Contents Page: NZJER, 2010, 35(2)
Name

Title

Page
NumberMark Le Fevre

Editorial: Occupational Stress and Employee
Well Being

1-2

Richard Sisley, Marcus A.
Henning, Susan J.
Hawken & Fiona Moir

A Conceptual Model of Workplace Stress:
The issue of accumulation and recovery andthe health professional

3-15Mark Le Fevre & Gregory
S. Kolt

Occupational Stress: Are We All Talking
About the Same Thing?

16-27

Richard SisleyAutonomous motivation and well-being: An
alternative approach to workplace stressmanagement

28-40

Zeenobiyah Hannif,
Felicity Lamm, &Anne Vo

Unhealthy Work? The policy-practice dividein Australian Call Centres

41-59

Vivienne Hunt, Erling
Rasmussen, & Felicity
Lamm

Call Centre Work and Health and Safety
Issues60-75

Jeremy Hayman

Flexible Work Schedules and Employee WellBeing

76-87

Commentary - Occupational Stress andWorkers’ Compensation: Getting out of the
kitchen?

88-96

Nadine McDonnell

Clare George &Mark Le Fevre

Research Note: Stress Management Practice:
Is it Effective?

97-118Erling Rasmussen andColin Ross

Chronicle: February 2010 – May 2010

119-130

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):1-2

Editorial: Occupational Stress and Employee Well Being
MARK LE FEVRE
Welcome to this special issue of the New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations.
Occupational stress, its causes, its consequences, and how both might be reduced continue to beissues of concern to both employers and employees. The eight contributions in this issue cover
the area of occupational stress, linked with employee health and well-being, from multiple
perspectives and, perhaps, indicate some potential ways to reduce the inevitable impact of theworkplace on health and well being.
The primarily theoretical papers from Sisley, and from Sisley, Henning, Hawken, and Moir, offer
somewhat revised views of occupational stress. Sisley introduces the idea of autonomous
motivation, and possible methods to increase this as a new approach to the amelioration ofoccupational stress, emphasizing the role of eustress as distinct from distress in linking employee
well being and motivation in the workplace. Sisley, Hening, Hawken, and Moir, suggest arevised approach to the assessment and monitoring of stress that may help in the assessment of
the effectiveness of stress management interventions in reducing stress in individuals. Le Fevre
and Kolt investigate what it is that workers mean when they say “I’m stressed” in order toestablish some shared core ideas between so called “lay” representations of stress and thedefinitions and descriptions commonly used in the academic literature. These papers help toestablish a current theory base against which the other papers in this issue can be set.
Hannif, Lamm, and Vo, and Hunt, Rassmussen, and Lamm, both look at aspects of employee
well being and stress in the call center industry. While Hunt, Rassmussen, and Lamm find,contrary to most of the papers that have looked at this industry, that employees, in general, enjoy
their call center work and believe it provides a career enhancing opportunity, both papers alsofind a distinct disjunction between the perceptions of staff and management as far as
occupational stress is concerned in both its frequency of occurrence and its severity. Thisdifference in perception has obvious potential negative consequences as far as the practice ofstress management in the work setting is concerned. Hayman’s paper examines the effects offlexible work scheduling and telecommuting on occupational stress and well being. The findings
in Hayman’s paper have clear resonance with the earlier theoretical papers and many of theemployee comments reported in the two call center based papers.
The two final contributions both fall into the review category though from rather different
aspects. George and Le Fevre review the evidence for the effectiveness of current stressmanagement intervention (SMI) practice and find that, though there has been some improvementin the method and reporting of SMIs, many of the concerns expressed in earlier reviews of SMIpractice remain unanswered. Finally McDonnell provides an interesting commentary on theinterpretation of occupational stress in the context of workers’ compensation systems and the
problems which stem from this.

1

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):1-2
It is tempting to draw a number of conclusions from this collection of papers, all looking atdifferent aspects of occupational stress yet also sharing some surprising consistencies. I leave
you, however, to read these works yourself and come to your own conclusions as to what should,
and perhaps more importantly, what practicably can, be done to reduce the frequency, severity,and impact of stress in the workplace. Perhaps I might permit myself one final comment. Stress,
like beauty, seems to exist in the eye (and mind) of the beholder, perceptions are the key, andthere may lay the key to the mystery of what to do about stress.

Mark Le Fevre
AUT

2

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

A Conceptual Model of Workplace Stress:
The issue of accumulation and recovery and the health professional
RICHARD SISLEY*, MARCUS A. HENNING**, SUSAN J. HAWKEN***, AND
FIONA MOIR****
Abstract
Given that interventions for workplace stress have been shown to be effective, and behaviourchange can be sustained over time (Veach, Rahe, Tolles and Newhall, 2003), a model that canserve to monitor the medium and long-term effects of both stressors and stress-management
interventions should prove useful. After reviewing some familiar concepts in the stress arena,
this paper presents such a model, building on existing work (Diehl and Hay, 2010; Ray, 2008;
Selye, 1970, 1976; Zubin and Spring, 1977) and it is thought that this adapted model will be
useful for management personnel, counsellors, educators, employees, and researchers.

