Heat stress at work:
not just a hot topic but
a political emergency
Climate change is creating new risks to which workers are exposed
in unequal fashion. The rst sectors to feel the impact of extreme
temperatures, such as agriculture or construction, are also those with
extremely precarious workforces. This impact will be complex, adversely
affecting physical and mental health in both direct and indirect ways.
Applying the general principles of prevention to heat stress is possible
but it will require a thorough overhaul of how work is organised and the
adoption of European legislation that lays down a minimum protective
threshold for all workers in Europe.
Aude Cefaliello
ETUI
↳ 36% of agricultural
workers in the EU
are exposed to high
temperatures for at least
a quarter of their working
hours. Photo :
©
Belga
Special reportHesaMag
28
. Winter 202314
oedema to loss of consciousness and even
death. However, studies also point to the
long-term risk of exposure to intense heat
and its potential to cause heart, kidney or
liver damage. The negative consequences
of heat exposure may also have more long-
term eects in the form of chronic tired-
ness, sleep disturbances and temporary
infertility (especially for men).
Where workers’ mental health is con-
cerned, the INRS (the French National
Scientic Research Institute) and ANSES
(the French Agency for Food, Environmental
and Occupational Health and Safety) note
the greater psychosocial risks associated
with global warming. The mere fact that
heat is tiring and poses an additional cogni-
tive strain (that can cause irritability or even
violence) is a risk to workers (tension and
conict) when interacting with colleagues
and non-colleagues alike. Cognitive fatigue
also increases the risk of accidents at work,
especially because it reduces concentration
and can lead to woolly decision-making in
the work environment (posing extreme dan-
ger when driving or operating machinery).
As EU-OSHA has stressed in its guid-
ance on heat stress, published in 2023, heat
has not only direct (short-term and long-
term) but also indirect eects on workers,
through the exacerbation of existing risks
such as air pollution, self-heating materi-
als, the occurrence of biological agents, and
exposure to chemical substances
1
. Heat can
also aect the application of certain OSH
prevention measures, most notably the
wearing of PPE, potentially even turning it
into a risk itself.
The multi-faceted impact of
global warming on workers’ health
Climate change will aect all workers in
all sectors in all countries, but its impact
will not necessarily be the same or have
the same intensity across the board. First,
there are key dierences in people’s work-
ing environments.
The European Agency for Safety and
Health at Work (EU-OSHA) stresses that
outside workers are most vulnerable to cli-
mate change, although its repercussions
will extend to all sectors, in particular the
emergency services, water supply, energy,
transport and construction. The frequen-
cy and nature of climate risks will also not
be the same for everyone. Outside workers
(including those working in construction,
agriculture or maintenance of public spac-
es) are most exposed to extreme climate
conditions (intense heat, but also UV radi-
ation), whereas those working in the emer-
gency, rescue and cleaning/maintenance
services often nd themselves in high-risk
situations because of climate crises such
as oods, landslides, storms, droughts and
wildres. Here, a lack of structural resourc-
es could aggravate the situation given that
climate emergencies will increase the need
for this kind of assistance.
When it comes to heat, indoor workers
whose jobs require physical eort (e.g. in
warehouses or on production lines) will
also be aected. Rises in temperature and
humidity increase the risks involved in
these kinds of jobs. The impact on health
can be immediate, ranging from cramp and
In 2022, 62,000 deaths in Europe were at-
tributed to the summer heat. This gure,
likely an underestimate, is only one among
the many examples illustrating a growing
challenge that we must address, name-
ly the signicant consequences of climate
change for public health and the world of
work. Year after year, we have ‘record tem-
peratures’, pushing us to the realisation
that the ‘historic’ heatwaves of 20 years
past have now become the new normal. The
European Environment Agency forecasts
a steady rise in average temperatures as
well as increasingly frequent and intense
heatwaves. Each summer, workers die be-
cause of the intense heat, but they are also
at risk from other aspects of climate change
and ever more extreme weather conditions
(ooding, storms, wildres, etc.). The time
for ‘crisis management’ is over; we must re-
think how work is organised to ensure that
workers do not lose their lives while they
earn their living.
The change in our means of production
and organisation is all the more important
and urgent because climate change will
not impact workers equally. If we do noth-
ing, then the working conditions in sectors
where workers are already exposed to phys-
ical danger, such as agriculture, construc-
tion or the emergency services, will dete-
riorate further. According to Eurofound,
23% of workers in the European Union are
exposed to high temperatures for at least a
quarter of their working hours; that propor-
tion climbs to 36% in agriculture and indus-
try, and to 38% in construction. These sec-
tors are also known for having precarious
working conditions and recruiting more
vulnerable workers (temporary work and
employment of foreign nationals). If (legal)
safeguards are not suciently robust, these
workers are likely to be the next victims of
the heatwaves which, in the words of Eric
Klinenberg, are ‘silent, invisible killers of
silent, invisible people’.
The time for ‘crisis management’
is over; we must rethink how
work is organised to ensure that
workers do not lose their lives
while they earn their living.
1. https://osha.europa.eu/
en/publications/heat-
work-guidance-workplaces
Special report HesaMag
28
. Winter 2023 15
A legislative void
The other issue is that the measures recom-
mended by EU-OSHA require the option for
workers to adjust their time schedules and
a needs-based reduction in labour intensi-
ty, regardless of economic pressures, which
may require a larger workforce. Currently,
and especially in sectors with a vulnerable
workforce, the reality of power dierentials
is obviously unlikely to lead workers to be-
have in a way that prioritises their health.
Consequently, in France, the sociologist
Annie Thébaud-Mony, a specialist in occu-
pational health, is advocating express ref-
erence to heat-related risks in the Labour
Code, including changes to working sched-
ules during periods of high temperatures.
