The Worksite Verdict
A road worker’s death exposes the gap between policy and practice. The law will not accept ignorance.
The Context
On Tuesday, 14 January 2026, a Downer employee was fatally struck by a vehicle on the Taihape-Napier Road near Ngamahanga. WorkSafe and police have opened a joint investigation. There is no sentencing, no fine, and no judicial ruling. Yet. This is the critical phase. The absence of a public verdict does not equate to an absence of liability. The investigation will dissect the worksite’s traffic management plan, the adequacy of signage, and the supervision of the operative. Every procedural failure documented becomes a potential charge.
The Risk
Directors may be personally liable. The Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 imposes a primary duty of care. Section 36 outlines the officer’s duty to exercise due diligence. This is not delegable. A fatality on a worksite may indicate a systemic failure of governance. If WorkSafe’s investigation finds a reckless disregard for safety, charges under the Act are probable. The maximum penalty for a body corporate is $3 million. For an individual officer, imprisonment for up to five years is a statutory possibility. Precedent, such as the WorkSafe v. Fliway case, demonstrates the courts’ willingness to impose significant fines where systemic failures are proven. Your duty is proactive. Ignorance of site-level failures is not a defence.
The Control
Immediate, verifiable action is required. Commission an independent, forensic audit of all high-risk worksite protocols, focusing on traffic management. This audit must report directly to the board, bypassing operational management chains. Scrutinise the paper trail: training records, site-specific risk assessments, and minutes from safety committee meetings. Preserve all documentation. Engage external legal counsel to conduct a privileged review of your due diligence processes. This creates a defensible record of proactive governance.
The Challenge
These are the critical questions you should be raising at the board table:
| Can you produce documented evidence that the board’s last review of high-risk site protocols directly challenged their practical implementation, not just their existence on paper? | |
| What is the specific, auditable process for ensuring that every site manager’s understanding of ‘due diligence’ aligns with the legal standard in section 36 of the HSWA 2015? | |
| If WorkSafe arrived tomorrow, which single piece of board-level documentation would you rely on to demonstrate active governance over worksite safety, beyond mere policy approval? |