Introduction
To create a frame of reference, the paper begins by presenting some common definitions, causes
and consequences of workplace stress and then reviews some existing workplace models. A
model that is used by the primary author is presented and, finally, its proposed effectiveness forworkplace practice and research is considered. To create a focus for the model, specificexamples will be taken from the health professional literature as this is an area that has beenhighlighted as an environment ripe for stress (Cutler, Alspector, Harding, Wright and Graham,
2006, Deckard, Meterko and Field,1994; Henning, Hawken and Hill, 2009; Hooper, Craig,
Janvrin, Wetsel and Reimels, 2010; West, Huschka, Novotny, Sloan, Kolars, Habermann andShanafelt, 2006). The main purpose of this paper is to create a frame of reference for the conceptof stress as it relates to the workplace environment, and specifically the occupational work
environment encountered by health professionals. As such, one specific focus of the stress model
is its link with the concept of the arousal (Bryant, Harvey, Guthrie and Moulds, 2000), as this isparticularly pertinent to the health environment which is often highly charged creating highlevels of arousal (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007; Rick, Acton, and Payne, 1988; Ryan, 2010).

Definition of workplace stressLife in the workplace undoubtedly presents particular challenges and opportunities that cangenerate different types of stressors, and workplace stress can be defined and described innumerous ways. In an earlier review article, Baker (1985) postulated that many definitions ofstress were framed by psycho-physiological explanations around a conflicting relationship*

Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Faculty of Business and Law, Auckland University of Technology.
Senior Lecturer, Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences,
University of Auckland.
***
Senior Lecturer, Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland.
****
Senior Lecturer in Communication Skills and Mental Health, Goodfellow Unit, School of Population Health,
Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland.
**

The authors wish to express sincere appreciation to Dennis Kerins for his valuable input and support.

3

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
between individuals and their environment. This perspective considered the demands of theenvironment in relation to the resource capabilities of the individual. Such models tended toview stress in terms of a dynamic process between physiological, psychological, and behaviouralentities that are cognitively interpreted by the individual (Rahe, 1999). As such, stress is definedin terms of its origin, whether this is from the individual or the workplace, or more likely acombination of both.
The notion of stress is far reaching and can encompass numerous disciplines, such as medicine,sociology, management, and psychology (Pitts, 2007). Consistent with Baker’s (1985) analysis, afrequently cited definition of workplace stress relates to the person-environment fit model (Blixand Lee, 1991; Edwards, 1996, 2008). In this view, problems with stress-related phenomena
occur when the person-environment fit is dysfunctional. This definition of workplace stress isused as the frame of reference for this paper, such that stress arises when undue pressure isapplied as a consequence of tasks or conditions occurring within the work environment during
the course of employment (Pitts, 2007; Blix and Lee, 1991).

