Psychosocial Hazards: The People We Sometimes Forget

When we think about psychosocial hazards in the workplace, we often focus on those directly impacted - workers exposed to aggression, burnout, bullying, or trauma. However, one group is frequently overlooked in psychosocial risk management: the first responders, safety professionals, investigators, and witnesses who are called upon in the aftermath of a serious or fatal workplace incident.

These individuals may have extensive training in emergency response, investigation, and crisis management, but many have received little to no training in managing the psychosocial impact of their roles. This gap in knowledge and support means that while we are addressing risks for frontline workers, we may be leaving behind those responsible for responding, investigating, and supporting them.

Why EAP Services Alone Aren’t Enough to Control Psychosocial Hazards

Too often, organisations default to Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) as their only psychosocial control measure. While EAPs provide valuable support, they are usually used as a reactive control, not a preventative one. In the hierarchy of controls, EAP services function like PPE or administrative controls - the hazards still exist, and they rely on the worker to seek help after exposure, rather than addressing the root cause or reducing the likelihood of harm in the first place.

For first responders, safety teams, and investigators, this approach is insufficient. These workers:

✔ May not recognise the psychological impact of their role until much later.

✔ Often prioritise others over themselves, delaying or avoiding seeking help.

✔ May experience secondary trauma from repeatedly being exposed to catastrophic events.

✔ Could face burnout, disengagement, or emotional exhaustion over time.

By relying only on EAPs, organisations shift the burden of resilience onto the individual, rather than addressing systemic issues that could reduce harm in the first place.

Industries Where First Responders and Investigators Lack Psychosocial Risk Training

Many industries have highly trained emergency responders, safety teams, and investigators, but their training focuses on physical risk, emergency response, and procedural investigations - not on managing the psychosocial impact of their roles. Some key industries include:

• Mining & Resources – Mines Rescue teams respond to fires, explosions, collapses, and fatalities, yet training often lacks a strong psychosocial risk management component.

• Construction & Infrastructure – Workplace fatalities, serious injuries, and traumatic incidents often involve first responders and untrained safety teams dealing with grief, stress, and high-pressure investigations.

• Transport & Logistics – Rail, road, and aviation workers frequently witness or respond to high-impact crashes and fatalities, with limited psychosocial support embedded in their training.

• Manufacturing & Heavy Industry – Investigators and safety teams are often first on the scene after serious incidents, but structured mental health and resilience frameworks are rarely in place.

• Emergency Services & Law Enforcement – While police, paramedics, and firefighters have some psychosocial training, the impact on investigators, supervisors, and compliance officers is often overlooked.

• Health & Community Services – Nurses, social workers, and aged care staff routinely deal with traumatic events, but psychosocial risk strategies for supervisors, compliance teams, and administrators are often missing.

• Education & Schools – Teachers, school staff, and principals frequently deal with aggression, violence, and traumatic incidents involving students, parents, and the public. Yet, many lack training in managing the psychosocial impact of these events - leaving them vulnerable to stress, burnout, and long-term emotional exhaustion.

Developing Psychosocial Risk Bowties & Registers: Don’t Forget the Others

When developing psychosocial risk bowties and risk registers, it is critical to think beyond the affected worker and consider the wider impact radius of a serious workplace incident. The first responders, safety professionals, witnesses, supervisors, and investigators also experience harm, and failing to address these risks can lead to:

🚨 Emotional exhaustion & burnout – Repeated exposure to critical incidents without structured support can erode mental resilience over time.

🚨 Compassion fatigue & disengagement – Responders and investigators may become desensitised to risk and trauma, reducing their ability to engage effectively in prevention and intervention.

🚨 Cumulative trauma & PTSD – Just because someone is trained to deal with high-risk events does not mean they are immune to their effects.

🚨 High turnover & talent loss – Without proper controls, safety professionals, investigators, and supervisors leave their roles due to unaddressed psychosocial risks.

When mapping risk pathways, ensure that psychosocial risk controls apply not just to the worker involved in the incident, but also to those responsible for responding, investigating, or supervising in the aftermath.

Higher Order Controls: Supporting First Responders & Investigators

To truly manage psychosocial risks for first responders, safety professionals, and investigators, organisations must implement higher-order controls that go beyond reactive measures like EAP. This includes:

• Embedding Psychosocial Training in First Responder Programs – Ensure that Mines Rescue teams, safety professionals, and investigators receive formal training in managing psychological hazards, trauma exposure, and resilience-building.

• Pre-Incident Psychological Preparedness – Just as workers undergo emergency response drills, responders and investigators should be mentally prepared for the realities of their roles—including exposure to distressing events.

• Formal Peer Support Networks – Establish structured, peer-led debriefing programs where responders and investigators can discuss their experiences in a psychologically safe environment.

• Structured Psychological Risk Assessments – Treat psychosocial risks the same way you would critical physical risks, ensuring mental health risk factors are included in safety audits and risk reviews.

• Mental Health Leadership Training for Supervisors – Supervisors of workers involved in serious incidents also need support. They are often the first point of contact for distressed employees but may have no training in psychosocial risk management.

• Job Role Adjustments & Recovery Pathways – High-exposure roles should include rotation policies, time away from high-impact duties, and alternative role pathways for workers affected by cumulative exposure to trauma.

A Holistic Approach to Psychosocial Risk Management

Workplace safety and risk professionals are dedicated to preventing harm, yet when it comes to psychosocial risk management, we often forget the very people responsible for protecting others.

First responders, investigators, safety professionals, and supervisors deserve higher-order controls that prevent harm - not just reactive measures that expect them to "become resilient" after exposure to trauma.

If you’re developing psychosocial risk bowties, risk registers, or WHS frameworks, make sure they include these critical roles. Strengthening prevention and mitigation efforts for first responders, safety teams, and investigators isn’t just good practice—it’s essential for sustainable, long-term risk management.

See our training, workshops and resources for psychosocial risk management