safety

Article
Psychosocial Safety and Health Hazards and Their Impacts on
Offshore Oil and Gas Workers
Emma D’Antoine 1, * , Janis Jansz 1,2,3 , Ahmed Barifcani 1 , Sherrilyn Shaw-Mills 1,2 , Mark Harris 4 and
Christopher Lagat 1

1 Department of Petroleum Engineering, WA School of Mines: Minerals, Energy and Chemical Engineering,
Curtin University, Bentley, WA 6102, Australia; [email protected] (J.J.); [email protected] (A.B.);
[email protected] (S.S.-M.); [email protected] (C.L.)
2 HSE Global, P.O. Box 2061, High Wycombe, WA 6067, Australia
3 College of Safety Science and Engineering, Xi’an University of Science & Technology, 58 Yanta Road,
Xi’an 710054, China
4 Faculty of Business and Law, School of Economics, Finance and Property, Curtin University,
Bentley, WA 6102, Australia; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-405056624

Abstract: The offshore oil and gas working environment is an inherently dangerous one, with risks
posed to physical safety on a daily basis. One neglected field of research is the added psychosocial
stressors present in this environment. This research examined the experiences of offshore oil and gas
workers through one-on-one online interviews which were recorded and transcribed. Transcripts
were analyzed through the qualitative software NVivo, which generated themes and patterns for
the responses given to questions that were developed through a focus group. The results of the
analysis showed that multiple psychosocial stressors are present in this population, such as fear
of speaking up, unsatisfactory company-provided facilities, work–life interference, work status,
micromanaging, gender harassment and bullying. In addition, interviews identified that production
and time pressures, along with fatigue, can influence accidents and mistakes. Climate factors also
cause discomfort. However, these are managed according to best practices by organizations. Due
to the timing of the study, COVID-19 was a significant stressor for some, but not all, employees. In
conclusion, offshore oil and gas workers face multiple stressors in a dangerous environment that may
Citation: D’Antoine, E.; Jansz, J.;
lead to devastating consequences.
Barifcani, A.; Shaw-Mills, S.; Harris,
M.; Lagat, C. Psychosocial Safety and Keywords: psychosocial stressors; offshore oil and gas; workplace health and safety; COVID-19
Health Hazards and Their Impacts on
Offshore Oil and Gas Workers. Safety
2023, 9, 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/
safety9030056 1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Raphael Grzebieta Australia’s Fly-in, Fly-out (FIFO) workforce has been the subject of increasing interest
in terms of psychosocial research [1,2], yet workers in the resource sector who are based
Received: 30 June 2023 offshore remain somewhat overlooked in comparison to onshore workers. There has been
Revised: 8 August 2023
an increased risk of suicide among onshore FIFO workers over the last ten years [2]; how-
Accepted: 11 August 2023
ever, the mental health statistics around the offshore oil and gas workforce are less clear.
Published: 15 August 2023
Added stressors for offshore employees include extreme geographical isolation, longer
rosters, extreme weather events such as tropical cyclones, changeable ocean conditions,
and helicopter travel. COVID-19 also affected travel, roster arrangements and work safety
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
for this population. The change in rosters during the pandemic resulted in the National
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority [3] issuing an alert
This article is an open access article concerning the psychosocial risks of compacted rosters on the mental wellbeing of offshore
distributed under the terms and workers. Rosters had been amended in an attempt to reduce the risk of transmission. How-
conditions of the Creative Commons ever, this meant that workers were spending extended periods of time offshore. Moreover,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// these changes were made without adequately consulting with offshore employees.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Making psychological health and wellbeing a priority can help contribute to a healthier
4.0/). economy because of mental health’s impact on performance and productivity [4,5]. In

Safety 2023, 9, 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety9030056 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/safety

Safety 2023, 9, 56 2 of 17

addition, organizations that provide empowering opportunities for employees tend to

see higher levels of productivity [6] and reduced costs from employee sickness, disability,
deaths, poor performance and poor productivity [7]. Failure to address poor mental health
in the workplace also negatively affects attendance and accident rates [8].
Assessing and managing risks should significantly lower intervention costs for psy-
chological issues and can reduce absences from work [9,10]. In summary, and in light
of the above, the main goals of the study were to investigate the causes of psychosocial
stress and the effect of psychosocial stressors on the mental health of offshore oil and gas
workers. Due to the identified increased psychological risk to onshore FIFO workers, and
the lack of legislation for offshore oil and gas workers in relation to mental health risks,
the significance of this study lies mainly in its ability to fill the existing knowledge gap, to
identify the work-related factors that affect offshore oil and gas employees’ mental health
and the effects of poor mental health in this environment. The study found the presence
of multiple psychosocial sources of stress that frequently interact. Findings are not only
limited to offshore oil and gas populations but can be generalized to remote work settings,
such as polar research stations, offshore wind facilities and to other maritime settings.

2. Materials and Methods

The exploratory qualitative study was conducted in Perth, Australia, through a focus
group and one-on-one interviews via Microsoft Teams. To analyze the results, NVivo soft-
ware was used, which allowed themes to emerge from the interview transcripts. Employees
working on offshore oil and gas facilities were recruited due to their lived experience.
Approval for the study was granted by The Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC)
(Ethics Approval number HRE2021-0512).

2.1. Participants
The sample consisted of two groups: 8 members of a focus group and 29 interviewees,
5 of whom were part of a pilot study, providing a total of 37 participants, 33 of whom were
male and 4 who were female. The age of participants in the pilot and main studies ranged
from 25 years to 60+ years. A total of 17 employees described themselves as permanent, 4 as
casual workers, 7 as contractors and one as a casual contractor. All respondents in the study
worked 12 h days, with no days off, while offshore. Roles were varied and included, but
were not limited to, Integrated Rater, Engineer, Cook, Health and Safety Advisor, General
Service Operator and Electrician.

2.2. Procedure
All interviews were video recorded and transcribed. The questions were formed
from a focus group session held prior to the interviews and from a review of published
literature related to offshore oil and gas work. This review of published literature identified
several main mental health hazards. Anxiety and depression were found among workers
who endured long, uneven or revolving shift patterns [11–13]. Workplace bullying and
interpersonal conflict had caused anxiety and negative safety outcomes [14], as well as
depression and elevated suicide risk [15]. Poor sleep quality for offshore workers was
linked to anxiety [16] as well as depression and mood disorders [11]. The isolation of
FIFO work has been associated with higher levels of anxiety [2,17] and stress [18]. Low job
latitude or control was shown in some studies [11,19] to be linked to anxiety and stress.
The published literature was related to offshore oil and gas workers internationally and
was not specific to Western Australia. The questions were of an open-ended design, which,
according to Creswell [20], enabled respondents to answer as accurately and genuinely as
possible. Appendix A contains the questions asked in the focus group, and Appendix B
details the main study interview questions with changes made after the pilot study.
Safety 2023, 9, 56 3 of 17

2.3. Analysis
From the transcribed documents, notes were made in a researcher’s diary. From the
transcripts of the video recordings, sections of answers were entered into NVivo. All
interviewees were anonymous and given numbers 1–37. Once the data had been imported
into NVivo, the software sorted similar items and applied codes and sub-codes, which
combined the items under predominant themes. The process of classifying and arranging
data assisted in identifying the themes that emerged from the interviews and focus group
participants’ responses. The coding gathered central responses to the research goals in col-
lective nodes and provided results that are reliable, as when repeated searching for similar
connections is performed, the same results produce the same computer-generated results,
pointing to the strong validity and reliability of the findings. NVivo uses several tools to
ascertain these links, ensuring methodical and valid results are generated. Furthermore,
the software minimizes the occurrence of automatic and human errors [21]. The analysis of
qualitative data through NVivo software strengthened the validity and reliability of the
analytical process [22]. The findings were compared to the results of the literature review.