Causes of workplace stress
Several causal factors are now discussed, specifically predisposition factors, demographic
factors, job-demand characteristics, leadership and management, working in interdisciplinary
teams and the advent of conflict scenarios. The examples are specifically from the healthprofessions literature.
Person-environment fit characteristics were investigated in reference to the profession of
psychiatry where it was shown that psychiatrists tended to be more neurotic, open and agreeable
when compared with physicians and surgeons (Kumar, Fischer, Robinson, Hatcher and Bhagat,2007). The attributes of neuroticism, openness and agreeableness may be useful for psychiatrists
to perform well within their sensitive profession but, also, may create a predisposition to stressrelated outcomes due to the psychologically demanding nature of their work such as whenworking with patient violence; difficult or hostile relatives or patient suicide (Kumar, Hatcher
and Huggard, 2005). These latter factors are also in line with demand-control theories, whichemphasise the demands of the work situation and the environmental moderators of stress, such as
empowerment in relation to a decision-making process (Baker, 1985). Other studies have also
shown that doctors with high scores on neuroticism and who were more introverted tended to be
more at risk of stress-related problems (McManus, Keeling and Paice, 2004).
A further study of young surgeons in New Zealand and Australia identified stress-related factors
such as being female, working in small hospital units and working excessive hours (Benson,
Sammour, Neuhaus, Findlay and Hill, 2009). However, it has been suggested that females are
disproportionately employed in workplaces that are highly stressed as they are considered lesslikely to respond to conflict and stress with aggression (Barling, Dupre and Kelloway, 2009). It
has also been noted that predispositions to stress are related to mood states, including depressedmood and anxiety (Brief and Weiss, 2002). A study investigating workplace stress amongst
Japanese doctors (Haoka, Sasahara, Tomotsune, Yoshino, Maeno and Matsuzaki, 2010)
indicated that conflict and the hierarchical nature of supervision created stressful environments.
However, there is a twist to this story, as one study suggested that personality factors may also
play a role in selecting particular career choices; more specifically Shanafelt et al., (2009) foundthat about 40 percent of American surgeons surveyed suffered exhaustion and burnout, but
ironically 70 percent of the sample seemingly enjoyed this stressful career choice. Nonetheless,there is good evidence to suggest that workplace stressors are harmful as they affect performance4New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
as well as personal well-being (Wallace, Lemaire and Ghali, 2009). Some causal factors cited in
the medical literature include workload, work hours, fatigue, emotional interactions, cognitive
demands, restricted autonomy, and structural and organisational changes to practice (Wallace etal., 2009; Boerjan, Bluyssen, Bleichrodt, Van Weel-Baumgarten and Van Goor, 2010; Haoka etal., 2010; West et al., 2006).
Similar studies from the nursing profession (McVicar, 2003), have shown several job-demand
factors that create an environment of stress. McVicar suggested that key issues are workload,
leadership/management, professional conflict, and emotional labour. Workload issues are related
to the inadequate staffing of both nurses and administrative personnel, which is inevitably related
to funding concerns. Many nurses leave full-time positions as it is perceived that these positions
require higher levels of responsibility leading to greater stress with no adequate remuneration
packages (Lumley, Stanton and Bartram, 2004).
Leadership and management styles are also linked to employer and employee stress, withpositive and integrative styles such as transformational leadership tending to engender moreparticipation at all levels. Further stressful precipitators linked with the issues of leadership andmanagement are shift work and remuneration (McVicar, 2003).
One key cause of stress identified in hospital settings is inter-professional and intra-professional
conflicts, which are often related to poor communication between team members (Xyrichis and
Lowton, 2008). The emotional demands of the job and working with patients who are in constantneed of attention all play a role in creating a stressful environment (McVicar, 2003; Hooper etal., 2010). Brief and Weiss (2002) cited a study that showed that nurses’ exposure to AIDS
patients was significantly correlated with the cultivation of negative affect and thus, impacted
mood state. This mood state was also moderated by organisational and social support, suggestingthat if management were more supportive of staff the stressful consequences of working withvery ill patients could be ameliorated. In addition, the personal backgrounds and contexts that
nurses bring to the hospital also play a key role in the way they can cope with this stressfulenvironment (Brief and Weiss, 2002; McVicar, 2003).

Consequences of stressPhysicalThe physical consequences of stress are, generally, considered in physiological terms. It wasnoted by Steffy and Jones (1988) that the use of physiological measures to monitor stress was astep forward and complemented survey methods by allowing access to more objective andreliable measures. Some of the earlier physiological measures shown to be related to stress werehigher levels of serum cholesterol, triglyceride serum, uric acid, and blood pressure; and these
physiological measures are considered indicators of stress-related disorders such as coronary
disease and peptic ulcers (Steffy and Jones, 1988). More recent studies have confirmed thatworkplace stressors are associated with greater coronary heart disease risk (Chandola, Heraclides
and Kumari, 2009). Measures in this research to determine levels of stress were linked tosympatho-adrenal biomarkers (plasma catecholamines and heart rate variability) and HPA axis
biomarkers – the post-morning profile of cortisol.

5New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
Psychological and social
Psychological and social consequences of workplace stress are given a wide exposure in theliterature (Barling et al., 2009; Deckard, Meterko and Field, 1994; Henning et al., 2009, Kumar
et al., 2007, Srivastava et al., 2007). Some of the obvious signs of workplace stress identified in
the health profession literature include problems with personal and professional relationships,
insomnia, headaches, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression (Srivastava et al., 2007, Deckard etal., 1994). Owens (2001) also explored the prevalence of sleep loss and fatigue amongst medical
personnel and noted links with stress and to the incidence of medical errors and quality of patientcare. A further study (West et al., 2006) found that self-perceived errors were associated withincidence of depression and burnout (including reduced empathy, depersonalisation, emotional
exhaustion, and lower personal accomplishment).
At the extreme end of the continuum, there is evidence to suggest that job stress is linked toworkplace aggression and violence (Barling et al., 2009). In a recent article (Dellasega, 2009)that reviewed some of the ideas and literature in relation to bullying in the nurse workplacefound (from a survey of over 1000 health workers) that 44 percent of nurses in the United
Kingdom had experienced “peer bullying”. Similar experiences were found in Finland, theUnited States, and New Zealand. Bullying was also noted in a radiographic workplaceenvironment (Ng, Yeung, Cheung, Chung and White, 2009), although in this case the source ofbullying (such as verbal abuse) came from patients rather than peers.

