WHS Compliance: How Requirements Differ by Australian State

Work health and safety is one of the most important compliance areas for any Australian business. But if you operate across state borders — or even if you just want to understand what applies to you — you need to know that WHS laws are not identical across every jurisdiction.

While most states have adopted the model WHS laws, the implementation, penalties, and enforcement approach differ. Two jurisdictions — Victoria and Western Australia (until recently) — have taken notably different paths.

This guide covers the key differences across all 8 states and territories.

The model WHS framework

In 2011, Safe Work Australia developed a model Work Health and Safety Act and supporting regulations. The goal was national harmonisation — one consistent set of WHS duties across the country.

Most states and territories adopted the model laws between 2012 and 2023:

| Jurisdiction | Adopted model WHS? | WHS regulator | | ------------ | ------------------ | -------------------------------------- | | NSW | Yes (2012) | SafeWork NSW | | VIC | No | WorkSafe Victoria | | QLD | Yes (2012) | Workplace Health and Safety Queensland | | WA | Yes (2022) | WorkSafe WA | | SA | Yes (2013) | SafeWork SA | | TAS | Yes (2013) | WorkSafe Tasmania | | ACT | Yes (2012) | WorkSafe ACT | | NT | Yes (2012) | NT WorkSafe |

Victoria is the only jurisdiction that has not adopted the model WHS laws. It continues to operate under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic).

Western Australia adopted the model WHS laws on 31 March 2022, replacing its former Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984.

Key differences between jurisdictions

1. Duty holder definitions

Under the model WHS Act, the primary duty holder is called a PCBU (Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking). This replaced the older concept of an "employer" and was intended to capture a broader range of relationships — including franchisors, principal contractors, and upstream designers.

In Victoria, the OHS Act still uses the term "employer" as the primary duty holder, with separate duties for self-employed persons and people who manage or control workplaces. The practical effect is similar, but the terminology and scope of duties differ.

2. Officer due diligence

Under the model WHS Act, officers of a PCBU (typically directors and senior managers) have a personal duty of due diligence — they must take reasonable steps to ensure the PCBU complies with its WHS obligations.

This duty is explicit in the model laws and has been adopted in all harmonised jurisdictions. Victoria's OHS Act takes a different approach: officers can be held personally liable if the company commits an offence and the officer authorised or permitted the offence, or was negligent in their duties.

The practical difference is that the model WHS laws impose a positive duty to act proactively, while Victoria's approach is more reactive — liability attaches after a breach occurs.

3. Penalty levels

Maximum penalties for WHS offences vary between jurisdictions. Under the model WHS Act, maximum penalties for the most serious breaches (Category 1 — reckless conduct) are:

• Corporations: $3.5M (indexed)
• Individuals (PCBU or officer): $700K / 5 years imprisonment
• Workers: $350K

However, each jurisdiction sets its own penalty levels through its regulations and periodic indexing. For example:

• NSW and QLD have penalty levels that closely follow the model Act
• Victoria has different offence categories and penalty structures under the OHS Act, with maximum penalties for the most serious offences reaching approximately $4.2M for body corporate repeat offenders
• WA introduced its own penalty schedule when it adopted the model laws, which differs slightly from the model amounts

4. Incident notification requirements

All jurisdictions require businesses to notify the regulator of serious workplace incidents, but the timeframes and definitions vary:

| Jurisdiction | Notification timeframe | Notifiable incidents | | ------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- | | NSW | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | VIC | Immediately after becoming aware (within 48 hours for incidents) | Death, serious injury, incident with immediate risk | | QLD | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | WA | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | SA | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | TAS | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | ACT | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident | | NT | Immediately after becoming aware | Death, serious injury/illness, dangerous incident |

The general standard is "immediately" after becoming aware, but what constitutes "immediately" can vary in practice between regulators.

5. High-risk work licensing

High-risk work licences (for operating cranes, forklifts, scaffolding, etc.) are issued by state regulators. While the national standard is consistent, the application process, renewal periods, and fees differ:

• Most jurisdictions require renewal every 5 years
• Some states require reassessment or continuing competency demonstrations
• Fees vary significantly (from approximately $75 to $200+ depending on the class and state)

6. Codes of practice

Each jurisdiction adopts its own codes of practice to provide practical guidance on how to comply with WHS duties. While many codes are based on model codes developed by Safe Work Australia, states can modify them or create their own.

