Safesearch Survey

foreword 2
introduction 3
participating organisations 5
key findings & observations 6
qualitative survey results 9
10 year analysis 12
survey findings – whs/hse 14
whs/hse officer 14
whs/hse advisor/coordinator 16
whs/hse manager 18
national whs/hse manager 20
general manager whs/hse 22
position analysis by state – whs/hse 24
whs/hse officer 24
whs/hse manager 25
position analysis by industry – whs/hse 27
whs/hse officer 27
whs/hse manager 28
survey findings – workers compensation 30
claims/im/rtw coordinator/advisor 30
claims/im/workers comp manager 32
group/gm workers compensation 34
position analysis by state
– workers compensation 36
group/gm workers compensation 36
position analysis by industry
– workers compensation 37
survey findings – environment 38
environment advisor 38
sustainability advisor 40
environment manager 42
national environment manager 44
head of environment & sustainability 46
position analysis by state – environment 48
sustainability advisor 48
head of environment and sustainability 49
position analysis by industry – environment 50
head of environment and sustainability 50
survey findings – new zealand 52
whs/hse manager 54
general whs/hse manager 58
appendix 1 60
appendix 2 62
appendix 3 63
contents
search | recruit | sustain 1
This survey is produced by safesearch and envirosearch, leaders in search
and recruitment of Health, Safety, Wellbeing, Workers Compensation and
Environment professionals and practitioners. Working across a diverse
range of industry sectors, safesearch and its sister company envirosearch
have proven experience in efficiently and effectively sourcing and securing
quality candidates across Australia, Asia Pacific and globally.
Both safesearch and envirosearch, which are now part of the global
ManpowerGroup, have built a reputation as thought leaders in HSE talent
acquisition whether the requirement be contract or permanent. The
company’s ‘narrow and deep’ approach results in retention rates that are
well above the industry average.
© safesearch 2016
This material is an original work. It cannot be copied without written consent from safesearch.
experis specialist brands

2 2015/2016 remuneration survey search | recruit | sustain 3
The health and safety sector in 2015-16 continues to
be influenced by downturns in investment across the
energy and resources sector and general softness
across the jobs front in a number of other industries
traditionally employing OHS/WHS expertise.
What do we as a sector know about how this and
other industry issues are impacting on the people who
are working in the profession? Who is most effected
and how? How is the education and experience profile
of the profession changing? What are the trends in
regards to the choices employers are making in the
way they are setting up their HSEQ teams/workforces,
and in what sectors?
We don’t know enough. Solid knowledge is built on
the analysis of high quality data, and we need more
of that data to better understand the subtleties of
change in the way Health and Safety is managed and
administrated throughout different industries and
across Australia. This makes the work of safesearch
and this remuneration survey important. It remains
an annual piece of data collection which shows
emerging trends over time, and gives us insights into
the evolution of the health and safety profession.
One program just introduced which will have a
structural effect on the sector in the years to come
– and the data in this survey – is Certification of the
profession. For some years, the Safety institute of
Australia has worked to build three key building
blocks to ensure the ongoing improvement of advice
to employers and the capability of the OHS/WHS
profession: (a) The creation of the OHS Body
of Knowledge, providing a rich source of knowledge
which outlines the conceptual frameworks for
the roles of OHS practitioner and professional; (b)
accreditation of higher education, building greater
consistency in education and articulating it against
the Body of Knowledge; and (c) Certification, which
combines both education and critical on-the-job
experience, to recognise the capability of individuals.
In July 2015, the Safety Institute of Australia
introduced its full Certification for the OHS profession,
with the introduction of three important levels of
certification: Practitioner, Professional and Chartered
Professional, and there are now 1400 members of
the profession certified into these roles. Employers
can have increased confidence that by employing a
certified person, they are more likely to get a person
capable of delivering high quality OHS/WHS advice at
the level they are certified.
We again commend the safesearch remuneration
survey to readers as a great initiative – a regular
source of annual data that over time, building on the
data of previous years, tells one part of the complex
story which is the state of the health and safety
profession through our workplaces in Australia.
David Clarke
Chief Executive
Safety Institute of Australia
foreword introduction
Welcome to the 10th
annual safesearch and
envirosearch health
safety and environment
remuneration survey
report. This year we
have seen record levels
of participation with 168
companies providing
data on 1334 individual
roles – a 10.5% increase
from last year’s survey. For the second year we
have incorporated data from New Zealand whilst
expanding the data sets in all areas including health,
safety, environment and workers compensation/injury
management positions.
The demand for HSE talent over the last twelve
months has been inconsistent and largely geography
specific, with NSW continuing to see strong growth
off the back of an infrastructure boom, and the
Victorian market steady but evolving in a positive
direction as clarity improves on state and federal
government investment. The resource states have
continued to see a recalibration and downturn in
the number of hires being made. There is however
recognition that in WA the market has bottomed out,
and in Queensland there are signs of growth with
increased positive sentiment and improved business
confidence both starting to drive hiring activity. New
Zealand with the upcoming change in legislation has
seen an increase in demand, particularly for talent
with experience operating at a senior level with strong
strategic execution focus and the ability to enable
operational accountability.
These findings are consistent throughout the broader
employment market with the 2016 Employment
Outlook Survey released by ManpowerGroup
(December 2015) indicating that Australian job
seekers can approach the New Year with cautious
optimism that there is growth in the employment
market. The survey, which captures the hiring
intentions of over 1500 employers in Australia, found
that just over three quarters (76%) will make no
changes to hiring plans, while 15% plan to increase
hiring and 7% expect some form of downsizing
over the next period. The resulting outlook is +8%.
The survey reported Victoria as having one of the
strongest hiring prospects coming into 2016 and also
noted the positive performance of the Queensland
economy despite being resource heavy. It was
concluded that unlike other resource-heavy regions
such as the Northern Territory, which remains
volatile, and Western Australia, which has been in a
sustained low growth period, Queensland’s diversity
has allowed the economy to keep ticking. This has
instilled confidence in employers that those in the
other regions have not been afforded.
Similarly in New Zealand of the 650 organisations
surveyed the majority (79%) expect no change in
hiring plans whilst 4% expect a decrease and 15%
are planning for growth, leaving the net employment
outlook at +11%. This is down from the +28% at the
same time last year however it suggests that hiring
activity will continue to build on the rapid growth in
the last twelve months albeit at a slightly slower pace.
The safety space in New Zealand is still experiencing
similar growth prospects to last year, with demand
for more experienced, capable professionals
outweighing availability locally and therefore
requiring organisations to look to Australia and other
markets to resource effectively. This in some way
remains driven by the change in legislation that was
due to occur during the latter part of 2015 and now
pushed out until April 2016.
Within the environmental sector across Australia and
New Zealand, 2015 has seen consolidation within
the portfolio and limited growth. Specifically, we
have seen continuation of the trend in recent years to
rationalise environmental roles into the broader HSE
function. This has in turn driven increased demand
for environmental expertise within combined HSE