Existing approaches to and models of stress in the workplace
Research in the area of stress has embraced several measurement systems that encompass the useof physiological methods (Chandola et al., 2009), self-report stress measures (Kristensen,
Borritz, Villasden and Christensen, 2005; Holmes and Rahe, 1967; Curbow, Spratt, Ungaretti,
McDonnell and Breckler, 2000; Lambert, Lambert and Ito, 2004; Haoka et al., 2010; Boerjan etal., 2010; Robinson, Clements and Land, 2003), observational measures (Morash and Haarr,
1995) and qualitative measures such as using semi-structured interviews (Kinman and Jones,
2005). These systems are useful when exploring the philosophical approaches or models thatframe stress phenomena as they relate to the workplace environment. Two approaches to
explaining stress in the workplace are considered: unitary approaches (causal versus
intervention) and multidimensional approaches (integrative).

Causal and intervention approaches
Several of these have been proposed in the literature. The first type of approach explains aparticular aspect of the process of workplace stress and often involves a theoretical standpoint,
such as focussing on the causes of stress or focussing on methods of preventing, minimising or
managing stress. Causal approaches, such as the person-environment fit and job demands-control
models, fit this category (Baker, 1985; Blix and Lee, 1991; Edwards, 1996, 2008; Karasek, 1979;
Pitts, 2007). Models of intervention are based on developing approaches that are integral tomanaging stress, which can be considered in terms of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention
systems (Cooper and Cartwright, 1997). Primary prevention refers to ameliorating the workplacestressors that exist within the work environment. Secondary prevention focuses on developing aperson’s level of awareness and providing techniques to cope with stress. Lastly, tertiary
prevention is aimed at treating and assisting persons thought to have suffered from a serious
illness related to stress.
6New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
Integrative approaches
The second type of approach tends to integrate cause with intervention. Wallace et al., (2009)
have provided a holistic model that considers an explanatory phase and an action phase. The
explanatory phase involves workplace stressors and their effect on physicians, which has afollow-on impact on the health-care system. Physicians’ outcomes are also affected bycontextual factors and person characteristics. The action phase considers the intervention aspectof dealing with the issue of workplace stress and outlines potential interventions based on thecausal evidence. Such interventions consist of addressing concerns related to: (1) workplace andprofession awareness, management and prevention, (2) physician self-care and prevention, (3)physician treatment and recovery, and (4) improved patient care and system outcome. Anotherexample of this type of integrative approach for health professionals is Dunn’s conceptual modelof medical student wellbeing. In this model, a ‘coping reservoir’ demonstrates the interplay
between positive input (psychosocial support, social activities, mentorship, intellectual
stimulation) and negative input (stress, internal conflict, time and energy demands) as well as
taking into account personality factors, and possible outcomes (burnout or resilience). It issuggested as a useful model for use in individuals to pinpoint possible areas for intervention(Dunn, Iglewicz and Moutier, 2008).

A conceptual model of stress: Applications for focussing on one element,
integration and measurement
The present paper aims to present a measurement model that can be used to monitor arousal
states over time and to consider these state changes in reference to their impact on workplacestress, specifically in the health professions. The authors feel that this model will be useful for
directing research in this area. It is an extension of earlier models cited in this area (Zubin andSpring, 1977; Selye, 1970, 1976) and considered in more recent literature (Diehl and Hay, 2010;
Ray, 2008). These earlier models used an adaptation framework intermeshed with the notion ofresilience, ‘survival of the fittest’. Selye (1970), in his seminal work on the evolution of stress,
noted the relationship between stress and the symptoms of loss of vigour and feeling exhausted.
It is from the feedback loop between stress and its symptoms that the three phases described in
his General Adaptation Syndrome arise: the experience of hardship (alarm reaction), theadaptation to it (stage of resistance), and finally the make or break phase (stage of exhaustion).
The notion of adaptation and resilience resonates with the health profession literature. A recent
article (McAllister and McKinnon, 2009), reviewed the area of resilience in relation to healthprofessions and their adaptation to the health workplace. McAllister and McKinnon suggested
that resilience has personal and cultural aspects that are required when faced with demanding
work environments. For example, nurses and paramedics are often placed in traumatic situations
that are extremely adverse and thus, have to introduce mechanisms to survive these situations.
McAllister and McKinnon further state that research into the mechanisms involved in resilienceand adaptation in relation to the health workplace is still in its infancy. Consequently, the main
purpose of the present paper is to describe an adapted measurement model that can be used toinvestigate these phenomena in more detail within the health and other environments.
The adapted model is represented in Figures 1 and 2 below. The horizontal axis indicates time
and the vertical axis represents a combination of physiological (and potentially psychological)
indices of arousal, which is pertinent to the health professions given the evidence suggesting
acute and chronic exposure to high levels of arousal leading to adverse stress-related pathologies(Bakker and Demerouti, 2007; Rick et al., 1988; Ryan, 2010). The exact mix of indices is not
crucial so long as it consistently indicates the reaction typically seen in response to acute7New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
stressors. Heart rate on its own, for example, could be expected to follow essentially the same
pattern as indicated in the graphs, and the index mix could be customised to meet the needs ofdifferent research projects. Similarly the absolute values of the rising and falling index at
different points in time are less important than the pattern of responses.
Figure 1. Accumulation of stress over time

