When H&S Professionals Disagree: Confidence, Evidence, and the Line We Must Not Cross

Disagreement in health and safety isn’t a problem. In fact, it’s necessary.

HSWA is a thinking law. It expects judgement, interpretation, and professional debate. If every H&S professional always agreed, it would be a sign that no one is thinking deeply enough.

But there’s a difference between healthy debate and harmful behaviour. Between confidence and arrogance. Between evidence‑based reasoning and fear‑based selling.

And right now, parts of the NZ H&S industry are blurring those lines.

When does an opinion become evidence?

Every H&S professional has opinions – shaped by experience, training, personality, and worldview. That’s normal. But HSWA doesn’t ask for opinions. It asks for decisions grounded in:

• Reasonably practicable thinking
• Reasonably foreseeable harm
• Evidence
• Worker input
• Operational reality
• Proportionality
• Continuous improvement

An opinion becomes evidence‑based when it is:

• Supported by data, research, or credible guidance
• Tested against real‑world work conditions
• Informed by worker experience
• Transparent about assumptions
• Open to challenge
• Able to withstand scrutiny

If it can’t survive those tests, it’s not evidence – it’s preference.

Confidence vs arrogance: the difference is humility

Confidence says, “I’ve thought this through, here’s my reasoning, and I’m open to challenge”, invites dialogue, strengthens decisions, is about the work.

Arrogance says, “I’m right because I’m the expert”, shuts down discussions, weakens decisions and is all about the ego.

And in a field where people’s lives and wellbeing are at stake, ego has no place.

Healthy debate vs bullying and harassment

Healthy debate looks like:

• Asking questions
• Testing assumptions
• Sharing evidence
• Respecting different perspectives
• Challenging ideas, not people
• Seeking clarity, not dominance

Bullying looks like:

• Talking over others
• Dismissing without listening
• Using fear to win an argument
• Undermining someone’s credibility
• Publicly shaming or belittling
• “Winning” at the expense of relationships

Harassment looks like:

• Repeatedly targeting a person
• Using power or status to intimidate
• Pressuring someone into agreement
• Making threats (explicit or implied)

If the goal is to “win”, it’s not safety. It’s salesmanship. And it’s unethical.

The dark side of the H&S consulting world

Some consultants in NZ build their business model on fear.

They hype up how “confusing” H&S is. They tell PCBUs they “can’t possibly do it themselves”. They imply HSWA is a trap waiting to catch them out. They sell complexity instead of clarity.

It works – because fear sells. But it’s not true.

HSWA was designed so that any PCBU can understand and apply it. It’s not meant to be mysterious. It’s not meant to be outsourced to the loudest voice. It’s not meant to be a revenue stream for people who thrive on panic.

Good consultants empower. Bad consultants disempower.

We should question the status quo – but not each other’s integrity

H&S professionals should challenge outdated thinking. We should debate. We should push for better practice. We should call out nonsense when we see it.

But we should never:

• Throw each other under the bus
• Undermine another practitioner to win a contract
• Weaponise HSWA to scare people
• Turn safety into a competitive sport

Understanding HSWA, applying it well, and driving continuous improvement is already a huge body of work. There is more than enough meaningful work for everyone.

We are supposed to be on the same team – the team that protects people.

The future of H&S in NZ depends on how we treat each other

If we want a mature, credible, respected profession, we need to:

• Debate ideas, not attack people
• Use evidence, not fear
• Build capability, not dependency
• Support PCBUs, not scare them
• Collaborate, not compete for scraps
• Hold ourselves to the same standards we expect of others

Because at the end of the day, H&S isn’t about who’s right. It’s about what’s reasonably practicable, what’s effective, and what keeps people alive and well.

And that requires all of us – working together, thinking critically, and lifting the profession rather than tearing it apart.