3. Results
The questions were developed from the focus group analysis, and any modifications
were finalized after the pilot study. There were 19 final questions in the main study, which
covered a wide range of topics. The questions asked of the participants are included in this
article’s Appendix A for the focus group and Appendix B for the interviewed participants.

3.1. Main Themes of the Study

From the analysis, themes emerged which were central to the experiences of employees
in the Australian offshore oil and gas working environment. A combination of psychosocial
factors significantly impacts the safety of offshore facilities. The following themes were
revealed in the analysis.

3.1.1. Inadequate Accommodation, Food and Internet

Participants stated that they were generally unhappy with the accommodation pro-
vided. Securing any time alone is extremely rare, particularly in living areas like cabins or
the gymnasium:
‘But yeah, this vessel—2 people to a room and the accommodation’s very small, the gym’s
very small even though it’s well stocked and so you can’t get any space to yourself, like
just a tiny piece is quite hard and that’s very challenging and so then off the back of that
when you do get that room to yourself which happens so infrequently, but if you get a
night to yourself like, you just don’t tell anybody and just go back to your room and read
a book or you don’t have to worry about anybody, that’s the hardest part is just how close
quarters it is all the time’. (P4)
Food quality was revealed to be an important part of life offshore, significantly affect-
ing the morale of workers (P11, P24, P28, P29):
‘Poor food can also have a big impact on crew morale, when I worked in Myanmar it was
near impossible to get veggies and decent meat and they never put out desserts for night
crew. Being stuck there for 9 weeks offshore with the same terrible food each day was
pretty awful’. (P29)
Food quality appears to have the potential to affect mood and, consequently, the
character of the environment during mealtimes:
‘If you make good food, they talk good conversation while they’re sitting eating where
they only get together for that one hour. So, I try to keep my food at a high standard, so
nobody’s sitting there talking about what shit food they’re getting, you understand?’.
(P24)
Safety 2023, 9, 56 4 of 17

Employees’ communication quality with family members is frequently poor, particu-

larly during peak period usage, for example, when shifts have ended. This was experienced
first-hand by the researcher, who lost audio and visual quality frequently during interviews
conducted with participants while they were offshore. Loss of connection was a common
complaint from participants:
‘It can sometimes be a little bit of a burden because you’re obviously not seeing your
family every day. It’s hard to compensate face-to-face time with phone time. So yeah, it’s
a challenge. . .the internet connection or the phone connection that can sometimes impact
your mental health’. (P17)

3.1.2. Accidents and Mistakes

In particular, the effects of fatigue and long rosters have a significant effect on levels of
alertness. In addition, time pressures on tasks become a significant contributing factor in
the causation of accidents when production expectations are high. Participant #8 explained
the perceived pressure to finish tasks, the perception that they have to get their job done.
They are unwilling or do not want to speak up, and this is a significant reason why a large
number of accidents are caused. The time pressures that offshore workers perceive are
reflected in the concerns about safety shared by P8:
‘They don’t realise really, that’s secondary to people not getting hurt, but that comes from
lump sum contracts. The companies are letting lump sum contracts and the contractors
that bid on them as cheap as possible and the faster they go the more money they make’.
After events such as unplanned shutdowns, workers feel pressure to get production
going again (P22). A production-focused organizational or managerial culture leaves
employees feeling stressed and unimportant:
‘I’ve seen managers and supervisors with that old school mentality of, OK, let’s go, go, go
grind, hustle. Let’s get this done as quick as we can. I don’t care. But that’s my number
one and everything else is number two. And you can really tell that that sort of mentality
and that sort of message that’s being driven is really causing, yeah, that that sense of
anxiety, that sense of they don’t really have a purpose. They’re just a number on a page
or a person completing work who’s there for two weeks and then they’re off and they’re
not part of that team’. (P26)
Accidents can also be caused by a lack of focus due to personal issues. P13 had
witnessed a near-miss accident involving a co-worker who was in the wrong frame
of mind:
‘I’ve seen it, you know, someone wasn’t in the right frame of mind one day because we had
a morning meeting and two guys luckily didn’t get killed, but were close. And all because
the guy’s head wasn’t in in the right spot. He operated a crane and whatnot. . .yeah. His
head wasn’t thinking straight and operated the crane in the wrong manner. And the
headache block parted from the wire and narrowly missed two people. And you know, just
mental health wasn’t in the right game, you know, at the time. So yeah, from a cultural
perspective there’s, you know, make sure that people when they go to do a high-risk task
they’ve got their thinking hat on and you know if people aren’t in the right frame we try
and, from a work perspective, try and make sure that people are in the right frame of mind
when they’re doing a high-risk task’.

3.1.3. Fear of Speaking Up

Raising concerns about safety issues is often avoided due to fear of repercussions
such as job loss. Fear of speaking up is generally found more frequently among casual or
temporary workers:
‘So that the casual guys, if they do it, they don’t get the call back. . . and the threats from
people who have the power to not reemploy people is one of the big issues’. (P13)
Safety 2023, 9, 56 5 of 17

The results of the main study reflect the findings of the focus group, where casual
workers spoke of their reluctance to express their dissatisfaction with aspects of their work.
Fear of speaking up extended to the stigma around men reporting mental
health issues:
‘I think people tend to assume that if they are having mental health problems, they may
be deemed unfit to work offshore and might lose their jobs’. (P29)
There appear to be different working ‘spaces’ with the oil and gas industry. Participant
#33 explained:
‘From what I’ve seen and what I’ve seen that the FPSO like I was saying is the pinnacle of
where everyone wants to be, but I’ve seen the other side of the coin, which is in in drilling,
and the bravado and the looking down upon people that have, you know, shown any sort
of weakness. It’s pretty disgraceful out there’.
As well as the drilling working environment, the diving community in offshore oil
and gas is typically masculine, and the effect of workplace culture on whether someone
will seek help for poor mental health is ‘massive’ (P4):
‘So, nobody would ever in the diving culture seek that and not make that aware because
diving’s. . . number one, you don’t want to be mentally week at all, like you would never
show weakness in diving, ever. . . I think there would be (stigma) for sure because people,
especially in diving, you don’t want to lose trust in somebody. You know, you are trusting
your life because if someone’s going to come rescue you, it could be that guy, you know.
And it’s very much any weakness. . . do not show any weakness you know? Probably
less so above the water, but it’s still the same. It’s still very much a macho. . . that classic
machismo or whatever it is’. (P4)
Not speaking up in the context of the macho culture of a male-dominated workplace
extends to reluctance to disclose symptoms of sickness, particularly during the pandemic
when symptoms were consistent with COVID-19:
‘I have returned to work after having COVID. And for me, I was generally trying to hide
any discomfort or physical symptoms I might have had from the aftereffects of it. So, I
didn’t really speak up about how I was feeling, if I was tired or fatigued. I was trying I
guess not to let my co-workers down and I could know that from that period where we had
five guys out with COVID at the same time, after they came back, they all went straight
back into sort of a 12-h day. And I could tell that affected some of them. You know, they
went from doing nothing in the cabin for seven days and isolation to sort of full-time
work in the sun, you know, lifting heavy things. So, it’s definitely a big adjustment for
them’. (P10)
P16 reported a similar experience:
‘I got flu. I think I got sick because the Air Con was really cold inside. But then you
have to be inside and outside during the whole day, so I think that’s what made me sick
last. Plus, I think someone was sick as well. So, they get sick, but they have to continue
working. So, like, if you’re working and someone is coughing or sneezing, you still need
to be there. I think that’s why I got sick. But that’s the only time and I didn’t have even
time like to rest or anything. It was just like take pills, continue working, and yeah,
hopefully you’ll be better next day’. (P16)
‘The self-declaration of someone being fit to work, if they are in insecure employment,
some have been reluctant to advise on symptoms as they may not pick up work again for
some time. Or alternatively when they do advise they have symptoms they are not paid’.
(P13)
Safety 2023, 9, 56 6 of 17

