In this section

• 4.1 Investigating a psychosocial incident
• 4.2 Keeping a record of the risk management process and outcomes

While most psychosocial hazards should be identified during the routine systematic risk management process, sometimes the first time a PCBU becomes aware of an incident is when it is reported.

WHS Act 2011 Part 6, Division 1 Discriminatory, coercive or misleading conduct

No person is permitted to undertake discriminatory, coercive or misleading conduct against workers who report a WHS matter, including about psychosocial risks or incidents.

There are various ways in which workers and others including other PCBUs may report hazards and incidents to the PCBU, including for example:

• during discussions between PCBUs with shared duties
• during discussions between workers, supervisors and managers
• entering issues into a risk or incident register
• in emails, mobile text messages, letters about a complaint or a grievance
• workers’ compensation claim information, or
• reports from HSR(s) and/or union representatives.

Relevant duty holders should create a positive organisational culture which actively supports early reporting and follow up, so psychosocial hazards and risks are managed before serious harm occurs.

The person tasked with responsibility to respond to reports of psychosocial hazards and incidents should, (in line with privacy or confidentiality considerations) consult and communicate with affected workers including on how they propose to investigate the matter, and the WHS actions and improvements that may be introduced. This person should explain the likely timeframes of the process, provide updates to affected workers, and fair and adequate access to psychological support

4.1 Investigating a psychosocial incident

Responding to a report of a serious workplace psychosocial incident will mean the PCBU should undertake an investigation in a fair, timely and balanced way to try to find out what happened and why and what can be done to improve the controls, so the incident does not occur again. This process is typically more comprehensive than those used as part of the normal hazard identification and risk assessment process.

The comprehensiveness of any investigation will be proportional to the level of risk, the seriousness of actual or potential psychological harm and the number of workers affected. It will also depend on the business size and available expertise. For example, a small business may choose to have a conversation about the incident with affected workers. In contrast, a medium business may have a larger number of workers exposed and might choose to ask for assistance from an external safety professional, and a large business may use their inhouse WHS and/or external professionals.

When investigations are undertaken, especially around allegations of serious misconduct or harmful workplace behaviours, the PCBU should ensure that:

• those tasked with undertaking the investigation are competent and able to identify psychosocial hazards, sources of risk and root causes, assess the risks and recommend appropriate preventative and early intervention controls, and understand their organisational processes around investigations, and the requirements under both WHS and industrial relations legislation.
• the process is conducted in a fair, objective and timely manner ensuring due process for both those who raised the issue and workers who have had allegations made about them. Including:
  • the privacy and confidentiality of affected parties is protected
  • that throughout the investigation, affected workers (including managers and supervisors) are:
    • informed of their rights and obligations
    • provided with a copy of relevant policies and procedures
    • kept informed about possible outcomes, timeframes, rights of appeal and reviews, and
    • provided with adequate and fair support.

It will not always be appropriate to consult with the affected workers or their representative HSR(s) if the initiating report or subsequent investigation includes sensitive and confidential information about other workers. In this case, it is still useful to provide them with general information about the process and outcomes.

Harmful workplace behaviour is a WHS hazard. In addition to being reported through hazard notifications, it may be reported as a grievance or complaint, or as a potential breach of a code of conduct or professional standards. Where there are existing systems in place to investigate and discipline such behaviour, the workplace should still apply a systematic WHS risk management process to identify, assess and control underlying causes of, and risks of exposure to affected workers of the behaviour. The PCBU must control the risks whilst investigations are being conducted, so the potential for further harm is eliminated or minimised.

Notifiable incident

WHS Act 2011 Part 3 Incident Notification s35-39

Where there is a notifiable workplace incident; such as a person’s death or serious physical or psychological injury or illness requiring immediate treatment as an in-patient in a hospital, the PCBU must ensure that the regulator is notified immediately after becoming aware of the incident and that a record is kept of each incident.

4.2 Keeping a record of the risk management process and outcomes

Keeping an organisational risk register (see Appendix B for an example) is an optional but helpful way to record psychosocial and physical hazards, risks and incidents and monitor that these have been managed.

You could choose to include only high-level information in the general risk register where you are concerned about the need to maintain confidentiality.

A WHS Inspector may ask to see a copy of any records and ask about processes relating to psychosocial risk management. The PCBU should be able to demonstrate if asked how the psychosocial hazards and any incidents raised or reported by workers and others have been managed. The way the PCBU chooses to demonstrate this will vary and depends on their organisational circumstances. If the PCBU does not have a written record, an inspector could, for example, ask for statements from affected workers.