388; 2017 n=312; Employers 2016 n=628; 2017 n=623) Q121 (W) / Q113 (€)What, if anything, did you do while or after visiting the WorkSafe website?

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

2016 2017 2016 2017

I downloaded a document/s to read or save 57% 59% 69% 70%

I printed a document/s 41% 36% 54% 54%

I used a template/s 29% 22% 43% 43%

I read a case study about how businesses manage health and safety

19% 16% 22% 24%

I watched/downloaded a video 13% 14% 15% 16%

I completed an online form/s 19% 13% 15% 14%

I subscribed to get updates 8% 10% 18% 18%

I contacted someone at a WorkSafe office 10% 9% 14% 13%

I did a quiz 6% 8% 4% 10%

I phoned WorkSafe’s 0800 number 10% 6% 10% 13%

I used one of the online interactive tools 6% 6% 8% 11%

I connected to WorkSafe on social media 3% 6% 3% 2%

I sent WorkSafe an email 12% 4% 6% 10%

I shared some information via social media 2% 4% 2% 2%

I just visited the site 2% 1% 1% 2%

I asked for information under the Official Information Act or Privacy Act

1% 0.5% 2% 2%

I made a complaint about WorkSafe 1% - 0.5% -

Other 2% 1% 1% 1%

Nothing 1% 2% 1% -


9.6 EMPLOYER USE OF WORKSAFE INFORMATION AND GUIDANCE

Employers were asked which types of WorkSafe health and safety guidance material they had used in

the last 12 months and which materials they had found most useful. Six new types of material were

added to the question about guidance used in 2016.

While there has been little change in the proportions using mainstream WorkSafe materials between

2016 and 2017, use of newer online materials, including quizzes, interactive tools and animated videos

all increased in 2017.

Seven in ten employers have used at least one WorkSafe health and safety guidance material in the

last 12 months. The most common materials used by employers were:

factsheets (35%)

forms and templates (35%)

Best / Good Practice Guidelines (35%)

checklists (34%).

Similar numbers of employers used the toolkits (23%) and/or quick reference guides (22%).


9.6.1 Guidance material used in the last 12 months: Employers from the four high-risk sectors

By sector

Use of the guidance materials was relatively flat across high-risk sector employers. There were a few

exceptions, as in 2017 higher numbers of Forestry sector employers used:

Approved Codes of Practice (83% cf. 29% overall)

Best/Good Practice Guidelines (64% cf. 35% overall)

A chart showing employers’ use of each guidance material across the four high-risk sectors is provided

in Appendix V.

35%

35%

35%

34%

29%

23%

22%

14%

12%

10%

7%

7%

6%

1%

1%

30%

Factsheets

Forms and templates

Best/Good Practice Guidelines

Checklists

Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs)

Toolkits

Quick reference guides

Health and Safety at Work Interpretive Guidelines

Posters

Case studies about how businesses manage workplace…

Online quizzes

Online interactive tools

Animated videos / ice breakers

Used other source of guidance material

Other types of WorkSafe NZ guidance

None

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=1470; 2016 n=1207; 2017 n=1283) Q104a (E)Which types of guidance material have you used in the last 12 months?Note: ‘None’ responses are not directly comparable for 2015 to 2016 years, due to the addition of new materials in 2016.

2016 2015

36% 27%

34% 19%

38% 31%

35% 27%

27% 24%

23% 18%

23% -

16% -

13% 9%

7% -

3% -

2% -

2% -

1% 1%

2% 1%

26% 38%

2017


USEFULNESS OF GUIDANCE MATERIAL

Employers were asked how useful each type of guidance material used in the last 12 months was for

their business, using a 3-point scale ranging from 1 ‘not useful’ to 3 ‘very useful’.

Between six and seven in ten rated most of the guidance materials as ‘very useful’ for their business,

with forms and templates and Best/Good Practice Guidelines most highly rated (62% ‘very useful’).

Materials that were considered as useful (rated ‘very useful’ by only half or fewer than half of their

users) included the following:

posters (52% rated ‘very useful’, down from 63% in 2016)

online tools, including online quizzes (45% ‘very useful’), animated videos such as Steve and

the Yappers (42% ‘very useful’) and online interactive tools (32% ‘very useful’).

9.6.2 Usefulness of Guidance Material: Employers from the four high-risk sectors

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors who have used any guidance materials in the last 12 months Q104b (E)If yes, how useful was it for your business?

‘Very Useful’

14%

14%

14%

10%

7%

5%

2%

1%

2%

2%

3%

1%

1%

1%

3%

8%

6%

8%

4%

5%

2%

1%

1%

1%

2%

13%

47%

38%

38%

39%

33%

34%

35%

31%

30%

26%

29%

28%

25%

70%

32%

42%

45%

50%

56%

62%

63%

66%

67%

69%

69%

72%

72%

Other types of WorkSafe NZ guidance (n=37)

Online interactive tools (n=53)

Animated videos / ice breakers (n=58)

Online quizzes (e.g. the Health and Safety at Work…

Posters (n=158)

Case studies about how businesses manage…

Quick reference guides (n=294)

Factsheets (n=505)

Toolkits (n=277)

Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) (n=513)

H & S at Work Interpretive Guidelines (n=190)

Checklists (n=391)

Best/Good Practice Guidelines (n=532)

Forms and templates (n=433)

Don't know Not useful Somewhat useful Very useful

2016 2015

73% 69%

70% 69%

74% 64%

68% -

65% 67%

72% 65%

66% 64%

64% -

65% -

63% 42%

59% -

37% -

60% -

69% 59%

2017


9.7 PREFERRED FORMATS FOR INFORMATION/GUIDANCE: WORKERS AND

EMPLOYERS

Workers and employers were asked which types of information they would find most useful for

communicating health and safety messages (Employers were asked this question in relation to their

workers). They were asked to choose five from a list of 14 types with the option to add other

preferences. Three response options, case studies about how businesses manage workplace health

and safety, online quizzes and online interactive tools were added in 2016.

WORKERS

Five formats were preferred by workers (and the same five formats topped the employers’ list).

Paper booklets/brochures were most commonly mentioned as useful for receiving health and

safety messages (56%).

Online training courses/learning modules, posters and videos appealed to between three and

four in ten workers (39%, 37% and 33%, respectively).

Preference for Mobile app format has increased, with 30% rating mobile apps a preferred

format (up from 26% in 2016). Note: preference for mobile apps was lower than average

among workers in the Manufacturing sector (21% mention).

Sector based results are provided in Appendix V.


9.7.1 Formats considered useful for communicating health and safety messages: Workers


56%

39%

37%

33%

30%

17%

16%

16%

16%

15%

12%

11%

9%

8%

2%

5%

Paper booklets/brochures

Online training courses/learning modules

Posters

Videos (e.g. for inductions)

Mobile Apps

Case studies about how businesses manage health and safety

YouTube clips

Text reminders (e.g. weekly reminders, alerts when newinformation comes out)


Scripts for one-on-one or group talks (e.g. toolbox/tailgatetalks)

Information sheets in a variety of languages

Pocket cards

Online quizzes (e.g. about the Health and Safety at Work Act)

Graphic stories (e.g. comic strips, cartoons)

Other

None of the above

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=2087; 2016 n=2167; 2017 n=1871) Q112 (W)From the list, which types of information would you find most useful for communicating health and safety messages?

2016 2015

59% 65%

43% 39%

36% 41%

33% 31%

26% 24%

19% -

14% 15%

15% 16%

18% -

18% 21%

8% 13%

13% 17%

13% -

6% 8%

2% 2%

4% 4%

2017


EMPLOYERS As mentioned, employers’ five top preferred formats matched those for workers.

Paper booklets/brochures were most commonly mentioned as useful for receiving health and

safety messages (51% in 2017) but preference for this format has decreased since 2015 (59%

mention)

Posters, online training courses/learning modules and mobile apps appealed to three in ten

employers (32%, 31% and 28%, respectively). As with workers, preference for mobile apps

type format has increased (up from 22% in 2015).

