Preventing psychosocial risks at work

DRAFT DOCUMENT
Fostering the role of the EFFAT European Works
Councils:
Taking an active role in managing stress and
psychosocial risks
Introductory Booklet
Draft Version 15/04/2015
1
DRAFT DOCUMENT
This project was financed by the European Commission, DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities
(grant VS/2014/0355). Exclusive responsibility for this publication lies with the project's partners. The
Commission assumes no responsibility for any use possibly made of the information contained herein.
April 2015
Published by EFFAT - European Federation of Food, Agriculture, Tourism, Trade Unions
Rue Fossé aux Loups 38 b3, 1000 Brussels (Belgium)
Compiled by SECAFI
20-24 rue Martin Bernard, 75013 Paris (France)
Authors: Michel AGOSTINI, Carine DEROSIER and Liesbeth VAN CRIEKINGEN
2
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Table of content
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
What is at stake? Understanding stress & psychosocial risks at work ................................................................... 5
1.
False beliefs ................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.
What are we talking about? ....................................................................................................................... 6
3.
Main sources of psychosocial risks at work ............................................................................................... 9
4.
Effects & symptoms ................................................................................................................................. 13
Why pay attention? The costs of not preventing psychosocial risks at work ...................................................... 15
1.
Some figures ............................................................................................................................................ 15
2.
The cost of ill health at work .................................................................................................................... 17
3.
Legal frameworks ..................................................................................................................................... 18
What can be done? Preventing psychosocial risks at work ................................................................................. 24
1.
Prevention principles ............................................................................................................................... 24
2.
Asses - Identification of risk factors ......................................................................................................... 25
3.
Prevent – defining actions ...................................................................................................................... 26
4.
Reasses – monitoring ............................................................................................................................... 27
The role of EWCs and national workers’ representative structures ..................................................................... 28
1.
Main causes for not fully addressing the issue ........................................................................................ 30
2.
Benefits of addressing the issue .............................................................................................................. 32
Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................. 34
1.
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................. 34
2.
Glossary .................................................................................................................................................... 37
3
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Introduction
Psychosocial risks and work-related stress are among the most challenging issues in occupational
safety and health. Amid today's economic upheavals, downsizing, layoffs, mergers and bankruptcies
have cost hundreds of thousands of workers their jobs. Millions more have been shifted to unfamiliar
tasks within their companies and wonder how much longer they will be employed. In this context of
precariousness, workers face the additional pressures of enhanced labour flexibility, fewer health
and retirement benefits and the feeling that they have to work longer and harder just to maintain
their current economic status. The results of this condition are uncertainty and higher levels of stress
but also fear, the risk of physical illness, marital strain, anxiety, depression and even suicide.
Addressing psychosocial risks and work-related stress is a challenge for EFFAT; both on the level of
the European Works Council (EWC) and in the context of the European sectorial social dialogue
(ESSD). In recent years, EFFAT has established more than 110 EWCs. Through the EU-financed project
“Fostering the role of the EFFAT European Works Councils: Taking an active role in managing stress
and psychosocial risks“, EFFAT wishes to facilitate transnational solutions and actions through
workers’ representation and participation at the EWC level.
Taking into account all the above-mentioned considerations, this project aims to deliver a practical
working tool for EWC members, trade union officers and shop stewards. As such, EFFAT aims to:
1) Facilitate an understanding of work-related stress and psychosocial risks and identify
the specific concerns within the EFFAT sectors. This assessment of the current state of
play will pay particular attention to the variety of activities amongst the sectors and will
be supplemented by, in addition to document-based and scientific research, the
feedback expressed in case studies conducted in five selected transnational companies
and at the conferences (Zagreb and Rome).
2) Identify methods of raising awareness, prevention and intervention that can be
facilitated and/or implemented through the European Works Councils within the EFFAT
sectors. This analysis will be based, in particular, on the work mentioned above, as well
as on good practices identified in other sectors.
This document is a first step towards the above goals. Based upon scientific research and case
studies, the presented elements aim to introduce the topic in light of a first conference in Zagreb
(April 28th, 2015). It presents an introduction to work-related stress and psychosocial risks and the
role the European Works Council The conference will make it possible to discuss amongst
participants, as well on major conclusions of the presented material as on their experiences and
available resources to improve the effective handling of these issues within EWCs.
In a second phase, practices and tools specific to European Works Councils will be researched by
taking stock of the available experiences and conducting interviews with the social partners of five
transnational companies.
4
DRAFT DOCUMENT
What is at stake?
Understanding stress & psychosocial risks at work
1. False beliefs
The lack of knowledge regarding psychosocial risks is often one of the first bottlenecks in addressing
their prevention at the workplace. Quite a few false and preconceived ideas exist; you might have
heard (our thought) one of the following:
“A little bit of stress is good for
you. Good stress enables
employees to give their best”
“It’s all subjective; it’s a matter of
character”
“There is an economic crisis. We
need to focus on being a
performant company; not wasting
time and money in preventing
psychosocial risks”
“Psychosocial risks only affect weak,
vulnerable people”
“Modern life and society have
become more violent, more
stressful. It’s not the company’s
fault”
“Preventing psychosocial risks? It’s
just another trend”
These preconceived notions can be dangerous if used as an excuse not to prevent
psychosocial risks at work. As such, lifting the veil on these false beliefs is a first and crucial
step.
5
DRAFT DOCUMENT
2. What are we talking about?
A variety of terms are used to refer to psychosocial risks at work. The term “stress” is the most
common, and generally used as an all-encompassing concept. Psychosocial constraints, psychoorganisational risk, mental stress, malaise, burn-out, well-being at work, … these are some of the
terms commonly used to designate situations that may be similar to one another but that do not
necessarily overlap. The majority of guides or texts presenting psychosocial aspects at work define
them via their consequences (work-related stress, violence at work, work-related exhaustion, etc.).
This variety in terms and meanings also exists within and across organizations and countries.
As such, a shared terminology and understanding of the underlying concepts is a prerequisite for
addressing the complex issue of psychosocial risks at work – especially in a transnational & social
dialogue context.
Reference definition
The reference definition of psychosocial risks we propose is that from the report of the French
scientific expert panel chaired by Prof. Michel Gollac (2011):
“What makes a work-related health risk into a psychosocial risk is not its manifestation, but
its origin:
psychosocial risks will be defined as risks for mental, physical and social health,
caused by conditions of employment and organisational and relational factors likely to
interact with mental functioning”.
This definition puts the accent on the conditions of employment, as well as organisational and
relational factors, looking at them in relation to their possible effects on health. The term
‘psychosocial risk’ thus does not relate to symptoms, disorders or diseases.
In other words, we speak of a psychosocial risk when referring to work situations
characterised by an organisation, relational practices and conditions of employment with a
pathogenic potential for the workforce. The issue is no longer to know which share stems
from the person's personal circumstances, but instead to become aware of the potential
consequences of existing or planned work-related constellations for a person's mental,
physical and social health.
The notion of psychological and organisational constraints is sometimes preferred to that of
psychosocial risks, as it puts a more explicit focus on the causal factors, underlining the
importance of organisational aspects.
6
DRAFT DOCUMENT
A first central idea: interaction between the worker and his/her work environment
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), “Health is a state of complete physical, mental
and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity“. Consequently, our
understanding of health at work (or occupational health) follows the same principles. Every work
situation can be subjected to tensions (physical, mental or socio-economic). Working conditions can
impact both positively and negatively on the health & safety of workers. These impacts can be
influenced by the following factors in the work environment (INRS, France):
Factors linked to the work task and content
Meaningful / meaningless, pleasant / unpleasant, safe/dangerous, …
Quantitative demands (work load, performance, amount of information, time pressure, …)
Qualitative demands (precision, quality, vigilance, ...)
