Using Dialogue to Address Jurisdictional Inequities in Access to Return to Work Resources and Identify Policy Weaknesses for Workers in Situations of Vulnerability.

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Anya Keefe, Barbara Neis, Kim Cullen, Desai Shan
{"title":"Using Dialogue to Address Jurisdictional Inequities in Access to Return to Work Resources and Identify Policy Weaknesses for Workers in Situations of Vulnerability.","authors":"Anya Keefe, Barbara Neis, Kim Cullen, Desai Shan","doi":"10.1177/10482911251319005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In Canada, occupational health and safety (OHS) and workers' compensation are primarily provincial responsibilities and there is no national institute for OHS research. Research capacity and many civil society resources to which injured workers can turn for support are primarily concentrated in three provinces. Labor force composition, employment options, vulnerability to injury, and return to work (RTW) challenges vary across jurisdictions and are changing over time, but not at the same rate. When coupled with jurisdictional inequities in RTW research and civil society supports, these differences have the potential to contribute to policy gaps and situations where issues addressed in one jurisdiction emerge again in another. This article reports on a multi-stakeholder, virtual dialogue process designed to help identify and address these potential inequities by transferring research insights related to RTW for workers in situations of vulnerability (e.g., precarious employment) and findings from a comparative policy scan to Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), a province with very limited RTW research capacity and civil society supports for injured workers. We describe the context, the dialogue process, key results from the policy scan, and we reflect on the opportunities and constraints of these knowledge synthesis and exchange tools as vehicles to address jurisdictional disparities in RTW research, policy and supports for workers injured in precarious employment and other vulnerable situations in a context of economic and policy change.</p>","PeriodicalId":45586,"journal":{"name":"New Solutions-A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy","volume":" ","pages":"81-95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11954360/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Solutions-A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10482911251319005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Canada, occupational health and safety (OHS) and workers' compensation are primarily provincial responsibilities and there is no national institute for OHS research. Research capacity and many civil society resources to which injured workers can turn for support are primarily concentrated in three provinces. Labor force composition, employment options, vulnerability to injury, and return to work (RTW) challenges vary across jurisdictions and are changing over time, but not at the same rate. When coupled with jurisdictional inequities in RTW research and civil society supports, these differences have the potential to contribute to policy gaps and situations where issues addressed in one jurisdiction emerge again in another. This article reports on a multi-stakeholder, virtual dialogue process designed to help identify and address these potential inequities by transferring research insights related to RTW for workers in situations of vulnerability (e.g., precarious employment) and findings from a comparative policy scan to Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), a province with very limited RTW research capacity and civil society supports for injured workers. We describe the context, the dialogue process, key results from the policy scan, and we reflect on the opportunities and constraints of these knowledge synthesis and exchange tools as vehicles to address jurisdictional disparities in RTW research, policy and supports for workers injured in precarious employment and other vulnerable situations in a context of economic and policy change.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: New Solutions delivers authoritative responses to perplexing problems, with a worker’s voice, an activist’s commitment, a scientist’s approach, and a policy-maker’s experience. New Solutions explores the growing, changing common ground at the intersection of health, work, and the environment. The Journal makes plain how the issues in each area are interrelated and sets forth progressive, thoughtfully crafted public policy choices. It seeks a conversation on the issues between the grassroots labor and environmental activists and the professionals and researchers involved in charting society’s way forward with the understanding that lack of scientific knowledge is no excuse for doing nothing and that inaction is itself a choice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信