Impact Of Physical Conditions On Employee Performance And Safety In The Workplace Essay.

Physical Condition

Rahim et al. (2014) state that there are several physical conditions, which degrades the standards and quality of employee performance. These physical conditions are related to health issues on spinal cord problems, neck pain, shoulder pain, thoracic, and others. These physical conditions contradict the safety climate created by the workplace, under the safe working practices, guided by the Occupational Health and Safety regulations.

From the arguments of Rusli, Edimansyah, and Naing (2008), it could be inferred that physical conditions contradict the aspect of safety climate in the workplace, raising questions on safety programs organized for ensuring the wellbeing of the employees in the workplace. Severe physical conditions could be problematic for the employees, which could yield consequences, which raise concerns over their safety and security while in the workplace.  On the contrary, Useche et al. (2018) considers working conditions and the resultant stress among the public transport drivers. This stress causes psychosocial affectation of the workers which contradicts the wellbeing of the workers. Rahim et al. (2014) and Useche et al. (2018) could be tied in the same thread in terms of correlation between physical conditions and degrading value of the safety climate. This degradation is something, which is unethical in terms of ensuring the security and safety of the workers in the workplace.

The managers are to ensure that the employees, involved in hard physical labor are not burdened much, as could lead to severe health issues with the physical conditions. For example, sitting for a long time in front of the laptops could strain the eyes, affecting the eyesight of the employees. This posture could also cause neck and shoulder pain, which could generate spondylitis, if not controlled and checked at the right time. These physical conditions are something that could not be imagined in an era where technological advancements have replaced the traditional working conditions, where heavy machines and hazardous working conditions were seen.

Rahim et al. (2014) upholds the viewpoints of Bambra et al. (2009) regarding exposure of the working-class population to hazardous physical working conditions leading to sickness. The working ambiance for the laborers was stressful, which is evident from standing and operating the machines for a long time. The factories were claustrophobic, creating suffocation. The placement of the machines was such which is dangerous as it could catch the sleeves of the dress, which was risky (Abubakar et al. 2018). The operating hours were lengthy, which caused stress, and anxiety. This mostly affected the workers on the night shift. Seeing the colleagues dying due to the accidents also caused psychosocial stress among the workers, rising concerns regarding safety and security in the workplace. The aspect is really sensitive as it contradicts the mechanisms of Occupational Health and Safety laws, raising concerns regarding the safety, security, and wellbeing of the workers. This is something that is not at all desirable and is against the workplace norms.

Statement 1 (Main Journal)

The statements of Abubakar et al. (2018) regarding “Occupational injuries are the resultant of two antecedents according to the 127 U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH): physical hazards and 128 psychological stressors” relates with the statements of Rahim t al. (2014), pertaining to physical condition including “the surroundings and conditions that affect employees and other related persons at workplace”. These statements link to the revelations of Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH, PART IV, 15(2) e), it could be inferred that the physical condition of the workers, which are stressful and harmful, contradicts the safety policies, regulations, orders and codes of practices (Ejkkp7.Dosh.gov.my 2022). The arguments of Rusli, Edimansyah, and Naing (2008) on “Stress is often described as being associated with anxiety and depression at workplaces, and some studies have suggested that stress, anxiety and depression are also related to poor Quality of Life (QOL) could be linked to the arguments of Rahim et al. (2014) on “Stress has numerous overwhelming effects on the workplace environment, as well as upon individuals who become victims of stress. Stress has immense implications for company profitability”. This statement proposed by Rahim et al. (2014) could also be linked to the statements of Usche et al. (2018) regarding “Recently, some psychosocial work factors such as driving stress, work overtime and job strain have acquired an important role explaining occupational health and safety problems in professional drivers’ populations”. In summary, the act in section 15 clause 2e gives a recap and overview of the necessity of ensuring the environment of work is both safe and conducive, in recognition to the stressors and factors that can undermine employee safety as echoed by Usche et al (2018).

Rahim et al. (2014) highlights the arguments of Smith (1976) that to measure these feelings experienced by the workers in the factories, and plants, the Index of Organizational Reactions (IOR) is used. This measurement considers the value reflected on the scale. If the value is near or close to .90, then it is reliable and considerable, reflecting an alarming situation of the workers experiencing a high-stress level from the harmful working conditions. The measurement through scale is based on Global Health Questionnaire, introduced by Goldberg in 1978.

Richards et al. (2019) are of the view that training is important for the employees to gain competencies for handling working conditions to avert adverse physical conditions. Here, ergonomics could be related, as it fosters enforced to assess whether the individuals are being able to exercise their functional capabilities with the use of relevant tools, according to the suitability. Rusli, Edimansyah, and Naing (2008) are of the view that physical conditions like health issues on spinal cord problem, neck pain, shoulder pain, thoracic, and others, degrade the quality of life for the workers. This is because of stress, which could be self-perceived or from the burdens of a heavy workload.

