New IWH research across 22 jurisdictions reveals Canada lags Australia on preventing work-related psychological injuries
Work-related psychological injuries are increasing in both number and cost compared to physical injuries, and Canadian jurisdictions remain far less coordinated in how they prevent and manage these conditions than their Australian counterparts, according to new research from the Institute for Work & Health (IWH).
Peter Smith, president and senior scientist at IWH and a professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto, presented the findings this week as part of the IWH Speakers Series. The research involved a modified environmental scan across 14 Canadian and nine Australian jurisdictions, plus interviews with 32 experts across 16 jurisdictions, funded by the Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba.
"Approaches vary a lot across different jurisdictions," said Smith. "That variation is a lot greater across Canadian jurisdictions than it is across Australian jurisdictions."
The cost of a poor psychosocial climate
A related IWH study, published in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, found that organisations with both a poor OHS climate and a poor psychosocial safety climate see psychological injury prevalence reach 17 per cent, nearly triple the rate in organizations where the psychosocial climate is good. Physical injuries similarly doubled. "Focusing on the psychosocial environment not only protects against psychological injuries, but physical injuries as well," Smith said. Psychological injury claims also carry longer durations and greater health care costs than physical ones, making early prevention critical.
What Australia is doing differently
Australia's consistency stems from Safe Work Australia, which developed a national code of practice now adopted by every state and territory. It requires employers to assess and address psychosocial hazards, framing the obligation around the work environment rather than employees' mental health broadly. Smith highlighted the code's straightforward four-step model: identify risks, assess their frequency and impact, control them, and review the measures. Canadian OHS professionals navigating this landscape have no equivalent national framework to draw on.
Australian jurisdictions have also largely abandoned individual resilience-building as a primary strategy. "Things around trying to treat the individual, build resilience, were not successful and took a lot of resources," Smith said. The evidence points clearly toward organizational-level interventions targeting how work is structured and managed.
The Canadian gap
In Canada, even basic questions about which psychological conditions are compensable vary by province. One province covers only post-traumatic stress; most others cover chronic mental stress, but adjudication processes differ. The separation of prevention and compensation functions in provinces like Ontario creates further confusion for employers trying to understand their obligations.
Canada's National Standard for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace is currently under revision, but Smith noted uncertainty about whether it brings compensation and prevention authorities together in the way SafeWork Australia does. He identified the Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of Canada as a body well positioned to drive greater harmonization.
Claims, return to work, and what employers can do
Jurisdictions with strong track records on psychological injury claims use smaller, specialised caseloads, trauma-informed adjudication training, and early intervention supports (including social workers and counsellors) provided at no cost to workers during the claims process. Research cited by Smith, conducted in Victoria, Australia, found workers with psychological injuries are less likely to receive a return-to-work plan or a target return date than those with physical injuries, pointing to a significant gap in how recovery is supported.
For Canadian employers and safety leaders, Smith's key recommendation is to assess psychosocial safety climate before implementing specific interventions. The PSC-12 tool measures management commitment, worker participation, and communication at the worker perception level. A forthcoming IWH study found that anti-stigma programmes and other targeted interventions are far less effective when the broader psychosocial climate is poor. Independent evaluation also remains a major gap: most agencies rely on internal metrics such as download counts or claim volumes, which cannot confirm whether conditions are improving.
"The best thing you can do to improve your psychosocial work environment is to already have a good one," Smith said. "When the environment is positive, employees trust changes, there's shared understanding, and interventions around job demands and stigma work best."
