Psychosocial workload and work pressure under ISO 45001: what does the standard require?
Psychosocial workload (PSA, psychosociale arbeidsbelasting) is one of the hazards that ISO 45001 explicitly requires you to identify and control. Work pressure, unwanted behaviour, aggression and bullying are as real a hazard as a machine with moving parts. The Arbowet (Dutch Working Conditions Act) requires employers to have a policy to prevent PSA, and the Nederlandse Arbeidsinspectie (Netherlands Labour Authority) actively checks this. On this page we explain what PSA is, what the standard and the law require, how PSA fits into your hazard inventory, and which measures work.
What is psychosocial workload?
PSA is an umbrella term for work-related psychological strain. The Arbowet distinguishes the following forms:
| Form | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Work pressure | Too much work in too little time, excessive demands | Structural overtime, unachievable deadlines |
| Work stress | Persistent tension caused by unhealthy working conditions | Burnout, long-term sickness absence |
| Unwanted behaviour | Bullying, sexual harassment, aggression, discrimination | A colleague who is structurally excluded |
| Aggression and violence | Threats or violence from customers, patients or colleagues | A care worker who is assaulted |
| Traumatic experience | A shocking event at work | Robbery, serious workplace accident |
Work pressure is by far the most common cause of sickness absence and dropout. According to the Nederlandse Arbeidsinspectie (Netherlands Labour Authority) , work pressure has for years been the biggest work-related risk factor in the Netherlands.
What does ISO 45001 require for PSA?
In clause 6.1.2, ISO 45001 requires you to systematically identify all hazards, including psychosocial hazards. The standard explicitly names:
- Work pressure
- Bullying
- Harassment and unwanted behaviour
This means PSA must be part of your RI&E and ISO 45001 cycle. You identify the PSA hazards that are relevant in your organisation, assess the risk and take measures.
Many organisations leave PSA out of their hazard inventory. They focus on physical hazards and skip psychosocial risks. The auditor specifically asks whether PSA has been included in the hazard identification.
In addition, clause 5.2 (the OHS policy) requires a commitment from top management to safe and healthy working conditions. Working in a psychologically safe way is an explicit part of that.
What does the Arbowet require for PSA?
The Arbowet (article 3, paragraph 2) requires employers to conduct a policy aimed at preventing or limiting PSA. In practice, you must:
- Include PSA in the RI&E (risk inventory and evaluation)
- Describe measures in the action plan (plan van aanpak)
- Appoint a confidential adviser (recommended, not always mandatory)
- Inform employees about the risks and the support available
The Arbeidsinspectie uses an approach in which, during inspections, it actively checks whether a PSA policy exists and whether this policy is put into practice.
The difference between ISO 45001 and the Arbowet on PSA
The Arbowet and ISO 45001 overlap on PSA, but there are nuances:
| Aspect | ISO 45001 | Arbowet |
|---|---|---|
| Identify PSA in the RI&E | Required | Required |
| Formulate policy | Part of the G&VW policy | Explicitly required |
| Take measures | Hierarchy of control measures | Action plan |
| Confidential adviser | Not required, but logical | Recommended (depends on sector) |
| Worker participation | Active participation required | Consent of the works council (OR) or staff representation body (PVT) |
| Continual improvement | Structurally required | Not explicit |
Both therefore oblige you to take PSA seriously. ISO 45001 adds the systematic approach of a management system: documenting, monitoring, measuring and improving.
PSA in the hazard inventory
When identifying PSA hazards in your hazard and risk inventory, you look at concrete situations in your organisation.
Work pressure
Identifying work pressure:
Ask questions such as: do employees work overtime structurally? Are there roles with demonstrably excessive workloads? Is there regulatory pressure or conflicting expectations?
Risk factors:
- High task demands combined with little autonomy
- Unclear division of roles or conflicting assignments
- Lack of support from managers or colleagues
- Poor work-life balance due to travel pressure or irregular shifts
Methods to measure work pressure:
- Periodic employee satisfaction surveys
- Sickness absence figures combined with exit interviews
- The Quickscan Werkdruk (workload quick scan) from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (SZW)
- Discussions in team meetings
Measures for PSA: the hierarchy of control measures
As with physical hazards, the hierarchy of control measures applies. Start at the source, not with the individual employee.
1. Elimination: Remove the cause. Cancel tasks that structurally cause too much pressure. Restructure roles with irresolvable role conflicts.
2. Substitution: Replace risky work situations. Divide work differently across employees. Introduce technology that takes over repetitive or stressful tasks.
3. Technical measures: Limit exposure through systems. Automatic alerts for excessively long working hours, planning software that makes work pressure visible.
4. Administrative measures: Change working methods. Clear division of roles, reasonable deadlines, sickness absence policy, manager office hours, team meetings about work pressure.
5. Individual support: Use this last: coaching, an EAP (employee assistance programme), reintegration support. Individual help does not solve structural problems.
A common mistake is to approach PSA problems only at the individual level: send that one employee to a coach. ISO 45001 requires structural control measures, not only individual interventions.
Practical example: work pressure at a consultancy firm
A consultancy firm with 30 employees notices high sickness absence among project manager roles. Exit interviews show that work pressure is the main reason for leaving.
In the RI&E update they include work pressure as a significant risk, with a risk score of 12 (likelihood 3, severity 4). They set an objective: reduce sickness absence in these roles from 8% to 5% within 12 months.
Measures: a redesign of project allocation (a maximum of 3 projects at the same time per project manager), a monthly work pressure conversation with the team leader, an anonymous annual survey, and training for team leaders in early detection.
After twelve months, sickness absence falls to 5.5%. The measure works. In the management review they decide to embed the approach and tighten the objective further.
Next step
PSA is part of a wider hazard inventory. For the guideline that deals specifically with psychosocial risks, see ISO 45003 alongside ISO 45001. Read how to map all hazards systematically on the page identifying hazards and assessing risks, or see how PSA relates to your RI&E and ISO 45001.