CLOSE MENU
A study by CUNY SPH researchers says U.S. workplaces could do more to protect workers’ mental and physical health by treating psychosocial hazards, such as excessive workload, workplace violence and incivility, and role ambiguity like a real safety issue, not just an individual wellness problem.
For the study, doctoral grad A. Michael Ierardi and Professor Diana Romero sought to understand how international workplace policies might inform a future U.S. standard for psychosocial risk management, and how those policies line up with the Surgeon General’s Five Essentials framework. They reviewed six current policies from Canada, Chile, Mexico, the International Organization for Standardization, the World Health Organization, and Australia. The focus of these policies was not on treating mental illness after it appears, but on preventing work conditions from creating harm in the first place.
The authors identified six recurring themes: external factors that push action, organizational assessment of needs, formal risk management systems, worker voice and privacy, continuous improvement, and practical tools for implementation. They found that these themes largely fit with the Five Essentials framework, especially around protection from harm and worker voice. The biggest gap was that the U.S. framework offers less detail on how to actually implement these ideas in everyday workplace settings.
“A future U.S. standard should be proactive, not reactive, meaning employers would identify and mitigate psychosocial hazards before they lead to stress, burnout, or other health problems,” says Dr. Ierardi. “Workers should be involved in the process, while still having privacy and confidentiality protections. This could help organizations create safer, healthier, and more supportive workplaces.”