Risks inherent to the execution of the tasks (e.g. medical error, …)
Factors linked to the work organisation
Task distribution and planning
Defined work tasks (clear/unclear)
Coherence / discrepancies between demands of the function (e.g. well and fast)
Balanced / unbalanced working hours (social and family life)
Management and implementation of organisational changes
Factors linked to work relations
Support / absence of help from colleagues or management
Tensed relations, conflicts, lack of respect
Supporting / commanding, deficient management
Expressed / weak recognition of the accomplished work
Factors linked to physical and technical environment
Physical hindrance (noise, vibrations, temperature, …)
Conception of work place and post (space, light, storage…)
Factors linked to the socio-economic environment
Economic situation of the company and future prospects
Level of competition on national and/or international level
Restructuring and organisational changes
7
DRAFT DOCUMENT
The second central idea: resources and constraints at work
A safe and healthy workplace regulates these factors in order to
provide the right balance between resources and constraints at
work.
>
Constraint factors stand in the way of delivering (good)
work, of cooperating, etc. They are a bottleneck for workers’ participation and an efficient
work organisation. As such, they are linked to the negative effects on workers’ health.
>
Resources are factors that may reduce tensions & enable workers to face work demands and
deliver quality work. As such, they have positive effects on health.
>
Individual and/or collective factors (e.g. work experience, freedom of speech within the
organisation, employees' level of training, collective support, etc.) can regulate the balance
between constraints and resources
The idea of interaction between the worker and his/her work environment and working conditions is
as such central. The imbalance between resources and constraints generates psychosocial risks at
work. It is characterized by a work situation in which
>
constraints are high and resources weak;
>
regulative factors do not function.
Lifting the veil on false beliefs - “Preventing psychosocial risks? It’s just another trend”
“Changes in employment patterns” have led to new risks with regard to work-related
health: precarious employment, subcontracting, higher workloads, or “work intensification
due to headcount reductions” have “inevitably had repercussions on working conditions”,
causing for instance musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) or such psychosocial risks (PSRs) as
work-related stress, says the International Labour Office (ILO).
8
DRAFT DOCUMENT
3. Main sources of psychosocial risks at work
An important prerequisite to guarantee the quality of the dialogue on psychosocial risks at work is a
shared understanding of their causes. There are many different causes of psychosocial risks.
Interlinked, they built up over time, creating vicious circles and starting to impair employees' health.
Employees' exposure to psychosocial risks can be attributed to events deriving from the work
organisation and the socio-economic environment found within the company. There are many
factors attributable to work organisation: workload, working alone, skill utilisation, internal
cooperation, performance recognition systems, etc. In the scope of impacting health at work, we can
identify the following examples of organisational sources:
Discrepancies between constraint and autonomy, between targets and resources (Karasek
model).
Discrepancies between efforts and rewards, between investment and recognition, between
commitment and returns (Siegrist model).
Management methods, lack of social support (Johnson model), isolation, individualisation,
financial considerations.
Methods of production management, standardisation, automation, streamlining of
processes, lean management.
Organisational changes, accelerating timeframes (in production or in the conducting of
change), changes in work activity, restructuring, lack of prospects, loss of meaning.
Intensification of the workload, excessive workload, mental overload, pressure (sales, clients,
etc.), increasing complexity of the role.
Hence, the psychosocial risks at
work are to be found at the
intersection of several spheres of
the work activity.
We can classify these spheres
according to the following six
dimensions (Gollac model):
9
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Work demands refer to four main dimensions:
o
The quantity of work is assessed in terms of the volume of work to be done and working time
needed. High volumes of overtime, untaken leave or time-off are alarm bells.
o
Work-related pressure is all about atypical working hours, the feeling of not having enough
time to do one's work and everything associated with a sense of urgency. This term may refer
to the work-related situations themselves (e.g. for medical staff, police officers) or to the
conditions under which work is organised and performed (e.g. non-transparent planning,
target achievement pressure, defective equipment, resource constraints).
o
Work complexity can refer to the tasks performed, to legislation and regulations, but also to
work organisation (e.g. versatility, complex procedures, a lack of information).
o Difficulties reconciling work and family life refer not just to work schedules themselves but also
to their predictability, the distance between home and work, high travel requirements on
account of the mobility requirements inherent to certain occupations.
Emotional demands
These concern all employees in direct contact with the public, for example in the tourism sector,
even if this aspect of their work is often a source of satisfaction. The work involves employees
keeping their own emotions under control and always having to make a good impression – “keep on
smiling”. Contact with the public is thus a potential source of tension, more or less frequent and at
varying degrees of intensity. The risk of verbal or physical aggression and the feeling of fear at work
are also factors causing tension in a large number of work-related situations.
Autonomy and margins of manoeuvre
A centralistic tradition, procedures under pressure as a result of frequent organisational changes, the
lack of information, and the subdivision of tasks on account of outsourcing are all factors liable to lead
to low levels of autonomy.
Finally, the possibility of speaking up, expressing expectations about one's work and being listened to
are all aspects with a positive influence on maintaining health.
Social relations and recognition at work
The first aspect is about working together with colleagues, a crucial resource where notions of
teamwork or service have been preserved, and conversely a serious constraint in situations where
individuals have to work by themselves or out of touch with their colleagues. The second factor is all
about the sense of purpose/meaningfulness of the work done.
The notion of social support refers on the one hand to the ability and willingness of a worker's nextlevel management to support employees in their work and to help them cope with difficulties; and
on the other hand – and more generally – to signs of recognition. It also in some cases echoes signs
of denigration or aggression possibly addressed at employees by actors internal to the company.
10
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Conflicting values
This dimension is of particular relevance in the scope of liberalisation of certain sectors. For
example, when rail operators move from the public to the private sector. The whole concept
of “public service” is built on such values as equal access, safety protection, user services, etc.
Moreover, it needs to be emphasized that some evolutions within the company and/or sector
might be elements potentially causing ethical qualms among employees. Employees can feel a
major contradiction between what they experience in their daily work routines and what they
deem necessary to do the job conforming to their convictions.
Socio-economic insecurity
Job security is also subject to evolution, e.g. in the case of restructuring, and needs to be observed
carefully. Cost pressure, the lack of investment, the search for performance improvements in a
context of increased competition and economic crisis can also lead employees to consider this factor
with greater concern. Felt insecurity can also be generated by developments in an employee's
working environment, in the variety of employment contracts within a company, in the modification
of the work tasks and of the geographical location of their activity.
11
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Lifting the veil on false beliefs - “Psychosocial risks only affect weak, vulnerable people”
and “Modern life and society have become more violent, more stressful. It’s not the
company’s fault”
As shown by the six dimensions above, the determinants of psychosocial risks are multifacetted – they can be both work-related and have nothing to do with work; linked to work
organisation but also to conditions of life (Rouilleault & Rochefort, 2005). The constraints of
family or social life can aggravate work-related constraints. Conversely, family and social
life can provide technical or emotional support or even elements of recognition, protecting
workers from work-related constraints (Gollac, 2011). In this context, the Belgian
government department responsible for well-being at work initiated a public campaign in
2012 to raise awareness towards psychosocial risks. This campaign revolved mainly around
two video spots showing the possible interconnection between work and private life.1
Developments within society (e.g. demographic evolution, the state of the economy, etc.)
and their repercussions can also be a factor influencing the work environment. For example,
the ageing of European populations and the need to work longer put a focus on maintaining
employability, life-long learning and anticipatory skill management.
On account of the multi-causality of psychosocial risks, these individual and societal
factors can also influence the determinants of our working lives. Nevertheless, although a
company is anchored in society, although the way work situations are appreciated differ
from one person to the next, and although the symptoms of psychosocial risks are similarly
very individual, their determinants and effects remain – at least in part – collective
(Rouilleault & Rochefort, 2005).
Guaranteeing a balance between work and private life, or providing training on how to deal
with violence can be part of a prevention approach. Nevertheless, it is important not to
solely focus on individual aspects and not to look solely at external sources. In a context of
preventing psychosocial risks at work, the field of action of greatest importance -and with
the greatest likelihood of reducing risk factors- is to be found in the work organisation.