3.1.4. Casual and Contract Workers

A major finding of the study was that casual and contract workers experience higher
levels of stress linked to job status:
‘Oh, I also feel the casualization of the whole mining and offshore industry has got a big
part to do with it as well because people are scared to speak up about things, like rosters
and things. People just want to keep the employers happy, so they’ve got to do their
normal roster and they get that call and it says can you come back two weeks later. As
a casual, you’re a lot more inclined to say yes, I’ll take it, because if you don’t take that
position, you won’t get the call back again’. (P33)
As a casual worker, participant #33 explained that people are unwilling to speak up
about injuries:
‘There’s also, you know, with people hurting themselves or just other things, you know
you’re a lot less likely to stand your ground, I suppose, as a casual because you just won’t
get the call back’.
The analysis also showed that there was a culture of blame and fear in some organi-
zations, as well as anxiety around making mistakes. P4, a contractor, reported a lack of
accountability, perhaps associated with understaffing and workers’ concerns about losing
their jobs. A common process that casual workers are subjected to is hiring, firing and
rehiring. This avoids organizational duties in the amendments to the Fair Work Act. 2009
(Cth.), which states that employers must offer casual conversion to employees. When
the period of offshore work is complete, workers are signed off and paid out, so they are
not technically working for the organization anymore. Likewise, P12 had been refused
casual conversion several times, the latest being a few days prior to the interview. P26
confirmed the tendency towards blaming contractors but that more mature organizations
were attempting to change this trend.

3.1.5. Being Away from Home and Work–Life Interference

Missing out on special events with family and friends was mentioned by several
participants (P5, P15, P13, P12 and P21). Being unable to respond to family emergen-
cies happening back home is especially difficult and causes stress to offshore workers
(P21, P25):
‘With the sickness side of things, my son suffers from asthma. He had quite a serious
asthma attack. He was put in hospital and the company actually put me on a flight and
sent me home. . . which was good because I wasn’t, it was probably dangerous to have me
at work because I wasn’t concentrating’. (P25)
Likewise, P1 felt that inattention to tasks and lack of awareness caused by issues at
home were significant work-related mental health hazards:
‘When an employee has issues at home, this can often preoccupy their mind leading to
distraction at work. Particularly during high-risk work (where precision is required), this
can have a profound effect on their concentration levels. This lack of attention can result
in a significant injury particularly in the process driven environment of the offshore
industry where a mistake could lead to a catastrophic outcome’.
Not all participants experienced help from their company when they had difficulties
back home:
‘Like a bloke I know he had time off because his daughter died and he was bullied and
harassed by one of the HR managers to get back to work and you know his daughter died
of SIDS. . . I think by and large, yeah, that they there’s a push to try and push people so
they quit’. (P13)
Safety 2023, 9, 56 7 of 17

‘It’s the isolation, you’re on an island, a FPSO, a platform, there’s no social aspect of life,
you are isolated from your family. Worse times are birthdays, Christmas, if someone is in
an accident, my son was in an accident and they wouldn’t fly me off, but I used to do that,
so I know how easy it is to fly people off ’. (P21)
Another worker with obvious mental health difficulties was not given the necessary help:
‘There was another guy, he had some mental health things going on. He went to work
on a ship and when he got home, he stabbed another person. They died. Yeah. So, like he
immediately had some mental health things going on, but he was pushed and then he had
to get off the ship. And then when he got home, he killed his housemate’. (P13)
‘...the boys noticed that he wasn’t right. And they phoned the office at the time, and they
said you need to get him off, you need to get him off. He’s not right. And they said no, no,
he said he’s OK. So yeah, he’s staying. And this guy stayed, went through work and he
wasn’t right at work, when he got off work, he went home and killed his flat mate’. (P24)
Other issues at home, such as unresolved interpersonal issues (P1, P8, P13) that do
not generally warrant an employee being flown off the facility, are worsened by isolation
(P15). P8 cited high rates of divorce in their department. Isolation on an offshore facility or
vessel tends to worsen family issues, especially if the ability to communicate properly with
family, particularly children (P15), is disrupted by poor internet provision (P2, P3, P4, P6,
P7, P10, P11, P17, P18). Transitioning back into home life after being offshore for weeks is
difficult (P8), and workers feel that they live two separate lives (P28).

3.1.6. Micromanaging
Participants expressed frustration at the tendency for managers to micromanage
workers, a damaging practice that reveals a lack of trust in workers (P28). Again, raising
safety concerns showed a tendency to cause difficulties for workers:
‘I’m in quite a strong trade union, which I’m proud to be. But having said that, that
doesn’t mean we’re, you know, rebellious, but we do the things, but we won’t accept
anything less on safety or conditions of work and these guys have come in with a pretty
intimidatory style, so yeah we were definitely singled out. But you know, you had to
watch your back at work in regards to what you did on jobs they, you know, they check
up on you, send people out to make, you know, try and catch us out on safety to try and
undermine us being on board’. (P6)
One organization excessively controlled food portions. P20, a qualified cook, stated:
‘We’re all qualified to do our jobs. And the micromanagement is getting out of control in
my opinion and not just in my department but in other departments too yeah, they get
around it. We all get around it one way or another. But it just makes it stressful. We just
wanna go there and do our jobs, you know, and do them safely. Obviously, safety is a big
issue. But to micromanage everybody’s diets I think is beyond. . . that’s getting to become
a control freak I think really’. (P20)
However, the over-regulation of food options may have had more to do with cost:
‘So, they really cut down on the budget and they end up, you know, serving sausages
and mashed potatoes and stuff like that. So, it’s just not a good thing to do, but the effect
that it has on, you know, crew morale is, is huge. It’s huge, but for whatever reason,
companies, you know, we had a KPI. They audit every cent that’s spent and you’re only
allowed a certain amount per head’. (P8)
Several participants had worked under managers who were overbearing, with strong
egos (P6, P29), and with ‘an intimidatory management style’ (P6). Unfriendly or unsupportive
managers caused their workforce to be unhappy and to dread returning to work (P29).
Safety 2023, 9, 56 8 of 17

