Take Home Messages:

Safety professionals and supervisors perceive workers – including workers who have recently returned to work – as having higher levels of satisfaction with their job, workplace relationships and work environment than workers actually do.

This indicates that the quality of work conditions may be overestimated by those in more senior positions. Therefore, it is vital to consult workers on their perceptions of the work environment and job satisfaction. Furthermore, it is important that employees are aware that their contribution in the workplace is valued.

Given the pressures associated with return to work after illness or injury, it is especially important that employers have a realistic view of employee satisfaction with all aspects of the workplace during the RTW process.

Why the research matters:

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are widespread in the working population. The cost to employers in workers' compensation and associated expenses runs to billions of dollars every year. Therefore, employers have an interest in understanding factors which may impact upon successful return to work from these conditions.

What the research involved:

A study by Thomas Fisher from the Indiana University Medical Center, sought to identify some of these factors. The researcher also wanted to examine the different views of workers “on the factory floor” and supervisors and safety professionals had about their work and work environment.

The Return to Work Perception Survey was created to measure perceptions of four factors which research suggests are influential in return to work after a musculoskeletal disorder:

1. Job satisfaction - the extent to which employees receive recognition from the management, and feel a sense of accomplishment.
2. Worker relationships – co-worker interpersonal relationships, and how employees and management work together for safety in the workplace.
3. Company policies and procedures – the extent to which management put in place appropriate procedures to deal with workplace injury e.g. modified duties, choice of health-care providers.
4. Work environment – the appropriateness of the physical demands of work tasks, and compliance with good safety practices.

This survey plus an additional measure of personal job satisfaction were completed by employees of eleven manufacturing companies in Kentucky. A particular emphasis was placed on the role of job satisfaction in return to work after injury.

Summary of research findings:

The major findings of the study are as follows:

• Safety professionals and supervisors gave higher ratings to job satisfaction, worker relationships and work environment (i.e. they felt that their employer handled these issues better) than did workers.
• There was no difference in ratings of company policies and procedures.
• There was no difference in perceptions between worker groups (material handlers, assembly line and quality control).
• 80% of safety professionals and 84% of supervisors described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied with their job, compared to 40-64% of workers.

The difference in perceptions between supervisors/safety professionals and workers suggests that the quality of work conditions may be overestimated by those in more senior positions. Therefore, it is vital to consult workers on their perceptions of the work environment and job satisfaction. Furthermore, it is important that employees are aware that their contribution in the workplace is valued.

This study shows that those in a position to improve job satisfaction often believe worker satisfaction levels are higher than they actually are. Since job satisfaction is an important factor in return to work, it is sensible to be clear about the workplace situation.

How high is job satisfaction in your workplace?  Below are some of the job satisfaction questions from the Return to Work Perception Survey. These can be used as part of a general workplace survey, or to understand the situation of an individual worker with a work injury.
 

Original research:

Perception differences between groups of employees:  identifying the factors that influence a return to work after a work-related musculoskeletal injury.

Fisher, T. F. (2003).

Work 21(3): 211-20.

Link to PubMed abstract