Safety: Findings from a National Workplace Health & Safety - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Factors Associated with Leading Indicators of Work Health & Safety: Findings from a National Workplace Health & Safety Survey Presenter: Dr Miriam H. Marembo 13 th Australian Injury Prevention & Safety Promotion Conference 13-15 November 2017

Background • Economic and social costs of work-related injury and illness account for about 4.1% of Australia’s GDP [Safe Work Australia, 2015c]. • Workplaces in Australia are becoming safer – Evidenced by a steady reduction in lagging indicators – Lagging indicators: Measures of harm that has already occurred e.g. incidence of workplace injuries [Government of Alberta, 2015]. • There is a need to continue promoting better preventative WHS practices through using leading indicators. – Leading indicators: aspects of workplace activities that can be used to improve OHS outcomes prior to an unwanted outcome occurring [Government of Alberta, 2015].

Objectives • Compare the distributions for each leading indicator by demographic, workplace and occupation characteristics. • To assess the degree of overlap and complementarity between three work health and safety (WHS) leading indicator measures. – Assessing the degree of overlap or complementarity between leading indicators will help determine whether they all measure similar or unique aspects of prevention and action control.

Data • Source: National Workplace Health and Safety Survey. • Project was led by Monash University, with input from expert researchers from the University of Melbourne, the Institute of Work & Health and Deakin University. • The survey was carried out via telephone and internet in June 2016 by Ipsos. • 1,130 workers in Australia, aged 18 years and above, who were employed for at least 1 hour of paid work per week completed a 20 minute questionnaire. • The questionnaire collected information on: – Worker and workplace characteristics, – Three leading indicators of work health and safety, • The Psychosocial Job Quality (PJQ) scale • The Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) vulnerability scale • The Organisational Performance Metric-Monash University (OPM-MU), – Lagging indicators of work health and safety. • National labour force data [ABS 2010;2015a;2015b; 2016].

Leading indicators of WHS Indicator Focus Specific measure Risk/ vulnerability criteria • Job quality • Job demands & complexity • Score = ∑all responses for Psychosocial Job Quality • Job control (PJQ) measure statements corresponding to • Job security [Butterworth et al., 2011] the indicator • Effort reward fairness • Cut-off: scores in quartiles • Overall PJQ corresponding to the greatest difficulty. • Exposure to OHS hazards at • Exposure to hazards • Exposure to ≥ 2 hazards on Occupational Health and • Inadequate policies & procedures Safety (OHS) vulnerability work a weekly/ daily basis or • 3 dimensions of worker • Inadequate awareness scale exposure at any level to 4 • Inadequate empowerment [Lay et al., 2016] protections specific hazards. • Overall vulnerability • Worker protections inadequate if they disagreed or strongly disagreed with ≥ 1 of the statements for each measure. • The presence of OHS • OPM-MU score • Score = ∑ all responses for 8 Organisational Performance Metric-Monash University leading indicators in the statements respondent’s workplace • Cut-off: scores in the 1 st (OPM-MU) [Shea et al., 2016] quartile corresponding to low OPM-MU.

Sample characteristics 100 80 Percentage 60 40 20 0 Male Female < 35 years 35-44 years 45-54 years ≥ 55 years Australia Outside Australia English Not English Part time 1-4 5-20 ≥400 <1 year ≥ 1 year White collar Blue collar Other Full time 21-99 100-399 Sex Age Birth location Language Employment # of employees Job tenure Occupation type • Total responses: 1,130 • Compared to the ABS figures, our sample had fewer males & more females; fewer younger (≤44 years) & more older workers; fewer full-time & more part-time workers; more workers in white collar & fewer workers in blue collar occupations.

Leading indicators distribution 50 40 Percentage 30 20 10 0 ≥ 55 years Male Female < 35 years 35-44 years 45-54 years Australia Other English Other Sex Age Birth location Language Poor PJQ OPM-MU OHS vulnerability • Significantly higher prevalence rates of: • OHS vulnerability among younger (<35 years) workers compared to older workers, • Low OPM-MU scores & OHS vulnerability among workers born in Australia compared to those born elsewhere.

