Pressure to produce = pressure to reduce accident reporting?

Each year, more than 4 million U.S. workers are injured on the job - several thousand die (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008). Despite these staggering numbers, research suggests that they are gross underestimates of the true volume of workplace related illnesses and injuries due to accident under-reporting. Although accident under-reporting has been well-documented, less is known regarding why this occurs. The current study suggests that under-reporting may in part be due to high levels of perceived production pressure. Specifically, this study tested the hypotheses that production pressure would be related to more experienced accidents overall and more negative attitudes toward reporting accidents. Further, we expected that production pressure would exacerbate the under-reporting of accidents. Survey data were collected from a sample of 212 copper mining workers located in the southwestern United States. The survey measured employee perceptions regarding production pressure, attitudes toward reporting accidents, perceived consequences of reporting accidents, and actual reporting behaviors (e.g., types and numbers of accidents experienced vs. reported). As predicted, the average number of experienced accidents per employee was significantly higher (M = 2.84) than the number of reported accidents (M =.49). In addition, production pressure was related to more negative reporting attitudes. Individuals who had positive reporting attitudes were injured less frequently; however, when an incident occurred, they were more likely to report it. Finally, higher levels of production pressure were related to greater accident under-reporting. Additionally, employees who perceived high levels of production pressure not only experienced more accidents overall, they also reported fewer of them to the organization. Implications for occupational safety initiatives - particularly in the current economic climate - are discussed, as are methodological challenges of conducting research in this area. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Safety and insecurity: exploring the moderating effect of organizational safety climate

This research reconciled disparate findings regarding the relationship between job insecurity and safety by examining organizational safety climate as a potential moderator. It was predicted that a strong organizational safety climate would attenuate the negative effects of job insecurity on self-reported safety outcomes such as safety knowledge, safety compliance, accidents, and injuries. Data collected from 136 manufacturing employees were consistent with these predictions. Results are discussed in light of escalating interest in how organizational factors can affect employee safety

Leader-member exchange: Moderating the health and safety outcomes of job insecurity

© 2015 Elsevier Ltd and National Safety Council. Introduction Job insecurity has been repeatedly linked with poor employee health and safety outcomes. Although research on high quality leader-member exchange (LMX) has demonstrated many beneficial effects, no research to date has examined the extent to which positive LMX might attenuate those adverse health and safety-related consequences of job insecurity. The current study extends research in this area by specifically examining the buffering impact of LMX on the relationship between job insecurity and safety knowledge, reported accidents, and physical health conditions. Furthermore, the study also examines whether positive LMX mitigates the typically seen negative impact of job insecurity on supervisor satisfaction. Methods The hypotheses were tested using survey data collected from 212 employees of a mine located in southwestern United States. Results As predicted, job insecurity was related to lower levels of supervisor satisfaction, more health ailments, and more workplace accidents, and was marginally related to lower levels of safety knowledge. Results indicated that LMX significantly attenuated these observed relationships. Conclusions The quality of the dyadic relationship between supervisor and subordinate has a significant impact on the extent to which job insecurity is associated with adverse health and safety outcomes. Practical applications Practical implications for supervisor behavior and developing high quality LMX are discussed in light of today\u27s pervasive job insecurity

Cross-level effects of procedural justice perceptions on faculty trust

© 2014 Peter Ping Li. The progression in the organisational justice literature has extended beyond the individual employee level towards recognising the importance of one\u27s work unit and its potential to affect individual reactions to unfairness. This study contributes to existing multilevel justice research by assessing whether aggregate (i.e. unit-level) fairness perceptions influence the relationship between individuals\u27 perceived violation of procedural justice and trust in management. Hypotheses were tested within a sample of faculty nested within different departments of a university undergoing an institution-wide budget cuts allocation process. Results largely supported our expectations: (1) the previously established individual-level relationships between procedural justice and trust were replicated in the faculty sample; (2) department-level procedural justice perceptions were related to trust in administration and (3) department-level procedural justice perceptions were shown to moderate the relationship between individual-level procedural justice perceptions and trust in management. Theoretical and practical implications of considering the context of individual-level procedural justice perceptions and reactions are discussed

