The research project ‘Psychosocial Risks and Mental Health of Employed Persons in the Post-Covid World of Work’ was carried out from November 2021 to December 2022. Its results were presented at the 19th International Conference in Commemoration of professor Marco Biagi ‘Work Beyond the Pandemic. Towards a Human-Centered Recovery’ on 26 May 2022, and published as a chapter in the book ‘Work Beyond the Pandemic. Towards a Human-Centred Recovery, London: Palgrave, 2023’.
Background and Research Objective
The digital transformation and new labour patterns, triggered also by the COVID-19 pandemic, led to additional or increased psychosocial risks and, as a consequence, to a significant rise in the number of mental disorders. These developments concern not only employees but also self-employed persons.
The goal of this project was to determine whether a systematic and holistic approach regarding the mental health and psychosocial risks of workers is already applied at EU level or follows from new regulatory initiatives. “Holistic approach” in this context is understood as the use of the full range of both direct and indirect measures aimed at guaranteeing mental health and the prevention of psychosocial risks at work. To this end, the regulatory acts as well as the recent legislative proposals at the European level concerning the regulation of working conditions, mental health, psychosocial risks and wellbeing at work are analysed. In addition, some proposals on the regulation of mental health and psychosocial risks at work in EU law are elaborated. The project takes an interdisciplinary approach focusing on the interrelation between labour and social law in consideration of numerous empirical studies.
Project Outcomes
As a result of the research project, the following outcomes can be stressed and proposals for future regulation in EU law be made.
Occupational health and safety (hereinafter – OSH) is one of the most comprehensively regulated fields of EU law. At the same time, EU legislation until now lacks a systematic and holistic approach concerning mental health at work and the prevention of psychosocial risks. Framework Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (hereinafter – the Framework Directive) was adapted in the 1990s, when the technical concept of OSH dominated. Although the Framework Directive addresses all risks, including psychosocial risks, EU law on psychosocial risks and mental health at work is still in its infancy. Furthermore, issues related to psychosocial risks and mental health at work are still mostly a subject of ineffective soft law regulatory instruments. EU law on OSH does not contain definitions of terms such as psychosocial risks, mental/psychosocial health, work-related stress, working life quality or well-being at work. As a result of the lack of uniform definitions at EU level, it is not possible to provide for overall protection measures against all risks and to develop an effective EU policy that would allow for the implementation of the Framework Directive in relation to psychosocial risks and for a harmonisation of national policies in this field.
Nevertheless, in the past years, the EU has recognised psychosocial risks to be among the main challenges for occupational health and safety management in the future. It remains to be seen whether and how soon the new initiatives and policy proposals will be translated into EU law.
Since the Framework Directive is not effective enough in regulating traditional as well as newly emerging psychosocial risks, e.g. related to AI, it has been proposed to add a reference to psychosocial risks and to incorporate psychosocial risk assessments into the Directive. Subsequently, certain guidelines in relation to psychosocial risks could be elaborated in a separate directive on psychosocial risks. This would help to avoid a fragmentation in the regulation of psychosocial risks, the latter of which is one of the shortcomings of some new EU initiatives.
The Framework Directive as well as almost all other directives and also some new EU legislative initiatives (concerning platform work, right to disconnect) do not cover self-employed persons. The characteristic feature of some new EU legislative initiatives that are relevant for mental health at work is that they seek to protect persons irrespective of their employment status. At the same time, they provide obligations in the field of OSH only in relation to employers, limiting the personal scope to employees. Therefore, a paradigm shift concerning the personal scope is necessary. The extension of the personal scope of regulations raises the question of the division of responsibilities in the field of OSH and mental health at work between different actors (employees, the self-employed, employers, state, social security agencies, platform providers, principals, etc.).
Furthermore, EU law has a tradition of special protection of ‘particularly sensitive risk groups’ who must be protected against dangers which especially affect them. In the modern world of work platform workers should be categorised as a ‘particularly sensitive risk group’. There are good reasons for addressing in a separate directive on psychosocial risks any status issues and working conditions, including psychosocial risks. However, automated monitoring and decision-making systems are no longer an issue exclusively related to platform work since today such systems are increasingly used also in traditional employment relationships. This would be an argument in favour of a broader solution that would address all workers subject to such systems, e.g. in a separate directive on algorithmic management.
And finally, in the European legislation on OSH, in contrast to ISO 45003:2021 ‘Occupational Health and Safety Management – Psychological Health and Safety at Work – Guidelines for Managing Psychosocial Risks’, short-time forms of employment are not seen as a hazard of a psychosocial nature. While a negative correlation between the type of contract (with regard to non-standard contracts) and the state of health at work is acknowledged, the new (more flexible and temporary) forms of work have been regarded as undergoing an (unavoidable) process which merely require adjustment (not abatement). However, job insecurity should be tackled at different levels: from inclusion into risk assessment at the workplace to collective bargaining and structural reforms in labour and social law at national level. At the European level, job insecurity should also be addressed in a future directive on psychosocial risks as mentioned above.