4 2015/2016 remuneration survey
appendix ??? appendix ???
introduction – continued
roles. Recent policy changes and activity within
operational oil and gas and construction sectors has
seen demand start to increase in more recent times
with positive hiring intent seen as we move into 2016.
We anticipate that the recent changes signalled by
the Commonwealth government, combined with
the global climate agreement reached in Paris
in late 2015, will drive further growth in both the
environmental and sustainability sectors.
safesearch has continued to play an active thought
leadership role over the past year with another
successful “safesearch Great Debate” having been
held in Sydney. The debate centred on the Board’s
role in safety within business, and saw contributions
from a number of leading board directors across
Australia. This event was once again supported by
PwC and was attended by a large audience of CEOs,
senior executives and safety leaders from across
the country, demonstrating the importance and
commitment to safety at all levels, which was both
refreshing and exciting to see. Through this event
and others we have seen a continued drive across the
profession towards the need to evolve, to align more
closely with the business and to do things differently
in order to maintain relevance and maximise impact.
We are committed to further contribution in this
space in the hope that we can continue to contribute
to a better informed and engaged workforce that
is better enabled to reduce fatalities, injuries and
illness, that manages assets and operations in a
sustainable fashion, embraces the changing nature
of work, and places an increased focus on people risk
and the potential impacts that will arise if such risks
are not properly managed.
Thank you again for your support, contribution and
interest in our survey. For feedback or to register
your interest for next year’s survey, email us at
salarysurvey@safesearch.com.au.
Aaron Neilson
General Manager
participating organisations
safesearch and envirosearch would like to thank each of the participants above as well as 116 other participating
organisations that preferred not to be named.
ABB Australia
AGC
Alcoa
Asciano
Australia Post
Australian Home Care Services
Australian Red Cross Blood
Service
Bega Cheese
Boskalis Australia
Broadcast Australia
Compass Group
Condor Energy Services
Crown
Delta SBD
DuluxGroup
Evolution Mining
Fonterra
George Weston Foods
Healthscope
Industrial Galvanizers
ISS Facility Services
Jemena
John Holland
Laing O’Rourke Australia
Lend Lease
Lion
L’Oreal Australia
Lyons Construction
Matrix Composites & Engineering
Medibank Private
Melbourne Health
News Corp Australia
Orica
Pilbara Meta Maya Regional
Aboriginal Corporation
PMP
Programmed
RMIT
Roads and Maritime Services
Safety Action
Samsung C&T
Sims Metal Management
Sirtex Medical
SMEC Australia
Swire Cold Storage
Telstra
Thiess
Transfield Services
Victoria Racing Club
Visy Industries
Watpac Civil and Mining
Westpac Banking Corporation
Woolworths

claims / im / workers compensation manager
• Average TAR increase of 9.4%
• 47% qualified to relevant Diploma-level (AQF 5)
• 41% are responsible for two or more jurisdictions
• VIC has the highest average TAR at $132,121
group / gm workers compensation
• Average TAR decrease of 1.5%
• All respondents qualified to at least relevant
undergraduate-level (AQF 7)
• 57% have 6+ years of experience
• 67% have one or more direct reports
environment advisor
• 94% are qualified to relevant undergraduate-level
(AQF 7)
• 69% have multi-site responsibility
sustainability advisor
• Average TAR increase of 5.2% from 2013/14 survey
• 29% have a relevant Masters (AQF 9) degree
• No direct reports reported for this role
environment manager
• 67% have no direct reports, compared
to 51% last year

national environment manager
(TFR increase of 14.6%)
• 79% lead a team
head of environment & sustainability
• Average TAR increase of 9% year-on-year
• 70% of Target STI paid out
• 29% have no direct reports
“Over the past ten years the HSE profession has
continued to evolve as a business partner that delivers
real value. Growth in remuneration levels during this
period reflects this, with HSE General Managers’ actual
take home packages increasing by 52.2%, while National
HSE Managers have increased by 71.2%.”
Aaron Neilson
General Manager
key findings & observations
The key findings from the 2015/2016 report include the
following:
• There is an overall increase in remuneration of 5.34%
across all safety roles this year compared to last
• Average TAR up, with double digit growth for mid-
level roles in QLD (WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinator and
Manager) and National Manager level in NSW
• In QLD the recovery continues with 11.3% and 20.7%
growth at the WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinator and
Manager levels respectively
• NSW sees significant 17.2% growth at the National
WHS/HSE Manager level with increases at all other
levels reflecting the strength in this market over the
last two years built around the infrastructure boom
• Increases at Management and National Management
levels can in some way be attributed to the ‘more
with less’ approach many organisations continue
to employ – smaller team sizes combined with
increased accountability at this level has driven
growth in management salaries
• The environment sector returns to growth with an
average 12.28% increase across all positions in this
year’s survey
whs / hse officer
• 80% have formal safety qualifications
• 55% with single site responsibility
• VIC average TAR has increased by 8.8% however it
remains lowest in Australia; NSW has increased by
4.1% while QLD has decreased by 6.5%
whs / hse advisor / coordinator
• 67% have multi-site responsibility; 15% have 10+ sites
• 85% have Diploma-level safety qualification (AQF 5)
or higher; only 2% with no formal safety qualification
• NT remains highest paid in the state, with VIC the
lowest despite a small increase (1.2%)
whs / hse manager
• 81% qualified to the Diploma-level (AQF 5) or higher
• 50% have direct reports; only 6% have more than 5
direct reports
• Average TAR increases in every state other than WA
and SA. TAR in VIC has increased 6%.
national whs / hse manager
• 57% have responsibility for 21+ sites
• 86% have direct reports, with 27% having 6+ direct
reports
• QLD average TAR returns to 2012/2013 levels; NSW
average TAR has increased by 17.2% to become
highest paying state
• VIC has decreased by 6.7% after five years of increases
gm whs / hse
• Average TFR up 0.4%, while average Actual STI is up
from 11.4% of TFR to 12.7% of TFR
• 32% have Masters -level (AQF 9) qualifications
• QLD average TAR increase of 13%; VIC average TAR
decrease of 5.2%
claims / im / rtw coordinator / advisor
• Average TAR increased by 7.7%
• 12% qualified to relevant undergraduate-level (AQF 7)
• 53% have responsibility for one jurisdiction
• Average TAR highest in WA for the third year in a row

key findings observations – continued qualitative survey results
The ‘infrastructure boom’ in NSW drives strong
growth at every level
Safety salaries in New South Wales have increased at
all position levels . Officer level roles have increased
by 4.1% average TAR, advisor/coordinator roles
have increased by 7.5% average TAR, manager level
roles increased by 1.9% average TAR, and national
manager level roles have increased by 17.2% average
TAR year-on-year. While GM-level roles have seen
their TAR increase year-on-year by 0.7% as a result
of a decrease in average bonus payout, average total
fixed remuneration (TFR) at the GM level is also up
this year, by 0.8%.
Solid growth continues in entry level roles
Officer-level roles have seen another year of robust
growth in almost every market, with only Queensland
seeing a decrease of 6.5%. Victoria has increased
by 8.8%, New South Wales has increased by 4.1%,
and Western Australia has increased by 2%. This
continues to demonstrate the recognition from
organisations that in order to attract suitable career-
minded safety professionals (both graduate/early-
career and mature age entrants or those changing
career), they need to remain competitive with other
functional areas. It also reflects an increase in those
already within organisations identifying safety as
a career pathway, or being identified as potential
‘champions’ and encouraged to transition.
Queensland continues to claw back lost ground
As the Queensland market recalibrates following the
resource boom so too have salaries at the whs/hse
advisor/coordinator level with a 12.2% increase and
whs/hse managers increasing by 20.7% compared to
last year. This is the second consecutive year that we
have seen increases at the Advisor/Coordinator level,
while at the manager level it is a welcome sign of
recovery following two years of double digit declines
at this level.
Legislative changes see New Zealand Market
continue to evolve
Recruitment activity in New Zealand for safety
professionals has strengthened on the back of
recent legislative changes. However as our survey
findings show, remuneration for safety professionals
continues to lag behind Australia, particularly at
the senior level. This imbalance is likely to cause
challenges as New Zealand-based organisations
increasingly look to Australia in their search for
senior safety talent.
Mid-level workers compensation salaries increase
Workers compensation roles at the Advisor/
Coordinator and Manager level have both seen
solid year-on-year increases, of 7.7% and 9.4%
respectively. This supports the experience seen by
our workers compensation recruitment team that
organisations are increasingly seeing the value in
properly resourcing their workers compensation
teams in order to better manage the costs associated
with claims management. This strong growth in
remuneration has not been seen at the senior-
most level however, with Group / GM Workers
Compensation roles having decreased slightly (-1.5%)
year-on-year.
Environmental sector shows signs of stability
In the resource-centric states of Queensland and
Western Australia, Environmental Managers have
seen their average TAR increase year-on-year after
having seen significant drops in last year’s survey
as the mining boom wound down. Environmental
Advisors’ TAR has increased by 16.5% year-on-year,
with all of the growth being seen in the resource
states of Western Australia and Queensland, while
Victoria has decreased slightly (-0.8%) and NSW
has increased marginally by 1.1%. This supports the
view that outside of the resource sector dedicated
environmental roles at the advisor level are being
folded into the broader HSE function. However,
within the mining and oil and gas sectors specialist
environmental roles at this level have continued to be
required.
This year our qualitative questions delved deeper
into the critical issues identified by safety industry
leaders in last year’s survey results: health and
wellbeing strategy, and the increasing suggestion
that the safety function itself must evolve in order
to maintain relevance and add value. A wide range
of organisations contributed to this section, with
both common threads and industry-specific issues
emerging.
Safety must be done differently
With 90% of respondents in agreement, the message
is clear that safety ‘needs to be done differently’. All
acknowledged the need to be more innovative, and to
adopt a continuous improvement approach towards
safety leadership and implementation. Typical
comments included:
“There is a need for the HSE team to move to more
of a value creation role, rather than value protection
(e.g. compliance), particularly the more senior roles.”
Survey respondents noted that while there are
many new philosophies on doing safety differently,
the common elements are a less systems-focused
approach and a stronger emphasis on behaviours,
engagement and ownership. Over half of this year’s
survey respondents referred to safety needing to be
seen as simple/easier, effective/smarter, and more
aligned to business objectives in order to better
appeal to the broader organisation. Commentary
included:
“We need to be less technical and more business
focussed. HSE professionals need to deliver ROI,
engage, execute and coach.”
“We need to remove onerous, sluggish safety
processes that do little to increase workplace safety
in favour of more streamlined, practical approaches
that people see as supporting them, not slowing them
down. Remove red tape. Increase accountability.”
“There are of course some awesome operators,
[and] as any industry needs to adjust to the technical
revolution and other generational changes, so does
our approach to safety. [The] profession has to
transform, but the trick will be to decipher through
the seemingly endless opinions and find approaches
that are genuine and worth investment.”
Health and Wellbeing comes into its own
As Health and Wellbeing programs begin to gain
traction and credibility, survey respondents are
coming face-to-face with the complexity of the
core issues: mental health, depression, stress
management, and the aging workforce. 80% of
respondents claimed their health and wellbeing
strategy is viewed as of high or significant importance
within their organisations, however only a third of the
respondents had a dedicated health and wellbeing
resource in place. As one respondent puts it:
“It is a focus, but is challenged by the cost cutting
in the business. We need to find smart (and cheap!)
ways to do things. Leveraging return on investment
where possible.”
The majority of respondents are using employee
survey results and/or results from EAP programs
to measure the effectiveness of their health
and wellbeing strategies. Despite this, only 50%
were confident their programs were delivering a
measurable return on investment.
An aging/maturing workforce remains a significant
issue for most organisations. As individuals are
increasingly encouraged (or need) to stay in the
workforce for longer, complexities are arising with
how this is managed. Some respondents reported
organisational concerns on the impact this shift
can have on productivity and injury/claim costs.
Others are already moving ahead to spend on capital
investment to upgrade equipment and plant to
accommodate the changing ergonomic requirements
of an aging work force.

