Desk Sharing and Psychosocial Hazards: What Employers Need to Know
- Peter Stansfield
- Jul 8
- 4 min read
On a basic level desk sharing is really a consideration between the number of people and the number of desks. What many do not appreciate, is that a safety lens now also needs to be applied.
Here in Western Australia psychosocial hazards were written into the Work Health and Safety Regulations back in 2022. Every Australian state and territory now has enforceable duties to manage them, with Victoria completing the set in December 2025. And this isn't purely an Australian quirk. ISO 45003, the international standard for psychological health and safety at work, has been live since 2021. Australia, a bit like the social media ban for under 16’s, just seems to get there quicker than the rest.
What is a psychosocial hazard?
What does that mean in plain English? A psychosocial hazard is anything at work that could cause psychological harm. The way work is designed. The way it's managed. The environment it happens in. Which means if you take someone's desk away without due care and consideration then potentially you may have created a hazard your organisation could legally be held responsible for.
Is hot desking a psychosocial hazard?
Not automatically. Desk sharing, hot desking, activity based working and hotelling are all legitimate ways of working, and I've delivered them plenty of times. The hazard isn't the model, it's the implementation. Take away control without due care, skip genuine consultation or push ratios too aggressively and that's where the risk lives. That's the distinction the regulator cares about, and it's the distinction your planning needs to make.
Five psychosocial hazard things to consider before adopting desk sharing
So, the next time your organisation is rolling out desk sharing, hot desking, activity based working, hotelling etc, here are five things to consider:
Control. Lowering someone's job control is a listed psychosocial hazard, and desk sharing could be considered as taking away control by design. Think about ways your employees can input into the desk sharing decision, solution, roll out and ongoing management of this new way of working.
Change management. Poor organisational change management is on the list too. A genuine and authentic employee engagement strategy that covers change management, communications and training will ensure that if later reviewed by the regulator you can showcase the investment made to support your employees with the adoption of and adaptation to desk sharing.
The ratio. Push desk sharing ratios too aggressively and it could trigger anxiety amongst your employees. A full scale bun fight to rush in early to secure a desk every morning is not a great working environment. This is where hot desking and ABW differ. If you've implemented a hot desking way of working, there is a risk it can be interpreted as engendering a psychosocial hazards based environment.
The quiet ones. Desk sharing hits some people harder than others. Neurodivergent staff, people with sensory needs, anyone whose desk was their anchor. If your approach treats the workforce as one homogenous group, then there is a risk. Defaulting everyone initially to desk sharing is fine, as long as you then work through the outliers and edge cases to ensure those who legitimately need an assigned desk are catered for.
Who owns it. Fundamentally it's a business risk. However, it can be raised and addressed by any of the key stakeholder groups, such as HR/People & Culture or the Property team. As long as it's not ignored or slips through the cracks, psychosocial hazards need to be seriously tabled and considered.
Where activity based working fits
As point three suggests, hot desking and activity based working are not the same thing, and the psychosocial risk profile differs between them. ABW is designed to give back what desk sharing takes away, through a variety of settings and genuine choice over how you work through the day. If you're weighing up the two models, I've written a full comparison of hot desking and activity based working that covers the difference properly.
Frequently asked questions
When did psychosocial hazard regulations start in Australia?
NSW introduced the first dedicated code of practice in 2021. The national model WHS Regulations were amended in 2022 and Western Australia adopted them the same year. Victoria was the last jurisdiction, with its own regulations commencing in December 2025.
Does desk sharing require a psychosocial risk assessment?
If desk sharing changes how people work, and it always does, it should be assessed like any other workplace change. Low job control and poor change management are both listed psychosocial hazards, so a rollout that touches both without a documented risk assessment leaves the organisation exposed.
Do these rules apply outside Australia?
The enforceable regulations are Australian, but the principle is global. ISO 45003 sets the international standard for managing psychosocial risk at work, and jurisdictions including the UK and EU impose general duties around work-related stress. Australia is simply further down the enforcement road.
The regulations regarding psychosocial hazards are not designed to be a blocker to adopting desk sharing, but they are a useful reminder to do things carefully and thoughtfully. So, this doesn't mean don't do desk sharing. I've delivered it plenty of times, incorporating psychosocial hazards thinking into the planning and implementation isn't a problem.
Psychosocial hazards consideration seems to be heading in one direction, so taking it seriously now is the way forward. In New South Wales (NSW), from July 2026 falling short of the code of practice can itself be a breach. No harm required. Put simply, the regulator will not need to show that an employee suffered harm. Not following the code of practice will be enough on its own to constitute a breach.
Leaders need to be aware and workplace project teams need to proactively manage the risk accordingly. Getting the workplace strategy right before the floor plan is where that starts.
