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
© 2024 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 AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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