New South Wales recently passed legislation requiring employers to manage the safety risks associated with digital systems. Here’s how the new rules will work – and what they could mean for Australia’s evolving WHS landscape.

In February, New South Wales made the news after becoming the first Australian state to formally regulate the safety hazards arising from digital work systems. 

Under the new Work Health and Safety Amendment (Digital Work Systems) Bill 2025, NSW employers will be required to ensure digital systems don’t put employees’ physical or psychosocial safety at risk.

This reflects a broader regulatory shift towards treating technology as an active driver of risk in its own right, with safety regulators becoming increasingly attuned to the impacts of systems like algorithmic management and artificial intelligence (AI).

We spoke to Carlie Holt, Partner and Work Health and Safety specialist at law firm Pinsent Masons, to unpack the implications of this Bill both in NSW and across Australia.

Expanding the definition of workplace risk

At a practical level, the Bill brings digital systems within the scope of standard risk management duties under WHS law. The legislation defines a ‘digital work system’ broadly – covering any algorithm, AI, automation system or online platform used in the workplace.

During the early readings of the Bill in parliament, a number of examples were brought forward to demonstrate the risks these systems can present. 

One example concerned a food delivery driver who was given his delivery instructions via an app. The driver reported that, on one occasion, the app provided a GPS route that required him to turn right across double white lines into a busy thoroughfare. If the driver took a longer, safer route, the digital work system flagged it as an ‘inefficiency’ or ‘delayed delivery’, which directly impacted his rating and ability to get future work.

“It’s now broadened well beyond the gig economy to any technology that’s being used in New South Wales workplaces,” says Holt.

The Bill is also motivated in part by the proliferation of AI, which has sparked much debate about emerging digital safety risks.

“With how fast things are developing, I think there’s going to be a lot of unforeseen consequences, which this legislation may deliberately or inadvertently capture,” she says.

Sign up for AHRI’s Embedding Responsible AI course to stay ahead of AI-driven change, keep your HR practices compliant and ensure your organisation is protected.

New access powers granted to unions and inspectors

A key feature of the reforms is expanded access powers. WHS permit holders, including union representatives, will be able to request “reasonable assistance” to inspect digital systems if they suspect a breach, following 48 hours’ notice.

Inspectors and unions will potentially be able to access information including:

• Work hours and rosters
• Performance management and performance reviews
• Incident logs
• Licensing and competency records
• Minutes from board meetings.

“It’s going to capture a huge amount of information that pretty much every workplace now stores electronically – all of that will be discoverable,” says Holt. 

Failure to comply with these requirements can result in fines of up to $66,770 for corporations and $13,310 for individuals, she says.

However, what constitutes “reasonable assistance” has yet to be explicitly defined. Guidance on the new rules is due to be released before they come into effect, but it’s not yet clear when employers can expect to see them.

“People need to be very careful in their race to get everything in an electronic system, and think about where that information could end up.” – Carlie Holt, Partner and Work Health and Safety specialist, Pinsent Masons.

Where the risks lie

The Bill has attracted some criticism since it was passed, particularly around how the new powers could be used in practice.

“The greatest concern [I am hearing] is people misusing the legislation by accessing electronic information for industrial purposes, but using safety as a justification,” says Holt.

The Bill currently doesn’t contain controls around what union representatives can and can’t do with the information they collect, she explains.

“People need to be very careful in their race to get everything in an electronic system, and think about where that information could end up,” she says.

“It’s going to make it imperative for organisations to get systems in place to inform workers how this is going to work, and [what to do] if someone comes to the site and requests access for information – [employees should have] a clear, written, step-by-step guide.”

This guide should include: 

• Who can deal with the enquiry
• Who can access the information
• Who can provide the information
• How and when the information will be provided
• What legally can’t be provided.

While these rules still apply only in NSW, employers across Australia would be well-advised to keep these risks in mind and audit their current data practices to get ahead of increasing scrutiny.

How could this Bill impact the rest of Australia?

Nationally, these reforms serve as an early indicator of how regulators may approach digital safety in the future.

“The other states will be watching to see the practical effects of this legislation,” says Holt.

This Bill is the latest example of states and territories breaking away from the model WHS framework, she says. Different states and territories now have diverging approaches to safety issues such as psychosocial risks, incident reporting and industrial manslaughter.

“There are calls from [many] industries to push for harmonisation and consistency – which I am a strong advocate for,” she says.

That fragmentation makes it increasingly important for employers to take a proactive approach to digital safety governance ahead of more regulatory change.

Holt suggests employers take the following steps to prepare for further digital safety legislation: 

• Audit the digital systems used to allocate, monitor and assess work
• Ensure appropriate human oversight of automated decision-making
• Review how data is stored, accessed and shared
• Develop clear protocols for responding to regulator or union requests for information.

Taking these steps now may help organisations avoid being caught out as expectations around digital safety continue to evolve.

All information, content and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. The contents of this article do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such.

Tune into AHRI’s new ER/IR Unpacked podcast to learn more about Australia’s shifting legal landscape. In the first episode, our host Jonathon Woolfrey FCPHR is joined by Natalie Gaspar to discuss existing and emerging legal frameworks around AI, and how to stay compliant while adopting new technologies.