1
See the campaign website and videos: www.sesentirbienautravail.be
12
DRAFT DOCUMENT
4. Effects & symptoms
Interlinked, imbalances between the dimensions built up over time, creating vicious circles and
starting to impair employees' health. People react physically and mentally. Following an alarm
signal, the body initially tries to resist, but ends up becoming exhausted.
Alarm / Resistance / Exhaustion
The effects on the individual might take the form of the following symptoms:
Decompensating symptoms
o Psychological symptoms: Fatigue, boredom, irritability, increased sensitivity, etc.
o Emotional symptoms: Crying, anguish, sadness, feelings of discomfort, etc.
o Intellectual symptoms: Concentration problems, errors, difficulty taking initiative,
etc.
Behavioural symptoms: addiction, irritability, escape, inhibition, reduced ambition, etc.
Physical symptoms: aches and pains (in muscles or joints, headaches, gastrointestinal
symptoms,…)
Furthermore, the following examples of diagnosed disorders can be linked to the above symptoms:
Hypertension
Coronary heart disease
Diabetes
Lipid disorders
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD)
Mental illness
Depression
Mental exhaustion (burn-out)
Recurring infections
Dermatitis
State of post-traumatic stress
….
Established in 2008 and comprising over 60 researchers, the IPD-Work Consortium is a panEuropean collaborative research project aiming to obtain reliable information on the effects of
psychosocial work-related factors on chronic diseases, disability and mortality. Individual level data
were derived from 17 European cohort studies including a total of 240 000 working men and women
from Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and the United
13
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Kingdom. Their research findings support the association between work-related psychosocial factors
and health. Work-related psychosocial factors, such as job strain and job insecurity, increase the
risk of developing coronary heart disease by approximately 20%.
It is important to bear in mind that Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) can be symptoms or diseases
linked to psychosocial constraints and stress at work. “Unfavourable psychosocial aspects are seen to
accentuate the effects of physical risk factors and contribute to an increased incidence in MSDs.”2
Hence, combining the attention for safety with the one on health is one of the challenges for
enhancing the prevention of psychosocial risks.
Lifting the veil on false beliefs - “A little bit of stress is good for you. Good stress enables
employees to give their best”
Some people may -wrongly- believe that “good stress” enables employees to give their best,
while “bad stress” makes them ill. However, from a scientific point of view, there is no such
thing as good or bad stress. People experience stress when they perceive that there is an
imbalance between the demands made of them and the resources they have available to
cope with those demands. Nevertheless a distinction needs to be made between “acute
stress” and “chronic stress”, as these have different effects on health.
2
•
Acute stress is what we experience when our body reacts to a threat or an ad hoc
situation (having to speak in front of an audience, changing jobs, an unexpected
situation, etc.). When the situation comes to an end, the stress symptoms end soon
afterwards.
•
By contrast, chronic stress represents our body's response to a long-term stress
situation: every day at work, we feel that what is being demanded of us exceeds our
capabilities. Chronic stress always has harmful effects on health.
Website EU OSHA (https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/factsheets/60/)
14
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Why pay attention?
The costs of not preventing psychosocial risks at work
We have seen that psychosocial risks and/or work-related stress generate effects and symptoms
imposing a significant burden on the health of individuals. Many studies indicate that psychosocial
risks and stress at work also generate costs for society (e.g. impacting health care and social welfare)
and for organisations (e.g. increased absenteeism, decreased productivity). The more, under the
terms of European legislation, employers are obliged to assess occupational risks and prevent the
health and safety of their workers.
1. Some figures
On a global level, the International Labour Office (ILO) states that
Every 15 seconds, a worker dies from a work-related accident or disease.
Every 15 seconds, 153 workers have a work-related accident.
In the European Union, a person dies from work-related causes every 3,5 minutes
According to EUROSTAT data, over a period of nine years, 28% of European workers reported
exposure to psychosocial risks that affected their mental well-being.
In Europe, the total cost of mental health disorders (both work and non-work related) is
estimated at €240 billion per year. Direct costs such as medical treatment account for less than
half of this sum. The larger amount of €136 billion is due to lost productivity including sick leave
absenteeism.3
According to the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA), “work-related
stress is one of the biggest occupational safety and health challenges that we face in Europe.
Nearly one in four workers is affected by it, and studies suggest that between 50% and
60% of all lost working days are related to it. This represents a huge cost in terms of both
human distress and impaired economic performance.”
“Around 8 in 10 European managers expressed concern about work-related stress in their
workplaces; however, less than 30% admitted having implemented procedures to deal
with psychosocial risks (ESENER)”.
“In 2002, the annual cost of work-related stress in Europe was estimated at EUR 20 billion”4.
3
European Network for Workplace Health Promotion, A guide to the business case for mental health. 2009. Page 4.
4
EU OSHA website (August 2013)
15
DRAFT DOCUMENT
“In Germany, attributable fractions were used to estimate the direct and indirect costs of
job strain and resulted in a total cost of €29.2 billion annually (Bodeker and Friedrichs,
2011). This included €9.9 billion in direct costs (prevention, rehabilitation, maintenance
treatment and administration) and €19.3 billion in indirect costs (lost working years
through incapacity, disability and premature death).” 5
In France, the National Research Institute INRS has estimated the national cost of workrelated stress between ad minima 1,9 and 3 billion euros in 2007. This figure includes
care costs and the performance loss due to absenteeism, discontinuation of professional
activity & premature death.
Similarly, a 2014 study by Securex states that, in Belgium, 37% of sick days are due to
work-related stress. On average, workers with a low level of stress are absent during 6
days a year. However, this figure rises to 20 lost working days for those suffering from a
higher level of stress.
In Austria, a national Employee Health Monitor publishes figures since 2009. From 2010
onward, the Monitor has shown a clearly increasing share of employees with three or
more psychological stress factors.6 The more, psychosocial disorders have been reported
to be the main reason why white-collar workers retire early, causing over 42 % of all
early retirements among this category of workers.
In a 2013 EU-funded project, the cost of work-related depression in Europe was estimated to be
€617 billion annually. This total sum was made up of costs to employers resulting from
absenteeism and presenteeism (€272 billion), loss of productivity (€242 billion), health care costs
of €63 billion and social welfare costs in the form of disability benefit payments (€39 billion)7.
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that by 2020 depression will become the
second most important cause of disability in the world.8
5
EU-OSHA, Calculating the cost of work-related stress and psychosocial risks. European Risk Observatory. Literature Review, 2014, page 8.
Der Österreichische Arbeitsgesundheitsmonitor, website, 2015.
7
Matix, Economic analysis of workplace mental health promotion and mental disorder prevention programmes and of their potential
6
contribution to EU health, social and economic policy objectives. 2013.
8
European Network for Workplace Health Promotion, A guide to the business case for mental health. 2009. Page 4.
16
DRAFT DOCUMENT
2. The cost of ill health at work
“In many organisations there is an erroneous perception that addressing psychosocial risks is
challenging and will incur additional costs when, in fact, the evidence suggests that failure to address
these risks can be even more costly for employers, workers and societies in general” (EU-OSHA,
20159). As such, consequences of psychosocial risks at work may hamper:
the health of workers;
o Physical and psychological symptoms, illness and disorders, reduction of motivation
and of work capacity, drop in productivity, …
the efficient internal operation of companies;
o Reduced output, defective quality level, loss of clientele, delays (lateness), …
the company’s performance, via direct and indirect financial costs
Examples
Direct cost
Indirect cost
Accidents at work
Indemnity payments, medical
expenses, ….
