Health and safety of Health and safety of Working students: Working students: Report from pilot Report from pilot studystudyKathryn Woodcock, Kathryn Woodcock, PhD, PEngPhD, PEngOccupational and Public HealthOccupational and Public Health

Maurice Mazerolle, Maurice Mazerolle, PhDPhDBusiness ManagementBusiness Management

Causal model of young Causal model of young worker injuryworker injury

The goal of this research is to validate and determine the weights of The goal of this research is to validate and determine the weights of the paths in the model so that interventions may focus on more the paths in the model so that interventions may focus on more important causal paths.important causal paths.

Background to this reportBackground to this report

Intent of studyIntent of studyTest feasibility of methodsTest feasibility of methods

Improve statistical estimation of sample Improve statistical estimation of sample size requirement to develop multi-factor size requirement to develop multi-factor modelmodel

RAC funded as pilot study RAC funded as pilot study

LimitationsLimitationsPilot not designed to generalize results Pilot not designed to generalize results beyond samplebeyond sample

Findings do suggest areas for further Findings do suggest areas for further evaluationevaluation

Young workers 15–24Young workers 15–24Policy and research priority: 10-15 youth fatalities/year Policy and research priority: 10-15 youth fatalities/year in Ontario; almost 16,000 lost time injury claims per in Ontario; almost 16,000 lost time injury claims per year. year. Age-based work restrictions largely stop at 18Age-based work restrictions largely stop at 18Pronounced differences between 15 and 24 year oldsPronounced differences between 15 and 24 year oldsLarge proportion of university students must work, yet Large proportion of university students must work, yet they may have little more work experience than high they may have little more work experience than high school aged workersschool aged workersYouth information intended for high school audience Youth information intended for high school audience (but products actually seem to speak to parents in tone (but products actually seem to speak to parents in tone and content)and content)Most youth involvement in program development is Most youth involvement in program development is “participatory” rather than “self-directed” nature: “participatory” rather than “self-directed” nature: youth input guided by eldersyouth input guided by elders

Student involvementStudent involvementProject philosophy: learn how students Project philosophy: learn how students themselves define the problem and themselves define the problem and determine solutions for workplace determine solutions for workplace health and safetyhealth and safetyCourse project: politics and public Course project: politics and public administration worked on survey incorporating administration worked on survey incorporating faculty needs. (approved by Research Ethics faculty needs. (approved by Research Ethics Board)Board)Paid Ryerson Business Consulting Service Paid Ryerson Business Consulting Service students to administer surveys in Summer students to administer surveys in Summer 2002, enter data and produce preliminary 2002, enter data and produce preliminary analyses analyses Student research assistant for participant-Student research assistant for participant-observation: abortedobservation: aborted

Pilot findingsPilot findings

Sample characteristicsSample characteristicsPerforming unsafe workPerforming unsafe workFactors potentially influencing Factors potentially influencing unsafe workunsafe work

InvincibilityInvincibilityHazard knowledgeHazard knowledgeRights knowledgeRights knowledgeHazardous work inherent to the jobHazardous work inherent to the job

Injury experienceInjury experience

Age (N=175)

1 13

14

21

24

1617

13

911

46

7

3 31 1

4

13

1 12

1 1 1 1 12

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Num

ber

45%

55%

Most respondents (55%) were under 25, but the Most respondents (55%) were under 25, but the age distribution allows some age-based age distribution allows some age-based comparisons.comparisons.

WorkplacesWorkplacesWorkplace size

(N=174)

1—510%

6—2030%

21—10022%

>10038%

Workplace is unionized(N=170)

Yes

No Don't KnowMost respondents worked Most respondents worked in business and services , in business and services , therefore no inter-sector therefore no inter-sector comparisons were comparisons were possible.possible.

Have you performed an unsafe work Have you performed an unsafe work tasktask

(N=179)(N=179)

Yes32%

Don't know3%No

65%

Reason(s) given by those who reported performing unsafe work

(N = 57)

14

4

26

16

21

21

24

28

12

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Personallystrong/quick/resistant

Personally lucky

Did not know it wasunsafe

Suspected unsafe butwas told it was safe

Did not know I couldrefuse

Other workers wouldlook down on me

Feared dismissal

Threatened withdismissal

Was wearingprotective equipment

Key:"Invincibility" beliefsHazard knowledgeRights knowledgeRights beliefs

% reporting performance of unsafe work vs. responses to other questions

31%

18%

30%

42%

55%

55%Unionized

Not unionized

Had WHMIStraining

No WHMIS training

Would assume workwas safe if others

doing it

Would not assumesafe based on

others

Risk perceptionRisk perceptionEstimated likelihood of injury and disease

(Recollection of pre-employment, N=173)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Minor Major Fatal SeriousDisease

