Limits for 'silent killer' chemical exposure on hold despite advice

Chemical exposure limits put on hold despite Safe Work Australia advice Wed 24 Jun 2026 at 9:12am In short: A majority of state and territory governments have put stricter workplace exposure limits on hold for nine hazardous chemicals. This is despite a Safe Work Australia report finding that the health and economic benefits would outweigh the costs. What's next? Unions have vowed to continue to work with state and territory leaders to implement the lower exposure limits. A majority of state and territory governments have put stricter workplace exposure limits on hold for nine hazardous chemicals despite a Safe Work Australia report finding the health and economic benefits would outweigh the costs. The chemicals, which include known cancer-causing substances including respirable crystalline silica (RCA), benzene and formaldehyde, impact workers in demolition, construction and tunnelling, as well as nurses and medical technicians who collect tissue. In March, six leading health organisations including the Thoracic Society, Cancer Council and Lung Foundation issued a joint statement urgently calling for stronger protections against what they described as a "silent killer". But the proposed changes had to be supported by at least two-thirds of state and territory governments to be legislated. A majority of jurisdictions have now responded, requesting that further work be carried out by the national body responsible for work health and safety, Safe Work Australia. Anguish for workers with diseases linked to chemicals Hamish Studholme spent decades working in the tunnelling industry before he was told he had silicosis and would never work in the sector again. Silicosis is an incurable lung disease caused by inhaling fine particles of respirable crystalline silica. The condition can lead to respiratory failure and increase the risk of lung cancer and other serious illnesses. Now 59, Mr Studholme has struggled to find work since his diagnosis. While he received some compensation, he said the disease had taken a significant financial and emotional toll. "It was incredibly hard mentally. No matter how strong you are, it's going to take a toll on you," he said. "The fact that you might get worse and you've got no real money coming in … you just don't know." Although workplace safety standards improved significantly during his time underground, he said more could be done to protect workers from dangerous dust exposure. "These companies are looking at production and putting it in front of the lives of workers," he said. "You can't put a cost on people's lives, and if those people making those decisions had relatives suffering from silicosis, they would think completely differently." Safe Work Australia had recommended halving the workplace exposure limit for respirable crystalline silica from 0.05 milligrams per cubic metre to 0.025 milligrams per cubic metre. Workers exposed to silica dust are required to undergo health monitoring before and during their employment to detect signs of disease. Implementation would cost businesses $31 billion The reduced exposure limits have faced opposition from business and industry groups, which argued they were impractical because technology to accurately measure exposure at the proposed levels was not yet widely available. A Regulatory Impact Statement released today by Safe Work showed that implementing the new exposure limits would cost employers $31 billion over 10 years. The majority of that cost would be borne by the mining sector. The report also found the benefits to workers, businesses, and the health system would outweigh those costs through reduced disease and disability, lower healthcare spending and improved workplace productivity. Around 3 million workers are currently exposed to one or more of the chemicals in Australia. According to the analysis, the cost of ongoing exposure to just five of the nine chemicals at current workplace limits would total $13.1 billion over the next decade. While implementing the new limits would have "economy-wide costs", the report said those costs would not outweigh the "non-quantifiable and qualitative benefits to workers, their families, the broader community and the economy". It also noted because of a long delay between exposure to the chemicals and the development of disease, the benefits might actually extend beyond the 10-year period the analysis focuses on. The report also pushed back on concerns from industry groups that businesses would be unable to comply, identifying commercially available methods capable of measuring all nine chemicals at the proposed limits. It said retaining current exposure limits was likely to give workers a "false sense of safety" that exposure at those levels would not cause adverse health impacts. Union negotiations continue In 2022, all nine chemicals were carved out of a broader upgrade of exposure limits due in part to concerns from industry groups that they could not comply. A second assessment from the workplace regulator, which reviewed the recommendation, backed up the initial finding that current exposure limits on all nine were unsafe. Safe Work had recommended that both the commonwealth and state and territory governments back the rollout of the limits from December 1. Australian Council of Trades Union Assistant Secretary Liam O'Brien said he would continue to work with states and territories to reduce the exposure limits. "We continue to work toward the most protective outcome for workers," he said. [Image text:] CAT EXCAVATION