qualitative survey results – continued
Mental Health management clarity needed
Despite recent media attention and increased
awareness of mental health in society more broadly,
respondents made it clear that their organisations
need more clarity on who is responsible, and where
the line is drawn in regards to internal and external
ownership of identification and treatment. As one
survey respondent explains:
“Currently mental health is in the national conscience
and is promoted accordingly. This in turn creates
an environment in which individuals look to their
work as both cause of health issues and a source of
information to manage the problem. It is important
for businesses to both delineate ‘work and home’, and
accept that people will focus on their workplace as a
source of stress.”
“There is a convergence between outside-of-work
issues and work issues and this blurring of the lines
makes managing this more difficult.”
From our survey responses it is clear health and
safety and HR professionals must continue to educate
front-line leaders on how to identify and manage
mental health issues proactively, rather than waiting
for them to appear in the workplace.
“The challenge is [this]: exactly what is the risk and
how best to manage it in the workplace, if indeed the
workplace is an appropriate place to manage it?”
The reality of endemic methamphetamine use hits
the workplace
For many organisations, the use of drugs to counter
the effects of fatigue, psychological illness and
stress are an area of ongoing concern. In particular,
the widening usage of methamphetamines (‘ice’)
has been identified, with one respondent noting the
“national health agencies have been caught off guard
by the speed this group of substances is infiltrating
our community.”
Technology drives the appetite for greater access to
information
Forward-thinking organisations are looking towards
technology for increased access to information for
their workforce and management. With increasing
use of handheld electronic devices, organisations
are looking to develop and implement increasingly
efficient and effective information solutions. Training,
asset tracking, compliance reporting, and individual
employee tracking information is being delivered
electronically via software and apps. This is seen as
a more simple and effective way for organisations
to deliver their messages and manage risk. As
the demand grows for simple and effective Safety
Management Systems, so too does the demand for
effective delivery methods. One respondent notes
their goal to “[use] innovative technologies to support
safety programs. Everyone has smart devices, [and]
safety programs need to leverage these devices
to deliver more engaging and consistent safety
messaging.”
However, for some it can be challenging to implement
such solutions in a cost-effective manner:
“[In] trying to do more with less, cost effective
technology will be important to meet the regulatory
burden of compliance. Unfortunately many of
the technology solutions are too expensive to be
implemented at the bottom of a cycle which is also
the best time to do it. Software needs to be rotating
seat not per user license, then it could be more cost
effective.”
Remote and offsite working more complex than it
appears
As the desire grows for flexibility and agility in work
environments, such as home, office or elsewhere,
complexities are emerging with regards to
practicality. Some comments include:
“Mobility means more people are not working in
traditional ways so understanding how to manage
risks associated with people that are ‘out of sight’
creates a whole expanding paradigm of risk
mitigation.”
“Transient / casual workforces present challenges
around training and development and injury
management.”
Retention is more of a focus than the ability to attract
talent
Seventy percent of organisations saw attracting safety
professionals this year to be the same or easier as
it has been in previous years. What has proved to be
more challenging for some organisations was the
attraction of the right talent, particularly with getting
the right technical fit when technical capabilities
are often overstated. The “more for less” approach
has continued, with managers looking to retain and
develop their current team.
Influencing skills as important as qualifications
While the majority of respondents confirmed the
importance of formal qualifications, greater emphasis
was put on credibility and influencing – with these
soft skills seen as having more of a positive impact on
safety culture and performance than formal training
alone. Explanations included:
“Qualifications are essential but needs to be balanced
against experience, ability to influence and track
record of achievements.”
“I would prefer people who can engage and execute a
plan as well as coach.”
“Good balance between capabilities technical,
strategic and soft skills is required.”

10 year analysis
TAR by Position by Year
whs/hse officer
-total actual remuneration
LOWER QUARTILE MEDIAN AVERAGE UPPER QUARTILE
$40000
$50000
$60000
$70000
$80000
$90000
$100000
$110000
$120000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/0806/07
whs/hse advisor / coordinator
- total actual remuneration
$60000
$70000
$80000
$90000
$100000
$110000
$120000
$130000
$140000
$150000
$160000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/0806/07
whs/hse manager
$80000
$100000
$120000
$140000
$160000
$180000
$200000
$220000
$240000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/0806/07
national whs/hse manager
$100000
$120000
$140000
$160000
$180000
$200000
$220000
$240000
$260000
$280000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/0806/07
general manager whs/hse
$160000
$210000
$260000
$310000
$360000
$410000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/0806/07
environment advisor
$60000
$70000
$80000
$90000
$100000
$110000
$120000
$130000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/08
environment manager
$80000
$100000
$120000
$140000
$160000
$180000
$200000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/08
$100000
$120000
$140000
$160000
$180000
$200000
$220000
$240000
$260000
$280000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/08
head / general manager of environment
sustainability - total actual remuneration
$150000
$200000
$250000
$300000
$350000
$400000
15/1614/1513/1412/1311/1210/1109/1008/0907/08