Propo

rtio

n o

f re

sponse

s

very likely

quite possible

small chance

impossible

Invincibility beliefsInvincibility beliefsRespondents who reported having performed an unsafe work Respondents who reported having performed an unsafe work task were asked for their reason. An explanation of being task were asked for their reason. An explanation of being personally strong, quick, or resistantpersonally strong, quick, or resistant, or being , or being usually pretty usually pretty luckylucky was classified as an expression of “invincibility”. was classified as an expression of “invincibility”.

% indicating "invincible"

25%

13%

14%

18%

57%

13%

Male (p<.025)

Female

Age 15-24

Age 25+

Assume safe if others doing

Would not assume

Estimated risk of injury

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

"Invincible" Notinvincible

Likely

Possible

Chance

Impossible

Invincibility beliefs?Invincibility beliefs?

““Invincibility” and risk Invincibility” and risk perception appear to be perception appear to be alternate reasoning alternate reasoning strategies, not strategies, not components of the components of the same strategy. Those same strategy. Those perceive injury as perceive injury as impossible do not need impossible do not need to feel invincible, and to feel invincible, and vice versa.vice versa.

Estimated likelihood Estimated likelihood (% agreeing)(% agreeing)

Contrary to usual beliefs Contrary to usual beliefs about youth and safety about youth and safety training, more of those older training, more of those older than 25 and with OHS training than 25 and with OHS training rated injury/disease as rated injury/disease as “impossible” than those “impossible” than those without training and younger. without training and younger. (Not statistically significant, but (Not statistically significant, but opposite direction from opposite direction from conventional wisdom.)conventional wisdom.)

The proportion who rated The proportion who rated injury/disease quite injury/disease quite possible/likely was not much possible/likely was not much different between different between older/younger respondentsolder/younger respondents

47%

40%

45%

37%

10%

11%

Injury/disease impossible

Had OHS training (various)

Had no OHS training

Age 25+

Age under 25

Injury/disease very likely/quite possible

Age 25+

Age under 25

Hazard knowledgeHazard knowledgeTypes of workplace health and safety

training received(N=181)

44

68

22

33

Other

Preventing falls

Safe lifting

WHMIS

79/181 had received no OHS training79/181 had received no OHS trainingOnly 67/102 had received OHS training from Only 67/102 had received OHS training from the current employerthe current employer

Factors affecting training Factors affecting training receivedreceived% Having safety training

81.5%

42.6%

69.7%

52.0%

76.6%

44.5%

OHS committee (p<.0001)

No OHS committee

Unionized (p<.07)

Not unionized

Age >25 (p<.0001)

Age <25

Overall 56.4% had Overall 56.4% had received some training at received some training at some workplace however some workplace however this was influenced by this was influenced by unionization and unionization and existence of OHS existence of OHS committee. Older committee. Older students were more likely students were more likely to work in larger, to work in larger, unionized workplaces and unionized workplaces and unionized workplaces unionized workplaces were more likely to have were more likely to have OHS committees.OHS committees.Students working in Students working in smaller workplaces (<20 smaller workplaces (<20 employees) were less employees) were less likely to have safety likely to have safety training (p<.0001)training (p<.0001)

Other sources of hazard Other sources of hazard knowledgeknowledge

Most likely ask to find if work/workplace had hazards (N=174)

Assume it was okay if others were doing it

12%

Someone in the workplace

66%

Search on own (e.g., manual)

7%

Someone outside the workplace

15%

Rights knowledgeRights knowledgeRecall reasons presented Recall reasons presented earlier by those who earlier by those who reported performing reported performing unsafe work (N=57)unsafe work (N=57)

21 (37.5%) said that 21 (37.5%) said that they were they were unaware that unaware that they could refusethey could refuse unsafe unsafe work.work.