As can be seen in Figure 1, a person is conceptualised to have a reasonably constant “normal”
state of arousal when awake, until some event or activity changes it significantly (Selye, 1970,
1976; Zubin and Spring, 1977). Clearly, the hours of sleep are one such event and the so-called“fight or flight” response, or stress reaction to an acute stressor is another; both are indicated in
the diagram. In an ideal world, individuals would have the time to recover fully from thephysiological changes produced by the stress response, as the stressor is dealt with orameliorates, and their arousal index returns in due course to its “normal” state.
However, in many workplace environments, and especially in the medical professions, thefrequency of stressors is high enough not to allow this opportunity (McAllister and McKinnon,2009). A person begins to recover from an acute stress response but has not yet completed theprocess – they have not yet returned to their “normal” state – when another stressor occurs,
producing a repeat stress response. As the figure indicates, in a high stress environment thefrequency of occurrence of stressful events can prevent the individual recovering sufficiently toreturn to their original “normal” state of arousal until they have finished work for the day; andrecovery at this stage is likely to take longer than it would from a single stressful event – anotion of accumulative stress that has been presented on numerous occasions (Kasl, 1984;
Benoliel, McCorkle, Georgiadu, Denton and Spitzer, 1990). If their chosen forms of out-of-work“rest and recreation” are in fact more arousing than relaxing, and if their workplace ischronically stressful, it is easy to envisage a longer-lasting change in arousal state, such that ahigher level becomes their new “normal” state, interrupted only by sleep, or in some cases byalcohol or drug induced stupor. Clearly the extent to which different individuals follow this pathwill depend on a number of factors, including their level of resilience or stress vulnerability(Zubin and Spring, 1977; Selye, 1970, 1976; Diehl and Hay, 2010; McAllister and McKinnon,
2009; Ray, 2008).

8

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
Figure 2. Implementation of relaxation techniques in professional life

Figure 2 indicates how, over time, the use of an effective relaxation practice can reverse thisnegative process and actually lower a person’s “normal” arousal state. The concept is that after asession of, say, Tai Chi, progressive muscle relaxation or Transcendental Meditation, during
which the person’s arousal index will have fallen significantly, returns to their usual activities
while retaining a slightly more relaxed state than normal. Clearly, they cannot perform normal
activities while experiencing the full “relaxation response” (Benson, 1975, 2000), but they can
do so while remaining slightly less aroused than was previously typical for them. Over time,
typically several months, this change can become lasting, resulting in a new lower “normal” stateof arousal – almost a mirror image of the higher arousal produced by long-term stress. Goodevidence from a number of studies, including meta-analyses, for this process in the case of bloodpressure and a range of other cardio-vascular risk factors in response to Transcendental
Meditation and, to a lesser extent progressive muscle relaxation, is provided in a review by
Schneider, Alexander, Salerno, Rainforth and Nidich (2005).
Thus, the model attempts to describe the medium to long-term changes resulting from theaccumulated effects of repeated short-term changes in arousal in response to stressors. Thismodel can incorporate the different measurement systems presented above and aim to be
instructive for interventions. However, as the model is dynamic in nature, it may also create
insight into the accumulative nature of stress-induced arousal and the recent conditions that
impact on the increase in stress. It is ideally suited for the health workplace (and indeed manyother workplace contexts) as it maps out changes that may occur over an extended period of timeand can be used to appraise the temporal effect of working in a stressful or stress-freeenvironment. It can also be employed to monitor stress-induced arousal levels of healthprofessionals and consider the effect of critical incidents such as major management changes.

