Making Your Situation Visible: How to Report Stress in the Workplace

When workplace pressures continue or concerns remain unresolved, many people reach a point where they feel something needs to change and their employer needs to become aware, but aren’t sure how to report stress in the workplace. This is not always about escalation or confrontation, but it is nearly always about gaining clarity and achieving a change in the working environment. 

From this stage, one of two things usually happen: 

• Serious harm can be avoided and working relationships stabilised or preserved, or 
• Individuals are better equipped to protect themselves so that, if formal action becomes necessary, they are prepared and more likely to achieve a fair outcome. 

This article is here to guide you through how to report stress in the workplace to your employer, making them aware about how your wellbeing at work is affected and preparing you for what happens next. It’s part of a series exploring each stage of a workplace stress claim, from recognising something is wrong through to litigation (this stage) and recovery: 

• Stage 1: Work-Related Stress: Early Signs, Causes and What to Do
• Stage 2 (this stage): Making Your Situation Visible: How to Report Stress in the Workplace
• Stage 3: An Employers Duty of Care: What Your Employer Must Do Once They Know About Your Workplace Stress
• Stage 4: Deterioration, Absence and Recovery: A Guide to Taking Time Off Work for Stress
• Stage 5: Legal Strategy After Workplace Stress: How Work Related Stress Claims Work
• Stage 6: Litigation and Preparing for Trial: What to Expect From a Workplace Stress Claim
• Stage 7: Aftermath and Recovery: Life After Workplace Stress and What Comes Next
• Stages overview 

Summary of this stage 

Stage 2 is the point at which your experience stops being private and starts being known to your employer. This article looks at how to report workplace stress and the practical steps that may be taken, including occupational health referrals, stress risk assessments and grievances, as well as why the way you communicate your situation to your employer matters as much as the steps you take. Once your employer is aware that your health is being affected, their responsibilities change. This stage is where that awareness begins. 

How do I know when I’ve moved from Stage 1 to Stage 2?  

As is true in real life, there is a natural overlap and blurring of the stages. Many people will reach Stage 2 very quickly, while for others it may take many months. 

Up to this point, stress may have been internalised, minimised, or managed quietly. Once concerns are communicated, documented or raised, the workplace can no longer assume everything is functioning normally. From both a practical and legal perspective, this is a turning point. 

This stage is often where formal or semi-formal mechanisms begin to appear, such as:  

• Supervision discussions  
• Adjustments to workload  
• Occupational health referrals  
• Wellbeing reviews  
• Internal grievances 

These processes can be constructive and supportive. In some environments, they lead to meaningful change. In others, they may feel slow, procedural, or uncertain. The quality of these responses often determines whether situations stabilise or escalate. 

How can Setfords help?

David Miers is a consultant solicitor specialising exclusively in work-related stress and psychiatric injury claims. He is based in Liverpool but can represent clients nationwide on a fully remote basis. He joined Setfords in 2019 and previously led the Work-Related Stress team at Slater u0026 Gordon after training at Weightmans.

Reach out today

What typically happens once I raise concerns at work?   

Once the workplace becomes aware that something is wrong, situations tend to move in one of three directions: 

• Resolution and support: the organisation responds constructively, adjustments are made, and the situation stabilises. 
• Continued strain without meaningful change: concerns are acknowledged but little changes in practice, leaving the employee in a prolonged state of difficulty. 
• Escalation into formal processes: the situation deteriorates and more formal steps become necessary. 

The quality of the organisation’s response at this stage often determines which of these paths follows. Some employers take early concerns seriously and act quickly. Others rely heavily on process, which can feel detached from the day-to-day reality of the person affected. 

What matters most is that this stage marks the point where the situation is no longer invisible. Risk has been identified. The workplace is aware. Decisions begin to carry weight. 

Practical Guidance: How to Report Stress in the Workplace

To keep this section clear of legal language, foreseeability has its own section below. In reality, however, it sits at the heart of this stage: making the employer aware that something needs to change to prevent harm. 

Every case is different and it would be impossible to cover every scenario, but in an ideal world, these three steps should be undertaken before thinking about litigation: 

• An occupational health assessment  
• A stress risk assessment 
• A grievance 

The stages can blur, so this section focuses on occupational health and risk assessments, with grievances addressed separately. 

How to Report Stress in the Workplace: Occupational Health

What is an occupational health referral and what should I expect?   

Occupational health referrals are often introduced at this stage. Their purpose is not to judge performance or assign blame. They are intended to: 

• Understand wellbeing 
• Assess workplace impact 
• Recommend adjustments 
• Support continued employment 

Recommendations might include: 

• Undertaking a stress risk assessment 
• Workload adjustments 
• Flexible working 
• Phased return 
• Additional supervision 
• Environmental changes 

Occupational health operates independently of line management. Its role is advisory and preventative. Employees should be open during the assessment and see this an opportunity to finally get the support they need to work safely and in a supportive environment. 

Should I allow my occupational health report to be shared with my employer? 

Yes, this is important. If you have had an occupational health assessment for workplace stress, permitting disclosure of the report to HR or your manager ensures that what you have been experiencing is clearly explained to the organisation. This ensures that their duty of care to prevent injury is engaged. 

