Irish Workplace Safety Regulations: Your Rights & Employer Obligations

Summary: Irish workplace safety is governed by the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the General Application Regulations 2007-2020. According to Section 8 of the 2005 Act, employers must ensure employee safety "so far as is reasonably practicable" by providing safe equipment, preventing improper conduct including bullying, conducting risk assessments, preparing safety statements, and consulting with employees on safety matters [1]. The Health and Safety Authority (HSA) enforces these regulations through inspections and can issue Improvement Notices or Prohibition Notices when violations occur [2]. Critically, breaches of these regulations establish negligence in personal injury claims, often resulting in higher compensation awards through the Injuries Resolution Board (IRB)—formerly the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) until 2023—or court proceedings [3].

Expert Authority: Gary Matthews, Principal Solicitor

• Law Society of Ireland Practising Certificate No. S8178
• 29+ years specializing in workplace injury litigation (1997-2025)
• €2.5M+ recovered for injured workers through IRB and court proceedings
• Member: Law Society

Last reviewed: 5 January 2026 | Next review: July 2026
This guide reflects current law and verified 2024-2025 enforcement data.

Core legislation: 2005 Act & 2007 Regulations

The Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 is Ireland's primary workplace safety statute, replacing the 1989 Act [1]. According to the Health and Safety Authority, the 2005 Act establishes the legal framework for securing safety, health and welfare of persons at work and protecting others from workplace risks [2]. The Act places duties on employers, employees, designers, manufacturers, and others involved in work activities.

The Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007 (SI 299/2007), as amended through 2020, provide detailed requirements across 15 Parts covering specific hazards and working conditions [4]. According to these regulations, employers must comply with specific controls for manual handling (Chapter 4), display screen equipment (Chapter 5), work at height (Part 4), pregnant and breastfeeding workers (Part 7), and young workers (Part 8), among other areas [4].

Section 8: General duties of employers

Section 8 of the 2005 Act establishes the core employer obligation: "Every employer shall ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the safety, health and welfare at work of his or her employees" [1]. This central duty extends across nine subsections covering specific requirements.

What "reasonably practicable" actually means

According to Section 2(6) of the 2005 Act, "reasonably practicable" means that an employer has exercised all due care by putting in place the necessary protective and preventive measures, having identified the hazards and assessed the risks to safety and health likely to result in accidents or injury to health at the place of work concerned and where the putting in place of any further measures is grossly disproportionate having regard to the unusual, unforeseeable and exceptional nature of any circumstance or occurrence that may result in an accident at work or injury to health at that place of work [1].

In practice, this isn't a cost-saving defence for employers. The test requires employers to identify hazards, assess risks, and implement necessary protections unless doing so would be "grossly disproportionate" to truly unusual and unforeseeable circumstances [1]. Courts consistently reject attempts by employers to avoid safety obligations on cost grounds alone.

How courts actually interpret "reasonably practicable"

Employers sometimes claim they couldn't afford safety measures, or that the risk was too remote to justify precautions. Irish courts consistently reject these arguments.

The Section 2(6) test works like this: once an employer identifies a hazard (or should have identified it), they must implement necessary protections. Cost only becomes relevant if the measures would be "grossly disproportionate" to an "unusual, unforeseeable and exceptional" risk [1]. That's a very high bar. Routine workplace hazards don't qualify.

In practice, courts examine three questions:

1. Did the employer identify the hazard through proper risk assessment?
2. Did they implement reasonable controls to address it?
3. If not, was the failure justified by truly exceptional circumstances?

The third question almost never saves employers. Standard business costs, competitive pressures, and time constraints don't constitute "exceptional circumstances." An employer who knew about a hazard and chose not to address it will struggle to defend that decision [1][2].

This matters for your claim. If your employer argues they couldn't reasonably have prevented your injury, examine whether they conducted a proper risk assessment. If the hazard was identifiable and they didn't address it, the "reasonably practicable" defence typically fails [1][3].

Section 8 subsections: employer obligations breakdown

Source: Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005, Section 8(2)(a)-(h) [1]

Which duties are most commonly breached?

Not all Section 8 duties are breached equally. Based on HSA prosecution patterns and inspection reports from 2020-2025, certain failures appear far more frequently than others [2][5][10]:

Training failures under Section 10 deserve particular attention. Many employers provide generic "health and safety" inductions but fail to deliver equipment-specific or task-specific training. The 2005 Act requires training appropriate to the actual work being done. A general PowerPoint presentation doesn't satisfy this duty [1].

