It was eight years ago that the Court of Appeal awarded Maurice Young, workshop manager at a Post Office depot in Scarborough £94,000 in damages for suffering a work-related stress illness.[1] Since then, the number of similar claims that have kept employment litigation lawyers busy indicates that employers do not always remember their legal obligations in identifying and preventing stress at work.
The problem is not just the number of expensive legal claims, but the impact on the UK workforce already reeling from the effects of the adverse economy. The CIPD's quarterly July 2010 Employee Outlook survey[2] showed almost half (49%) of staff have noticed an increase in stress at work as a result of the economic downturn.
A new guide: Work-related stress – what the law says,[3] by John Hamilton[4], head of safety, health and wellbeing at Leeds Metropolitan University, highlights the potential legal liabilities they face if they continue to ignore their responsibilities in this area. The guide has been produced on a joint basis by the CIPD, the HSE, Acas and Health, Work and Wellbeing.
Peter Brown, head of work environment, radiation and gas policy, HSE, explains: "A certain level of pressure at work helps to motivate people and can boost energy and productivity levels. But, when the pressure individuals are under exceeds their ability to cope, it becomes a negative rather than a positive force."
The guide can be downloaded free of charge (see note 3) and, as well as defining the legal position, it provides some practical guidance to help them identify the problem and take the necessary action. The following is a summary of the core requirements:
You need to be proactive in considering what factors could cause ill-health or exacerbate existing health conditions. The law states that you should:
- take reasonable steps to examine the workplace to identify risk;
- identify possible sources of stress that could foreseeably cause employee ill-health;
- take notice of signs of harm to employees that are plain enough for you to realise that preventative or protective action is required
consider existing health needs or disabilities on the employee’s ability to carry out their work; and
- expect that employees can withstand normal pressures of work.
However, there are number of factors that will help determine whether harm is foreseeable or not, including:
- Is the workload much more than is normal for the job?
- Are the job demands unreasonable when compared with the demands made of others doing comparable work?
- Are there signs that employees are suffering from stress, such as prolonged or repeated incidences of absence?
- Are there any other non-work factors that may be contributing?
See also ‘Toil and trouble’ by Anne McCracken, in The People Bulletin, 22 October 2009.
[1] Young v The Post Office [2002] EWCA Civ 661
[2] www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/empreltns/general/_employee_outlook.htm
[3] www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/health/stress/_work-related-stress-what-law-says.htm
[4] www.stressguidance.org