Mental health sits at the heart of good employment relationships.
When we talk about mental health, the workplace is not always the first thing that comes to mind. Yet most of us spend a significant part of our lives at work, and what happens there can profoundly affect how we feel, function, and live outside it.
As employment law practitioners, we regularly see the devastating impact that unhealthy workplaces, excessive workloads, poorly managed change, bullying, and unfair processes can have on people’s mental health. We also see the reverse: how declining mental health can affect an employee’s attendance, confidence, performance, and relationships at work.
It is widely accepted that poor mental health can contribute to absenteeism and reduced productivity. But the issue is more fundamental than that. A workplace that causes or compounds psychological harm is not a workplace in which people feel safe, supported, or motivated to turn up and do their best.
Mental Health Week is therefore an opportunity to reflect on an increasingly important reality: mental health is not simply a personal issue that employees leave at the door when they come to work. It sits at the heart of good employment relationships, effective leadership, workplace health and safety, and legal compliance.
For many years, workplace mental health was viewed primarily through the lens of individual resilience. The focus was often on what an employee could do to cope, rather than what might be happening in the workplace to cause or worsen their distress.
That approach is changing. Employers are now expected to consider not only how they respond when an employee becomes unwell, but whether workplace systems, workloads, management practices, restructures, investigations, and organisational culture are contributing to psychological harm.
Employers’ obligations exist under the Employment Relations Act 2000, the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, human rights legislation, and the implied duty of trust and confidence.
The Health and Safety at Work Act expressly includes mental health within its definition of “health”. WorkSafe also recognises psychosocial risks, including excessive workloads, bullying, poor support, unclear roles, and poorly managed organisational change, as workplace risks that businesses must manage.
Looking Beyond the Crisis
WorkSafe's guidance encourages employers to look beyond the immediate problem and consider what may be causing it. Rather than waiting until an employee reaches crisis point, employers should be identifying and addressing workplace conditions that create psychological risk in the first place.
That means taking a closer look at questions such as whether workloads are genuinely sustainable, whether employees feel safe speaking up when something isn't right, and whether managers have the skills and confidence to respond appropriately when someone is struggling. It also means considering whether workplace processes, including restructures, performance management, and investigations, are being carried out in a way that supports rather than undermines employee wellbeing.
These are not simply matters of good management. Increasingly, they are issues with legal significance.
The Intersection Between Mental Health and Workplace Processes
The Employment Court's decision in FGH v RST provides a useful reminder of why employers need to look beyond an employee's behaviour when mental health concerns arise during a workplace process.
In that case, the employer interpreted the employee's growing anxiety and psychological reactions as resistance to performance management, despite increasing signs that the process itself was affecting her health. The Court found that the employer should have obtained appropriate medical advice before extending the performance management process and escalating matters further.
The lesson is not that workplace processes must stop whenever an employee raises health concerns. Rather, employers need to understand what is happening, obtain appropriate information where necessary, and remain open to adapting the timing, structure, or approach of a process where mental health may be affecting an employee's ability to participate.
Burnout and Workload
Burnout is another area where employers can no longer assume that stress simply comes with the territory.
The Employment Relations Authority's decision in Perry v The Warehouse Group Limited illustrates this point. The employee repeatedly raised concerns about workload and burnout. While the employer provided access to leave and EAP support, the Authority found that it should have taken more proactive steps to investigate and address the underlying causes of those concerns. Its failure to do so contributed to a finding of constructive dismissal.
Support services can play an important role, but they are rarely a complete solution. Providing assistance is important; addressing the source of the problem is even more important. Where workload concerns are raised, employers should take the time to understand what is driving them and whether changes can be made to create a more sustainable working environment.
Restructuring and Mental Health
Few workplace events create uncertainty quite like a restructure, and uncertainty inevitably affects people's wellbeing. In a challenging economic climate, where job security can feel less certain and financial pressures are rising, the impact can be even greater.
Organisational change is often necessary, but how that change is managed matters. Consultation should involve more than simply presenting a proposal and inviting comments. Employees need sufficient information to understand why change is being proposed, a genuine opportunity to provide feedback, and confidence that their views will be properly considered.
Employers should also be mindful of the effect that proposed changes may have on workloads, stress levels, and overall wellbeing. Concerns raised during consultation should be assessed on their merits rather than dismissed as resistance to change. The most effective change processes are not only legally compliant and commercially sensible; they also recognise the human impact of workplace uncertainty.
What Employers Can Do
Creating a mentally healthy workplace does not require grand initiatives or expensive wellbeing programmes. More often, it comes down to getting the fundamentals right.
That includes ensuring workloads are manageable, addressing conflict and bullying early, training managers to recognise and respond appropriately to signs of distress, and engaging meaningfully with staff during periods of change. It also means taking relevant medical information into account when making significant employment decisions and being prepared to adjust workplace processes where circumstances warrant it.
Perhaps most importantly, employers should take a proactive approach to identifying psychosocial risks before they lead to harm. While EAP services and wellbeing initiatives can provide valuable support, they are most effective when they sit alongside healthy workplace practices rather than being used as a substitute for them.
A Final Thought
Most disputes involving mental health do not arise because an employer intended harm. They arise because warning signs were missed, concerns were minimised, or workplace processes continued without enough regard for their impact.
Mentally healthy workplaces are not created by posters and wellbeing initiatives alone. They are created through respectful leadership, manageable workloads, fair processes, meaningful consultation, and a culture in which people feel safe speaking up.
These are not simply workplace aspirations. Increasingly, they are legal expectations.
If your organisation is navigating workplace change, burnout, bullying, stress-related absence, or mental health concerns affecting employment, the team at Buckett Law can assist with both the legal and human aspects of the situation.