Section 19: Risk assessment requirements

Section 19 is the foundation of Irish workplace safety law. Every other duty flows from it. If your employer hasn't conducted a proper risk assessment, they can't comply with any of their other obligations under the 2005 Act [1].

What Section 19 requires

According to Section 19(1), every employer must [1]:

1. Identify the hazards in the place of work under their control
2. Assess the risks presented by those hazards
3. Prepare a written risk assessment of the risks to safety, health and welfare

The risk assessment must cover all employees, including any single employee or group who may be exposed to unusual or specific risks. This means generic assessments aren't enough. If your job involves particular hazards (working at height, manual handling, chemical exposure, lone working), those specific risks must be individually assessed [1][2].

What the written risk assessment must contain

A compliant risk assessment identifies [1][2]:

• Each hazard present in the workplace
• Who might be harmed and how
• The likelihood and severity of harm
• Control measures already in place
• Additional controls required
• Who is responsible for implementing controls
• Timeframes for implementation

When risk assessments must be reviewed

Section 19(3) requires employers to review and amend the risk assessment when [1]:

• There's been a significant change in the matters it relates to (new equipment, processes, substances, or working arrangements)
• There's any other reason to believe it's no longer valid (an accident, near-miss, or newly identified hazard)

Best practice is annual review at minimum, but significant changes trigger immediate review obligations. After any review, the employer must implement any improvements identified [1][2].

Why this matters for your claim

If you're injured by a hazard your employer failed to identify or assess, that's a Section 19 breach. Request a copy of your employer's risk assessment. If it doesn't mention the hazard that injured you, or if no assessment exists at all, you have strong evidence of regulatory failure [1][3].

Section 20: Safety statement requirements

The safety statement is the document that translates risk assessments into action. Section 20 requires every employer to have one, and it must be based on the Section 19 risk assessment [1].

What the safety statement must contain

Section 20(2) specifies that every safety statement must include [1]:

Communication requirements

Having a safety statement isn't enough. Section 20(3) requires employers to bring it to employees' attention [1]:

• At least annually to all employees
• Upon commencement to newly-recruited employees
• Following any amendment to all affected employees
• In a form and language reasonably likely to be understood

If you've never seen your employer's safety statement, that's a Section 20(3) breach. If you only saw it once five years ago, that's also a breach [1].

When the safety statement must be reviewed

Section 20(5) requires review when [1]:

• There's been a significant change in the matters it refers to
• There's reason to believe it's no longer valid
• An HSA inspector directs amendment (must be done within 30 days)

The 3-employee exception

Section 20(8) provides that employers with 3 or fewer employees can comply by following an applicable HSA Code of Practice instead of preparing a full safety statement. This only applies where a Code of Practice exists for that work activity. The employer must still conduct risk assessments under Section 19 [1][2].

Availability for inspection

Section 20(7) requires that a copy of the safety statement (or relevant extract) must be kept available for inspection at or near every place of work while work is being carried out there [1]. If your employer can't produce a safety statement when asked, that's direct evidence of non-compliance.

Your rights as an employee (Sections 13, 25-27)

Section 13: Your duty and your right to refuse dangerous work

According to Section 13 of the 2005 Act, employees have a duty to take reasonable care for their own safety and that of others, and to cooperate with their employer on safety matters [1]. Critically, Section 13 also establishes that employees can refuse work presenting imminent danger without facing penalisation [1].

Critically, if you face a situation of serious and imminent danger that you reasonably believe you cannot avert, you can stop work and move to a place of safety. Section 27 protects you from dismissal or penalisation for this action [1].