Statement 1 (Support from another journal)

Richards, Pennington, and Sinelnikov (2019) are of the view that managers need to ensure that the employees are trained, motivated, and encouraged, which would reduce the stress levels among the employees. Physical education programs could be organized for making the employees more physically fit and strong. In this context, the workplace conditions of Malaysia and the UK could be brought in. These working conditions are different, and that is obvious, as the Occupational Health and Safety Laws are exclusive and different for different countries. Here, it is obvious that the employee perceptions regarding the health and safety laws, working conditions would be different. The workers experience different feelings while working in the workplace. But if the feeling is stressful or fearful, then the working conditions, culture, and most importantly the safety climate, degrade. This scale is now commonly used in the workplaces for measuring stress experienced by the workers from experiencing hazardous working conditions (Varianou et al. 2019).

The statements of Richards, Pennington, and Sinelnikov (2019) on “Occupational socialization refers to a specific branch of socialization theory and research that relates to ways in which individuals develop skills, behaviors, competencies, and beliefs recognized as important to a particular context of employment” could be linked with the statements of Rahim et al. (2014) on “Employees were also not educated on the precautionary measures that need to be taken when working in a dangerous situation, according to the Statistics released by Social Security Organization (SOCSO)”. The statements reflect the concern of the employers towards ensuring the occupational health and safety of the workers in the workplace (Dosh.gov.my 2022, PART IV 15(2)c). In the context, the statements of Varianou et al. (2019) regarding “WHO’s revelation on “older workers are at a higher risk regarding self-reported health problems and long-term sickness absence, holds high significance. Furthermore, the OSHA act part 4 section 15 clause 2c requires that employees go to such lengths as to ensure that employees have all the necessary information they need regarding the safety measures and risks involved with operating a given plant or equipment. In particular, the law therefore requires the employers to categorically take all measures to ensure all workers, including the elderly, have full information on the risks of certain equipment and how they can protect themselves.

Rahim et al. (2014) highlights the modern 21^st-century working scenario, where the machines and devices are certified and assured of risks, which ensures the safety and security of the workers. In some context, the physical conditions from working in these machines and devices are negative, as it fails to meet the minimum standards and principles of occupational health and safety. This aspect is something that raises questions on the occupational health and safety enforced in the workplace.

Statement 1 (Support from another journal)

Social safety theory could be related to the physical condition. According to this theory, developing friendly social bonds is human nature among the workers in the workplace. But when the employees experience stress at an intense level, which causes mental health issues, it becomes a risk and is opposed to the aspect of safety in terms of the social bonding, which they have in the workplace (Slavich 2020).

Chung and Williamson (2018) are of the view that theoretical underpinnings on ergonomics establish the interaction between humans and the environment in the given surrounding, mapped by the systems and networks, evoking socialization. Here, the concept of difference in the perceptions of the employees regarding the workplace condition could be brought in.

The statements of Slavich (2020) on “social-psychological perspectives have not been well integrated into existing theories of stress, leading instead to two largely distinct literatures: one that conceptualizes stress in high resolution but less frequently assesses biological mechanisms or concrete health outcomes (e.g., social psychology) and a second that conceptualizes stress in lower resolution but more commonly assesses biological mechanisms and clinical diagnoses (e.g., psychiatry, clinical psychology)” could be linked with the statements of Rahim et al. (2014) on “a large quantity of research to about this psychosocial vulnerability having the capability to influence the physical, mental and social health of an individual”. These statements of the main journals, and supporting journals could be synthesized with the statement of DOSH published in the website on assurance towards certification of the machines and devices, ensuring the safety of the workers, through OSH Accident Cost Calculator, indicating the measurement towards keeping the risks and accidents in workplace in control (Oshacc.dosh.gov.my 2022, PART V 21 (2)).  The section 21 subsection 2 requires a manufacturer to establish all necessary research to ensure the safety of the equipment during operation. Such research is meant to provide information on the physical and stress factors that may be imminent for an employee using the equipment. OSHA therefore agrees with the statements discussed by Slavich (2020) and Rahim et al (2014)

Rahim et al. (2014) through the multivariate analysis of variance test result, highlights that there is significantly no difference between employee perceptions on working conditions in UK and Malaysia. Based on these results, the hypothesis has been rejected. However, it could not be disagreed that the occupational health and safety regulations are different in different countries, due to which the perceptions of the workers are bound to be different. This difference maps the variations in the safety climate, which the employers are to consider for ensuring the health, safety, security, and wellbeing of the workers.

Theory/Concept/Law

Khoo et al. (2014) argue that training programs are needed for enhancing the awareness of the people about how to deal with the physical conditions, which acts as an obstacle in exerting the performance in the workplace.

