Safe Plus isn't an accreditation system and I don't think it should be used for that. It is an assessment of performance against the three main pillars of h&s - leadership, risk management and worker engagement. We have just had one done - it's very good and I would certainly recommend it if done well. It has little to do with compliance and shouldn't be used that way in my view.

SafePlus helps lift the performance of workplace health and safety in businesses. It can be used to assess how well a business is performing against good practice health and safety requirements and provide tailored guidance and advice on how and where to improve. It’s not an accreditation or compliance audit scheme, rather a voluntary, health and safety performance improvement tool for businesses.

The SafePlus toolkit is available in three initiatives. Choose the one that works best for your business, or use them all:
• Free Resources and Guidance, • Market-delivered Onsite Assessment and Advisory Service, • Free Online Self-Assessment Tool (on-line tool coming around mid 2018)

The benefits of SafePlus can include: • Tailored guidance and advice • Increased business confidence • Improved productivity through better health and safety • Better risk management • Independent and qualified view of current performance • Reputational and employer of choice gains. For more info visit www.safeplus.nz

I find it disappointing that people do not know the difference between Accreditation and Certification. Legally this is quite big - Accredited means you own the process - Certified means you have met the requirements (i.e. ISO owns the standards process and companies work to gain Certification to the standard).
I also have a major concern about promoting standards that are only applicable to New Zealand. I agree something is needed to replace ACC WSMP and Partnership however I do not feel developing a stand alone process with lower levels of acceptability than ISO and AS/NZ standards is helpful.
Whilst SafePlus appears to be more robust that the ACC system, I am concerned that this will be a money maker for independent consultants to "push" smaller businesses into with little thought or consideration to the needs of those businesses.
I hope I am incorrect in my assumption - only time will tell.

I have the same reservations towards SafePlus as raised by Dianne above - particulary the development of a stand alone process that fails to meet ISO and AS/NZ standards. As a health and safety practitioner often one of my key arsenals when pushing for additioanl resources from senior management is that the buisness must be compliant with best practice and ISO, AS/NZ standards.

The ACC terminology was WSMP Accreditation and yet one only became 'accredited' if one met the requirements laid down by ACC.

So as 'people' I remain a disappointment. I'm still confused because either way certain criteria are being achieved to meet external standards.
OED: Certified officially recognize as possessing certain qualifications or meeting certain standards
Accredited: (of an official body) give authority or sanction to (someone or something) when recognized standards have been met.

Anyhow - doesn't look as if SafePlus is going to replace any qualifications (accreditation OR certification!) demanded of tenderers by bureaucracies and larger corporations.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone as to how many SafePlus assessments are going on (using actual Assessors, as opposed to de facto or self assessments). I'd also like to hear how the experience went for them. I'm not hearing anything so I suspect not much is happening. But I could be wrong.

I am looking foward to the online tool once it become available until then it is hard to comment.

Companies/businesses need to maintain standards but they must be financially viable. I assist my clients mostly with the new ACC Accredited Employers Programme, Sitewise and Impaq Prequal, or, for the largest client ISO certification. They want these under their belts because the majority of large clients and bureacracies like councils and hospital boards request them. I watch the progress of SafePlus with interest.

PS May I most respectfully state that I am disappointed that purportedly educated 'people' misuse apostrophes for plurals (no apostrophes in plurals EVER!) and cannot adequately spell plurals like 'companies' and businesses.

Good on ya Jan. A fellow member of the Misplaced Apostrophe Police. There's a work van parked up my street with an offer of >Free Quote's< and I swear I'm going to take a paint can to it one dark night...

I most disappointed we now have teh spelling and grammar police on board. I cant spell for nuts and I think the use of CAPS is just plain rude.

Aaaaaaaand 3,2,1, go!

I really like the online assessment tool and will be using it with my clients. However; I feel the 'paid for' version is a massive fail. I've had some interesting discussions with Safe+ advocates who insist on giving me a detailed description of what behavioural based safety audits vs ISO accreditation is. I normally smile sweetly and walk off because yes, I do know what behavioural based safety is and don't need a 101.

The problem is that business owners really have no idea about the technical nuances of auditing, accreditation and behavioural based safety. There appears to be no feasibility study or return on investment stats to make a business case for the paid process. Instead, the answer is 'Do it cause it will make you safer... it's a nice/good thing to do" (palm to forehead).

Whoever came up with the 'paid' Safe+ version seems to lack an understanding of how business works and how to deliver an effective marketing/ branding/ communication strategy that backs the product up.

I know I'm probably going to get metaphorical rotten tomatoes thrown at me for saying this.....however; I feel sorry for the consultants that paid to get accredited....I think they purchased a white elephant.

I'm an accredited SafePlus Assessor (since Nov 2017). For what it's worth, here's my opinion:
I've only received two queries from large businesses and I've provided quotes. Interestingly, both were happy with the quotes I presented, but concerned about the amount of time needed to do an assessment (i.e., interviewing their personnel).
I think it's a good initiative because it is NOT a document-based audit.
However (and I know it's early days), I think ACC and WorkSafe should be doing more work in getting the information out there. I also think if there was a financial incentive (as there was for WSMP), there would be more interest - it's a no-brainer I'm afraid.
In a nutshell - maybe I purchased a white elephant! - I hope not coz it was expensive!

I appreciated the last two candid comments. I too shrank back from the cost, but also the bother of having to get higher than "member" status with either of our esteemed safety clubs. I'm not against the need for some sort of professional status, but I looked at Safe Plus and just could not see how it would ever become mainstream. Seems I got that right. Thanks Sarah and Laraine.

With reference to Laraine's comments above about ACC getting involved - I suspect they are far too busy coming up with their own two new schemes for 2019, which in my opinion, look far more collaborative and useful. ACC have been at this stuff for nearly two decades now and they are getting better and better at it. One scheme will be the default for ALL employers. Get that! Not voluntary, like WSMP. That default scheme also has forms of incentive included. The other scheme is a rebuild of AEP.

I analysed these two developments in the following blogs, if anyone is interested: http://public.safetybase.co.nz/48962-2-2-2/ and http://public.safetybase.co.nz/48962-2-2-2-2/