Videos (for example for induction) were a less preferred option among employers than workers

(18% and 33% respectively).

Sector based results are provided in Appendix V.

9.7.2 Formats considered useful for communicating health and safety messages: Employers


51%

32%

31%

28%

18%

18%

16%

16%

13%

12%

10%

10%

7%

6%

6%

Paper booklets / brochures

Posters

Online training courses/learning modules

Mobile Apps

Videos (e.g. for inductions)

Text reminders (e.g. weekly reminders, alerts whennew information comes out)

YouTube clips

Scripts for one-on-one or group talks (e.g.toolbox/tailgate talks)

Pocket cards

Case studies about how businesses manageworkplace health and safety

Online quizzes (e.g. about the Health and Safety atWork Act)


Information sheets in a variety of languages

Graphic stories (e.g. comic strips, cartoons)

None of the above

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors (2015 n=1493; 2016 n=1222; 2017 n=1292) Q105 (E)From the list below, which types of information would you find most useful for communicating health and safety messages?

2016 2015

56% 59%

33% 35%

32% 30%

26% 22%

17% 18%

18% 16%

12% 12%

25% 25%

13% 17%

13% -

7% -

11% -

6% 9%

5% 7%

6% 8%

2017


9.8 LIKELIHOOD OF WORKSAFE INSPECTOR VISITING WORKPLACE/BUSINESS

Workers and employers who knew ‘at least a little bit’ about WorkSafe were asked how likely they

thought it was that a WorkSafe inspector will visit their workplace/business in the next 12 months, using

a 5-point scale ranging from ‘very unlikely’ (1 on the scale) to ‘very likely’ (5 on the scale).

Three in ten workers and employers (30%) from the four high-risk sectors thought it was likely (a rating

of 4 or 5) that a WorkSafe inspector would visit their workplace or business in the next 12 months.

9.8.1 Proportion who know at least ‘a little bit’ about WorkSafe and think it likely that a

WorkSafe NZ inspector will visit their workplace/business in the next 12 months:


28% 27%33% 30%

2014(n=1227)

2015(n=1542)

2016(n=1727)

2017(n=1496)

29%35% 35% 30%

2014(n=960)

2015(n=1305)

2016(n=1128)

2017(n=1191)

WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors who know at least a little bit about WorkSafeQ73 (W)

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors who know at least a little bit about WorkSafeQ69 (E)

How likely do you think it is that a WorkSafe NZ inspector will visit your workplace/business in the next 12 months?


WORKERS

By sector

Forestry workers were more likely to think an inspector would visit their workplace than workers in the

other high-risk sectors (54% cf. 30% overall), while workers in the Agriculture sector were less likely to

think this was the case (24%).

Perceptions about the likelihood of an inspector’s visit have fluctuated over the survey years.



Workers

18%

33%

54%

31%

24%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2017

Base: Workers in Agriculture (2014 n=329; 2015 n=394; 2016 n=556; 2017 n=425) Construction (2014 n=362; 2015 n=405; 2016 n=478; 2017 n=373) Forestry,(2014 n=238; 2015 n=336; 2016 n=280; 2017 n=327) Manufacturing (2014 n=298; 2015 n=407; 2016 n=413; 2017 n=371) Other sector, (2014 n=382; 2015 n=456; 2016 n=671; 2017 n=703)Q73 (W)How likely do you think it is that a WorkSafe NZ inspector will visit your workplace in the next 12 months?

2016 2015 2014

29% 20% 19%

32% 29% 32%

60% 58% 51%

39% 30% 33%

15% 13% 16%


EMPLOYERS

By sector

As in previous years, Forestry employers who know ‘at least a little bit’ about WorkSafe NZ were more

likely than other high-risk sector employers to think that a WorkSafe inspector would visit their business

in the next 12 months (62% cf. 30% overall), with 53% saying they think it ‘very likely’ (cf. 19% overall).



Employers

2017

13%

28%

62%

34%

25%AGRICULTURE

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

MANUFACTURING

OTHER

2016 2015 2014

33% 30% 21%

35% 39% 42%

69% 71% 71%

36% 36% 25%

15% 17% 12%

Base: Employers in Agriculture (2014 n=254; 2015 n=326; 2016 n=317; 2017 n=336) Construction (2014 n=224; 2015 n=347; 2016 n=248; 2017 n=301) Forestry (2014 n=245; 2015 n=262; 2016 n=228; 2017 n=222) Manufacturing (2014 n=237; 2015 n=370; 2016 n=335; 2017 n=332) ‘Other’ (2014 n=186; 2015 n=304; 2016 n=302; 2017 n=362) Q69 (E) How likely do you think it is that a WorkSafe NZ inspector will visit your business in the next 12 months?

195

SECTION 10:

IMPROVING HEALTH AND

SAFETY IN THEIR INDUSTRY


10 WHERE WORKSAFE SHOULD FOCUS TO

IMPACT HEALTH AND SAFETY

INTRODUCTION This short section discusses workers’ and employers’ suggestions for improving health and safety in

their industry sector.

At the end of the survey, workers and employers were asked what could make the most difference to

improve health and safety in their industry, taking into account things covered in the survey.

Half of the workers and half of the employers surveyed chose to make a comment. The main themes

among workers and employers have been consistent since 2015:

encouraging personal responsibility

encourage use of common sense (not sole reliance on health and safety rules)

proper and relevant training for the job. Familiarisation with equipment

more awareness of health and safety, and paying attention to safe work practices

(more) visits and mentoring by health and safety representatives. Visits on-site by WorkSafe

(employers particularly)

The value of a simple, workable health and safety policy (employers particularly)

Note only themes mentioned by three percent or more workers and employers are listed in this section.

A small selection of verbatim comments are included to provide a more tangible understanding of these

broad themes. A file of all suggestions has been provided separately to WorkSafe.

WORKERS

By sector

While the main themes were mentioned by workers across the four high-risk sectors, there were some

differences by sector. Forestry workers for example, commonly spoke about the need to lessen

pressure to meet high production targets, and also, for good on-the-job training. Construction workers

and Agricultural sector workers stressed the importance of encouraging personal responsibility and

common sense on-site.

A selection of verbatim comments on key themes is included below.

“People need to be personally responsible for their safety as well as their employer to provide them

with the correct gear and safe environment.” Agriculture worker

“Safety seems to be becoming a bit over the top rather than using common sense.”

“Let people who work in their workplace set the standard of health and safety because you are taking

away the reason for them thinking common sense and become teachers instead of rule makers.”

Manufacturing worker


“You have not touched on mental health or depression or bullying, (or even tiredness from the night-

before), any of which can be the root cause for accidents to happen, no matter how safe the workplace

is, or how conscientious our workmates and bosses are.” Agriculture worker

“H&S is a high priority in our workplace; however this is sometimes compromised in order to protect

revenue. Especially under the pressure of time constraints.”

“Communicate clearly the requirements & guidelines so all understand and accept as best practice.

Every day! It's for everyone's benefit.” Manufacturing worker

“Targets too high - pay is not good enough. Therefore people take shortcuts & accidents happen.”

Forestry worker

“I think that there should be "surprise" visits to site by inspectors. Not to go into every detail, but to look

around and talk to the employee on site, at the machine. This inspector needs to be from the industry

with experience with machines and equipment, and common sense. They must not be someone who

has been a university trained "know it all" who has never seen the true working environment. If you are

to influence any future change, you must have the respect from those you are trying to advise.”

