Severity of Work Disability and Work

This paper analyzes the effect of severity of disability on labour force participation by using a self-reported work limitation scale. A dynamic labour force participation model is used to capture the feedback effect of past participation on current participation. The results suggest that net of persistence and unobserved heterogeneity, differences in severity levels explain a significant portion of the variance in the participation rates among disabled individuals. Moreover, the disability is shown to have longer lasting adverse effects on female participation and work limited women will be more likely to benefit from the work requirements imposed on Disability Support Pension recipients.severity, work disability, labour force participation

‘Work’ is a Four Letter Word? Disability, Work and Welfare

[Excerpt] This chapter suggests that to overcome the problem of disabled people’s ongoing disadvantage in mainstream employment and, therefore, society, a radical alternative strategy is required that poses a direct challenge to orthodox thinking on work, and associate policies that centre almost exclusively on disabled workers. Building on long standing analyses from within the disability studies literature, it is argued that an holistic approach is needed that includes: a/ the reconfiguration of the meaning of work for disabled people; b/ the de-stigmatisation of associate welfare provision; and c/ that the theoretical and practical foundations for such an approach have already been laid (Abberley 2002: Barnes 2000: 2003: Oliver and Barnes 1998). It begins with an overview of theoretical considerations with reference to the concept of ‘independent living’ for disabled people and the social model of disability. Attention will then centre on the organisation of labour, the reconfiguring of work for disabled people, and its implications for work and welfare in the 21st century

Work Disability, Health, and Incentive Effects

Disability insurance – the insurance against the loss of the ability to work – is a substantial part of social security expenditures in many countries. The enrolment rates in disability insurance vary strikingly across European countries and the US. This paper investigates the extent of, and the causes for, this variation, using data from SHARE, ELSA and HRS. We show that even after controlling for differences in the demographic structure and health status these differences remain. In turn, indicators of disability insurance generosity explain 75% of the cross-national variation. We conclude that country-specific disability insurance rules are a prime candidate to explain the observed cross-country variation in disability insurance enrolment.

Disability Insurance Plans: Trends in Employee Access and Employer Costs

[Excerpt] Short- and long-term disability insurance programs replace some of the wages lost by people who cannot work because of a disabling injury or illness that is not work-related. Short-term disability insurance typically covers periods lasting less than 6 months, and long-term disability insurance lasts for the length of the disability or until retirement. Those workers who are unable to work due to injury or illness and who do not have disability insurance coverage through their employers may seek benefits from Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). The number of SSDI claimants has grown over the past decade as younger workers and those in relatively low- skill, low-pay jobs have applied for benefits. This has prompted interest in the amount of coverage for workers in employer-provided disability insurance programs. This issue of Beyond the Numbers examines trends in employer- provided disability insurance coverage over time, explains the basic terms of coverage for typical plans, and estimates the costs to private employers

Work Disability, Health, and Incentive Effects

Disability insurance – the insurance against the loss of the ability to work – is a substantial part of social security expenditures in many countries. The enrolment rates in disability insurance vary strik-ingly across European countries and the US. This paper investigates the extent of, and the causes for, this variation, using data from SHARE, ELSA and HRS. We show that even after controlling for differences in the demographic structure and health status these differences remain. In turn, indicators of disability insurance generosity explain 75% of the cross-national variation. We conclude that country-specific disability insurance rules are a prime can-didate to explain the observed cross-country variation in disability insurance enrolment.

Work Disability, Work, and Justification Bias in Europe and the U.S.

To analyze the effect of health on work, many studies use a simple self-assessed health measure based upon a question such as “do you have an impairment or health problem limiting the kind or amount of work you can do?” A possible drawback of such a measure is the possibility that different groups of respondents may use different response scales. This is commonly referred to as “differential item functioning” (DIF). A specific form of DIF is justification bias: to justify the fact that they don’t work, non-working respondents may classify a given health problem as a more serious work limitation than working respondents. In this paper we use anchoring vignettes to identify justification bias and other forms of DIF across countries and socio-economic groups among older workers in the U.S. and Europe. Generally, we find differences in response scales across countries, partly related to social insurance generosity and employment protection. Furthermore, we find significant evidence of justification bias in the U.S. but not in Europe, suggesting differences in social norms concerning work.Work limiting disability, Vignettes, Reporting bias

Work Disability, Work, and Justification Bias in Europe and the U.S.

