Understanding and mitigating employee burn-out

Employee burnout, identified by prolonged physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion due to chronic stress, is not just a wellness issue; it also carries significant legal implications. Useful HR strategies for avoiding staff burnout can be found in the Quality and Outcomes Framework used by GP practices.

Effectively managing employee well-being and avoiding burnout amongst staff are pressing concerns for HR professionals working with us at Neathouse Partners. Useful strategies can be identified within the healthcare sector, specifically in the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) utilised by GP practices.

Employee burnout, identified by prolonged physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion due to chronic stress, is not just a wellness issue; it also carries significant legal implications.

In light of the Health and Safety at Work Act (1974), it’s crucial to manage potential causes of workplace stress, as underscored by the landmark Walker v Northumberland County Council (1995) case.

The High Court ruling in the Walker case expanded employers’ responsibility to encompass mental health, significantly altering health and safety standards at workplaces. The verdict affirmed the necessity for employers to prevent work-induced mental stress.

In John Walker’s case, experiencing two breakdowns due to a heavy workload and insufficient support underscores this vital employer obligation to maintain a mentally safe work environment.

What Employers Can Do To Help

The QOF system stresses the significance of a compassionate, inclusive workspace and recommends routine assessments of workload, flexibility, absence causes, and support quality.

This implies that businesses need to:

  • Regularly evaluate their team’s well-being considering workloads and management systems.
  • Be open to flexible working conditions such as remote work, flexible hours, or job-sharing.

To prevent employee burnout, employers can:

  • Recognise signs of burnout and create a supportive environment.
  • Implement flexible work conditions and devise a well-being action plan.
  • Invest in regular training, fair remuneration, and promote compassionate leadership.
  • Initiate a ‘buddy’ system for newcomers and prevent discrimination.
  • Encourage regular peer review meetings and reflection time.
  • Address potential workforce gaps to avoid overworking staff.

The Critical Role of Leadership In Preventing Employee Burnout

Leadership is central to the Quality of Framework (QoF) model and effective leaders not only inspire and motivate their teams but also safeguard their well-being, thus fostering a resilient, productive and engaged workforce.

  • Train leaders to identify burnout signs such as fatigue, productivity drop, increased absenteeism, cynicism, or disengagement.
  • Include preventive strategies in leadership training to give leaders the skills to create a stress-minimised, balanced work-life environment. This could include encouraging regular breaks, promoting positive work cultures, supporting flexible working arrangements and setting manageable workloads.
  • Equip leaders to foster open dialogues about mental health and well-being, promoting a culture of trust and comfort.
  • Highlight the importance of personalised support measures, like workload adjustments, mentoring, and professional mental health referrals, in training.

Legally, employers are obliged to safeguard employee health, including mental well-being, so taking steps to train leaders on burnout prevention is an essential step for employers wanting to meet their obligations under workplace safety laws whilst promoting well-being and productivity amongst their teams.

Legal Precedents On Employer Responsibility

In the case of Barber v Somerset County Council (2004): A UK schoolteacher, Leon Alan Barber, suffered from a stress-related illness leading to early retirement. His workload was excessive and he had previously taken time off for stress. Upon return, he was given the same workload, which resulted in further illness.

The House of Lords (now the Supreme Court) ruled in Barber’s favour, stating that employers are responsible if they fail to take steps that are reasonable considering the circumstances, to prevent employees from suffering harm to their health and safety.

Final Thoughts

Both of the cases noted in this article establish legal precedents emphasising an employer’s responsibility to consider the mental health of their employees and to take reasonable measures to prevent harm from undue stress and potential burnout in the workplace.

    Read more

    Latest News

    Read More

    Can salary sacrifice schemes boost workplace sustainability?

    7 December 2023


    Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

    Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

    Latest HR Jobs

    University of Dundee – Research and Innovation Services (RIS} Salary: £45,585 to £54,395. Grade 8, per annum This provides summary information and comment on the

    Swansea University – Human ResourcesSalary: £25,138 to £27,979 per annum (pro-rated for part time) together with the NEST Pension Benefits. Grade 05 This provides summary

    British Geological Survey – BGS Human Resources and Learning & DevelopmentSalary: £43,116 to £47,076 per annum, pro rata (depending on qualifications and experience). UKRI Pay

    Queen Mary University of LondonSalary: £38,165 to £44,722 This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court

    Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

    Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE