I get where you're going but as an example on a new build 2 story residential build no-one but the scaffolder would be required to notify as they're the only one who trigger the requirements as defined in Regulation 2 of the HSE Regs 95.
The requirement to notify is part of the MBIE Regulation review currently underway, make a submission - I certainly have

Health and Safety in Employment Regulations 1995
Regulation 26 Notification (part)
(1) In this regulation, the term employer includes a person who controls a workplace.
(2) Subject to subclause (4), every employer who intends to commence any notifiable work or any work that will at any time include any notifiable work must, so far as is reasonably practicable, take steps to lodge notice of that intention in accordance with this regulation.

My view is that 'employer' equal PCBU and that by applying that Clause requires "every employer to lodge notice.

Seriously I don't believe gloves are the answer.

WorkSafe have publicised the unacceptably high fatality rate associated with vehicles. Over the last 10 years there has been a vehicle involved in some way in 1/2 of all recorded fatal workplace accidents.

Where workers and others have to be in or around moving vehicles then the best thing a responsible PCBU can do is try separate people and the vehicle. The use of barriers and planned traffic management makes a huge difference and reduces the interaction between people and the vehicles.

I'm don't believe that extending the charging or conviction options in a prosecution to include industrial manslaughter would significantly change attitudes. I do wonder whether it might also make the job of WorkSafe's Inspectors harder by increasing the amount of pushback they're already experiencing.
I would like to see the range of penalties extended and an automatic inflation adjustment applied so penalties don't become trivial as legislation isn't updated that often.