sou · GMB3121 · 1999-01-01 00:00:00 — But in all sectors the majority of respondents had been in their present post for at least five years. Relatively few respondents belonged to the younger age groups. About in the so- cial services and health care sectors, in social insurance offices and as many as in schools were aged 50 or more. The majority of the staff in the health care and social service sectors tend to be women. The dominance of women among the staff in the survey sample was overwhelming; only about of the staff in social insurance offices and the social service and health care sectors were men. Men were in a majority among school staff, which is presumable due to the fact that the respondents were headmasters. The gender distribution in schools was quite well-balanced, however. It is interesting to note that in social insurance offices and the health care sector – where female dominance was greatest – the percentage of supervi- sory staff was lowest. In social insurance offices this is because the questionnaires were only sent to staff in the local insurance offices. The survey shows a correlation between su- pervisory staff and gender which indicates that fewer women than men held supervisory posts. For obvious reasons, the educational background of the staff in the different sectors va- ried. The percentage of staff who had only attended compulsory school was largest in so- cial insurance offices. The percentage of staff with university or college education was largest in schools, followed by the social service and health care sectors. The greatest diffe- rence as regards education was that between social insurance offices, where the percentage of staff with university or college education was less than , and the other sectors, where it varied from less than to over . However, it must be borne in mind that the questions related to the respondents formal education. Extensive in-service staff trai- ning occurs in all sectors, and perhaps most of all in social insurance offices. The results must therefore be considered in this light. Operational goals, influence on the work situation and in-service training A negligible proportion of the respondents stated that they were completely unaware of the operational goals set for their workplace. However, a small group in the social service and health care sectors – about of respondents – admitted that they were only partly aware of these goals. It may be asked whether awareness of operational goals is lower in these sectors than in social insurance offices and schools, or whether the finding was due to other causes. A correlation analysis indicates that familiarity with operational goals is greater among supervisory staff than among those in subordinate positions. There is also a correla- tion between this factor and a variable that measures the employees scope for influencing their work which indicates that awareness of operational goals is related to influence over the work situation. The proportion of staff who agreed only partly or not at all with the statement that they receive the support they needed to achieve the declared goals varied from about in schools to almost in social insurance offices. Consequently, quite a large number of respondents agreed only partly or not at all with the statement that they received the sup- port they needed. Several correlation analyses were carried out in order to explain why the staff felt that they received insufficient support from their superiors, and they revealed that lack of support has to do with the fact that management does not make it clear what it ex- pects of its staff, is not available when needed and is incapable of running operations in a competent . As regards the need of in-service training, several respondents said that this need was not fully met. A majority of respondents in schools and the health care sector considered that they were offered good opportunities to improve their skills. Less than of the res- pondents in schools and in the health care sector agreed only partly or not at all that they had good opportunities to improve their skills, i.e. they experienced shortcomings in this respect. This view was shared by more than half the social insurance staff and about of those in the social service sector. The proportion of respondents who considered that they only had limited influence, or none at all, over their own work was highest in social insurance offices and lowest in schools. We believe that the reason why this view is so prevalent in social insurance offices is that their work is highly regulated and that the percentage of respondents in supervisory posts was lowest in this group. When it comes to the organizations willingness to try out the ideas and suggestions of its staff, the response pattern was similar to that concerning the possibility of influencing the work situation, i.e. the proportion of respondents who were dissatisfied was largest in social insurance offices and smallest in schools. About of the social insurance staff agreed only partly or not at all that their organization showed great interest in trying out their ideas and suggestions. The corresponding percentages in the other sectors were in the social service sector, in the health care sector and in schools. One analysis indicates that there is a correlation between interest in the ideas and suggestions of the staff and high standards in terms of knowledge, support and management among immediate su- periors. Changes in organization and their effects on attitudes to persons with disabilities A large number of respondents irrespective of sector stated that their tasks had changed in the last five years. The greatest changes have taken place in social insurance offices () and the social service sector and schools (about ), while fewer respondents in the he- alth care sector stated that their tasks had changed (). Few of those who have been as- signed new duties in the last