Stress : An Employers Duties

Dealing with stress in the workplace is a difficult issue for employers. Individuals respond to the pressures at work differently. Circumstances which cause stress in one person may be seen as motivational by another.

Clearly, many employees feel that admitting they are suffering from a stress-related illness could damage their position at work. Employers may feel that they cannot deal with the problem if they are not told that it exists.

Employers cannot, however, afford to be ignorant on this subject. An employer needs to be educated as to the best ways to prevent the onset of stress and it is also important to be able to recognise the signs and to know how best to respond.

There have been three recent rulings in stress cases which employers should note.

In the case of Simmons v British Steel plc, Christopher Simmons fell and hit his head in May 1996. As well as the physical injury, he also suffered from the worsening of a pre-existing skin condition and became severely depressed. The Court of Session only awarded him £3,573 on the grounds that his depression and severe skin condition arose from his anger at the happening of the accident, rather than from the accident itself. The House of Lords, however, ruled that where there is a breach of the duty of care such that it is reasonably foreseeable that an employee could suffer a physical injury, then the employee could also claim damage for any psychological injury suffered, even though it was not reasonably foreseeable that such damage would occur.

Likewise, in the case of Donachie v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, the Court of Appeal confirmed that in cases of stress, the employer must take an employee as they are. In other words, if an employee turns out to be particularly susceptible to problems, such as having a low pain threshold, then it is the employer’s bad luck and does not give them a defence.

In the third case (Barber v Somerset County Council), the House of Lords ruled in favour of teacher Leon Barber, awarding him £72,547 in damages against his employer. Mr Barber suffered from depression brought on by a very heavy workload and responsibilities whilst a teacher at East Bridgwater Community School. He complained to the school managers but nothing was done to lessen the burden of work. In the summer term of 1996 he took three weeks off work after seeing his doctor, who had diagnosed stress and depression. In November of that year, Mr Barber became seriously ill and was no longer able to work. The County Court found that Mr Barber had been given very little support, even though the school was aware of the stress he had been working under, and awarded him damages. This decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal who found that Mr Barber’s employers had not breached their duty of care to him. The House of Lords disagreed, even though they did say that the breach of duty by Somerset County Council was ‘fairly close to borderline’. Their view was that something should have been done to monitor Mr Barber’s condition and to reduce his workload to ease his return to work. The Lords did, however, back the Court of Appeal’s guidance that an employee can only win damages for stress at work either if the employer knows that he or she has suffered a previous mental breakdown or has been told by the employee that they believe stress at work is making them ill.