Psychosocial regulation in Australia, Japan, Singapore and the EU
Every market handles psychosocial risk differently. Here’s how each one treats it, and where the direction of travel is the same.
1 December 2025
Victoria was last, on 1 December 2025, under its own OHS (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025.
This is not a new duty. The obligation to manage risks to psychological health has always existed under the general duty in section 19 of the WHS Act. What changed is that the benchmark became enforceable.
- From 1 July 2026, NSW businesses have a duty to comply with approved Codes of Practice under the WHS Act 2011 (NSW), or provide a standard equivalent to or higher than the Code (s26A).
- Regulators no longer need to prove harm occurred; falling short of the Code may itself constitute a breach.
- Higher-order controls (work design and management practices) are required. In New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria, training alone is not sufficient as a primary control.
2015
The Stress Check Programme has been mandatory for workplaces of 50 or more employees since 2015.
The mandate exists now; universal scope is what’s new. Japan is the only one of these markets that mandates a measurement instrument.
- The amended Industrial Safety and Health Act (promulgated May 2025) extends it to all workplaces regardless of size, with a proposed effective date of April 2028.
Nov 2023
The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-Being at Workplaces (MOM, SNEF and NTUC) was issued on 20 November 2023 as recommendations for employers.
The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-Being at Workplaces is a set of recommendations and is explicitly not legally binding. It encourages employers to act and does not compel them. Singapore does not have an enforceable psychosocial duty equivalent to Australia’s.
- The Code of Practice on WSH Risk Management was expanded in 2021 to explicitly cover mental well-being.
- The 2022 Code of Practice on Chief Executives’ and Board of Directors’ WSH Duties refers to directors allocating resources to workplace mental well-being.
- Approved Codes are not laws, but courts may consider compliance with them.
Singapore is legislating in the same direction.
The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-Being at Workplaces is guidance, and the Code of Practice on WSH Risk Management was expanded in 2021 to cover mental well-being. Separately, the Workplace Fairness Act names a mental health condition as a protected characteristic and will require employers with 25 or more staff to run a written grievance process. It passed in two bills across 2025 and is expected in force by the end of 2027.
They are different instruments doing different jobs. The Act governs discrimination and grievance handling; it does not require psychosocial risk management, and it does not make the Tripartite Advisory binding. What it does is make mental health legally consequential, and a grievance process needs a record behind it.
Plus Ultra hosts customer data in Australia. We follow Singapore’s direction of travel closely; we don’t yet operate there.
No fixed date
Managing psychosocial risk is a legal requirement under Framework Directive 89/391/EEC: employers must assess and manage all workplace risks, and EU-OSHA explicitly extends this to psychosocial hazards.
The Framework Directive does not explicitly use the terms “psychosocial risk” or “work-related stress”. The extension to psychosocial hazards comes through EU-OSHA guidance and the social-partner framework agreements. Implementation varies significantly by member state.
- The extension is supported by the social-partner framework agreements on work-related stress (2004) and on harassment and violence at work (2007).
- Implementation varies significantly by member state: some have detailed binding legislation, others general legislation.
Every Australian jurisdiction requires this now.
Australia has nine work health and safety jurisdictions, each with its own regulator and its own Act. Since December 2025, when Victoria’s standalone regulations took effect, all of them require employers to manage psychosocial hazards as an enforceable duty.
The duty attaches to being a PCBU. There is no employee threshold: the size of your organisation changes what counts as reasonably practicable, and the duty applies either way.
Two things hold everywhere. Higher-order controls (work design, staffing, supervision) must be considered before training, posters or an employee assistance programme. And consultation with workers is a legal duty that has to be evidenced.
Some regulators go further and say plainly that training alone is not sufficient as a primary control.
Eight jurisdictions regulate psychosocial hazards through the same four regulations, each with its own approved code of practice: New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory, Western Australia, the ACT and the Commonwealth. Victoria does it differently, under standalone regulations of its own. Every one of them requires it.
New South Wales made its Code an enforceable benchmark and funds a dedicated psychosocial inspectorate. From March 2025, Queensland requires a written plan for sexual-harassment risk specifically. Each applies only in its own state. Your own regulator’s requirements are the ones that bind you.
Audit-ready means: every hazard recorded with the control chosen against it, a named owner, and a dated trail of what you found and when you last reviewed it.
What each step asks, and what the platform records
Identify
Find the hazards, consulting workers.
Records: pulse and questionnaire results by team, written feedback with the topic each worker chose.
Assess
Judge how likely and how serious each one is.
Records: the rating on each register entry; team trends.
Control
Eliminate the risk where reasonably practicable, otherwise minimise it, higher-order controls first.
Records: controls in hierarchy order, a named owner for each.
Review
Check that controls work and revisit them.
Records: review dates, the audit trail, team trends over time.
What this covers.
- Measurement on validated instruments.
- A hazard record with controls in hierarchy order. Elimination is asked first.
- A named owner against each control.
- A review trail: what you found, what you did about it, and when you last looked.
- An export a WHS officer can read.
What stays yours.
The duty. It attaches to you as a PCBU and cannot be transferred to a supplier.
The controls. We record what you chose and show whether it moved; choosing it is your judgement, informed by consulting the workers affected.
The legal question. Whether you have discharged the duty is a matter for you, your advisers and your regulator. We produce the evidence and give no verdict on it.
The certificate. It shows you have a process; this is the running record that shows what it found.
The international guidance: ISO 45003 and the WHO guidelines
ISO 45003, published in 2021, is the international standard for managing psychosocial risk at work. It gives guidelines for doing so inside an ISO 45001 occupational health and safety management system. It contains guidelines and no requirements, so it is not certifiable the way ISO 45001 is, though conformance can be independently assessed.
The World Health Organization’s guidelines on mental health at work, published in 2022, recommend organisational interventions that reduce or remove psychosocial risk factors such as bullying and low job control.
In Australia the duty is set in law and applies whether or not you hold a certificate. Plus Ultra supports your ISO 45003 alignment; it does not certify anything.
ISO 45003:2021 (ISO, June 2021) · World Health Organization, Guidelines on mental health at work, 28 September 2022
Plus Ultra provides decision-support and evidence. It is not legal advice, and it is not a compliance verdict. The WHS duty of care remains with the employer.