Safeguard salary survey 2009 – respondents’ comments

This is an edited selection of comments made by survey respondents, with any identifying text removed.

Comments

Salaries will not increase until CEOs recognise the true value of OHS professionals to their organisations.

Salaries in NZ are not on a suitable par with overseas, taking into account qualifications/experience and level of role within organisation. OHS still seen as an add-on to HR whereas it is actually that of a legal officer

Lack of a qualifications framework makes it hard for employers to be consistent with salaries

Extremely low in Government sector.

When I was working as an employee, with a name change from occupational health nurse to health & safety advisor I managed to negotiate a $10,000 increase (because from a perceived female role to a perceived male role).

I believe salaries are often not based on the qualifications offered by the OHS professional. There are OHS managers earning good salaries with minimal (if any) qualifications of repute (ie at least an undergraduate degree).

Under-valued for the work and risk people are exposed to, with demanding hours and expectations.

I have been involved in health and safety in both public and private sectors for the last 25 years, and salaries have increased. There is still room for further increase as practitioners become qualified and professional, industries are becoming more and more technical and require a much more diligent approach to risk management.

Occupational health nurses with other responsibilities and qualifications are giving more input to companies as well as research, data entry and reports, health monitoring, management on a multi-organisational level, health monitoring and interpretation, graduated return to work plans and reviews, health advisory work, basic first aid through to serious injury outside the 'first aid' banner. OHS advisors appear to be on some huge salaries with nurses as their more poorly paid second cousins.

They are way too low! We need to have career pathways to improve our knowledge. People may take us seriously if we can prove we have the skills, eg degrees in OHS.
We need to be regulated. Best if we are self-regulated though.

I never know what others receive and so have no baseline by which to negotiate a better deal for myself.

I feel NZ salaries are very poor in relation to similar roles in other countries, particularly USA and UK. This will affect recruitment.

Definitely on the increase for experienced practitioners. I was offered another position and a bidding war started.

There is still a disparity in salaries between those who generate income and those who prevent loss of income.

Probably not as high as they should be, due to many organisations seeing the OHS role as "non productive" therefore not paid as much as a "productive" employee.

OHS is still perceived as a necessary evil by a large proportion of employers, and salaries reflect how OHS is undervalued.

For similar responsibility overseas we in NZ are $20 to 30K behind. I am looking towards Australia.

Generally the low level of pay (and professional status) for OHS personnel is a reflection of the level of unimportance placed upon health and safety in New Zealand. Importance is linked to consequences. Direct monetary consequences (fines, reparations) are pitifully low compared to other OECD countries.

Still not recognised as a professional employment sector, therefore salaries track lower than other sectors. The sooner there is a professional body operating the better it will be for those who can meet the criteria.

Salaries seem to be lower than in other countries such as Australia or UK. There is no recognition from employers about the importance of competent people. Safety still seems to be something that the majority of employers think anyone can do and they tack it on to other jobs, especially HR, when in fact the skills are very different. I believe that this downvalues safety and hence salaries.

Still not recognised as a key role in business structure.

In my experience many employers are unfamiliar with the OHS sector and relevant qualifications and therefore remuneration packages.

The pay often isn't worth the responsibility or potential liability, but being in a job where you can make a difference to people's lives is very rewarding.

Generally undervalued but this is probably a symptom of the general lack of understanding by senior management of the value to the organisation of good OHS culture and practice.

It appears that the regulators get the lowest scale income coupled with the fewest benefits (ie cars, etc)

While roles and seniority within organisations are beginning to be seen to be equivalent to those in other specialist HR roles, the remuneration remains low due to how OHS is seen within companies. It is still largely seen as a compliance cost that does not impact on bottom line, and salaries are reflective of this.