WorkSafe New Zealand has opened its first intake of health and safety inspectors for 2025, and is keen to hear from anyone with an interest in making work safer in Aotearoa.
Inspectors are our frontline eyes and ears across the motu. We are adding up to 60 new recruits this year, each of whom will get full training and development.
This is an opportunity for people starting their career, looking for a change of career, or considering a meaningful way to repurpose their existing skills. You’ll need to be communicative and resilient, have an inquiring mind, and be an effective problem solver.
“We are currently integrating the full range of assessment and investigation work in our inspectorate. This will create a supportive training ground for our incoming inspectors to springboard from,” says WorkSafe’s Head of Inspectorate Rob Pope.
WorkSafe is investing an extra $2.7 million annually into growing its inspectorate. This is part of our new strategy to target the sectors with highest work-related harm – construction, manufacturing, forestry, and agriculture. While a background in these sectors would be highly advantageous to working for WorkSafe, it is not essential.
WorkSafe is the health and safety regulator for work in New Zealand. Our role is to influence businesses to meet their responsibilities and keep people healthy and safe.
This technical bulletin provides guidance about the work trainee divers may undertake while under direct supervision during occupational diving operations.
Introduction
WorkSafe New Zealand requires applicants to provide dive logs to support their Certificate of Competence (CoC) application.
WorkSafe has recently seen an increase in divers submitting dive logs that indicate a need to make clear the distinction between a ‘diver under training’ and a ‘diver working without a CoC’.
This technical bulletin clarifies recommendations for divers who do not hold a current CoC as an occupational diver, but who are doing training dives while at work.
Background
The Health and Safety in Employment Regulations 1995 (the Regulations) require occupational divers working for a Person Conducting or Undertaking a Business (PCBU) to hold a CoC in the category in which they are diving. The CoC is issued by WorkSafe.
The Regulations have a provision allowing workers to undertake training to become the holder of a CoC, but require diving ‘under the direct supervision’ of another diver who holds a CoC for that category of diving.
WorkSafe defines direct supervision as being ‘within reach or contact at all times to ensure immediate assistance can be provided if necessary’.
When is a diver under training?
If a diver does not hold a current CoC, they must be under the direct supervision of a current CoC holder while diving is taking place. In this case they are considered a ‘trainee diver’.
As with all trainees in the workplace, supervision is required because they do not yet meet the necessary level of competency to operate independently in the workplace. For divers, this level of supervision is higher than expected in other workplaces.
Students undertaking formal instruction on a diving course (for example, Australian Diver Accreditation Scheme, Professional Association of Diving Instructors, and Science Diving New Zealand) are not working and do not require a CoC under the Regulations providing all the diving is in accordance with the course syllabus and supervised by a suitably qualified trainer holding a CoC.
But if they begin work tasks outside of their dive course (for example, leading dives, taking samples, fixing nets, cleaning aquariums or being a safety diver) they are considered to be working and will be seen as requiring a CoC.
What sort of training can be undertaken?
While the Regulations allow for employees to train to become a holder of a CoC, the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) requires a PCBU to ensure the reasonable safety of all workers, including those under training.
Before conducting any trainee diving, a PCBU must ensure that the minimum diver level pre-requisite competency has been met, and the trainee divers are competent to learn the specific tasks required for that category of CoC. This includes the use of the diver’s breathing equipment and any hazardous powered tools – both of which should be taught in a formal diving course before use in any workplace.
As trainee divers are learning, PCBUs must also consider both the environment and duration of the training as well as competency levels. Dive sites should be assessed to be of low risk, close to appropriate surface and emergency support and in an environment where the focus is on the work skills being taught, not the hazards of the actual dive site. Remote and isolated sites are not recommended.
Further, being a ‘trainee diver’ should be time limited to ensure the diver has an expectation of how long it will take to achieve competency in the assigned work skills and be able to be assessed for all the skills learnt. Most trainee divers should be able to effectively show competency within a few weeks or months, depending upon the complexity of diving and skills required. In any case the trainee period should be limited to six months at maximum, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
What is not considered training?
A trainee diver cannot fill the role of a standby diver – any standby diver must be able to immediately come to the working diver’s assistance, and as such must already hold a suitable CoC. Performing the role of a standby diver is not considered training.
Even though a trainee diver may be considered the CoC diver’s ‘buddy’ when diving, they cannot be counted as an extra ‘working diver’. Doing so without having separate direct supervision may not be considered training and could indicate the diver is working without a CoC.