HoweverHowever30 (52.6%) feared or 30 (52.6%) feared or were threatened with were threatened with dismissal if they refuseddismissal if they refused

Rights beliefs are as Rights beliefs are as important as rights important as rights knowledge, and beliefs knowledge, and beliefs must match realitymust match realityStudents cannot afford to Students cannot afford to gamble on rights that gamble on rights that may be merely may be merely theoretical theoretical

Training in OHS Rights (N=181)

No OHS training

44%

Had OHS rights

training31%

Some OHS training

but not on rights25%

Students can’t afford job Students can’t afford job lossloss

Motivation for working (N=183, multiple responses allowed)

172324

48

65

98

11231835

54

87

-5

20

45

70

95

120

Afford tuition Experience tocompete for jobsafter graduation

Socialinteraction at

work

Discounts orother benefits

Enhancecomprehension

of coursecontent

Supportdependent

Num

ber

during school term

during co-op or summer

Relation of job activities to educational goals(N=173)

Directly related39%

Same industry12%

General experience

25%

Just money24%

Sources of rights Sources of rights knowledgeknowledge

Safety committee (N=171)

Committee but activities are not well

known16%

Don't know whether there is a committee

23%

No committee

32%

Activities well known29%

% Reporting access to a % Reporting access to a safety committeesafety committee

68.2%

42.1%

20.8%

17.7%

56.9%

32.7%

86.7%

49.4%

Workplace size 100+ workers

Workplace size 21-100

Workplace size 6-20

Workplace size 1-5

Age 25+

Age <25

Union

Non union

Committee required by

OHSAct

Committee not required by OHSAct

Injury experience (%)Injury experience (%)

31%

58%

19%

38%

21%

Overall

Those who have done unsafe worktask (p<.0001)

Those who have not done unsafework

Those who have had OHS training(various) (p<.02)

Those who have not had any safetytraining

No association with gender, age, existence of safety committee, or workplace size.

Relationship with training is counter-intuitive.PILOT LIMITATION:Although a greater proportion of those who had OHS training had injuries than those without training, the sequence of training and injury is unknown. Training may have been given in response to injury or at a later time for some reason.

Age affects training-injury Age affects training-injury relation?relation?

Different association between training and injury when examining older and younger workers separately.PILOT LIMITATION: may be related to sample size/rate however further study is required.OHS training approaches have changed over the years.

Training and injury, by age group

No training% injured

7%

No training, % injured

24%

Trained% injured

33%

Trained% injured

42%

Overall % injured

Age <25 Age 25+

Do young workers have more Do young workers have more injuries?injuries?

Young workers disproportionately more likely to report having had an injury

0

2

4

6

8

10

15 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 42 48 53

Age of respondent

Inju

ries

am

ong r

esponden

ts

Injuries distributed by exposed years

Injuries distributed by exposed person

Actual injuries by age of respondent

Qualitative methodsQualitative methodsObservations and resultsObservations and results

Student group leadership is more charismatic than Student group leadership is more charismatic than bureaucratic, thus priorities are volatile. Commitment is bureaucratic, thus priorities are volatile. Commitment is contingent on individuals, but is no less sincere.contingent on individuals, but is no less sincere.

Delay of 16 months from proposal to receipt of funds (20 months Delay of 16 months from proposal to receipt of funds (20 months from original planning discussions)from original planning discussions)Student film crew remained availableStudent film crew remained availableOriginal RWSC student leaders were no longer involvedOriginal RWSC student leaders were no longer involvedStudent organization (RyeSAC) priorities changed.Student organization (RyeSAC) priorities changed.The video action research was not possible.The video action research was not possible.RECOMMENDED: Grants involving partnerships with youth RECOMMENDED: Grants involving partnerships with youth organizations must be adjudicated and awarded on a fast track to organizations must be adjudicated and awarded on a fast track to capture enthusiasm and commitment before individuals change.capture enthusiasm and commitment before individuals change.

Working students deal with health and safety concerns Working students deal with health and safety concerns interstitially: while conducting other business. They do not interstitially: while conducting other business. They do not tend to make special trips to pursue information.tend to make special trips to pursue information.

Ryerson relocated RWSC to location where drop-in traffic was Ryerson relocated RWSC to location where drop-in traffic was negligiblenegligibleParticipant-observer had nothing to observe.Participant-observer had nothing to observe.

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsSponsored by Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board Research Advisory Council “Solutions for Workplace Change” program, Ryerson University Faculty of Community Services and Faculty of Business SRC programs, and Ontario Work-Study Program. The cooperation of RyeSAC, the Ryerson Working Students’ Centre and the assistance of the students in PPA 553 (Prof. Myer Siemiatycki) and Ryerson Business Consulting Service is gratefully acknowledged.