D E PA R TM E NT S • H S E&T CO RN ER
New study highlights impact
of COVID-19 on mental health
of offshore workers in Australia
Employees cited lack of access to social support,
difficulties getting to work and returning home,
and higher workloads among key stress drivers
BY STEPHEN WHITFIELD, ASSOCIATE EDITOR
The impacts that the COVID-19 virus can
have on people’s physical health have
been obvious, but the pandemic’s impacts
on people’s mental health – while less out-
wardly obvious – are significant, as well.

Offshore workers are no exception.

In a recent study, the majority (64%) of
offshore workers surveyed said they were
experiencing either a moderate or high
level of general psychological distress.

Additionally, 13% reported very high or
severe psychological distress, suggesting
that they may be experiencing anxiety
and/or depression.

The report aims to provide insights to
help organizations evolve the way they
manage their offshore crews. It was com-
missioned by Australia’s National Offshore
Petroleum Safety and Environmental
Agency (NOPSEMA), Offshore Alliance,
and the Australian Petroleum Production
and Exploration Association. Over the past
two years, Australia has implemented
stringent protocols, such as state border
closures and self-isolation protocols, to try
and contain the spread of COVID-19.

From June to August 2021, researchers
from Curtin University and the University
of Western Australia gathered responses
from 502 people working in Australia’s
offshore oil and gas industry. Respondents
answered questions about their mental
health and wellbeing and provided details
about influencing factors like their work
schedules (roster), accommodations and
travel arrangements.

In their responses, workers specifically
described feeling stress in relation to the
uncertainty of getting to work on time,
40 returning home and whether a lockdown
would happen while they were offshore.

Survey participants described facing
challenges such as a lack of access to
social support, with some specifically cit-
ing a lack of support from their employers.

For instance, one respondent said “it’s been
a constant battle to get living standards to
an acceptable level.” Another worker noted
that, due to state border closures, he had
to live in temporary accommodations for
much of his time off work over a 14-month
period. In fact, he said he had only been
back home once in that time frame. Nearly
a third (32%) of respondents said they had
encountered difficulties traveling home.

Causes of distress
The study also looked at the impact that
different schedules had on workers’ men-
tal health and wellbeing. While respon-
dents reported 54 different schedules, six
were found to be most common (Table
1). Comparisons of psychological distress
across those six rosters showed no statis-
tically significant differences. However,
researchers did find the lowest wellbeing
scores for the 21/28 schedule, although
they couldn’t be sure why.

Researchers also looked at the impact of
other workplace factors. Of note, approxi-
mately half of those surveyed said they
had experienced work schedule changes
since the start of the pandemic. Then,
60% of that half said there was little to no
consultation, by employers with employ-
ees, about those changes. This points to a
“concerning” lack of clear communication
by employers, researchers said.

A total 63% of respondents also
reported their company had seen staff
reductions on offshore facilities since the
pandemic began, and some noted longer
working hours and an overall increase in
workload and pressure. A large number
of individual responses said they believe
staff reductions and longer working hours
are major drivers of psychological distress.

Improving mental health
To identify ways to help offshore work-
ers improve mental health, the study also
examined the connection of factors within
family and social life, the worker’s job, his
or her personal attributes, and the facility
and organization for which they work.

The study found that long and
unpredictable work schedules, poor
internet and communication facilities,
and separation from family were factors
strongly associated with negative mental
health. Meanwhile, perceived line manager
support, job satisfaction, satisfaction with
food quality, regular communication with
home, perceived priority given to mental
health and wellbeing, and autonomy
during the worker’s time off-shift were
common factors protecting mental health.

When asked to describe ideas for “quick
wins” that would benefit mental health
and wellbeing in the short term, they
listed things like improved food quality;
employers considering workers’ individual
schedule preferences; boosting the quality
of offshore internet/communication
facilities; limiting room sharing offshore;
increasing personal space on the facility;
and providing recreation and leisure
options to decompress after a shift.

Researchers said a key message they
want to emphasize is the need for “rela-
tional repair” between offshore workers
and employers. Sentiments reflected in
the survey show that employers may have
breached a “psychological contract” with
their employees, or a set of unwritten
mutual expectations characterized by
respect, compassion, objectivity and trust.

M A R C H/A P R I L 202 2 • D R I L L I N G C O N T R AC T O R
Scan me to access
the full report on the
NOPSEMA website.

bit.ly/3prVo8v



H S E&T CO RN ER • D E PA R TM E NT S
To start on this relational repair, the
researchers proposed five recommenda-
tions. First, employers should make stron-
ger efforts to provide social support to their
workers. Social support, particularly from
an organization’s leadership, is a key fac-
tor for employees’ positive mental health
and wellbeing. For example, employers
could promote opportunities for workers
to socially engage with one another while
they’re on an offshore facility.

Second, employers should support
employees in their efforts to connect with
families while offshore and to travel home
when they’re off rotation. With some work-
ers facing longer stretches of time between
visits home, and in some instances having
no possibility of getting home due to bor-
der closures, workers reported a sense of
struggle, stress and uncertainty. Attention
to instances of poor internet and phone
connections on site, and providing quick
repairs, is also important so that workers
feel better connected and can communi-
cate daily with their families.

DAYS ON
DAYS OFF
Schedule 1
14 14
Schedule 2
21 21
Schedule 3
28 28
Schedule 4
21 28
Schedule 5
28 56
Schedule 6
21 (1st hitch) / 28 (2nd hitch)
21 (1st hitch) / 35 (2nd hitch)
Table 1: Among the six most commonly identifi ed rosters, researchers found the
lowest wellbeing scores for the 21/28 schedule , although they couldn’t be sure why.

Third, employers should give more con-
sideration to the impact that workload,
accommodations and COVID-19 proto-
cols have on employees’ mental health.

Researchers recommended that employers
assess their employees’ current workload
and pay more attention to accommodation
factors, such as food quality and the avail-
ability of social leisure options .

Fourth, employers should communi-
cate decisions with transparency. Finally,
employers should engage their workers
during the decision-making process. Not
doing so can lead organizations to miss
out on useful and important informa-
tion, or more importantly, lead to workers
feeling disengaged, undervalued and not
respected. DC
D R I L L I N G C O N T R AC T O R • M A R C H/A P R I L 202 2
41