survey findings - whs/hse
whs/hse officer
figure 3
number of sites responsible for
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
55% 20%
3%
6%
figure 4
number of direct reports
100%
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
table 1.1
percentage of remuneration packages with vehicles
Vehicles No. Percent
A. Base + Benefits 2 40.00%
B. Total Fixed Remuneration 3 60.00%
Total 5
Overall % 8.47%
Average Value * $16,400
* Using Vehicle Formula, including 50% discount for Work Requirement
table 1.2
number with incentives as part of their package
Incentives No. Percent
Percentage with a STI 41 69.49%
Basis of STI
- As a % of Base Salary 16 39.02%
- As a % of Fixed Rem 25 60.98%
Percentage with a LTI 2 3.39%
table 1.3
breakdown of packages by basis of remuneration
Basis of Remuneration No. Percent
Total 59
Job Match 100%+ Partial
Percentage*
73.68% 33.3326.32%
Range Earliest Average Latest
Last review date**
01/01/2014 8/07/2015 01/10/2015
* Job Match denotes whether each position matches position descriptions located
in Appendix 3
** Last review date denotes range of most recent remuneration review
The average Total Actual Remuneration (TAR)
for a WHS/HSE Officer this year is $95,757. This
represents an increase of $8,015, or 9.1%year-on-
year. Despite the cooling off of the mining boom,
this year’s results provide further evidence of the
continued advancement of the HSE function within the
Australian market.
This year sees 55% of WHS/HSE Officers having single
site responsibility, decreased from 66% last year.
This suggests at the WHS/HSE Officer level multi-site
responsibility is becoming increasingly common with
responsibility for 2 – 5 sites increasing from 21% last
year to 36% this year.
Consistent with previous years, it is uncommon for
vehicles to be included as a part of remuneration at
this level.
80% of WHS/HSE Officers have some form of safety
qualification (up from 76% last year) with Diploma
(AQF 5) level or higher safety qualifications being held
by 40% (up from 39%).
Site allowance/uplifts are seen across 3.4% of
respondents at this level, with an average site
allowance/uplift of $38,720. Uplifts are not reflected
in TAR figures provided.
Number of Respondents = 59
table 1
remuneration summary for whs/hse officer
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $82,233 $91,800 $94,503 $109,268
Actual STI $0 $0 $1,254 $2,640
TAR $82,233 $94,100 $95,757 $111,540
Target STI $0 $0 $1,813 $4,321
TTR $84,213 $94,100 $96,316 $111,682
figure 1
highest safety qualification
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
POSTGRAD DIPLOMA/CERTIFICATE
UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE
DIPLOMA/ADVANCED DIPLOMA
CERTIFICATE III OR IV
CERTIFICATE I OR II
NO FORMAL QUALIFICATIONS
0%
0%
0%
10%
30%
40%
0%
20%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
10%
20%
25%
35%
10%
0%

survey findings – whs/hse
whs/hse advisor/coordinator
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
33%
34%
13%
18%
1%1%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
6%
94%
table 1.1
Total 27
Overall % 6.19%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 436
Percentage*
67.57% 32.43%
Last review date**
01/01/2013 5/06/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
The average WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinator earns a
TAR of $123,955 which is an increase of 2.4% from
last year’s survey results. This follows on from a
4% increase last year, but is still slightly below the
$126,562 TAR seen in our 2012/13 survey.
The majority of individuals at this level (67%) have
multi-site responsibility and 15% have responsibility
for ten or more sites. All but 15% of respondents
at this level have a Diploma-level (AQF 5) safety
qualification or higher, and only 2% have no formal
safety qualifications.
The majority of WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinators (94%)
have no direct reports. 6.2% have vehicles included
as a part of their remuneration package.
Number of respondents = 436
table 1
remuneration summary for whs/hse advisor/
coordinator
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $100,701 $116,617 $119,008 $133,374
Actual STI $0 $3,400 $5,017 $6,809
TAR $107,247 $122,955 $123,955 $138,503
Target STI $0 $5,000 $5,835 $10,402
TTR $106,464 $123,014 $124,816 $140,238
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
4%
10%
22%
48%
13%
0%
2%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
2%
7%
45%
46%
0%
0%

whs/hse manager
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
24%
8%
21%
19%
19%
8%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
6%
50% 44%
table 1.1
Total 52
Overall % 19.70%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 264
Percentage*
68.50% 31.50%
Last review date**
68.50% 31.50% 01/10/2014
in Appendix 3
WHS/HSE Managers earned an average TAR of
$165,541 this year. This represents an increase of
4.1% after two years of decreases, while still falling
far short of the $182,673 TAR that reported in our
2012/13 survey during the height of the resource
sector boom.
Average Actual STI this year is $7,282 (4.6% of
TFR), up 20.5% from last year’s Average Actual STI
of $6,041 (3.9% of TFR). The majority of WHS/HSE
Managers this year were paid at least some STI,
unlike the previous two years.
Remaining consistent with last year, 82% of
respondents have a minimum Diploma/Advanced
Diploma level (AQF 5) safety qualification, at least half
of respondents hold undergraduate-level (AQF 7) or
greater safety qualifications and 10% have Masters-
level (AQF9) safety qualifications or higher.
While 50% of WHS/HSE Managers have direct reports,
the percentage of those with teams of six or more has
decreased from 15% last year to 6% this year, further
reflecting the ‘doing more with less’ trend safesearch
has identified within the safety function in recent
years.
Number of respondents = 264
table 1
remuneration summary for whs/hse manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $141,073 $151,000 $158,313 $176,700
Actual STI $0 $1,660 $7,282 $15,000
TAR $143,000 $166,307 $165,541 $183,642
Target STI $0 $0 $11,257 $21,400
TTR $146,621 $169,735 $169,570 $184,627
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
1%
9%
27%
13%
33%
16%
0%
3%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
23%
32%
38%
7%
0%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
18%
28%
29%
8%
19%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
27%
14%
59%
table 1.1
A. Base Salary 10 62.50%
Total 16
Overall % 15.24%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 105
Percentage*
68.37% 31.63%
Last review date**
01/01/2012 10/03/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
National WHS/HSE Managers earned an average TAR
of $222,774 this year, an increase of 9.5% from last
year’s average TAR of $203,379. Median Actual STI at
this level is $4,500, meaning that most National WHS/
HSE Managers received a bonus during the most
recent survey period. The average Actual STI this
year is $14,031 (6.7% of TFR) against a Target STI of
$29,484 (14.1% of TFR).
The majority (57%) of individuals at this level have
responsibility for 21 or more sites. 76% of individuals
at this level have 11+ years of experience.
86% of WHS/HSE Managers have at least one
direct report with 27% having six or more direct
reports. 74% of National WHS/HSE Managers have
undergraduate degree (AQF 7) safety qualifications
or higher, with 29% holding Masters-level (AQF 9)
safety qualifications, up from 20% reported in both
our 2014/15 and 2013/14 surveys and 14% reported in
2012/13.
table 1
remuneration summary for national whs/hse
manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $180,600 $200,250 $208,859 $244,575
Actual STI $0 $4,500 $14,031 $20,320
TAR $185,225 $217,175 $222,774 $253,063
Target STI $5,500 $21,000 $29,484 $39,737
TTR $195,000 $231,400 $238,098 $271,015
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
29%
36%
9%
12%
7%
0%
8%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
42%
34%
21%
3%
0%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
17%
50%
14%
5%
12%
1%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
43%
8%
49%
table 1.1
Total 6
Overall % 11.76%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 51
Percentage*
72.92% 27.08%
Last review date**
01/01/2014 20/05/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
General Managers earned an average TAR of
$344,387 this year, an increase of 1.6% from $338,910
last year.
Average total fixed remuneration (TFR) at the GM
level has essentially remained flat (+0.4%) year-
on-year, while average Actual STI has increased by
$4,354 to $38,916. This year’s Actual STI represents
12.7% of this year’s average TFR, in comparison to
11.4% last year.
88% of respondents have eleven or more years of
experience, up from 82% last year, with the majority
(55%) having over 15 years of experience. At this level
81% hold an undergraduate safety qualification (AQF
7) or greater, an increase from 72% last year. 32%
hold a Masters (AQF 9) safety qualification.
Note: This category includes Divisional General
Managers for divisions of significant size.
table 1
remuneration summary for general manager whs/
hse
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $252,500 $295,000 $305,472 $332,078
Actual STI $0 $35,518 $38,916 $60,000
TAR $282,700 $312,232 $344,387 $373,800
Target STI $49,216 $75,000 $77,565 $96,000
TTR $299,185 $357,000 $383,036 $422,419
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
32%
30%
19%
14%
0%
0%
5%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
55%
33%
10%
3%
0%
0%

