Is Mental Health Really a Workplace Risk?

Workplace mental health is a touchy topic for everyone. One of the biggest barriers to progress in this area is a fundamental lack of agreement on whether or not mental health really should be considered a workplace risk. Introducing mental health and psychosocial risk management into the workplace raises a ton of questions, most of which we don’t have the answers to. When a problem seems so tangly, it’s often easier to try and avoid it (a typical method of coping). Here are three reasons why we’re so conflicted when it comes to managing mental health risks:

1. We’re all still learning: Managing psychosocial risks requires learning new information and acquiring new skills. Most leaders aren’t ready for this additional burden and their organizations haven’t developed systems to support their learning journey.
2. It challenges our ethics: It’s tough staying neutral on this topic and at some point, it requires internal reflection to understand what we believe to be true about not only mental health but also our role in managing risks and the roles of other careholders.
3. The expectations aren’t clear: There are a lot of mixed messages being sent. Canada developed a national standard for managing psychosocial risk in the workplace but then made it voluntary. Employers are being held accountable for mental health injuries, but occupational health and safety legislation doesn’t provide clear requirements.

Let’s break down a few of those tangles by exploring these reasons in more depth.

We’re All Still Learning

Although the concept of workplace mental health isn’t new, it’s certainly become more prevalent over the past decade. We’ve all been on a steep learning curve trying to understand what it means both in theory and in practice. One thing we know is that tackling poor mental health is a shared responsibility between workers and employers[1].

For workers, this has meant more focus on individual resiliency and the adoption of healthier coping mechanisms. Although these are good practices, they’re overly relied upon as mitigations[2].

For leaders, it’s meant trying to understand the right approach for themselves and their organizations. Research tells us how important it is to have clear leadership and expectations when it comes to psychosocial risk[3]. While leaders have expressed concern over the state of workers’ wellness, they also have indicated that they are uncertain about their role and the role of organizations when it comes to managing this type of threat[4]. In the face of uncertainty, many employers choose to do nothing.

As government and industry organizations grapple with the evolving landscape of workplace mental health, their primary approach has been one of influence rather than enforcement.

Check out the research report by Dr. Joti Samra for a thorough review of The Evolution of Workplace Mental Health in Canada.

It Challenges Our Ethics

Traditionally, employers have focused on finding physical hazards in the workplace—a fairly straightforward task. Incorporating psychosocial risk management means identifying nonphysical threats that are inherently subjective. That subjectivity leads to questions of ethics[5].

We often hear of privacy as a relevant ethical concern, and it is. But the ethics I’m talking about here are the ones we hold personally. It’s these ethics that are truly shaping our approach to workplace mental health. What do you believe is the right thing when it comes to managing psychosocial risks in the workplace? Do you believe this as a worker? A leader? As a member of the community? How does your perspective change when you’re in a different role?

During my research on psychosocial risk in Canada’s construction and extractive industries, I heard first-hand from workers who preferred harm over change. It’s a common theme in research and often stems from the pride a worker feels in being ‘strong’ enough to overcome the challenges of the workplace[6]. Our organizational cultures are deeply ingrained in us and the prospect of changing those cultures may be unsettling.

The Expectations Aren’t Clear

At the end of the day, it’s employers who are responsible for implementing psychosocial risk management practices. When something goes wrong, it’s employers who pay the fines. However, employers take their cues from government, industry, workers, the public, and other groups. So far, the messaging isn’t too clear.

While Canada has been recognized as having one of the best workplace mental health standards globally https://mentalhealthcommission.ca/national-standard/, it is voluntary and few organizations have fully implemented it[7]. Provincial occupational health and safety legislation is nearly silent on the topic of risk management for psychosocial risk. Instead, there is an assumption that psychosocial hazards will get picked up as part of the general requirement for employers to identify and mitigate hazards.

Summary

It’s no wonder many people are feeling a bit overwhelmed when it comes to workplace mental health. Addressing mental health risks is challenging for every stakeholder because we are all individual people trying to figure things out. There’s a slew of ethical dilemmas that are politically charged and the expectations are a bit fuzzy. So, let’s break it down together! Your thoughts on this mental health puzzle matter, and it’s a conversation that needs all of us.

---

[1] Asare-Doku, W., Rich, J., Kelly, B., & James, C. (2020). Mental health interventions in the mining industry: A narrative review. Mental Health Review Journal, 25(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/mhrj-10-2019-0039

[2] London, K., Meade, T., & McLachlan, C. (2022). Healthier construction: Conceptualising transformation of mental health outcomes through an integrated supply chain model. Sustainability, 14(15), 9460. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159460

[3] Derdowski, L., & Mathisen, G. (2023). Psychosocial factors and safety in high-risk industries: A systematic literature review. Safety Science, 157, 105948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105948

[4] Kunyk, D., Craig-Broadwith, M., Morris, H., Diaz, R., Reisdorfer, E., & Wang, JianLi. (2016). Employers’ perceptions and attitudes toward the Canadian national standard on psychological health and safety in the workplace: A qualitative study. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 44(2016), 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.08.030

[5] Doorn, N. (2015). The blind spot in risk ethics: Managing natural hazards. Risk Analysis, 35(3), 354–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12293

[6] Dorow, S., O’Leary, V., Hilario, C., Cherry, N., Daigle, A., Kelly, G., Lindquist, K., Garcia, M. M., & Shmatko, I. (2021). Mobile work and mental health: A preliminary study of fly-in fly-out workers in the Alberta oil sands. University of Alberta. https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-yqtg-m927

[7] Sheikh, M. S., Smail-Crevier, R., & Wang, J. (2018). A cross-sectional study of the awareness and implementation of the National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace in Canadian employers. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 63(12), 842–850. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743718772524