“…Morality cannot be legislated, but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless…” Martin Luther King, Jr.
It is only comparatively recently that the law has confirmed that employers have a legal liability for stress-based psychiatric injury suffered by their employees.
More and more employees are complaining that they cannot handle their workloads and that this is causing danger to their health.
What Is It?:
Work Related Stress (WRS) can be defined as “the result of demands of the work environment exceeding the employees’ ability to cope or control them.” The most common symptoms are absenteeism, low morale, feelings of overload, feelings of underload, communication problems, problems juggling home life and work life.
The EU Commission in its report “Guidance on Work Related Stress” defines WRS as “Work-related stress is the emotional, cognitive, behavioural, and physiological reaction to aversive and noxious aspects of work, work environments, and work organisations. It is characterised by high levels of arousal and distress and often by feelings of not coping.”
Recent research undertaken by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (June,2000) states that the experience of stress arises from an imbalance between the “perceived” demands of work and “perceived” resources available to the individual. The effects are not just psychological in nature but also affect a person’s physical health, well-being and productivity.
Factors at work that can influence the level of stress include:
- Organisational Culture and Function
- Role in the Organisation
- Career Development
- Workload
- Work pace
- Physical Work Environment
- Changes- Continuous change in methods, technologies, staff, can increase the effect of the above factors.
Under Common law employers have a duty of care to their employees to keep them safe from harm; to ensure a reasonably safe place of work, systems of work, plants, tools, equipment, and competent safety conscious employees, including management.
In addition employers have a statutory duty under health and safety legislation (The Health and Welfare at Work Act, 1989, Section 6(1)) to safeguard the physical and psychological health of their employees, including third parties such as contractors. Employers who put excessive pressure on employees for results may be in breach of this duty of care.
However, it is acceptable to assume that an employee can withstand a certain level of pressure and responsibility, and ideally this would be clear in the job description.
An employer is not liable for stress caused from outside the workplace, such as personal, family or social issues.
Some basic guidelines to show how a claim might be sought. Such claims would include:
- Breach of Duty;
- Reasonable Foreseeability;
- Clear Causation between injury suffered and working conditions;
- Actual injury due to the occupational stress (Case of Curran V Cadbury (Ireland) Limited.
UK case studies that first recognised a legal liability for stress-related injury include the Walker V Northumberland County Council, (1995)(UK); Cross V Highlands and Islands Enterprises(2001) (UK); Sutherland V Hatton(2002)(UK). The case of Sutherland was considered extremely helpful as Lady Justice Hale set out 16 “practical propositions” by way of guidance as to the circumstances in which stress at work would give rise to legal liability.
These practical propositions have most recently been endorsed in Ireland and cited with approval in the judgement of Laffoy J. in McGrath V Trintech Technologies and Anor (High Court, Unreported 29th October, 2004) and the judgement of Clarke J. in Maher V Jabil Global Services Limited, (High Court, Unreported 12 May 2005.) Both recent judgments give a comprehensive review of the area.
Other relevant cases include Curran V Cadbury (Ireland) Ltd (1999); Sullivan V Southern Health Board (1997); McHugh V Minister for Defence (2001); Beate Riehn V DSPCA (2003).
Such cases indicate that the courts recognise the employers’ legal duty of care towards employees not to expose them to situations which cause injury to their mental health. Secondly they indicate that liability can be imposed where conditions at work are such as to give rise to significant stress to an employee, and where an employee suffers a psychiatric injury as a result. Thirdly, that lack of support or remoteness of an employer can be a source of stress as well as inordinate workloads. McHugh V Minister for Defence show the courts placing a duty on employers to make appropriate ongoing enquiries as to the health of an employee; in this case liability was imposed in part because of the failure of the army to “recognise and treat the signs of stress”. And fourthly, the Beate Riehn case indicates that even if an employer is so remote as not to notice any stress, this does not absolve them from liability.
Coping Skills Organisational:
What can an employer do to manage workplace stress and protect themselves from liability?
- Take adequate action to prevent WRS: Provide employees with suitable training, stress management programmes and open communication opportunities.
- Risk assessment: Look for pressures at work that may cause high and long lasting levels of stress and identify who might be harmed.
Evaluate the risk by identifying what action has already been taken, deciding whether this is enough and if not, decide what should be done. Record all findings. Review the assessment at regular intervals and check the impact of the measures taken.
Coping Skills Personal:
What can the individual do to cope with stress in the workplace?
Start with devising your own Personal Coping Strategies. Consider your level of assertiveness, personal planning and self talk. Ask yourself to what extent are you in control of these areas of your daily working life. As each individual differs, so does the stress response, so it is important to choose the coping skills that suit you.
Some of the most popular stress management techniques include relaxation, exercise, diet, talking to a friend, exercising humour, quitting the work area at particular times. Any of these exercises can be practised daily as a method of maintenance. Improve your own self awareness and try to recognise how you perceive work situations.
In conclusion, Health and Safety legislation clearly recognises that stress can be a source of illness in the workplace and that employers can be held liable for placing employees in a stressful working environment. It pays employers to take workplace stress seriously as it may cost them dearly in litigation, out of court settlements, sick pay and in having a depressed and under productive workforce.