position analysis by state – whs/hse
Where the sample number was not sufficient for analysis, individual states have been excluded to prevent identification
of company remuneration information and to protect the integrity of the data. A minimum of four respondents is
required per state for analysis.
whs/hse officer
Average TAR at the Officer level remains highest in Western Australia again this year, at $95,515, an increase of 2%
from last year. The lowest average TAR is in Victoria at $83,827, an increase of 8.8% from the previous year’s figure
of $77,058. New South Wales has increased by 4.1% this year on the back of last year’s significant 15.6% growth,
while Queensland’s average TAR has decreased by 6.5%.
Total Fixed Remuneration Total Actual Remuneration Total Target Remuneration
No. Median Average Median Average Median Average
NSW 12 $87,231 $87,111 $89,440 $89,193 $90,000 $89,114
QLD 6 $74,727 $82,469 $76,308 $84,067 $78,951 $85,155
VIC 9 $90,000 $83,715 $90,000 $83,827 $90,000 $84,234
WA 12 $95,800 $92,920 $98,613 $95,515 $99,162 $98,101
WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinators in the Northern Territory remain the highest paid in the safesearch survey again
this year, despite decreasing by 4.3% this year. Victoria has the lowest average TAR this year, despite a marginal
increase of 1.2%. In New South Wales average TAR has increased again this year by 7.5% on the back of last
year’s 12.2% increase, in line with expectations given the strong pipeline of infrastructure projects in the state.
Western Australia has decreased for the second year in a row to $128,431, the lowest TAR for this position in
Western Australia since 2011/12. Queensland has increased again this year by 11.3% after the previous year’s
increase of 9.3%.
NSW 59 $103,578 $114,381 $109,962 $118,505 $113,936 $120,751
NT 7 $140,000 $144,500 $140,000 $144,500 $140,000 $144,500
QLD 61 $129,940 $125,033 $138,985 $135,037 $135,764 $134,191
SA 20 $103,578 $116,513 $109,962 $119,961 $113,936 $120,195
TAS 6 $127,775 $131,492 $127,775 $131,492 $127,775 $131,492
VIC 95 $100,438 $106,032 $107,247 $110,309 $106,464 $111,227
WA 151 $120,000 $123,145 $125,000 $128,431 $125,000 $129,747
whs/hse manager
WHS/HSE Managers have seen increases in every state other than Western Australia and South Australia. New
South Wales has seen an average TAR increase of 1.9%, while in Victoria average TAR has increased by 6%.
Queensland numbers have rebounded significantly this year, increasing by 20.7% and reversing two years of
significant decreases. In Western Australia the average TAR has decreased by 3.9% after holding steady last year
and dropping by 20.8% the year prior. At this level, South Australia is the lowest paid state
NSW 55 $147,596 $152,037 $158,935 $159,526 $169,735 $169,989
QLD 40 $155,000 $162,462 $166,307 $176,135 $169,735 $176,196
SA 7 $125,546 $127,107 $126,800 $131,359 $136,112 $132,159
VIC 64 $143,800 $144,680 $145,000 $149,491 $150,000 $154,343
WA 56 $161,991 $164,286 $170,232 $173,431 $177,110 $176,854
The average TAR for National WHS/HSE Managers in Queensland presently sits at $227,082,up significantly from
last year’s figures and a 7.2% increase from our 2013/14 survey findings. New South Wales sees a significant
increase of 17.2% on the back of significant investment in infrastructure projects, and is now the most highly
remunerated market in the country for National WHS/HSE Managers. Victoria has seen its first decrease at this
level in six years, dropping by 6.7% to $190,028, while Western Australia sees an increase of 5% to $232,624..
NSW 41 $212,185 $222,712 $230,020 $238,830 $242,850 $257,463
QLD 17 $215,000 $210,876 $217,350 $227,082 $235,596 $241,361
VIC 26 $183,535 $180,660 $188,392 $190,028 $203,850 $198,212
WA 15 $228,150 $221,355 $228,150 $232,624 $268,934 $253,880

position analysis by industry – whs/hse
In New South Wales this year’s average TAR has remained essentially flat (+0.7%) despite an average increase of
fixed remuneration from $309,158 to $318,081. Victoria also sees a decrease this year, with average TAR dropping
by 5.2% and average fixed remuneration decreasing by 9.6%.
In Western Australia, the average GM TAR has increased after two years of decreases, rebounding by 12.8% to
$369,500 after last year’s drop of 8.7%. GMs in Queensland have also seen an increase in average TAR, gaining 13%
in comparison to last year.
NSW 20 $296,355 $318,081 $321,375 $352,073 $369,055 $406,871
QLD 6 $292,000 $305,028 $352,755 $366,391 $352,630 $368,727
VIC 16 $255,000 $267,690 $272,000 $307,282 $302,100 $333,214
WA 4 $327,500 $347,500 $352,500 $369,500 $404,375 $420,788
whs/hse officer
This year the Engineering and Construction sector overtakes the Resources and Energy sector, with an average TAR of
$106,401 compared to the Resources and Energy sector at $94,918. Manufacturing has rebounded by 21.7% to $95,420 while
Transportation has decreased by 13.7% to $71,920.
Resources and Energy 11 $91,658 $91,868 $97,726 $94,918 $100,824 $98,287
Engineering and Construction 28 $103,967 $105,571 $104,717 $106,401 $103,967 $105,571
Manufacturing 5 $90,000 $95,420 $90,000 $95,420 $90,000 $95,420
Transport 5 $69,280 $69,280 $71,920 $71,920 $74,476 $74,476
Other 5 $62,880 $69,738 $62,880 $69,738 $62,880 $70,088
At the advisor/coordinator level, those in the Resources and Energy sector have seen a significant decrease of 15.8% this
year, from an average TAR of $160,700 last year to $135,240 this year. Engineering and Construction have decreased by
3.2% to $133,628, while Manufacturing is up slightly from $100,484 to $102,985, a gain of 2.5%. Transport, Professional
Services/Finance/Retail and Industrial Services sectors have all decreased year-on-year.
Government 4 $89,999 $95,349 $89,999 $95,349 $89,999 $95,349
Manufacturing 20 $104,995 $101,825 $104,995 $102,985 $104,995 $104,601
Transport 35 $103,578 $103,981 $109,962 $109,818 $113,936 $113,765
Professional Services / Finance
/ Retail
9 $103,050 $101,357 $103,050 $102,690 $108,203 $109,266
Industrial Services 48 $125,000 $121,818 $125,000 $121,916 $125,000 $124,063
Research and Education 4 $117,885 $113,714 $117,885 $113,714 $117,885 $113,714
Telecommunications 58 $100,438 $102,083 $100,438 $102,083 $106,464 $108,086
Other 12 $87,470 $90,856 $88,790 $90,856 $88,570 $91,223
position analysis by state – whs/hse – continued

