Zum Inhalt springen
🎉 Limited time: Save the 199€ setup fee - register now! Save now

§ 25 ArbSchG · Legal position as at 21 August 2026

Fines for Missing Psychological Risk Assessment

What actually follows a deficiency: an order under Section 22(3) ArbSchG with a deadline first, and only then the administrative offence under Section 25. With the fine ranges the Act sets out, and the sources for every figure.

5.000 €

Range under Section 25(2)

30.000 €

only for contravening an order

6

Typical findings

5 %

minimum inspection quota, Section 21(1a)

Legal framework: § 25 ArbSchG

Under Section 25(1) no. 2(a) ArbSchG it is an administrative offence for an employer or a responsible person to contravene an enforceable order issued by the supervisory authority under Section 22(3) ArbSchG. The absence of a risk assessment does not itself trigger a fine: the authority first orders the necessary measures under Section 22(3) and sets a reasonable deadline unless there is imminent danger.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act sets out two ranges for fines. Under Section 25(2) up to EUR 5,000 is possible, and up to EUR 30,000 in the cases covered by Section 25(1) no. 2(a). The higher range requires that an enforceable order of the supervisory authority has been contravened. How an authority applies that range in an individual case depends on severity, culpability and economic circumstances, and is not published in a nationally uniform form.

If an order is not complied with within the deadline, the authority may prohibit the work concerned or the use of the work equipment concerned under Section 22(3) ArbSchG.

Administrative fines: Section 25 ArbSchG. Criminal offences: Section 26 ArbSchG, which builds on Section 25 and requires persistent repetition or intentional endangerment of an employee’s life or health.

The four stages of escalation

Where a company stands is decided by what it can present, not by a calculated amount. The calculator classifies a company into one of these four stages.

Stage 1: Assessment in place, documented and reviewed

unremarkable

You meet Section 5(1) in conjunction with Section 5(3) no. 6 ArbSchG and hold the documentation required by Section 6(1).

What remains is repetition: if working conditions change materially, the assessment has to be repeated.

§ 5 Abs. 1 und 3 Nr. 6 ArbSchG · § 6 Abs. 1 ArbSchG · § 3 Abs. 1 ArbSchG

Stage 2: Assessment in place, but incomplete

needs completion

You have carried out a survey, but the following is missing: {fehlend}. Section 6(1) ArbSchG requires documentation covering all three parts.

No fine follows from this directly. What can follow is an order under Section 22 ArbSchG with a deadline.

§ 6 Abs. 1 ArbSchG · § 22 Abs. 3 ArbSchG

Stage 3: No assessment of psychological strain

obligation not met

Since number 6 was added to Section 5(3) in 2013, psychological strain has been an explicit part of the risk assessment. The law sets no threshold based on headcount.

From the 2026 calendar year the state occupational safety authorities must inspect at least 5 percent of the establishments in their state each year (Section 21(1a) ArbSchG). Start the assessment before an order arrives.

§ 5 Abs. 1 und 3 Nr. 6 ArbSchG · § 22 Abs. 3 ArbSchG · § 25 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 Buchst. a und Abs. 2 ArbSchG · § 21 Abs. 1a ArbSchG

Stage 4: An order has already been issued

urgent

If an order from the supervisory authority has been issued to you, the deadline it sets is the only date that counts.

In this situation, consult a lawyer rather than an online calculator.

§ 22 Abs. 3 ArbSchG · § 25 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 Buchst. a und Abs. 2 ArbSchG · § 26 ArbSchG

Classify your own company step by step →

Typical findings

The Act assigns no separate amount to any of these findings. What is stated is the provision breached and the consequence attached to it.

§ 5 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Abs. 3 Nr. 6 ArbSchG

Assessment of psychological strain entirely absent

The company has not yet assessed psychological strain. Since number 6 was added to Section 5(3) in 2013 it has been an explicit part of the risk assessment. The law sets no threshold based on sector or headcount.

Consequence: No immediate fine. The supervisory authority orders the necessary measures under Section 22(3) ArbSchG and sets a reasonable deadline unless there is imminent danger. Only contravening that enforceable order is an administrative offence under Section 25(1) no. 2(a).