‘There was a manager that used to work at our company who has now been let go because
of the way he treated people, and everyone that worked with him used to say how much
they dreaded going back to work. A previous manager I worked for offshore was extremely
demanding and constantly paging me to get updates on what was happening and there
was little trust in me, I found this quite mentally taxing and would feel so much more
exhausted working under him than his back-to-back’. (P29)
Antithetical to micromanaging is allowing employees role autonomy:
‘I think that one plays a big part in affecting mental health. When you go into a job and
you know that you’ve got that autonomy and you’ve got the trust of your managers and
supervisors. It does incentivise you to do better and achieve’. (P27)

3.1.7. Bullying from Higher Up

Bullying was reported in the sample, but it generally came from management-level
employees:
‘It’s generally from higher up because there’s always a little bit of banter amongst the
team, but generally speaking, I’ve always found that to be restrained and healthy, you
know’. (P22)
Bullying shows similarities with micromanaging in that they both tend to originate
from higher up the organizational hierarchy. P21 had experienced exclusion from meetings
and trips, demotion and barriers to promotion. P8 advised:
‘The only thing that you can do, and, you know, people do do this, they would just start
taking notes and with bullies all you have to do is confront them, and you know when
you get some evidence behind you and then one day, just confront them and just say this
is the last time, like no more because it’s always a strong, big strong alpha male picking
on the weakest one in the group’. (P8)

3.1.8. Gendered Harassment

A female participant in the focus group did not indicate gendered harassment. P16
stated that workplace culture and the protracted time spent offshore in an unfavorable en-
vironment were potentially able to affect workers. However, the respondent did not refer to
what made the environment unfavorable. One potential female participant chose not to go
ahead with the study due to fear of being identified. The experiences of sexual harassment
for this individual were specific enough to potentially identify them to their colleagues.
P20 and P29 were both impacted negatively by the male-dominated environment offshore.
P20 explained an incident that had happened on a vessel they worked on:
‘The incident itself didn’t cause me the stress, the stress came afterwards, which I predicted.
When other crew members took an opinion about it and most of them that weren’t there.
So it was like, yeah, it was one of those female things, female-male things that went on
anyway. But it was witnessed by three males who stood up for me, but some males think
that you’re being woke or whatever it is that they’ve got in their head and they then bully
you afterwards and make you feel like you were lying or something like that’.
P29 described their experience of harassment while working offshore:
‘I experienced a bit of harassment from one guy who was interested in me when I made it
very clear I wasn’t interested’.

3.1.9. COVID-19 Impacts

Extended periods away from the family during the COVID-19 pandemic were stressful
(P14, P16, P29). Along with extended separation, there were major concerns for loss of
work (P4, P7, P24), particularly during economic downturns:
Safety 2023, 9, 56 9 of 17

‘There’s a lot of guys, mariners, that just can’t keep up their tickets and things like that
and just, you know, just basically get squeezed out of the industry and that’s what’s
happened now. And now everyone is looking for people in WA and you know, a lot of
good guys are gone and they can’t get back into the industry because they just don’t have
the money to get their tickets again, like it costs so much for a casual employee on vessels
to get all your tickets back again, you know you need a 15 grand kicker straight up there
to get into it and you can’t get a bank loan because you don’t have the money or security
so you’re kind of stuck. We’ve lost a lot of good people’. (P33)
Other concerning factors include loss of leave (P24) and coercion to move interstate to
circumnavigate state quarantine mandates (P4, P8, P13). During the height of the pandemic,
offshore workers experienced increased fatigue and mental health issues:
‘We have seen a marked rise in mental health issues, and staff having to demobilise early
due to fatigue and mental health. COVID-19 has certainly been one of the root causes of
this worrying trend. We have seen a direct link between fatigue and mental health’. (P1)
The procedures put in place by organizations in response to the pandemic were
criticized by P22:
‘Definitely cause that’s why I resigned from a full-time position. You know I’d been there
14–15 years whatever it was. And then I just got sick and tired of being locked up. Told
what you’re gonna do. Told what you’re allowed to eat. Told what you’re allowed to drink.
The whole way it was managed, if you could call it that, I found very frustrating. And
they even, even when the pandemic first broke and we actually raised it with onshore
management saying, listen, because we were sailing for Singapore, said have you got
anything in place or have you thought about anything around what’s going to happen
with this? And they laughed at us and said we’re watching too much social media. And
then we set off for a three-week journey and three months later we got back home and that
was after being anchored up there and there was no certainty about how they could get us
off or when they could get us off. They wouldn’t send food out to the ship because they’re
worried that we’re gonna run out or we’re gonna get COVID off the packaging on the
food’. (P22)

3.1.10. Heat Stress

High humidity is common between March–May in the southern hemisphere tropics
when workers use several pairs of overalls each day (P18). Several participants referred
to the heat as a major factor in discomfort (P1, P6, P7, P8, P9, P13, P16, P18, P23, P25, P26,
P28). The relentless heat is often unbearable:
‘No, just the heat, the oppressive heat. You got heat coming off the equipment. The engine
room like it’s just hot, hot, hot. We’ll do our first three hours, you know, we’ll go outside
at 7:00 o’clock in the morning and when we come in for smoko at nine, we just have to
drop our overalls on the ground and put a fresh set of overalls on. So, we’ll do a set of
overalls every three hours. You can’t come back inside into the air conditioning and with
absolutely sweat sodden overalls. Yeah, you just get the chills’. (P8)
Although heat stressors are managed extremely well in the offshore working environ-
ment, failure to keep hydrated or to recognize the sign of dehydration can be devastating:
‘One of my colleagues, he did get heat stress and ended up in hospital. And unfortunately
for that person, he did have some slight brain damage as well. . . As far as I know, no, he
won’t be working again, to be honest’. (P28)

4. Discussion
Sex and Gender Statement
The Western Australian offshore oil and gas industry is a male-dominated industry,
and an analysis of results was not conducted to determine any differences between male
and female participants’ responses. A reason for not conducting a gender analysis was
Safety 2023, 9, 56 10 of 17