Dive logging as a trainee diver
It is expected practice that trainee divers log any supervised dives as training dives to achieve a competency requirement or qualification. This practice is clearly undertaken in a formal course environment and should be replicated by all divers under training.
All normal dive log details should be recorded (such as date, location, depth and time) along with details of their supervising diver, other divers in the team as well as the competencies and activities being undertaken. The logs of training dives should then be submitted as part of their CoC application.
Any dives not directly supervised are not considered training or suitable recent experience for the trainee diver and could indicate that the diver may have been working without a CoC.
Medicals for trainee divers
The Regulations require that occupational divers be ‘medically fit’. Due to the health and exposure risks associated with occupational diving, any trainee diver should be medically assessed and hold a diving medical clearance prior to undertaking any training dives under supervision.
Recommendations
The competency requirements for the relevant categories of CoC are the minimum standards for an occupational diver in the respective sectors. Sometimes a risk assessment will identify additional competencies that divers may require.
WorkSafe recommends:
A trainee diver must be under direct supervision of a suitable CoC holder when underwater.
A trainee diver should hold a suitable medical clearance for occupational diving and have the minimum pre-requisite diving qualifications required to apply for a CoC in that category of diving before starting in-water training.
Training should only be conducted with appropriate controls for the safety of both the trainee and supervising diver.
Training sites should be assessed as suitable for the trainee diver and with adequate surface and emergency support.
At no time should a trainee diver be using any diver’s breathing equipment or hazardous powered tools unless qualified from, or as part of, a formal training program.
All training dives should be logged as such with appropriate details included.
Employers should aim to achieve the competency requirements in a timely manner with minimal delay. Divers should not be operating as divers-in-training for an extended period.
E tū is furious to learn that the Government is proposing to scrap the Living Wage for workers employed by government contractors.
Currently, contractors who deliver cleaning, security, and catering services for government agencies are required to pay at least the Living Wage ($27.80 at present time) to all their workers. In a media release today, Nicola Willis has announced a proposal to scrap that requirement altogether.
E tū National Secretary Rachel Mackintosh says the proposal is cruel.
“It is heartless to consider taking away this important protection for workers, which will categorically mean their lives will become much harder,” Rachel says.
“The affected workers, once celebrated as essential workers during the Covid-19 pandemic, are employed by contractors to do crucial work keeping our public buildings clean and secure. They are the same workers who are often ignored by governments and exploited by businesses.
“The Living Wage requirement in the procurement rules gives these workers some much-needed reprieve. Our members have reported the huge difference the Living Wage makes in their lives, like allowing them to do the basics – pay the bills, put food on the table, buy clothing for their kids, and spend more time with their families.
“Proposing to end this support for these workers is frankly abhorrent.”
Rachel says the Government’s justification is completely inadequate.
“Nicola Willis says this is to “simplify the process” of procurement for businesses.
“Basic human dignity is not an obstacle to delivering services. Spinning this as some kind of streamlining process is disgusting – in reality, this is a proposal to make cleaners, security guards, and catering staff even poorer so the National-led Government can give more to their rich mates.
“Even more galling is Willis’ claim that this is “part of [their] plan to increase jobs and incomes” – you don’t have to be an economist to understand that you do not increase incomes by cutting them.
“Nicola Willis should face up to affected workers and justify herself to them. Why does she think they shouldn’t be able to put food on the table? Why does she want to make it harder for them to pay for their kids’ school uniforms?
“She will not face the workers. This Government has refused to engage with unions on these issues, so they can keep living in complete ignorance of the damage they are causing.”
Rachel says it’s not too late to change course.
“These changes are now open for public consultation, and if the Government has any regard whatsoever for the essential workers employed by contractors to look after government buildings and provide key services, they will keep the Living Wage requirement in their procurement rules.”
New draft government procurement guidelines will remove living wage protections for thousands of low-paid workers in Aotearoa New Zealand, said NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi President Richard Wagstaff.
“The Minister of Finance Nicola Willis has proposed a new rule saying that the Living Wage no longer needs to be paid in cleaning, catering, and security guard services that are procured by government. These workers now face the potential of significant pay cuts,” said Wagstaff.
“During a cost-of-living crisis, government should be lifting people’s wages and ensuring everyone has good jobs, but instead they are reducing the quality of life for thousands of New Zealand workers.
“The Living Wage is an important protection for workers, and its level is set by independent experts who look at the real cost of living for families. Taking this protection away won’t lead to better contracts or better services, it will only lead to higher profits for companies and a more exploited workforce.
“Nicola Willis claims that this protection will be replaced by a new ‘economic benefit rule’. There is nothing in that rule about wages, terms and conditions, worker protection, or income security. For this government, economic benefit clearly doesn’t mean any benefit for workers or their families.
“This is about to trying to lift the profits of companies at the expense of working people. It’s the same logic that brought back 90-day trials, removed Fair Pay Agreements, reduced sick leave, and cut the minimum wage in real terms.
“The NZCTU condemns these changes, which will worsen the material living standards for thousands of workers,” said Wagstaff.
NZCTU Secretary Melissa Ansell-Bridges is issuing a challenge to women in government to stand with working women on International Women’s Day by pushing policies to reduce the gender pay gap.
“We are calling on the women who work in the Beehive to show some solidarity with working women by getting real on pay equity,” said Ansell-Bridges.
“International Working Women’s Day, which has its roots in the labour movement, has been celebrated for well over a century. This day is an opportunity to take stock of all the progress that we’ve made towards gender equality.
“There is still so much to do. We’re currently on a trajectory that will mean we still have a gender pay gap in 2055, despite all the work that unions and workers in female dominated industries have been doing to settle pay equity claims.
“Currently we have a gender pay gap of 8.9% on average. This is much higher for wāhine Māori (16.2%) and Pasifika women (21.2%). Women cannot afford to keep on waiting to be paid fairly.
“Rather than working to close the pay gap, this Government has put the brakes on pay equity by closing the Pay Equity Taskforce and making it significantly harder to fund settlements.
“The Government needs to show they value the work of women in Aotearoa by getting behind pay equity,” said Ansell-Bridges.
E tū is deeply concerned by comments made by NZME investor and billionaire James Grenon, that he wants to replace the board of directors with four new people – including himself.
Grenon owns a 9.3% stake in NZME, and has been a controversial figure in the media landscape.
NZME delegate Isaac Davison said the takeover proposal created significant uncertainty about the company’s potential direction and the newsroom’s editorial independence.
“Our top priority is preserving the impartiality of our journalism and the independence of the newsroom,” Isaac says.
“E tū journalists follow a code of ethics which includes a commitment to reporting and interpreting the news with “scrupulous honesty” and without fear or favour.
“While the intentions of the potential new board members remain unclear, we are concerned about an apparent record of backing news ventures which lack transparency.
“Further, NZME is in the last stages of a major change process which has had a profound impact on staff morale. We believe it is a time for consistency and stability rather than more uncertainty.”
E tū Director Michael Wood says that Grenon has a clear agenda to use NZME for his own interests.
“Mr Grenon clearly wants to use his financial clout to steer the editorial direction of one of New Zealand’s largest and most important media networks,” Michael says.
“While changes to media ownership in New Zealand are common, there is not any recent example of an extremely wealthy individual seeking to use an ownership stake to steer public discourse in the way that Mr Grenon, based on his track record, seems to be attempting.
“These concerns are heightened by a lack of transparency. When his initial stake in NZME was revealed, Mr Grenon indicated that he was not intending to make any further moves, yet within a week it has been reported that he is working closely with an NZ On Air board member and a high-profile businessman to take over the board.
“The idea that a shadowy cabal, backed by extreme wealth, is planning to take over such an important institution in our democratic fabric should be of concern to all New Zealanders.”
Michael calls on the current board to re-affirm its commitment to the editorial independence of NZME’s publications.
“While there is clearly a commercial process to play out, we must protect the rights of NZME journalists to report free from undue interference. We urge other shareholders to think carefully about the impact on the value and standing of NZME if they allow it to be turned into a plaything for the agendas of billionaires like Mr Grenon.”
Workers at NZ Post’s call centre have been told their jobs are being gradually moved to Manila, in the Philippines, as part of NZ Post’s need to cut costs.
While workers’ jobs are safe for now, they will be replaced by workers in Manila by attrition, with people not being rehired in Aotearoa New Zealand when one leaves.
NZ Post worker and E tū delegate Samatha Boe says the move is out of line with NZ Post’s values.
“I find it disappointing a government-owned business is looking to send jobs offshore, thus taking away from everyday New Zealanders trying to earn a living in a difficult economic climate,” Samantha says.
“The Government should be prioritising having Kiwis in jobs. They might save in some running costs, but they’ll lose out in tax revenue and unemployment benefits.
“One of NZ Post’s values is ‘stronger together’ – we should be keeping these values here in Aotearoa.”
E tū Negotiation Specialist Joe Gallagher fears this is just another signal of the Government’s overall goal of preparing NZ Post for privatisation.
