Health & Safety Archives

WorkSafe’s heightened focus on farm safety

May 6, 2026

Employment Law, Health & Safety, Regulatory Compliance, Rural & Agricultural Law, Workplace Regulation

Development of Approved Codes of Practice

WorkSafe New Zealand has promised greater attention to safety in the agricultural sector when it announced the new four-year ‘Statement of Intent’ on 4 December 2025.

In recent years, WorkSafe has significantly increased its focus on the agricultural sector reflecting the industry’s persistently high rates of serious injury and fatalities. Farming remains one of the most hazardous occupations in New Zealand, and WorkSafe’s evolving approach aims to address the root causes of harm while working more collaboratively with those on the land.

A key development has been the designation of agriculture as a priority high-risk sector. Alongside the other sectors classified as high-risk (construction, manufacturing and forestry), farming now receives a significantly greater share of WorkSafe’s attention and resources.

This prioritisation is embedded in the regulator’s broader strategy which centres on reducing fatalities, minimising serious injuries and targeting the activities most likely to cause harm. Rather than applying a one-size-fits-all regulatory model, WorkSafe is increasingly tailoring its interventions to reflect the unique risks present on farms.

Greater attention

One of the most visible aspects of WorkSafe’s effort is the development of Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) specific to agriculture. These codes are designed to clarify what ‘good practice’ looks like in practical, farm-based scenarios.

Current and emerging ACOPs focus heavily on the use of vehicles and machinery – areas consistently identified as leading causes of death and injury on farms. This includes guidance on quad bikes, tractors, utes and side-by-side vehicles, as well as their safe operation on uneven terrain and proper maintenance procedures.

Additional codes address responsibilities in multi-operator environments and provide clearer expectations around child safety on farms – an issue of ongoing concern in rural communities.

Alongside regulatory guidance, WorkSafe has expanded its on-the-ground presence. Inspectors are increasingly visiting farms not only to assess compliance, but also to engage directly with farmers and workers.

Hundreds of visits have been carried out in concentrated periods, with around 1,000 farm visits conducted between October and December 2025 with a focus on observing real-world practices involving machinery, hazardous substances and general risk management.

These visits are not purely enforcement-driven; they are also intended to provide practical advice and identify common issues across the sector. This hands-on approach allows WorkSafe to gather valuable data while building relationships within the farming community.

More collaboration

Another important element of WorkSafe’s strategy is its emphasis on education and industry collaboration. Acknowledging that lasting improvements in safety require cultural change, the regulator has partnered with industry groups and events to promote safer practices. Campaigns and resources such as ‘Keep safe, keep farming’ aim to integrate health and safety into everyday decision-making on farms.

By working with organisations that already have credibility in rural communities, WorkSafe’s aim is to influence behaviour in a way that traditional enforcement alone cannot achieve.

Perhaps the most notable shift in WorkSafe’s approach is its move toward a more balanced model of regulation, combining enforcement with proactive guidance.

While WorkSafe retains the ability to take enforcement action where necessary, there is now a stronger emphasis on helping farmers understand and meet their obligations before incidents occur.

This reflects an understanding that many farmers operate in complex, resource-constrained environments where practical, accessible advice can be more effective than punitive measures alone.

Looking ahead

WorkSafe New Zealand’s activities in the agricultural sector represent an evolving strategy.

Through targeted regulation, increased farm visits, collaborative education efforts and a focus on the most significant risks, the regulator is working to improve safety outcomes across one of New Zealand’s most vital industries. While challenges remain, the current approach signals a commitment to reducing harm through both accountability and support.

To read more on WorkSafe’s ACOPs, click here.

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Content Copyright © NZ LAW Limited, 2026. Editor: Adrienne Olsen. E-mail: [email protected] Ph: 029 286 3650

Over the Fence

December 17, 2025

Disputes Resolution, ETS & Forestry, Farming Best Practice, Health & Safety, Law Changes, Rural Property

New limits on farmland to forestry conversions

The amount of farmland being converted to exotic forestry and registered in the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) has been limited with the introduction of the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme-Forestry Conversions) Amendment Act 2025. The legislation came into force on 31 October 2025.

