On 20 February 2026, SafeWork NSW adopted the Healthcare and Social Assistance Industry Code of Practice under the WHS Act. Until now, healthcare and social assistance lacked consolidated, tailored guidance on managing WHS risks despite recording the highest injury rate of any industry. This Code fills that gap, setting explicit expectations for healthcare psychosocial compliance across hospitals, aged care, disability support, social assistance, and home-based care settings. And it does not land in isolation. From 1 July 2026, a new section 26A of the WHS Act turns compliance with an approved Code of Practice from an evidentiary benchmark into a legal duty. That changes what this Code means for every PCBU operating in the sector.

The pattern

Healthcare and social assistance employs more than two million workers and is Australia's largest industry. It is also the most injury-prone. The sector accounts for 19.9% of all serious workers' compensation claims nationally, the highest share of any industry, with a claim rate more than twice the national average.

Within that picture, psychosocial injury is accelerating faster than any other category. Serious mental health claims across all industries rose 14.7% in a single year to 17,600 in 2023-24, now representing 12% of all serious claims. Workers with a psychological injury spend an average of 35.7 weeks off work, nearly five times longer than other serious injuries. The median compensation payout sits at $67,400, compared with $16,300 across all other serious claims. Healthcare workers carry a disproportionate share of that burden, and the most common psychosocial hazards in the sector are precisely the ones hardest to manage with generic tools: work-related violence and aggression, workplace bullying and harassment, and high job demands.

Until now, most organisations in aged care, disability support, and health services have managed those hazards with annual staff surveys, generic risk registers, and wellbeing programmes that address symptoms rather than causes. The Code makes that approach harder to defend. And the enforcement environment makes it riskier to try.

What this looks like in practice

Consider an aged care provider operating across multiple facilities. Staff absorb client aggression daily, carry emotional labour that nobody quantifies, and work rotating rosters that compound fatigue over months. The organisation runs an annual engagement survey, records incidents when workers report them, and offers an EAP.

Before the Code, a regulator could ask whether the provider identified and controlled psychosocial hazards under its general duty. Now, a regulator can point to sector-specific guidance that explicitly covers aged care settings and ask: did you follow it? A court can treat that Code as evidence of what is known about hazards, risks, and controls in this industry when deciding what counts as reasonably practicable. And the Code specifically warns that psychosocial and physical hazards can interact and combine to increase risk, which means assessing them in isolation no longer reflects the standard of practice a regulator expects.

The timing matters for another reason. Since 1 March 2026, registered organisations including unions can initiate civil penalty proceedings for WHS breaches in NSW on behalf of affected workers. They can now claim a portion of any penalty the court imposes. In a sector with high union density and high psychosocial claim rates, that creates enforcement pressure from two directions: the regulator and the workforce itself.

What to do about it

If you operate in aged care, disability support, or health services in NSW, four practical steps close the gap between where most organisations stand today and where the Code expects them to be.

First, review your psychosocial hazard identification. Confirm it covers the hazards specific to this sector: client aggression, emotional labour, shift-based fatigue, exposure to traumatic events, understaffing, and isolated or home-based work. The Code names these directly.

Second, assess whether your risk assessment process reflects the Code's sector-specific expectations, not just the general model Code of Practice for managing WHS risks. This Code sets a higher bar for what a PCBU in healthcare should know about its own hazards.

Third, document your controls and verify they are implemented, not just planned. From 1 July 2026, a PCBU that departs from a Code must positively demonstrate that its alternative controls meet or exceed the Code's standard. That is a significantly higher evidentiary burden than the current position.

Fourth, review whether your monitoring and reporting captures the interaction between psychosocial and physical hazards. SafeWork NSW's burnout Industry Action Report already identifies excessive workloads, poor culture, and low peer support as key drivers of harm in this sector. If your reporting system does not surface those patterns, it is not telling you what a regulator will look for.

The sector has the highest psychosocial claim rates in the country. The regulatory expectations are now proportionate to that risk. The question is whether your compliance system is.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information on psychosocial compliance in Australian workplaces. It does not constitute legal advice. Organisations should consult qualified professionals for advice specific to their circumstances. Data cited is sourced from Safe Work Australia, SafeWork NSW, and referenced publications as of the date of publication.