> Why business is bad for your health
> Warning. Expansion may be hazardous to your health. For once, we're not
> referring to waistlines, that most visible symbol of the much-discussed
> epidemic of obesity. Expansion in this context refers to a study in this
> week's issue, in which Hugo Westerlund and colleagues report the
> deleterious effects on workers' health observed in conjunction with the
> growth of companies, especially from rapid expansion of more than 18%
> personnel (p 1193).
> At first glance, the whole notion seems curious. The adverse effects of
> downsizing--reductions in personnel--in the workplace not only seem
> intuitive but also are well documented. A recent study showed that workers
> who kept their jobs during major downsizing were twice as likely to die
> from cardiovascular disease, perhaps triggered by work stress. But why
> might it be the case that increasing the number of employees results in
> absence from work owing to long-term sickness and hospitalisation?
> Perhaps the terminology that characterises 21st-century work can provide
> some clues. According to Richard Sennett, author of a tellingly titled
> book, The corrosion of character: the personal consequences of work in the
> new capitalism (New York: Norton, 1998), today's employees are expected to
> be flexible, open to change, take risks, do more with less, tolerate
> ambiguity, view instability as normal, and accept that a long-term
> relationship with an employer can no longer be expected, nor that they
> will benefit from long-term social networks established through shared
> experience in the same workplace. A young American worker with 2 years of
> college education, for example, can expect to change jobs at least 11
> times during his or her working life, a period of time that is also being
> compressed because of prejudice against older workers. And job security? A
> concept that belongs to a former era.
> This re-engineering of corporations may sound progressive, especially to
> shareholders, but the apparent price workers pay is an undercurrent of
> anxiety and diminished loyalty and commitment, their morale eroded by a
> chaotic and often dysfunctional work environment in which individuals are
> devalued or discounted altogether. Modern businesses seem to be
> continually downsizing, merging, acquiring, and outsourcing. But, through
> all this lurching from pillar to post, what happens to the workers who
> actually produce, manufacture, and serve, and whose knowledge and
> experience provide the intellectual capital that underpins these
> workplaces? Surely there are many employers of high integrity, who
> understand that people are their greatest asset, and treat them
> accordingly.
> Unfortunately, many people are all too familiar with rather darker stories
> of contemporary employment: of change for the sake of change, of enormous
> corporations becoming even larger through fear of competition, of constant
> restructuring, of abrupt and nakedly cruel terminations, of capricious
> demands that change the entire character of one's work, and of family and
> socially unfriendly policies and attitudes. Even where the letter of
> employment law is obeyed, there may be subtle or overt pressures to
> circumvent anything the employer perceives as detrimental to the
> organisation, perhaps most especially to its finances. An April 4 New York
> Times article documented the apparently widespread practice of US managers
> altering workers' time records, shaving off hours legitimately worked, in
> order to increase their companies' bottom line--often after being
> threatened with being fired themselves if they refuse to perform this
> illegal activity. Why do they do it? Two explanations cited: "no job
> security at all", and extraordinary pressures "to control costs and
> improve productivity".
> Such work conditions must exact a physical and mental toll on employees.
> So while the findings of Westerlund and colleagues might seem initially
> unexpected, a look at current employment practices leaves little doubt
> that workplace expansion could certainly cause stress and ultimately
> illness and hospital stays.
> What's the solution? Value people over profits? Recognise human capital as
> paramount? These answers are obvious. But given the high-handed, soulless
> treatment doled out today by many employers, it's a start. If appeals to
> integrity and character fail, there's always the bottom line: depressed
> and anxious personnel are unlikely to be productive, and absence from work
> costs employers and society money. The re-engineering of work ought to
> perpetuate fulfilment and productivity in employees, not illness and
> disability.
> The Lancet
>
>
> Ursula Snyder, PhD
> Editor/Program Director, Medscape Ob/Gyn & Women's Health
> www.medscape.com/womenshealth
> Section Editor, Ob/Gyn & Women's Health, Medscape General Medicine
> www.medscape.com/mgmhome
>
>
> T: +1 902 868 1892  F: +1 902 346 2048 (CANADA)
> Voicemail: +1 212 624 3725 (USA)
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> Medscape/WebMD
> 224 West 30th Street
> New York, NY 10001
> T: +1 212 624 3700
> F: +1 212 624 3820
>

-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]

To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname

To post a message to all 1040 subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.

To unsubscribe, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SIGNOFF SDOH

For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]

To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST

To view the SDOH archives, go to: http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html