9New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

Implications for research and well-being
This proposed model of monitoring stress-arousal levels is useful for both workplace practiceand research. Effective interventions are available and a recent article in the New Zealand
Medical Journal (Henning et al., 2009) posed several initiatives that could be applied to the
medical workplace environment to heighten quality of life for doctors and thus, reduce the onsetof stress and burnout. The initiatives include: (1) having a monitoring system for identifying
early warning signs of burnout, (2) promoting and implementing engagement in healthy exercise,(3) developing healthy sleep patterns, (4) creating access to retreats and regular meditation, (5)establishing peer groups and one-on-one support systems, and (6) ensuring close supervision andsupport for junior doctors. These ideas were derived from reviewing the salient literature in thisarea (Bruce, Conaglen and Conaglen, 2005; Child and Old, 2004; Hassed, Lisle, Sullivan andPier, 2009; Huggard, 2003; Krasner, Epstein, Beckman, Suchman, Chapman, Mooney and Quill,
2009; Owens, 2001; Paice, Rutter, Wetherell, Winder and McManus, 2002; Saleh, Quick,
Conaway, Sime, Martin, Hurwitz and Einhorn, 2007) and resonate with more recent research(Hartfiel, Havenhand, Khasla, Clarke and Krayer, 2010). In addition, interventions relevant to
New Zealand need to consider the unique contextual aspects of the New Zealand environment
such as the multicultural nature of the health workforce in general (Suaalii-Sauni et al., 2009;
Alexander, 2008) and doctors more specifically (McKimm, Wilkinson, Poole and Bagg, 2010).
Research paradigms are crucial to investigating these areas. The research in this area is flexible
and can encompass both qualitative and quantitative approaches and utilise physiological andpsychological self-report stress measures (e.g., Chandola et al., 2009; Holmes and Rahe, 1967;
Morash and Haarr, 1995) and semi-structured interviews (Kinman and Jones, 2005). The
measurement model proposed in this study can be used to consider the multifaceted levels ofstress that encompass psychological and physiological factors. First, the model can be used tomonitor self-perceived levels of wellness using self-report mechanisms as monitoringmechanisms (Kristensen et al., 2005; Holmes and Rahe, 1967; Curbow et al., 2000; Lambert etal., 2004; Haoka et al., 2010; Boerjan et al., 2010; Robinson et al., 2003). Second, physiologicalmeasures (Chandola et al., 2009) can be used to gain an objective measures of stress-induced
arousal. External to the measurement model, sociological aspects of wellness can also be
investigated by considering the wider aspect of context and culture (Alexander, 2008; SuaaliiSauni et al., 2009) and it may be that some aspects of this dimension, too, can yield numerical
data that can be used in the model.

Conclusions
The measurement model presented in this paper is an extension of earlier models (e.g., Selye,
1970, 1976; Zubin and Spring, 1977). It suggests that humans adapt to the workplaceenvironment to survive its inherent stressors. However, adaptation may not be a functional
outcome if it leads to vulnerability to stress-related illness and problems with well-being. Thismeasurement model will likely be useful for various workplace environments, but the focus of
this paper was the health-related environment. For example, the authors intend to utilise thisframework for further empirical quantitative and qualitative work in this area, specificallymonitoring doctors’ well-being in the hospital environment. In addition, the first two authors
have already used it in training and development courses (for example, to explain the
cumulative effects of ongoing stress and of repeated use of secondary stress-management
interventions to business and medical students) as it is an inherently intuitive and applied
model that often resonates with medical and business students as it does with both employers
and employees alike.
10New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

References
Alexander, G. (2008). Cultural Competence Models in Nursing. Critical Care Nursing Clinics ofNorth America. 20(4): 415-421
Baker, D. (1985). The Study of Stress at Work. Annual Review of Public Health. 6: 367-381
Bakker, A., and Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resource Model: State of the Art.
Journal of Managerial Psychology. 22(33): 309-328
Barling, J., Dupre, K. and Kelloway, E. (2009). Predicting Workplace Agression and Violence.
Annual Review of Psychology. 60: 671-692
Benoliel, J., McCorkle, R., Georgiadu, F., Denton, T. and Spitzer, A. (1990). Measurement ofStress in Clinical Nursing. Cancer Nursing. 13(4): 221-228
Benson, H. (1975, 2000). The Relaxation Response. New York: Harper Torch.
Benson, S., Sammour, T., Neuhaus, S. J., Findlay, B. and Hill, A. G. (2009). Burnout inAustralasian Younger Fellows. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery. 79(9): 590597
Blix, A. and Lee, J. (1991). Occupation Stress among University Administrators. Research inHigher Education. 32(3): 289-302
Boerjan, M., Bluyssen, S., Bleichrodt, R., Van Weel-Baumgarten, E. and Van Goor, H. (2010).
Work-related Health Complains in Surgical Residents and the Influence of Social Support andJob-related Autonomy. Medical Education. 44(8): 835-844
Brief, A. and Weiss, H. (2002). Organizational Behavior: Affect in the Workplace. Annual
Review of Psychology. 53(1): 279-308
Bruce, S., Conaglen, H. and Conaglen, J. (2005). Burnout in Physicians: A Case for PeerSupport. Internal Medicine Journal. 35: 272-278
Bryant, R., Harvey, A., Guthrie, R., and Moulds, M. (2000). A Prospective Study ofPsychophysiological Arousal, Acute Stress Disorder and Posttramautic Stress Disorder. Journalof Abnormal Psychology. 109(2): 341-344
Chandola, T., Heraclides, A. and Kumari, M. (2009). Psychophysiological Biomarkers ofWorkplace Stressors. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 35(1): 51-57
Child, S. and Old, A. (2004). Resident Medical Officer Working Conditions in New Zealand:
Results of a Recent Survey. The New Zealand Medical Journal. 117. Retrieved August 24, fromhttp://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/117-1204/1118/.
Cooper, C. and Cartwright, S. (1997). An Intervention Strategy for Workplace Stress. Journal of
Psychosomatic Research. 43(1): 7-16
Curbow, B., Spratt, K., Ungaretti, A., McDonell, K. and Breckler, S. (2000). Development of theChild Care Worker Job Stress Inventory. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 15: 515-536
11