Accident investigation; Implementation of
corrective measures ; Lost production
time; Train and compensate a
replacement worker; …
Staff turnover,
rotation
Costs of new recruitment
process, …
Loss of knowledge and experience; Train
replacement worker; …
Other cost generating effects may be:
Damage to the company’s reputation (e.g. strikes, social tension, …)
Absenteeism at work refers to workers being absent from work. It is defined by a
temporary incapacity, enlarged or permanent, to work due to an illness or disability.
Almost all EU countries insist on measures being taken to reduce absenteeism at work. As
such, companies often use the absenteeism rate as an indicator since it is impacting
company performance. There exists close links between absenteeism and the level of
stress, burn-out and social relations at work.
Presenteeism is the opposite of absenteeism. Scholars have defined the term in various
ways. Amongst these, the following two can be found within organisations:
From on an OSH perspective, presenteeism at work refers to coming to work when one
is ill. It concerns problems raised by workers coming to work in spite of a physical or
psychological health problem, which would require staying away from the work place.
9
EU-OSHA, Calculating the cost of work-related stress and psychosocial risks. European Risk Observatory. Literature Review, 2014.
17
DRAFT DOCUMENT
By doing so, one of the possible effects can be “poorer performance” at conducting
one’s tasks. Nevertheless, in this context, the possible performance loss is not linked to
a lack of motivation or engagement of the worker; but is due to the fact that he/she
cannot function effectively due to ill health. The unproductivity is involuntary.
Secondly, the term can also refer to the practice of working longer hours than is
required. This can be linked to the belief that workers must be present in the
workplace regardless of the amount of work available or accomplished; and/or the fact
that an employer encourages his/her workers to work long hours without the real
need to do so.
Nevertheless, despite the evidence reported in many studies, methods to estimate the cost at
organisational level are few and exact figures for the financial burden remain rare10.
Lifting the veil on false beliefs - “There is an economic crisis. We need to focus on being a
performant company; not wasting time and money in preventing psychosocial risks”
We have seen that psychosocial risks at work and work-related stress are detrimental to the
health and well-being of workers, an aspect which in itself would be more than sufficient to
look for ways of preventing them. But they also have an economic impact. Studies indicate
that there is also a strong ‘business case’ for preventing stress and psychosocial risks at
work (EU-OSHA, 2015). Moreover, employers have a legal responsibility to reduce risks to
workers’ health and safety11, and this also includes psychosocial risks.
Hence, the prevention of these risks is a vital initiative to encourage health & well-being
at work, to comply with legal obligations AND to maintain company performance. For
example, the ArcelorMittal group Health Vision and Approach clearly embeds this idea by
stating that “profits and health are the two sides of the same coin”.
10
EU-OSHA, Calculating the cost of work-related stress and psychosocial risks. European Risk Observatory. Literature Review, 2014.
11
stemming from the Framework Directive (89/391/EEC)
18
DRAFT DOCUMENT
3. Legal frameworks
The assessment and prevention of work-related risks is a statutory obligation and needs to be seen
in combination with an approach preventing the psychosocial risks to which workers are exposed.
Health & safety at work: a legal obligation for the employer
In the field of occupational safety and health, European employers are all subject to the same
requirements on account of European level standards and, except for specific provisions, to their
respective transpositions into national legislation. In particular the EU Framework Directive 89/39112
defines the prevention and protection of the health and safety of workers in Europe. It constitutes
the basis for all subsequent individual directives on occupational health and safety.
Under the terms of the directive, the employer is obliged to develop an overall health and safety
policy & to assure workers’ participation and representation on these issues, namely by13:
assessing the occupational risks which cannot be avoided, updating these assessments in the
light of changing circumstances and taking the appropriate preventive and protective
measures;
making a record of the risk assessment and of the list of accidents at work;
informing workers and/or their representatives about potential risks and preventative
measures taken;
consulting workers and/or their representatives on all health and safety matters and
ensuring their participation;
providing job-specific health and safety training;
designating workers to carry out activities related to the prevention of occupational risks;
implementing measures on first aid, firefighting and the evacuation of workers.
As such, in most EU Member States, an employer is under the obligation to provide his/her staff with
a healthy and safe environment and corresponding working conditions. Although the majority of
legislative frameworks provide for a certain amount of cooperation to be expected from workers in
this respect, legal liability for identifying, assessing and preventing occupational risks clearly lies
with the employer. This includes psychosocial risks and stress in the workplace.
A recent EU-OSHA study14 shows that this legal obligation, generated by the Framework Directive
and its national transpositions, remains a major (if not the chief) motivator for company
managements.
12
For the full text of the Directive and its amendments, see the European legislation website on: www.eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:01989L0391-20081211:EN:NOT
13
Source : European Council
14
EU-OSHA, ESENER. Surveying Europe’s enterprises”. Presentation made at the Safety Reps conference in Budapest, 22-23 May 2013.
19
DRAFT DOCUMENT
In the case of management not meeting their assessment and prevention obligations with regard to
occupational risks, administrative and criminal charges can be pressed. For example, in France,
15
government labour inspectors wrote a report on the suicides that occurred within France Telecom .
They stated that the company had ignored warnings from doctors about the mental health of certain
employees. In 2012, the company and its former senior executives were charged with moral
harassment.
Workers’ representation and participation
The 1989 Health and Safety at Work Framework Council Directive 89/391 requires all European
Member States to ensure that employees are informed and consulted about health and safety
matters at the workplace, allowing them to monitor these issues and make proposals for
improvements and changes. This consultation can be with workers’ representatives rather than with
employees themselves, and the Directive makes clear these representatives must have appropriate
rights and safeguards (Fulton, 2013).
The 2013 Safety Reps report of the ETUC notes the variety of terms used in the Member States to
designate employee representatives in charge of OSH and working conditions (i.e. safety reps).
Nevertheless, the following EPSARE definition encompasses this diversity:
“Health and safety representatives are workers employed in an enterprise and specifically mandated
to represent workers’ interests on health and safety issues. They may be elected by all workers or
appointed by the trade unions. Their mandate gives them specific rights (information, consultation,
etc.) framed by the law or a collective agreement”.16
Even though the EU-OSHA ESENER study shows that the legal obligation remains one of the major
drivers for corporate managers to introduce prevention policies; the same study concludes that
employee representation bodies in the field of occupational safety and health appear to be another
key driver. In fact the vigilance of workers and/or their representatives in the face of OSH issues is,
whatever the size of the company, an important factor promoting action. The importance of
addressing psychosocial risks within industrial relations is therefore not to be underestimated.
The more, the detrimental effects of work-related stress – and more generally of psychosocial risks –
on workers' health is a widely shared concern throughout the European Union. As such, two
framework agreements signed by the social partners relate to psychosocial risks:
15
16
Between 2008 and 2009, 35 France Telecom workers committed suicide.
Agostini and Van Criekingen, Safety reps study. ETUC, 2013. Page 13-14.
20
DRAFT DOCUMENT
one on work-related stress (2004)
The 2004 agreement states that employers have an obligation to protect the occupational
health and safety of their workers, and that such obligation extends to stress at work if this
entails a risk to health and safety. The agreement also proposes measures to combat work
stress, including:
Management and communication measures such as clarifying the enterprise’s objectives
and the role of workers, ensuring adequate management support for individuals and
teams, matching responsibility and control over work, improving work organisation and
processes, working conditions and environment;
Training for managers and workers in order to raise awareness and understanding of
stress, its causes and ways to manage it;
Provision of information to, and consultation with, workers and their representatives in
accordance with EU and national legislation, collective agreements, and practices.
and the other on harassment and violence at work (2007)
The 2007 agreement wishes to raise the awareness and understanding of employers, workers
and their representatives of workplace harassment and violence. It also provides employers,
workers and their representatives at all levels with an action-oriented framework to identify,
prevent and manage problems of harassment and violence at work.
