Mental stress and safety in the workplace

For a long time, only physical influences were considered to be work-related stress. It is only in recent years that more attention has been paid to psychological aspects.

Long-distance truck drivers complain more often than average about back problems, miners suffer (or even die) from dust lung. And in the days when there were neither bath covers nor extraction systems in electroplating plants, employees frequently contracted cancer.

The list has one thing in common. All the diseases mentioned affect the body. It was only in 2013 that the legislator included mental stress in paragraph 5, section 3 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. It states: "A hazard can arise in particular from

1. the design and equipment of the workplace and the workplace
2. physical, chemical and biological effects
3. the design, selection and use of work equipment, in particular working materials, machines, devices and systems, as well as the handling thereof
4. the design of work and production processes, work sequences and working hours and their interaction
5. inadequate qualification and instruction of employees
6. mental stress at work.

So much for the law. However, what is meant by "mental stress" was only defined in 2017 in DIN EN ISO 10075-1:2017, which states: "Mental stress is the totality of all detectable influences that come from outside and have a psychological effect on people."

However, a psychological influence can lead to fatigue and therefore reduced alertness. Monotony and mental exhaustion are just as negative. And all of this jeopardizes occupational safety. The employer is therefore obliged to minimize or even better eliminate any negative psychological factors at work.

Headaches are an effect of psychological stress (Photo: stock.adobe.com/peterschreiber.media)

However, the circle that developed the above definition attaches great importance to the fact that the word stress is to be understood neutrally. In this context, the term is considered neutral and value-free. In this respect, it differs from the use of the word in everyday life. If, however, the term stress is used in connection with psychological influences in the workplace, it should be understood as the immediate, not long-term effects of psychological stress on the individual. The individual coping strategy must then also be taken into account. This in turn can be both positive and negative.

Mental influences on employees change

Occupational psychologists generally view stress as a whole. Nevertheless, in the past, a number of specific components have been defined, differentiating between intensity, duration and, above all, composition (Table 1). The table classifies the psychological factors as their places of origin. It must be taken into account that working conditions and thus the influences on the employee change. The effects can therefore increase, decrease or disappear completely. However, a preliminary result of studies in this context has already shown that stress from the social sphere has been greatly underestimated to date, while there has long been a wealth of knowledge on human-technology interactions in the field of occupational safety. But how should psychological factors be assessed in the context of occupational safety? Unlike directly measurable physical or chemical influences, psychological influences have no measurable basis. The quality and quantity of the influences and whether their consequences are positive, negative or neutral can already be disputed. For some individuals, for example, difficult tasks lead to more motivation, for others to resignation or outright refusal. It would therefore be desirable to have an evaluation of the stress that could be worked out by the individual. For example, through threshold values. However, this idea is hardly practical.

So what methods are recommended in practice to identify and assess psychological factors and place them in the context of occupational safety? Psychologists recommend three main instruments here, namely workshops, observation interviews and employee surveys. Under certain circumstances, a mix of these three can also be useful. In each company and in each situation, a decision on the tool of choice should be made individually. It is clear that all of the methods mentioned have their strengths and weaknesses. For example, workshops are subject to group dynamic distortions, employee interviews can be subject to evaluation uncertainties or even errors and the results of employee surveys can be less meaningful due to different interpretations and perspectives of the interviewees.

In addition, paragraph 5, section 2 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act states that standard values for companies and workplaces are only possible in relation to similar working conditions. In the case of different working conditions, individual assessment standards must therefore be drawn up and enforced.

The financial and organizational requirements of the analyses are enormous

A general criticism is that none of these instruments provide starting points for concrete measures. In addition, many stresses are not even perceived as such, but have an unconsciously stressful effect on the employee. These could also be surveyed too generally and not in relation to the company in question or the actual working environment.

It is clear that an assessment of psychological factors in occupational health and safety is an almost impossible financial and organizational task, especially for small and medium-sized companies - and thus for the vast majority of electroplating companies. The group of people involved alone includes company doctors, occupational safety experts, psychologists, data protection specialists and supervisors. Every measure must be coordinated with the employer representatives, who must be involved.

Due to the difficult circumstances, the Joint German Occupational Safety and Health Strategy (GDA) has already compiled an inventory of all known (legal) texts on the subject in 2021 in the "Psyche" working group (Table 2). There are requirements to take mental work factors into account in several laws and standards. To name just a few:

• Occupational Health and Safety Act
• Workplace Ordinance
• Industrial Safety Ordinance
• Working Hours Act
• Maternity Protection Act.

All of this makes it clear that there is not just one affected area, but that the issue of mental health is a cross-industry problem with many different (stress) factors. Here are a few examples:

Occupational Health and Safety Act and Workplace Ordinance

They form the general basis for the employee's protection against stress factors and the employer's obligation to minimize or completely eliminate these factors. Prescribe risk assessments of workplaces and provide guidelines for the design of workplaces.

Working Hours Act

Prescribes mandatory breaks, limits working hours, provides for predictable time off for employees. There are regulations on night and shift work, work on Sundays and public holidays.

Maternity Protection Act

Contains all important regulations for the protection of pregnant women and their unborn children. The law provides clear guidelines on the design of the human-machine interface occupied by pregnant women. Rest periods are regulated, as is time off for medical prevention.