whs/hse manager
Manager-level WHS/HSE professionals in the Resources and Energy sector have seen a 17.5% decrease in average
TAR this year, returning the function to slightly below 2013/14 levels. Within the Manufacturing sector, average
TAR has decreased again this year, down 3.2% on the back of last year’s 1.9% decrease. Average TAR within the
Industrial Services sector has decreased significantly again this year, falling 7.4% after last year’s drop of 22%.
The Transport sector has increased by 7.5% year-on-year while the Engineering and Construction sector has
decreased by 3.9%.
Manufacturing 39 $150,000 $143,210 $152,500 $144,426 $155,000 $156,486
Transport 36 $147,596 $147,414 $166,307 $161,967 $169,735 $168,712
/ Retail
12 $130,000 $125,855 $130,000 $129,408 $130,500 $137,847
Research and Education 4 $128,123 $124,980 $128,123 $124,980 $128,123 $124,980
Other 8 $140,000 $142,118 $140,000 $142,118 $142,470 $146,824
National WHS/HSE Managers in Engineering and Construction have seen their TAR return to growth this year,
increasing by 4.6% after falling by 17.5% last year. Within the Manufacturing sector, average TAR has increased
by 4% year-on-year, from $192,065 to $199,659. The highest average TAR for positions at this level is within the
Resources and Energy sector which has decreased by 7% year-on-year, while the lowest sectors include Industrial
Services and Manufacturing.
Manufacturing 19 $195,000 $189,537 $196,000 $199,659 $211,200 $215,848
Transport 14 $198,200 $229,753 $230,020 $240,837 $237,840 $250,016
/ Retail
5 $217,285 $208,020 $222,185 $214,357 $244,122 $271,826
Other 4 $163,562 $168,471 $163,562 $168,471 $163,562 $179,377
position analysis by industry – whs/hse – continued
At the GM level, those within the Resources and Energy sector have the highest TAR with a solid increase of 8.1%
from last year, while those in Engineering and Construction have seen their TAR decrease again this year, falling by
5.5% having decreased by 3% in last year’s survey. Within the Manufacturing sector the average TAR has decreased
by 7.3% to $350,635..
Manufacturing 9 $305,000 $292,709 $312,232 $324,966 $351,455 $352,955
Transport 4 $252,500 $271,250 $283,500 $317,775 $291,000 $327,500
Telecommunications 4 $247,157 $249,728 $247,157 $249,728 $296,588 $299,674

survey findings – workers compensation
claims/im/rtw coordinator/advisor
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
20%
37%
17%
6%
15%
3%
5%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
98%
2%
table 1.1
Total 14
Overall % 13.33%
Average Value * No Data
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 105
Percentage*
75.73% 24.27%
Last review date**
1/01/2013 19/05/2015 1/10/2015
in Appendix 3
This year’s TAR of $92,710 represents an increase of
7.7% from last year’s figure of $86,089. While a clear
majority of 81% have over five years of experience,
only 12% hold a relevant undergraduate (AQF 7) or
postgraduate qualification (AQF 8), and 41% hold
no formal safety or workers compensation-related
qualifications at all. 41% of respondents are self-
insured. The majority (53%) have responsibility for
a single jurisdiction, and vehicles do not commonly
form part of their package at this level (13% of
respondents).
table 1
remuneration summary for claims/im/rtw
coordinator/advisor
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $80,000 $89,000 $90,172 $99,000
Actual STI $0 $578 $2,539 $6,000
TAR $86,400 $89,154 $92,710 $101,300
Target STI $0 $3,824 $4,090 $6,400
TTR $86,400 $92,015 $94,262 $104,308
table 2
scheme sector
Workers Compensation Number Percentage
Self Insured 32 41%
Comcare 21 27%
Conventional State Scheme 25 32%
TOTAL 78 100%
table 3
State Jurisdictions Number Percentage
Single 39 53%
2 - 5 27 36%
6 - 10 8 11%
11 - 20 0 0%
21 - 50 0 0%
50 0 0%
TOTAL 74 100%
figure 1
highest relevant qualification
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
0%
2%
10%
26%
21%
0%
41%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
3%
11%
66%
16%
3%
0%

claims/im/workers comp manager
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
16%
68%
5%
11%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
81%
10%10%
table 1.1
Total 0
Overall % 0.00%
Average Value * 0
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 21
Percentage*
85.71% 14.29%
Last review date**
01/02/2015 24/06/2015 01/09/2015
in Appendix 3
Managers at this level see an average TAR of
$136,979, an increase of 9.4% on the back of last
year’s 6.5% increase. 47% hold relevant qualifications
to at least the Diploma (AQF 5) level, with just 6%
holding postgraduate (AQF 8) level qualifications.
47% of respondents have no relevant qualifications.
The majority (56%) have over ten years of experience,
and 68% are responsible for over fifty sites, with 41%
responsible for multiple jurisdictions. Most (81%) are
leading a small team of 1-5 employees.
table 1
remuneration summary for claims/im/workers comp
manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $115,721 $117,885 $128,648 $130,000
Actual STI $0 $9,700 $8,332 $13,000
TAR $117,885 $125,421 $136,979 $150,800
Target STI $0 $11,572 $9,696 $20,800
TTR $117,885 $127,293 $138,344 $150,800
table 2
scheme sector
Self Insured 9 53%
Comcare 5 29%
TOTAL 17 100%
table 3
Single 10 59%
2 - 5 5 29%
6 - 10 2 12%
11 - 20 0 0%
21 - 50 0 0%
50 0 0%
TOTAL 17 100%
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
0%
6%
0%
41%
6%
0%
47%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
6%
50%
39%
6%
0%
0%

group/gm workers compensation
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
25%
63%
13%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
56%
33%
11%
table 1.1
Total 2
Overall % 22.22%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 9
Percentage*
75% 25%
Last review date**
01/01/2013 01/04/2014 01/10/2014
in Appendix 3
The average TAR for this category is $180,626,
a decrease of 1.5% from $183,346 reported last
year. Every respondent has at least a relevant
undergraduate degree, with 29% holding a relevant
Masters degree. The majority (57%) have over five
years of experience, while67% have one or more
direct reports. 11% lead a team of six or more. 43%
have less than 5 years relevant experience, while 88%
have responsibility for 21 or more sites.
table 1
remuneration summary for group/gm workers
compensation
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $137,011 $164,000 $162,584 $185,100
Actual STI $0 $21,484 $18,042 $25,500
TAR $137,011 $185,484 $180,626 $209,700
Target STI $14,444 $27,402 $26,286 $30,420
TTR $158,884 $188,600 $188,870 $215,050
table 2
scheme sector
Self Insured 4 50%
Comcare 2 25%
TOTAL 8 100%
table 3
Single 1 14%
2 - 5 3 43%
6 - 10 3 43%
11 - 20 0 0%
21 - 50 0 0%
50 0 0%
TOTAL 7 100%
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
29%
29%
43%
0%
0%
0%
0%
figure 2
years of experience
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
14%
14%
29%
14%
29%
0%

position analysis by state – workers compensation position analysis by industry
– workers compensation
Individuals at this level receive the highest TAR in Western Australia for the third year in a row.
NSW 38 $85,995 $87,646 $86,745 $90,304 $92,015 $92,051
QLD 4 $79,643 $88,943 $82,196 $90,364 $81,555 $90,855
SA 4 $80,000 $80,862 $86,400 $84,062 $86,400 $84,062
VIC 34 $88,500 $87,996 $88,577 $88,934 $89,154 $89,611
WA 25 $95,022 $94,862 $102,960 $99,292 $104,524 $102,044
In this category the highest average TAR is in Victoria. New South Wales sees a slight decrease of 2.7% year-on-
year while Victoria sees an increase of 9% year-on-year.
NSW 5 $117,000 $121,888 $125,421 $130,328 $127,293 $130,677
VIC 9 $117,885 $126,210 $125,421 $132,121 $127,293 $134,315
group/gm workers compensation
Average TAR for this position in New South Wales is up 2.7% year-on-year.
NSW 6 $156,720 $159,592 $173,242 $173,449 $181,917 $182,481
At the Coordinator/Advisor level, the highest average TAR is within the Resources and Energy sector. The lowest average TAR
is in the Government ($82,624) and Other ($80,992) sectors.
Government 21 $89,154 $82,624 $89,154 $82,624 $89,154 $82,624
Manufacturing 4 $100,000 $97,500 $100,000 $97,500 $100,000 $97,500
Transport 8 $85,995 $85,995 $86,745 $86,745 $92,015 $92,015
/ Retail
8 $89,000 $86,412 $93,450 $89,466 $97,900 $92,931
Other 13 $80,140 $80,992 $80,140 $80,992 $80,140 $80,992
The average TAR for positions at this level in the Government sector have increased 7.4% year-on-year and positions in
Industrial Services have seen an increase of 8.9% from last year.
Government 6 $115,721 $122,231 $125,421 $130,314 $127,293 $131,874