Section 25: Safety representatives' rights and powers

According to Section 25, where employees select a safety representative, that representative has specific legal powers [1]:

• Inspect the workplace: Safety representatives can conduct workplace inspections, particularly after accidents, dangerous occurrences, or when requested by employees [1]
• Investigate complaints: Representatives can investigate employee safety complaints and potential hazards [1]
• Receive HSA notices: Employers must provide copies of all Improvement Notices and Prohibition Notices to safety representatives [1]
• Make representations: Under Section 25(4), employers must consider safety representative representations and "so far as is reasonably practicable, take any action necessary or appropriate" [1]
• Time off for training: Representatives are entitled to paid time off for safety training [1]

Section 26: Employee consultation requirements

Section 26 of the 2005 Act requires employers to consult employees on matters relating to safety, health and welfare at work, including [1]:

• Any measure which may substantially affect safety and health
• The designation of employees to carry out safety activities
• Information on risk assessments and protective measures
• Planning and organisation of safety training
• Designation of employees for evacuation and serious danger procedures

According to Citizens Information, consultation must occur before changes are implemented, not merely as notification after decisions are made [6]. Failure to consult employees before introducing new equipment, processes, or working methods violates Section 26 [1].

Section 27: Protection against penalisation (retaliation)

Section 27 provides critical protection for employees who report safety violations or exercise their safety rights. According to this section, an employer shall not penalise or threaten penalisation against an employee for [1]:

• Making a complaint or representation to the employer, safety representative, or HSA about safety concerns
• Giving evidence in proceedings under the Act
• Acting in compliance with safety legislation (including refusing unsafe work)

"Penalisation" includes dismissal, demotion, loss of opportunity for promotion, unfavourable change in working conditions, or any other unfavourable treatment [1]. According to the Workplace Relations Commission, employees who suffer penalisation can pursue claims for both unfair dismissal under employment law and personal injury claims if the unaddressed safety concern leads to injury [7].

HSA enforcement: Improvement & Prohibition Notices

The Health and Safety Authority enforces workplace safety regulations through inspections, notices, and prosecutions. Understanding how HSA enforcement works is critical because these actions can provide powerful evidence for compensation claims [2].

Improvement Notices (Section 66)

According to Section 66 of the 2005 Act, when an HSA inspector identifies a contravention of safety legislation, they may serve an Improvement Notice requiring the employer to remedy the breach within a specified period (minimum 14 days) [1].

If your employer receives an Improvement Notice for the same hazard that caused your injury, this creates strong evidence of breach of statutory duty in your compensation claim [2][3]. According to the IRB's assessment process, documented regulatory violations by enforcement authorities carry significant weight in liability determinations [3].

Prohibition Notices (Section 67)

Under Section 67, if an HSA inspector believes that work activities involve or will involve a risk of serious personal injury, they may serve a Prohibition Notice immediately stopping those activities until the breach is remedied [1]. Unlike Improvement Notices, Prohibition Notices take effect immediately and require urgent compliance [2].

Prohibition Notices indicate serious safety failures. If you were injured in circumstances that subsequently led to a Prohibition Notice, this demonstrates the severity of the employer's breach and can significantly increase compensation awards [2][3].

Using HSA enforcement actions in your claim

You don't need to wait for HSA prosecution to pursue a personal injury claim. The HSA enforcement process and personal injury compensation are parallel, not sequential [3]. That said, evidence from HSA investigations—including inspection reports, notices served, and any subsequent prosecutions—can substantially strengthen your case [2][3].

Workplace bullying as a health & safety violation

One of the most overlooked aspects of Irish workplace safety law is that bullying and harassment are health and safety violations, not merely employment law issues. This distinction is critical for victims seeking compensation through workplace bullying claims.

Section 8(2)(b) and (g): Legal basis

According to Section 8(2)(b) of the 2005 Act, employers must manage and conduct work activities "in such a manner as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the safety, health and welfare at work of his or her employees" [1]. More specifically, Section 8(2)(b) requires employers to prevent "improper conduct or behaviour likely to put the safety, health or welfare of employees at risk" [1].

The Health and Safety Authority's Code of Practice on "Prevention of Workplace Bullying" (first issued 2007, updated 2020) explicitly confirms that workplace bullying falls within the scope of health and safety legislation [8]. According to the HSA, bullying creates psychological and sometimes physical risks that employers are legally obligated to prevent [2][8].

Why this matters for compensation claims

If workplace bullying or harassment causes you psychological injury (stress, anxiety, depression) or contributes to physical injury, you may have a personal injury claim under the 2005 Act [3]. This is in addition to any unfair dismissal or constructive dismissal claims under employment law [7].

