Posted on: 10/06/2026

Thought Leadership

Work-related stress is no longer just a wellbeing issue, it is firmly a health and safety risk, and the HSE is treating it that way. This article explains what the regulator’s renewed focus means in practice, including what “good enough” now looks like and why policies alone won’t protect organisations. It sets out practical, preventative steps HR leaders can take to evidence effective controls and reduce enforcement risk.

By Lorna Wells, LLM FCIPD, principal HR consultant at West Midlands Employers

Most HR professionals will be familiar with the growing challenge of managing work-related stress. But how confident are organisations that their current approach would stand up to regulatory scrutiny?

Answering this question will be key for employers as the level of regulatory attention being given is now changing.

According to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), 22.1 million working days were lost to work-related stress, depression and anxiety in 2024/25. The average length of absence in this category was 22.9 days, and stress has now overtaken musculoskeletal conditions as the leading cause of work related absence. Against that backdrop, it is unsurprising that stress reduction features as a core priority in the HSE’s 2025/26 Business Plan.

 For public sector organisations already under financial and operational pressure, the key questions are not whether stress should be taken seriously, but what “good enough” now looks like in the eyes of the regulator and how HR leaders can ensure their organisations are not exposed to enforcement action.

Beyond absence management

Most employee relations practitioners are familiar with managing individual cases of work-related stress. Occupational health referrals are arranged, absence procedures are followed, support plans are developed, and managers are guided through complex employee relations issues.

Yet, by the time an individual reaches this stage, the organisation is often already dealing with the consequences rather than the causes.

There is a danger that an over reliance on reactive case management fails to address the wider organisational risk. While managing individual cases remains important, the HSE's focus is whether the organisation took reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm in the first place. In practice then, are we overly focused on procedural compliance and mitigating Employment Tribunal risk, while overlooking the wider statutory framework that governs mental health at work?

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) imposes a duty on employers to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of employees. While often associated with physical hazards, the HSE has been clear for some time that this duty extends equally to work related stress.

A clear signal from the HSE

A recent enforcement case involving the University of Birmingham provides a timely illustration of how the HSE is applying this duty in practice. In late 2025, the University was served with a notice of contravention for multiple material breaches of the HSWA relating to the management of work related stress.

The HSE’s intervention was not triggered by a single complaint, but by evidence suggesting:

• Organisational level failings;

• multiple employees experiencing work related stress or ill health; and

• a clear legal framework within which enforcement action could be taken.

The investigation was extensive. It included inspection visits and meetings with senior leaders (including HR leadership), a detailed review of stress policies, risk assessments and absence data, and engagement with employees to understand how stress was managed day to day, the effectiveness of support arrangements, and the extent of employee involvement in decision making.

Importantly, the HSE was not assessing whether supportive policies existed on paper. It was evaluating whether effective systems were operating in reality.

The findings highlighted several material breaches, including:

• Failure to fully implement the organisation's stress management policy.

• Inadequate organisational stress risk assessments.

• Insufficient control measures to reduce identified risks.

• Lack of effective monitoring and review arrangements.

The HSE is increasingly focused on evidence of implementation, effectiveness and accountability. The message for employers is unambiguous, having a policy is not the same as managing risk.

Treating stress like any other workplace hazard

The HSE’s position is that work related stress should be treated in the same way as any other workplace hazard, identified, assessed, controlled and reviewed. What makes stress different is its scale and complexity. Stress risks are often systemic, influenced by workload, organisational change, management capability, role clarity and employee voice.

This requires coordination across disciplines: HR, health and safety, organisational development, and senior leadership. Just as importantly, it requires clarity of accountability. Failure to act can quickly undermine even the most well designed framework.

For HR leaders, this represents a shift in emphasis, from supporting individual cases once harm has occurred, to shaping and assuring the organisation’s overall control environment.

How to reduce the risk of enforcement action

So what does good practice look like in this context?

1. Embed mental health into risk assessment

Mental health must be explicitly considered within risk assessment processes. Identified risks must be realistic, evidence based and linked to meaningful control measures, not generic statements that cannot be operationalised.

2. Move from policy to implementation

A mental health or stress management policy is only effective if it is understood and used. Organisations should develop a clear mental health at work plan that is communicated to all employees, sets out available support, addresses identified risks and actively promotes positive mental health.

3. Monitor, review and evidence effectiveness

The HSE expects to see active monitoring and review. Action plans should be tracked, outcomes evaluated and adjustments made where controls are not delivering the intended impact.

4. Build management capability

Line managers play a critical role in identifying early warning signs, having effective conversations and managing workload and expectations. Access to practical tools, training and advice is essential.

5. Use recognised frameworks

The HSE’s Management Standards approach provides a structured and regulator endorsed framework for assessing and controlling stress risks. While not mandatory, it is widely regarded as a “suitable and sufficient” methodology.

A Strategic Issue for Public Sector Employers

For public sector organisations facing financial pressures, workforce shortages and ongoing transformation programmes, the risk factors associated with work-related stress are unlikely to disappear anytime soon. The challenge for HR leaders is to ensure that stress management is not treated as a standalone wellbeing initiative, but as part of a wider organisational risk management framework.

The HSE's recent activity sends a clear message. Employers will increasingly be judged not by the quality of their policies, but by the effectiveness of their actions.

For HR professionals, this creates an opportunity to move the conversation beyond absence management and towards prevention, governance and organisational accountability. Those organisations that take a proactive approach will not only reduce the risk of enforcement action, but are also likely to benefit from healthier, more engaged and more productive workforces.

Find out how our tailored tailored HR solutions and experts can help your organisations.

HR Consultancy