survey findings – environment
environment advisor
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
7%
1%
31%
58%
1%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
96%
4%
table 1.1
Total 39
Overall % 29.10%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 134
Percentage*
82.14% 17.86%
Last review date**
1/09/2012 12/06/2014 1/10/2015
in Appendix 3
Environment Advisors earned an average of TAR
of $115,837 this year, which represents a 16.5%
increase year-on-year. The average target STI at the
Advisor-level within the environmental sector has
increased for the second year in a row, from $4,895
to $9,512and STI eligibility increased again this year
from 85% to 93%.
Almost all (94%) respondents hold at least an
undergraduate degree-level (AQF 7) environmental
qualification. The majority of Environmental Advisors
have 3-5 years of experience, and for the first time
in our survey the majority (58%) of Environmental
Advisors are responsible for 2-5 sites. This
combination of increased remuneration and increased
multi-site responsibility reflects consolidation of the
Environmental Advisor role and a move away from
enviro-specific resources for single sites.
respondents at this level, with an average uplift of
$45,548. Site allowances/uplifts are not reflected in
TAR figures provided.
table 1
remuneration summary for environment advisor
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $100,000 $111,072 $108,674 $117,718
Actual STI $0 $8,000 $7,163 $11,158
TAR $100,888 $118,371 $115,837 $126,467
Target STI $4,869 $10,740 $9,512 $11,772
TTR $105,000 $121,692 $118,185 $128,382
figure 1
highest environment qualification
0% 10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
2%
8%
86%
2%
2%
0%
2%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
5%
11%
23%
58%
3%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
20%
30%
30%
10%
10%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
100%
table 1.1
Total 0
Overall % 0.00%
Average Value * 0
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 11
Percentage*
66.67% 33.33%
Last review date**
1/09/2012 20/09/2014 1/10/2015
in Appendix 3
Sustainability Advisors received an average TAR of
$135,077, a 5.2% increase from our 2013/14 survey
findings, and nearly equal to the $136,565 seen in
2012/13. All but 14% of individuals in these roles have
at least an undergraduate environment qualification
(AQF 7), with 29% holding a relevant Masters degree
(AQF 9).
table 1
remuneration summary for sustainability advisor
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $103,725 $134,400 $129,142 $163,429
Actual STI $0 $4,000 $5,935 $11,298
TAR $105,725 $147,495 $135,077 $171,118
Target STI $3,750 $13,440 $11,354 $15,814
TTR $111,600 $147,840 $140,496 $171,272
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
29%
0%
57%
0%
0%
14%
0%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
0%
14%
43%
0%
43%
0%

environment manager
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
4%
28%
18%
48%
2%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
25%
67%
8%
table 1.1
Total 8
Overall % 14.04%
Average Value * No Data
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 57
Percentage*
91.84% 8.16%
Last review date**
1/09/2012 15/08/2014 1/10/2015
in Appendix 3
Environment Managers have seen an 8.6% increase
in average TAR, reversing last year’s 6.3% decrease.
Almost all of this increase can be attributed to an
increase in average Actual STI, which has nearly
tripled from $4,205 last year (36% of Target STI) to
$11,532 (71.3% of Target STI) this year.
All Environment Managers surveyed are, at a
minimum, undergraduate degree qualified, with
14% holding PhD-level (AQF 10) environment
qualifications.
Site allowances/uplifts are seen across 12.3% of
respondents at this level, with an average uplift
between them of $46,142. Uplifts are not reflected in
TAR figures provided.
table 1
remuneration summary for environment manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $150,000 $160,000 $160,155 $165,450
Actual STI $0 $13,115 $11,532 $15,646
TAR $162,157 $172,180 $171,687 $178,080
Target STI $15,000 $16,204 $16,176 $17,360
TTR $165,380 $173,308 $176,331 $183,063
figure 1
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
14%
0%
5%
81%
0%
0%
0%
0%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
24%
24%
48%
5%
0%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
36%
14%
7%
43%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
57%
21% 21%

table 1.1
Total 8
Overall % 57.14%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 14
Percentage*
85.71% 14.29%
Last review date**
1/10/2014 12/03/2015 1/09/2015
in Appendix 3
Average TAR for National Environment Managers
has increased by 22.1% from $185,103 to $225,937
year-on-year. As with the other environmental roles,
some portion of this growth comes from higher STIs
being paid out this year. Average TFR year-on-year
has increased by 14.6%, whereas average Actual STI
has increased nearly 250%, from $6,071 to $20,793 –
more than 100% of Actual STI due to some ‘stretch’
targets being hit.
The majority of respondents (71%) at this level have
11+ years of experience, and 79% have one or more
direct reports.
table 1
remuneration summary for national environment
manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $168,873 $213,650 $205,145 $235,087
Actual STI $2,500 $22,914 $20,793 $31,278
TAR $176,250 $238,392 $225,937 $269,075
Target STI $5,324 $22,391 $18,147 $24,241
TTR $186,875 $235,175 $223,292 $258,596
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
0%
14%
57%
0%
0%
14%
14%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
14%
57%
14%
14%
0%
0%

head of environment sustainability
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
8%
8%
67%
17%
figure 4
^
1,001
501-1,000
101-500
26-100
6-25
1-5
None
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
97%
14%
57%
29%
table 1.1
Total 2
Overall % 14.29%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 14
Percentage*
69.23% 30.77%
Last review date**
1/09/2012 1/04/2015 1/10/2015
in Appendix 3
The average TAR for Heads of Environment and
Sustainability has increased by 9% this year, from
$268,177 to $292,267. STIs have again been largely
paid out, with average Actual STI this year landing at
70% of average Target STI for this group. The increase
this year is largely the result of an increase in TFR
across the positions, from an average TFR of $229,329
last year (a three year low) to a TFR of 261,363 this
year, slightly below the $261,667 figure reported three
years ago in our 2012/13 survey.
This year 29% of respondents in this category have
no direct reports, up from 11% reported in the two
previous years.
table 1
remuneration summary for head of environment
sustainability
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $206,750 $258,721 $261,363 $304,750
Actual STI $11,000 $30,700 $30,904 $36,168
TAR $223,000 $289,580 $292,267 $343,750
Target STI $25,667 $34,170 $44,091 $63,500
TTR $234,925 $286,058 $305,454 $381,000
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
20%
20%
40%
0%
0%
0%
20%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
60%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%

position analysis by industry – environment
environment advisor
Average TAR for Environment Advisors in Victoria has decreased by 0.8% on the back of last year’s 7.1% drop, while
in NSW average TAR has again increased very slightly by 1.1% following on from last year’s marginal increase of
0.5%. Queensland has seen a significant increase this year (up 41.1%), moving to become the second highest state
from last place last year. Western Australia has also seen a significant year-on-year increase of 18.6%.
NSW 15 $105,850 $107,940 $115,350 $111,743 $121,728 $118,043
QLD 36 $105,653 $106,682 $117,782 $118,642 $118,331 $118,518
SA 4 $105,000 $107,000 $105,000 $107,000 $110,250 $112,350
VIC 18 $100,000 $101,644 $100,000 $102,260 $104,750 $106,902
WA 58 $112,445 $111,408 $122,778 $119,360 $123,226 $121,222
Sustainability advisors in Victoria see an average TAR of $137,800, up 11.9% from our 2013/14 survey findings. As
is the case with previous years’ surveys, a very small proportion (1.3%) of Sustainability Advisors’ TAR comes from
STI.
VIC 5 $150,000 $136,000 $150,000 $137,800 $157,500 $145,750
environment manager
At the Environment Manager level, those in New South Wales have seen a decrease in average TAR of 2.6%.
In Victoria, average TAR has increased by 4.8% to $155,627. Queensland has seen a rebound from last year’s
significant drop, with average TAR increasing year-on-year by 9.7%, although it still remains below the peak of
$183,473 seen two years ago. Similarly, after last year’s decrease of 19.3% in Western Australia, there has been a
modest increase in average TAR of 4.7%.
NSW 9 $158,000 $158,673 $167,109 $164,492 $176,308 $173,528
QLD 12 $148,354 $159,534 $173,120 $178,446 $169,108 $181,165
VIC 5 $163,955 $154,307 $163,955 $155,627 $168,300 $164,458
WA 29 $162,636 $163,185 $175,170 $175,991 $178,899 $178,952
National Environment Managers in Western Australia see an average TAR of $259,600, 14.9% above the national
average of $225,937.
WA 8 $228,152 $228,080 $258,128 $259,660 $250,967 $252,138
head of environment and sustainability
Comparing this year’s results with those from safesearch’s 2011/2012 survey (the last year for which directly
comparable data is available in sufficient quantity), average TAR for Heads of Environment and Sustainability in
Victoria have decreased by 10.1%. In New South Wales, those in the same function have seen a 6.7% increase.
NSW 6 $264,968 $247,439 $289,580 $283,043 $291,462 $294,694
VIC 4 $240,805 $252,903 $249,305 $268,903 $264,886 $288,943

