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]

Introduction: As they deliver food, packages, and people across cities, digital platform drivers (gig workers) are in a key position to become infected with COVID‐19 and transmit it to many others. The aim of this study is to identify perceived COVID‐19 exposure and job risks faced by workers and document the measures in place to protect their health, and how workers responded to these measures. Methods: In 2020–2021, in‐depth interviews were conducted in Ontario, Canada, with 33 digital platform drivers and managers across nine platforms that delivered food, packages, or people. Interviews focused on perceived COVID‐19 risks and mitigation strategies. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and uploaded to NVivo software for coding by varied dual pairs of researchers. A Stakeholder Advisory Committee played an instrumental role in the study. Results: As self‐employed workers were without the protection of employment and occupational health standards, platform workers absorbed most of the occupational risks related to COVID‐19. Despite safety measures (e.g., contactless delivery) and financial support for COVID‐19 illnesses introduced by platform companies, perceived COVID‐19 risks remained high because of platform‐related work pressures, including rating systems. We identify five key COVID‐19 related risks faced by the digital platform drivers. Conclusion: We situate platform drivers within the broad context of precarious employment and recommend organizational‐ and government‐level interventions to prevent digital platform worker COVID‐19 risks and to assist workers ill with COVID‐19. Measures to protect the health of platform workers would benefit public health aims by reducing transmission by drivers to families, customers, and consequently, the greater population. [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 Work disability research has found co-worker support to be a significant but under-recognised aspect of work reintegration (WR) processes. Although co-workers work alongside returning workers, their practical contribution to WR success or failure is often invisible to others. This study aimed to gain further insight into the role and contribution of co-workers in WR interventions. Method An exploratory qualitative pilot study was conducted in Toronto, Canada in 2011. Three focus groups were conducted with 13 co-workers, recruited for their direct experience of 'working alongside' a returning worker. An iterative data gathering and analysis process occurred. Themes were generated from categories in open-ended interview questions and new issues arising from the data. Findings The findings detail co-workers' practical experiences of WR processes and their reflections on social and work conditions that impacted their participation. Co-workers' capacity to support returning workers was related to the quality of the WR arrangements, the relationship with the returning worker, work culture, and the duration of the required support. Workplace privacy and confidentiality requirements were identified as a key challenge for co-worker participation. The effects on co-workers of WR processes ranged from the opportunity to learn new skills to disillusionment and withdrawal from the workplace. In worst case scenarios, 'ripple effects' including emotional distress, physical injury and termination of co-workers' employment had occurred. Conclusion Co-workers are not a neutral party in WR procedures. Formalizing the co-worker role to include communication, consideration and recognition might improve co-workers' WR experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 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]