By Stuart Snape, Partner at Graham Coffey & Co. Solicitors
Musculoskeletal injuries are among the most common harms experienced by workers in the UK. They do not usually involve a single moment of crisis. They build slowly, back pain from poor lifting, neck strain from an unsuitable workstation, or joint issues from repetitive tasks. These injuries are widely accepted as part of working life, but they are largely preventable.
Legal protections exist. Employers are required to assess and reduce risks, particularly where work involves manual handling, screen use, or exposure to vibration. Yet many workplaces take minimal action until harm has already occurred. As a result, the legal rights intended to protect workers often go unused, and the conditions that lead to long-term injury persist without challenge.
The data: predictable harm, inconsistent prevention
According to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), 543,000 workers in the UK reported work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in 2022/23. These injuries accounted for 7.8 million lost working days and 27% of all reported work-related ill health.
This affects a wide range of sectors. Physically demanding roles in logistics, construction and manufacturing are most frequently associated with lifting, strain, and vibration injuries. But sedentary roles carry risks too. Hybrid and remote workers are increasingly affected by conditions linked to poor workstation setups, static postures and lack of support or assessment from employers.
These statistics understate the issue. Many workers do not report pain, viewing it as an expected part of the job or fearing repercussions. Others carry on through discomfort, which often delays recovery and worsens outcomes. The wider economic cost is considerable – the HSE estimates that work-related injuries and ill health cost the UK £20.7 billion in 2021/22, with MSDs forming a substantial share.
Rights that exist on paper
The UK’s regulatory framework includes clear duties to reduce musculoskeletal risk. The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 creates a general duty of care. The Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992, Display Screen Equipment Regulations 1992, and Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 require employers to assess and mitigate risks associated with lifting, screen use, and vibration exposure.
But compliance is uneven. Many assessments are treated as formalities rather than tailored evaluations. DSE assessments may be carried out sporadically, with no meaningful follow-up. In remote settings, risk management is often overlooked entirely, despite clear guidance from the HSE that duties still apply.
Workers are typically expected to initiate support requests. That might mean reporting pain, asking for adjustments, or challenging poor working conditions. Yet these steps carry perceived risks and may be discouraged in practice. The result is a system in which legal protection exists, but is difficult to access without persistence and legal knowledge.
What goes wrong in practice
Under-reporting is a widespread problem. Workers frequently normalise early-stage discomfort and continue working despite symptoms. In many workplaces, pain is only recognised as an issue once it becomes a medical or legal matter.
Even when reports are made, employer responses are often delayed or inadequate. Risk assessments may be outdated or irrelevant to the specific role. In hybrid work environments, the responsibility for a safe working space is often left to the employee, with little employer input or follow-up. The Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors has warned that remote workers frequently operate from unsuitable setups, with limited access to advice or equipment.
The wider issue is cultural. Many employers act only in response to incidents or claims, rather than as a matter of ongoing risk management. Preventative practices such as regular ergonomic reviews or task rotation remain uncommon. Long-term health risks receive less attention than immediate physical hazards, even though the impact of MSDs is more widespread and longer-lasting.
Consequences for workers
Musculoskeletal injuries can lead to long-term pain, restricted movement and reduced job opportunities. Many affected workers take extended leave or are forced to adapt their roles, often with financial consequences. Some conditions may improve with treatment, but others cause permanent impairment.
There is also a psychological toll. Pain and uncertainty about recovery, job security and support can cause stress, anxiety and sleep disruption. While employees can pursue compensation for injuries caused by employer negligence, bringing a claim requires evidence, time and confidence, which many injured workers lack.
Employers must hold insurance for this purpose, but compensation is only triggered after harm. It cannot undo the months or years of pain that may have been suffered before a claim was brought. Legal remedies remain reactive, not preventative.
What needs to change
Reducing musculoskeletal injury rates requires more than compliance. It demands cultural and structural reform. Risk assessments should be specific, reviewed regularly, and followed by action. Independent ergonomic assessments should be standard practice in high-risk industries and remote work contexts.
There must also be better reporting and monitoring. Many MSDs are not captured by RIDDOR because they do not result in time off or immediate diagnosis. Yet they are no less serious. Requiring employers to record recurring symptoms and low-level pain over time would help identify risks before they become long-term injuries.
The HSE needs more resources and a stronger mandate to carry out proactive inspections focused on health as well as safety. Currently, regulatory attention often prioritises acute incidents. The long-term cost of ignoring chronic harm is too easily overlooked.
Closing the rights gap
Musculoskeletal injuries are a systemic workplace issue, not a series of unfortunate individual experiences. The UK’s legal framework recognises the problem, but enforcement, oversight and cultural change have not kept pace. Workers continue to suffer preventable harm in silence, while rights intended to protect them go unused.
A system that relies on post-injury claims is not a protective one. Until policy and practice prioritise prevention, the workplace will remain a place where injury is tolerated, and rights are conditional on the ability to fight for them.
Photo by Radowan Nakif Rehan on Unsplash
