"If man did not work...these worlds would perish." Bhagavad-Gita
"If man did not work...these worlds would perish." Bhagavad-Gita
Menstuff® has compiled information on the issue of work. The
photos above are from left to right by Robert Mottar, Homer Page,
Homer Page, Wayne Miller, Allan Grant, Waleter Sanders, Steinheimer,
August Sander and Arthur Lavine from The
Family of Man.
Jobs
Dangerous jobs
Workplace safety: It's a guy
thing
The Traveling Man's Eating Plan
Social Security
Behind Closed Doors -
Bankruptcy
World Poverty
Economic Parity -
Almost
Wage Gap
Females in Classrooms
Work Ethic and Vacation
Days
Work More, Learn Less = Out of Work
Younger
Work-Related Aviation
Fatalities
Unemployment
Recessions
Retirement
Which Job for
You?
Bullshit Bingo
Importance of good Credit
Books
and the related topic of Transition.
Workplace safety: It's a guy thing
By Donna Laframboise
In addition to going to their graves far too early, these victims all had something else in common: Every one of them was male. Indeed, 96% of the approximately 760 of people killed on the job in Canada each year are men. Workplace safety is, overwhelmingly, a men's issue because our most dangerous jobs continue to be performed primarily by one half of the population.
But our society apparently believes gender is important only if the numbers show women being victimized disproportionately. Otherwise, gender breakdowns hardly seem worth mentioning -- and certainly not worth dwelling on.
Last Friday, organizations across the country observed the annual Day of Mourning for those killed or injured on the job. At emotional ceremonies, ordinary people took a few moments to remember workers killed in accidents both large and small -- in mines, in the pulp and paper industry, on oil rigs and on farms.
But even though about 10 times as many people die in industrial accidents each year as are killed by domestic violence, the day attracted scant media attention (according to the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 70 spouses killed their wives or husbands in 1998).
Many news outlets -- including the National Post -- ignored it altogether. Moreover, not one of 10 articles that did appear in Canadian newspapers breathed a word about gender.
Such indifference is no isolated event. While researching workplace fatalities a few years ago, I combed through more than 60 pages of a Statistics Canada publication devoted to workplace injuries searching for a gender breakdown of work-related deaths.
Published in late 1994, this book lists the number of fatalities by industry and province only. (Non-fatal injury data does include a gender breakdown -- indicating roughly three out of four workplace injuries were experienced by men in 1991-1993).
Nowhere, in either the extensive graphs or text, does this publication -- produced by an office known for examining every imaginable activity, including housework, from a gender perspective -- mention how many of the dead were male. The 96% figure was tracked down through a series of telephone calls.
(In the United States, by contrast, a 1993 document published by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health declares that the fatality rate for males is "12 times higher than for females" and that "males accounted for 94% of the fatal occupational injuries reported.")
Yesterday, after placing fresh calls to Statistics Canada (which stopped publishing occupational injury and death data altogether in 1995), I was advised to contact the Association of Worker Compensation Boards of Canada, based in Mississauga, Ont.
While that organization has the total number of workplace fatalities for the past five years at its fingertips, and sells a book that classifies non-fatal workplace injuries according to body part, province, age, industry and occupation, it too is bizarrely uninterested in breaking down workplace fatalities according to gender. Such data, I was told, aren't readily available.
In order to gain access to these numbers I'd have to fill out a form on the organization's Web site, agree to pay a $60-per-hour search fee, and wait -- the person who conducts the searches wasn't in yesterday.
Since someone else had already gone through this process for occupational deaths in the 15-24 age category, the organization was able to tell me that 54 young men versus three young women lost their lives on the job in 1998.
Having been trained, via an undergraduate degree in women's studies, to believe that looking at issues according to how they affect men and women differently can help one understand the world better, I certainly wasn't warned that data documenting men's distadvantages would be difficult to access.
But for all our certainty -- within the media and beyond -- that it's women who are hard done by, an unending stream of stories about the challenges that middle-class women encounter in the workplace continue to get written.
Working-class men, on the other hand, are literally dying for a living -- while few people even notice.
