Hundreds of offshore energy workers are racing against the clock to meet a new 124kg weight restriction that comes into force next month, with many turning to weight-loss injections as a last resort to keep their jobs.
The policy, introduced by trade body Offshore Energies UK (OEUK), requires all personnel working on offshore platforms to weigh under 124kg (19.5 stone) by November. The rule stems from strict safety protocols governing emergency evacuations, specifically the maximum load capacity of helicopter winching systems used during platform rescues.
A Weighty Safety Concern
While the immediate concern revolves around helicopter evacuation procedures, OEUK health and safety lead Graham Skinner emphasised that the weight limit impacts broader safety measures across offshore installations. “This isn’t just about one piece of equipment,” Skinner explained. “Capping worker weight benefits all life-saving systems on platform.”
The industry has previously attempted to accommodate heavier workers by modifying safety equipment – enlarging lifeboats and adjusting helicopter seating arrangements. However, Skinner described these efforts as merely addressing “symptoms rather than causes” of the underlying safety issue.
Statistics from 2025 reveal that 78% of medical evacuations from offshore platforms were related to health emergencies such as heart attacks and strokes, further justifying the industry’s focus on worker fitness and weight management.
From 2,200 to Under 300: The Weight Loss Journey
Since announcing the policy in 2025, the number of workers exceeding the 124kg limit has dramatically decreased from approximately 2,200 in early 2025 to 840 earlier this year. OEUK expressed satisfaction with this progress, though concerns remain for the estimated 241-300 workers still above the threshold.
“Those with the most weight to lose have naturally had the greatest concerns about this policy,” Skinner acknowledged. “Everyone goes through that psychological change curve – initial disbelief, anger, and all those emotions when facing major life changes.”
Many workers have reportedly embraced GLP-1 weight-loss injections as part of their transformation strategy. Some employers have even installed additional refrigeration units to store the medication, highlighting the widespread adoption of this approach. However, Skinner stressed that these injections represent just one tool among many, rather than a universal solution.
Jobs on the Line as Deadline Approaches
For the remaining workers struggling to meet the November deadline, the consequences could be severe. Those unable to comply with the weight restriction may face redeployment to onshore positions or, in worst-case scenarios, job loss entirely.
“If someone cannot mobilise for their work because they’re over the weight limit, then they simply cannot perform their duties,” Skinner stated bluntly. “Ultimately, it’s a safety policy tied to capability.”
The RMT union has voiced strong opposition to the policy, arguing it could provide employers with a “convenient mechanism” to dismiss workers without proper redundancy procedures. General secretary Eddie Dempsey called for the policy’s withdrawal and meaningful consultation with trade unions to develop a “fair, proportionate and evidence-based approach.”
“Nobody disputes that safety must be the overriding priority when working offshore,” Dempsey said. “But safety policies must be proportionate and developed through proper consultation with the workers they affect.”
Looking Beyond the Numbers
p>Skinnier workers aren’t necessarily healthier ones, and some critics question whether the policy adequately considers individual fitness levels and medical conditions. The debate continues as the industry balances legitimate safety concerns with worker rights and livelihoods.
With just weeks remaining before the policy takes effect, thousands of offshore workers find themselves at a crossroads – between their health, their jobs, and an industry’s commitment to safety.
Why it Matters
This policy represents a significant shift in how industries approach workplace safety and employee welfare. As more sectors grapple with similar challenges, the offshore energy industry’s response – combining medical interventions, behavioural changes, and policy enforcement – may serve as a blueprint for other high-risk workplaces. The human cost extends beyond individual workers to their families and communities, particularly in regions heavily dependent on offshore employment. While safety remains paramount, this case highlights the complex intersection of public health, worker rights, and economic necessity in modern industrial settings.></p>