Leading indicators distribution cont.. 60 40 Percentage 20 0 ≥400 ≥ 1 year Full time Part time 1-4 5-20 21-99 100-399 <1 year White collar Blue collar Other Employment type # of employees Job tenure Occupation Poor PJQ OPM-MU OHS vulnerability • Significantly higher prevalence rates of: • OHS vulnerability among part-time compared to full-time workers, • OHS vulnerability among workers who have been employed in their current job for <1 year compared to those who have been in their current job for longer, • OHS vulnerability among blue collar workers compared to workers in other occupations.

Overlap between leading indicators • Total responses: 1,113 • 444 32.0% met the criteria of being at risk [39.9%] on one of the 3 measures. • OHS vulnerable 16.8% were at risk on two leading 114 [10.2%] indicators. • 11.3% were at risk on all three leading 75 71 indicators. [ 6.7 %] [ 6.4 %] • There is some overlap in the 126 constructs being measured by the 3 [ 11.3 %] leading indicators. Low job • Low OPM-MU Each indicator also captures 41 quality [ 3.7 %] 72 [ 6.5 %] something unique corresponding to 170 [ 15.3 %] the type of prevention & control action being measured.

Summary • Distributions for each leading indicator by demographic, workplace and occupation characteristics. – Distribution varied by age, birth location, employment type, job tenure & occupation. – Higher prevalence of OHS vulnerability among younger workers (<35 years), workers born in Australia, part-time workers, workers who have been employed in their current job for < 1 year & blue collar workers. – Higher prevalence of low OPM-MU scores among workers born in Australia. • Degree of overlap & complementarity between three WHS leading indicator measures. – Approximately a third of the respondents were at risk on one of the 3 measures. – 16.8% were at risk on two and 11.3% were at risk on three leading indicators. – There is an overlap in some constructs being measured by the 3 measures , but each measure also captures something unique corresponding to the type of prevention & control being measured.

References • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Australian Labour Market Statistics, Oct 2010, cat. no. 6105.0 . • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015a). Education and Work, Australia, May 2015. Table 13 - Highest level of eduactional attainment: Level-By state or territory of usual residence and sex, persons aged 15-74 year s, cat. no. 6227.0. • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015b). Labour Force, Australia, Detailed, Quarterly, May 2015 , cat. no. 6291.0.55.003. • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). Labour Force, Australia, Detailed, Quarterly, Aug 2016 , cat. no. 6291.0.55.003 • Butterworth, P., Leach, L. S., Strazdins, L., Olesen, S. C., Rodgers, B., & Broom, D. H. (2011). The psychosocial quality of work determines whether employment has benefits for mental health: results from a longitudinal national household panel survey. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 68 (11), 806-812. doi: 10.1136/oem.2010.059030 • Government of Alberta, (2015). Leading indicators for workplace health and safety: A user guide., 22/03/2017, from http://work.alberta.ca/documents/ohs-best-practices-BP019.pdf • Lay, A. M., Saunders, R., Lifshen, M., Breslin, C., LaMontagne, A., Tompa, E., & Smith, P. (2016). Individual, occupational, and workplace correlates of occupational health and safety vulnerability in a sample of Canadian workers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 59 (2), 119-128. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22535 • Safe Work Australia (2015c). The Cost of Work-Related Injury and Illness for Australian Employers, Workers and the Community: 2012-13. Canberra. • Shea, T., De Cieri, H., Donohue, R., Cooper, B., & Sheehan, C. (2016). Leading indicators of occupational health and safety: An employee and workplace level validation study. Safety Science, 85 , 293-304. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.01.015.

Acknowledgements • Co-authors: Dr Behrooz Hassani-Mahmooei, Ms Clare Scollay, Prof. Helen De Cieri, Prof. Tony La Montagne, Dr Jason Thompson, Associate Prof. Peter Smith & Prof. Alex Collie. • This project was partly funded by enforceable undertakings received via WorkSafe Victoria, through the Institute for Safety Compensation & Recovery Research. • The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of staff of the WorkSafe Victoria & ISCRR for their review of the survey content & support for the project. • The authors also thank the survey participants.

Thank you Contact: Dr Miriam H. Marembo Email: miriam.marembo@monash.edu Phone: +61 9903 8634 www.iscrr.com.au 16