Supervisor and Organizational Factors Associated with Supervisor Support of Job Accommodations for Low Back Injured Workers
- 575 Downloads
Purpose Temporary job accommodations contribute to the prevention of chronic work disability due to low back pain (LBP) through the facilitation of early return to work; yet, workplace dimensions of job accommodation are poorly understood. The objective of this study was to determine supervisor and organizational factors associated with supervisors’ support for temporary job accommodations for LBP injured workers. Methods Supervisors were recruited from 19 workplaces in the USA and Canada and completed an online survey regarding job accommodation practices and potential associated factors with respect to a case vignette of a worker with LBP. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify the most parsimonious set of factors associated with supervisors’ support for accommodations. Results A total of 804 supervisors participated with 796 eligible for inclusion in the analysis. The final set of factors explained 21 % of the variance in supervisors’ support for temporary job accommodations. Considerate leadership style (β = 0.261; 95 % CI 0.212, 0.310), workplace disability management policies and practices (β = 0.243; 95 % CI 0.188, 0.298), and supervisor autonomy for designing and providing workplace accommodations (β = 0.156; 95 % CI 0.071, 0.241) had the largest effect on supervisor support for accommodations. Conclusion Factors predicting supervisors’ likelihood to accommodate LBP injured workers include use of considerate leadership style, workplace disability management policies and practices, and supervisor autonomy. Workplace interventions targeting these factors should be developed and evaluated for their ability to improve work disability prevention outcomes.
KeywordsJob accommodation Supervisor Predictors Return to work Disability management
This research was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Grant MOP-102571, Supervisors’ perspectives on accommodating back injured workers: A mixed methods study (PI: V Kristman) and by intramural research funding (Project LMRIS 09-01) of the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety (PI: WS Shaw). Dr. Kristman is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research through a New Investigator Award in Community-based Primary Health Care.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of interest
None to declare.
- 10.Schultz IZ, Krupa T, Rogers E. Best practices in accommodating and retaining persons with mental health disabilities at work: answered and unanswered questions. In: Schultz IZ, Rogers E, editors. Work accommodation and retention in mental health. New York: Springer; 2012. p. 445–65.Google Scholar
- 18.Williams-Whitt K. Impediments to disability accommodation. Ind Relat. 2007;62(3):405–32.Google Scholar
- 21.Williams-Whitt K, Taras D. Disability and the performance paradox: can social capital bridge the divide? Brit J Ind Relat. 2010;48(3):534–59.Google Scholar
- 22.Kristman VL, Shaw WS, Williams-Whitt K. Supervisors’ perspectives on work accommodation for chronically ill employees. In: Stone S-D, Crooks VA, Owen M, editors. Working Bodies: Chronic illness in the Canadian Workplace. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press; 2014. p. 114–37.Google Scholar
- 35.Halpin AW. Manual for the leader behavior description questionnaire. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research; 1957.Google Scholar
- 36.Stogdill RM, Coons AE, editors. Leader behavior: its description and measurement. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research; 1957.Google Scholar
- 37.Fleishman EA. Twenty years of consideration and structure. In: Fleishman EA, Hunt JG, editors. Current developments in the study of leadership. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press; 1973. p. 1–40.Google Scholar
- 38.Bass BM. Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press; 1990.Google Scholar
- 40.Riley JF, Ahern DK, Follick MJ. Chronic pain and functional impairment: assessing beliefs about their relationship. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1988;69:578–82.Google Scholar
- 45.Kotter JP. A force for change: how leadership differs from management. New York: Free Press; 1990.Google Scholar
- 47.Schultz IZ, Milner RA, Hanson DB, Winter A. Employer attitudes towards accommodations in mental health disability. In: Schultz IZ, Rogers E, editors. Work accommodation and retention in mental health. New York: Springer; 2012. p. 325–40.Google Scholar
- 48.Dyck DEG. Disability management: theory, strategy and industry practice. 5th ed. New York: LexisNexis; 2013.Google Scholar
- 50.McKnight HD, Ahmad S, Schroeder RG. Why do feedback, incentive control, and autonomy improve morale? The importance of employee–management relationship closeness. J Manag Issues. 2001;4:466–82.Google Scholar
- 55.Malhotra R. The legal genealogy of the duty to accommodate American and Canadian workers with disabilities: a comparative perspective. Wash. U. J. L. & Pol’y. 2007. http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol23/iss1/2. Accessed 10 Feb 2016.