Surveying several reports by women economists on women's gains in the 1980's, the New York Times business writer Sylvia Nasar rejected Faludi's thesis. She pointed to masses of empirical data showing that "Far from losing ground, women gained more in the 1980s than in the entire postwar era before that. And almost as much as between 1890 and 1990." Today more than ever, economic position is a function of education. In 1970, 41 percent of college students were women, in 1979, 50 percent were women and in 1992, 55 percent were women. In 1970, 5 percent of law degrees were granted to women. By 1991, it was 43 percent and has since gone up. In 1970, women earned 8 percent of medical degrees. By 1991 it was 36 percent. The giant strides in education are reflected in accelerated progress in the professions and business. Younger women, The Times says, "now earn 80 cents for every dollar earned by men of the same age, up from 69 cents in 1980.
What of the remaining gap between male and female earnings?
Serious economics scholars who are trained to interpret these data
(including many eminent female economists) point out that most of the
differences in earnings reflect such prosaic matters as shorter work
weeks and lesser workplace experience. For example, the average work
week for for full-time, year-round females is shorter than for males.
When economists compare men's and women's hourly earnings instead of
yearly earnings, the wage gap narrows even more. June O'Neills "Why
the Gender Gap in Wages Narrowed in the 1980's", Journal of Labor
Economics 11, No 1 (January, 1993) reports that females who were
currently working full-time and year-around had, on average,
one-quarter fewer years of work experience than comparable males.
And, the experience gap is particularly important in explaining the
earnings gap between older women and men than that for younger
workers (67 cents for ages 55-64 vs 82 cents for ages 25-34). For
older women, the experience gap is wider than one-quarter and adds up
over time to a sizable gap in years of experience and an even wider
gap in hours of experience. These data are important in understanding
the oft-cited claim of a "glass ceiling" for women. Promotion in
high-powered professional jobs often goes to those who have put in
long hours in evenings and on weekends.
Today, women are 55% of all undergraduates and they are 59 percent of all master's degree candidates. Women are nearly 50% of the enrollment in American law and medical schools. In fact, women now constitute the majority of all graduate and professional students in American higher education.
The claim that girls and women are burdened by low self-esteem is demonstrably untrue. Surveys conducted by the U.S. Department of Education demonstrate thata girls and young women have higher aspirations than their male counterparts.
Eight-grade girls are twice as likely as eighth-grade boys to aspire to a professional, business or managerial career. Twelfth-grade girls are more likely to aspire to get a college or graduate degree than 12th grade-boys.
Another unfortunate consequence of the gender bias myth is that girls' schools and women's colleges (like Mills College) have decided to capitalize on it and to advertise themselves as sanctuaries from male oppression. This is unworthy of them and leaves them open to the possibility that their reason for being will cease to exist when the claims of gender bias cease or prove unfounded.
There is a powerful case to be made for single-sex education, and it has nothing to do with cries of female victimization or male oppression. Research has convincingly demonstrated that students in single-sex schools, undistracted by the other sex, take their studies more seriously.
It's difficult to slow a journalistic phenomenon when it is in
full cry. But sooner or later, the facts will prevail. One hopes.
Work More, Learn Less = Out of Work
Younger
Work-Related Aviation Fatalities
For all aircraft crashes during the study period, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Accident Briefs were abstracted to obtain information about flight purpose, weather, aircraft, pilot, and probable cause. These reports were merged with records from the Alaska Occupational Injury Surveillance System, a database established and maintained by CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which includes information about cause of death, occupation of decedent, and circumstancesassociated with the crash. This study includes all occupational deaths related to commercial, military, and general aviation (i.e., all flying not involving military aircraft, scheduled airlines, and commuter or air-taxi service). For this analysis, an aircraft crash was defined as an incident in Alaska in which an aircraft in motion sustained substantial damage or an incident that resulted in injury or death to an aircraft occupant. An aircraft crash was categorized as occupational if at least one of the occupants in the aircraft was 1) working for pay or compensation; 2) working as a volunteer emergency medical technician, firefighter, or law enforcement officer; 3) traveling on business, including to and from customer/business contacts; or 4) engaging in a work activity in which the aircraft is the work environment. Denominator data for rates were based on 1990 U.S. Bureau of the Census and Alaska Department of Labor estimates.
During 1990-1994, a total of 876 aircraft crashes occurred in Alaska; of these, 405 (46%) were occupational. Overall, 106 (12%) crashes resulted in at least one fatality, and 69 (65%) of these were classified as occupational. Of these, 62 (90%) involved fixed-wing aircraft, and seven (10%) involved helicopters. Nearly all (61 [98%]) of the fixed-wing crashes involved propeller-driven aircraft; 54 (89%) were single-engine aircraft. No occupational fatalities occurred on scheduled commercial airline operations.
A total of 192 occupants were on board the 69 aircraft involved in the fatal occupational crashes; 149 (78%) of these occupants were killed. Of the 149 fatalities, 99 (66%) were occupation-related. The annual occupational fatality rate for pilots in Alaska was 268 per 100,000, 2.1 times higher than the U.S. pilot-specific rate of 126 per 100,000 (1). For all workers in Alaska, regardless of occupation, the death rate for work-related aircraft crashes was 8.3 per 100,000, 27.1 times higher than the U.S. rate of 0.3 per 100,000 (1).
The mean number of persons on board the aircraft was 2.8 (range: one-11); in 23 (33%) of these crashes, only the pilot was on board at the time of the crash. The mean age of the occupational decedents was 39 years (range: 20-68 years), and most (58 [59%]) were aged 30-44 years. In addition, nearly all (96 [97%]) deaths occurred among men. The most common cause of death was multiple impact injuries (48 [48%]), followed by head injuries (27 [27%]) and injuries to the chest (11 [11%]).
The takeoff and landing phases of flight together accounted for 228 (56%) occupational crashes, but for only eight (12%) of the fatal occupational crashes. Most (137 [60%]) of these crashes were associated with unimproved, off-airport sites (e.g., sandbars, mountain ridges, and meadows). Controlled flight into terrain during the cruise phase of flight (i.e., straight and level flying) or the maneuvering phase of flight (i.e., changing altitude or direction) together accounted for 46 (67%) fatal occupational crashes. The most common (28 [41%]) impact sites of fatal crashes were mountain sides and passes.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) defines two categories of flying conditions based on meteorologic considerations. Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) exist when visibility is less than 1 mile or the aircraft cannot be operated clear of clouds or overcast; in IMC, pilots must rely on instrumentation for navigation. Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) exist when visibility is greater than or equal to 1 mile and pilots can use visual cues for navigation. In Alaska, crashes occurring under IMC were 5.3 times (95% confidence interval=3.5-7.9) more likely to be associated with a death than crashes in VMC.
NTSB determined that pilot error (defined as aircrew action or inaction that became a contributing cause or factor in the crash) was a cause in 53 (77%) of the fatal occupational aviation crashes in Alaska. In addition, 23 (33%) of the aircraft involved in fatal occupational incidents were not completely destroyed; however, only 22% of the occupants of these aircraft survived. Reported by: Alaska Field Station, Div of Safety Research, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, CDC.
Editorial Note: When compared with risks for all U.S. workers, occupational aviation fatalities among workers in Alaska accounted for a disproportionate number of occupational fatalities in that state: workers in Alaska were 27 times more likely to be killed in an aircraft than were all U.S. workers. This increased risk reflects, in part, the greater use of aircraft for routine transportation in Alaska. Controlled flight into terrain during the transition from VMC to IMC was the most frequently identified cause of occupational crashes. This transition is a difficult flight task for pilots, and FAA regulations prohibit pilots of single-engine aircraft from flying in IMC while carrying passengers for compensation.
In Alaska, many pilots risk flying into potentially hazardous conditions because of the demand for reliable air service. In 1994, 70% of pilots in Alaska involved in the commuter and air-taxi industry reported inherent pressures in their flight operations, including self-induced pressures, mail-delivery responsibilities, and pressures from passengers, management, and other pilots (2). Approximately half of pilots surveyed reported having flown from VMC into IMC on at least one occasion, and 84% reported having inadvertently entered IMC on a VMC flight. Weather conditions in Alaska can change rapidly, and the vast distances between some weather reporting points often conceal substantial local variation in the weather. However, VMC flight into IMC usually involved poor pilot decision making (3).
The frequency of pilot error in the incidents described in this report underscores the need for the development and introduction of Alaska-specific Aeronautical Decision Making (ADM) and judgement training (3). ADM is designed to assist pilots in making better decisions during potentially hazardous conditions, to avoid situations that require skill beyond their capabilities, and to reduce the number of judgement-related crashes. The FAA has proposed requiring ADM training for all levels of pilot certification in the United States (4).
NTSB has recommended that all pilots use protective equipment to reduce aviation fatalities (5). Helmets, energy-absorbing structures, padding the occupant's immediate environment, and use of shoulder restraints could reduce the number of aircraft-related occupational fatalities (5,6).