Consideration of future safety consequences: A new predictor of employee safety

Background: Compliance with safety behaviors is often associated with longer term benefits, but may require some short-term sacrifices. This study examines the extent to which consideration of future safety consequences (CFSC) predicts employee safety outcomes. Methods: Two field studies were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of the newly developed Consideration of Future Safety Consequences (CFSC) scale. Surveys containing the CFSC scale and other measures of safety attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes were administered during working hours to a sample of 128 pulp and paper mill employees; after revising the CFSC scale based on these initial results, follow-up survey data were collected in a second sample of 212 copper miners. Results: In Study I, CFSC was predictive of employee safety knowledge and motivation, compliance, safety citizenship behaviors, accident reporting attitudes and behaviors, and workplace injuries-even after accounting for conscientiousness and demographic variables. Moreover, the effects of CFSC on the variables generally appear to be direct, as opposed to mediated by safety knowledge or motivation. These findings were largely replicated in Study II. Conclusions: CFSC appears to be an important personality construct that may predict those individuals who are more likely to comply with safety rules and have more positive safety outcomes. Future research should examine the longitudinal stability of CFSC to determine the extent to which this construct is a stable trait, rather than a safety attitude amenable to change over time or following an intervention. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd

Dirty work on the COVID-19 frontlines: Exacerbating the situation of marginalized groups in marginalized professions

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, Rudolph et al. (2020) argue that frontline healthcare workers are facing very high levels of job stressors and strains, which may develop into detrimental long-term outcomes. In addition, they point to the heavy burden of jobs in “businesses that continue to provide service to the public” (p. 8). While we agree with these points, we believe that the full costs borne by those working on the COVID-19 frontlines have been understated, as well as the reasons why. In this commentary, we argue that the burden from the global pandemic falls heavily on often marginalized groups working in so-called “dirty jobs” (i.e., "occupations that are likely to be perceived as disgusting or degrading", Ashforth & Kreiner, 1999, p. 413) who already face serious preexisting health and socioeconomic disparities. The pandemic has merely exacerbated such pre-existing workplace inequalities. To protect these vulnerable workers, we pose potential interventions at the national, community, and organizational levels. We conclude our commentary with thoughts on how we can find a silver lining in the COVID-19 pandemic

Measurement invariance of cognitive and affective job insecurity: A cross-national study

Empirical evidence of established measurement invariance of job insecurity measures may enhance the practical utility of job insecurity as a valid predictor when utilised over different cross-national samples. This study investigated the measurement invariance of the nine-item versions of the Job Security Index (a measure of cognitive job insecurity) and the Job Security Satisfaction Scale (a measure of affective job insecurity), across four countries (i.e. the United States, N = 486; China, N = 629; Italy, N = 482 and South Africa, N = 345). Based on a novel bifactor-(S-1) model approach we found evidence for partial metric, partial scalar and partial strict invariance of our substantive bifactor-(S-1) structure. The results extend measurement invariance research on job insecurity with obvious pragmatic implications (e.g. scaling units, measurement bias over cross-national interpretations). Contribution: This research provides evidence to support the applied use of cross-national comparisons of job insecurity scores across the nationalities included in this study. Theoretically, this research advances the debate about the nature of the relationship between cognitive and affective job insecurity, suggesting that in this cross-national dataset, a model where cognitive job insecurity is specified as the reference domain outperforms a model where affective job insecurity is assigned this status. Practically, it demonstrates that it is sensible and necessary to differentiate between cognitive and affective job insecurity and include measures of both constructs in future research on the construct

Китаб Ибрагима Хосеневича из коллекции Национальной библиотеки Республики Беларусь как исторический источник : реферат к дипломной работе / Инна Чеславовна Кевра; БГУ, Исторический факультет, Кафедра источниковедения; науч. рук. Белявский А.М.

The construct of individualism–collectivism (IND-COL) has become the definitive standard in cross-cultural psychology, management, and related fields. It is also among the most controversial, in particular, with regard to the ambiguity of its dimensionality: Some view IND and COL as the opposites of a single continuum, whereas others argue that the two are independent constructs. We explored the issue through seven different tests using original individual-level data from 50 studies and meta-analytic data from 149 empirical publications yielding a total of 295 sample-level observations that were collected using six established instruments for assessing IND and COL as separate constructs. Results indicated that the dimensionality of IND-COL may depend on (a) the specific instrument used to collect the data, (b) the sample characteristics and the cultural region from which the data were collected, and (c) the level of analysis. We also review inconsistencies, deficiencies, and challenges of conceptualizing IND-COL and provide guidelines for developing and selecting instruments for measuring the construct, and for reporting and meta-analyzing results from this line of research