According to the Judicial Council's Personal Injuries Guidelines (2021), psychological injuries are assessed under specific categories, with compensation ranging from minor psychiatric damage (€500-€15,000) to serious psychiatric damage (€40,000-€80,000) depending on severity, duration, treatment required, and prognosis [9]. Employers who fail to prevent bullying in breach of Section 8(2)(b) can be held liable for these injuries [1][3][9].

Workplace injury compensation ranges (Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021)

The following table provides verified compensation ranges from the Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021 for the most common workplace injuries. These ranges apply to IRB assessments and court awards, adjusted for injury severity, duration, and impact on quality of life [9].

Important: These ranges are guidelines—actual awards depend on age, work impact, treatment, prognosis. Multiple injuries assessed cumulatively but proportionally. Pre-existing conditions: compensation only for worsening. Proposed 16.7% increase pending 2025 adoption [9].

Evidence requirements for bullying claims

To succeed in a bullying-related personal injury claim, you typically need [3][8]:

• Medical evidence of psychological injury caused by the bullying
• Documentary evidence (emails, messages, witness statements) of the bullying behaviour
• Evidence you reported the bullying to your employer (triggering their duty to investigate and prevent)
• Evidence the employer failed to take adequate preventive action
• Evidence of the impact on your health, work performance, and daily life

Psychological hazards: the emerging regulatory focus

Section 8 duties aren't limited to physical hazards. The HSA's 2024 Annual Report explicitly identifies "psychosocial hazards and fatigue" as a targeted enforcement focus [2]. This represents a shift in how regulators interpret workplace safety obligations.

Under Section 19, employers must identify all workplace hazards and assess associated risks. This includes psychological hazards: excessive workload, unrealistic deadlines, lack of control over work pace, poor management support, and workplace conflict. These aren't soft issues. They're regulatory requirements [1][2].

The practical implication is significant. If you're suffering work-related stress, anxiety, or burnout, your employer may be in breach of Section 19 (risk assessment) and Section 8 (general duty) if they haven't assessed and addressed these hazards. This is not the same as a general duty of care. It's a specific statutory obligation with enforcement consequences [1][2][8].

How regulation breaches strengthen compensation claims

Breaches of workplace safety regulations don't just expose employers to HSA enforcement—they fundamentally strengthen workplace accident compensation claims by establishing breach of statutory duty.

Two bases for negligence: common law and statutory duty

According to Irish personal injury law, injured employees can pursue compensation on two legal bases [3]:

1. Common law negligence: The employer owed a duty of care, breached that duty, and the breach caused your injury
2. Breach of statutory duty: The employer violated a specific regulation (like Section 8 of the 2005 Act or a provision of the 2007 Regulations), and that violation caused your injury

Claims typically plead both bases. Statutory breaches provide clearer, more objective evidence of fault than general common law negligence arguments [3].

Agency workers, contractors, and multi-employer sites: who's responsible?

Workplace injuries don't always involve a simple employee-employer relationship. Section 8 duties extend beyond direct employees, and multiple parties may share liability for the same incident [1].

Agency workers

If you're an agency worker, both the host employer (controlling the workplace) and the employment agency have concurrent duties under the 2005 Act. The host employer controls the physical environment and systems of work. The agency must ensure you're not placed in unsafe situations and that appropriate information is provided. Both can be liable for injuries caused by regulatory failures [1][3].

Multi-employer sites

Section 12 requires employers sharing a workplace to cooperate on safety matters. On construction sites, this typically means the main contractor bears responsibility for site-wide hazards (access, welfare facilities, general site safety), while individual subcontractors remain responsible for their specific work activities. An injury caused by site-wide failures often results in main contractor liability [1][4].

Self-employed persons on your premises

Section 12 also covers self-employed workers. If you control the premises where a self-employed person works, you owe them duties similar to those owed to employees regarding workplace safety, access, and information about hazards [1].

The key question in multi-party situations: who controlled the hazard that caused the injury? That party typically bears primary liability, though others may share responsibility [3].

IRB assessment and regulation violations

According to the Injuries Resolution Board's claims process, when assessing liability, the IRB (and subsequently courts if proceedings issue) considers whether the employer breached any statutory safety obligations [3]. Documented violations—such as failure to conduct risk assessments (Section 19 breach), inadequate safety statements (Section 20 breach), lack of training (Section 10 breach), or failure to prevent identified hazards (Section 8 breach)—create strong presumptions of liability [1][3].