Makes it worse

  • An earlier order from the supervisory authority went unanswered
  • The obligation was known and deliberately not met
  • Other parts of the risk assessment are missing as well

Eases it

  • The assessment is completed within the deadline set
  • The company presents the authority with a plan and dates
  • First measures are implemented while the deadline is still running
§ 5 Abs. 3 Nr. 6 ArbSchG

Risk assessment without the psychological strain section

A risk assessment exists but contains no section on psychological strain. Often only physical hazards such as noise, hazardous substances or ergonomics were considered. Section 5(3) no. 6 names psychological strain explicitly as a hazard factor.

Consequence: To that extent the assessment is incomplete. The authority can order it to be completed under Section 22(3) ArbSchG and set a deadline.

Makes it worse

  • The strain is documented within the company, for example through complaints or absence data
  • A works council has already asserted its involvement under Section 87(1) no. 7 BetrVG
  • No measures were considered despite the known strain

Eases it

  • The remaining parts of the risk assessment are complete
  • The survey of psychological strain is scheduled and documented
  • The company completes the assessment immediately after being notified
§ 6 Abs. 1 ArbSchG

Documentation under Section 6(1) missing or incomplete

The assessment was carried out, but the documentation is missing or does not cover all three elements required by Section 6(1): the result of the risk assessment, the measures defined and the result of their review. Headcount determines how extensive the documentation has to be, not whether it is required at all.

Consequence: During an inspection the authority can demand the documentation and order it to be produced under Section 22(3) ArbSchG. Here too, a fine requires that the order is contravened.

Makes it worse

  • No documentation at all can be presented during the inspection
  • Measures were neither defined nor tracked
  • The effectiveness of measures was never reviewed

Eases it

  • The documentation was produced immediately after the notice
  • Survey and measures demonstrably took place
  • Result and measures are at least partly evidenced
§ 3 Abs. 1 i. V. m. § 5 Abs. 1 ArbSchG

Assessment not repeated after material changes

The assessment of psychological strain was carried out but not repeated after material changes to working conditions, for example a shift to remote work, restructuring, new work equipment or substantial staff turnover. Section 3(1) requires measures to be reviewed for effectiveness and adapted to changing circumstances.

Consequence: The authority can order the assessment to be repeated under Section 22(3) ArbSchG and set a deadline.

Makes it worse

  • Working conditions changed substantially and nothing was reviewed
  • Complaints from the workforce arrived after the change
  • The last assessment is several years old and was never reviewed

Eases it

  • The change is recent and the reassessment is scheduled
  • Parts of the organisation have already been reassessed
  • The company can show a documented review cycle
§ 87 Abs. 1 Nr. 7 BetrVG

Works council not involved under Section 87(1) no. 7 BetrVG

The employer carried out the assessment without involving the existing works council. The co-determination right in health protection under Section 87(1) no. 7 BetrVG covers planning, choice of method and derivation of measures.

Consequence: This is not an administrative offence under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The co-determination right is enforced under works constitution law, for example through the conciliation committee or an injunction. Where there is no works council there is nothing to involve, and therefore no allegation.

Makes it worse

  • The works council had expressly asserted its co-determination right
  • The method was deliberately chosen without involvement
  • A works council request under Section 80 BetrVG went unanswered

Eases it

  • The works council is involved retrospectively before the method is chosen
  • Employer and works council agree on the procedure
  • There is no works council, in which case the co-determination right does not apply
§ 3 Abs. 1 und § 6 Abs. 1 ArbSchG

Defined measures not implemented or never reviewed

The assessment was carried out and documented, but the measures derived from it were not or only partly implemented and their effectiveness was never reviewed. Section 3(1) requires implementation and review, Section 6(1) requires documentation of the result of that review.

Consequence: The authority can order implementation under Section 22(3) ArbSchG and set a deadline. If the order is not complied with, it can prohibit the work concerned.

Makes it worse

  • Measures have been open for years with no new date
  • The workforce has complained about exactly these strains
  • Implementation would have been possible with little effort

Eases it

  • Partial measures are implemented and documented
  • The effectiveness review is scheduled and documented
  • Implementation was demonstrably delayed by external circumstances

Sources for every figure on this page

Individual fine decisions are not published in Germany, and the federal states do not publish a uniform scale for setting amounts. This page therefore states ranges from the Act and nothing beyond them.