The implementation of both framework agreements was monitored by the European Social
Partners. Although a good prevention policy goes beyond legal obligations, the Framework
Agreements can be a help for introducing joint initiatives:
at a national level (cf. examples of national legal frameworks on the next page);
at a sectorial level (e.g. the publication of joint recommendations on occupational stress by the
trade union UNI Europe and the Confederation of European Security Services - CoESS - in 2008
following a questionnaire-based survey among their members);
or at company level (e.g. in 2012, the steel multinational ThyssenKrupp and representatives of
the trade union IndustriAll Europe signed an agreement on health and safety for the
company’s elevator division, ThyssenKrupp Elevator. The agreement promotes, amongst
others, the importance of improving working conditions by helping to avoid and reduce stress
and psychological pressures)17.
17
Andrea Broughton, Steel giant and union sign international health and safety agreement. Eurofound (2013)
21
DRAFT DOCUMENT
National contexts for the prevention of psychosocial risks at work and work-related stress
As is often the case in the European Union, differing national situations can be observed amongst
Member States. Although the spirit of the Directive is intended to be common to all Member States,
its transposition and implementation may vary from one country to the next.
Against this background, there is no single way of approaching psychosocial risks. The 2012 SLIC
Campaign report states that “all countries cover psychosocial risks by the main act on occupational
safety and health. In many countries, the act only states that the legislation covers all risks, without
mentioning psychosocial risks. In some countries, psychosocial risks are mentioned or regulated in an
act or secondary legislation.”
Below are some examples based upon national legal frameworks:
-
Countries like Luxembourg, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Spain decided not to mention
18
psychosocial risks specifically in their regulation .
-
In Italy, the European framework agreement on work-related stress was accepted
voluntarily by the social partners in 2008. Hence, the regulatory framework for health and
safety in the workplace established by Legislative Decree 81/2008 highlighted the obligation
to assess work-related stress in companies. To support companies in assessing work-related
stress risks, methodological guidelines have been developed.
-
In France, the inter-professional social partners signed a national agreement, transposing
the European framework agreement on work-related stress in 2008. The agreement defines
the concept of stress and focuses on issues such as work organisation and subjective factors.
Employers are given the responsibility for deciding the appropriate measures to prevent
stress.
Since, psychosocial risks became a priority on the national agenda (despite the fact that they
are not legally defined). As such, the collective bargaining process on work-related stress,
violence and harassment was speeded-up by the government. The labour inspectorate was
also asked to monitor the impact of restructuring processes on mental health. More
recently, in 2013, the social partners signed an inter-professional agreement on the quality
of work life.
-
According to the German Occupational Safety and Health Act, the employer is obligated to
realize a risk and strain assessment for every workplace and to analyse all factors that could
affect the workplace and the working conditions. However, there are no specific legal
regulations on work-related stress and/or mental workload in Germany. “In the absence of a
binding legal obligation, voluntary activities take place in the context of workplace health
promotion, mainly in larger enterprises. As a part of the New Quality of Work Initiative, the
German Government has created a network wherein various partners provide recent
research results, recommendations and examples of good practice on the prevention of
”19
work-related stress . “The social health insurance funds have played a significant role in
improving the mental health of the workforce by solely implementing a national framework
20
for workplace mental health promotion and prevention” . In 2014, the Labour Ministry
18
Cfr “Psychosocial risks in Europe: Prevalence and strategies for prevention”, 2014 (EU-OSHA and Eurofound)
19
WHO, Country Profile of Occupational Health System in Germany. 2012.
Eurogip.
20
22
DRAFT DOCUMENT
commissioned an in-depth study on work-related stress. The study could pave the way for a
so-called "anti-stress act".
21
-
In Belgium, a law on well-being at work exists since 1999. In 2014, a new legislation defines
the scope of psychosocial risks and states that companies must take measures to prevent
them (e.g. internal procedures for intervention when employees are suffering from violence,
harassment, stress, and burn-out).
-
In Croatia, a new law on occupational safety (OG 71/14) has been introduced in 2014 to
protect workers from psychosocial risks (stress) and psychophysiological strain at work. The
act introduces a general principle of risk prevention and protection of health at work. It
brings in rules on the elimination of risk factors, procedures for the training of workers and
21
procedures for providing information and consultation .
-
In Austria, the Employee Protection Act commits the employers to systematically establish,
assess and document in writing all hazards and health implications existing for all
employees. On the basis of the results, suitable measures for the prevention of hazards shall
be determined and implemented. A 2013 amendment of the Act stipulates that enterprises
have to evaluate psychological stress at the workplace, in addition to physical stress.
source: EurWork Observatory (Eurofound website)
23
DRAFT DOCUMENT
What can be done?
Preventing psychosocial risks at work
1. Prevention principles
The main aims of the 1989 EU Framework Directive on health & safety at work are (Rouilleault &
Rochefort, 2005):
to introduce prevention approaches in terms of objectives and methods, with a view to
adapting work to humans rather than vice-versa;
to give priority to primary prevention;
to develop risk assessment as a basis for prevention plans;
to discuss such subjects within workers’ representative bodies.
The main steps of any prevention process can be visualised as follows:
24
DRAFT DOCUMENT
2. Asses - Identification of risk factors
In terms of prevention, addressing psychosocial risks involves identifying risk factors stemming from
work organisation, work-related social relations and the conditions of employment, and to which
workers are exposed, with a view to coming up with alternatives reducing or even suppressing
exposure, rather than waiting for the first symptoms or diseases to appear.
Preparing for the assessment is a vital step of the whole process, as it establishes the foundations. To
be effective, the assessment and subsequent prevention processes need to be planned as a project.
One of the first tasks of the project team is to define the precise objectives of the overall process
and those of the assessment. All this information is necessary, in particular for choosing the right
investigation methods and for assessing the opportuneness of engaging an external expert.
Building a psychosocial risks map - checklist
Main categories of indicators?
Indicators constitute an essential element in setting up an assessment and a warning system.
Their choice is never neutral. For more clarity, we need to distinguish between three overall
types of indicator:
-
Indicators reflecting perceptions on what has actually been experienced.
These provide an indispensable subjective dimension when looking at any work situation.
For example, the levels of social support at work, the psychological demand of the task,
etc. Indicators in this category can be assessed on a questionnaire-based approach. In
doing so, it is important to refer to scientifically validated models.
-
Indicators reflecting how a company is functioning.
These can directly or indirectly constitute warning signals. A few examples:
o Indicators related to working time (e.g. absenteeism rate, actual hours worked,
untaken leave, amount of time for training, atypical working hours, etc.) ;
o Staff movements (e.g. frequency of job changes, turnover, etc.)
o Labour relations (e.g. the functioning of representative bodies, social movements,
disciplinary sanctions)
-
Indicators reflecting occupational health.
o Work-related accidents and occupational diseases (e.g. number, frequency rate,
severity rate, etc.)
o Worsening situations (e.g. internal and external acts of verbal abuse and physical
violence, harassment, suicide or attempted suicide, etc.)
o Symptoms or diseases linked to psychosocial risks (e.g. cardiovascular disorders,
MSDs, burn-out)
25
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Investigation methods?
Once the indicators have been established, the next step involves identifying the risk factors. This
can be done in different ways, as there are several investigation and analysis methods available:
- Group and/or individual interviews
- Observations of work situations,
Questionnaire-based surveys,
- Presentations at meetings, etc.
Though defining indicators is a very useful way of identifying phenomena and measuring trends over
time, it is important to approach their use pragmatically and not to overdo things. Numerous studies
have shown that collecting too many indicators, often without meaning for employees but soaking up
an increasing share of the energy and time of those responsible for them, can in itself be a cause of
psychosocial risks!
Though the questionnaire approach may seem relatively easy to implement, experience shows that
non-respect of the methodological precautions listed below can lead to deceptive or unusable results.
A questionnaire is not a miraculous tool permitting to respond to everything. It only makes true sense
if it’s integrated into a global approach, based on working hypotheses that can be validated or
invalidated.