position analysis by state – environment
environment advisor
In the Resources and Energy sector, the average TAR for Environment Advisors has again seen an increase, rising 6.6% on
the back of last year’s 2.8% increase, while Engineering and Construction has decreased by 0.5%. The remuneration for
standalone environmental advisors within the Manufacturing sector has decreased 13.2%, returning to 2012/13 levels.
Manufacturing 9 $100,000 $103,315 $108,000 $106,898 $110,000 $109,751
environment manager
In the Resources and Energy sector, Environment Managers have seen their average TAR decrease again this year, falling
by 3% after having seen a 5.9% decrease last year. Within Engineering and Construction, the average TAR has again
decreased, recording a drop of 4% after last year’s decrease of 3.4%.
At the National Environment Manager level, average TAR within the Engineering and Construction sector sits at $266,754,
well above the all-sector average of $225,937. A significant portion of this result is based on some individuals at this level
receiving more than 100% of their STI as a result of achieving ‘stretch’ targets.
head of environment and sustainability
Heads of Environment and Sustainability in Manufacturing see an average TAR of $252,750, well below the all-sector
average of $292,267.
Manufacturing 4 $213,500 $236,750 $229,000 $252,750 $239,850 $266,425
“In the resource-centric
states of Queensland
and Western Australia,
Environmental Managers
have seen their average TAR
increase year-on-year after
having seen significant drops
in last year’s survey as the
mining boom wound down.”

survey findings – new zealand
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
5%5%
37%
53%
figure 4
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
5%
95%
table 1.1
Total 4
Overall % 20.00%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
A. Base Benefits 7 35.00%
Total 20
Percentage*
68.42% 31.58%
Last review date**
01/01/2012 24/05/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
The average TAR for WHS/HSE Advisor/Coordinators
in New Zealand this year is $95,310, a 1.7% increase
from last year’s figure of $93,719. While average TFR
has decreased very slightly year-on-year (-0.6%), this
has been offset by a significant increase in Actual
STIs paid out, from $679 last year to $2,113 this year.
The majority (58%) have between 3-5 years of
experience, while 51% hold a Diploma (NZQA 5) level
or higher safety qualification, an increase from 34%
last year.
table 1
remuneration summary for whs/hse advisor/
coordinator
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $83,000 $85,000 $92,518 $94,100
Actual STI $0 $0 $2,792 $5,810
TAR $85,000 $88,810 $95,310 $94,100
Target STI $0 $0 $3,209 $5,810
TTR $85,000 $88,810 $95,728 $94,100
All figures for New Zealand roles are in NZD
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
0%
13%
0%
38%
50%
0%
0%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
0%
5%
21%
58%
16%
0%

whs/hse manager
figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
8%
17%
58%
17%
figure 4
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
83%
17%
table 1.1
Total 3
Overall % 25.00%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 12
Percentage*
63.64% 36.36%
Last review date**
01/01/2015 12/07/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
The average TAR for WHS/HSE Managers in New
Zealand is $131,432. This includes an average STI of
$4,067. This represents a decrease of 6.5. % from last
year’s average TAR of $140,587.
The majority (83%) are qualified to the Diploma (NZQF
5) level or greater, with 33% holding undergraduate
degree-level (NZQF 8) safety qualifications. All
respondents have multi-site responsibility, but only
17% have direct reports.
table 1
remuneration summary for whs/hse manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $118,875 $120,000 $127,365 $127,969
Actual STI $0 $0 $4,067 $1,601
TAR $120,000 $125,000 $131,432 $137,596
Target STI $0 $0 $6,654 $14,081
TTR $120,000 $128,728 $134,019 $146,386
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
0%
0%
33%
50%
0%
17%
0%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
8%
50%
25%
17%
0%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
16%
37%
32%
5%
5%
5%
figure 4
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single74%
16%11%
table 1.1
Total 6
Overall % 30.00%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 20
Percentage*
61.54%38.46% 38.46%
Last review date**
01/02/2015 27/07/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
National WHS/HSE Managers in New Zealand have an
average TAR of $176,467. This includes an Actual STI
of $12,081. At this level 90% are qualified to Diploma-
level (NZQF 5) or higher.
table 1
manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $144,750 $157,900 $164,990 $198,000
Actual STI $0 $9,000 $12,081 $20,320
TAR $153,680 $159,500 $176,467 $210,329
Target STI $0 $17,660 $19,424 $36,150
TTR $153,680 $172,250 $184,414 $216,900
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
0%
10%
25%
40%
15%
5%
0%
5%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
0%
37%
58%
5%
0%
0%

figure 3
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single
70%
20%
10%
figure 4
^
51
21-50
11-20
6-10
2-5
Single63%
13%
25%
table 1.1
Total 2
Overall % 18.18%
table 1.2
Basis of STI
table 1.3
Total 11
Percentage*
81.82% 18.18%
Last review date**
01/11/2014 1/06/2015 01/10/2015
in Appendix 3
In New Zealand the GM WHS/HSE role has an average
TAR of $285,907. This includes an Actual STI of
$20,440. 87% of individuals in this function have one
or more direct reports.
table 1
manager
Rem. Type
Lower
Quartile
Median Average
Upper
Quartile
TFR $236,699 $259,780 $265,467 $288,480
Actual STI $0 $0 $20,440 $32,500
TAR $241,699 $294,780 $285,907 $309,480
Target STI $0 $41,544 $48,374 $69,750
TTR $241,699 $312,000 $313,841 $341,250
figure 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
PhD/DOCTORATE
MASTERS
CERTIFICATE I OR II
11%
11%
33%
22%
11%
0%
0%
11%
figure 2
years of experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
16+
11-15
6-10
3-5
1-2
1
20%
50%
30%
0%
0%
0%

appendix 1
methodology
168 companies submitted data for this survey,
including many of Australia’s largest employers of
WHS/HSE and Environmental professionals. There
are a total of 1,334 individuals covered in this year’s
survey. The list of participating organisations can be
found at the front of this report. Some organisations
preferred not to be named.
All Health Safety and Environment positions had
sufficient position matches to obtain meaningful
market comparisons (i.e. medians and/or quartiles).
The survey has provided valid results with sample
sizes ranging from 9 to 436 with a mean sample
size of approximately 78 per role. Where the sample
size is insufficient in the geographical and industry
breakdowns we have omitted analysis to ensure
confidentiality. The data in this report should be read
in the context of other market remuneration data
available for a comprehensive summary of market
remuneration trends.
The survey was conducted and data collected from
September to November 2015.
The survey utilised a job matching approach, where
standard role descriptions covering Health Safety,
Workers Compensation and Environment positions
were provided to participating organisations to
match their equivalent roles. Each role description
contained a purpose, key accountabilities, person
specification and key role dimensions (approximate
budgets, staff reporting etc).
“We are committed to further contribution
in this space. Our hope is that we can
continue to contribute to a better informed
and engaged workforce – one that is better
enabled to reduce harm and manage assets
and operations in a sustainable fashion, while
placing an increased focus on people risk and
the potential impacts that will arise if such
risks are not properly managed.”
Aaron Neilson
General Manager, safesearch

Safesearch Survey

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (7)

Semelhante a Safesearch Survey

Semelhante a Safesearch Survey (20)

Mais de Daren Dawson

Mais de Daren Dawson (17)

Safesearch Survey