that the research only included four female participants, with the rest of the participants
being male.
Company-provided facilities such as accommodation, food and Internet were men-
tioned frequently by participants. Poor accommodation has wide-ranging negative effects,
such as reduced quality of sleep and resulting fatigue [23] and the inability to disengage
from work [24]. Fatigue is linked to decreased motivation, communication, attention and
recall and reduces an individual’s ability to make decisions. Furthermore, there is an
increase in the tendency to make errors [25] and perform at a reduced level [26]. Good
quality food and sleep are considered to be one of the most important factors in work
programs [27]. Providing permanent accommodation alone would significantly help to
improve mental health and wellbeing [2] as sometimes the room that workers slept in was
changed frequently during their time offshore.
As P13 witnessed, near-miss accidents are highly likely when workers are distracted or
not in the right frame of mind. Distracted employees are at a higher risk of being involved
in accidents because their ability to identify hazards is reduced [28]. Furthermore, when the
focus is on production, particularly after a shutdown [P22], there is a diversion of cognitive
resources to concentrate on meeting production targets [28]. When cognitive resources are
stretched, concentration and alertness are reduced, and any peripheral safety cues may be
missed [29].
Communication between team members is vital for a collaborative work environment.
However, speaking up about workplace issues can negatively impact interpersonal com-
munication and connectivity. Casual workers are likely to have less information available
to them due to the weaker flow of information, perhaps due to the association between
insecure work and work disorganization [30]. Power discrepancies between managers and
workers further impair employees’ sense of control over work tasks, promotion, and future
career options. Being excluded from meetings and trips means that information sharing is
further compromised and, consequently, can undermine work performance, which could
be a challenge to reverse [31]. Speaking up has been referred to as ‘booking a window seat
on the next flight out of here’ [32] (p. 16). Several of the interview respondents alluded to
the organizational focal point of being in a state of production (P22, P26, P29), notably
on drilling sites (P6). In times of high production, employees would be expected to work
overtime (P29).
A major finding of the study was that casual and contract workers experience higher
levels of stress linked to their job status. Casual conversion is available to employees who
have worked a steady pattern of shifts for 6 months and have been with the same employer
for over 12 months [33,34]. Unfortunately, 40.9% of casual employees in Australia are
disqualified from casual conversion on these criteria [35], and the organization may still
refuse conversion based on ‘reasonable grounds’ [34]. The process of hiring employees
for their short-term duration offshore and then terminating their contract and restarting
it again for the next offshore swing should not be used as a tactic by organizations to
avoid casual conversion or to deprive workers of opportunities to vote on employment
matters (P20).
Research on offshore facilities has noted that casual or contract workers have experi-
enced inferior conditions. On North Sea facilities, it was found that contractors generally
performed the riskiest work and reported an ‘us and them’ culture [36] (p. 588). Perma-
nent employees are less willing to trust temporary employees because of their short-term
status [37]. Trust between workplace teams may safeguard against the emergence or pro-
gression of blame culture within an organization [38]. Because open communication and
the flow of information facilitate safety behavior, organizations should seek to build on the
manager–employee trust relationship. Giving employees role autonomy will strengthen
this relationship, which is crucial if there is to be accountability without blame. Like
micromanaging, low role autonomy can lead to feelings of helplessness [14], poor perfor-
mance [38] and eventually to interpersonal conflict [14,38].
Safety 2023, 9, 56 11 of 17

Spending prolonged periods away from home and family on a regular basis means that
usual support avenues for workers are unavailable. Where there is conflict between family
and work, stress can manifest [7,39–41] to affect attention levels during tasks and safety
compliance [42]. Living away from home is a major drawback of working offshore [27],
and often there is a resulting difficulty in balancing work and family responsibilities [14,43]
and in readapting to family life (P8, [43]). Reintegrating back into the family home is made
more difficult by fatigue [2] and by misaligned expectations from both partners (P8).
Micromanaging is associated with low workplace morale, reduced productivity and
high levels of employee turnover [44,45]. Supervisors who micromanage their workers
suppress creativity [45], underestimating the potential for development and growth within
the workplace and the organization as a whole. Furthermore, it places employees at risk of
burnout and is a common reason for workers leaving their job [44].
The results consistently showed that bullying came from sources where unequal
power relations existed, such as management and other workers. While P20 and P29
experienced gender harassment, other participants had experienced bullying from the
management level, a similar finding to other research [2], where results showed that 40.54%
of participants identified that bullying came from supervisors or management. Over half
of the employees in another study [46] had experienced bullying in the workplace, with
close to one-third (32.3%) reporting moderate to severe depression. Both studies examined
Australian onshore mine workers. Being a victim of bullying affects employees’ intentions
to remain with the organization [47]. Other research reported a four-fold increase in
psychological distress [48]. Supportive practices opposing bullying to tackle the patterns of
masculine norms present in the mining environment are suggested [2], lending weight to
the theory that social support is negatively associated with bullying [49].
In a study involving female FIFO workers [50], all participants often felt discriminated
against by male supervisors. Furthermore, career progression was difficult due to the
barriers to networking opportunities for women. Female oil and gas workers endure
an environment of pervasive sexual harassment [51], and two of the four female partici-
pants in this study indicated that they were negatively impacted by the male-dominated
work environment. Impacts of gendered organizational climate are often experienced as
discrimination, harassment and sex-role stereotyping.
When rosters were extended during COVID-19, additional strains were placed upon
a population that was already vulnerable to poor mental health and had a higher risk of
suicide [2,52]. Rosters for offshore workers are generally lengthier than those for onshore
workers, with the shortest offshore roster being two weeks (P29). The longest roster was
six weeks away (P11), while during the pandemic, this extended to 3 months away from
home for some workers (P22).
The main concerns for participants were catching and transmitting the virus (P1),
echoing other recent study findings on offshore workers [53] and through a national survey
during the first month of COVID-19 restrictions [54]. In particular, the fear of infecting
loved ones or family members caused distress [P1,55], and there had been frustration and
nervousness about when the pandemic would end. Research has found poor mental health
due to characteristic FIFO stressors together with quarantine measures and fear of job
loss [55]. Another common cause of stress was attempting to hide symptoms similar to
those of COVID-19, causing presenteeism, which impacts productivity and heightens errors
and accident risk, increasing the likelihood that employees will become absent in the future
with worsening physical and mental health [56]. Echoing these results, many participants
in this study who traveled interstate to work offshore were often kept away from family for
months at a time, causing understandable distress [55]. Confinement and restrictions were
significant issues for P20 and P22, which mirrors other authors’ findings [57] of frustration
at being confined and restricted from contact with others.
In the tropical Northwest of Australia, daytime temperatures can reach extreme highs.
Further climate-specific events include cyclones [58] and humidity [59]. Other situations
affected by heat are motion sickness [60], hazardous ocean conditions [61] and helicopter
Safety 2023, 9, 56 12 of 17

travel [7,62–64]. Although clothing can function as a protective factor against radiant heat,
it also acts as a barrier to the human–environment exchange [65]. Carrying out the most
physically demanding tasks between 10–2 pm in the shade (P13) and staying hydrated are
practices already in place in some organizations. Colleagues offshore generally look out
for each other (P28) and would rather co-workers have a refreshment break than develop
heat stress (P22). Fortunately, breaks are well-managed (P9, P18), and there is a stop-work
option if it becomes too hot (P13).
Not only can abrupt changes to the weather increase the risk of accidents, but it can
also place demands on employees’ personal resources. Anticipating the arrival of bad
weather may cause psychological stress in the form of perceived time pressures, creating a
tense and anxious working environment [14]. Because production and cost pressures are
sometimes prioritized, concerns regarding potential accidents increase. Moreover, fatigue
can result in a decline in attention, particularly where there are shift rotations. A lack of
trust between team members and supervisors is linked to poor interpersonal behaviors and
poor communication about safety, decreasing the chance that existing organizational flaws,
which may contribute to accidents, can be identified.

