Banned for 12 Months: What Tasmania's Workplace Protection Orders Bill Can and Can't Do

On 9 October the Tasmanian Government released the draft Workplace Protection Orders Bill 2026 for comment. If it passes, the Magistrates Court could bar a person for up to 12 months from entering a workplace or coming within a set distance of it or impose other conditions. The trigger is that the person has used personal violence or damaged property at the workplace and there is a serious risk they will do it again. The draft applies to people of all ages. It uses a broad definition of workplace that includes volunteer organisations. It also covers violence through electronic or online interaction. Submissions close at midnight on 1 November 2026.

For anyone working in retail, health, hospitality or community services, this is worth more than a passing glance.

A New Tool Is Not a New Control

Let me be clear about what an order like this can and can't do. It is a legal tool that operates after violence has already happened. It may stop the same person coming back. It does nothing to stop the first incident. Your duty as a PCBU to manage the risk of occupational violence exists now and doesn't wait for the Bill.

So before you think about how you'd use an order, ask yourself:

• Do you know which of your sites, shifts and roles carry the highest risk of aggression from customers, patients or members of the public?
• Are your controls built into the work through screens, layout, staffing levels and lone work arrangements? Or do they rely on de-escalation training alone?
• Do workers report every incident, including verbal abuse and online threats? Or have they stopped bothering because nothing changes?
• When someone is banned from your premises now, how is that communicated to every shift?

The Online Piece Matters

The detail in the draft that stood out to me is the inclusion of electronic and online interaction. Many frontline workers now cop abuse through social media, email or booking apps long before anyone turns up in person. Community services and health workers often have their names and faces visible online. If your occupational violence procedure only talks about what happens at the counter, it is already out of date.

This is also where psychosocial risk and physical risk overlap. The fear of a person returning can be as harmful as the incident itself. A worker who spends every shift watching the door is carrying a hazard your risk register should name.

Evidence Will Decide Whether an Order Is Granted

If the Bill passes in something like its current form, a court will need evidence of what happened and of the serious risk of it happening again. That means your incident records will matter. Ask yourself whether your current reporting would support an application. Are dates, times, witnesses and the exact words or actions recorded? Is CCTV kept long enough? Are online threats screenshotted and stored?

Good records help workers now, whether or not an order is ever sought. They show patterns and support police reports. They also tell you where your controls are failing.

Should You Make a Submission?

I'd encourage it if your business sits in one of the sectors most affected. Consultations are often dominated by legal and advocacy groups. Practical feedback from people who manage real incidents is what improves a draft. Questions worth raising include who can apply for an order, how quickly an interim order can be made and how it would be enforced at a multi-tenant site like a shopping centre.

If a person who threatened one of your workers last month walked back through the door tomorrow, would every person on shift know what to do?