Most people would agree that all workers have the right to feel safe, respected, supported and valued at work. Good work promotes good health, and at the heart of good work lies a safe work environment (Modini et al., 2016). But what makes a workplace psychologically healthy and safe?
Historically, employers considered a safe work environment one free from traditional hazards, such as heat, noise, dust, and hazardous chemicals. Yet several decades of robust research highlights that psychosocial safety is equally as important as physical safety for a healthy workplace (Dollard & Bakker, 2010; Dong et al., 2024). Psychosocial safety refers to how an organisation protects workers from psychosocial hazards and risks, such as aggression, violence, job insecurity, bullying, lack of job control and high work demands. Psychosocial hazards refer to hazards that arise from the design or management of work, the work environment, machinery or equipment, and the social aspects of work; and can cause psychological and/or physical harm.
Why is psychosocial safety important?
On 1 December 2025, Victoria’s workplace laws caught up to decades of research illuminating the importance of psychosocial safety in the workplace. According to the Occupational Health and Safety (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025 (Vic), employers must take proactive steps to protect workers from psychological and physical harm. The new laws require employers to identify psychosocial hazards, assess the associated risks, eliminate the risks to psychological health, and review, revise and update risk controls.
The new laws recognise 17 psychosocial hazards:
- Job demands (e.g., excessive workloads, unreasonable time pressure)
- Fatigue
- Low job control (e.g., limited autonomy and decision making)
- Job insecurity
- Poor support
- Lack of role clarity (e.g., competing demands, frequent role changes)
- Poor organisational change management
- Inadequate reward and recognition
- Poor organisational justice
- Traumatic events or material
- Remote or isolated work
- Intrusive surveillance
- Poor physical environment
- Violence and aggression
- Bullying
- Harassment (including sexual harassment)
- Conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions
Employers frequently underestimate the impact of psychological injuries. Workers exposed to psychosocial hazards can develop psychological injuries such as depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (Schulte et al., 2024). The National Return to Work Survey 2025 found that workers with a psychological injury required more support, took longer to return to work, and reported greater impacts on their daily life compared to workers with a physical injury (Safe Work Australia, 2025). Eliminating psychosocial hazards protects workers, prevents psychological injuries, decreases staff turnover, and improves workplace culture (Kjærgaard et al., 2025).
Why is psychosocial safety important?
The Managing psychosocial hazards at work Code of Practice provides in-depth guidance for addressing psychosocial hazards in the workplace to achieve psychosocial safety (Safe Work Australia, 2022). Figure 1 outlines the steps to manage psychosocial hazards (WorkSafe Victoria, 2025).
Figure 1
Psychosocial Hazard Risk Management Steps
Victoria’s new laws require organisations to consult workers regarding psychosocial hazards. Research demonstrates that consulting workers regarding psychosocial hazards promotes healthier and safer workplaces (Safe Work Australia 2025). Workers know their work the best and are often best placed to help solve workplace problems. In addition, consulting workers promotes cultural safety and creates safer workplaces. For example, a recent qualitative study found that Indigenous methodologies support workplace psychosocial safety and could enhance conventional occupational health and safety practices (Karanikas & Hasan, 2026). The study conducted in-depth interviews with seven Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Occupational Health and Safety professionals.
The interviews highlighted the importance of worker consultation in identifying psychosocial risks. For example, one participant noted:
I think in a Western culture… consultation is done to people rather than done with people. Risk assessments… should start with the workers on the ground, and then that covers your consultation… What hazards can you pick up? What risks? How do we control that? (Karanikas & Hasan, 2026).
Another effective way to support psychosocial safety is to provide appropriate training. For example, workers supporting people experiencing family violence must be equipped with adequate training to recognise and respond to family violence. WIRE’s Understanding and Responding to Family Violence training supports workers to feel confident in understanding, recognising, and responding to family violence. When the expectations of their roles are clear, workers feel a sense of containment and support.
Unpacking individual wellbeing initiatives
Victoria’s new laws align with meta-analytic evidence that supports the effectiveness of workplace wellbeing interventions that target psychosocial hazards (Aust et al., 2023). When interventions do not target psychosocial hazards, they often lead to ineffective outcomes. For example, in a recent study of over 46,000 UK workers across a range of organisational contexts, participants who engaged with individual-level wellbeing intervention (e.g., mindfulness, resilience, relaxation and stress management) showed no difference in subjective wellbeing compared to those who did not participate (Fleming, 2024).
Individual interventions aim to address the symptoms rather than the root causes of workplace stress. As such, structural problems are framed as individual problems, and workers are expected to adapt to unjust working conditions (Islam & Sanderson, 2022), which unfairly shifts the burden to the individual and perpetuates inequality. Failed interventions waste time, money, and organisational resources. They create missed opportunities for prevention, which can reduce long-term organisational costs and legal risks.
