Lords' ruling means employers need to look for signs of stress

A landmark legal ruling by the House of Lords has put the onus on employers to keep up-to-date with what causes occupational stress and the effectiveness of any precautions they may take.

The ruling, in the case of Barber v Somerset County Council, has also made it clear that being unsympathetic to complaints of occupational stress or having autocratic or bullying leadership could count against an employer.

The case centred on former schoolteacher Leon Barber, who suffered a mental breakdown in November 1996, after working long hours following a restructuring at his school the year before. He had spoken to the head teacher and two deputies but nothing had been done to assist him.

The judge had taken the view that more should have been done for him, and that the school had been in breach of its duty of care.

According to law firm Cloisters, which represented Barber, in ruling in his favour and awarding £72,547 damages, the law lords agreed that, once an employer knew an employee was at risk of suffering injury from occupational stress, it was under a duty to act.

This duty continued until something reasonable was done.

Certified sickness absence because of stress or depression needed to be taken seriously by employers, requiring an inquiry from the employer.

"They should not be brushed off unsympathetically, or by sympathising but simply telling him or her to prioritise their work without taking steps to improve or consider the situation further," said Cloisters.

Critically, a management culture that was sympathetic and 'on their side' could make a real difference to the outcome of a case.

"Monitoring employees who are known to be suffering from occupational stress is mandatory. If they don't improve, more drastic steps may need to be taken to help them. Temporary recruitment may be required. Although this will cost money, it will be less costly than the permanent loss through psychiatric illness of a valued member of staff," added Cloisters.

The statutory duty to carry out risk assessments had also been recognised by the judgment, it suggested.

The judgment was welcomed by the National Union of Teachers, which said more teachers might be able to pursue claims as a result.