Our Thoughts on 2026 H&S and Employment Reform
The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill was introduced in February 2026, and the Employment Relations Amendment Act became law during the same month. There's been a lot of change recently that directly affects our clients, so we've taken a moment to put together our thoughts on both of these updates.
Across both the employment relations reforms and the Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill, the Government’s overall direction is clear: reduce perceived “red tape”, increase certainty for employers, and rebalance the system toward greater operational flexibility. Taken together, these changes signal a shift away from process-heavy compliance settings and toward a more business-centred framework—including new limits on unjustified dismissal claims for higher earners, greater scope for negotiated terminations by agreement, and a health and safety model that would allow smaller businesses to focus primarily on “critical risks”.
From an Emendas perspective, the intent is understandable, particularly for SMEs that are often overwhelmed by complex legal expectations. However, there is a genuine risk that these reforms could create false confidence rather than real certainty. In health and safety, defining “critical risk” as harm that is “likely” to cause death or notifiable harm introduces a highly subjective threshold that may actually increase confusion and require just as much risk assessment effort to interpret. Meanwhile, employment reforms may reduce formal legal exposure, but they do not remove the cultural and reputational consequences of poor decision-making, weak leadership, or unfair process.
Overall, the opportunity here is not to “do less”, but to do smarter, with practical governance, better risk prioritisation, and stronger leadership capability. If reforms are interpreted as permission to shortcut good practice, the likely result will be increased harm, increased conflict, and higher long-term cost (including ACC burden, lost productivity, and workforce disengagement). Businesses that stay focused on capability, fairness, and real-world risk management will still be the ones best protected, regardless of where the law ultimately lands.
Overall, we feel that both the loosening of safety legislation and the trend towards leeway for employers (specifically, those employers who are already pushing the limits of what is safe and looking for corners to cut) might make sense if New Zealand had stellar reemployment relations and health and safety records. We most assuredly do not.
Take, for example, the income threshold of $200,000 total at which unjustified dismissal claims will no longer be considered. Earning a higher than average income does not make someone immune to poor employment practice. In many parts of the country, a $200k household income is not enough to be without financial concerns, and being dismissed without reason is a significant blow.
Similarly, the law now states that employee behaviour will be strongly considered in personal grievance claims. This is a loophole forming before our very eyes: made a mistake in the weeks before being unfairly dismissed? Your remedy for being unfairly dismissed could be reduced or eliminated.
We see the intent behind these law changes, but in reality, it's another way for employers (again, those already predisposed to unethical practices) to mistreat employees without fear of repercussions. There are already processes in place for dismissing employees who are not performing adequately. Following these ensures a fair dismissal, so why not have employers do it, rather than creating ways to release them from consequences?
We’ve mentioned many times that New Zealand’s workplace fatality rates and other associated safety statistics are very poor when compared to culturally similar nations. In this environment, loosening restrictions for SMEs, which constitute 97% of NZ’s businesses, seems like a step in the wrong direction. We can absolutely get on board with reducing administrative burden, as long as it’s not going to put NZ’s workforce at increased risk. Employers who benefit from looser restrictions may not feel the same relief after an accident, injury, or worse happens on their watch.
Want to hear more thoughts from our team? Head to the home page to join our mailing list!