RESUMEN

Forestry services work presents high risk for injury, illness, and fatality. How worker and employer views of workplace safety compare influences the strategies to address hazardous working conditions. Interviews with forestry services workers and employers revealed themes about occupational hazards and ways to prevent work-related injury. Workers identified hazards related to the social and natural environments, and injury prevention solutions focused on interventions beyond their control and based on employer responsibility. Employers characterized hazards within job task contexts and tied solutions to worker behaviors to improve job task performance. Discordance between worker and employer reports indicates inconsistent views about what safety measures should be provided and pursued to effectively reduce injury risk. Because many workers in the forest services industry are marginalized due to their immigrant documentation status and being racially/ethnically minoritized, power differentials between workers and employers can also influence how workplace safety and health measures are determined and implemented.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Forestry services is a hazardous industry with high job-related injury, illness, and fatality rates. The Northwest workforce is largely Spanish-speaking, Latino, and immigrant, working in poor conditions with insufficient attention paid to safety and health. Institutional racism fundamentally shapes the structural vulnerability of Latino immigrant workers. Given this context, we sought to understand how workplace organizational factors and safety climate affect job-related injuries in this industry. METHODS: We developed 23 case studies from personal interviews after selecting from an initial participant survey pool of 99 Latino forest workers in southern Oregon who had been injured at work in the previous 2 years. Workers were recruited through snowball sampling and door-to-door canvassing. Questions spanned work conditions, tasks, employer safety practices, injury experience, medical treatment, and workers' compensation benefits. RESULTS: Workers reported broken bones, chainsaw lacerations, back pain, heat and pesticide illnesses, and other occupational injuries. One-third of the cases fell into a Systems Functional category in which they reported their injuries to their supervisors and received medical treatment and workers' compensation benefits. The remaining two-thirds experienced System Failures with difficulties in receiving medical treatment and/or workers' compensation benefits, employer direction to not report, being fired, or seeking alternative home remedies. CONCLUSION: Workers employed by companies with more indicators of safety climate were more likely to obtain adequate treatment for their injuries and fully recover. Workers for whom interpretation at medical exams was provided by someone unaffiliated with their employers also reported better treatment and recovery outcomes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This case history of Oregon state's Ag Seminar Series is consistent with the Socio-Ecological Model, demonstrating how policy at a state level can influence an organizational approach with impacts that ultimately influence safety practices on the farm. From modest beginnings, the Ag Seminar Series, offered through a workers compensation insurance company, now serves over 2,300 Oregon farmers annually in English and Spanish. This case offers unique but also replicable methods for educators, insurers, and researchers in safety education, safety motivators, and research-to-practice (r2p).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Agriculture is among the most hazardous occupations in the United States. Research can provide new insights about disease and injury and serve as the foundation for occupational health and safety policies. The determination of research priorities can be problematic. Public participation approaches offer opportunities to identify and integrate various perspectives. METHODS: The agenda process was modeled on the NIOSH National Occupational Research Agenda. Center staff contacted representatives of producer groups, labor, health care, academia, and public agencies to participate in telephone interviews and a daylong workshop. RESULTS: Twelve research priorities were identified: musculoskeletal disorders; respiratory disease; skin disease; traumatic injuries; chemical exposures; special populations at risk; social and economic foundations of workplace safety; risk communication barriers; diagnostic approaches; hazard control technology; intervention effectiveness; and surveillance research methods. CONCLUSIONS: The agenda process engaged stakeholders in priority setting. The resulting document is a useful guide for occupational safety and health in agriculture.

Asunto(s)