Forestry worker

“The owner of my workplace does what we call a "Safety Draw" after every "Clean" six months

(Incident or Accident Free six months) whereby every worker has a chance to win a brand new 5

burner BBQ. A bit of motivation for all to stay safe at work. Any time off work caused by incidents will

delay the draw. Quite a few of us boys on the shop floor are dusting off our large Jumbucks for the

summer, from this draw.” Manufacturing worker

“The amount of compliance paperwork to PROVE that you are compliant will NOT stop accidents from

happening. To repeatedly go through tick box exercises often causes complacency as opposed to

emphasising some very important pertinent subjects.” Forestry worker

“WorkSafe needs to understand the culture of the workers in the industry to make health & safety rules

& regs more relevant for those actually doing the work in the industry.” Forestry worker

“Although the few people I have dealt with at WorkSafe NZ have been professional and pleasant, it is

sometimes difficult when the inspector who attends an anonymous complaint from the public, does not

seem to have specialist knowledge of the type of work he or she is inspecting. I had an inspector who

advised he was a boilerman back in England, attend to inspect safe working at heights. The same

inspector attended a Colleagues incident following an electrical flash over. I realize resources can be

an issue, but it would be good to have specialists in each industry oversee relevant trade works.”

Construction worker

“I believe that there have been far too many rules/regulations put in place to dumb the whole thing

down to a level where simple tasks are made more difficult and sometimes less safe. Let people make

some decisions for themselves. It worked in the past.” Construction worker

“Regulations, penalties and compulsory compliance will not change safety as much as allowing

workers time and knowledge to think and manage their own environment.” Construction worker

A summary of all workers’ suggestions with 3% mention or more by high-risk sector is provided.


10.1.1 Suggestions to impact health and safety: Workers, 2017

MAIN SUGGESTIONS (3% mention or more)

AGRICULTURE(n=504)

CONSTRUCTION(n=441)

FORESTRY(n=364)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=551)

Encourage personal responsibility 7 8 5 4

Encourage use of common sense 9 6 2 3

Proper training for the job / familiarisation with equipment

4 6 8 4

More awareness of health and safety and paying attention to safe work practices

3 3 4 3

Awareness and management of hazards

4 3 2 2

Greater level of work siteinspections

2 4 3 3

Education for workers and management on safe practices and legal rights and obligations

3 3 3 2

Less pressure to meet high production targets

2 3 7 2

Visits / mentoring by health and safety reps

1 2 5 3

Employers be more accountable. Take more responsibility

1 2 3 5

Continued communication –reminder of hazards

3 2 2 2

Stop going over the top about health and safety

3 3 1 1

No suggestions 55 46 40 51

Base: All Workers Q84 (W)Thinking about all the things covered in this survey, what could make the most difference to improve health and safety in your industry?


EMPLOYERS

By sector

Employers stressed the value of site visits, both to help employers embed health and safety practices,

but also (if WorkSafe) to help foster a positive relationship with WorkSafe at workplaces.

“If someone from WorkSafe were to visit one of our sites (they haven't as yet) it would be really good

for them to have a look at not only our physical work but also our processes and systems in our SSSP.

So that we know we are on track with best practice and they can advise of and confirm the systems

that we have in place are up to scratch.”

“WorkSafe getting out more and talking to people on the sites, making themselves seem more

approachable and encouraging the positive practices seen onsite. Many people still see WorkSafe as

something 'negative. Most of the time they only turn up when something has gone wrong and people

feel as though they might be out to get them. A more proactive approach to getting out on-sites,

sharing information (in person) etc. might help. A standardised approach to health and safety across

the industry would be great for a lot of people. Everyone seems to expect different things and a lot of

information gets passed around but everyone expects it in a different format creating double handling

and wasted time on paperwork. More black and white information is also good. Some information and

explanations from WorkSafe especially can still be up for interpretation and still leaves you feeling as

though there is a bit of a grey area.” Construction employer

“I like the way WorkSafe show up and highlight areas that need work in a way that makes them seem

helpful, not dictatorial. The main issues with Health and safety is going away from one on one talks

about how you are going to be safe, which happens for some as all their time is chewed up making and

paying for pointless documents that do not get read daily and are impossible to remember. The main

points of health and safety are: Is our gear safe to use? Are my workers and I using the gear properly?

Do they understand what is going to happen as this process is undertaken? Are they sober? Are they

happy? Do they understand the correct method? Are they capable of performing the correct method? Is

it safe to cut this tree in this fashion? Am I pushing us too hard for money?

It is clear that the years that accidents in forestry rose, log prices fell, so the main way to protect

forestry staff is truly and undeniably; to make sure that the corporate stakeholders absorb the losses

and do not pressure their logging crews to produce more. We would go a long way towards safety if we

encouraged less drinking as well, starting by removing it from the rugby/sports culture, as alcohol is

without a doubt the worst drug in this industry when it comes to safety, followed by meth. Another good

way to keep workers off meth could be to offer them good wages and financial incentives, i.e., have a

system for those who require it, where the company teaches good financial management and wealth

creation methods, so that all the 'spare cash' that some workers get has a predetermined destination.

People need a goal, or else they will live day to day-week to week, and will naturally then fall in to the

habits of the people they are influenced by i.e. the manager/owner and their work peers which may

influence to just get 'wasted' for the weekend. I have also noticed that quite often a weed smoker will

be less of a drinker, and if weed is legalised, a forestry company would be far wiser to discourage

alcohol than weed, and to encourage weed over meth, but most importantly, to give them an 'out' from

all these drugs.

Without an alternative fun way to socialise and spend money, money will naturally be spent on drugs

and alcohol and be 'pissed against the wall' due to a lack of direction and financial goal. Total reform of

the culture of New Zealanders is needed, and signing health and safety forms and having atlas sized

health and safety documents falls far short of building strong workplace relationships and having good

communication and leadership skills, as well as having a policy of 'company profits last, workers profit

first'!” Forestry employer


“I like the WorkSafe philosophy of creating a safe work culture. The buddy system is great for that as

well. All of this new legislation has only made Health and Safety a less of a burden to employees

workers and visitors and a far more accountability for PCBU's and Officers. It is a shame that it has

taken Cave Creek and countless fatalities to make this change a reality.” Construction sector

Employers talked of the importance of having a health and safety policy that is simple, concise and

relevant to the sector.

“Many businesses control Health and Safety in different ways (Paper systems or Electronic). One thing

that has helped us is a centralised database to compile hazards, training, accidents/incidents/near

misses within our business. Having a simple system to centralise all information into one place would

be very beneficial i.e. especially for smaller businesses. They could either download a copy or log-into

their own version. If everyone uses a single copy then WorkSafe would get live country-wide data. We

have implemented a Database here using all the criteria from ACC's WSMP requirements. This has

helped us improve our HSE and set flags for items that need periodic review.” Manufacturing employer

“More questions based on "productivity, production, profit verse Health & Safety". In my opinion, this is

root cause of the majority of failings in health & safety in the average construction company.”

Construction employer

“It does not matter how many Health and Safety procedures or rules you have in place - they are only

as good as the people you have working for you. If they choose not to think first and follow guidelines

given then they will put themselves and possibly other workers at risk.” Agriculture employer

There was a sense across both workers and employers that paperwork for the sake of paperwork does

not necessarily drive better health and safety outcomes for workers or the business.

“Everyone in the workplace is involved with H&S. It's not about regulations, punishment, it’s about all

workers looking after each other, and so no one is hurt or killed at work. It would be good if all workers

felt comfortable to speak up in a work environment if they saw something unsafe. Really get the

message across what H&S is about not a big stick but stopping workers getting injured. Think as a

business owner the rules and regulations are getting too time consuming - feel the importance should

be about Risk management and letting workers speak up when they see things. Feel paperwork is

becoming the more important factor on H&S over just spending time making sure things are safe in the

workplace. In other words trusting businesses to do the job on managing the H&S if their records show

low injury rates.” Forestry employer

Other verbatim comments included the following concerns and thoughts.

“NZ Government engages a policing of minimum Harvesting Compensation Ratio payable to Logging

Contractors who are held accountable for all the Industry related risks, not the Forest Corporations.

