Work safety climate. Comparison of selected occupational groups
Marta Stasiła-Sieradzka , Agata Chudzicka-Czupała , Marta Znajmiecka-Sikora
AbstractImplementation of effective programs to improve occupational safety should be linked to an understanding of the specific nature of the given job. The aim of the research was to compare occupational groups with different job-related specificities: industrial production line workers, retail workers and mine rescuers, in terms of their assessment of the work safety climate. The survey covered 2,995 respondents with diversified demographic characteristics. The study used an abridged version of the Safety Climate Questionnaire by Znajmiecka-Sikora (2019) to assess 10 separate safety climate dimensions. The results of the MANOVA multivariate analysis, Wilks’ multivariate F-tests and univariate F tests prove that there is a statistically significant difference between the respondents representing the three occupational groups collectively in terms of global assessment of all work safety climate dimensions, and also indicate significant differences between workers belonging to the three occupational groups in terms of their assessment of the individual dimensions of the work safety climate, except the organization’s occupational health and safety management policy as well as technical facilities and ergonomics, which may be due to the universality of the requirements set for organizations with regard to these two aspects of safe behavior. The differences observed in the assessment of the remaining work safety climate dimensions induces one to promote more differentiated and individualized activities, taking into account the work specificity and the nature of the threats occurring in the respective working environment of the representatives of the different occupations. The difference in assessment of the work safety climate found in the research encourages one to create practical programs for safety, not only in the procedural and technical dimension, but also in the social and psychological one.
|Journal series||PLoS ONE, ISSN 1932-6203, (N/A 100 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.9|
|ASJC Classification||; ;|
|Publication indicators||: 2017 = 1.111; : 2018 = 2.776 (2) - 2018=3.337 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.