StatementSourceRetrieved
Duty to assess, psychological strain as no. 6§ 5 Abs. 1 und 3 ArbSchG21.08.2026
No threshold based on headcount§ 1 ArbSchG21.08.2026
Documentation of result, measures and review§ 6 Abs. 1 ArbSchG21.08.2026
Order by the authority, reasonable deadline, prohibition if not complied with§ 22 Abs. 3 ArbSchG21.08.2026
Fine ranges up to EUR 5,000 and up to EUR 30,000§ 25 Abs. 1 und 2 ArbSchG21.08.2026
Imprisonment of up to one year§ 26 ArbSchG21.08.2026
Minimum inspection quota of 5 percent from 2026§ 21 Abs. 1a ArbSchG21.08.2026
Co-determination in health protection§ 87 Abs. 1 Nr. 7 BetrVG21.08.2026
Addition of no. 6 in 2013Sekundärquellen (Haufe, BAuA)21.08.2026

Fines & enforcement by federal state

Inspections under §5 ArbSchG are carried out by the regional trade inspectorate of each federal state. Detailed pages with authority info, focus sectors and key cities for each state:

Fines in Baden-WürttembergFines in BayernFines in BerlinFines in BrandenburgFines in BremenFines in HamburgFines in HessenFines in Mecklenburg-VorpommernFines in NiedersachsenFines in Nordrhein-WestfalenFines in Rheinland-PfalzFines in SaarlandFines in SachsenFines in Sachsen-AnhaltFines in Schleswig-HolsteinFines in Thüringen

Fines & enforcement by industry

Inspection focus and typical stressors differ by sector. Detail pages per industry:

Pflege & GesundheitIT & DienstleistungHandwerk & BauGastronomie & HotelEinzelhandelBüro & VerwaltungTransport & LogistikProduktion & FertigungErziehung & Bildung

§5 ArbSchG · Required for every employer in Germany

Are you also responsible for the psychological risk assessment?

Since 2013, every German employer is legally required to assess psychological workplace stressors (§5 ArbSchG). If the authority orders the defect to be remedied and the order is breached, fines run up to €30,000 (§25 ArbSchG). From 2026 the authorities must inspect at least 5% of companies per year (§21 Para. 1a ArbSchG).

  • Anonymous survey covering all 6 GDA areas
  • Automatic evaluation, measure planning, audit-ready PDF report
  • Set up in 3 minutes. From €699 once per survey round. No subscription trap.
Check your obligation in 30 seconds → See fines & enforcement How SafeMind works

SafeMind

Create your GB Psych in minutes

GDA-compliant, fully documented, and ready for inspections - without the usual months-long process.

Learn more How authorities inspect → Works council template

Frequently Asked Questions

What fine applies if the psychological risk assessment is missing?
Its absence alone does not trigger a fine. If the supervisory authority finds the deficiency, it first orders it to be remedied under Section 22(3) ArbSchG and, unless there is imminent danger, sets a reasonable deadline. Only contravening that enforceable order is an administrative offence under Section 25(1) no. 2(a) ArbSchG. The Act sets out two ranges: up to EUR 5,000 under Section 25(2), and up to EUR 30,000 in the cases covered by Section 25(1) no. 2(a). How an authority applies that range in an individual case depends on severity, culpability and economic circumstances, and is not published in a nationally uniform form.
What is the difference between Section 25 and Section 26 ArbSchG?
Administrative fines: Section 25 ArbSchG. Criminal offences: Section 26 ArbSchG, which builds on Section 25 and requires persistent repetition or intentional endangerment of an employee’s life or health. Its range is imprisonment of up to one year or a fine.
Who enforces compliance with Section 5 ArbSchG?
Enforcement lies with the trade inspectorate or occupational safety authority of each federal state. These authorities may inspect workplaces, issue orders under Section 22(3) ArbSchG, prohibit the work concerned if an order is not complied with, and pursue administrative offences under Section 25.
What counts as a deficiency under Section 5(3) no. 6 ArbSchG?
Typical findings are: no assessment of psychological strain at all, a risk assessment without that section, an assessment not repeated after material changes, missing documentation under Section 6(1), measures not implemented or never reviewed, and, where a works council exists, the assessment carried out without its involvement under Section 87(1) no. 7 BetrVG.
How often are companies inspected?
From the 2026 calendar year the state occupational safety authorities must inspect at least 5 percent of the establishments in their state each year (Section 21(1a) ArbSchG). That is a duty imposed on the authorities, not a probability for an individual company: which establishments are selected is decided by the authority, and the criteria are not published as a formula.
Can deficiencies be remedied after an inspection?
Yes, and that is what the Act provides for. The order under Section 22(3) ArbSchG sets a deadline. If it is met, there is no administrative offence under Section 25(1) no. 2(a). If it is missed, the authority may prohibit the work concerned in addition to pursuing the offence.