Labour Government preaches its policies to support the workers, but small businesses in primary

industries of NZ suffer more substantial difficulties to maintain trained, reliable staff, while maintaining

safety for all employees. Forest Companies still do not recognise the impact. Safe Practises costs

Contractors they engage for services. Forestry Corporations prioritise their Management Revenue and

strong-arm Contractors off against each other to gain lower costed harvesting services. All liability falls

on the Contractor and none on the Forestry Corporate Companies.” Forestry employer

“To make it easier to dismiss workers for not following correct procedures, the health and safety laws

often are contradicted and protect the employees who don’t follow rules. Paid time off for employees to


attend training courses. Ability for employers to deduct training costs from workers who leave the

industry or fail drug tests. Drug testing people on benefits.” Forestry employer

A summary of all employers’ suggestions with 3% mention or more by high-risk sector follows.

10.1.2 Suggestions to impact health and safety: Employers, 2017

MAIN SUGGESTIONS (3% mention or more)

AGRICULTURE(n=365)

CONSTRUCTION(n=331)

FORESTRY(n=223)

MANUFACTU-RING

(n=357)

Encourage personal responsibility 6 5 9 2

Encourage common sense 8 4 2 1

Visits / mentoring by health and safety reps

4 4 4 3

More awareness of health and safety and paying attention to safe work practices

5 3 5 4

Have a workable , clear health and safety policy

5 3 5 3

Proper training for the job / familiarisation with equipment

2 6 7 2

Have information readily available 2 4 4 6

Education for workers and management on safe practices and legal rights and obligations

6 3 3 3

Don’t focus on threats/consequences

5 2 2 3

Awareness and management of hazards

5 2 3 2

Change the ‘she’ll be right’ culture in the workplace

4 2 3 2

No suggestions 52 51 46 58

Base: All Employers Q79 (E)Thinking about all the things covered in this survey, what could make the most difference to improve health and safety in your industry?

202

SECTION 11:

APPENDICES


APPENDIX I: SURVEY METHODOLOGY

QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT

In 2014, structured questionnaires were designed for workers and employers based on extensive

consultation with WorkSafe and on the insights provided by the qualitative research. International

research was used to frame up the question areas included in the quantitative stage, particularly the

research carried out for Safe Work Australia by Valerie Braithwaite and reported in Motivations,

Attitudes, Perceptions and Skills: Pathways to Safe Work.

The dynamics that underlie co-operation and progress on workplace health and safety were identified

in her report as:

1. Appreciation among workers of risk: workers being aware of safety issues and prioritising their

own safety above other considerations (with this being developed and nurtured within the work

context).

2. Strong leadership: where bosses value safety for its own sake and prioritise it above everything

else.

3. Responsive dialogue: where open and timely communication across all levels leads to

identifying problems and fixing them.

4. Participatory structures: formal avenues that are in place (e.g. regular meetings) that ensure

safety is not overlooked and that give workers a say.

5. Work safety authorities that are present and that are fair, seen to be doing their jobs and that

are respected and trusted.

The presence and effectiveness of these five factors impact on safe routines being institutionalised in

the workplace and also on the ability of individual workers to manage their own health and safety and

that of others.

Most of the survey questions have remained identical across all four years, so changes could be

tracked. However several new questions have been added or wording altered, with these being

reported only for the relevant years. The questionnaires will be available on WorkSafe’s website in the

2017 Technical report. See Appendix II for a summary of question topics.

Separate versions of the questionnaire were prepared for employers and for workers. These

questionnaires were adapted for the five sectors included (ten versions in total).

OVERVIEW OF METHOD AND SAMPLE

A self-completion written survey method, providing respondents with the opportunity to complete the

survey either online or in hard copy, was used. This method provided a cost-effective, repeatable

means of obtaining a robust sample of the target audiences.

A comprehensive technical report which discusses the benefits and limitations of this research

approach in more detail and which elaborates on all the technical aspects outlined below is published

separately (see: Nielsen. (2017) Health and safety attitudes and behaviours in the New Zealand

workforce: A survey of workers and employers. 2017 Technical report).


SAMPLE SOURCES

WORKERS

The Electoral Roll records the names and addresses and occupations of the majority of New

Zealanders aged 18 and over who are eligible to vote. The Electoral Roll is a combination of records of:

those who are enrolled on the General Roll

those who are enrolled on the Māori Roll (please note that Māori descent as flagged in the

Electoral Roll was used in this research as an indicator for Māori ethnicity).

Therefore, the Electoral Roll was used to select a representative sample of people working within each

of the sectors being targeted. Potential respondents were selected from the Electoral Roll database as

at 30 June 2017. With the exception of Forestry, participants from one year’s survey were not invited to

participate in the next year’s survey. However, participants in the 2014 survey could be invited to take

part in the 2017 survey. In the Forestry sector, as there were small numbers of workers, some people

may have been invited to participate in all four surveys.

Limitations of the sample source used for workers are:

Around 10% of the eligible New Zealand population are not enrolled to vote and are therefore

excluded from the survey. This figure increases to about 34% of 18-24-year-olds who are

eligible to vote but who are not enrolled. Secondly, the Electoral Roll does not contain all

migrant workers, just those eligible to vote and enrolled to do so.

Occupations are self-described on the Electoral Roll and sample selection was carried out by

searching for words or phrases likely to identify a person working in a specific industry.

Therefore, some people in a sector will have been omitted and others may have been selected

incorrectly for a sector.

A higher proportion of those working in some sectors may not currently be living at the address

they listed on the Electoral Roll (more mobile or moving around to where the work is), thus

relying on others to forward mail to them.

The Electoral Roll excludes workers under 18 years of age.

Those with lower levels of literacy may be less likely to complete a written questionnaire.

EMPLOYERS

The ACC Levy Payers’ database (a list of all the organisations that pay ACC levies) was used to select

a sample of employers from each of the five sectors. In 2015 and 2016, at WorkSafe’s request, the

database included Accredited Employer Programme (AEP) businesses, which are large organisations

that have contracted to take responsibility for the management and costs of their employees’ work-

related injuries and illnesses for an agreed period of time. The ACC database was supplemented for

the Forestry sector by a WorkSafe database.

The ACC database supplied to WorkSafe did not include participants from the 2015 or 2014 surveys,

except for the Forestry sector, where due to the small number of businesses operating in the sector, all

employers were invited to participate.

Limitations of the sample source used for employers are:

The contact information in the ACC database varied – in many instances there was only a

business name supplied and therefore the invitation to participate had to be sent to ‘The Health

and Safety Manager’ rather than a named person; a number of the businesses listed were no

longer operating or had moved address; and some employers who no longer employed staff

were included in the database.


Businesses that had taken part in ACC research in the previous six months were excluded from the

sample provided by ACC.

SURVEY TIMING

Fieldwork for the 2017 surveys was conducted between 30 October 2017 and 10 January 2018.

RESPONSE RATES Tables 12.1.1 (and 12.1.2 in the Employers’ section below) summarise:

the number of people invited to participate in the survey for each high-risk sector

the targeted number of completed questionnaires (500 per sector with the exception of Forestry

where, given the relatively small size of the population of workers in this sector, 400 completed

questionnaires was targeted) and the number of completed questionnaires actually received

the response rate for the survey - calculated as total completed questionnaires/total number of

people invited minus all ineligible contacts (e.g. deceased, moved address with no forwarding

address, overseas).

WORKERS

The targeted number of completed workers’ questionnaires was 500 in the Agriculture, Construction

and Manufacturing sectors, 400 in each of Forestry and Commercial Fishing due to the relatively small

number of businesses in these industries, and 900 in the ‘Other’ sector.

111.1 Workers’ Response

A total of 1,885 valid completed questionnaires were received from workers across the four high-risk

sectors, 365 from workers in Commercial Fishing and 1,031 from workers in the ‘Other’ sector.

