The challenge in addressing psychosocial hazards at work comes not from the dangers posed but from the executives’ willingness to change. Recently, David Burroughs reflected on his years of advising executives on this hazard. Burroughs’ experience of corporate responses to workplace bullying is indicative of the challenge of organisational change.
Lisa Leong has followed up her This Working Life podcast with a more detailed look at the practicalities of addressing work-related psychosocial hazards with Dr Laura Kirby. It is worth listening to, but there is a term repeated in the podcast that needs examining – “leader”.
The Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) legislation states that employers must eliminate hazards as far as is reasonably practicable. If you start your safety journey from this point, you will forever be frustrated in your OHS achievements and disappointed in your job. OHS may be forever linked with laws and regulations, but the safety and health of ourselves, colleagues and others is based on our personal moral code and the values we bring to our actions. OHS satisfaction comes from accepting that OHS laws are only part of our purpose
Earlier this week, the Institute for Safety Compensation and Recovery Research (ISCRR) conducted a seminar called “Using Biopsychosocial Risk Profiling to Inform Claim Triage“. Workers’ compensation claims are not a focus for this blog, but attending events peripheral to one’s own discipline sometimes enlightens. There were a couple of moments when the occupational health and safety (OHS) approach came up in discussion.
It is clear from the emails I have received, as well as many of the comments on LinkedIn and other social media platforms, that the modern role of Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) remains a contentious issue, as discussed below. One of the many issues, young workers’ perceptions of EAP, was addressed by Alena Titterton of Johnson Winter Slattery, who provides an important and different perspective on who uses EAPs:
This week, a colleague shared with me some bizarre experiences he had while negotiating with his company’s Employee Assistance Program (EAP) provider for basic data. It reminded me of the EAP role in preventing and managing psychosocial hazards at work. Australia’s psychological health regulations appear to have placed the EAP industry in a state of confusion and transition, which warrants consideration and the perpetual questioning of the effectiveness of EAPs. It may be that the days of the EAP, as traditionally configured, are over.
The 2nd (annual) psych health and safety conference commenced with what was almost a summary of the current play in the workplace psychosocial/psychological sphere. This year, the venue is bigger, and the number of delegates in person and online appears much bigger. But the most significant feature is the blending of different disciplines under the psych tag.
Rob Briner kicked it off
