Canadian Occupational Safety (COS) magazine is the premier workplace health and safety publication in Canada. We cover a wide range of topics ranging from office to heavy industry, and from general safety management to specific workplace hazards.
Issue link: https://digital.thesafetymag.com/i/356771
8 Canadian Occupational Safety www.cos-mag.com PEOPLE & PLACES UPDATES FROM THE WORLD OF HEALTH & SAFETY Co-workers' crucial role in return-to-work By Megan Mueller T he role of co-workers is crucial in the return-to-work process, and it's a role that's not without challenges. is is according to two new studies that hint at ways of making return to work more of a seamless path. Co-workers are not a neutral party when it comes to injured workers' return to work (RTW). ey can make all the diff erence to the success — or failure — of a return, yet can also be negatively aff ected by the challenges involved. is was made clear in two new quali- tative studies exploring the role of co-workers. Both studies were joint ven- tures between past and present scientists from the Institute for Work & Health (IWH) and colleagues in Australia. "A number of studies have found that when injured workers feel they have support from co-workers, they're more likely to return to work," says former IWH scientist Agnieszka Kosny, now a research fellow at Australia's Monash University, who led one of the two stud- ies. "But the goodwill of co-workers toward injured colleagues can be impeded by workplace systems." Debra Dunstan of the University of New England in Australia, who co- authored the other study with IWH scientist Ellen MacEachen, agrees. For this reason, she recommends improving communication with, and recognition of, co-workers regarding RTW issues. ese two new studies—both pub- lished in the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation—shed light on the unde- clared stakeholders who both contribute to and feel the o en-negative eff ects of RTW: the co-workers. In the fi rst study, published last July, Dunstan and MacEachen conducted focus groups in Toronto with co-workers from a range of occupations. ey found that co- workers' capacity to support returning workers was based on four things: • e quality of the RTW arrangements, including managerial attention to these arrangements—most co-work- ers in the study knew little of why and when the worker they had supported was returning, and many reported relatively haphazard arrangements for job reassignment; • eir relationship with the returning worker—co-workers were more open to helping out if they had a pre-exist- ing and positive relationship with the returning worker; • e work culture, including whether or not people 'pitched in' and acted as a team; • e duration of the required support, because worker goodwill could wear thin over time. e researchers also found that, although some co-workers in the study saw RTW in positive terms, most described the process as detrimental. Specifi c negative impacts on co-work- ers included extra work or heavier duties, and disruptions of personal work eff ectiveness, organizational eff ec- tiveness and workplace social relationships. In the worst-case sce- narios, co-workers suffered 'ripple eff ects' such as emotional distress, phys- ical injury and termination of their own employment. Privacy requirements also posed challenges. "Co-workers, who saw themselves as potential resources in RTW planning, sometimes felt shut out of the process due to confi dentiality requirements— even when they wanted to show support to the returning worker," says MacEachen. e second RTW study, led by Kosny and published in January, looked at the role of co-workers in RTW in the elec- trical construction sector. Kosny's research concluded the structure of work in this case can impede co-worker support and con- tribute to making injured workers' experiences diffi cult. A number of fac- tors and work conditions were found to contribute to the diffi culty: • a competitive and cost-cutting cul- ture that facilitates the view of injured workers as a liability; • job insecurity (i.e. precariousness of work; • diff erent "camps" in the electrical sector, which were unlikely to help each other (e.g. those with steady employment versus those with non- permanent work); • little modifi ed work; • poor offi cial communication among workplace parties. "Management can model acceptable and unacceptable behaviours for their workforce," Kosny says. Dunstan and MacEachen sug- gests ways management can improve co-workers' experiences with RTW, including: hiring replacement staff to ease the workload on co-workers; communicating effectively so co- workers understand the injury and are consulted about RTW plans and receive guidance on how to assist; and acknowledging and recognizing the contribution of co-workers, through monetary or in-kind payments such as extra holidays. Meagan Mueller is a communications associate at the Institute for Work and Health, a research fi rm based in Toronto. You can contact her at mmueller@iwh.on.ca. New appeals commissioner Douglass Tadman has been appointed CEO and chief appeals commissioner for the Appeals Commission for Alberta Workers' Compensation to continue its mission to provide a timely, fair and independent appeals process across Alberta. Tadman is acknowledged as a subject matter expert in workers' compensation legis- lation and policy. He has extensive knowledge of the commission's busi- ness, stakeholders, and issues, and has been instrumental in implementing the strategic direction. e chief appeals commissioner is responsible for autho- rizing commissioners to act on behalf of the commission to hear appeals. Tadman has chaired more than 400 Appeals Commission hearings and more than 200 arbitration panels as a former vice-chair of the Alberta Public Service Grievance Board. e appoint- ment became eff ective Jan. 31. e Appeals Commission is an administra- tive tribunal, independent of the Workers' Compensation Board, and is the fi nal level of appeal on workers' compensation matters in Alberta. Its decisions are not subject to review by the courts. Master Lock buys Toronto software fi rm Master Lock Canada, a wholly owned subsidiary of Oak Creek, Wis.-based Master Lock Company, has acquired N4 Systems, makers of safety manage- ment so ware Field ID. Field ID's so ware-as-a-service product off ering gives customers the ability to manage safety more effi ciently and eff ectively with the use of mobile apps and the web. e Field ID solution will complement existing solutions off ered by Master Lock's Life Safety business, such as lockout/ tagout locks and accessories for industrial safety. Field ID will continue to operate independently from its Toronto head- quarters but will leverage Master Lock's sales and marketing capabilities, the company said. Offi cials at both Master Lock and Field ID say the merger is expected to lead to growth in the adop- tion of the Field ID so ware among safety professionals. AIHA's new set of offi cers e American Industrial Hygiene Asso- ciation (AIHA) has elected its 2013 AIHA board of directors. e new board members will be inducted into offi ce at AIHA's annual business meeting on ursday, May 23, during the annual American Industrial Hygiene Conference and Exposition (AIHce) in Mon- treal. e conference will be held May 18 to 23. AIHA's board of directors for 2013–2014 includes: Bar- bara J. Dawson, president; Christine A.D. Lorenzo, president-elect; Daniel H. Anna, vice-president; Allan K. Fleeger, past president; Charles F. Redinger, sec- retary; Steven E. Lacey, treasurer; Cynthia A. Ostrowski, treasurer-elect; and Peter J. O'Neil, executive director. With about 10,000 members, the AIHA is the premier association of occupa- tional and environmental health and safety professionals. Barbara J. Dawson