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

Cutler, J.L., Alspector, S.L., Harding, K.J., Wright, L.L. and Graham, M.J. (2006). Medical
Students’ Perceptions of Psychiatry as a Career Choice. Academic Psychiatry. 30: 144-149
Deckard, G., Meterko, M. and Field, D. (1994). Physician Burnout: An Examination of Personal,
Professional and Organizational Relationships. Medical Care. 32: 745-754
Dellasega, C. (2009). Bullying Among Nurses. AJN, The American Journal of Nursing. 109(1):52-58
Diehl, M. and Hay, E. (2010). Risk and Resilience Factors in Coping with Daily Stress in
Adulthood: The role of Age, Self-concept Incoherence and Personal Control. Developmental
Psychology. 46(5): 1132-1146
Dunn, L. B., Iglewicz, A. and Moutier, C. (2008). A Conceptual Model of Medical Student
Well-being: Promoting Resilence and Preventing Burnout. Academic Psychiatry. 32: 44-53
Edwards, J.R. (2008). Person-Environment Fit in Organizations: An Assessment of Theoretical
Progress. Academy of Management Annals, 2 (1), 167-230.
Edwards, J.R. (1996). An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit
approach to stress. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (2), 292-339.
Haoka, T., Sasahara, S., Tomotsune, Y., Yoshino, S., Maeno, T. and Matsuzaki, I. (2010). The
Effect of Stress-related Faactors on Mental Health Status among Resident Doctros in Japan.
Medical Education. 44: 826-834
Hartfiel, N., Havenhand, J., Khalsa, S., Clarke, G. and Krayer, A. (2010). The Effectiveness of
Yoga for the Improvement of Well-being and Resilience to Stress in the Workplace.
Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health. [Epub ahead of print]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=2916andfile_nro=1
Hassed, C., Lisle, S.D., Sullivan, G. and Pier, C. (2009). Enhancing the Health of Medical
Students: Outcomes of an Integrated Mindfulness and Lifestyle Program. Advances in Health
Sciences Education. 14(3): 387-398
Henning, M.A., Hawken, S.J. and Hill, A.G. (2009). The Quality of Life in New ZealandDoctors and Medical Students: What Can be done to Avoid Burnout? The New Zealand Medical
Journal. 122(1307): 102-110. [Selected paper in the NZMJ Digest, February 2010, 18, 26-29]
Holmes, T. and Rahe, R.H (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of
Psychosomatic Research. 11: 213-218
Hooper, C., Craig, J., Janvrin, D., Wetsel, M. and Reimels, E. (2010). Compassion Satsifaction,
Burnout and Compassion Fatigue among Emergency Nurses Compared with Nurses in Other
Selected Inpatient Specialities. Journal of Emergency Nursing. 36(5): 420-427
Huggard, P. (2003). Compassion Fatigue: How much can I Give? Medical Education. 37(2):163-165
Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job
design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-308.
12

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

Kasl, S. (1984). Stress and Health. Annual Review of Public Health. 5: 319-341.
Kinman, G. and Jones, F. (2005). Lay Representations of Workplace Stress: What do People
really mean when they say they are stressed? Work and Stress. 19(2): 101-120
Krasner, M., Epstein, R., Beckman, H., Suchman, A., Chapman, B., Mooney, C. and Quill, T.
(2009). Association of an Educational Program in Mindful Communication with Burnout,
Empathy and Attitudes among Primary Care Physicians. Journal of the American Medical
Association. 302(12): 1284-1293
Kristensen, T., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E. and Christensen, K. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout
Inventory: A New Tool for the Assessment of Burnout. Work and Stress. 19(3): 192-207
Kumar, S., Fischer, J., Robinson, E., Hatcher, S. and Bhagat, R. (2007). Burnout and Job
Satisfaction in New Zealand Psychiatrists: A National Study. International Journal of Social
Psychiatry. 53(4): 306-316
Kumar, S., Hatcher, S. and Huggard, P. (2005). Burnout in Psychiatrists: An Etiological Model.
The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine. 35(4): 405-416
Lambert, V., Lambert, C. and Ito, M. (2004). Workplace Stressors, Way of Coping and
Demographic Characteristics as Predictors of Physical and Mental Health of Japanese Hospital
Nurses. International Journal of Nursin Studies. 41: 85-97
Lumley, C., Stanton, P. and Bartram, T. (2004). Casualisation Friend or Foe?: A Case Study
Investigation of Two Australian Hospitals. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations.
29(2): 33-48
McAllister, M. and McKinnon, J. (2009). The Importance of Teaching and Learning Resiliencein the Health Disciplines: A Critical Review of the Literature. Nurse Education Today. 29: 371379
McKimm, J., Wilkinson, T., Poole, P. and Bagg, W. (2010). The Current State of Undergraduate
Medical Students in New Zealand. Medical Teacher. 32(6): 456-460
McManus, I. C., Keeling, A. and Paice, E. (2004). Stress, Burnout and Doctors’ Attitudes toWork are Determined by Personality and Learning Style: A Twelve year Longitudinal Study of
UK Medical Graduates. BMC Medicine. 2: 29
McVicar, A. (2003). Workplace Stress in Nursing: A Literature Review. Journal of Advanced
Nursing. 44(6): 633-642
Morash, M. and Haarr, R. (1995). Gender, Workplace Problems and Stress in Policing. Justice
Quarterly. 12: 113-140
Ng, K., Yeung, J., Cheung, I., Chung, A. and White, P. (2009). Workplace Violence – A Surveyof Diagnostic Radiographers Working in Public Hospitals in Hong Kong. Journal of
Occupational Health. 51(4): 355-363
Owens, J. (2001). Sleep Loss and Fatigue in Medical Training. Current Opinion in Pulmonary
Medicine. 7: 411-418
13