In practice, this means regulation violations can shift liability assessment from contested disputes to near-certain employer fault, allowing claims to focus on quantum (compensation amount) rather than liability [3].

Complete IRB claims timeline (2024 verified process)

Understanding the IRB timeline helps you plan financially and medically. Based on the IRB's 2024 Annual Report showing 11.2-month average assessment time, here's the complete step-by-step timeline with exact timeframes [3]:

Strategic timeline considerations:

• Don't delay medical report: Waiting for "final" prognosis can delay your claim by months. IRB accepts applications with ongoing treatment—assessment reflects current condition and future prognosis [3]
• 2-year limitation runs from injury date: IRB process time doesn't extend this. Submit IRB application within 18 months to preserve litigation option if IRB rejected [13]
• Parallel processes work: HSA investigation (6-18 months) and IRB claim (11.2 months avg) run simultaneously—HSA findings strengthen IRB case [2][3]
• Solicitor early involvement: 60% of successful claimants use solicitors. Early engagement ensures proper medical evidence, maximizes award, costs average only €694 (vs €25k for court) [3]
• 9-month payment typical: If assessment accepted, payment follows within weeks—total injury-to-payment timeline approximately 12-14 months for accepted cases [3]

Source: Injuries Resolution Board Annual Report 2024; IRB Claims Process Guide 2025; verified January 2026 [3].

Impact on compensation amounts

While the Judicial Council Guidelines set compensation ranges based on injury severity [9], proven regulatory violations can influence awards within those ranges and support claims for aggravated damages in exceptional circumstances. More significantly, clear breach of statutory duty can prevent or reduce contributory negligence arguments by employers, preserving full compensation [3].

IRB vs Court vs Direct Settlement: Complete comparison

Understanding your compensation route options is critical for making informed decisions. Based on verified 2024 IRB Annual Report data and Central Bank NCID statistics, here's how the three main routes compare:

Sources: Injuries Resolution Board Annual Report 2024 [3]; Central Bank National Claims Information Database (NCID) 2024; Central Bank Employers & Public Liability Insurance Report 2024. All figures verified January 2026.

Recent HSA prosecutions & penalties (2024-2025)

Recent prosecutions demonstrate that HSA enforcement has intensified, with substantially higher fines and, in serious cases, potential imprisonment. These cases also illustrate the types of violations that commonly cause workplace injuries.

Major prosecutions (October 2024 - December 2025)

Sources: HSA Press Releases [2][5][10]; Irish Independent coverage [11]

Penalty escalation trend

According to the Health and Safety Authority's annual reports, prosecution outcomes show clear escalation [2]:

• District Court maximum: €5,000 per offence (summary prosecution)
• Circuit Court: Unlimited fines and up to 2 years imprisonment for serious violations
• 2024-2025 trend: Average fines in serious cases have increased from €50,000-€150,000 (2018-2020) to €250,000-€650,000 (2024-2025) [2][5][10]

The HSA's willingness to pursue Circuit Court convictions and substantial penalties demonstrates that workplace safety enforcement is a prosecutorial priority, particularly in fatality cases or cases involving repeated violations [2].

HSA prosecution data analysis (2024-2025)

Based on verified HSA press releases and prosecution records, the following analysis reveals enforcement patterns and trends that inform both compliance strategy and compensation claims:

Implications for injured employees: These prosecution statistics strengthen personal injury claims significantly. If your employer is successfully prosecuted for the violation that caused your injury, that conviction is conclusive evidence of negligence in your civil claim—employers cannot re-litigate their guilt [3]. Even HSA investigations without prosecution provide powerful evidence: Improvement Notices, Prohibition Notices, and inspector reports are all admissible in IRB/court proceedings [2][3].

HSA inspection and enforcement activity (2024 data)

The HSA's 2024 Annual Report shows a significant increase in enforcement activity. Inspectors conducted over 11,600 workplace inspections and investigations across all economic sectors, up from 9,995 in 2023 [2]. The focus remained on high-risk sectors: construction, agriculture, manufacturing, and healthcare.

Workplace fatalities dropped to 34 in 2024. This is the lowest number since the HSA's establishment in 1989 [2]. The fatality rate per 100,000 workers fell from 2.7 in 2015 to 1.2 in 2024. Progress is real, but 34 preventable deaths still represents 34 failures of the regulatory system.

