.png)
In August 2024, the Ministry of Labor and Employment announced that Regulatory Standard No.1 (NR-1) would undergo changes and come into force on May 24, 2025. However, the time allotted was not enough for companies to adapt, which led to the update - which now includes psychosocial risks - being postponed until May 26, 2026.
The update of NR-1 generated reactions among business organizations, which called for the new requirements to be postponed. The National Confederation of Industry (CNI) and the Social Service of Industry (SESI) highlighted the lack of clarity in some points of the standard and the risks of legal uncertainty for companies.
The Federation of Industries of the State of São Paulo (FIESP) and FecomercioSP pointed out that the inclusion of psychosocial risks in the Risk Management Program is highly subjective, which makes it difficult to implement in practice, especially for small and medium-sized businesses. In common, these organizations say that more preparation time is still needed for companies to be able to adapt responsibly and safely to the new guidelines.
As presented in the last edition of this newsletter, the main update requires the creation of a Risk Management Program (PGR). In this way, it will be necessary to assess and map the physical, social and environmental conditions in which employees find themselves, in order to prevent mental illness. Along with this, companies must also have an action plan to carry out all these steps, as well as assistance strategies for those affected.
This decision is the result of a scenario in which more and more people are taking time off work due to psychological conditions. Among the elements feeding this context, psychiatrist and managing partner of Ethos Psiquiatria, Emi Mori, points to greater awareness of mental health and a reduction in stigmas, which leads more people to seek help. "But there have also been changes in the job market, such as increased workloads, fewer resources and higher demands. In addition, there is a generational clash: young people want a balance between personal life and work, while many companies are not always prepared to match this."
Consequently, “if we analyze the data on sick leave - both from the INSS and from general surveys - we see an exponential increase over the last five years in cases related to mental health,” explains Mori. “Burnout has become a recurring theme and this has led to questions about the extent to which work has caused mental illness.”
Data on mental health at work
According to the National Association of Occupational Medicine (ANAMT), 30% of Brazilian workers suffer from burnout syndrome. Furthermore, the Brazilian branch of the International Stress Management Association (ISMA) presented the following data in 2023:
- 72% of Brazilians are stressed at work;
- 32% of Brazilians suffer from burnout syndrome;
- Brazil is the second country with the most cases of burnout - second only to Japan, which has 70% of its population in this condition, although other international studies have different rankings.
Data from the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) also indicates that sick leave due to burnout has increased by 136% in five years - from 178 diagnoses in 2019 to 421 in 2023.
Not surprisingly, a 2023 survey of 2,017 people by Infojobs found that 86% of people would change jobs in search of better mental health and more job satisfaction. Furthermore, of those interviewed, 61% did not feel satisfied at work and 76% knew someone who had taken time off work to take care of their mental health.
So what are the next steps to change this scenario?
Different approaches are needed
In practice, the changes to NR-1 represent the need for cultural change in companies - especially those that are attached to practices such as: micromanagement; high, unrealistic and inflexible targets; moral and/or sexual harassment; lack of recognition; and injustices in the environment.
Micromanagement - a practice in which leaders supervise excessively and control every detail of the teams' work - has been identified by experts as a risk factor for well-being.
In this sense, Mori points out that the lack of autonomy is one of the most critical elements: "Micromanagement can be very unhealthy. Studies confirm that, as well as reducing efficiency, micromanagement generates anxiety, demotivation and can contribute to burnout. Large companies have been realizing for a long time how much of a negative impact this has. However, it's as if now the issue of ‘let's take care of our employees’ mental health' is no longer a make-believe," he says.
On the other hand, part of the market still sees these factors as subjective, which could make it difficult to adapt to NR-1. In addition, so far, organizations such as the National Confederation of Industry (CNI) and employers' federations have not issued a unified position on the possible impacts of the new standard. Behind the scenes, however, experts point out that some companies are already looking to anticipate the requirements.
The future of work with a new culture, leadership and technology
From May 2026, companies will not only have to map psychosocial risks more accurately, but also rethink how they deal with mental health on a daily basis.
For Camila Cardoso, a human resources specialist who has led the sector in companies such as Ambev and P&G, this is the time to promote profound transformations.
In this sense, tools such as psychosocial questionnaires should become more common to structure this type of assessment. Which, in the case of NR-1, "will go a long way towards giving HR and the company's top management access to information that wasn't organized before. The psychosocial questionnaire will show how many people are being impacted by mental health problems, an issue that is still not very visible," says Cardoso.
Therefore, "we can no longer just talk about mental health being important. It will be necessary to have a plan, map risks and take action. All of this will have to change the work culture, especially in the high-performance model we live in today, where we're expected to perform all the time," says the HR leader.
For Camila, these movements can be a turning point for companies that want to move towards more consistent health management. “It starts with awareness, with managers gaining visibility of what is happening and then it will change the way we work and relate to each other in companies.” In this respect, she points out that some companies are already discussing issues such as psychological safety and leadership with compassion, but a large part of the market is still far from these practices.
Among the other elements that can help drive these changes, the former P&G believes that artificial intelligence will be an important ally in this process, especially in analyzing data and identifying patterns.
Even so, the decisive point will be the engagement of the leadership. "What's really going to make a difference is HR being able to influence senior management and make them understand that mental health isn't just a benefit, it's a strategy. The company that doesn't look at this is going to be left behind, it's going to be exposed, it's going to lose people and its reputation will be affected. So it's going to take courage to make this change."
Cardoso also stresses that “we'll have the data and the tools, but what will matter is how we use it to transform the workplace - and that only happens when the leadership gets on board.”
In this sense, psychiatrist Emi Mori adds that for the plans to come to fruition, it is essential to train leaders. "If they aren't aware of the importance of mental health, it's very difficult for the process to work. Without this, everything comes to a standstill right from the start."
NR-1 is therefore not just a technical guideline, but a possible cultural milestone.
“If the company doesn't pay attention, this will come to light in some way - it could impact employee productivity and even be fined,” says the psychiatrist. So "it's an important first step. If it's not changing in any other way, let's start by force," she concluded.
Regardless of the extended deadline, ignoring the signs that the work of the future requires deep and urgent changes no longer seems to be an option. Now it's up to each organization to decide: do you want to be a protagonist or a spectator of this transformation?