Nonetheless, no express provisions have
yet been adopted, despite evidence of many
heat-related health risks.
Despite this, some countries, such as
Spain, have taken measures to reorgan-
ise work schedules during intense heat. In
Greece, the guards working in the Acropolis
have secured an adjustment to their time
schedules that avoids their working in the
afternoon during heatwaves. This exibility
is vital to protect workers’ health but should
apply across the board so that all sectors
can benet.
Legislation varies considerably from
one country to another in Europe. In Spain,
measures based on weather alerts are in
place to prohibit outdoor working in periods
of extreme heat. In Portugal, the tempera-
ture of a workplace must by law be between
18 and 22 degrees Celsius and have a spe-
cic humidity management system. In the
Belgian ‘law on thermal environmental fac-
tors’, targeted at both heat and cold, action
is mandatory when the legal occupational
exposure temperature limit is exceeded (ac-
cording to the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature
index, which strictly speaking considers not
just temperature but also other elements
like humidity and wind). Although there
are recommendations in Germany, there is
no legal occupational exposure limit value
on heat stress. The problem is that today’s
Berlin is tomorrow’s Madrid. Legislation
needs to be harmonised to provide a min-
imum protective threshold for all workers
in Europe.
According to EU-OSHA, the applica-
tion of the existing obligation to develop
a comprehensive, consistent policy to pre-
vent heat stress should lead to the imple-
mentation of heat action plans, an early
warning system and the implementation
of safe working practices. Risk assessment
should be followed by the introduction of
a hierarchy of controls, perhaps includ-
ing emergency procedures and a ‘buddy’
system. Working in isolation poses a con-
siderable risk in itself given that it is very
dicult for someone to assess their own
heat tolerance and that, if an incident oc-
curs, assistance from a third party is vi-
tal for administering rst aid and raising
the alarm with the emergency medical
services.
Additionally, the information that
workers should receive on the dangers of
heat stress should include descriptions
to help them recognise the symptoms of
heat-related injuries and illnesses, meas-
ures to reduce the risk, acclimatisation
procedures and procedures to follow in the
event of heat-related illness. However, in
the absence of specic legislation on heat
stress, there is no guarantee that employ-
ers will abide by the recommendations.
OSH principles applied
to heat stress prevention
Incorporating climate hazards into occu-
pational risk assessments is emerging as
a key issue in workers’ safety in Europe.
The need to adopt sector-appropriate pre-
ventive measures, which acknowledge that
the impact of climate conditions depends
on the type of work concerned, underlines
the importance social partner involvement
in this issue. Where heat-related risks are
concerned, EU-OSHA’s recent guide shows
that it is perfectly possible to implement a
collective system of technical and organ-
isational preventive measures within an
individual organisation.
The principles already set down in
the 1989 Framework Directive (Direc-
tive 89/391/EEC) on health and safety at
work can also be applied to heat stress, for
example the obligation of the employer to
evaluate all workplace risks and to adopt
(rst collective then individual) preven-
tive measures following an information
and consultation process with the workers
and/or their representatives. Employers
should evaluate the risks created by cli-
mate change, taking various factors into
account, including a worker’s protective
clothing, age and health. For heat expo-
sure, biological dierences should also be
taken into account, given that some stud-
ies note that women may be less heat-tol-
erant than men.
In the absence of specic legislation
on heat stress, there is no guarantee
that employers will abide by the
recommendations.
Special reportHesaMag
28
. Winter 202316
recommendations point in one direction:
the best preventive measures require work-
ers to be able to regulate their own hours
and tasks so that they can alternate rest
periods with work. This means giving some
autonomy back to workers; but that auton-
omy will only be genuine if it is exercised in
an environment where economic pressures
and power are controlled and attenuated. It
would be naive to assume that workers will
behave in a way that prioritises their own
health and their colleagues’ if doing so puts
their jobs at risk. In view of climate change,
we need to adopt measures that will enable
workers to be heard, empowered, recog-
nised and protected. ●
where precariousness is highest; we are once
again in danger of sweeping the risks these
workers face under the carpet. We must re-
sist the discourse and fatalistic narrative
that says, in eect, that nothing can be done,
that it’s an ‘occupational hazard’, or all part
of the job. The fact that conditions will be-
come increasingly extreme is unfortunately
a reality for the coming years, but we have
a choice as to how we are going to respond
collectively and how we decide to protect (or
let down) the workers concerned.
But ensuring that workers are genu-
inely protected means revising economic
needs and objectives downwards. We must
restore human beings to the heart of how
work is organised. The current neoliberal
momentum means that we cannot main-
tain production and also ensure workers’
health. In other words, workplaces must see
either an increase in available resources or
a reduction in the pressures of work. All the
In this ‘legislative void’, national case law
has begun to provide some answers regard-
ing ad hoc protection for workers. In 2015
in France, roofers exercised their ‘right to
withdraw’ in the event of serious, imminent
heat-related danger and stopped working
during a heatwave. In Italy, a 2015 ruling
found that where working conditions were
unsafe or temperatures were ‘prohibitive’,
workers have the right to stop working with
no loss of earnings or danger of dismissal.
True worker protection requires
a paradigm shift
Today, we face a political emergency. From
a European legislative standpoint, there is a
genuine dierence between indoor jobs and
outside jobs, with outdoor workers excluded
from the protective scope of some directives.
The sectors most aected are also those
↴ In Greece, the Acropolis guards
have secured an adjustment to their
time schedules that avoids their
working in the afternoon during
heatwaves. Photo :
©
Belga
Special report HesaMag
28
. Winter 2023 17