To analyze the effect of health on work, many studies use a simple self-assessed health measure based upon a question such as "do you have an impairment or health problem limiting the kind or amount of work you can do?" A possible drawback of such a measure is the possibility that different groups of respondents may use different response scales. This is commonly referred to as "differential item functioning" (DIF). A specific form of DIF is justification bias: to justify the fact that they don't work, non-working respondents may classify a given health problem as a more serious work limitation than working respondents. In this paper we use anchoring vignettes to identify justification bias and other forms of DIF across countries and socio-economic groups among older workers in the U.S. and Europe. Generally, we find differences in response scales across countries, partly related to social insurance generosity and employment protection. Furthermore, we find significant evidence of justification bias in the U.S. but not in Europe, suggesting differences in social norms concerning work.work limiting disability, vignettes, reporting bias

Dynamics of Work Disability and Pain

This paper investigates the role of pain in affecting self-reported work disability and employment of elderly workers in the US.We investigate pain and its relationship to work disability and work in a dynamic panel data model, using six biennial waves from the Health and Retirement Study.We find the dynamics of the presence of pain is central to understanding the dynamics of self-reported work disability.By affecting work disability pain also has important implications for the dynamic patterns of employment.Work limiting disability;health

Rates and predictors of recurrent work disability due to common mental health disorders in the United States.

ContextDespite the high prevalence of work disability due to common mental disorders (CMD), no information exists on the rates and predictors of recurrence in a United States population.ObjectiveTo estimate recurrent work disability statistics and evaluate factors associated with recurrence due to CMDs including adjustment, anxiety, bipolar, and depressive disorders.MethodsRecurrent work disability statistics were calculated using a nationwide database of disability claims. For the CMDs, univariate and multiple variable analyses were used to examine demographic factors and comorbidities associated with the time to recurrence.ResultsOf the CMDs, cases with bipolar (n = 3,017) and depressive disorders (n = 20,058) had the highest recurrence densities, 98.7 and 70.9 per 1000 person-years, respectively. These rates were more than three times higher than recurrence rates for other chronic disorders (e.g., diabetes, asthma; n = 105,558) and non-chronic disorders (e.g., injury, acute illnesses; n = 153,786). Individuals with CMD were also more likely to have a subsequent disability distinct from their mental health condition. Risk factors for recurrent CMD disability included being younger, being an hourly employee, living in a geographic area with more college graduates, having more previous psychiatric visits, having a previous work leave, and the type of work industry.ConclusionsResults indicate that CMD patients may benefit from additional care and disability management both during and after their work absence to help prevent subsequent CMD and non-CMD related leaves

World Report on Disability, Chapter 8: Work and Employment

Across the world, people with disabilities are entrepreneurs and selfemployed workers, farmers and factory workers, doctors and teachers, shop assistants and bus drivers, artists, and computer technicians (1). Almost all jobs can be performed by someone with a disability, and given the right environment, most people with disabilities can be productive. But as documented by several studies, both in developed and developing countries, working age persons with disabilities experience significantly lower employment rates and much higher unemployment rates than persons without disabilities (2–9). Lower rates of labour market participation are one of the important pathways through which disability may lead to poverty (10–15). In Article 27 the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) “recognizes the right of persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others; this includes the opportunity to gain a living by work freely chosen or accepted in a labour market and work environment that is open, inclusive and accessible to persons with disabilities” (16). Furthermore, the CRPD prohibits all forms of employment discrimination, promotes access to vocational training, promotes opportunities for self-employment, and calls for reasonable accommodation in the workplace, among other provisions. A number of factors impact labour market outcomes for persons with disabilities including; productivity differentials; labour market imperfections related to discrimination and prejudice, and disincentives created by disability benefit systems (2, 17–19). To address labour market imperfections and encourage the employment of people with disabilities, many countries have laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability. Enforcing antidiscrimination laws is expected to improve access to the formal economy and have wider social benefits. Many countries also have specific measures, for example quotas, aiming to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities (20). Vocational rehabilitation and employment services – job training, counselling, job search assistance, and placement – can develop or restore the capabilities of people with disabilities to compete in the labour market and facilitate their inclusion in the labour market. At the heart of all this is changing attitudes in the workplace