The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health: Employer Considerations
Now, as closed businesses begin to reopen and work-at-home employees begin to return to their workplaces, employers may find themselves confronting a whole new range of COVID-19-related issues.
June 12, 2020 at 09:47 AM
4 minute read
COVID-19 created a number of problems for employers, not the least of which was the need for many employees to work from home.
Now, as closed businesses begin to reopen and work-at-home employees begin to return to their workplaces, employers may find themselves confronting a whole new range of COVID-19-related issues.
Among those unexpected issues: employees who return to work with emotional or mental problems.
Most businesses have always been better at dealing with the physical concerns of their employees than with their emotional problems. But COVID-19 has created levels of stress for all people, and workers are not excluded. The pressure that workers have experienced in past weeks may not become fully evident until those people return to their usual workplaces and schedules.
Employers may realize that their workers will need some assistance to get back on track. If employers don't provide assistance to employees who are depressed or distracted, productivity may suffer significantly.
But doing the right thing may not be the only motivation to provide assistance to workers who are hurting. Failure to provide help may expose employers to problems from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
That's right. Failure to provide assistance to employees with emotional or mental problems could put employers in hot water with the federal government.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines say mental illness can be considered work-related if an employee provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional. If an employee suffering from mental illness experiences a dramatic increase in symptoms after returning to work, and it is shown to be work-related, the employer may be required to report the case to OSHA.
Mental impairments that limit one or more major life activities may rise to the level of a protected disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If an employee with a disability requests an accommodation, employers must provide it so long as it does not pose an undue hardship on the company.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says employers should be on the lookout for a number of stress danger signals on the part of returning-to-work employees:
- Trouble concentrating
- Irritation, anger or denial
- Uncertainty, nervousness or anxiety
- Lack of motivation
- Feeling tired, overwhelmed or burned out
- Feeling sad or depressed
- Insomnia
And there are other factors: Concern about being exposed to the virus; family needs, including children's distance learning; uncertainty about employment; learning curves or technical issues involving new platforms; and adapting to a different workspace or work schedule.
For some, such stressors may lead to serious mental health problems, including anxiety disorders and depression.
The degree to which employers addressed mental health before COVID-19 varied greatly and was often wanting. As Florida reopens, companies should be sensitive to employees' mental health. Ignoring those needs could demoralize workers and leave employers open to legal peril.
In the COVID-19 landscape, such an accommodation could include continued work from home.
Here are some things employers can do to help them recognize and deal with emotional issues:
- Communicate with employees and their supervisors about job stress.
- Identify job-related stressors and eliminate as many as possible.
- Talk with workers, supervisors and union leaders about how the pandemic has affected work.
- Explore how mental health resources might be leveraged for the workplace.
- Institute rest and exercise periods.
- Watch for signs that employees might be abusing alcohol or drugs, and make sure that those workers have access to treatment or counseling.
Employers should be proactive about recognizing mental health issues and respond appropriately. Such a response might include such assistance as the following:
- Protected lines of communication. Employers may designate a specific person, email address or telephone number that employees can utilize for informational purposes. The process should be free of stigma and may even be anonymous.
- Benefits. Employers should review existing medical/mental health benefits and consider supplementing them. Employers should announce what benefits are available and how they can be accessed.
- Flexible return-to-work policies. To ease stress associated with the transition back to the office, employers may relax the timeframe and manner in which employees return to work.
Attorney Jeffrey Lieser is a founder of Tampa-based law firm Lieser Skaff Alexander. www.lieserskaff.com
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLeveraging the Power of Local Chambers of Commerce: A Second-Career Lawyer’s Guide to Building a Thriving Practice
5 minute readCFPB Proposes Rule to Regulate Data Brokers Selling Sensitive Information
5 minute readEssential Labor Shifts: Navigating Noncompetes, Workplace Politics and the AI Revolution
Trending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250