“Our postal network is core infrastructure designed to help our communities and businesses, not just another thing to make a quick buck on,” Joe says.
“We’re deeply concerned that the Government is allowing NZ Post to make these kinds of changes in preparation to sell off this service to the highest bidder.
“The state-owned enterprise model has been appropriate for NZ Post, and we have worked very constructively with the company through some significant changes, always putting the interests of workers and the wider community who use the services first.
“Offshoring work, inadequate government support, and the talks of privatisation all point to an abdication of responsibility for both New Zealand’s workforce and the services we need.”
ENDS
For more information and comment: Joe Gallagher, 027 591 0015
A forestry subcontractor was failed by poor risk management from the two businesses above him, both of which have been sentenced for their inaction.
39-year-old Misha Tremel was killed while manually felling trees on a small block at Clevedon in June 2022. The qualified tree feller had been brought in by Turoa Logging Limited, which was harvesting 7,800 tonnes of pine on behalf of the forest managers Pulley Contracting Limited.
The trees being manually cut by Mr Tremel were windthrown, meaning they had been bent and damaged by wind. WorkSafe and the forestry industry strongly recommend that such trees are harvested using machines.
WorkSafe’s investigation found Turoa Logging had not properly reassessed its harvesting plan after nearby trees were cut by machinery and had not ensured safe felling practices were followed. Pulley Contracting did not do enough to identify the ongoing risks to workers and should have been auditing Turoa Logging more thoroughly.
“Businesses must manage their risks and cannot contract their way out of responsibility. Contractors on smaller sites like this are owed the same level of care as those in large-scale operations,” says WorkSafe’s area investigation manager, Paul West.
Mr Tremel was a much-loved husband and father who was originally from Ukraine. His death continues to be a shattering loss for his young family to process.
“Businesses must consult, cooperate and coordinate as part of a contracting chain. WorkSafe recommends health and safety is always built into contract management,” says Paul West.
Forestry had the highest fatality rate of any sector in 2024, with 16.58 deaths per 100,000 workers. Under its new strategy, WorkSafe is turning about 15 percent of its targeted frontline activity to the forestry sector because of the high rate of harm, particularly for Maōri.
WorkSafe’s role is to influence businesses to meet their responsibilities and keep people healthy and safe. When they do not, we will take action.
Turoa Logging Limited and Pulley Contracting Limited were sentenced at Manukau District Court on 4 March 2025.
Both companies were ordered to pay a combined total of $335,680 in fines and reparation
Both companies were charged under sections 36(1)(a), 48(1) and (2)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015:
Being a PCBU having a duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers who work for the PCBU, while the workers were at work in the business or undertaking, did fail to comply with that duty, and that failure exposed workers to a risk of death or serious injury.
The maximum penalty is a fine not exceeding $1.5 million.
Media contact details
For more information you can contact our Media Team using our media request form. Alternatively:
From April there will be a new way of doing a SafePlus self-assessment.
The current SafePlus online tool is at the end of its life and would require significant resource to rebuild.
It is being replaced with downloadable questions – in multiple languages – that can be used much more flexibly as a paper-based survey or in any online survey tool (at the user’s cost).
Registered users of the online tool have been contacted to let them know that no new assessments using the current tool can be started after 11 April 2025.
Those who have run a previous assessment using the tool can access their data and reports until 12 June 2025. After 12 June 2025, the personal data put into the tool by users will be destroyed, to meet Privacy Act requirements.
From April the survey questions and a results calculator will be available to download from the SafePlus section of the WorkSafe website. Businesses can use the questions either as a paper-based survey, or in their own choice of online survey platform.
They are the same questions currently used in the online tool. The questions were developed using the SafePlus framework. They focus on three key areas of health and safety – leadership, worker engagement, and risk management.
Businesses can use their workers’ responses to the questions to calculate a SafePlus health and safety maturity rating in the three key areas, and they can repeat the survey to see their progress year on year.
WorkSafe will not have access to the data. The questions and results calculator are downloadable files, so the business using them will save them in their own system. This means all data will remain with the business itself.
Providing the survey questions for businesses to pick up and use means more flexibility to run their own surveys using their own choice of survey tool. The new way of providing the survey questions also means we can incorporate user-requested enhancements to provide a paper-based option for completing surveys and translation of the questions into multiple languages.
The survey questions and results calculator will be free to use. However, WorkSafe will no longer provide the survey functionality, so if a business decides to use an online survey tool then that may have some cost to them to use.
Onsite assessments by independent SafePlus assessors are also available.