Overall, the targeted number of questionnaires was exceeded in the Agriculture and Manufacturing

sectors, but it was not met in the other sectors, with 90% achieved in the Construction sector, 91.5% in

the Forestry sector and 91.25% in the Commercial Fishing sector.

The workers’ grouping includes self-employed people who do not employ others and employers who

do the day-to-day work they also employ others to do. These groups completed the survey from the

viewpoint of someone working in their sector, rather than as an employer.

Appendix III provides a profile of the respondents in the workers’ and employers’ samples.

WORKERS AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MANUFACTURINGCOMMERCIAL

FISHINGOTHER

NUMBER OF PEOPLE

INVITED1900 2300 2500 2500 2700 3500

TARGETED NUMBER OF

COMPLETED

INTERVIEWS

500 500 400 500 400 900

NUMBER OF

COMPLETED

QUESTIONNAIRES

RECEIVED

514 448 366 557 365 1031

RESPONSE RATE* 32% 23% 19% 26% 18% 33%

*Response rate was calculated using response rate Method II. For detailed explanation refer to Health and Safety Attitudes and Behaviours in the New Zealand Workforce: A Survey of Workers and Employers, 2017 Survey, Technical Report.


EMPLOYERS

The targeted number of completed employers’ questionnaires was 400 in the Agriculture, Construction

and Manufacturing sectors, 300 in each of Forestry and Commercial Fishing, and 400 in the ‘Other’

sector.

11.1.2 Employers’ response

A total of 1,307 valid completed questionnaires were received from employers across the four high-risk

sectors and 429 questionnaires from employers in the ‘Other’ sector, and 164 from the Commercial

Fishing sector.

Overall, the targeted number of interviews was not met in any of the high-risk sectors, with 94.7%

achieved in the Agriculture sector, 84.5% in the Construction sector, 75% in the Forestry sector, 91% in

the Manufacturing sector and 54.6% in the Commercial Fishing sector. The targeted number was

exceeded only in the ‘Other’ sector.

MARGIN OF ERROR

All sample surveys are subject to sampling error, which is the measure of uncertainty arising from

survey estimates because only a sample of the population is observed.

The maximum sampling error for each respondent group in the four WorkSafe high-risk sectors is as

follows:

Workers: total sample size of 1,885 respondents. Survey results are subject to a maximum

sampling error of plus or minus 2.3% at the 95% confidence level.

Employers: total sample of 1,307 respondents. Survey results are subject to a maximum

sampling error of plus or minus 2.7% at the 95% confidence level.

That is, there is a 95% chance that the true population value of a result of 50% actually lies between

47.7% and 52.3% for workers and between 47.3% and 52.7% for employers. As the result moves

further away from 50%, so the error margin decreases.

The maximum error margins for the key sub-groups of interest are:

*Response rate was calculated using response rate Method II. For detailed explanation refer to Health and Safety Attitudes and Behaviours in the New Zealand Workforce: A Survey of Workers and Employers, 2017 Survey, Technical Report.

EMPLOYERS AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MANUFACTURINGCOMMERCIAL

FISHINGOTHER

NUMBER OF PEOPLE

INVITED1806 2586 1258 2275 1172 2407

TARGETED NUMBER OF

COMPLETED

INTERVIEWS

400 400 300 400 300 400

NUMBER OF

COMPLETED

QUESTIONNAIRES

RECEIVED

379 338 226 364 164 429

RESPONSE RATE* 32% 19% 30% 27% 20% 26%


11.1.3 Margin of error

MAXIMUMMARGIN OF ERROR

ON 50% RESULTS

WORKERS

(SAMPLE

ACHIEVED)

MARGIN OF

ERROR (95% LEVEL

OF CONFIDENCE)

EMPLOYERS

(SAMPLE

ACHIEVED)

MARGIN OF

ERROR (95% LEVEL

OF CONFIDENCE)

AGRICULTURE 514 ± 4.3% 379 ± 5.1%

CONSTRUCTION 448 ± 4.6% 338 ± 5.4%

FORESTRY 366 ± 5.1% 226 ± 6.6%

MANUFACTURING 557 ± 4.2% 364 ± 5.2%

TOTAL WORKSAFE4 HIGH-RISK SECTORS

1885 ± 2.3% 1307 ± 2.7%

OTHER 1031 ± 3.1% 429 ± 4.8%

TOTAL 5 SECTORS 2916 ± 1.8% 1736 ± 2.4%

COMMERCIAL FISHING 365 ± 5.2% 164 ± 7.7%


APPENDIX II: TOPICS IN THE 2017 SURVEY

The surveys include the following topics. New topics in 2017 are in italics. Topics not included in the

2017 Cross Sector report are noted by an asterisk. Questions that were not included in the 2017

survey are marked with an exclamation mark.

Type of work/business*

Workplace health and safety in context

o Most important considerations at work/for business (i.e. where does health and safety

sit relative to other considerations)

o Views about health and safety in the workplace, including priority given to health and

safety and who should be responsible for health and safety

o Key drivers of health and safety in business (last asked in 2014)

Worker engagement, participation and communication

o Heard of and/or signed up to the Canterbury Rebuild Safety Charter*

o Health and safety training undertaken

Views, knowledge and experience of risk

o Views about risk (relative to other industries)

o Likelihood of someone being seriously hurt in the next 12 months

o How safe workers feel at work

o Resources and information, and knowledge and skills, to deal with risk

o Risky behaviours in the workplace

o Exposure to loud noise and use of protective hearing equipment

o Exposure to dust and solvents, and controls used including health checks for workers

(for Manufacturing and Construction)!

o Uptake of personal health checks from exposure to dust and solvents (for

Manufacturing and Construction)!

Experience of workplace incidents and responses

o Experience of harm

o Most recent serious harm incident

o Responses to harm (whether an ACC claim made was added)

o Experience of near misses/hazards - and responses

Approaches to health and safety in the New Zealand workforce

o Understanding of regulations and requirements

o Changes in workplace health and safety practices and reasons (employers only).

Advice and information about health and safety

o Sources of advice

WorkSafe: contact and perceptions

o Awareness and knowledge of, and contact with, WorkSafe

o Perceptions of, and trust and confidence in, WorkSafe

o Where WorkSafe should focus to impact on health and safety

WorkSafe: contact and guidance

o Contact with WorkSafe

o Use and usefulness of WorkSafe information/guidance (employers only)

o Action taken after visiting the WorkSafe website

o Preferred formats for information/guidance


o Awareness of/response to campaigns/interventions:

o Safer Farms (modified)*

o Safetree*

o Safe Crew; FishSafe Safety Guidelines

Approaches used when businesses/organisations work together (overlapping duties -

employers only)*

Approaches used to ensure health and safety of goods and services from suppliers (upstream

duties - employers only)*

Profile information about workers/employees.

o Number of employees/contractors/migrant workers

o Demographics such as age, gender, ethnicity (workers only)

o Educational qualification (workers only), income (workers only)

o Region and average hours worked (workers only).


APPENDIX III: SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

2017 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

11.3.1 Sample description: Workers

WORKERS Weighted % AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MANUFACTURING OTHER SECTOR

GENDERMALE 69% 96% 94% 76% 42%

FEMALE 31% 4% 6% 24% 58%

AGE

18 – 24 YEARS 4% 7% 7% 5% 5%

25 - 34 YEARS 12% 21% 21% 15% 17%

35 – 44 YEARS 14% 20% 25% 20% 21%

45 – 54 YEARS 20% 21% 23% 26% 25%

55 + YEARS 49% 31% 24% 33% 33%

ETHNICITY

NEW ZEALAND EUROPEAN 89% 78% 71% 60% 75%

MĀORI 8% 10% 37% 20% 9%

PACIFIC PEOPLES <0.5% 2% 3% 11% 3%

ASIAN 1% 6% 1% 5% 8%

WORKPLACE SIZE

1 WORKER 26% 15% 4% 3% 10%

2-5 WORKERS 50% 21% 16% 6% 10%

6-9 WORKERS 8% 12% 29% 7% 8%

10-19 WORKERS 5% 18% 20% 11% 12%

20-49 WORKERS 4% 10% 14% 19% 16%

50-99 WORKERS 2% 4% 7% 15% 9%

100 OR MORE WORKERS 3% 17% 10% 34% 32%

REGION*

NORTHERN REGION 10% 35% 17% 31% 35%

CENTRAL REGION 52% 41% 57% 39% 42%

SOUTHERN REGION 38% 30% 31% 31% 28%

* Region is defined as follows:Northern: Northland, AucklandCentral: Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Gisborne, Hawkes Bay, Taranaki, Manawatu-Whanganui, Wellington-WairarapaSouthern: All of the South IslandNote: In 2014, Wellington-Wairarapa was included in the Southern region .