For example, Victoria has its own set of Compliance Codes under the OHS Act, which are different in both structure and content from the model WHS codes of practice used in harmonised jurisdictions.

State-by-state breakdown

New South Wales (SafeWork NSW)

NSW was one of the first jurisdictions to adopt the model WHS laws in 2012. SafeWork NSW is the regulator and has broad inspection and enforcement powers. Key features:

• Psychosocial hazards regulation was strengthened in 2023, requiring PCBUs to manage psychosocial risks including bullying, harassment, and work-related stress
• SafeWork NSW conducts targeted industry campaigns and publishes sector-specific guidance
• The Workers Compensation Act operates through the icare scheme, with SIRA as the scheme agent

Victoria (WorkSafe Victoria)

Victoria's OHS Act 2004 remains the primary legislation, with WorkSafe Victoria as the regulator. Key differences:

• Employer-focused duties rather than PCBU duties
• Different offence categories: breaches vs the model's 3-tier Category system
• Wage theft is a criminal offence under the Wage Theft Act 2020 (Vic)
• WorkSafe Victoria is also the workers' compensation authority (unlike most other states where these are separate entities)

Queensland (Workplace Health and Safety Queensland)

QLD adopted the model WHS laws in 2012 and closely follows the national framework. Key features:

• Additional industrial manslaughter offences (criminal liability for negligent conduct causing workplace death)
• Strong enforcement of the WHSQ compliance standards for construction and mining
• WorkCover Queensland operates the workers' compensation scheme as a publicly-owned competitive insurer

Western Australia (WorkSafe WA)

WA adopted the model WHS laws on 31 March 2022, replacing the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984. Key features:

• The WHS transition period meant businesses had to update their systems and documentation to align with the new framework
• WA maintains its own state industrial relations system for unincorporated businesses
• WorkSafe WA has published extensive transition guidance for businesses moving from the old OSH framework

South Australia (SafeWork SA)

SA adopted the model WHS laws in 2013. Key features:

• SafeWork SA has a strong focus on small business education and offers free advisory visits
• SA uses the ReturnToWorkSA scheme for workers' compensation
• The state has specific regulations for mining and petroleum operations

Tasmania (WorkSafe Tasmania)

Tasmania adopted the model WHS laws in 2013. Key features:

• WorkSafe Tasmania operates as a combined WHS and workers' compensation regulator
• The state has a lower payroll tax rate (4%) which reduces the overall compliance cost burden
• Workers' compensation is provided through privately-underwritten policies

ACT (WorkSafe ACT)

The ACT adopted the model WHS laws in 2012. Key features:

• WorkSafe ACT oversees both WHS and workers' compensation
• The ACT has specific requirements for government contractors
• The territory's small size means the regulator has close working relationships with local businesses

Northern Territory (NT WorkSafe)

The NT adopted the model WHS laws in 2012. Key features:

• NT WorkSafe oversees WHS, workers' compensation, and dangerous goods regulation
• Specific considerations for remote area operations and isolated work sites
• The NT offers payroll tax concessions for businesses operating in regional and remote areas

Practical implications for your business

If you operate in a single state, you primarily need to comply with that jurisdiction's WHS laws. But if you operate across borders, you need to:

1. Identify which WHS laws apply in each jurisdiction where your workers are located
2. Understand the differences in duties, penalties, and notification requirements
3. Maintain compliance with the highest standard across all jurisdictions to minimise risk
4. Keep track of different regulator requirements for licensing, reporting, and inspections

How Reguladar helps

Reguladar tracks WHS obligations across all 8 states and territories. When you tell us where your business operates, we show you:

• Which WHS laws apply to you
• Your specific duties as an employer or PCBU
• Upcoming compliance deadlines and reporting obligations
• State-specific requirements that differ from the national framework

Get started free to see your personalised compliance dashboard.

Key takeaways

• Victoria is the outlier — it has not adopted the model WHS laws and operates under its own OHS Act
• WA recently harmonised — it adopted the model WHS laws in 2022
• Penalties vary — maximum fines and offence categories differ between jurisdictions
• Officer duties differ — the model WHS laws impose a positive due diligence duty; Victoria's approach is more reactive
• Notifications are required everywhere — but the exact requirements and timeframes vary by state

Staying compliant across multiple jurisdictions is challenging, but understanding the key differences is the first step. Reguladar makes it easy by tailoring your compliance dashboard to the states and territories where you operate.