Line speed increase at a food packing plant
You are the newly appointed HSE adviser at a food packing plant employing 210 staff. Six months ago the main production line speed was raised from 60 to 75 packs per minute to meet a retailer contract. The line supervisor reports that operators are skipping the second scheduled break 'to keep up', two experienced packers have moved to other shifts, and a 34-year-old operator has had two panic attacks at work in the last month. Her GP note says 'work-related stress, fit for modified duties for four weeks'. The site manager tells you: 'Stress is not an injury, so it is not a health and safety issue; she just needs to be more resilient. Anyway, we cannot slow the line without losing the contract.' There is no stress risk assessment, no written policy on mental health, and the joint safety committee has not discussed wellbeing in 14 months.
1. Explain the distinction between work-related stress and mental ill health, and assess the site manager's claim that stress is 'not an injury' and therefore not a health and safety issue.
Read the worked answer
Work-related stress is the adverse reaction people have to excessive pressures or other types of demand placed on them; it is not a diagnosed illness. Mental ill health includes conditions such as anxiety and depression, which can be caused or worsened by prolonged stress. The operator's panic attacks and GP note are indicators that stress may already be affecting health, but neither you nor the line manager should diagnose. The manager's claim is misleading: the employer's duty under HSWA 1974 to ensure health, safety and welfare includes mental health, and MHSWR 1999 requires risk assessment. Stress itself is not a reportable injury under RIDDOR, but that is irrelevant to the duty to assess and control risks. The absence of a stress risk assessment and the 14-month gap in committee discussion strengthen the case that this is a governance failure, not a resilience failure. The line-speed and contract pressure should be treated as a risk to be assessed, not a reason to dismiss the issue.
2. Identify the immediate actions you would take for the operator and the principles that should govern them.
Read the worked answer
Immediate actions: have a private, non-diagnostic conversation; explain confidentiality and its limits; offer OH and EAP referral; ask what adjustments would help; implement the GP's modified duties for four weeks, for example reduced line speed, extra breaks or rotation away from the fastest station; appoint a single point of contact; review daily. Principles: avoid forcing disclosure; share health information only on a need-to-know basis; do not promise absolute secrecy; separate support from disciplinary action; record decisions objectively; consult the employee before changes; check the Equality Act 2010 if the condition is long-term. Assess the whole line, not just the individual, because two experienced packers left and others skip breaks; those are organisational indicators. If the role is safety-critical, obtain OH advice on fitness for work, but do not use that as a pretext to remove her without discussion. Review modified duties at four weeks and document the rationale.
3. What should the joint safety committee do next, and what evidence should it require?
Read the worked answer
The committee should treat the line-speed change as a management-of-change issue: request the change documentation, the risk assessment, and data on breaks taken, absence, turnover and near misses. It should ask for an assessment based on the HSE Management Standards covering demands, control, support, relationships, role and change, using the Indicator Tool plus focus groups by shift. It should not accept a single survey as proof. It should require an action plan with owners, dates and a review point. The committee should challenge the 'resilience' framing: if operators skip breaks to meet line speed, the primary control is work design. Evidence should include whether the retailer contract permits a trial of lower speed or extra staff at peak. The committee's role is monitoring and consultation, not diagnosis or individual case management; it should avoid discussing the operator's health in open session.