This analysis produced a descriptive characterization of the epidemiology of occupational aviation fatalities in Alaska. Additional efforts will be required to assess the association between other potential risk factors (e.g., carbon monoxide exposure, aging aircraft, pilot fatigue, and risk-taking) and occupational aviation fatalities. One important limitation of this analysis was the lack of accurate and reliable denominator data to control for exposure (i.e., flight hours). Fatal aircraft incident rates provided by the NTSB generally are presented as fatal incidents per 100,000 aircraft flight hours; however, these rates are based on national estimates, and these estimates cannot be applied to occupational aviation in Alaska.
In response to this study, the Alaska Interagency Working Group for the Prevention of Occupational Injuries has formed an aviation working group (including representatives from industry and state and federal agencies), to determine strategies for reducing such crashes. Ongoing activities include data collection and dissemination of information to local news media, industry, and educational and flight-safety organizations in Alaska.
References
1. Toscano G, Windau J. Compensation and working conditions.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries, 1995.
2. National Transportation Safety Board. Aviation safety in Alaska:
safety study. Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board,
1995; document no. NTSB/SS-95/03.
3. National Transportation Safety Board. Safety recommendation.
Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board, 1995; document
no. A-95-121-136.
4. Federal Aviation Administration. Notice of proposed rule-making:
95-11, human factors and aeronautical decision making. Part 61 B,
Human Factors (paragraph 28) and ADM (paragraph 29). Federal Register
1995;60:41160.
5. National Transportation Safety Board. General aviation
crashworthiness project: impact severity and potential injury
prevention in general aviation accidents. Springfield, Virginia:
National Technical Information Service, 1985; document no.
NTSB/SR-85/01.
6. Desjardins SF, Laananen DH, Singley GT. Aircraft crash survival
design guide: design criteria and checklist. Vols 1-4. Springfield,
Virginia: National Technical Information Service, 1980; document no.
AD-A093784.
Job Stress, Work Strain Double Risk of
Death From Heart Disease
Investigators found that people who reported persistent stress due to high work demands, low job security, or few career opportunities had the same level of risk for fatal heart attacks as people who smoke and do not exercise. High job stress was also associated with being overweight and having high cholesterol.
"We don't really know if the increased risk for [heart disease] death is due to physiological changes in the body that occur in response to chronic stress or because stress may be a predictor of poorer overall health habits," says lead researcher Mika Kivimaki, PhD, of the University of Helsinki.
While acknowledging that stress management benefits overall health, the American Heart Association (AHA) says there is little direct evidence that stress reduction is effective for the prevention or treatment of heart disease.
AHA spokesman Philip Greenland, MD, tells WebMD that the twofold increase in heart disease deaths reported in this study is modest compared to the increases associated with the big three risk factors for heart disease -- smoking, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol. Research suggests that people who have all three risk factors are 16 times more likely to die from heart disease as those who have none.
"It is quite possible that job strain could contribute to heart disease, but in the absence of these three major risk factors we are not talking about a really big impact," says Greenland, who leads the department of preventive medicine at Chicago's Northwestern University.
"I am concerned that this will be interpreted as meaning that dealing with stress is all you have to do. You can't ignore these other risk factors."
In this study, Kivimaki and colleagues followed more than 800 workers -- men and women -- at a metal-works factory in Finland for an average of 25 years in an attempt to examine the relationship between work and stress. None of the participants had heart disease when the study began, but 73 people had died from heart disease by the time it ended. The study is reported in the Oct. 19 issue of the British Medical Journal.
After taking into account obvious heart attack risk factors such as age, smoking, high blood pressure, being overweight, and sedentary lifestyle, the researchers found that employees who reported high job strain were twice as likely to die from heart disease as workers who did not feel stressed. Workers who felt they had high work demands, little opportunity for advancement, and a feeling that their work was not rewarding were also twice as likely to die of heart disease.
"We have known that stress is something that can trigger heart
attacks in people who already have heart disease," Kivimaki tells
WebMD. "But this study suggests it is a risk factor that can predict
[heart disease death] in anyone."
Source: Salynn Boyles, my.webmd.com/content/article/1674.53277
Helping Minorities Gain Technology
Skills
Collecting Items for Homeless Men
Information source: Transitions,
1-2/02
Workaholic Wives and Their Sick
Husbands
But there's another equally provocative way to interpret his findings - - perhaps best captured, Stolzenberg said, in what he called the "wonderfully amusing title" of a 1970s-era journal article, "Warning: The Male Sex Role May be Dangerous to Your Health."
