Regulatory Relief For Manufacturing Sector
Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety
Minister for Regulation
Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden is consulting with manufacturers, including wood processors, bakers, and millers to help businesses focus on managing genuine risks rather than navigating red tape.
'We're simplifying machine guarding rules and reviewing exposure standards to reduce complexity and improve consistency in the manufacturing sector,' says Ms van Velden.
The proposed changes aim to ensure standards reflect real-world risks and align with international benchmarks. Manufacturers have said that the current rules are unclear and difficult to apply, leading to unnecessary costs and compliance burden.
As an example of the law's confusion, a business owner told me they got conflicting advice from WorkSafe inspectors on identical machinery guarding in Auckland and Christchurch, deeming the same machine guarding to be compliant in one city but non-compliant in another city.
'During my nationwide consultation and roadshow, businesses described the law as full of grey areas, with outdated guidance that creates confusion and unnecessary cost. We're acting on that feedback, with changes designed to address the specific pain points raised.'
One key change is the simplification of machine guarding rules, which support the safe use of machinery, in the Health and Safety in Employment Regulations.
As an example of how out of date the machine guarding rules are, there are some in the meat industry who believe that machine guarding rules conflict with food safety cleaning requirements.
We will be consulting on replacing the requirements with a more flexible, risk-based approach. WorkSafe guidance will continue to support businesses in applying appropriate controls.
Although this will be a great help to the manufacturing sector, it will be beneficial for a range of sectors working with machinery including agriculture, horticulture, construction and food production.
'Feedback on machine guarding has highlighted the need for greater consistency when using machinery. These changes will enable businesses to use a wider range of tools while applying updated safety measures to keep their staff safe.'
Wood processors and manufacturers also gave feedback that they feel constrained by Workplace Exposure Standards that don't reflect operational realities or international benchmarks.
'Many described the current approach as overly rigid and unclear, with one participant saying the standards are 'an overreaction to risk which will cripple the industry'.'
The Workplace Exposure Standards for soft wood dust, hard wood dust, and welding fumes will be reviewed, with an aim to improve clarity and better align with international standards.
'Businesses expressed frustration that the wood dust standard is impractical and not based on realistic risk assessments. They want a system that is both protective and practical, and these changes aim to provide that.'
WorkSafe will also look at updating the Workplace Exposure Standard for flour dust, which is designed to minimise the risk of respiratory problems.
'This is an example of the Red Tape Tipline making a difference, addressing regulations that increase the price of food,' says Mr Seymour.
'Concerned bakers made a submission to the Ministry for Regulation, raising concerns that the permitted concentration of flour dust was so stringent it would ruin their business.
'One commercial stakeholder said they had invested millions in retrofitted air conditioning units, purchasing new industrial vacuum cleaners, and additional controls in bakeries including deep cleaning, but it was still almost impossible to comply with the regulation.
'These costs eventually flow down to prices at the checkout. It's another example of how permissive regulations, no matter how small they might seem on paper, make a difference to the cost of everything in New Zealand.
'The review will consider international benchmarks and feasibility considerations, such as measurability. This will provide bakers and millers with more confidence that they have met safety standards, reducing the cost and stress of overcompliance and price of food,' says Mr Seymour.
This review will be undertaken in consultation with those in the manufacturing sector over the coming months to ensure they are practical and effective.
'Simplifying machine guarding rules and reviewing the Workplace Exposure Standards will make it easier for people to do the right thing, without compromising safety,' says Ms van Velden.
'These changes will save time and costs for businesses and workers as we cut-red-tape to make it easier to do business. When our Kiwi businesses thrive, there are more jobs and lower prices for all New Zealanders.'
Notes:
These changes are part of the wider health and safety reform, which delivers on the ACT-National Coalition Agreement commitment to reform health and safety laws and regulations.