5. Conclusions
The main findings of the study can be summed up in the themes identified. There
were several sources of stress from company-provided facilities. When considering that the
possibility of accidents and mistakes is a stressor, the resulting fatigue from poor facilities
is even more important to consider. Being away from home compounds the effects of
a stressful environment. Casualization has had major negative effects on the offshore
workforce, and the subsequent insecurity contributes to poor mental health. This was
worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic when the general trend in employment security
took a downturn. This also intensified the reluctance to speak up on work and safety
issues due to fear of job loss, blacklisting and discrediting. When speaking out about
issues, employees run the risk of bullying and harassment from those whom they are in
an unequal power relationship with. Raising safety issues appears to be an unwelcome
practice in some workplaces when this should be encouraged in a mature organization.
Prior to the pandemic, research into FIFO workers’ mental health and wellbeing
had been identifying declining mental health and increasing suicides. This research has
revealed significant sources of psychological distress for a seldom researched population,
in particular, the female offshore oil and gas workforce.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, E.D.; methodology, E.D. and J.J.; software, E.D.; validation,
E.D. and J.J.; formal analysis, E.D.; investigation, E.D.; resources, C.L.; data curation, E.D.; writing—
original draft preparation, E.D.; writing—review and editing, J.J.; visualization, E.D.; supervision, J.J.,
A.B., S.S.-M., M.H. and C.L.; project administration, C.L.; funding acquisition, C.L. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program
(RTP) Scholarship.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki and approved by the Human Research Ethics Office of CURTIN UNIVERSITY (HRE2021-
0512, 25 August 2021) for studies involving humans.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Data is unavailable due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or
in the decision to publish the results.
Safety 2023, 9, 56 13 of 17

Appendix A
Focus Group Interview questions
Positioning statement: The offshore oil and gas working environment is unique and
may hold many psychological stressors for employees. When considered together, these
factors may pose a greater than average risk to employees’ mental health and wellbeing.
This discussion aims to facilitate the development of effective interview questions for the
research participants of the study Identifying Western Australian Offshore Oil and Gas Workers
Mental Health Hazards and Risk Control Measures.
Exploratory Questions:
In your experience, are there any management practices or work organization practices
that affect mining industry employees’ mental health? If so, please explain.
Do you know of any psychosocial obstacles for employees when returning to work
following a work-related injury or ill health, and if so, how do you think that these
can be mitigated?
What do you think are the main types of, and causes of, mental health stressors for
offshore oil and gas workers? What risk control measures do employers use for these
mental health stressors, and how effective do you think they are?
If employees have poor mental health, how does this impact offshore employees’
health and safety?
Do you know of any economic effects on organizations when employees have to deal
with psychosocial issues and/or poor mental health? If so, what are the
economic effects?
What do you think are the economic effects of having good employee mental health
practices implemented by the company?
Regarding best practices, what do you find gives the best outcomes for promoting
positive mental health for employees in the workplace?
Where do you think that there are opportunities for improvement in promoting posi-
tive mental health practices for contractors and workers with ongoing employment in
the offshore oil and gas industry?
Exit statement:
Is there anything else that you would like to add to the discussion or anything that
you feel was missed?

Appendix B
Main Study Questions
Positioning statement: It has been identified that the offshore oil and gas working
environment can be stressful for workers, particularly when considering mental health
and wellbeing, so it is necessary to investigate the psychosocial stressors which present
themselves to employees in this environment and examine the personal, organizational
and economic implications of poor mental health caused by these stressors. A work-related
mental health hazard is defined as work demands that do not match the workers to their
knowledge and abilities or the resources that they have available to do the work. The
response can be cognitive, physical, behavioral or emotional. Work-related mental health
hazards include, but are not limited to, physically and/or cognitively demanding work,
aggression, bullying, interpersonal conflict, under-supervision, over-supervision, lack of
constructive feedback, lack of support, lack of respect, work overload, lack of role clarity,
poor organizational change management, unplanned work events (e.g., over-time, call-
outs), awkward roster design (e.g., mid-swing rotations, working night shifts after traveling
during the day), extreme weather conditions, suboptimal living and sleeping conditions
(e.g., vibration, restricted living area, high levels of ambient noise, lack of privacy), poor
organizational justice, fatigue, burnout, experiencing dangerous occurrences, exposure to
trauma and emergency management. Further, being physically or socially isolated from
friends and family may be an additional burden [66–68].
Safety 2023, 9, 56 14 of 17

The aim of this interview is to identify mental health hazards and possible solutions to
these stressors and inform organizations and policy-makers of best practices for preventing,
identifying and improving poor mental health in the offshore working environment.
Demographic information
What is your role in the oil and gas industry?
Do you work for a large (more than 200 employees) or small company (less than
200 employees)?
What best defines your work status? You may agree to more than one:
Permanent.
Contractor.
Part of a service company.
Casual.
Length of experience in the offshore oil and gas industry:
Less than 5 years.
6–10 years.
11–15 years.
16–20 years.
21–25 years.
26–30 years.
30+ years.
Which age group do you belong to?
Under 25
26–30
31–35
36–40
41–45
46–50
51–55
56–60
60+
Exploratory questions
What are your rostered hours of work, and for how many days/weeks at a time are
you at a time rostered to work offshore?
How do you feel about this?
Have you experienced any management or work organization factors that have caused
you stress? If yes, please explain how this affected your mental health.
Have you had any time off work due to stress?
Are there any environmental factors that have affected your mental health when
working offshore? If yes, please explain.
What do you perceive to be the main work-related mental health hazards?
Have you experienced any psychosocial stressors? If yes, please explain.
If you have experienced returning to work after an illness or injury, how were your
mental health needs considered in your return-to-work plan?
How does the workplace culture affect whether someone will seek help for stress or
poor mental health?
In what way have you found that the personality of managers affects employee mental
health?
In what way have you found that the personality of co-workers affects employee
mental health?
Does stigma seem to affect poor mental health help-seeking and reporting?
Have you ever had a psychological illness or suffered from poor mental health?
If ‘Yes’:
Has having a psychological illness or poor mental health had an effect on you financially?
Safety 2023, 9, 56 15 of 17

Have there been any economic effects on your employer or its employees from a
worker being stressed or from having poor mental health? If yes, describe the effects.
Does your employer provide mental health education? If yes, please describe the
education provided.
Does your employer implement any other strategies for mental health promotion or
support? If yes, please describe these strategies.
What interventions or approaches does the company have to develop employee
resilience? Resilience is the capacity of a person to recover quickly from difficult
situations through having good problem-solving skills that enable the person to cope
when there are difficulties.
In your experience, what have you found most beneficial for improving employee
mental health?
Has the COVID-19 pandemic had any effect on your mental health? If so, why?
Exit statement:
Is there anything else that you would like to tell me about psychosocial stressors or
mental health hazards, what is done well to manage these hazards and if there are
opportunities for improvement in managing employee mental health in the offshore
oil and gas industry?