Stolzenberg's analysis, published recently in the American Journal of Sociology, is based on survey data collected in 1986 from 2,867 adults, including their spouses, as part of the Americans' Changing Lives survey conducted by the University of Michigan. Study participants were interviewed again three years later.
In both surveys, participants were asked to assess their overall health on a scale that ranged from "excellent" to "poor." (Researchers have consistently found that these kinds of general self-ratings are more accurate than a doctor's evaluation, Stolzenberg noted.) The surveys also solicited information about employment, hours worked and other data.
Stolzenberg confirmed what researchers already know: Marriage is healthy. Both married men and married women were significantly more likely to report that they were in good health than single people, if other important factors were held constant.
Similarly, working long hours had no perceptible effect on the health of either men or women, he found. The additional time on the job actually seemed to boost the well-being of most men.
The surprise came when he examined the effect of a wife's employment on her husband. "Fewer than 40 hours of work per week by wives has no effect on husbands' health, but more than 40 hours has substantial negative effect," he reported.
Just how large is "substantial"? It depends on how healthy the husband is to start with. If he reports that his health is between "good" and "very good," and his wife works 40 hours or less per week, then he has a 50 percent chance of reporting that his health is "very good" or better three years later. If his wife works more than 40 hours per week, then that probability drops to 36 percent.
Why might a workaholic wife pose a health risk for a husband? Stolzenberg says a big reason is that husbands and wives generally still have different roles in a marriage -- and maintaining the family's health largely remains women's work.
"Women are trained from childhood to promote health in their families, to manage health, be aware of health symptoms. They also are the ones who are more likely to organize social contact, and pleasant social contact tends to promote good health because it is one of the best stress relievers we know," he contends.
Wives who work long hours, he found, had less time to do things like remind their husbands to eat nutritious meals or take medication, and otherwise manage their hubbies' health.
So is the hidden message that men, on average, can't take care of themselves? Apparently many can't, Stolzenberg said -- or at least not as well as when they have the gentle prodding (some might call it nagging) of their spouses.
An earlier version of his study, circulated more than a year ago, sparked controversy and a brief flurry of publicity after Stolzenberg summarized it at academic workshops. Some observers concluded that his findings argue strongly for a return to traditional sex roles. (One colleague, in a pre-Sept. 11 quip, asked, "So the Taliban are right?")
Others said his findings demonstrated how traditional sex roles have harmed men.
"I don't think it's either one," he said. "There is no reason why things should or have to be organized this way. . . . It would be better if everyone paid more attention to their own health and well-being."
Source: By Richard Morin, Washington Post,
www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A11583-2001Dec7?language=
Fear of Layoffs Raises Men's Blood
Pressure
In a new study, researchers found that besides the traditional risk factors for high blood pressure--such as smoking, inactivity and being overweight--several psychological factors stood out among the 27% of participants who developed high blood pressure over a two decade period.
For men, unemployment, job insecurity and feelings of inadequacy in their job performance were all linked to at least a 50% greater risk of high blood pressure.
Having a "low-status" job was the only work-related factor linked to high blood pressure among women. The women were more likely to be affected by relationship-related feelings such as loneliness--but much of this association, according to the researchers, was explained by the poorer health habits of these women. The findings are published in the May 28, 2001 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine.
The new research suggests that psychological factors affect men and women differently, according to Dr. Susan Levenstein of the Human Population Laboratory in Berkeley, California, and colleagues.
The sex differences in this study may be due to differences in the way men's and women's cardiovascular systems respond to stress, Levenstein's team speculates.
"It may also be conjectured," they add, "that the threat or reality of unemployment could be particularly devastating for men, for psychological and/or practical reasons."
The researchers note that other studies have hinted that men may be more sensitive to "work-related threats to their autonomy," and women to strains in relationships with family and friends.
In the study, the researchers examined 20 years of health and lifestyle data gathered on nearly 2,400 men and women in one California county.
Source: Archives of Internal Medicine
2001;161:1341-1346. news.excite.com/news/r/010529/11/health-layoffs
Woman Complains of 50 Hour Work
Week
Rise and Fall of the Traditional
Breadwinner
There is only one success - to be able to spend your life in your own way. - Christopher Morley
The real measure of your wealth is how much you'd be worth if you lost all your money. - Anonymous
A professional is someone who can do his best work when he doesn't feel like it. -- Alistair Cooke 1908 - NA
 |
|
 |