five years felt that this had an adverse effect on their behaviour towards persons with disabilities. On the contrary, over half the staff in social insurance offices and more than in the social service and health care sectors stated that the changes had had a favourable effect on their contacts with disabled clients/patients. The corresponding proportion in schools was . The majority of headmasters stated that the changes had no effect on the way they related to persons with disabilities. We also asked whether there had been an increase in work duties during the last five ye- ars. Depending on the sector, of the staff stated that their duties had increased in the last five years. The percentages were highest in schools and social insurance offices. of respondents in the health care sector stated that they had not been assigned new duties. In social services, the duties of non-supervisory staff had not increased to the same extent as for supervisory staff. One correlation analysis shows also that a broader range of duties leads to a sense of pressure at work. The great majority did not feel that increased duties had an adverse effect on their relations with disabled persons. The most significant effects were reported by the social services staff, one-fifth of whom stated that increased duties had had an adverse effect on their relations with disabled persons. Judging by the respondents replies, staff cuts have a more negative impact when it comes to attitudes towards disabled persons. of respondents in social insurance offices stated that there had been staff cuts in the last five years; the figure for schools was and for the social service sector . The figure for the health care sector was much lower, . One reason for this may be that there have been fewer staff cuts in rehabilitation ser- vices than in other health care fields. About one-third of those who had witnessed staff cuts in social insurance offices and the social service and health care sectors stated that these had an adverse effect on their relations with disabled persons. But only of the headmasters confirmed that staff cuts had had an adverse effect in this respect. Only a small minority stated that staff cuts had had a favourable effect. The majority view was that staff cuts had no effect on attitudes to clients/patients one way or the other. Perception of the work situation The questions about the work situation concerned the respondents assessment of job satis- faction, their workload and their qualifications for the work they were doing. As regards this last aspect, the competence factor, the overwhelming majority of res- pondents in all sectors considered that they had sufficient knowledge and information to cope with their work. did the majority have any great doubts about their work perfor- mance. Nevertheless, of respondents in the health care sector and social insurance offices, in the social service sector and in schools stated that they were very or rather doubtful in this respect. A number of correlation analyses were performed with a view to identifying the reasons for this uncertainty. The results indicate that the employees doubts about whether they performed their duties properly were related to uncertainty about operational goals, the vaguely defined demands of their immediate superiors, changes in the rules, new tasks, the lack of in-service training, vague rules and pressure due to inability to meet clients demands. As regards the job satisfaction factor, there was variation between the various sec- tors, and the proportion of respondents who complained about their work situation was low in all sectors. A relevant question in this connection concerned the element of responsibi- lity at work. Responses to this question were generally positive. Only a few per cent of res- pondents stated that they were not trusted with any responsibility at all. This finding is not consistent with the distribution of responses to the question about the possibility of influ- encing work and the organizations interest in the staffs ideas and suggestions. On the one hand, the staff were expected to take great responsibility for their work, but on the other they did not have much influence over their work situation or much opportunity to present ideas and suggestions within the organization. As regards the workload factor, many respondents felt that they had too many matters to deal with, that their work demanded too much attention and responsibility of them, that they had to deal with great expectations and demands and that the work involved mental stress. stated that they found that their work involved a high or very high degree of mental stress. The largest percentage () of respondents was to be found in schools; al- most half the respondents in this sector stated that the degree of mental stress in their work was very high. Perception of the role of management Almost half the respondents in the social service and health care sectors stated that manag- ement did not make it clear what it expected of the staff. of respondents in social insu- rance offices stated that this was true of their immediate superior. The percentage of headmasters who said the same of their immediate superiors was also high: . A comparatively large proportion also felt that they did not get sufficient support from management. For example, of respondents in social insurance offices stated that their immediate superior was not available when they needed advice and support. About one-third of the staff in social insurance offices, the social service sector and schools, and about half the staff in the social service sector did not think that the manage- ment made the necessary effort to implement changes. A relatively high proportion of res- pondents also painted a pessimistic picture of their superiors appreciation of their work situation. The social insurance staff were most critical in this respect, one-third of respon- dents