Identifying workplace stress hazards: a risk management approach

PDF DOWNLOAD

Long hours, commuting, and managing work/life balance are just a few of the challenges affecting the mental health and wellbeing of employees. Employers need to be vigilant in managing the risks to mental health in order to maintain a healthy and happy workforce, limit workers compensation or negligence claims and to comply with their absolute duties under OHS legislation.

Impact of workplace stress

Under workers compensation legislation, workplace stress has been recognised as a contributing factor to psychiatric “injury” with claims being available to workers in each jurisdiction in Australia. Additionally, common law actions have been successfully brought against employers for negligence causing psychiatric injury, most often associated with bullying and harassment claims.

A key component in the emerging cases is the concept of how much a psychiatric injury is attributable to work stress, and how much relates to the employee’s past experience. The 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing in Australia revealed that 1.54 million people suffered from or experienced symptoms of clinical depression. The Australian Human Rights Commission when developing the 2010 Workers with Mental Illness: A Practical Guide for Managers found that around 45% of Australians aged between 16 and 85 will experience a mental illness in any given year.

Detecting workplace stress

In a clinical sense, what research refers to as “job strain” is a risk factor for clinical depression and generalised anxiety disorders. However, everyone is born with a different predisposition to anxiety and depression, and work stress affects every employee differently. This means that employers need to be conscious to the mental health issues that their employees face in an increasingly demanding workplace environment. Some of the major causes for “job strain” include:

• Poor interpersonal relationships at work (including conflict with co-workers);
• Management action (such as disciplinary action);
• Lack of support from managers and supervisors;
• Organisational change and adaptation;
• Job insecurity;
• Shiftwork;
• Aggression, bullying and harassment; and
• Excessive workloads.

Recent Cases

In 2007 the Victorian WorkCover Authority reported that work-related stress was the second highest level of compensation of all injuries and illnesses in Australia, and the median cost of claims is 2 to 3 times higher. Recent cases highlight how workplace stress has contributed to psychiatric “injury”:

• The case of The Greater Southern Area Health Service v Walsh [2010] NSWWCCPD 98 raised the issue of reasonableness of management action causing psychological injury. The fact that legislation and guidelines may require and/or authorise certain action does not, alone, render action as being reasonable. Proper exercise of judgment and assessment of facts and circumstances must be made by those responsible to determine the threshold question as to whether such action is required. In this case the conduct of the employer was found to be unreasonable, and the worker was entitled to an award for weekly payments.

• In the case of Q-Comp v Robin Jeffry Foote [2007] QIC 83 involving a counsellor with a Community Health Service operating a Needle Exchange Program in Queensland it was confirmed that an employer takes a worker with all their pre-existing conditions. In this particular case the employment was found to exacerbate a pre-existing condition that could properly be defined as an “injury” within the meaning of the Act. This was distinguished from a worker’s perception of reasonable management action. In this case, the worker’s employment was found to be a significant contributing factor to his psychological injury.

• In Amity Group Pty Ltd v Yusuf [2009] NSWWCCPD 152 a nursing assistant was successful in claiming psychological “injury” as a result of her physical injuries. It was held that even if her personal problems contributed to her depression, it did not prevent a finding that her depression resulted from work injuries. In this case WorkCover accepted that she had a major depressive order because of her pain.

• In the High Court case of Koehler v Cerebos (Australia) Ltd (2005) (2205) 222 CLR 44, an overworked employee brought a negligence claim at common law against her employer for work-stress related psychiatric illness. The claim was brought at common law in the absence of stress-related injury options under Western Australia’s compensation legislation. Despite complaints about excessive workload, and lack of management action, the employees claim was unsuccessful.

The High Court ruled that a reasonable person would not have foreseen the risk of psychiatric illness to the employee. In reaching this decision the distinction between stress and psychiatric injury was highlighted, and the court determined that the employee had agreed to take on the responsibilities when signing her employment contract, that there were no physical signs, and no complaints of a psychiatric nature to her employer. This case highlights that a psychiatric injury needs to be reasonably foreseeable to employers in a common law jurisdiction.

• In a recent Presidential decision, the New South Wales Workers Compensation Commission ruled that a worker who was forced to quit his job after suffering panic attacks was not entitled to compensation because his condition arose from his past experience. The Presidential members noted that the worker clearly suffered form panic attacks, however, no doctor had given an opinion that these attacks arose out of his employment (Naguib v Salesforce Australia Pty Ltd [2010] AWR 20-171).

These cases also highlight the potential for each workers compensation claim to also lead to a prosecution of the employer under OHS legislation for a failure to ensure employees are not exposed to risks to their health and welfare.

Workplace Health Promotion: Prevention and Early Intervention

Legal obligations aside, workplace stress has financial costs for employers through absenteeism, poor work quality, special supervision, management hours, lost productivity, and turnover.

The total cost associated with absenteeism in Australia has been estimated at $16 billion per year (Hallis 2007). Stress has been found to increase the duration of work absence and contributes substantially to that cost.

A University of Melbourne and VicHealth funded report titled Estimating the Economic Benefits of Eliminating Job Strain as a Risk Factor for Depression (October 2010) has found that excessive pressure at work is costing Australia’s economy $730 million a year due to job-stress related depression. This figure included lost productive time, employee replacement costs, government-subsidised mental health services, and medications for depression.

Occupational Health and Safety Obligations

With costs associated with workplace stress rising, best practice objectives for employers and managers are to address the cause of stress, and to prevent stress occurring. Coupled with this are strict duties under safety legislation in all jurisdictions on employers to ensure the health and welfare of their employees. Employers should understand the extent to which risk factors for stress operate in their workplace and what changes are required to remedy the stressful aspects for their employee’s jobs.

Tips for developing a Workplace Stress OHS policy:

• carry out a risk assessment on the job rather than on an individual and identify the causes of stress;

• account for the abilities and skills of the employee including training needs;

• develop control measures to reduce risk (i.e. conflict resolution procedures, coping strategies, employee assistance programs, and facilitate access to counselling);

• consult with staff about the stressors in their roles; and

• regularly undertake risk evaluations and review control measures.

Conclusion

Fostering a workplace culture of mental health promotion can not only protect employers from potential claims arising out of workplace stress, it can result in a more productive and cost-effective workforce.