Published by the Australian Council for Educational Leaders (ACEL), AEL is an internationally recognised journal that exchanges current research, trends, and good educational practice highlighting contemporary techniques and contexts. Reprinted with permission.

Earlier this year, Work Safe Australia introduced changes to Australian legislation that requires workplaces such as schools to better manage the risks posed by psychosocial hazards at work. This is perhaps unsurprising, given the substantial cost of mental ill-health across Australia (recently estimated at around $70 billion per year; see, Australian Government Productivity Commission, 2020). The new Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work: Code of Practice (Safe Work Australia, 2022) came into effect on 1 April 2023. While it may seem like yet another “extra” requirement to manage, it does present an opportunity to reconsider how psychosocial hazards might be mitigated within schools. With the education sector internationally facing an acute teacher shortage, psychosocial pressures on staff in schools have been exacerbated; managing them successfully can be part of an effective retention strategy.

What are psychosocial hazards?

Essentially, psychosocial hazards are events, situations, or interactions in the work environment that may cause mental, emotional, and/or physical harm. The terminology is distinct: hazards refer to situations or things that have the potential to harm a person, while risk refers to the possibility that harm (death, injury, or illness) might occur when exposed to a hazard (see, Safe Work Australia, n.d). While causes are often complex to recognise and address, the Australian Code of Practice outlines workrelated psychological injuries as having a higher cost to organisations due to affected workers’ longer recovery times away from work. In education, rates of claims for mental health injury are higher than for the general population (Al Afreed et al., 2022).

Psychosocial hazards are associated with a suite of mental and emotional impacts. These may present as anxiety, sleep disorders, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Physical harms arising from psychosocial hazards may include musculoskeletal injuries, chronic disease, or fatigue related injuries (Safe Work Australia, n.d.). The nature of educators’ work is associated with high vulnerability to mental stress, as it includes significant emotional labour, time pressures, intense external demands with few options for independent control, and an effort-reward imbalance (Wischlitzki et al., 2020). Managing this kind of stress may cause harm when workers are repeatedly dis-stressed, when stress levels are excessive, and when stress is experienced in a sustained way.

When creating a working environment characterised by psychosocial safety, work design and management are essential considerations because they, alongside workplace interactions and behaviours (Leka & Jain, 2010), influence mental and emotional health and safety. Since work design is often a contributor to psychological stress, it is simultaneously a crucial component of any strategic intervention to improve stress in the workplace (Parker & Jorritsma, 2020). When organisations are proactive in identifying and managing the risks associated with psychosocial hazards, workers are better protected from harm, decreasing disruptions associated with staff turnover and absenteeism, potentially contributing to enhanced organisational outcomes (Safe Work Australia, 2022).

Common psychosocial hazards in schools

The Australian Code of Practice and the World Health Organisation (see, Leka & Jain, 2010) outline several common psychosocial hazards for leaders to be aware of and seek to mitigate within the workplace. Research illustrates some of the ways these occur within school environments.

Job demands: Workload and work intensity

Workload has been acknowledged as an ongoing issue in Australian schools, with multiple studies indicating that heavy workloads influence teacher attrition, retention, and attraction (Heffernan et al., 2022; Longmuir et al., 2022). Recent efforts to support schools to review and implement interventions to reduce workload have shown that teacher-directed workload-reduction projects can make considerable improvements in workload and wellbeing with no negative impact on student achievement (see, Churches, 2020).

Support in the workplace

A perceived lack of support in the workplace is a top psychosocial hazard. Recent research into teachers’ working conditions demonstrates that educators value support from leadership when it comes to, for example, responding to student needs and behaviour (e.g. Longmuir et al., 2022) or crafting their jobs to better align with their interests and values (Slemp et al., 2023). Supportive collegial relationships are additionally a source of professional support that enhances wellbeing (Acton & Glasgow, 2015).

Professional recognition

Mechanisms for providing professional reward and recognition in schools are often tied to inflexible career progression pathways. In some schools there can be a perception that opportunities for career advancement are limited to leadership pathways, which can hinder meaningful professional learning and recognition of those who choose to remain in the classroom (Booth et al., 2021). In a recent survey of 5,497 participants within the sector, fewer than half of respondents reported feeling appreciated in their role (Longmuir et al., 2022). Recognition of the work of educators may also be devalued at the societal level, with the status of the profession implicated in teachers’ intentions to leave the profession (Heffernan et al., 2022).

Workplace relationships and conflict

Interactions in the workplace that result in conflict, violence, aggression, harassment, or bullying can cause significant psychosocial distress. This risk is significant, with around a quarter of teachers feeling unsafe at work (Longmuir et al., 2022). In schools, relational hazards may exist in, for example, accusations or disrespect from parents, and/or disruptive or disrespectful behaviour from students. When student disruption or disrespect is repetitive, severe, or prolonged these interactions are more likely to constitute a risk, as was highlighted in the interim report on student disruption in classrooms (Education and Employment References Committee, Parliament of Australia, 2023).

Lack of job control and clarity

Job control refers to the extent staff have agency and autonomy over the execution of tasks. Work with limited job control includes aspects of other directed work, which in education contexts includes externally directed reform such as changes of curricula (Wischlitzki et al., 2020). When staff experience low professional empowerment and a lack of agency they may be more susceptible to high levels of work stress, which can be experienced as a reduced professional self-concept or work burnout (Karagianni et al., 2023). Clarity within a role includes how tasks are prioritised; teachers may experience a “values paradox” when administration and reporting tasks are emphasised over activities that directly support and enhance student learning and development (Acton & Glasgow, 2015).