Workplace safety rules rarely move fast, and then two move at once. This year, both Oregon and the international standards body behind ISO 45001 are updating the rules that govern how employers protect their people. Both updates point in the same direction: safety programs need to prove they work, not just describe what they intend
It’s a quiet shift. A fuel station forecourt at 9.47pm, one person on the till. The cashier steps into the back store to start unloading a delivery. Nobody sees what happens next, nobody sees the boxes fall on top of her – not because nobody was paying attention, but because nobody was there to. The
The numbers most EHS programs run on are, by definition, already history. In 2024, 5,070 US workers died from work-related injuries, a 4.0% improvement on 2023’s 5,283, but still one worker roughly every 104 minutes [US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries]. Across all of private industry, the recordable injury and illness
Heat stress has quietly become one of the fastest-moving areas of EHS regulation in the US, and for good reason. In its own proposed national heat standard, OSHA cites 1,042 US worker deaths from occupational heat exposure between 1992 and 2022, an average of 34 a year, with 43 recorded in 2022 alone. The also
Understanding why these regulations are changing—and what they mean for employers—is becoming increasingly important as organisations adapt their health and safety programmes to manage heat-related risks more effectively. Key Takeaways Introduction Across North America, employers are experiencing more frequent periods of high temperatures and extended heat events. These conditions are creating new challenges for organisations
Not so long ago, managing lone worker safety was relatively straightforward. Most employees worked from a central location, supervisors knew where their teams were throughout the day, and lone working was often limited to a small number of specialist roles. Written lone worker policies, periodic risk assessments and occasional welfare checks were usually considered sufficient
For many years, lone worker safety has largely been viewed as a compliance issue. Organisations developed policies, completed risk assessments, and introduced procedures to meet their legal obligations. Once those measures were in place, they were often reviewed only when regulations changed or following a serious incident. Today, that approach is becoming increasingly outdated, particularly
Ask ten companies whether they’re compliant with lone worker legislation and you’ll probably receive ten confident “yes” answers. Now ask those same companies how they would respond if a worker missed a check-in at 8:30pm on a Friday evening. Who receives the alert? How quickly is it escalated? What evidence could they produce following a
Medical alert systems for lone workers are becoming an increasingly common consideration as more organisations manage employees who work independently or across multiple locations. Traditionally associated with healthcare and personal wellbeing, these systems are now being used to help protect workers who may be at risk of injury or medical emergencies while working alone. The
Using geofencing apps for field worker safety has become an increasingly popular approach for organisations managing mobile teams. By creating virtual boundaries around specific locations, these systems help employers understand when workers arrive at or leave a site, providing valuable operational visibility across multiple locations. From an operational point of view, this is useful. It
