Search

Purpose: Injured workers can experience adverse effects from work injury and claims processes.Workers may be treated unfairly by employers, compensation boards, and return-to-work coordinators; however,how workers respond to these challenges is unknown. This article describes how injured precarious workersresponded behaviourally and emotionally to procedural unfairness in work injury and claims processes, and whatworkers did next. Methods: Interviews were conducted with thirty-six precariously employedinjured workers recruited in Ontario through social media, email, cold calling, word-of-mouth, and the "snowball"method. Thematic code summaries were analyzed to identify how precarious workers responded to procedural unfairness. Results: Workers went through all or most of these five stages (not always linearly)when faced with procedural unfairness: (1) passive, (2) fought back, (3) quit pursuit of claim, (4) quit job, and (5)won or got further in fight. Feeling confused, angry, frustrated, unsupported, disappointed, determined, optimistic,and wary were common emotions. Conclusions: Identifying unfairness and its emotional,behavioral, and material effects on workers is important to understand implications for compensation systems.Understanding and recognizing unfairness can equip employers, legal representatives, compensation boards, andphysicians, to address and prevent it, and provide worker resources. Policy changes can ensure accountability andconsequences to unfairness initiators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose This study examined how the participation of union representatives impacted return-to-work (RTW) processes, and explored key activities undertaken by union representatives involved in return-to-work coordination. Methods Forty-seven RTW coordinators (RTWCs) participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews in 2018 as part of a cross-Canadian study investigating their strategies for managing challenges in the RTW process. The study included RTWCs from a variety of organisation types, including unionized organizations. Audio-recordings were transcribed, coded, and analysed using constant case comparison and deviant case analysis leading to the development of findings themes. Results Our findings highlight the role of union representatives in RTW processes and how their activities are seen by other parties involved with work accommodation. First, we describe Union RTWC's administrative functions and the extent of their involvement in RTW accommodation negotiations. Second, we examine how Union and Non-union RTWCs framed the same RTW processes differently, according to their own accountabilities. Finally, we identify the positive ways that union participation figured into the RTW process, including playing a role in identifying viable modified work and serving as a trusted party to help reluctant workers engage with RTW plans. Conclusions We introduce a standpoint perspective to shed light on how Union and Non-union RTWCs approached accommodation issues and consider acknowledgement of power relations as a starting point for managing divergent interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The objective of this study was to explore how workers' compensation policies related to healthcare provision for workers with musculoskeletal injuries can affect the delivery and trajectories of care for injured workers. The principal research question was: What are the different ways in which workers' compensation (WC) policies inform and transform the practices of healthcare providers (HCPs) caring for injured workers? Methods: We conducted a cross-jurisdictional policy analysis. We conducted qualitative interviews with 42 key informants from a variety of perspectives in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec in Canada, the state of Victoria in Australia and the state of Washington in the United States. The main methodological approach was Framework Analysis. Results: We identified two main themes: (1) Shaping HCPs' clinical practices and behaviors with injured workers. In this theme, we illustrate how clinical practice guidelines and non-economic and economic incentives were used by WCs to drive HCP's behaviours with workers; (2) Controlling workers' trajectories of care. This theme presents how WC policies achieve control of the workers' trajectory of care via different policy mechanisms, namely the standardization of care pathways and the power and autonomy vested in HCPs. Conclusions: This policy analysis shed light on the different ways in which WC policies shape HCP's day-to-day practices and workers' trajectories. A better understanding and a nuanced portrait of these policies' impacts can help support reflections on future policy changes and inform policy development in other jurisdictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Cancer survivors have strong personal desires to resume work to feel productive and meet financial needs. However, they may be faced with physical and psychological challenges. This research addresses the question: "What are the needs of cancer survivors when returning to or staying in the workforce?" by (i) examining cancer survivors' perspectives on supports needed when returning to or staying in the workforce and (ii) exploring personal and employment factors that influence the return to work process. Methods An exploratory qualitative design was used. We conducted focus groups and one-on-one semi-structured interviews with cancer survivors (n = 15). Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. Results Four key themes were identified as significant aspects of the return-to-work process for cancer survivors: (1) changing perspectives on self and work; (2) managing work and social systems; (3) determining disclosure and accommodation; and (4) the importance of supports for return to work and daily life. Conclusions There is a growing interest in developing targeted interventions to improve work outcomes for cancer survivors. This study informs cancer rehabilitation research by developing an understanding of the supports and strategies that should be implemented to help cancer survivors return to work successfully and improve quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose:Theoretical and empirical research findings attest to the workplace being a social environment in which co-workers have a critical influence on the employment outcomes and return-to-work (RTW) success of other employees. However, co-workers do not have a formal role in RTW planning. The aim of this study was to explore how managers responsible for developing and implementing RTW procedures view the role of co-workers in this process. Method:An exploratory qualitative pilot study was conducted in Canada. Participants (1 male; 13 females; mean experience in RTW = 11.8 years) were workplace (n=8) or RTW managers (n=6) with direct oversight of RTW plans. The participants were recruited via invitation from a research institute and were drawn from three different provinces. Data were gathered via open-ended questions and were coded and subject to thematic analysis. Findings:Three key themes were identified: (1) Managers view RTW as having little relevance to co-workers but expect them to cooperate with the arrangements; (2) Formal procedures are inadequate when psychosocial barriers to work resumption are present, so managers use informal strategies to engage co-workers’ emotional and social support; and (3) Managers have difficulty integrating RTW procedures with other legal obligations, such as privacy and confidentiality requirements. Conclusion:Existing arrangements for the development and implementation of RTW are sufficient most of the time, but may be inadequate when an injured worker presents with psychosocial barriers to work resumption.Implications for RehabilitationStandard RTW arrangements can be inadequate when a RTW plan requires active co-worker support.Privacy and confidentiality provisions can result in managers using informal procedures for information exchange and to engage co-workers.The use of risk management strategies – assessment, consultation and communication – could be used to include co-workers when workplace issues threaten the success of a RTW plan. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Introduction. Immigrants often come to Canada for the purpose of employment and make up a large proportion of our labour force. Yet, these workers' labour market experience may not always be positive – new immigrant workers can have difficulties finding a job in their field and may end up working in ‘survival jobs’ that expose them to workplace hazards. Workers who are new to Canada may not be familiar with legislation designed to protect them at work or with social programs that can help after a work-related injury. Methods. Through a series of in-depth interviews this study examined the experiences of new immigrants after they were injured on the job. Results. The analysis revealed that many workers were in manual, ‘survival jobs’ and had not received job or occupational health and safety training. Many did not speak the English language well and knew little about their rights. While workers often felt trepidation about reporting their injury, most told a health care provider or employer that they were injured or in pain. This, however, rarely led to timely or appropriate claim filing. Workers were often discouraged from filing a claim, misinformed about their rights or offered ‘time off work’ in lieu of reporting the injury to worker's compensation. In instances where a claim was filed, communication problems were common and led to mistakes being made on forms and misunderstandings with the adjudicator and employer. Interpretation services were not always offered consistently or at the correct time. Conclusion. Efforts must be made to systematically inform new immigrants of their health and safety rights, responsibilities and entitlements as they are entering the labour market. Systems must be put in place to ensure that immigrants can access the compensation system in the event of a work-related injury and that employers and healthcare providers fulfil their reporting responsibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Introduction: Health care providers (HCPs) play a central role in workers' compensation systems. In most systems, they are involved in the legitimization of work-related injury, are required to provide information to workers' compensation boards about the nature and extent of the injury, give recommendations about return-to-work capability and provide treatment for injury or illness. This study identifies problems that occur at the interface between the health care system, injured workers, and workers' compensation boards (WCBs) that may complicate and extend workers' compensation claims and the mechanisms that underlie the development of these problems. Methods: Interviews were sought with injured workers, peer helpers and service providers from a variety of geographic locations in order to get a broad picture of return to work problems and concerns. This analysis includes data from total of 34 interviews with injured workers who had long term and complicated claims. Interviews were also conducted with 14 peer helpers and 21 service providers. Results: We identified four domains related to injured workers' interface with the health care system that played a key role in complicating and prolonging compensation claims. These problems, related to health care access, conflicting or imperfect medical knowledge, limited understanding of compensation system requirements and confusion about decision-making authority, resulted in frustration, financial difficulties and mental health problems for injured workers. Conclusion: Recommendations are made about how compensation system parties can find better ways to serve injured worker health care needs and facilitate a smooth relationship between the compensation board and HCPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction There is a limited body of research on how the actual social exchange among workplace actors influences the practice of return-to-work. The objective of this study was to explore how workplace actors experience social relations at the workplace and how organizational dynamics in workplace-based return-to-work extends before and beyond the initial return of the sick listed worker to the workplace. Method An exploratory qualitative method approach was used, consisting of individual open-ended interviews with 33 workplace actors at seven worksites that had re-entering workers. The workplace actors represented in these interviews include: re-entering workers, supervisors, co-workers, and human resource managers. Results The analysis identified three distinct phases in the return to work process: while the worker is off work, when the worker returns back to work, and once back at work during the phase of sustainability of work ability. The two prominent themes that emerged across these phases include the theme of invisibility in relation to return-to-work effort and uncertainty, particularly, about how and when to enact return-to-work. Conclusion The findings strengthen the notion that workplace-based return-to-work interventions need to take social relations amongst workplace actors into account. They also highlight the importance and relevance of the varied roles of different workplace actors during two relatively unseen or grey areas, of return-to-work: the pre-return and the post-return sustainability phase. Attention to the invisibility of return-to-work efforts of some actors and uncertainty about how and when to enact return-to-work between workplace actors can promote successful and sustainable work ability for the re-entering worker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Most workers who incur an injury on the job follow a relatively straightforward path through a workers’ compensation claim, recovery and return to work. However, a minority of compensation claims is prolonged and can be disproportionately costly. We conducted this qualitative study in order to gain an understanding of systemic, process-related problems affecting injured workers who had failed to return to work as expected. Method A total of 69 in-depth interviews were conducted with injured workers with complex and extended workers’ compensation claims and with return-to-work (RTW) providers such as health care providers, insurers, legal advisors, and workplaces. The study was based in Ontario, Canada. A modified grounded theory analysis led to the identification of common mechanisms in RTW problems. Results We identify problems with return to work and extended workers’ compensation claims in dysfunctions in organizational dynamics across RTW systems including the workplace, healthcare, vocational rehabilitation and workers’ compensation. These system problems are difficult to identify because they appear as relatively mundane and bureaucratic. These appeared to have damaging effects on workers in the form of a ‘toxic dose’ affecting the worker beyond the initial injury. Conclusions Worker’s problems with extended claims were linked to RTW policies that did not easily accommodate conflict or power imbalances among RTW parties and by social relations and processes that impeded communication about RTW situations and problems. Avenues for intervention are located in a shift to a critical lens to RTW process that addresses differences of knowledge, resources, and interests among different parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]