Leadership

Burnout’s Death Toll Makes It a Board-Level Safety Risk

Long working hours led to an estimated 750,000 deaths in 2016, while burnout costs a 1,000-person company $5 million a year. Boards, not wellness programs, must act.

By Grace Kim

3 min read

Burnout is a workplace safety hazard. It’s time to start treating it like one
Burnout is a workplace safety hazard. It’s time to start treating it like onePexels / pixabay

What's News

  • WHO and the ILO linked long working hours to an estimated 750,000 deaths from stroke and heart disease in 2016, versus 360,000 workplace-injury deaths.
  • U.S. workplace stressors are estimated to kill 120,000 people a year.
  • Burnout costs a company with 1,000 employees an estimated US $5 million a year.
  • Knowledge workers field nearly 600 emails and more than 750 Teams messages every week.
  • Australia's Department of Defence became the first federal employer convicted over psychosocial risk in December 2025.

By Grace Kim

Long working hours led to an estimated 750,000 deaths from stroke and heart disease in 2016, according to a World Health Organization and International Labour Organization report. That toll was more than twice the 360,000 people killed by workplace injuries.

The figures recast burnout as a board-level safety and productivity issue. The WHO defines burnout as the result of “chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed.” The analysis also cites a U.S. estimate that workplace stressors kill 120,000 people a year.

What does burnout cost?

A study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine estimates burnout costs a company with 1,000 employees US $5 million a year. The analysis says that commercial toll should trigger emergency board meetings worldwide and direct questions to executives about the workplace practices driving it.

Microsoft’s Work Trend Index puts the communication load on knowledge workers at nearly 600 emails and more than 750 Teams messages every week. The source says executives should also ask who approved spending more than half the working week in meetings.

The analysis frames both loads as management choices, not worker failures, and links burnout to low engagement. It warns of potential industrial manslaughter charges for CEOs and shareholder scrutiny over productivity. It also identifies burnout as a growing contributor to cardiovascular incidents and death by suicide.

Burnout carries both a dollar cost and a death toll, so a wellness memo cannot neutralize it.

Who owns the risk?

The source says most leaders treat burnout as an HR line item, often answered with a wellness program. It argues that companies routinely neglect culture or delegate it to HR, even when HR lacks formal training, resources and authority over leadership behavior.

Australia’s leave data shows why that model fails. Safe Work Australia’s 2025 statistics put the median absence for a serious mental health claim at almost five times the time off for other serious workplace injuries. The analysis says employers press HR for a button instead of fixing the work.

The analysis places primary responsibility elsewhere:

  • The board, which should ask the right questions as regulation increases and shareholders seek optimal productivity.
  • The CEO, whom the source holds fully accountable for organizational productivity and performance.
  • The leaders who set expectations, perpetuate practices, apply consequences for culture drift and ignore chronic workplace problems.

This approach starts with designing culture deliberately and questioning inherited post-industrial habits. The source says CEOs rarely intend to burn out employees; neglect does the damage. Better working methods supported by research, rather than assumptions about how work should operate, form part of the remedy.

Accountability must sit with the people who design the work, not with a support team brought in after the damage appears.

What changes when burnout becomes regulated?

Standard setters have already begun changing how employers manage the risk. ISO 45003 became the first international standard for managing psychological health and safety at work in 2021. The U.S. Surgeon General’s Framework for Workplace Mental Health and Well-Being names protection from harm, including psychological safety, as its first essential.

Australia has moved from guidance to enforcement. Every state and territory now requires employers to identify and manage psychosocial hazards in the same way as physical hazards. In December 2025, Australia’s Department of Defence became the first federal employer convicted of failing to manage psychosocial risk.

The author says enforcement should end the comfort of passing burnout off to wellness or resilience training while commercial performance and lives remain impaired. The conclusion is blunt: “Burnout is, quite literally, an existential risk.”

The standards and enforcement shift now makes burnout management an operating duty, not a discretionary benefit.

Where can workers get help?

Support: In the USA, call or text the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline on 988. In Australia, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

For companies, the next test is whether boards redesign work and assign accountability before more regulators treat unmanaged burnout as the safety breach the evidence already shows.

Original: who.int

Share this article:

More from Grace Kim

Grace Kim

Show full bio

Market editor covering people, launches and day-to-day practice in entrepreneurship, startups and venture funding at Business Bearings.

1,985 articles

Related articles

« Previous articleNext article »