The leading causes of death in 2024 were vehicle-related incidents (10 fatalities), heavy or falling objects (6 fatalities), and falls from height (5 fatalities). Together, these three causes accounted for 64% of all workplace deaths [2]. Each reflects a failure of specific regulatory duties: safe systems of work, equipment safety, and work-at-height controls under the 2007 Regulations.

How to identify safety regulation violations

Many employees don't realise their employer is violating safety regulations until after an injury occurs. This section helps you identify common violations before you're harmed.

Common violations by industry sector

Safety regulation violations vary significantly by industry. The following table identifies the most frequent breaches in Irish workplace sectors based on HSA inspection reports and prosecution patterns 2020-2025:

Sources: HSA Annual Reports 2020-2024; HSA prosecution records; IRB sector analysis; Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021 [2][3][9]. Compensation ranges are indicative based on typical injury severity within each sector—actual awards depend on individual circumstances.

Risk assessment violations (Section 19)

According to Section 19, employers must conduct risk assessments identifying workplace hazards and evaluating risks [1]. Violations include:

• No risk assessment conducted: Employer has no documented assessment of workplace hazards
• Generic template assessment: Risk assessment is clearly a copied template with no workplace-specific details
• Not updated: Assessment hasn't been reviewed despite workplace changes (new equipment, processes, or after incidents)
• Employee denial of access: Employer refuses your request to see relevant risk assessments (violates Section 9 information duty) [1]

Safety statement violations (Section 20)

Section 20 requires employers to prepare a written safety statement based on the risk assessment, specifying how safety and health will be secured and identifying responsible persons [1]. Red flags include:

• No safety statement: Employer has not prepared any safety statement
• Generic template: Statement contains no workplace-specific information; clearly downloaded template
• Not brought to attention: You've never seen the safety statement despite Section 20(3) requiring it be brought to employees' attention
• Not reviewed: Statement hasn't been updated despite accidents, near-misses, or workplace changes

Training violations (Section 10)

Section 10 requires employers to provide safety training appropriate to the work, and to ensure employees receive training [1]:

• No induction training: You started work with no safety training
• Unpaid training: Employer requires attendance at safety training outside work hours without pay (violates Section 10 - training must be during working hours or paid time) [1]
• Equipment-specific training absent: You're expected to operate machinery/equipment without specific training on safe use

Consultation violations (Section 26)

Common Section 26 violations include [1][6]:

• New equipment introduced without consulting employees on safety implications
• Working methods changed without safety consultation
• Restructuring implemented without discussing safety impacts
• Notification after implementation rather than consultation before

Quick self-assessment: Is your employer complying?

Use this checklist to identify potential regulation violations in your workplace. Each "No" answer may indicate a breach of the 2005 Act or 2007 Regulations [1][4][6]:

Remote and hybrid workers: your employer's safety duties still apply

Section 8 applies to "any place where work is carried on." That includes your home office. If you work remotely, even part-time, your employer retains statutory safety duties under the 2005 Act [1][6].

This isn't theoretical. In a 2021 WRC case, a constructive dismissal claim succeeded where an employer failed to implement adequate safety measures for remote workers during the pandemic. The WRC held that the employer's obligations under the 2005 Act required them to address the changed working conditions [7].

What employers must do for remote workers

According to HSA guidance and the WRC Code of Practice on Remote Working (January 2024), employers should [2][6][7]:

• Support home workstation risk assessments: A self-assessment questionnaire is acceptable, but employers must act on identified issues
• Apply DSE regulations: Display Screen Equipment rules under the 2007 Regulations (Chapter 5, Part 2) cover remote workers using computers [4]
• Provide suitable equipment: If the employer requires specific equipment, they must ensure it's safe and suitable
• Address psychological risks: Lone working, isolation, and blurred work-life boundaries are assessable hazards

Employers can't simply claim ignorance of your home working conditions. The duty to assess risks doesn't disappear because work happens off-site. If you've reported ergonomic problems, inadequate equipment, or work-related stress from remote working and your employer hasn't responded, that may constitute a Section 8 or Section 19 breach [1][2][6].

Frequently asked questions

Detailed FAQ Answers

Related internal guides: Workplace accident claims • Employer negligence • IRB process • Claim time limits