Objective Many workers suffer from musculoskeletal disorders. In France, occupational physicians are able to set job aptitude restrictions obliging employers to adapt the worker's job. The present study explored the impact of job restriction from the point of view of the employees' supervisors. Methods A qualitative study was conducted in 3 public hospitals. 12 focus groups were organized, involving 61 charge nurses and head nurses supervising 1 or more workers restricted for heavy lifting or repetitive movements. Discussions were recorded for qualitative thematic analysis. Results Charge and head nurses complained that aptitude restrictions were insufficiently precise, could not be respected and failed to mention residual capability. A context of personnel cuts, absenteeism and productivity demands entailed a need for polyvalence and reorganization threatening the permanence of adapted jobs. Job restrictions had several negative consequences for the charge and head nurses, including overwork, increased conflict, and feelings of isolation and organizational injustice. Conclusion Protecting the individual interests of workers with health issues may infringe on the interests of their supervisors and colleagues, whose perception of organizational justice may go some way to explaining the support or rejection they show toward restricted workers. This paradox should be explicitly explored and discussed.