11.3.2 Sample description: Employers

EMPLOYERS Weighted % AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MANUFACTURING OTHER SECTOR

GENDERMALE 58% 71% 69% 61% 51%

FEMALE 42% 29% 31% 39% 49%

AGE

18 – 24 YEARS 1% 1% 1% 0.5% 1%

25 - 29 YEARS 3% 4% 3% 4% 3%

30 – 39 YEARS 14% 20% 13% 16% 17%

40 – 59 YEARS 54% 57% 62% 58% 57%

60 + YEARS 27% 18% 21% 21% 21%

# YEARS IN

OPERATION

LESS THAN ONE YEAR 1% 2% 3% 1% 3%

1 TO LESS THAN 2 YEARS 3% 8% 2% 6% 6%




20 YEARS OR MORE 56% 32% 40% 44% 37%

DON'T KNOW <0.5% - - 1% <0.5%

# OF EMPLOYEES

NONE 14% 9% 6% 4% 5%

1 TO 5 EMPLOYEES 74% 63% 46% 52% 58%

6 TO 9 EMPLOYEES 6% 10% 19% 13% 16%

10 TO 19 EMPLOYEES 3% 9% 15% 11% 9%

20 TO 49 EMPLOYEES 2% 6% 8% 11% 6%

50 TO 99 EMPLOYEES 1% 3% 4% 4% 2%

100 OR MORE EMPLOYEES <0.5% 1% 1% 4% 4%

REGION

NORTHERN REGION 8% 43% 16% 34% 31%

CENTRAL REGION 54% 36% 57% 42% 47%

SOUTHERN REGION 38% 26% 34% 31% 30%

* Region is defined as follows:Northern: Northland, AucklandCentral: Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Gisborne, Hawkes Bay, Taranaki, Manawatu-Whanganui, Wellington-WairarapaSouthern: All of the South IslandNote: In 2014, Wellington-Wairarapa was included in the Southern region.


11.3.3 Sample description: Type of industry, “Other’ Sector

TYPE OF INDUSTRY WORKERS EMPLOYERS

Health care and social assistance 15% 12%

Education and training 14% 8%

Retail trade 11% 19%

Professional, scientific and technical services 11% 11%

Administrative support services 9% 5%

Transport, postal and warehousing 6% 9%

Information, media and telecommunications 6% 3%

Financial and insurance services 6% 5%

Public administration and safety 4% 1%

Accommodation and food services 3% 8%

Electricity, gas, water and waste services 2% 2%

Wholesale trade 2% 5%

Rental, hiring and real estate services 2% 4%

Arts and recreation services 2% 5%

Manufacturing 2% 2%

Mining 1% <0.5%

Personal Services 1% 6%

Agriculture 1% 3%

Commercial Fishing 1% <0.5%

Other 1% 2%


11.3.4 Sample description: Work location, ‘Other’ Sector

WORK LOCATION WORKERS EMPLOYERS

An office 48% 45%

A health or educational facility 21% 12%

A retail or wholesale outlet 9% 18%

Home-based business 8% 11%

In a vehicle (e.g. taxi driver, travelling salesperson)

7% 13%

A hospitality location (e.g. hotel, restaurant) 3% 8%

In a factory/workshop 3% 6%

Outdoors 3% 8%

At client's home/property 3% 2%

At sea 1% <0.5%

Cultural and Recreational facility 1% 2%

Other 3% 10%


APPENDIX IV: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

EXPANDED VERSIONS OF TABLES FROM SECTION 3.1 IN THE REPORT:

11.4.1 Three most important things in their work: The four high-risk sectors

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors Q30 (W)What three things are most important to you in your work right now?

WORKERS2014

(n=2296)2015

(n=2097)2016

(n=2183)2017

(n=1881)

Having a regular income 36% 30% 33% 30%

Taking pride in doing a good job 52% 50% 50% 47%

Staying healthy and safe while at work 33% 35% 39% 36%

Having a good work/life balance 36% 39% 44% 40%

Enjoying my work 25% 27% 23% 27%

Working with people I like and respect 17% 16% 20% 19%

Making good money 19% 20% 16% 19%

Staying fit and healthy so I can keep doing the work I do

20% 18% 18% 19%

Working hard now to build a better future

12% 14% 12% 14%

Learning new things 8% 10% 8% 11%

Being free to make my own decisions 15% 16% 14% 15%

Working for a promotion or to build a career

4% 4% 3% 4%

Doing physical work 3% 3% 3% 2%

Working outdoors or on the land 12% 12% 9% 8%

Other 1% <0.5% 1% 1%


11.4.2 Three most important considerations for their business: The four high-risk sectors

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors Q24 (E)From the list below, what three aspects are most important considerations for your business right now?

EMPLOYERS2014

(n=1351)2015

(n=1501)2016

(n=1234)2017

(n=1307)

Keeping workers healthy and safe while at work

50% 60% 63% 63%


32% 33% 33% 31%

Being a respected and trusted business 38% 39% 39% 37%

Growing the business / improving the profitability of the business

36% 33% 29% 29%

Ensuring the business complies with laws and regulations

22% 26% 31% 27%

Making sure there is enough work in the pipeline

19% 19% 17% 15%

Continually improving the business to maximise productivity

24% 18% 19% 17%

Being a great place to work for all people in the business

18% 17% 17% 21%

Attracting and retaining good workers 17% 14% 15% 17%

Being an environmentally-friendly business 8% 7% 8% 10%

Being an innovative business 4% 4% 3% 4%

Succession planning / planning who will take over if key people leave / retire / are unable to work

5% 5% 3% 5%

Looking after the health and welfare of the animals

18% 17% 14% 17%

Other 1% <0.5% 1% 1%

None of the above <0.5% 1% <0.5%


APPENDIX V: WORKSAFE CONTACT AND

COMMUNICATION PREFERENCES

INTRODUCTION Specific details on types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months, actions following on from

visiting the website by four high risk sector are included in this Appendix.

11.5.1 Types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Workers from the four high-risk



AGRICULTURE(n=412)

CONSTRUCTION(n=364)

FORESTRY(n=315)


OTHER SECTOR(n=686)

I visited their website 18% 28% 28% 20% 21%

I have phoned them for advice or information

4% 7% 11% 3% 3%


39% 48% 44% 41% 36%

During National Fieldays 15% 3% 1% 1% 1%

An inspector has visited my workplace

15% 23% 57% 24% 7%

At trade event or other event 5% 9% 5% 2% 1%


6% 6% 6% 4% 2%

Through media reports on WorkSafe NZ (e.g. Radio, tv, newspapers)

32% 26% 22% 26% 31%

Through my workmates/colleagues 13% 21% 20% 16% 13%

As a result of WorkSafe NZ’s advertising about being healthy and safe at work

19% 22% 17% 25% 19%

During conferences/workshops/seminars/forums/attended a road show

0.5% 1% 1% 1% 1%

Have not had any contact with WorkSafe NZ

25% 18% 14% 24% 31%

Base: Workers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafe Q72 (W)In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?