A summary of all the changes and major milestones:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
12 hours ago
- RNZ News
What officials said about pay equity changes
Photo: RNZ The minister who ushered through the pay equity changes said any limitations on workers' rights were justified in order to reduce the risks to employers. A document dump from the Treasury and the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) showed the processes the government went through to change the pay equity framework, and then return contingency funding to the Budget allowances. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden, who introduced the legislation, acknowledged the changes would likely be contentious, but were necessary to meet the government's policy objectives of keeping a pay equity system, while changing the framework for assessing whether there is sex-based undervaluation. The government worked on the changes in secret, before announcing the amendment bill in May and passing it under urgency. New Zealanders protested the changes to the Equal Pay Amendment Act. File photo. Photo: RNZ / Tess Brunton At the Budget, Finance Minister Nicola Willis revealed the changes had saved $12.8 billion over the forecast period. The short timeframe to get the bill passed before the Budget meant there had been "limited testing and analysis" of the policy proposals, and the retrospective provisions in the bill were "inconsistent" with general principles. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii MBIE acknowledged the transitional provisions would likely be "contentious" but without them it was unlikely the amendments would "meet the policy objective of ensuring the regime achieves pay equity, whilst better managing claims, and ensuring costs are related to sex-based differences in remuneration." The legal risks remained redacted, and the bill had no Regulatory Impact Statement. The process was also kept secret to prevent a surge of claims being lodged and potentially determined under the existing Employment Relations Act. The acting Attorney-General, Paul Goldsmith's consideration of the bill concluded that while it imposed limits on the right to freedom from discrimination, the right to justice, and freedom of expression, it was still consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. The paper van Velden took to Cabinet for approval, included in MBIE's document dump, shows she considered any limitations on the rights to be justified. "I consider that this is justified to meet the policy intent of allowing employers to better manage their operations, reducing potential risks to an employer's financial viability, which may lead to a reduction in employment or the quality or quantity of services provided," van Velden wrote. In December 2023, shortly after assuming the government benches, the finance minister requested more information on how the pay equity forecasts worked and whether there were any upcoming large claims. In February 2024, the Treasury reported back, saying the approach brought in by the previous government had contributed to higher cost outcomes, as it disincentivised agencies and funded sector employers from taking a lower-cost bargaining approach. "While the current Pay Equity process does require agencies to seek a bargaining contingency prior to the bargaining phase, this occurs late in the process, and many of the potential parameters for settlement are already largely agreed between the parties," officials said. "The absence of financial incentives during the pre-bargaining phase may have contributed to agencies adopting approaches which exceed the minimum requirements of the Equal Pay Act, for example, agreeing to higher paid comparators when lower paid ones would be appropriate." It also meant the Cabinet had "poor visibility" of the costs, until parties were at or near settlement. Treasury said pay equity costs were managed outside of Budget allowances, and there was merit in exploring an approach that brought some or all of the costs back within Budget allowances. By April 2024, Cabinet had agreed to a reset, bringing pay equity funding into two centralised tagged contingencies: one for the funded sector, the other for the public sector. This still allowed the government to meet its legal obligations as an employer, but was deemed to support the coalition's fiscal strategy. However, by the end of 2024, the government was looking to disestablish the funded sector contingency, identifying it as a significant spending commitment. It expected service providers to manage their own claims, with any cost pressures they created managed like any other cost pressure: through the Budget process. Nicola Willis chose to close the funded sector contingency and return the funding to the Budget 2025 allowance and capital allowance. This saved $9.6b over the forecast period. For the public sector contingency, Treasury recommended it be retained, but at a reduced level. "On balance, we consider retaining the contingency at [redacted] for residual costs to protect future allowances to be preferable given the legal obligations on the Crown as an employer under the new Act and Treasury's judgment that we can quantify the impacts with more than 50 percent confidence," Treasury wrote. The government adopted this approach, with the tagged public sector contingency reduced by $3.2b over the forecast period. In total, the changes returned around $12.8b to the Budget 2025 operating and capital allowances. Closing or reducing the contingencies without some certainty from Cabinet on policy change, however, was seen to potentially "strain the credibility" of future Budget allowances. And so, the future approach to pay equity was developed. Van Velden's legislation discontinued 33 claims and increased the threshold for what qualified as work that was "predominantly performed by female employees." All review clauses under settled claims became unenforceable. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Herald
16 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Government's secret pay equity overhaul bypassed public scrutiny
It halted existing claims and raised the threshold for proving work had been historically undervalued to support a claim. Claims then had to start again under the new threshold. The bill halted existing claims and raised the threshold for proving undervalued work. Photo / Jason Dorday It was revealed in the Budget that the savings from tightening the regime amounted to about $12.8 billion over the next four years. The documents, released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, revealed ministerial meetings, including one involving the Prime Minister, were carefully managed, with instructions to withhold their proactive diary release under confidentiality provisions. One email from Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden's office instructed officials to manually remove digital access to cabinet papers, warning that leaving the default settings in place 'will give access to ministers but also SPSs [senior private secretaries] and some ministerial advisers. So you might want to remove that and we can add individual named ministers instead'. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden's office kept details of pay equity changes under tight wraps. Photo / Mark Mitchell Another memo described how hard copies were hand-delivered to ministers' offices to avoid creating digital trails. 'If you really need a soft copy, I can email it through,' wrote an official from the office of van Velden. 'For context, I swear I'm not being weirdly difficult – this was the method of distribution that has been advised.' The strategy was internally referred to as 'Project Ten'. A comprehensive communications pack was prepared in advance, to be released only after the bill had been introduced and passed. 'We recommend that any announcements or statements about the proposed amendments must be made after the introduction of the bill,' one paper said. 'This is because there is a risk of a large increase in the number of claims being raised if information about the proposed changes is made public beforehand.' That advice was followed. The legislation stopped 33 active claims overnight, some of which had been under way for years, and implemented a stricter legal test for future ones. The documents make clear that fiscal concerns were central to the push – a key driver was to significantly reduce costs to the Crown. Officials stressed the need for the law to be passed in time for Budget 2025, reinforcing the cost-cutting motive. But, they acknowledged the truncated timeline meant there was no opportunity for public submissions on the bill, a process later criticised as 'particularly unusual and draconian'. Officials also conceded limited testing and analysis of the policy proposals because of the short timeframe, and raised concerns about unintended consequences arising once the bill has been passed. Despite the rushed process, the internal discussions reveal the Government was aware of the contentious nature of the changes. Officials noted the proposed transitional arrangements, which 'retrospectively remove and alter people's rights', were 'most likely to be contentious' and 'may engage the Human Rights Act and Bill of Rights Act'. It proceeded anyway. – RNZ
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
Regulatory Relief For Manufacturing Sector
Hon Brooke van Velden Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Minister for Regulation Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden is consulting with manufacturers, including wood processors, bakers, and millers to help businesses focus on managing genuine risks rather than navigating red tape. 'We're simplifying machine guarding rules and reviewing exposure standards to reduce complexity and improve consistency in the manufacturing sector,' says Ms van Velden. The proposed changes aim to ensure standards reflect real-world risks and align with international benchmarks. Manufacturers have said that the current rules are unclear and difficult to apply, leading to unnecessary costs and compliance burden. As an example of the law's confusion, a business owner told me they got conflicting advice from WorkSafe inspectors on identical machinery guarding in Auckland and Christchurch, deeming the same machine guarding to be compliant in one city but non-compliant in another city. 'During my nationwide consultation and roadshow, businesses described the law as full of grey areas, with outdated guidance that creates confusion and unnecessary cost. We're acting on that feedback, with changes designed to address the specific pain points raised.' One key change is the simplification of machine guarding rules, which support the safe use of machinery, in the Health and Safety in Employment Regulations. As an example of how out of date the machine guarding rules are, there are some in the meat industry who believe that machine guarding rules conflict with food safety cleaning requirements. We will be consulting on replacing the requirements with a more flexible, risk-based approach. WorkSafe guidance will continue to support businesses in applying appropriate controls. Although this will be a great help to the manufacturing sector, it will be beneficial for a range of sectors working with machinery including agriculture, horticulture, construction and food production. 'Feedback on machine guarding has highlighted the need for greater consistency when using machinery. These changes will enable businesses to use a wider range of tools while applying updated safety measures to keep their staff safe.' Wood processors and manufacturers also gave feedback that they feel constrained by Workplace Exposure Standards that don't reflect operational realities or international benchmarks. 'Many described the current approach as overly rigid and unclear, with one participant saying the standards are 'an overreaction to risk which will cripple the industry'.' The Workplace Exposure Standards for soft wood dust, hard wood dust, and welding fumes will be reviewed, with an aim to improve clarity and better align with international standards. 'Businesses expressed frustration that the wood dust standard is impractical and not based on realistic risk assessments. They want a system that is both protective and practical, and these changes aim to provide that.' WorkSafe will also look at updating the Workplace Exposure Standard for flour dust, which is designed to minimise the risk of respiratory problems. 'This is an example of the Red Tape Tipline making a difference, addressing regulations that increase the price of food,' says Mr Seymour. 'Concerned bakers made a submission to the Ministry for Regulation, raising concerns that the permitted concentration of flour dust was so stringent it would ruin their business. 'One commercial stakeholder said they had invested millions in retrofitted air conditioning units, purchasing new industrial vacuum cleaners, and additional controls in bakeries including deep cleaning, but it was still almost impossible to comply with the regulation. 'These costs eventually flow down to prices at the checkout. It's another example of how permissive regulations, no matter how small they might seem on paper, make a difference to the cost of everything in New Zealand. 'The review will consider international benchmarks and feasibility considerations, such as measurability. This will provide bakers and millers with more confidence that they have met safety standards, reducing the cost and stress of overcompliance and price of food,' says Mr Seymour. This review will be undertaken in consultation with those in the manufacturing sector over the coming months to ensure they are practical and effective. 'Simplifying machine guarding rules and reviewing the Workplace Exposure Standards will make it easier for people to do the right thing, without compromising safety,' says Ms van Velden. 'These changes will save time and costs for businesses and workers as we cut-red-tape to make it easier to do business. When our Kiwi businesses thrive, there are more jobs and lower prices for all New Zealanders.' Notes: These changes are part of the wider health and safety reform, which delivers on the ACT-National Coalition Agreement commitment to reform health and safety laws and regulations. A summary of all the changes and major milestones:
