It’s 9:00 AM on a Tuesday. The front desk calls: “There is an MPT (Labor Prosecution Office) auditor here; they want to speak with HR.” In a few minutes, you are standing before them. The questions are direct:

• “Have you conducted the NR-1 psychosocial risk assessment?”

• “Where is the PGR (Risk Management Program) updated with these risks?”

• “What training can you prove you have delivered?”

• “How does the harassment reporting channel work? How many reports have you received in the last 12 months, and what actions were taken?”

Pause and imagine this scene at your company: would you feel comfortable or insecure facing these questions?

Since May 2025, NR-1 has required every Brazilian company, regardless of size, to identify and manage psychosocial risks (work overload, harassment, abusive targets, lack of leadership support) within the PGR, with the same technical rigor applied to physical and chemical risks. The standard is in full force, and the MPT is actively investigating based on the Constitution, the CLT (Labor Laws), and current regulations.

The numbers prove the urgency: the MPT received 18,207 moral harassment complaints in 2025 (+26.9% vs. 2024); the TST (Superior Labor Court) recorded 142,814 new lawsuits (+22.3%); the “Disque 100” helpline saw a 49.8% increase. In 2025, over half a million leaves of absence due to mental health disorders were granted—a record for the decade.

Who is responsible for NR-1: HR, SESMT, or Occupational Health?

All three areas, jointly—and therein lies the most common blind spot:

• SESMT handles the technical inventory and action plan in the PGR;

• Occupational Health manages the PCMSO (Occupational Health Medical Control Program) and mental health surveillance;

• HR oversees the reporting channel, training, and case management.

If these areas do not communicate, the company may have each well-structured and yet remain vulnerable.

Training and other actions: What NR-1 requires beyond diagnosis

NR-1 mandates that workers receive training appropriate to the occupational risks identified by the company, including psychosocial risks. With the update of the standard and the strengthening of integrated risk management, it is not enough to recognize factors such as harassment, work overload, interpersonal conflicts, excessive pressure for results, or lack of organizational support: you must prepare leaders and teams to prevent, identify, and manage these situations.

In this context, training on harassment prevention, team management, non-violent communication, and mental health becomes vital evidence of compliance. However, regulators tend to evaluate not only the completion of the training but also its effectiveness. Therefore, it is fundamental to keep records, learning assessments, monitoring indicators, action plans, and evidence of practical application in the workplace.

When the topic is psychosocial risk, a one-off training session without continuity, monitoring, or evidence of results will struggle to demonstrate the commitment required by risk management. The logic of NR-1 is clear: training must effectively contribute to reducing exposure to risk factors and fostering a psychologically safe work environment.

A word of caution: An isolated lecture is not enough. NR-1 requires initial and periodic training, especially when the organization needs to prevent, identify, and control psychosocial risks continuously and effectively. Beyond training, the standard requires: continuous monitoring (climate surveys, indicators, periodic reviews), psychological support channels, working condition reviews, and integration with other NRs, such as NR-17 (ergonomics).

What the inspector expects to find

In addition to evidence of training/awareness (HR), inspectors will request: Risk assessment in the PGR and action plan (SESMT); mental health protocols in the PCMSO (Occupational Health); a confidential reporting channel with a history of case resolutions; and climate, absenteeism, and turnover indicators (HR + Occupational Health). The absence of any item can lead to formal notices, a TAC (Conduct Adjustment Agreement), or a civil public action.

TAC: The commitment that haunts the company for years

Once signed with the MPT, a TAC becomes an extrajudicial executive title: this means that if it is breached, it is enforced directly in the Labor Court with fines per violated clause—and it does not shield the company from MTE (Ministry of Labor) penalties for the same irregularity. Add to this the public exposure: MPT inquiries and civil actions are typically public, becoming news and fuel for individual lawsuits from former employees.

The time to act is before the inspector knocks at the door

Waiting for an audit, a complaint, or the signing of a TAC is the most expensive way to discover that there were untreated risks. Companies that take the lead can structure processes, train leaders, strengthen harassment prevention, implement psychosocial risk management actions, and gather the evidence required by NR-1 before it is demanded.

TothBe supports organizations in this process through specialized and empathetic guidance, training programs for employees and leaders, and methodologies aligned with NR-1 and ISO 45003 to strengthen governance and compliance in workplace health and safety.

Do you want to strengthen psychosocial risk management and advance securely in NR-1 compliance? Talk to TothBe. contato@tothbe.com.br