Whilst occupational health advice is simply that; advice, it is highly persuasive in framing the duty of care owed to the employee by the employer. 

If an employer receives a clear occupational health report and fails to act on its recommendations, it will find it difficult to later argue that it responded reasonably, particularly if that failure contributes to a deterioration in your mental health. 

A failure to refer an employee for an occupational health assessment is often pleaded as a breach of duty, but this is considered in more detail in Stage 3: Ongoing Employer Duties. 

How Setfords can support you.

If you are experiencing bullying at work, getting the right legal advice can make a significant difference. The experienced employment solicitors at Setfords provide clear, practical guidance to help you understand your rights and explore your options if you are facing workplace bullying or harassment.

Contact us

How to Report Stress in the Workplace: Stress Risk Assessment

What is a stress risk assessment?  

A stress risk assessment is a preventative tool used to identify and address workplace pressures before they cause harm. They are often recommended in occupational health reports. 

It is not a disciplinary process. It is a structured way of understanding risk and implementing support. 

Excellent guidance is available via the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). 

The HSE Management Standards focus on key areas: 

• Workload demands 
• Control over work 
• Support from managers and colleagues 
• Relationships in the workplace 
• Clarity of role 
• Organisational change 

A typical stress risk assessment may involve: 

• Discussion with the employee 
• Review of workload and expectations 
• Identification of pressure points 
• Exploration of support needs 
• Creation of an action plan 
• Monitoring and follow-up 

This process is designed to prevent escalation and support safe, sustainable working conditions. 

What if I’m asked to complete the risk assessment alone, or with the manager who is causing my stress? 

Sometimes, employees are asked to complete the risk assessment on their own, or with their manager who might be the source of the stress. Neither situation is ideal. However, the important thing is that the process is undertaken. A resolution or compromise reached through an imperfect process is generally preferable to the assessment not happening at all.  

Again, a failure by an employer to undertake a suitable and sufficient risk assessment is often pleaded as a breach of duty, but we will consider this in more detail in the next stage.

How to Report Stress in the Workplace: Raising a grievance 

In stress at work cases, grievances are usually raised at one of two stages: 

1) Stage 2 (this stage) 

Here, a grievance is used to establish awareness and foreseeability. It acts as a measured step to ensure concerns are heard when informal discussions have not led to change.  

If framed appropriately, it can place the employer on notice of a risk to health (foreseeability) and create an opportunity for intervention before harm develops. This can be considered a protective or defensive grievance 

2) Stage 4 – documenting failures and escalation 

At a later stage, a grievance may serve a different purpose: recording what has happened, identifying failures, and clarifying events once the situation has deteriorated. The tone, intention and objective are different. 

This section focuses on grievances at stage 2. 

What is a grievance and do I need to raise one? 

A grievance is often misunderstood. It is not a declaration of conflict or a legal threat. It is a structured way of raising concerns formally when informal discussions have not resolved the situation. 

Whether a grievance is necessary depends on your circumstances, but it becomes worth considering where: 

• Your workload remains unmanageable despite being raised 
• Difficult behaviour has continued after you raised it 
• Promised support has not materialised 
• Your wellbeing is deteriorating 
• Earlier discussions have not led to meaningful change 

At this stage, the purpose of a grievance is not escalation or accusation, but clarity and visibility. It ensures your concerns are formally communicated and understood within the organisation. 

In practical terms, a grievance often represents the point at which an employer can no longer say it was unaware of the problem. It helps ensure that concerns are visible, documented, and understood, which in turn shapes what the organisation is expected to do next.  

What should a grievance include and avoid? 

A well-constructed grievance typically includes: 

• A brief summary of concerns 
• A factual chronology 
• Specific examples 
• The impact on wellbeing and work 
• Clear issues the employee would like addressed 
• Preferred outcomes or support sought 

It should avoid: 

• Personal attacks 
• Legal arguments 
• Emotional language 
• Ultimatums 

Handled appropriately, a grievance gives the organisation an opportunity to intervene, support the employee, and stabilise the situation before harm develops further. 

Setfords is here to support.

We have a specialist solicitor in u003ca href=u0022https://www.setfords.co.uk/our-people/profile/david_miers/u0022 target=u0022_blanku0022u003eDavid Miersu003c/au003e who is highly experienced in this area of work and is one of the few UK specialists in work-related stress claims. David has a proven track record with millions of pounds of compensation recovered for clients since joining Setfords in 2017.

Reach out today

Distinguishing stress from foreseeable psychiatric injury 

Many employees assume that telling their employer they are “stressed” is enough to trigger support or responsibility. In practice, it is not always that simple. 

Workplace stress is common. Deadlines, workload pressure, and challenging environments are part of many roles. The law does not expect employers to intervene every time an employee feels under pressure. 

What changes the position is when it becomes clear that the employee is becoming clinically unwell. 

There is an important difference between: 

• Expressing pressure or dissatisfaction, and 
• Communicating a risk of psychiatric harm or clinical deterioration. 

It is the second situation that begins to engage an employer’s duty of care in a meaningful way. 