considering that their superiors did not show any appreciation of their work. Superiors ability to give feedback is illustrated by the question whether they knew enough about the field of work. Two-thirds of employees in social insurance offices had confidence in their superiors knowledge, and more than half the staff in the social service sector agreed. The number of respondents in the health care sector and in social in- surance offices who did not feel that their immediate superiors knew enough about their work was much lower (and , respectively). than of the staff in the he- alth care sector and schools considered that the management was sufficiently knowledge- able. There were differences between the sectors both as regards superiors ability to get things done (make it clear what was expected of the staff and make the necessary effort to bring about changes) and their knowledge, but we consider that the overall picture repre- sents a serious criticism of the management and their competence. Correlation analyses also indicate that the ability of immediate superiors to support and guide their staff have a significant effect on job satisfaction: there is a very strong correla- tion between job satisfaction and support from immediate superiors (i.e. they are available, show understanding and have the relevant knowledge). There is also a clear indication that job satisfaction is greater among those whose superiors make well-defined demands on their staff and make the necessary effort to bring about changes. Perception of pressure at work The proportion of respondents who experienced great pressure at work on account of changes in the rules varied; it was lowest in the health care sector and highest in social insurance offices. In social insurance offices it was the rule rather than the exception. It was also very common among headmasters. Another common reason for the sense of pressure at work was the addition of new duties. This problem was greatest in schools, where it was mentioned by four out of five respondents, and least in the health care sector, where it was mentioned by about half the respondents. Great pressure at work on account of vague rules was experienced by half the staff in the social service sector and two-thirds of the social insurance staff. The incidence of great pressure at work on account of being obliged to reject clients applications or not being able to fulfil the wishes of patients/pupils/parents was slightly less frequent. It was mentio- ned by about half the headmasters and of social insurance staff. This cause of pressure was least significant in the social service sector. The proportion of respondents who experienced great pressure on account of the lack of in-service training varied between about in the health care sector and schools and about in the social service sector, while job insecurity was a less common cause of pressure. Contacts with and attitudes to persons with disabilities In this section we asked questions relating to the communications between staff and per- sons with disabilities and their relatives. In the sectors studied in the survey, communica- tion and contacts are of the essence as they affect job performance, job satisfaction and, not least, clients, patients and pupils. The staff included in the survey had frequent contacts with disabled persons. In social insurance offices, four out of five had daily contacts in some form, in the health care sector three out of five and in the social service sector two out of three. Frequent contacts were less common in schools, although more than half the school staff had contacts with disab- led persons at least once a week. The reason why respondents in schools had less frequent contacts than the other categories is that virtually all the staff included in the survey were headmasters. The survey shows that staff, regardless of the sector in which they work, considered that in recent years persons with disabilities and their relatives have become more aware of their rights and are better at presenting their case, at the same time as they are more de- manding. However, there are differences of opinion as to whether they have become more understanding or more impatient. The conventional wisdom is that persons with disabilities do not make very great demands, accept the decisions that are made and seldom criticize or make objections. Generally speaking, the reason that is given by researchers for this beha- viour is that persons with disabilities have a sense of guilt for being a burden on society, they feel isolated, grateful and dependent. The picture of persons with disabilities presented by the staff categories studied in the survey is very different. The staff are not dealing with helpless, submissive and grateful clients, but with competent, confident and demanding persons. The survey also reveals that the staffs perception of persons with disabilities as more impatient and demanding in recent years tends to be related to whether they think they have jobs that cause stress or pressure because of insecure conditions or because they cannot fulfil the wishes of patients/clients/pupils. Between and of the staff in the various sectors said that they thought societys efforts on behalf of persons with disabilities were sufficient. The highest proportion was to be found among social insurance staff and the lowest among staff in the health care sector and schools. Naturally, it may be asked whether this indicates negative attitudes on the part of certain employees in relation to persons with disabilities or whether there are other rea- sons for these responses. The fact that so many of the social insurance staff replied that re- sources are adequate in this area may, in our view, be a result of the Assistansce Benifit Act that was introduced in 1994, which has made it possible for many persons with disabi- lities to lead a more independent life than before. However, in view of the lack