3. Prevent – defining actions
By identifying the specificities of imbalances that exist within the organisation of work, areas of
leverage for taking preventive action can be identified. Though it is legitimate wanting to deal with all
identified risk factors, priorities need to be set in order to agree on what to do first. This process
often leads to quite a long list of actions deemed able to improve psychosocial risk prevention.
However, this list must not be confused with an action plan.
Several questions need to be posed with regard to each measure proposed:
Is it urgent?
Is it important?
Is it easy to implement?
Do we have the means available to implement it?
Hence, there is a need for a social construction between the risk assessment and the prevention
plan to build an action plan in line with possibilities and accepted by all stakeholders. As such, the
approach can be seen as a project and a continuous improvement process.
With regard to prevention policies, a distinction is traditionally made between three different levels:
The purpose of primary protection is to eliminate risks at source (for example through
ergonomics, changes in work organisation, etc.);
26
DRAFT DOCUMENT
the aim of secondary prevention is to protect employees by helping them to cope with risk
exposure (for instance, via training in conflict management);
tertiary prevention (where the focus is more on containment) focuses on reducing
disabilities attributable to risks which individuals were unable / did not know how to avoid.
This involves individual or collective care of employees suffering from work-related disorders
(for instance psychological support schemes).
Generally speaking, experience shows that the effectiveness of prevention schemes is dependent on
the coherent interaction of these three forms of prevention. Discussion between the employer and
the workers’ representative bodies on the actions to be put in place should therefore include specific
attention to the coherent combination of these three levels. Obviously, the various stakeholders will
not always come up with the same answers to these questions. This means that a certain amount of
discussion is indispensable to define shared priorities.
4. Reassess – monitoring
The overall prevention process must include an evaluation of the action plan, allowing to measure
the effectiveness of implemented actions (and make adjustments).
The evaluation can be done on several levels:
Evaluating the action plan from the perspective of the objectives assigned to each
measure;
Evaluating the impact of the action plan on the risk levels;
Evaluating perceptions of how effective the action plan is;
Introducing an indicator-based tracking system to monitor progress.
27
DRAFT DOCUMENT
The role of EWCs and national workers’ representative
structures
We have seen that the EU Framework Directive specifies employer responsibility on health & safety
at work, and the mandatory nature of employee consultation, participation and training.
The importance of addressing occupational health issues in the various levels of industrial relations is
not to be underestimated. First of all, there is a clear mandate: improved working conditions appear
to be a priority in surveys asking workers about their expectations of trade unions. OSH topics, and
psychosocial risks and work-related stress in particular, are as such transnational in nature. Clearly,
the EWC has the right to take up its role.
Secondly, the main levers for action in terms of psychosocial risks are to be found within a company:
in how work is done and in labour relations. This puts the accent on the conditions of employment,
as well as organisational and relational factors, looking at them in relation to their possible effects on
health. Consequently, integrating the issue within the industrial relations allows coherence in
collectively assessing the various aspects and facilitates the participation of workers & their
representatives on the long term.
The more, the 2012 ESENER study (EU-OSHA) reveals that a positive effect of formal and direct
participation of workers can be observed on the management of occupational risks. Psychosocial
risks and work-related stress can be prevented and successfully managed, regardless of business size
or type.
Finally, European Works Councils (EWCs) are increasingly strategic crossroads of industrial relations
in transnational companies. As such, these bodies can support and/or complement local & national
representative structures to address work-related issues. The information and consultation rights
given to EWCs by the directive 2009/38/EC offer a basis to get involved.
As such, European Works Councils are a good way to address issues surrounding working
conditions and health and safety:
Transnational exchange between social partners on work-related issues is
easier, as the issues addressed frequently result in a consensus.
EWC action on these issues makes it easier for workers to understand the
Council’s activities, as they are based on tangible professional practices.
Exchanging good practices improves the support EWCs provide as a whole to
workers across sites.
Comparing better situations in other establishments may push employers to
take action.
28
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Some examples of what EWCs can do to tackle psychosocial risks and work-related
stress:
Take an active role in the definition of the EWC agenda in order to raise the
issues related to work-related stress and psychosocial risks.
Propose a training session on these issues for the EWC members.
Launch a working group on the topic of OSH, including psychosocial risks and
work-related stress.
Ask for periodic comparative data on occupational hazards in the different
countries, including work-related stress and psychosocial risk factors.
Require the assistance of external experts to take stock of the topic and/or to
conduct a specific project.
Ask for information on the risk assessments in the various countries, the
respective action plans and the evaluation of these actions.
Liaise with national representatives on these topics (e.g. via H&S Committees
and/or Safety reps)
Negotiate & sign agreements. Several EWCs have already initiated discussions
or agreed upon framework agreements, codes of conduct, etc.
Compare the coherence between internal communication on company values
and strategies & real life experiences of workers (e.g. HR, CSR, sustainability
policies, …)
Conduct surveys in the different sites/locations
Identify, discuss and share ‘good-practices’ within the company. Good
practices that work in one country can also work in another.
Urge for the need for action in specific locations / member states (e.g. in
response to a series of accidents at work, a high absenteeism rate, a lack of
local legal constraints, etc.)
Propose a shared approach with preventive actions across workplaces
….
29
DRAFT DOCUMENT
1. Main causes for not fully addressing the issue
The maturity of EWCs tends to spur on the development of practices in addressing OSH topics.
Nevertheless, it is a sad fact that within the nodes of European industrial relations, OSH issues are
seldom and scantily raised despite their importance to the staff of transnational companies. We can
identify the following causes:
Lack of awareness and competencies within EWCs
Occupational risks are approached in a fragmentary manner by various disciplines such as industrial
medicine, ergonomics, occupational psychology, etc. Often, OSH issues are looked upon “as a thing
of specialists”. As a result, EWC members might not dare to take up the issue. More often than not,
they have not received information and/or training on the importance of addressing employment
and its conditions through health & safety at work and working conditions. The poor performance of
prevention-related representation systems in companies without specific workers’ representation on
OSH clearly reflects this problem.22
The understanding of psychosocial risks and work-related stress might also suffer from some of the
false beliefs we mentioned in the first part of this document.
Collective training, through courses and seminars, is indispensable for the ability of EWC members to
give priority to and push through the improvement of work situations in the field. Although there are
no miracle solutions, workers representatives have a solid starting-point, which is that they enable
workers to have their say and do not let specialists take over the issues which relate to their health.
The EWC can give the company’s workers a collective voice across countries.
A taboo on psychosocial risks at work
Often, OSH topics are still perceived as mainly linked to physical risks at work (e.g. noise, vibrations,
asbestos, etc.). Psychosocial risks and their effects might not be as visible and/or be seen in relation
with the work environment.
In some cases, despite awareness raising and training efforts, it might remain difficult to “break the
silence” and discuss topics like suffering and stress at work. Including workers’ representatives and
respective bodies is therefore important in facilitating a cultural transition towards raising and
addressing difficulties at the work place.
The more, in some companies, the term psychosocial risks is perceived as negative and therefore
banned from the enterprise’s vocabulary. However, this cannot be an excuse for not addressing the
causes behind psychosocial risks. For example, some companies prefer to classify their prevention
measures within a “well-being at work” or “sustainability” policy.
22
Cfr ESENER study, EU-OSHA
30
DRAFT DOCUMENT
The articulation between the various levels of workers’ representation on OSH
National, local and company specific variety and complexity sometimes increase the difficulty to
incorporate multi-facetted issues like psychosocial risks at work on transnational level. The more,
the representation channel on OSH might differ according to the country’s model of workers’
representation and participation. Mapping the Safety Rep organisations in the various countries
represented in the EWC is as such a prerequisite to
Firstly, identify relevant players (and contacts).
Secondly, to be able to gather information from the national level in preparation of
discussions within the EWC meeting.
For example, the existing models of legal representative bodies on occupational health &
safety in Europe might be visualized as follows23:
23
Agostini and Van Criekingen, Safety Reps project study report. Health, Safety and Risk Prevention: towards better
information, consultation and participation of workers within companies (2013).
