Extreme Heat At Work: What Global Employers Need To Know

Extreme heat is becoming a regular workplace risk across many jurisdictions. Below, we bring together global employment law insights from our recent four-part series to help organisations manage heat-related risks appropriately and protect their workforce in increasingly challenging conditions.

Extreme heat is no longer an exceptional event. It is an increasingly common feature of the working environment in countries across the world. For employers, this creates both operational and legal challenges. Managing heat risk requires more than reactive measures taken during a heatwave. It calls for planning, clear policies and a consistent approach.

In this article, we bring together insights from our four-part series on extreme heat at work, focusing on maximum working limits, practical employer steps, relaxing dress codes and employee refusal to work. These insights reflect high-level trends only, and employers should review the specific legal framework in their jurisdiction and take local advice where necessary. A consolidated PDF is also available to download at the end of this article, providing country-by-country guidance across all four topics for the 26 jurisdictions we surveyed.

Maximum working temperature: what the law says

The first article examines whether a maximum working temperature exists in the countries we surveyed. In most jurisdictions, there is no fixed upper temperature limit. Instead, health and safety frameworks require employers to provide a safe working environment. This means employers must assess whether workplace temperatures pose a risk and take appropriate action.

That said, some countries do provide guidance thresholds or sector-specific rules, particularly for outdoor work or high-risk industries.

Practical steps employers should take

The second article focuses on practical measures employers should or are required to implement during extreme heat. Across the countries we surveyed, a risk-based approach emerges as being essential. Employers must assess the specific risks posed by heat exposure and respond accordingly.

Common measures include:

• Adjusting working hours to avoid peak heat periods.
• Increasing rest breaks and access to shade.
• Providing cool drinking water.
• Improving ventilation or cooling systems.
• Monitoring vulnerable employees more closely.

Many jurisdictions expect employers to take proactive steps. Failure to do so may expose organisations to liability under the health and safety framework.

Dress codes in hot weather

The third article considers how employers should adapt dress codes in hot weather. Employers may maintain dress standards, but they should remain reasonable and not compromise health and safety.

Rigid dress codes can create legal risk if they prevent employees from working safely in high temperatures. Employers should review policies and allow flexibility where necessary.

Issues to consider include:

• relaxing formal clothing requirements;
• permitting lighter, breathable fabrics;
• ensuring personal protective equipment (PPE) remains effective;
• balancing safety requirements with comfort.

Employers should apply dress code adjustments consistently.

When employees can refuse to work

The fourth article explores when employees may refuse to work due to extreme heat. In many jurisdictions, employees have the right to stop work if they face a serious and imminent risk to their health or safety (or where a similar threshold is met).

Extreme heat can feasibly meet this threshold in certain circumstances, particularly where employers have failed to implement preventive measures.

Employers must also handle refusals with care. Taking adverse action against employees who raise genuine safety concerns may create legal risk.

Takeaway for employers

Heatwaves are no longer a surprise, so the response by employers should not be either. Employers must treat extreme heat as a predictable business risk, not a seasonal inconvenience. That means planning ahead, adjusting quickly and showing flexibility where it matters most. A rigid approach may create unnecessary legal risk, while a thoughtful one protects both people and productivity.