In legal terms, foreseeability is not created simply because work is demanding. It arises when an employer knows — or reasonably ought to know — that an employee’s mental health is being affected to the point of illness. 

That may be through: 

• Repeated warnings 
• Medical evidence 
• Sickness absence 
• Clear descriptions of deteriorating wellbeing 
• Requests for support linked to health 

At that point, the risk is no longer abstract. It becomes something the organisation is expected to respond to. 

How do I communicate the seriousness of my situation to my employer?

Many employees communicate distress in ways that do not clearly signal clinical risk. These statements are understandable, but they may not fully convey the seriousness of the situation. 

Examples of statements that may fall short: 

• “I’m really stressed at the moment.” 
• “Work is very busy and it’s getting on top of me.” 
• “I’m finding things difficult.” 
• “The workload is too much.” 
• “I’m struggling a bit.” 

These describe pressure but they may not alert an employer to a risk of psychiatric illness. From an employer’s perspective, they can often be interpreted as temporary workload concerns rather than a developing health issue. 

Communication becomes more significant when it links workplace pressures to health impact. Statements more likely to create foreseeability would be: 

• “I am struggling to cope and my mental health is being affected.” 
• “I am experiencing anxiety and sleep problems because of work.” 
• “I am concerned I am becoming unwell if this continues.” 
• “I don’t feel able to sustain this workload without it affecting my mental health.” 

These statements signal that the issue is no longer just pressure, it is potential harm. 

Where an employee feels safe to do so, a clear and measured message can make a significant difference. A gold standard example might be: 

“I want to raise a concern about my wellbeing. The current workload and situation are affecting my mental health, and I am worried that I may become unwell if this continues. I would appreciate support and a discussion about possible adjustments.” 

This type of communication: 

• Remains professional 
• Avoids confrontation 
• Links pressure to health 
• Creates clarity 
• Signals risk without making accusations 

It helps the employer understand that this is not simply a performance or workload issue, it is a wellbeing concern that may require action. Many psychiatric injury cases turn not on whether stress existed, but on when the risk of illness became visible. 

Employers are not expected to anticipate hidden harm. But once concerns are clearly communicated, particularly where health impact is identified, the position changes. 

This is why Stage 2 is so important: it’s about ensuring the seriousness of the situation is understood early enough for meaningful change to happen. 

The legal framework at this stage: foreseeability of injury

What is “foreseeability of injury” in stress at work cases? 

Foreseeability of injury is one of the most important legal concepts in workplace stress cases, and it is worth understanding early. 

An employer’s duty of care to prevent psychiatric ill health, or other stress-related illness, is usually only engaged once it knows (or ought reasonably to know) that an employee is becoming unwell. This is what is meant by foreseeability of injury. 

Employers are not expected to prevent every instance of stress or difficulty at work. Many roles are demanding, and pressure alone does not automatically trigger a legal duty to intervene. But the position changes when an employer knows, or reasonably ought to know, that an employee is at risk of harm.  

This is why making your situation visible matters so much. Without clear communication of the risk, an employer can argue that the harm was not foreseeable, and that it had no reason to intervene. 

Most people at this point still want the situation to improve. They are not thinking about claims. They are trying to protect their wellbeing, their career, and their professional position, but how organisations respond at this stage often determineseverything that follows. 

Analogy: the loose stair vs the invisible pressure 

Some people struggle with the concept of foreseeability of injury, particularly if they have experience of physical injury claims. Why should psychiatric injury be treated differently? 

In truth, the legal principle is the same, but the way risk presents itself is very different. 

A useful analogy is the loose stair vs the invisible pressure.  

If a staircase at work is broken and someone trips, the risk is obvious. The employer can see the loose step. Others may have complained. Someone may already have stumbled. If nothing was done and someone was injured, foreseeability is relatively easy to establish. 

Psychiatric injury is different. 

There is rarely a single “broken step.” Instead, the risk builds gradually: increasing workload, repeated conflict, exposure to distressing situations, or a lack of support over time. Many employees continue working, performing, and appearing outwardly capable while their mental health deteriorates, and the warning signs are not always obvious and are often internalised: 

• An employee mentioning they are struggling 
• Signs of exhaustion 
• Sickness absence 
• Performance changes 
• Concerns raised informally 

That is why foreseeability is often harder to establish in psychiatric injury cases. 

With a physical risk, the danger is usually visible and inherent. 

With psychological harm, the employer often only becomes responsible once warning signs have been communicated or become clear. 

The law recognises this difference. Foreseeability in psychiatric injury cases often depends on when the signs became visible, and what was done in response once they were. 

What’s next?

This stage is a critical point in the process. By raising concerns, engaging with occupational health, completing a risk assessment, or submitting a grievance, you have ensured that your situation is no longer invisible. Your employer is now aware, which carries legal and practical weight. 

Stage 3: An Employers Duty of Care: What Your Employer Must Do Once They Know About Your Workplace Stress picks up from here. Once an employer knows about your workplace stress and the risk of injury it presents, their role shifts from awareness to action. The key question is no longer whether a problem exists, but how they respond to it.