31
DRAFT DOCUMENT
2. Benefits of addressing the issue
The existence of active EWCs with representatives working on health and safety can make the
difference between a company officially and routinely applying rules, and genuine protection &
prevention. The more, addressing these issues transnationally also supports the EWC’s collective
action.
Example - the EWC of Orange Group (France Telecom)
What?
Upon request of the EWC, a study on psychosocial risks amongst all employees of the group was
conducted in over 16 countries.
Implication of a working group in drafting a questionnaire and analysing the survey results
Presentation of the results and findings to the
subsidiaries
management of all involved national
Benefits?
Putting psychosocial risks on the Group’s agenda
Comparative assessment across countries
Increased understanding of national representative systems
Useful elements for collective bargaining at national level
Example - EWC of Philip Morris International
What?
Following questions by representatives of one country, the EWC decided to invite three experts on
work-related stress to their next meeting. The experts came and participated in a panel discussion
with the EWC.
Benefits?
Increased knowledge on work-related stress within the EWC
Insights on what is happening in the various factories and countries
Ever since, work-related stress is on the EWC agenda as a regular topic
32
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Example - joint project of EWCs in industrial sector (UNI Europa)
What?
Seven EWCs from the same sector took part in a EU-funded project launched by UNI Europa.
Administration of a questionnaire, a joint seminar and company visits
Benefits?
Sharing of existing tools and solutions (mutualisation)
Transnational monitoring of national actions (and their results) by defining shared indicators
Increased awareness of OSH challenges
Example - EWC of Allianz SE
What?
Signature of a company agreement between the EWC and management to launch a joint and durable
action against stress at work in the national subsidiaries of the European Union, Switzerland and EEA
contracting parties.
Benefits?
It officially puts the fight against stress and its impact at the centre of Allianz SE's health
prevention priorities
Creation of pan-European guidelines on work-related stress
For two years, each subsidiary will have to develop a local anti-stress strategy before doing a
report at group level
Example - EWC of Michelin
What?
Signature of a European Framework agreement on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) negotiated
with the extended EWC bureau and validated by the plenary body. In addition to general prevention
and specific actions in terms of chemical risks and ergonomics, the agreement contains provisions to
identify stress, harassment and all forms of violence, and provisions to prevent addictive behaviours.
Benefits?
Applies within the scope of 14 countries and will run for 3 years
CSR agreement linking economic, social and OSH issues
33
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Annexes
1. Bibliography
Agostini, Michel and Van
Criekingen, Liesbeth
Safety Reps project study report. Health, Safety and
Risk Prevention: towards better information,
consultation and participation of workers within
companies.
SECAFI (Paris) and
ETUC / ETUI (Brussels)
2013
Agostini, Michel; Bauchiere,
Didier; Beaufort, Philippe;
Montreuil, Elodie; Van
Criekingen, Liesbeth and
Weingarten, Jörg
Industrial relation practices related to psychosocial
constraints at work in the steel sector
European Foundation
for the Improvement
of Living and Working
Conditions (Dublin)
2013
Agostini, Michel; Bourdeleau,
Christophe; Mouret, Brigitte
and Van Criekingen, Liesbeth
PSR Rail. A guide to identifying and preventing
psychosocial risks at work in the railway sector
EVA (Berlin)
2013
Austrian institute for empirical
social studies (IFES)
The Austrian employee health monitor survey
(Arbeitsgesundheitsmonitor).
Bechter, Barbara; Brandl,
Bernd; and Meardi, Guglielmo
From national to sectoral industrial relations:
developments in sectoral industrial relations in the
EU
Broughton, Andrea
Steel giant and union sign international health and
safety agreement.
Buffet, Marie-Amélie; Gervais,
Roxane; Liddle,Mark; and
Eeckelaert, Lieven
Well-being at work: creating a positive work
environment. Literature Review.
BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME,
CEEP and ETUC
Framework agreement on work-related stress
European Social
Dialogue (Brussels)
2004
BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME,
CEEP and ETUC
Framework agreement on harassment and violence
at work
European Social
Dialogue (Brussels)
2007
Clot, Yves
Le travail à cœur : pour en finir avec les risques
psychosociaux
La Découverte (Paris)
2010
Impact of restructuring on health and safety and
quality of work life. Psychosocial risks.
K.U. Leuven. Higher
institute of labour
studies (Leuven)
2009
Beacons of excellence in stress prevention
Health and Safety
Executive (HSE)
2003
EFFAT
2014
Di Nunzio, Daniele; Hohnen,
Pernille; Hasle, Peter; Torvatn,
Hans and Øyum, Lisbeth
Dr. Joe Jordan, Emma Gurr,
Gordon Tinline, Dr. Sabir Giga,
Dr. Brian Faragher, Prof. Cary
Cooper
Psychosocial risks and work-related stress. Practical
guidelines for EWC Members and Trade Union
Officers.
Presentation "Working together for risk prevention:
European Agency for Safety
What can ESENER tell us about management
and Health at Work (EU-OSHA)
leadership and worker participation?"
European Commission
Investing in well-being at work: addressing
(Directorate-General for
psychosocial risks in times of change
Employment, Social Affairs and
EFFAT
Chamber of Labour of
the province of Upper
Austria (AK OÖ) Vienna
European Foundation
for the Improvement
of Living and Working
Conditions (Dublin)
European Foundation
for the Improvement
of Living and Working
Conditions (Dublin)
European Agency for
Safety and Health at
Work (Bilbao)
European Agency for
Safety and Health at
Work (Bilbao)
Publications Office of
the European Union
(Luxembourg)
2009
2011
2013
2013
2012
2010
34
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Inclusion)
European Commission
(Directorate-General for
Internal Policies)
Occupational Health Concerns: Stress-Related and
Psychological Problems Associated with Work
Publications Office of
the European Union
(Luxembourg)
European Council
Council Directive of 12 June 1989 on the
introduction of measures to encourage
improvements in the safety and health of workers
at work (89/391/EEC)
European Council
(Brussels)
Flintrop, Julia; Vargas, Oscar
and others
Psychosocial risks in Europe: Prevalence and
strategies for prevention. Joint project between
EU-OSHA and Eurofound.
Publications Office of
the European Union
(Luxembourg)
Gollac, Michel
Mesurer les facteurs psychosociaux de risque au
Ministère du travail,
travail pour les maîtriser - Rapport du Collège
de l'emploi et de la
d'expertise sur le suivi des risques psychosociaux au
santé (Paris)
travail
2011
Hassard, Juliet; Teoh, Kevin;
Cox, Tom; and others
Calculating the cost of work-related stress and
psychosocial risks. European Risk Observatory.
Literature Review
European Agency for
Safety and Health at
Work (Bilbao)
2014
International Labour
Organization (ILO)
Emerging risks and new patterns of prevention in a
changing world of work
ILO (Geneva)
2010
Kieselbach, Thomas
(coordinator)
Health in Restructuring (HIRES) report. Innovative
approaches and policy recommendations.
IPG (Bremen)
2008
Lohmann-Haislah, A.
Stressreport Deutschland 2012. Psychische
Anforderungen, Ressourcen und Befinden.
Matrix
Milczarek, Malgorzata and
Irastorza, Xabier (editors)
Economic analysis of workplace mental health
promotion and mental disorder prevention
programmes and of their potential contribution to
EU health, social and economic policy objectives
Drivers and barriers for psychosocial risk
management: an analysis of the findings of the
European Survey of Enterprises on New and
Emerging Risks (ESENER) : report
Bundesanstalt für
Arbeitsschutz und
Arbeitsmedizin
(Dortmund)
European Commission
and Executive Agency
for Health and
Consumers (Brussels)
2013
1989
(amended in
2003, 2007
and 2008)
2014
2012
2013
European Agency for
Safety and Health at
Work (Bilbao)
2013
Montreuil, Elodie
Prévenir les risques psychosociaux. Des outils pour
agir sur la pénibilité et préserver la santé au travail.
