Skip to main content
Log in

Policy and Practice of Work Ability: A Negotiation of Responsibility in Organizing Return to Work

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose In welfare policy and practical work it is unclear what the concept of work ability involves and assessments may be different among involved actors, partly due to a lack of theoretical research in relation to regulations and practice. Based on theoretical and legal aspects of work ability the aim of the study is to analyze stakeholders’ perspectives on work ability in local practice by studying multi-stakeholder meetings. Methods The material comprises nine digitally recorded multi-stakeholder meetings. Apart from the sick-listed individual, representatives from the public Social Insurance Agency, health care, employers, public employment service and the union participated in the meeting. The material was analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results Three perspectives on work ability were identified: a medical perspective, a workplace perspective and a regulatory perspective. The meetings developed into negotiations of responsibility concerning workplace adjustments, rehabilitation efforts and financial support. Medical assessments served as objective expert statements to legitimize stakeholders’ perspectives on work ability and return to work. Conclusions Although the formal goal of the status meeting was to facilitate stakeholder collaboration, the results demonstrates an unequal distribution of power among cooperating actors where the employers had the “trump card” due to their possibilities to offer workplace adjustments. The employer perspective often determined whether or not persons could return to work and if they had work ability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. MacEachen E, Kosny A, Ferrier S, Lippel K, Neilson C, Franche RL, Pugliese D. The ‘ability’ paradigm in vocational rehabilitation: challenges in an ontario injured worker retraining program. J Occup Rehabil. 2011; doi: 10.1007/s10926-011-9329-x.

  2. Holmqvist M. The active welfare state and its consequences. Eur Soc. 2010;12(2):209–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. De Boer W. Quality of evaluation of work disability. Hoofddorp: TNO Quality of Life; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  4. World Health Organization. Classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva: WHO; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ilmarinen JE. Aging workers. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58(8):546–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tengland P-A. The concept of work ability. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):275–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nordenfelt L. The concept of work ability. Bruxelles: P.I.E. Peter Lang; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garsten C, Lindvert J, Thedvall R, editors. Arbetets marknad: Arbetsmarknadens nya organisering. Liber: Malmö; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Garsten C, Jacobsson K. Sorting people out: detecting and classifying employability, work capacity and disability at Swedish Public Employment Services. International Sociological Association-conference; Guthenburg 2011.

  10. Garsten C, Jacobsson K, editors. Learning to be employable: new agendas on work, responsibility, and learning in a globalizing world. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Peralta Pierto J. Den sjuka arbetslösheten: Svensk arbetsmarknadspolitik och dess praxis 1978–2004. Uppsala: Uppsala University; 2006.

  12. Lindqvist R. Funktionshinder, arbetsförmåga och socialpolitik. In: Westerhäll L, editor. Arbets(o)förmåga—ur ett mångdiciplinärt perspektiv. Stockholm: Santérus; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Esping-Andersen G. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jacobsson K. A European politics of employability: the political discourse on employability of the EU and the OECD. In: Garsten C, Jacobsson K, editors. Learning to be employable: new agendas on work, responsibility, and learning in a globalizing world. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Vahlne Westerhäll L. Det sjukförsäkringsrättsliga arbetsförmågebegreppet i lagstiftning och rättstillämpning. In: Vahlne Westerhäll L, editor. Arbets(o)förmåga: ur ett mångdisciplinärt perspektiv. Stockholm Santérus; 2008.

  16. Proposition. Förändringar inom sjukförsäkringen för ökad hälsa i arbetslivet. 2002.

  17. Riksförsäkringsverket. Om avstämningsmöten. 2003.

  18. Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography: principles in practice. London: Routledge; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 3rd ed. London: SAGE; 2002.

  20. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):209–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johansson R. Vid byråkratins gränser: Om handlingsfrihetens organisatoriska begränsningar i klientrelaterat arbete. Lund: Studenteratur; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stone D. The disabled state. Basingstoke: Macmillan; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Swaan A. In care of the state. Health Care, Education and welfare in Europe and the USA in Modern Era. Cambridge: Cambridge Polity Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Löfgren A. Physicians’ sickness certification practices: frequency, problems, and learning. Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Conrad P. Medicalization and social control. Annu Rev Sociol. 1992;18:209–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Castells M. The information age: economy, society and culture. The rise of the network society. Malden, Mass: Blackwell; 2000.

  27. Garsten C. Workplace vagabonds. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Swedish Public Employment Service. Statistics on unemployed at the Swedish Public Employment Service. 2010.

  29. MacEachen E, Kosny A, Scott-Dixon K, Facey M, Chambers L, Breslin C, Kyle N, Irvin E, Mahood Q and the Small Business Systematic Review Team. Workplace health understandings and processes in small businesses: a systematic review of the qualitative literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2010;20(2):180–98.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kaye H, Jans LH, Jones EC. Why don’t employers hire and retain workers with disabilities? J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(4):526–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Baril R, Berthelette D, Massicotte P. Early return to work of injured workers: multidimensional patterns of individual and organizational factors. Saf Sci. 2003;41:277–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Krause N, Dasinger LK, Neuhauser F. Modified work and return to work: a review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil. 1998;8:113–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Johansson G, Lundberg O, Lundberg I. Return to work and adjustment latitude among employees on long-term sickness absence. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(2):181–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pransky G, Shaw W, Franche R. Disability prevention and communication among workers, physicians, employers, and insurers—current models and opportunities for improvement. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(11):625–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Loisel P, Durand M-J, Berthelette D, Vézina N, Baril R, Gagnon D, Larivière C, Tremblay C. Disability prevention: new paradigm for the management of occupational back pain. Dis Manage Health Outcomes. 2001;9(7):351–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pollitt C, Bouckaert G. Public management reform. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hughes OE. Public management & administration: an introduction. New York: Palgrave; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hood C. A public management for all seasons? Publ Adm. 1991;69(1):3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Power M. The audit society. Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sahlin-Andersson K. National, international and transnational constructions of new public management. In: Christensen T, Laegreid P, editors. New public management: the transformation of ideas and practice. Ashgate: Aldershot; 2001.

  41. Brunsson N, Sahlin-Andersson K. Constructing organizations: the example of public sector reform. Organ Stud. 2000;21(4):721–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Ellen MacEachen for valuable comments during the finalization of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ida Seing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seing, I., Ståhl, C., Nordenfelt, L. et al. Policy and Practice of Work Ability: A Negotiation of Responsibility in Organizing Return to Work. J Occup Rehabil 22, 553–564 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-012-9371-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-012-9371-3

Keywords

Navigation