References
1. Bowers, J.; Lo, J.; Miller, P.; Mawren, D.; Jones, B. Psychological distress in remote mining and construction workers in Australia.
Med. J. Aust. 2018, 208, 391–397. [CrossRef]
2. Parker, S.K.; Fruhen, L.; Burton, C.; McQuade, S.; Loveny, J.; Griffin, M.; Page, A.; Chikritzhs, T.; Crock, S.; Jorritsma, K.; et al.
Impact of FIFO Work Arrangements on the Mental Health and Wellbeing of FIFO Workers. Centre for Transformative Work
Design. 2018. Available online: https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/impact-of-fifo-work-arrangements-on-
the-mental-health-and-wellbei (accessed on 12 June 2023).
3. National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority. COVID-19 Roster Changes. 2020. Available
online: https://www.nopsema.gov.au/offshore-industry/safety/covid-19 (accessed on 5 June 2023).
4. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety. Mentally Healthy Workplaces Audit—Technical Guide. 2020. Available on-
line: https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/publications/mentally-healthy-workplaces-audit-tool-and-technical-guide (accessed
on 13 March 2023).
5. Wright, T.A.; Cropanzano, R. Psychological well-being and job satisfaction as predictors of job performance. J. Occup. Health
Psychol. 2000, 5, 84–94. [CrossRef]
6. Zacharatos, A.; Barling, J.; Iverson, R.D. High-performance work systems and occupational safety. J. Appl. Psychol. 2005, 90, 77–93.
[CrossRef]
7. Sutherland, V.J.; Cooper, C.L. Stress in the offshore oil and gas exploration and production industries: An organizational approach
to stress control. Stress Med. 1996, 12, 27–34. [CrossRef]
8. James, C.; Tynan, R.; Roach, D.; Leigh, L.; Oldmeadow, C.; Rahman, M.; Kelly, B. Correlates of psychological distress among
workers in the mining industry in remote Australia: Evidence from a multi-site cross-sectional survey. PLoS ONE 2018,
13, e0209377. [CrossRef]
9. Cotton, P. Management of injured workers with psychosocial barriers. Aust. Fam. Physician 2006, 35, 958–961. Available online:
https://search-informit-com.au.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=360983219989263;res=IELHEA (accessed on 5
June 2023).
10. Shaw-Mills, S.T. Towards the Prevention of Long-Duration Workers Compensation Claims—Pre-Claim Intervention and Strategy.
Doctoral Dissertation, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia, 2015. Available online: http://link.library.curtin.edu.au/p?cur_
dspace_dc20.500.11937/172 (accessed on 16 September 2022).
11. Berthelsen, M.; Pallesen, S.; Bjorvatn, B.; Knardahl, S. Shift schedules, work factors, and mental health among onshore and
offshore workers in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Ind. Health 2015, 53, 280–292. [CrossRef]
12. Žeželj, P.S.; Cvijanović Peloza, O.; Mika, F.; Stamenković, S.; Mahmutović Vranić, S.; Šabanagić Hajrić, S. Anxiety and depression
symptoms among gas and oil industry workers. Occup. Med. 2019, 69, 22–27. [CrossRef]
13. Torquati, L.; Mielke, G.I.; Brown, W.J.; Burton, N.W.; Kolbe-Alexander, T. Shift work and poor mental health: A meta-analysis of
longitudinal studies. Am. J. Public Health 2019, 109, 13–20. [CrossRef]
14. Nielsen, M.B. Bullying in work groups: The impact of leadership. Scand. J. Psychol. 2013, 54, 127–136. [CrossRef]
15. Miller, P.; Brook, L.; Stomski, N.; Ditchburn, G.; Morrison, P. Bullying in Fly-In, Fly-Out employees in the Australian resources
sector: A cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0229970. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Parkes, K.R. Work environment, overtime and sleep among offshore personnel. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2015, 99, 383–388. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
Safety 2023, 9, 56 16 of 17

17. Henry, P.; Hamilton, K.; Watson, S.; McDonald, M. FIFO/DIDO Mental Health Research Report 2013; Perth Lifeline: Perth, WA,
Australia, 2013.
18. Parkes, K.R. Shift schedules on North Sea oil/gas installations: A systematic review of their impact on performance, safety and
health. Saf. Sci. 2012, 50, 1636–1651. [CrossRef]
19. Karasek, R.A. Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Adm. Sci. Q. 1979, 24, 285–308.
[CrossRef]
20. Creswell, J.W. A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research; SAGE Publications: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 2014.
21. Dhuria, D.; Chetty, P. Explaining Validity and Reliability of Qualitative Data in Nvivo. Knowledge Tank; Project Guru. 2017.
Available online: https://www.projectguru.in/explaining-validity-reliability-qualitative-data-nvivo/ (accessed on 22 June 2023).
22. O’Kane, P.; Smith, A.; Lerman, M.P. Building transparency and trustworthiness in inductive research through computer-aided
qualitative data analysis software. Organ. Res. Methods 2021, 24, 104–139. [CrossRef]
23. Commission for Occupational Safety and Health. Mentally Healthy Workplaces for Fly-In Fly-Out (FIFO) Workers in the
Resources and Construction Sectors—Code of Practice. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety, Western Australia.
2019. Available online: https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/publications/mentally-healthy-workplaces-fly-fly-out-fifo-workers-
resources-and-construction-sectors (accessed on 13 May 2023).
24. Mette, J.; Velasco Garrido, M.; Harth VPreisser, A.M.; Mache, S. “It’s still a great adventure”—Exploring offshore employees’
working conditions in a qualitative study. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2017, 12, 35. [CrossRef]
25. Landon, L.B.; Douglas, G.L.; Downs, M.E.; Greene, M.R.; Whitmire, A.M.; Zwart, S.R.; Roma, P.G. The behavioral biology of
teams: Multidisciplinary contributions to social dynamics in isolated, confined, and extreme environments. Front. Psychol. 2019,
10, 2571. [CrossRef]
26. Jepsen, J.R.; Zhao, Z.; Van Leeuwen, W.M.A. Seafarer fatigue: A review of risk factors, consequences for seafarers’ health and
safety and options for mitigation. Int. Marit. Health 2015, 66, 106–117. [CrossRef]
27. Riethmeister, V.; Brouwer, S.; van der Klink, J.; Bültmann, U. Work, eat and sleep: Towards a healthy ageing at work program
offshore. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 134. [CrossRef]
28. Namian, M.; Albert, A.; Feng, J. The distracted worker: Effect on hazard recognition and safety performance. In Construction
Research Congress; ASCE: New Orleans, LA, USA, 2018; pp. 367–377. [CrossRef]
29. Sneddon, A.; Mearns, K.; Flin, R. Stress, fatigue, situation awareness and safety in offshore drilling crews. Saf. Sci. 2013, 56, 80–88.
[CrossRef]
30. Quinlan, M. Precarity and workplace well-being: A general review. In Safety or Profit? International Studies in Governance, Change
and the Work Environment; Nichols, T., Armstrong, P., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 29–44. [CrossRef]
31. Milliken, F.J.; Morrison, E.W.; Hewlin, P.F. An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate
upward and why. J. Manag. Stud. 2003, 40, 1453–1476. [CrossRef]
32. Australian Council of Trade Unions. Offshore Workers Need Better Protection. 2020. Available online: https://www.actu.org.au/
our-work/policies-publications-submissions/2020/offshore-workers-need-better-protection (accessed on 2 June 2023).
33. Fair Work Ombudsman. Casual Employment Information Statement [Fact Sheet]. 2023. Available online: https://www.fairwork.
gov.au/employment-conditions/national-employment-standards/casual-employment-information-statement (accessed on 3
June 2023).
34. Stanford, J. Shock Troops of the Pandemic: Casual and Insecure Work in COVID and Beyond. 2021. Available online: https:
//australiainstitute.org.au/report/shock-troops-of-the-pandemic/ (accessed on 13 May 2023).
35. Gilfillan, G. COVID-19: Impacts on Casual Workers in Australia: A Statistical Snapshot. Research Paper Series, 2019–2020,
Parliamentary of Australia. 2020. Available online: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/7262636/
upload_binary/7262636.pdf (accessed on 2 June 2023).
36. Collinson, D.L. Surviving the rigs: Safety and surveillance on North Sea oil installations. Organ. Stud. 1999, 20, 579–600.
[CrossRef]
37. Moreland, R.L.; Levine, J.M. Socialization and trust in work groups. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2002, 5, 185–201. [CrossRef]
38. Conchie, S.M.; Donald, I.J. The role of distrust in offshore safety performance. Risk Anal. 2006, 26, 1151–1159. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
39. Parkes, K.R. Psychological aspect of stress, health and safety on North Sea installations. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 1998, 24,
321–333. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40. Sutherland, V.J.; Cooper, C.L. Man and Accidents Offshore: The Costs of Stress among Workers on Oil and Gas Rigs; Lloyd’s
List/Dietsmann: London, UK, 1986.
41. Sutherland, K.M.; Flin, R.H. Stress at sea: A review of working conditions in the offshore oil and fishing industries. Work Stress
1989, 3, 269–285. [CrossRef]
42. Johnson, R.C.; Eatough, E.M.; Hammer, L.B.; Truxilllo, D. Home is where the mind is: Family interference with work and safety
performance in two high risk industries. J. Vocat. Behav. 2019, 110, 117–130. [CrossRef]
43. Mette, J.; Robelski, S.; Kirchhöfer, M.; Harth, V.; Mache, S. Living the 14/14 schedule: Qualitative analysis of the challenges and
coping strategies among families of offshore wind workers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 241. [CrossRef]
44. Collins, S.K.; Collins, K.S. Micromanagement—A costly management style. Radiol. Manag. 2002, 24, 32–35. Available online:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12510608/ (accessed on 15 May 2023).
Safety 2023, 9, 56 17 of 17

