Work-related stress and suicide: Managing the risks to your business

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) figures for 2024/2025 indicate that 964,000 workers experienced work-related stress, depression or anxiety, resulting in 22.1 million working days lost per year. Yet many employers still treat it as an HR support issue rather than an operational risk. Recognised causes include excessive workloads, tight deadlines, responsibility without adequate support and ineffective management. 

Marking Stress Awareness Week (2 – 6 November 2026), HSE reminded employers that stress is a health and safety issue: its risks must be assessed and managed like other workplace health and safety risks. A wellbeing policy and an employee assistance programme are not substitutes for managing excessive workloads, poor job design or ineffective supervision.

What does the law require?

HSE has increasingly emphasised prevention of work-related stress, moving beyond guidance, towards more visible enforcement. Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 requires employers to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, employees’ health, safety and welfare at work. This includes psychological health. There is a linked obligation under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 which requires suitable and sufficient risk assessments and effective arrangements for managing preventive and protective measures.

Employers also have a duty not only to make adjustments that minimise health and safety risks but to ensure compliance with the Equality Act 2010. This is especially important given that research shows that neurodiverse individuals are at greater risk of suicide with up to 25% of autistic people having attempted suicide or having suicidal behaviours. Employers must be aware of the national standard Neurodiversity and the Built Environment (BSI PAS6463) which provides practical examples of how workplaces can accommodate neurodiverse needs . 

HSE’s ten-year strategy, Protecting People and Places (2022), identified work-related ill health as a significant and growing challenge and commits to addressing stress, depression and anxiety. Psychosocial risk is therefore firmly embedded in the regulator’s long-term agenda. As such, employers need to identify foreseeable work-related stress risks, assess who may be affected and implement appropriate controls. Assessments must reflect actual working conditions, rather than simply record that a policy or employee assistance programme exists.

HSE’s Working Minds campaign, and its planned inspection focus in its 2026/2027 Business Plan, reinforced that stress is a foreseeable and manageable risk. HSE this week also highlighted its existing Management Standards (2004), which provide a framework for identifying stressors, consulting staff, and implementing practical controls. A business which has in place a stress management system that meets those standards will be demonstrating good practice.

On 11 December 2025, HSE issued a Notice of Contravention to a university for failures in implementing its stress management policy, assessing risks, applying controls and monitoring effectiveness. The regulatory problem was not an absence of wellbeing initiatives. It was the university’s failure to demonstrate that it understood the sources of work-related stress and its controls’ effectiveness. Mental health is therefore a clear regulatory priority.

UK regulations on the reporting of suicide 

The UK does not officially collect data specifically recording work-related suicides. However, it has been estimated that 650 deaths by suicide each year could be work related.

A 2021 study highlighted shortcomings in the UK’s regulatory response: work-related suicides are not systematically recorded, investigated or regulated, and employers are not generally required to investigate or alter their systems following such a death. 

As suicide is expressly excluded from the deaths employers must report to the HSE, it is often treated primarily as an individual mental health issue rather than a potential workplace safety matter. Investigations into any work-related factors are not routine and depend on the discretion of the employer or Coroner. Coroners can issue Prevention of Future Deaths reports outlining the need for change following a relevant death, but these are relatively rarely used, potentially leaving a significant workplace risk unidentified.

This contrasts with other jurisdictions who formally recognise work-related suicide including Japan, the United States and France. France’s 2019 France Télécom convictions also show that executives can face criminal liability for management practices linked to employee suicides. 

RIDDOR Consultation

On 12 June 2026, an open letter from, amongst others, trade unionists, safety industry experts and bereaved families urged HSE to include work-related suicide in its consultation on the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013 (RIDDOR) to improve evidence, strengthen employer accountability and promote prevention.

It argued that HSE’s approach overlooks changing work demands and psychological harm, undermining its safety mission and diverging from international practice. Although HSE currently considers suicide reporting to be an unfair burden on employers, it confirmed that the letter would be treated as a consultation submission. The consultation ran until July 2026 and responses are being analysed. 

The consultation has exposed a gap in the present regime. Because suspected work-related suicides are not routinely reported to HSE, the regulator may never receive the information needed to identify recurring organisational risks. The counterargument is that employers should not be required to determine the causes of a death. The practical question is whether a narrower reporting trigger could provide regulatory visibility without asking employers to make that judgment.

Prevention and preparedness 

HSE’s suicide prevention guidance provides recommendations for employers to manage workplace stressors and support those experiencing mental ill health. Recommendations include allowing flexibility in working hours, promoting good mental health and removing stigma. The guidance also addresses support to employees following a suicide and consideration of restricting access to certain items for workers with suicidal thoughts. 

BSI’s BS 30480 Suicide and the Workplace also offers a framework to help organisations identify and manage suicide risk, strengthen workplace policies, support conversations, and establish clear support and communication processes following a suicide. The framework encourages employers to treat suicide prevention as an organisational issue, rather than relying on individual wellbeing support.

Employers must proactively address mental ill health, considering both their response when someone becomes unwell and how to prevent harm. Practical steps include: 

• Use the following HSE guidance actively: suicide prevention guidance, work-related stress guidance, stress talking toolkits and management standards. Stress risk assessments should be specific, evidence-based and regularly reviewed. Individual, tailored stress risk assessments will be required where an employee is at specific risk.
• Consult employees meaningfully about workload, deadlines, staffing levels, management support and organisational change.
• Translate polices into action with clear responsibilities, training and escalation routes.
• Train managers to identify warning signs, respond appropriately and escalate concerns.
• Monitor hotspots, using absence, turnover, grievances, workload complaints and engagement feedback to identify emerging risks.
• Take bullying, harassment, discrimination and job insecurity seriously as potential drivers of acute stress
• Support flexibility, including time for counselling, medical support and other help.
• Establish clear reporting procedures so concerns about stress, deteriorating mental health or unsafe workloads can be raised early and addressed.
• Plan post-incident responses, including support for colleagues, internal investigations and review of risk assessments and controls.
• Keep contemporaneous records of assessment, consultation, implementation and review, which will matter if the employer faces scrutiny.

Work-related stress is already one of the leading causes of work-related ill health in the UK and there is increasing pressure on employers and regulators to take preventative measures to address the issue, as well as confronting the associated issue of work-related suicide more directly. The direction of travel is towards greater visibility, greater scrutiny and greater expectation of preventative action.

The practical lesson is that policies alone will not suffice. Employers should ensure stress risk assessments are fit for purpose, managers can identify and escalate concerns, reporting and monitoring systems are effective, and organisational pressures are addressed before harm occurs. 

A thoughtful and documented preventative approach is not only likely to reduce legal and regulatory risk but is also likely to reduce harm to employees and strengthen organisational resilience.