Collection: Fonctions
de l'entreprise, Dunod
(Paris)
2011
Paris, Jean-Jacques and Van
Criekingen, Liesbeth
European Works Councils (EWCs) as drivers of
working conditions and occupational health and
safety
ETUC (Brussels)
2014
Job strain as a risk factor for future coronary heart
disease: Collaborative metaanalysis of 2358 events
in 197,473 men and women.
The Lancet. Volume
380, No. 9852, p1491–
1497, 27 October 2012
2012
Changer le travail … oui mais ensemble
ANACT (Lyon)
2005
Sahler, Benjamin; Dubois,
Amandine; Journoud,
Ségolène; and Pelletier, Julien
A guide to the business case for mental health
European Network for
Workplace Health
Promotion (ENWHP)
2009
The Committee of Senior
Labour Inspectors (SLIC)
Psychosocial risk Assessments. SLIC Inspection
Campaign 2012. Final report
SLIC
2012
Trontin, Christian
Coût du stress : enjeux et évaluation. Présentation
faite aux Journées de la Prévention de l'INPES du 10
avril 2008 (Paris)
INRS (Paris)
2008
Prof Mika Kivimäki, Solja T
Nyberg, G. David Batty, and
others for the IPD-work
Consortium
Rouilleault, Henri and
Rochefort, Thierry
35
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Valérie Flohimont, Charlotte
Lambert, Joëlle Berrewaerts,
Sébastien Zaghdane, Martin
Desseilles and Aurore Füzfa
Guide pour la prévention des risques psychosociaux
au travail
SPF Emploi, Travail et
Concertation sociale
(Brussels)
2013
Van Gyes, Guy and Szeker, Lise Impact of the crisis on working conditions in Europe
European Foundation
for the Improvement
of Living and Working
Conditions (Dublin)
2013
Walters, David ; Wadsworth,
Emma ; Marsh, Katie
Worker representation and consultation on health
and safety: an analysis of the findings of the
European Survey of Enterprises on New and
Emerging Risks (ESENER)
European Agency for
Safety and Health at
Work (Bilbao)
2012
WHO
Country Profile of Occupational Health System in
Germany
The WHO European
Centre for
Environment and
Health (Bonn)
2012
36
DRAFT DOCUMENT
2. Glossary
Psychosocial risks at work enclose a variety of terms and concepts. Below definitions may facilitate a
shared understanding of these elements in the scope of an efficient social dialogue.
Definitions
are
based
upon
the
EU-OSHA
(www.osha.europa.eu),
Eurofound
(http://www.eurofound.europa.eu) and INRS (www.inrs.fr) websites.
Psychosocial risks at work
The majority of guides or texts presenting psychosocial risks often define them via their consequences (workrelated stress, violence at work, work-related exhaustion, suicide in connection with work, etc.). The reference
definition of psychosocial risks we propose is that from the report of the French expert panel chaired by Michel
Gollac (2011):
“What makes a work-related health risk into a psychosocial risk is not its manifestation, but its origin:
psychosocial risks will be defined as risks for mental, physical and social health, caused by conditions of
employment and organisational and relational factors likely to interact with mental functioning”.
This definition puts the accent on the conditions of employment, as well as organisational and relational
factors, looking at them in relation to their possible effects on health. The term ‘psychosocial risk’ thus does
not relate to symptoms, disorders or diseases.
Work-related stress
People experience stress when they perceive that there is an imbalance between the demands made of them
and the resources they have available to cope with those demands. Although the experience of stress is
psychological, stress also affects people’s physical health. Stressful situations lasting for long periods always
take their toll on the health of the individuals subject to it. They also have negative repercussions on the
functioning of organisations (staff turnover, lost working days, loss of quality in production, a lack of motivation
among teams, etc.).
Some people may -wrongly- believe that “good stress” enables employees to give their best, while “bad stress”
makes them ill. However, from a scientific point of view, there is no such thing as good or bad stress. Not only
researchers but also many OSH experts or social partners support this idea, which is also made clear in the
European Framework agreement on work-related stress. Stress is a phenomenon under which the body has to
adjust to an environmental factor. Nevertheless a distinction needs to be made between “acute stress” and
“chronic stress”, as these have different effects on health.
•
•
Acute stress is what we experience when our body reacts to a threat or an ad hoc situation (having to
speak in front of an audience, changing jobs, an unexpected situation, etc.). When the situation comes
to an end, the stress symptoms end soon afterwards.
By contrast, chronic stress represents our body's response to a long-term stress situation: every day at
work, we feel that what is being demanded of us exceeds our capabilities. Chronic stress always has
harmful effects of health.
37
DRAFT DOCUMENT
Reactions to the same circumstances vary between individuals. Some people can cope better with high
demands than others. It is the individual’s subjective evaluation of their situation that is important. It is not
possible to determine from the situation alone the amount of stress it may cause.
Harassment and work-related violence
Offensive remarks, insinuations, humiliation or bullying, insults, sexual innuendo, acts of violence, unjustified
criticism, side-lining, …. The list of acts of violence that can occur within a company is long. These acts can be
exercised by a certain individual or a group, with or without a managerial role, against a single or several
employees.
Harassment (also known as bullying, mobbing, or psychological violence) refers to repeated, unreasonable
behaviour directed towards an employee, or group of employees, aimed at victimising, humiliating,
undermining or threatening the harassed person. Harassment can also take place on a more organised basis, as
part of a company's management policy.
Internal conflicts, non-regulated disagreements at work are not to be equated with harassment.
Harassment can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder, loss of self-esteem, anxiety, depression, apathy,
irritability, memory disorders, sleep disorders and problems with digestion, and even suicide. Symptoms may
persist for years after experiencing harassment. At the organisational level, harassment can result in increased
absenteeism and staff turnover, and reduced effectiveness and productivity. Legal damages arising from
harassment cases can also be high.
Burn-out
Burn-out, originally identified among the nursing and support staff, can affect all professions requiring intense
personal commitment. Preventive measures must prevent a worsening of the health of people already
threatened by exhaustion and, at the same time, prevent further cases occurring.
Burn-out is a set of consecutive reactions to situations of chronic work-related stress. It is characterised by 3
dimensions:
•
•
•
Emotional exhaustion: a feeling of being emotionally overextended (“drained” or “gutted”),
Depersonalisation or cynicism: an anomaly of self-awareness. It consists of a feeling of watching
oneself act, while having no control over a situation. Relations with users, customers, patients, etc.
become depersonalised,
A feeling of non-accomplishment: a feeling of not being able to meet up to the expectations of those
around us, withdrawal, a negative attitude to our work results, etc.
A number of occupations require a high level of personal and emotional investment. Employees working in
such occupations can be affected by the risk of a burnout when they start feeling too large a gap between their
expectations, the picture they have of their work (painted in values and rules) and work reality. This situation,
which exhausts them and “emotionally” drains them, leaves them questioning their initial investment.
38
DRAFT DOCUMENT
EFFAT
EFFAT is the European Federation of Trade Unions in the Food, Agriculture and Tourism sectors resulting from a
merger concluded between two European trade union federations - the ECF-IUF and EFA - on 11 December 2000. As a
European Federation representing 120 national trade unions from 35 European countries, EFFAT defends the interests
of more than 2.6 million members towards the European Institutions, European industrial federations and enterprise
management
www.effat.org
SECAFI
SECAFI is part of the French Groupe Alpha. It specializes in industrial relations, socio-economic and strategic analysis,
organizational reviews, occupational safety and health and working conditions. Established in 1983, the company
provides expertise, training and consulting to the social partners. SECAFI has the goal of looking for new balances
within enterprises by bringing all technical skills to bear to enrich social dialogue.
www.secafi.com
39