45. Irani-Williams, F.; Tribble, L.; Rutner, P.S.; Campbell, C.; McKnight, D.H.; Hardgrave, B.C. Just let me do my job! Exploring the
impact of micromanagement on IT professionals. ACM SIGMIS Database DATABASE Adv. Inf. Syst. 2021, 52, 77–95. [CrossRef]
46. Miller, P.; Brook, L.; Stomski, N.J.; Ditchburn, G.; Morrison, P. Depression, suicide risk, and workplace bullying: A comparative
study of fly-in, fly-out and residential resource workers in Australia. Aust. Health Rev. 2019, 44, 248–253. [CrossRef]
47. Bowling, N.A.; Beehr, T.A. Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: A theoretical model and meta-analysis. J. Appl.
Psychol. 2006, 91, 998–1012. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
48. Steele, N.M.; Rodgers, B.; Fogarty, G.J. The relationships of experiencing workplace bullying with mental health, affective
commitment, and job satisfaction: Application of the job demands control model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2151.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
49. Baillien, E.; De Witte, H. Why is organizational change related to workplace bullying? Role conflict and job insecurity as mediators.
Econ. Ind. Democr. 2009, 30, 348–371. [CrossRef]
50. Bailey-Kruger, A. The Psychological Wellbeing of Women Operating Mining Machinery in a Fly-in Fly-out Capacity. Master’s
Thesis, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia, 2012. Available online: http://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/1682 (accessed on
13 May 2023).
51. Murphy, K.; Strand, L.; Theron, L.; Ungar, M. “I just gotta have tough skin”: Women’s experiences working in the oil and gas
industry in Canada. Extr. Ind. Soc. 2021, 8, 100882. [CrossRef]
52. Feringa, A.; Wentzel, N. Smashing the Stigma in Mental Health—A Strategic Blueprint for Change. APPEA J. 2020, 60, 10–18.
Available online: https://www.publish.csiro.au/aj/AJ19209 (accessed on 23 March 2023). [CrossRef]
53. Baygi, F.; Khonsari, N.M.; Seif, E.; Asayesh, H.; Qorbani, M. The mental health status of offshore oil platform workers during the
COVID-pandemic. Front. Psychiatry 2022, 13, 1009602. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Fisher, J.R.; Tran, T.D.; Hammarberg, K.; Sastry, J.; Nguyen, H.; Rowe, H.; Popplestone, S.; Stocker, R.; Stubber, C.; Kirkman,
M. Mental health of people in Australia in the first month of COVID-19 restrictions: A national survey. Med. J. Aust. 2020, 213,
458–464. [CrossRef]
55. Asare, B.Y.A.; Thomas, E.; Affandi, J.S.; Schammer, M.; Brown, P.; Pilbeam, M.; Harris, C.; Ellison, C.; Kwasnicka, D.; Powell,
D.; et al. Mental Well-Being during COVID-19: A Cross-Sectional Study of Fly-In Fly-Out Workers in the Mining Industry in
Australia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12264. [CrossRef]
56. Lohaus, D.; Habermann, W. Presenteeism: A review and research directions. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2019, 29, 43–58. [CrossRef]
57. Brooks, S.K.; Webster, R.K.; Smith, L.E.; Woodland, L.; Wessely, S.; Greenberg, N.; Rubin, G.J. The psychological impact of
quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020, 395, 912–920. [CrossRef]
58. Bureau of Meteorology Climatology of Tropical Cyclones in Western Australia. 2020. Available online: http://www.bom.gov.au/
cyclone/climatology/wa.shtml (accessed on 16 September 2022).
59. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety. Working Safely in Hot Conditions. 2020. Available online: https:
//www.commerce.wa.gov.au/worksafe/working-safely-hot-conditions (accessed on 16 September 2022).
60. Haward, B.M.; Lewis, C.H.; Griffin, M.J. Motions and crew response on an offshore oil production and storage vessel. Appl. Ergon.
2009, 40, 904–914. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
61. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety. Cyclone—Emergency Preparation, Planning and Preparedness. 2016.
Available online: https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/worksafe/cyclone-emergency-preparation-planning-and-preparedness
(accessed on 16 September 2022).
62. Bjerkan, A.M. Health, environment, safety culture and climate—Analysing the relationships to occupational accidents. J. Risk Res.
2010, 13, 445–477. [CrossRef]
63. Chen, W.; Wong, T.; Yu, T. Influence of occupational stress on mental health among Chinese offshore oil workers. Scand. J. Public
Health 2009, 37, 766–773. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
64. Sutherland, V.J.; Cooper, C.L. Personality, stress and accident involvement in the offshore oil and gas industry. Personal. Individ.
Differ. 1991, 12, 195–204. [CrossRef]
65. Ramsey, J.D. Heat and cold. In Stress and Fatigue in Human Performance; Hockey, R., Ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1983;
pp. 33–60.
66. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS). Psychosocial hazards in the workplace. Draft Code of Practice;
Government of Western Australia: Perth, WA, Australia, 2021; 32p.
67. ISO. ISO 45003:2021. Occupational Health and Safety Management—Psychological Health and Safety at Work—Guidelines for
Managing Psychosocial Risks. 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:45003:ed-1:v1:en (accessed on
16 September 2022).
68. NOPSEMA. Psychosocial Risk Management Draft Guidance Note N-09000-GN1958 A757599. 2021. Available online: https:
//www.nopsema.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021-09/A757599.pdf (accessed on 16 September 2022).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.