‘Farmland’ is classified according to the Land Use Capability (LUC) scale. Classification is based on the farmland’s long-term ability to support various productive uses. Features such as climate, soil, slope, vegetation and erodibility are taken into consideration. The classes include:

Classes 1 to 4 – arable land for a range of cultivations
Classes 5 to 7 – non-arable land suitable for pastoral farming and forestry, and
Class 8 – severe restrictions around land use.

Since 31 October, there are new limits on how much exotic forest can be registered on the ETS. The restrictions impact post-1989 forest land classified within LUC classes 1 to 6 that was not already forestry land on 31 October 2025, where the forest species on the land are mostly exotic. If one of the following exceptions apply, however, the land can still enter the ETS:

Indigenous forest land
Exempt as Māori land
High or severe erosion prone land in a regional or district plan
Crown afforestation land
Unmapped and not on the national LUC scale map
Unfarmed land, or
Classed as 7 or 8 on the LUC scale.

You can check your land’s classification on the national LUC map or have your own LUC assessment completed.

If land is restricted from conversion to forestry under the Act you may still register up to 25% of restricted land on an individual farm in the ETS scheme. There is also a biannual national ballot for land classed as 6 on the LUC scale to allow a further 15,000 hectares annually to enter the ETS scheme. The 25% allowance is of your total land within the farm boundary including any non-restricted land.

The new legislation aims to protect the future of New Zealand food production, while still allowing sustainable growth in the forestry sector. It also protects farmers’ ability to diversify their farmland.

Increase in Disputes Tribunal jurisdiction

From 24 January 2026, the Disputes Tribunal’s financial jurisdiction will increase from $30,000 to $60,000. These changes will improve New Zealanders’ access to cost-effective justice.

Filing fee increase: The Tribunal’s filing fees will also increase as they are set in tiers according to the amount in dispute. The filing fee for claims of $30,001 or more will be $468.

The tiered filing fee system reflects the amount of time taken to hear the dispute with larger claims assumed to take longer and have greater impact on the parties. While the new tier is higher than the current cost to file a claim in the District Court, the Tribunal does not charge additional hearing fees so access to justice is still improved.

Tribunal process: The Disputes Tribunal provides timely, low-cost, and accessible resolutions for many civil or contractual disputes. Hearings are run by a referee in an informal setting, unlike the formal court process. Lawyers are not permitted.

The Tribunal does not deal with undisputed debts, disputed debt valued over $60,000, employment issues, tenancy issues, social benefit disputes, wills or estate disputes, land disputes, intellectual property or family law. For these disputes there are other means of seeking justice such as the District or Family Court and so on.

Good for resolving contractual disputes: For farmers, this expansion provides a more accessible avenue for resolving contractual disputes. It offers a cheaper, faster alternative to the court system and avoids the common issue where civil claims between $30,000 and $60,000 are uneconomic to pursue. Previously, claims were partly abandoned to limit a claim to $30,000 and stay within the financial jurisdiction of the Disputes Tribunal. The ability to abandon part of a claim will still be available to bring larger claims down to $60,000 but, as before, one large claim cannot be broken up into multiple smaller claims.

Time limits: It is still important to be mindful of any applicable time limits involved in a claim. For example, some contract milking agreements require specific notice of disputes to be raised within 28 days of either becoming aware of the issue or the end of the season, whichever occurs earlier. While those clauses may not apply to claims before the Disputes Tribunal, it would be wise to ensure they are met to avoid any argument, especially if the Tribunal’s jurisdiction will be exceeded.

Although we cannot appear at the Disputes Tribunal, if you would like some advice on a potential claim or defence we are happy to help.

Health and safety considerations for farm visits

With the growing popularity of farm visits and stays, it is important to understand the health and safety implications that come with hosting visitors on your farm.

