An Evaluation of the Policy Context on Psychosocial Risks and Mental Health in the Workplace in the European Union: Achievements, Challenges, and the Future

Abstract

Despite the developments both in hard and soft law policies in the European Union in relation to mental health and psychosocial risks in the workplace, a review of these policies at EU level has not been conducted to identify strengths, weaknesses, and gaps to be addressed in the future. Keeping in mind that the aim should be to engage employers in good practice, ideally such policies should include key definitions and elements of the psychosocial risk management process, covering risk factors, mental health outcomes, risk assessment and preventive actions, or interventions. The current paper aims to fill this gap by reviewing hard and soft law policies on mental health in the workplace and psychosocial risks applicable at EU level and conducting a gap analysis according to a set of dimensions identified in models of good practice in this area. Our review of ninety-four policies in total revealed several gaps, especially in relation to binding in comparison to nonbinding policies. These are discussed in light of the context of policy-making in the EU, and recommendations are offered for future actions in this area.

Atipični rad - izazovi zaštite od psihosocijalnih rizika i stresa na radu i u vezi s radom

“…3., dalje u tekstu: OS). Riječ je o negativnom iskustvu koje nastaje kao rezultat izloženosti lošim uvjetima rada (psihosocijalnim i/ili fizičkim); (Leka et al, 2015;WHO, 2008: 1). Rezultat je različitih čim-benika, a usko je povezan s izlaganjem psihosocijalnim rizicima koji su njegov uzrok, a s kojima se često pogrešno poistovjećuje (Leka et al, 2015: 63d).…”

“…Svi poslodavci složit će se s tezom da je za uspjeh i kompetitivnost važno dobro upravljanje poduzećem i rizicima poslovanja. No, kada je riječ o upravljanju psihosocijalnim rizicima, poslodavci ga još uvijek ne prepoznaju kao prioritetni problem, možda i zato što su troškovi koji nastaju kao rezultat stresa i s time povezanih zdravstvenih problema nevidljivi neizravni troškovi (Leka, 2015., Ertel et al, 2010. Zato se s pravom postavlja pitanje jesu li instrumenti i pristup ovom problemu, dakle postojeći pravni okvir i soft law pristup kroz socijalni dijalog prikladni i učinkoviti (Ertel et al, 2010: 170).…”

Prévenir les risques psychosociaux : une étude des perceptions et des pratiques des employeurs

“…La présente publication s'inscrit dans un projet de recherche sur l'intervention des inspecteurs du travail dans le champ des risques psychosociaux au travail (RPS), c'est-à-dire les « risques pour la santé mentale, physique et sociale, engendrés par les conditions d'emploi et les facteurs organisationnels et relationnels susceptibles d'interagir avec le fonctionnement mental » (Gollac, 2012 : 31). Un nombre croissant de gouvernements développent des programmes de prévention de ces risques; ces interventions ont fait l'objet de diverses études, qui montrent un écart entre les politiques et les pratiques (Langenhan, Leka et Jain, 2013;Leka et al, 2011;Leka et al, 2015;Lippel et Quinlan, 2011;Weissbrodt et Giauque, 2017;Zoni et Lucchini, 2012). En effet, les RPS sont plus difficiles à réguler que d'autres risques professionnels (Bruhn et Frick, 2011), notamment parce que leur résolution peut interférer avec les prérogatives du management en matière d'organisation.…”

Psychosocial risk management: calamity or opportunity?

“…According to this perspective, efforts to tackle mental ill health should not focus on particular problems in isolation (such as depression for example which appears to currently be high on the agenda of national, European and international policy makers) but should seek to put in place policies and practices that seek to tackle a wide range of risk factors to mental 2 health through appropriate interventions. These should prioritise prevention and tackling problems at source while also developing awareness and skills, and facilitating treatment and rehabilitation (8).…”

“…Recent reports for example on trade unions and inspectorates show confusion both in terms of key definitions and awareness of coverage of these issues in health and safety legislation (10). For example, the term 'psychosocial risk' is often being confused with that of 'work-related stress'; and the relevance of key EU directives and national legislation to these issues is being questioned (8,9). Furthermore, the perspective of occupational health services has traditionally been 'reactive', supporting individuals and organisations deal with problems they experience, and not designing a work environment that will prevent them from occurring (11).…”