11.5.2 Types of contact with WorkSafe in the last 12 months: Employers from the four high-risk


AGRICULTURE(n=332)

CONSTRUCTION(n=297)

FORESTRY(n=218)


OTHER SECTOR(n=358)

I visited their website 40% 54% 57% 58% 48%

I have phoned them for advice or information

5% 18% 26% 18% 13%


45% 52% 56% 52% 44%

During National Fieldays 15% 3% 2% 4% 4%

Been visited by a WorkSafe NZ inspector

13% 18% 52% 26% 6%

At a trade event or other event 10% 18% 9% 8% 5%


10% 11% 14% 6% 3%

Through media reports on WorkSafe NZ (e.g. radio, TV)

31% 22% 24% 27% 25%

Through my business contacts or industry information

19% 25% 38% 25% 18%

I have seen WorkSafe NZ's advertising

31% 29% 26% 27% 24%

Have not had any contact with WorkSafe NZ

13% 8% 4% 12% 23%

Base: Employers who know at least a little bit about WorkSafeQ68 (E): In the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you had contact with WorkSafe NZ or heard about them?


FURTHER DETAILS ON ACTION TAKEN WHILE OR AFTER VISITING WORKSAFE WEBSITE

BY HIGH RISK SECTOR

11.5.3 Action taken while or after visiting the WorkSafe website: Workers from the four high-

risk sectors

AGRICULTURE(n=68)

CONSTRUCTION(n=100)

FORESTRY(n=78)

MANUFACTURING(n=66)

OTHER SECTOR(n=137)

I downloaded a document/s to read or save

51% 61% 57% 62% 60%

I printed a document/s 41% 33% 45% 40% 36%

I used a template/s 50% 11% 15% 23% 24%


13% 14% 19% 29% 19%

I subscribed to get updates 6% 11% 17% 13% 5%

I watched/downloaded a video 6% 17% 30% 14% 13%

I completed an online form/s 3% 17% 21% 13% 3%

I contacted someone at a WorkSafe office

7% 9% 12% 11% 7%

I sent WorkSafe an email 4% 4% 5% 4% 7%

I used one of the online interactive tools

11% 4% 3% 10% 4%

I phoned WorkSafe’s 0800 number

6% 6% 6% 6% 4%

I did a quiz 6% 8% 10% 8% 7%

I connected to WorkSafe on social media

6% 6% 2% 4% 2%

I shared some information via social media

1% 6% 0% 3% 2%


1% 0% 0% 1% 2%

I just visited the site 2% 0% 0% 2% 1%

I made a complaint about WorkSafe

- - - - -

Other - 1% 1% - 6%

Nothing 3% 1% - 2% 2%


11.5.4 Action taken while or after visiting the WorkSafe website: Employers from the four high-

risk sectors

AGRICULTURE(n=125)

CONSTRUCTION(n=175)

FORESTRY(n=118)


OTHER SECTOR(n=205)

I downloaded a document/s to read or save

69% 67% 69% 78% 72%

I printed a document/s 43% 55% 62% 65% 56%

I used a template/s 43% 40% 29% 49% 44%


17% 29% 24% 23% 22%

I subscribed to get updates 13% 20% 21% 21% 17%

I watched/downloaded a video 14% 17% 16% 17% 16%

I completed an online form/s 7% 19% 43% 13% 10%

I contacted someone at a WorkSafe office

7% 17% 21% 12% 9%

I sent WorkSafe an email 3% 13% 14% 11% 6%

I used one of the online interactive tools

19% 7% 3% 7% 10%

I phoned WorkSafe’s 0800 number 6% 18% 9% 10% 10%

I did a quiz 6% 13% 5% 10% 10%

I connected to WorkSafe on social media

1% 1% 6% 4% 5%

I shared some information via social media

2% 2% 1% 1% 2%


- 4% 1% 2% 1%

I just visited the site 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%

Other - 1% - 1% 0.5%

Nothing - 1% 1% - 2%

Base: All respondents (excluding not answered) (n=828) Q113 (E) Do while / after visiting the WorkSafe website


11.5.5 WorkSafe guidance material used in the last 12 months: Employers, 2017

AGRICULTURE(n=365)

CONSTRUCTION(n=333)

FORESTRY(n=225)


OTHER SECTOR(n=418)

Factsheets 36% 34% 43% 38% 26%

Forms and templates 31% 39% 36% 34% 26%

Best/Good Practice Guidelines 30% 40% 64% 31% 28%

Checklists 31% 37% 27% 33% 33%

Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) 21% 34% 83% 29% 19%

Toolkits 23% 24% 23% 21% 14%

Quick reference guides (e.g. Health and Safety at Work)

18% 25% 26% 23% 19%

Health and Safety at Work Interpretive Guidelines (e.g. General Risk and Workplace Management)

11% 16% 22% 13% 15%

Posters 12% 11% 19% 12% 10%

Case studies about how businesses manage workplace health and safety

9% 10% 13% 9% 9%

Online quizzes (e.g. about the Health and Safety at Work Act)

7% 9% 2% 5% 6%

Online interactive tools 10% 6% 4% 3% 4%

Animated videos / ice breakers (e.g. Steve and the Yappers)

6% 7% 4% 6% 6%

Used other source of guidance material (ACC, Sitesafe, Hazardco)

1% 1% 0% 1% 1%

Other types of WorkSafe NZ guidance 1% 1% 3% 1% 2%

None 37% 24% 5% 31% 44%

Base: Employers Q104a (E)Which types of guidance material have you used in the last 12 months?


11.5.6 Top 5 preferred formats for communicating health and safety messages: Workers, 2017

11.5.7 Comparison of preferred formats for communicating health and safety messages:

Workers in the four high-risk sectors, 2017

Base: Workers Q112 (W)From the list below, which types of information would you find most useful for communicating health and safety messages?

AGRICULTURE(n=511)

CONSTRUCTION(n=443)

FORESTRY(n=362)



1 61%Paper booklets/brochures

51%Paperbooklets/Brochures

64%Paper booklets/Brochures

61%Paper booklets/Brochures

51%Online training courses

2 33%Online training courses

41%

Online training courses

46% Videos 55% Posters 48%Paper booklets/Brochures

3 31%Mobile Apps

35% Posters 39%Online training courses


43% Posters

4 29% Posters 34%Mobile Apps 37% Posters 43% Videos 34% Videos

5 28%Online interactive tools

34% Videos 36%Mobile Apps

21%Mobile Apps

25%Mobile Apps

AGRICULTURE• Paper booklets/brochures (61% cf. 56% overall)• Online interactive tools (28% cf. 16% overall)

CONSTRUCTION

FORESTRY

• Paper booklets/brochures (64% cf. 56%)• Videos (e.g. for inductions) (46% cf. 33%)• Mobile Apps (36% cf. 30%)• YouTube clips (27% cf. 16%)• Scripts for one-on-one or group talks (e.g. toolbox/tailgate talks) (24% cf. 15%)• Text reminders (e.g. weekly reminders, alerts when new information comes

out) (21% cf. 16%)

MANUFACTURING

• Paper booklets/brochures (61% cf. 56%)• Posters (55% cf. 37%)• Online training courses/learning modules (44% cf. 39%)• Videos (e.g. for inductions) (43% cf. 33%)• Information sheets in a variety of languages (19% cf. 12%)• Online quizzes (e.g. about the Health and Safety at Work Act) (13% cf. 9%)


11.5.8 Top 5 preferred formats for communicating health and safety messages: Employers,

2017

11.5.9 Comparison of preferred formats for communicating health and safety messages:

Workers in the four high-risk sectors, 2017

Base: Employers Q105 (E)From the list below, which types of information would your business find most useful for communicating health and safety messages to your workers?

AGRICULTURE(n=370)

CONSTRUCTION(n=336)

FORESTRY(n=224)


OTHER SECTOR(n=423)

1 49%Paper booklet/brochure

50%Paper booklet/Brochure

68%Paper booklet/brochure



2 35% Poster 36%Online training courses

36% Poster 45% Poster 34%Online training courses

3 30%Mobile App

33% Mobile App 30%Mobile App


32% Poster

4 22%Online training courses

24% Poster 28% Videos 23% Videos 23%YouTube clips

5 18%Online interactive tools

24%Text reminders


17%YouTube clips

20% Videos

AGRICULTURE • Online interactive tools (18% cf. 10% overall)

CONSTRUCTION

• Online training courses/learning modules (36% cf. 31%)• Mobile Apps (33% cf. 28%)• Text reminders (e.g. weekly reminders, alerts when new

information comes out) (24% cf. 18%)• Scripts for one-on-one or group talks (e.g. toolbox/tailgate

talks) (22% cf. 16%)

FORESTRY

• Paper booklets/brochures (68% cf. 51%)• Videos (e.g. for inductions) (28% cf. 18%)• Scripts for one-on-one or group talks (e.g. toolbox/tailgate

talks) (25% cf. 16%)• Text reminders (e.g. weekly reminders, alerts when new

information comes out) (25% cf. 18%)• YouTube clips (20% cf. 16%)• Pocket cards (20% cf. 13%)• Case studies about how businesses manage workplace health

and safety (19% cf. 12%)• Graphic stories (e.g. comic strips, cartoons) (11% cf. 6%)

MANUFACTURING

• Posters (45% cf. 32%)• Online training courses/learning modules (36% cf. 31%)• Videos (e.g. for inductions) (23% cf. 18%)• Graphic stories (e.g. comic strips, cartoons) (11% cf. 6%)


APPENDIX VI: SEGMENTATION QUESTIONS

INTRODUCTION As part of the 2014 and 2015 surveys, segmentation analysis was undertaken and reported on.

However, as the segmentation is relatively stable this was not repeated in 2016 or 2017. While some

questions used in the segmentation analysis are discussed in section 5, there were some questions

that were only used as part of the segmentation in 2014 and 2015.

This appendix and charts provide results for the questions not reported elsewhere, over time and for

each sector.

Note: The statements below were asked on an agreement scale. The desired response for some was

for workers and employers to agree with the statement (e.g. I always keep an eye out for health and

safety at work), whereas for other questions it was desirable for the respondent to disagree (e.g. I get

annoyed there are so many rules when how I keep myself safe is my own business).

OVERVIEW In 2016 there were high levels of agreement among both workers (81%) and employers (90%) that I

always keep an eye out for health and safety hazards at work. While workers’ responses have

fluctuated a little over time, employers’ responses have shown an increase since 2014 (from 84% in

2014 to 90% in 2017).

Workers’ responses to other statements have remained stable over time on most measures. There

has been a small decrease in workers agreeing that health and safety can be a waste of money

because it won’t stop all accidents happening (down from 57% in 2014 to 54% in 2017).

Employer views about health and safety regulations have become more positive over time, with the

proportion who agreed that we are highly motivated to comply with all health and safety regulation

increasing from 64% in 2014 to 72% in 2017.


11.6.1 Proportion of workers who agree or disagree with statements: The four high-risk sectors

WORKERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

Agree

I always keep an eye out for health and safety hazards at work

81% 79% 83% 81%

I get huge satisfaction from knowing we have a safe working environment

72% 70% 76% 72%

Health and safety is important but it's not always realistic to follow every rule and guideline

58% 61% 59% 60%

Disagree

When you are really busy, it's easy to forget about health and safety

37% 38% 39% 37%

I get annoyed that there are so many rules when how I keep myself safe is my own business

43% 38% 45% 44%

Health and safety can be a waste of money because it won't stop all accidents happening

57% 51% 53% 54%

The main reason I do health and safety is so I don't get into trouble

53% 50% 54% 52%

I really only follow the health and safety rules because I have to

62% 61% 65% 61%

Base: Workers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered (2014 n=2269-2282; 2015 n=2069-2078; 2016 n=2163-2170; 2017 n=1845-1876) Q48 (W)How strongly do you agree with each of the following statements?


11.6.2 Proportion of employers who agree or disagree with statements: The four high-risk

sectors

WORKERS

By Sector

As in previous years, workers in the Forestry sector were more likely to agree that they:

always keep an eye out for health and safety hazards at work (91% cf. 81% overall)

get huge satisfaction from knowing we have a safe working environment (86% cf. 72%).

Workers in the Forestry sector were also more likely to disagree with the other statements, compared

with those in the four high-risk sectors overall.

There were positive changes over time in the Construction sector, with a decrease in the proportion of

workers who agreed that I really only follow the health and safety rules because I have to (down from

70% in 2016 to 62% in 2017).

EMPLOYERS 2014 2015 2016 2017

AGREE


84% 87% 89% 90%

We are highly motivated to comply with all health and safety regulations

64% 67% 72% 72%

I would feel personally responsible if someone in the business was seriously hurt, even if our business was not at fault

76% 75% 73% 76%


56% 63% 59% 52%

We have rules around working safely but it is up to workers whether they always follow them

49% 48% 45% 44%

DISAGREE

The main reason we follow health and safety is so we don't get into trouble

52% 52% 54% 51%

I get annoyed that there are so many health and safety regulations - this is my business and I don't need to be told how to run it

53% 48% 50% 56%


57% 52% 52% 57%


47% 47% 47% 50%

Base: Employers from the four high-risk sectors excluding not answered (2014 n=1344-1354; 2015 n=1497-1502; 2016 n=1231-1234; 2017 n=1296-1304) Q46 (E)How strongly do you agree with each of the following statements?


11.6.3 Proportion of workers who agree or disagree with statements by sector, 2017



FORESTRY(n=357-359)



AGREE


81% 83% 91% 78% 67%

I get huge satisfaction from knowing we have a safe working environment

71% 71% 86% 76% 66%


64% 62% 49% 51% 47%

DISAGREE

I get annoyed that there are so many rules when how I keep myself safe is my own business

28% 48% 56% 56% 53%


41% 35% 53% 35% 32%

I really only follow the health and safety rules because I have to

58% 62% 73% 62% 62%


38% 59% 64% 67% 66%

The main reason I do health and safety is so I don't get into trouble

43% 56% 70% 56% 55%

Base: Workers excluding not answered Q48 (W)To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


11.6.4 Proportion of employers who agree or disagree with statements by sector, 2017

TION 3:



FORESTRY(n=225-226)


OTHER SECTOR

(n=427-428)

AGREE


87% 92% 97% 92% 85%

I would feel personally responsible if someone in the business was seriously hurt, even if our business was not at fault

77% 73% 84% 79% 70%

We are highly motivated to comply with all health and safety regulations

70% 72% 88% 74% 72%


58% 49% 45% 45% 40%

We have rules around working safely but it is up to workers whether they always follow them

50% 41% 36% 38% 37%

DISAGREE


54% 58% 65% 60% 64%

I get annoyed that there are so many health and safety regulations - this is my business and I don't need to be told how to run it

46% 63% 64% 60% 58%


45% 53% 66% 52% 49%

The main reason we follow health and safety is so we don't get into trouble

48% 49% 69% 57% 55%

Base: Employers excluding not answered Q46 (E)To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?


ABOUT NIELSEN Nielsen Holdings plc (NYSE: NLSN) is a global performance management company that

provides a comprehensive understanding of what consumers watch and buy. Nielsen’s Watch

segment provides media and advertising clients with Nielsen Total Audience measurement

services for all devices on which content — video, audio and text — is consumed. The Buy

segment offers consumer packaged goods manufacturers and retailers the industry’s only global

view of retail performance measurement. By integrating information from its Watch and Buy

segments and other data sources, Nielsen also provides its clients with analytics that help

improve performance. Nielsen, an S&P 500 company, has operations in over 100 countries,

covering more than 90% of the world’s population. For more information, visit www.nielsen.com

230

Date post:	20-Mar-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Health and Safety Attitudes and Behaviours in the New ...

Documents