Farm hosts must take all reasonably practicable steps to eliminate or minimise risks, considering the likelihood and severity of harm, what visitors can reasonably be expected to know, and the availability, suitability, and cost of the ways to eliminate or minimise those risks. All this comes under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.

Whether your farm guests are staying overnight or just visiting an operating farm or workplace, it is important to consider if they will be in a vicinity of animals, heavy machinery or hazardous substances. Procedures need to be in place to mitigate the risk of damage or harm to your visitors, other workers and animals. The legislation states that this responsibility falls to the person in charge of the business or undertaking (PCBU).

It is good practice to provide all your farm guests with health and safety information, and requirements before they arrive or, at the latest, on their arrival. Where possible, your guests should sign a written confirmation that they have been provided with the information and requirements. Warnings and prohibited areas should also be clearly displayed onsite, so it is clear to all visitors the immediate dangers present.

The PCBU must warn authorised visitors of any work-related, or out of the ordinary, hazards that may cause them serious harm. For many people who are visiting a farm the usual hazards that farmers would always avoid may not be immediately obvious. Examples of these are chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides, animals, machinery, and water hazards such as oxidation ponds and troughs.

This duty applies only to authorised visitors who have the farmer’s or owner’s permission to be on the farm. A PCBU will not be liable under the Act for harm suffered by people who enter your property without permission.

Visitors also have responsibilities. They must take reasonable care to ensure their actions, or lack of, don’t put themselves or others at risk. They must also comply with any reasonable instructions given by the PCBU, as far as practicable.

If you are establishing a farm stay or walk over the summer, we’re happy to help you set this up.

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2025. Editor: Adrienne Olsen. E-mail: [email protected] Ph: 029 286 3650

Employment law reform in 2025

July 28, 2025

Business Updates, Contracts and Agreements, Employment Law, Health & Safety, Legal News, Workplace Advice

Employment law continues to evolve, with several changes, or proposed changes, introduced by the government in recent months. The changes are widespread across the employment law spectrum, and it will be important for both employers and employees to be across them.

Theft by an employer

The Crimes (Theft by an Employer) Amendment Bill came into effect on 13 March 2025. Amending the Crimes Act 1961, it now states an employer will commit theft if they intentionally fail, without reasonable excuse, to pay money owed to an employee under their employment agreement and/or statutory obligations. This includes all remuneration entitlements during the notice period and any outstanding holiday pay when they leave their employment.

Whilst this does not change employer obligations, it increases their potential vulnerability to criminal prosecution if money is withheld.

If employers are found guilty of theft under this new law, they can be liable:

For individual employers, for a fine of $5,000, up to one year’s imprisonment, or both, or
For corporate employers, a maximum fine of $30,000.

Equal Pay Amendment Act

On 14 May 2025, the government amended, under urgency, the Equal Pay Act 1972; this was originally implemented to promote gender pay equity by ensuring that employees received equal pay for work of equal or comparable value.

These amendments increased the threshold for what is required to raise a claim under the Act and discontinue current pay equity claims.

Pay deductions for partial strikes

On 25 June 2025, the Employment Relations (Pay Deductions for Partial Strikes) Amendment Bill was passed.

Partial strikes are a common bargaining tool used by employees in negotiations with their employer; employees report to work but reduce their usual outputs or breach their employment agreement in some way. This legislation has reintroduced the ability to make pay deductions from an employee who is involved in a partial strike.

The specified pay deduction can be calculated by either:

Calculating the percentage of reduction in work rate resulting from the strike, or
Applying a 10% deduction.

The deduction will only apply to the time period an employee took part in a partial strike (notice to an employee would be required before the deduction is made). An employee’s remuneration for that period will not be subject to statutory minimum wage requirements.