Applying an intersectional lens
Workers from marginalised groups face higher rates of psychological stress in the workplace. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, LGBTQIA+, disabled, and culturally and linguistically diverse, and young workers experience disproportionate rates of racism, bullying, discrimination, violence and abuse in the workplace (Safe Work Australia, 2025). Additionally, women and gender-diverse workers experience gendered violence such as sexual harassment, physical assault, stalking, verbal abuse and misgendering (WorkSafe Victoria, 2025). WIRE supports organisations to improve gender equity in the workplace. Through our consulting and coaching services, we work with organisations to review internal policies and procedures and improve policy, practice and service.
Organisations that risk higher rates of discrimination at work tend to have power imbalances, lack support, managers with limited understanding of racism and cultural safety, a rigid hierarchical structure, barriers to raising safety concerns (e.g., stigma), client or customer facing roles, tolerance of racist and sexist “jokes”, and a lack of worker diversity (Safe Work Australia, 2025).
The Safe Work Australia (2022) Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work Code of Practice suggests organisations provide training so that workers know what to do if they experience or witness discrimination, bullying, violence, or sexual harassment at work. For example, WIRE’s Navigating Complex Conversations training equips staff to deal with aggressive and discriminatory behaviour from clients or customers using a trauma-informed, intersectional feminist, person-centred and strengths-based approach.
Organisations have a duty to protect workers and promote psychosocial safety in the workplace. By targeting psychosocial hazards, organisations can foster psychologically safe and healthy workplaces.
Connect to WIRE’s consulting and training work or contact us via consultancyservices@wire.org.au.
Workers with psychosocial safety hazard concerns can contact WorkSafe via 1800 136 089.
Written by Nat Salih.
Nat is a Support & Information Worker and Training Facilitator at WIRE and recent psychology honours graduate. Nat began at WIRE in 2021 as a phone room volunteer before moving into their current roles. They are passionate about workers’ rights and promoting psychosocial safety in the workplace.
References
Aust, B., Møller, J. L., Nordentoft, M., Frydendall, K. B., Bengtsen, E., Jensen, A. B., Garde, A. H., Kompier, M., Semmer, N., Rugulies, R., & Jaspers, S. Ø. (2023). How effective are organizational-level interventions in improving the psychosocial work environment, health, and retention of workers? A systematic overview of systematic reviews. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 49(5), 315–329. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4097
Boot, C. R., LaMontagne, A. D., & Madsen, I. E. (2024). Fifty years of research on psychosocial working conditions and health: From promise to practice. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 50(6), 395–405. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4180
Dollard, M. F., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to conducive work environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X470690
Dong, R. K., Li, X., & Hernan, “Banjo” Roxas. (2024). Psychological safety and psychosocial safety climate in workplace: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review towards a research agenda. Journal of Safety Research, 91, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2024.08.001
Fleming, W. J. (2024). Employee well‐being outcomes from individual‐level mental health interventions: Cross‐sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Industrial Relations Journal, 55(2), 162–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12418
Islam, G., & Sanderson, Z. (2022). Critical positions: Situating critical perspectives in work and organizational psychology. Organizational Psychology Review, 12(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866211038044
Karanikas, N., & Hasan, S. M. T. (2026). Indigenous perspectives into occupational health and safety: A qualitative study with Indigenous Australian professionals. Safety Science, 203, 107337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2026.107337
Kjærgaard, A., Rudolf, E. M., Palmqvist, J., Jakobsen, M. E., & Ajslev, J. Z. N. (2025). The Psychosocial Hierarchy of Controls: Effectively Reducing Psychosocial Hazards at Work. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 68(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23694
Modini, M., Joyce, S., Mykletun, A., Christensen, H., Bryant, R., Mitchell, P., & Harvey, S. (2016). The mental health benefits of employment: Results of a systematic meta-review. Australasian Psychiatry, 24, 331–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856215618523
Occupational Health and Safety (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025 (Vic). https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-09/25-103sra-authorised.pdf
Safe Work Australia. (2022). Managing psychosocial hazards at work. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-08/model_code_of_practice_-_managing_psychosocial_hazards_at_work_25082022_0.pdf.
Safe Work Australia. (2025). National Return to Work Survey 2025. https://data.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-11/NRTW_Survey_Analysis_Report_Nov2025.pdf
Schulte, P. A., Sauter, S. L., Pandalai, S. P., Tiesman, H. M., Chosewood, L. C., Cunningham, T. R., Wurzelbacher, S. J., Pana‐Cryan, R., Swanson, N. G., Chang, C., Nigam, J. A. S., Reissman, D. B., Ray, T. K., & Howard, J. (2024). An urgent call to address work‐related psychosocial hazards and improve worker well‐being. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 67(6), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23583
WorkSafe Victoria. (2025). Gendered Violence. https://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/gendered-violence