Wendy Jones

Occupational safety and health and smaller organisations: research challenges and opportunities

Abstract Despite the prevalence of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and micro organisations, comparatively little is known about how such organisations approach occupational safety and health (OSH). Research has tended to present a negative picture of OSH practices in smaller organisations. This paper discusses some of the challenges to researching OSH in SMEs and micro organisations and how these challenges can be overcome. It draws lessons and experiences from a qualitative study involving 149 structured interviews, nine short-term ethnographies and 21 semi-structured interviews with owners and employees in SMEs and micro organisations from a broad cross-section of industry sectors in the UK, including construction, retail, healthcare, logistics and agriculture. Data from the study suggest that the established boundaries between micro, small and medium-sized enterprises are less meaningful in an OSH context – OSH practices are influenced more by the culture of the organisation, the type of work being undertaken and the sector that an organisation operates in. OSH practices in SMEs and micro organisations tend to reflect more informal characteristics of such organisations, with more emphasis (than many larger organisations) on tacit knowledge, learning by doing and improvisation. Such practices should not necessarily be assumed to be unsafe or incompatible with formalised OSH.

What is a ‘good’ job? Modelling job quality for blue collar workers

Abstract This paper proposes a model of job quality, developed from interviews with blue collar workers: bus drivers, manufacturing operatives and cleaners (n  =  80). The model distinguishes between core features, important for almost all workers, and ‘job fit’ features, important to some but not others, or where individuals might have different preferences. Core job features found important for almost all interviewees included job security, personal safety and having enough pay to meet their needs. ‘Job fit’ features included autonomy and the opportunity to form close relationships. These showed more variation between participants; priorities were influenced by family commitments, stage of life and personal preference. The resulting theoretical perspective indicates the features necessary for a job to be considered ‘good’ by the person doing it, whilst not adversely affecting their health. The model should have utility as a basis for measuring and improving job quality and the laudable goal of creating ‘good jobs’. Practitioner Summary: Good work can contribute positively to health and well-being, but there is a lack of agreement regarding the concept of a ‘good’ job. A model of job quality has been constructed based on semi-structured worker interviews (n  =  80). The model emphasises the need to take into account variation between individuals in their preferred work characteristics.

Nanomaterials in construction and demolition - how can we assess the risk if we don't know where they are?

This research, funded by the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health in the United Kingdom, has used a combination of literature review, web searching and unstructured interviews with a range of industry professionals to compile a list of products used in construction and the built environment which might contain nanomaterials. Samples of these products have been analysed using Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X- Ray Spectroscopy to investigate whether nanomaterials are actually present and to what extent. Preliminary results of this testing are presented here. It is concluded that there is a discrepancy between the academic literature and the reality regarding the current application of nanomaterials in the construction industry and the built environment. There are also inaccuracies and deficiencies in the information provided by manufacturers which makes it difficult to accurately assess the location and application of nanomaterials within the industry. Further testing is planned to evaluate the risk of nanoparticle release from nano-enabled building products at their end of life by reproducing common demolition and recycling processes such as crushing, grinding, burning and melting. Results of this will form the basis of practical guidance for the construction, demolition and recycling industries to help them identify where particular protection or control measures may be appropriate as well as providing reassurance where no additional action is required.

Managing the unknown – Addressing the potential health risks of nanomaterials in the built environment

Abstract Nanomaterials offer significant potential for high performing new products in the built environment and elsewhere. However, there are uncertainties regarding their potential adverse health effects and the extent to which they are currently used. A desk study and interviews with those working across the construction, demolition and product manufacture sectors (n = 59) identified the current state of knowledge regarding nanomaterial use within the built environment. Some nanomaterials are potentially toxic, particularly those based on fibres; others are much less problematic but the evidence base is incomplete. Very little is known regarding the potential for exposure for those working with nano-enabled construction materials. Identifying which construction products contain nanomaterials, and which nanomaterials these might be, is very difficult due to inadequate labelling by product manufacturers. Consequently, those working with nano-enabled products typically have very limited knowledge or awareness of this. Further research is required regarding the toxicology of nanomaterials and the potential for exposure during construction and demolition. Better sharing of the information which is already available is also required through the construction, demolition and manufacture/supply chains. This is likely to be important for other innovative products and processes in construction, not just those which use nanomaterials.

Nanotechnology in construction and demolition: What we know, what we don’t

Self-cleaning windows, very high strength concrete and thin, super-efficient insulation are just three examples of new building materials promised by nanotechnology, which manipulates matter at the atomic level. But for all their purported benefits, little is known about the risks posed by very small, engineered particles and fibres. Some long and very thin strands might act like asbestos if they are inhaled, for instance. To begin addressing this knowledge gap, the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) sponsored a research team at Loughborough University, led by Professor Alistair Gibb and Dr Wendy Jones, to investigate where these materials are used, how widespread this use is, what the potential risks are and how workers in construction and demolition might manage them. The executive summary of that report, released in January, is reproduced here with IOSH’s permission.