In this context, physical education training programs concept could be brought in, which justifies the difference in the perceptions of the workers regarding the working conditions. In the workplaces where the workers are facilitated with physical education training programs, the perceptions are positive, as the capability to fight stressful working conditions is high. The workers in this workplace are physically strong as the aim is to upgrade their resilience-building skills (Useche et al. 2018). On the contrary, in the workplaces where there is an improper approach towards implementing physical education training programs, the workers fall prey to stress, anxiety, accidents, and risks.

The statements of the main journal and other journals relate to the perceptions of the workers on working conditions. Tests and analysis on measuring these perceptions and feelings could be related to the approach of DOSH towards Notification of the Occupational Diseases and Positional Reporting along with the occupational accident cost calculator (Dosh.gov.my 2022). These approaches gain value when the workers are facilitated with the physical education programs, making them physically fit and healthy for handling all types of operations. The aspect of physical education programs proposed by DOSH could be linked with the statements of Khoo et al. (2014). Measurements evoked by OSH Accident Cost Calculator (OSHA) and also on the requirement of employers to notify health workers if they sense or feel any form of injury (Dosh.gov.my 2022, PART VIII 32(1)) could further be linked with the arguments of Rahim et al. (2014) regarding General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) to measure the feelings and perception of the workers occupational health and safety. Making notifications to health workers is an important step towards ensuring the health and safety of the workers. Such notifications are made by the employer on the safety issue at their workplace. Furthermore, Part VIII 33 (2) of OSHA requires the recruitment of an assessor eg an engineer to construct the extent of damage or accident at the workplace. Information from General Health Questionnaire and accident calculator can be viewed as complementary sources of information on the safety of employees as perceptions of the employees can be validated or discredited by an assessor at the plant.

References

Abubakar, A.M., Karadal, H., Bayighomog, S.W. and Merdan, E., 2018. Workplace injuries, safety climate, and behaviors: application of an artificial neural network. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics.

Bambra, C., Gibson, M., Sowden, A. J., Wright, K., Whitehead, M., & Petticrew, M. (2009). Working for health? Evidence from systematic reviews on the effects on health and health inequalities of organizational changes to the psychosocial work environment. Prevention Medicine, 48(5), 454-461.

Chung, A.Z. and Williamson, A., 2018. Theory versus practice in the human factors and ergonomics discipline: Trends in journal publications from 1960 to 2010. Applied Ergonomics, 66, pp.41-51.

Dosh.gov.my 2022. Inspection. Available at: https://www.dosh.gov.my/index.php/services/enforcement/inspection [Accessed on 8th March 2022]

Dosh.gov.my 2022. Continuous Education Programme (CEP) Available at: https://www.dosh.gov.my/index.php/certification/information/continuous-education-programme-cep [Accessed on 8th March 2022]

Ejkkp7.Dosh.gov.my 2022. Occupational diseases and position reporting. Available at: https://ejkkp7.dosh.gov.my/ejkkp7 [Accessed on 8th March 2022]

Khoo, T.H., Surienty, L. and Daisy Kee, M.H., 2011. Occupational safety and health (OSH) in Malaysian small and medium enterprises and effective safety management. International Journal of Business and Technopreneurship, 1(November), pp.321-338.

Oshacc.dosh.gov.my 2022. OSH Accident Cost Calculator. Available at: https://oshacc.dosh.gov.my/ [Accessed on 8^th March 2022]

Rahim, N.A., Ng, H.K., Biggs, D.M. and Boots, K., 2014. Perception of safety, physical working conditions, and stress between Malaysia and the United Kingdom. International Journal of Business and Society, 15(2), pp.321-338.

Richards, K.A.R., Pennington, C.G. and Sinelnikov, O.A., 2019. Teacher socialization in physical education: A scoping review of the literature. Kinesiology Review, 8(2), pp.86-99.

Rusli, B.N., Edimansyah, B.A. and Naing, L., 2008. Working conditions, self-perceived stress, anxiety, depression, and quality of life: a structural equation modeling approach. BMC public health, 8(1), pp.1-12.

Slavich, G.M., 2020. Social safety theory: a biologically based evolutionary perspective on life stress, health, and behavior. Annual review of clinical psychology, 16, pp.265-295.

Smith, F. J. (1976). Index of Organizational Reactions. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6(54), 1265.

Useche, S.A., Cendales, B., Montoro, L. and Esteban, C., 2018. Work stress and health problems of professional drivers: a hazardous formula for their safety outcomes. PeerJ, 6, p.e6249.

Useche, S.A., Gómez, V., Cendales, B. and Alonso, F., 2018. Working conditions, job strain, and traffic safety among three groups of public transport drivers. Safety and health at work, 9(4), pp.454-461.

Varianou-Mikellidou, C., Boustras, G., Dimopoulos, C., Wybo, J.L., Guldenmund, F.W., Nicolaidou, O., and Anyfantis, I., 2019. Occupational health and safety management in the context of an aging workforce. Safety Science, 116, pp.231-244.