There is an exception to this where an employee has reasonable grounds for believing the strike is justified on the grounds of health and safety under s84 of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

Termination of employment by agreement proposal

The Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) currently states that an employee can only be dismissed if there is a good reason to do so (justification), and a fair and proper process is followed.

The Employment Relations (Termination of Employment by Agreement) Amendment Bill would allow an offer to be made to an employee to mutually terminate their employment by paying a specified sum to them by way of settlement. This change would allow greater freedom for parties to negotiate exits without the risk of a personal grievance claim arising from the termination offer.

Employee remuneration disclosure

The ERA currently allows employers to include provisions that prevent their employees from disclosing, or discussing, their remuneration with colleagues or third parties. Under this proposed legislation employees would not be required to keep their remuneration details confidential.

The Employment Relations (Employee Remuneration Disclosure) Amendment Bill sets out that employees will have grounds for a personal grievance under s103 of the ERA, if an employer has engaged in adverse conduct for a remuneration disclosure reason. The intent behind the Bill is to increase pay transparency, and with the hope of addressing pay inequities.

Unjustified dismissal regime

The government announced on 17 June 2025 the introduction of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. The bill proposes that employees who earn $180,000 per annum or more (in base pay) will be prevented from raising a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. This threshold aligns with the top tax bracket and is said to affect about 3.4% of the current workforce. The threshold would subsequently be adjusted annually to reflect the CPI.

Under this proposed legislation, an employee earning above the specified income threshold could be dismissed without the risk of an unjustified dismissal claim – unless their employment agreement explicitly preserves this right. This change will apply to all new employees and, after a 12-month transition period, to all employees.

If this bill is passed, we expect more senior employees to negotiate compensation provisions in their employment agreements in the event of termination.

Personal grievance remedies reduction

The ERA currently requires an employee’s conduct to be considered when the authority or court awards remedies for successful personal grievances (PG). However, the Employment Relations Amendment Bill introduced on 17 June, gives greater weight to an employee’s behaviour by:

Removing an employee’s eligibility for remedies for a PG if their behaviour amounts to serious misconduct
Removing an employee’s ability to apply for reinstatement or compensation (other than lost wages) if their behaviour contributed to the issue giving rise to the PG
Allowing courts and tribunals to reduce awards entirely
As part of the potential awarding of remedies, considering whether an employee delayed the disciplinary process, and
Removing employer penalties for minor flaws in the disciplinary process if all other conduct was fair and reasonable.

Review of health and safety

In 2024 the government undertook a consultation aimed at understanding how the current health and safety legislation works. In response, the following changes have been proposed:

An exemption for small, ‘low risk’ businesses from some general Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) requirements. These businesses will only have to manage critical risks and provide basic facilities to ensure worker welfare
Landowners will not be responsible if someone is injured on their land while doing recreational activities. These responsibilities will lie with the organisation that is running the activity
Addressing overlapping health and safety duties by clarifying boundaries between the HSWA and regulatory systems that manage the same risk
Amending the notification requirements, so that only significant workplace events are reported, and
Clarifying the distinction between governance and management’s role in managing health and safety risks, ie: the board leaving the day-to-day management of risks to management.

Additional proposed changes to note

The Employment Relations (Restraint of Trade) Amendment Bill is awaiting its second reading. This bill seeks to limit circumstances where restraint of trade provisions can be enforced by having an income threshold, requiring compensation for the period of the restraint and ensuring they are reasonable.

The Employment Relations Amendment Bill introduced on 17 June 2025, included the long awaited ‘gateway test’ to be used when determining whether a worker is a contractor. For clarification on this proposed test, please get in contact with us.

Wide impact

There will be few employers and employees who are not impacted by the proposed changes; these will require employment agreements to be reviewed, change the way employment relationships are terminated and result in a different focus in personal grievance disputes.

We are happy to advise on how to work your way through the impacts of both the proposed changes and the recently passed legislation.

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Property Speaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Property Speaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022. Editor: Adrienne Olsen. E-mail: [email protected]. Ph: 029 286 3650

Health & Safety