Risk assessment of psychological stress: how businesses put it into practice

Since October 2013, the Occupational Health and Safety Act (Arbeitsschutzgesetz) has explicitly named psychological stress at work as a source of hazards (§ 5 Abs. 3 Nr. 6 ArbSchG). Nevertheless, it is missing from many risk assessments or appears there only as a heading. This stands out during company inspections by the employers' liability insurance association (Berufsgenossenschaft) or the trade supervisory authority (Gewerbeaufsicht).

Part of the normal risk assessment

The law does not require a separate risk assessment solely for psychological stress. The recommendations of the Joint German Occupational Safety and Health Strategy (Gemeinsame Deutsche Arbeitsschutzstrategie, GDA), most recently in the 4th edition of 2022, see it as part of the normal assessment covering all hazards of an activity. The employer remains responsible. They may appoint reliable and competent persons in writing (§ 13 Abs. 2 ArbSchG). The works council or staff council has co-determination rights in how it is carried out.

Psychological stress is meant in a neutral sense here: all external influences that act on a person. It becomes a problem when it leads to fatigue, stress or, in the long term, illness.

The six areas of work design

The GDA recommendations assign the influences arising from work to six areas:

• Work content and tasks, such as scope for decision-making, completeness of the task, emotional demands
• Work organisation, such as work intensity, interruptions, unclear responsibilities
• Working hours
• Social relationships with colleagues and supervisors
• Work equipment
• Working environment, for example noise, lighting, cramped conditions

According to the recommendations, the factors relevant across all sectors are above all work intensity, working hours, scope for decision-making, social relationships and noise.

Seven steps

The process is the same as for any risk assessment: define work areas and activities, identify and assess hazards, define and implement measures, check their effectiveness and update the assessment. Where working conditions are similar, assessing one workplace or activity is sufficient.

For identifying hazards, the recommendations name employee surveys, observation interviews and moderated workshops. Which method is suitable depends on the size of the company and its experience. In small businesses, a workshop with a suitable tool is often enough; larger ones combine a survey and a workshop.

Measures that address working conditions take priority over those that only aim to change employees' behaviour. Better staff planning at peak times is generally more effective than a stress management seminar. Under § 6 ArbSchG, the result of the assessment, the measures defined and the result of their review must be documented. Reasons for an update include restructuring, reports of overload or a conspicuous accumulation of complaints.