of resources and unsatisfied needs mentioned by some respondents, one may well wonder what lies be- hind the answers given to this question. (SOU 1998:48) The staff were also asked directly whether they thought that persons with disabilities and their relatives often encountered negative attitudes in their contacts with the health care sector, schools, social insurance offices or the social service sector. Respondents in the he- alth care sector often considered this to be the case, both as regards contacts with their own sector (of health care sector staff) and contacts with other sectors (). The res- pondents in the social service sector gave a less pessimistic picture in this respect, although quite a large proportion () believed that negative attitudes occur in the health care sector. Not many respondents in social insurance offices, and even fewer in schools, thought that attitudes towards disabled persons were sometimes negative. Another question concerned the reasons why disabled persons are dissatisfied with the way they are treated by authorities and other public bodies. Many respondents thought that the main cause of dissatisfaction had to do with the conditions prevailing in the public sector; the fact that the staff do not have sufficient time for each disabled individual was mentioned as a common reason by half the social insurance staff and schools and by two- thirds of staff in the health care sector. The shortage of staff was mentioned by half the he- alth sector and school staff and more than of the social insurance staff. The organizations lack of economic resources was mentioned by over half the school staff, of the health care sector staff and more than of the staff in the social service sector. The vagueness of the regulatory framework was mentioned by more than half the social insurance staff and more than one-third of the staff in the social service and health care sectors. The lack of necessary in-service training was mentioned by almost half of the staff in the health care sector and about one-third of the social insurance staff and schools. Fewer respondents mentioned staff attitudes as a common reason for dissatisfaction. of respondents in the health care sector and of respondents in the social service sector mentioned staff attitudes, while and , respectively, believed that the ab- sence of an equal rights philosophy was a common cause of dissatisfaction among persons with disabilities. Explanations involving disabled persons themselves were not generally considered a common reason by staff. However, almost of social insurance staff believed that the unrealistic expectations of persons with disabilities are a common reason for the poor reception they are sometimes given. Only a small percentage of the various staff categories considered disabled persons behaviour a common reason, although two-thirds or more believe that this might be the reason in some cases. Slightly less than half the social insurance staff stated that persons with disabilities so- metimes complained of the way they are treated. About one-third stated that relatives of persons with disabilities sometimes complained. Fewer of the respondents in the health care sector had received complaints; over one-fourth had received complaints from persons with disabilities, but more than had received complaints from relatives. In the health care sector and among headmasters the number of complaints received from relatives (and , respectively) was greater than that from the disabled persons themselves (and , respectively). few respondents in any of the sectors said that they had recei- ved complaints; those who had done so stated that they were a rare occurrence. About of the staff in social insurance offices stated that they had received com- plaints and that in the majority of cases they were about things beyond the staffs control. This applies both to complaints from persons with disabilities and complaints from relati- ves. In the social service sector about half of the respondents stated that complaints, whet- her from disabled persons or from their relatives, were about things beyond their control. Almost as many respondents in the health care sector () who had received complaints stated that they were about matters beyond their control, while fewer () stated that complaints from relatives concerned matters beyond their control. res for headmasters were as regards complaints from disabled persons and as re- gards complaints from relatives. What are these complaints about? When it comes to complaints from persons with disa- bilities a large percentage of social insurance staff (of those who had received com- plaints) said that these related to long processing times. A large number of complaints had also been received for insufficient assistance (), failure to provide assistance () and complaints that the client had not been assessed in relation to his/her individual needs (). Many respondents in the social service sector (of those who had received complaints from persons with disabilities) received complaints about insufficient assi- stance, long processing times () and complaints that the client had not been assessed in relation to his/her individual needs (). In the health care sector, many respondents (of those who had received complaints from persons with disabilities) had received complaints about long processing times and insufficient assistance (). Finally, in schools many respondents (of those who had received complaints from persons with disabilities) had received complaints mainly about insufficient assistance. The picture is similar when it comes to complaints from relatives, but there are some differences: there appear to be less complaints from relatives about long processing times. Furthermore, particularly in the social service and health care sectors, and also to some extent in schools, it is more common for relatives to complain about the lack of informa- tion.