Contracting Out Health and Safety? Know the Risks Before You Rely on It

It might feel easy to hand health and safety to a contractor — but doing so can leave leaders exposed, and risks hidden. Sometimes they’ve been around for years — part of the furniture, liked by the team, and seemingly keeping everything running.

But when something serious happens, who’s really responsible?

And how do you know if your system is actually protecting people — or just producing paperwork that says it is?

If your business:

• Has a reasonable number of staff
• Uses heavy vehicles, machinery, or hazardous substances
• Operates across multiple sites
• Is involved in contracting or subcontracting relationships

… then relying entirely on a contractor might not be enough.

Contractors can support you — but they shouldn’t replace your internal safety resource

Under New Zealand’s Health and Safety at Work Act (HSWA), businesses cannot contract out their duties. As a business owner, you retain legal responsibility for making sure risks are actually being managed — not just documented.

When businesses rely entirely on an external contractor to “own” the health and safety system:

• It can create blind spots — especially if no one else knows the process
• It removes visibility — when paperwork is the only source of assurance
• It delays response — if the contractor isn’t available
• It prevents growth — because internal capability never develops. And if the contractor leaves after years of running everything, you’re left starting from scratch — with limited systems knowledge or safety leadership embedded in your teams.
• It creates a false sense of security — especially when the person who is responsible for the system is now checking it and confirming everything is “fine”

Many contractors do good work. But if they’ve been there for 2+ years, are doing everything — it’s time to ask:

Are we getting assurance — or just admin?

A quick test: who really leads health and safety in your business?

Ask yourself:

• What does your Health and Safety Policy say about who leads safety — a contractor, or your directors, people leaders, and employees? (If a contractor leads safety, your own leaders can lose sight of what’s really happening — and that puts them at risk).
• Who carries out your internal audits, workplace inspections, and safety checks — and who arranges external audits to confirm things are working? Is it a contractor, or your own employees? (If contractors run the checks and the reviews, there’s no real independence — and your board may only hear that everything is fine).
• Who prepares your health and safety information for governance and internal meetings — a contractor who’s responsible for the system, or your own employees? (If a contractor writes the reports, leaders may never see the real issues — just a version that protects the contractor’s system).
• Who investigates incidents — a contractor, or the responsible manager? (A contractor is unlikely to identify issues linked to their own system, training, or workplace relationships — especially if they’re paying their monthly invoice).
• Who leads worker engagement — your contractor, or your business leaders? (If contractors run toolbox talks and committees, your leaders miss direct input from workers — and the law expects leaders to be involved).
• Who manages your contractors and ensures the paperwork is in order — a contractor, or your staff responsible for the contract/contractor, supported by your admin staff? (If a contractor controls this, they can overcomplicate it to stay in charge — but once set up properly, it’s a simple, repeatable process your team can own). 
• Who arranges your training & inductions — your contractor, or your managers? (Training and inductions should be owned internally, as managers know their work, risks, and people best. Contractors should be used to build capability and provide specialist support — not to replace leadership ownership or reduce inductions to a box-ticking exercise.)

If the honest answer is “a contractor” to most of the above, you may have a visibility problem — and your directors or board may be more exposed than they realise.

Is there real independent oversight?

It’s easy to assume that having someone “experienced” means everything is covered.

But, if the same contractor designs your system, runs the meetings, completes the checks, and reports back to leadership — who’s actually verifying it works? It’s even riskier if they then bring in someone they know to “check” the system they created. That’s not independent assurance — it’s just one contractor confirming another’s paperwork. Without internal involvement or genuine external oversight, you could be legally exposed, paying more than necessary, and still not know if your system works in practice.

What good looks like: building internal capability

If your business has more than a handful of employees, operates in moderate to high-risk environments, has multiple sites, and is involved in contracting or subcontracting arrangements, it may be time to hire a full-time health and safety advisor. This person:

• Responds quickly when things change
• Works with managers daily to improve behaviour — not just record actions
• Builds knowledge and capability across your team
• Provides far better coverage — 40 hours a week, or over 2,000 hours a year — compared to many contractors charging for just 40–60 hours a month (that’s only 480 to 720 hours a year).
• Will typically cost less than a contractor — around $65,000 ($31hr) to $75,000 ($36hr) per year in the Taupo area — while delivering over 2,000 hours of support annually. That’s better value, more availability, and stronger day-to-day safety leadership

Why partner with Lakes Safety Services

We bring more than 25 years of hands-on leadership experience in health and safety — building and leading Health and Safety teams, recruiting and restructuring, and when necessary, removing underperforming contractors and consultants. That experience has shown a clear pattern: when businesses hand over too much to contractors, capability stalls, risks get hidden, and leaders lose visibility. Long-term contractor control might feel convenient, but it often leaves businesses with a false sense of security — and leaders more exposed than they realise.

If you’d like straight advice on avoiding these risks, contact us today.