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15

Paice, E., Rutter, H., Wetherell, M., Winder, B. and McManus, I. (2002). Stressful Incidents,
Stress and Coping Strategies in the Pre-registration House Officer Year. Medical Education.
36(1): 56-65
Pitts, W. (2007). Educational Competency as an Indicator of Occupational Stress for Probation
and Parole Officers. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 33: 57-73.
Rahe, R.H. (1999). Stress and Coping; History and Applications. In I. Gawler (ed.). Medicine of
the Mind. (pp. 209-236). Victoria, Australia: Chanel Press Pty Ltd.
Ray, S. (2008). Evolution of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Future Directions. Archives of
Psychiatric Nursing. 22(4): 217-225
Rick, T., Acton, S., and Payne, R. (1988). Acute and Chronic Stress in Cardiothoracic
Anaesthetists. Stress Medicine. 4(1): 3-9.
Robinson, R. J., Clements, K. and Land, C. (2003). Workplace Stress among Psychiatric Nurses:
Prevalence, Distribution, Correlates, and predictors. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and
Mental Health Services. 41: 32-51.
Ryan, C. (2010). Reflective Inquiry in the Medical Profession. In N. Lyons (Ed.). Handbook of
Rreflection and Reflective Inquiry (pp. 101-130). New York: Springer.
Saleh, K., Quick, J., Conaway, M., Sime, W., Martin, W., Hurwitz, S. and Einhorn, T. (2007).
The Prevalence and Severity of Burnout among Academic Orthopaedic Departmental Leaders.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 89(4): 896-903
Schneider, R. H., Alexander, C. N., Salerno, J, Rainforth, M., and Nidich, S (2005). Stress
Reduction in the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease in African Americans: A
Review of Controlled Research on the Transcendental Mediation Program. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality. 17(1): 159-180
Selye, H. (1970). The Evolution of the Stress Concept: Stress and Cardiovascular Disease. The
American Journal of Cardiology. 26: 289: 299
Selye, H. (1976). Forty years of Stress Research: Principal Remaining Problems andMisconceptions. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 115: 53-56.
Shanafelt, T., Balch, C., Bechamps, G., Russell, T., Dyrbye, L., Satele, D., Collicott, P.,
Novotny, P., Sloan, J. and Freischlag, J. (2009). Burnout and Career Satisfaction among
American Surgeons. Annals of Surgery. 250(3): 463-471
Srivastava, K., Raju, M., Saldanha, D., Chaudhury, S., Basannar, D., Pawar, A., Ryali, V. andKundeyawala, S. (2007). Psychological Well-being of Medical Students. Medical Journal Armed
Forces of India. 63(2): 137-140.
Steffy, B. and Jones, J. (1988). Workplace Stress and Indicators of Coronary-disease Risk.
Academy of Management Journal. 31(3): 686-698.

14

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):3-15
Suaalii-Sauni, T., Wheeler, A., Saafi, E., Robinson, G., Agnew, F., Warren, H., Erick, M. andHingano, T. (2009). Exploration of Pacific Perspectives of Pacific Models of Mental HealthService Delivery in New Zealand. Pacific Health Dialog. 15(1): 18-27
Veach, T. L., Rahe, R. H., Tolles, R. L. and Newhall, L. M. (2003). Effectiveness of an Intensive
Stress Intervention Workshop for Senior Managers. Stress and Health. 19: 257-264.
Wallace, J., Lemaire, J. and Ghali, W. (2009). Physician Wellness: A Missing Quality Indicator.
The Lancet, 374: 1714-1721.
West, C., Huschka, M., Novotny, P., Sloan, J., Kolars, J., Habermann, T. and Shanafelt, T.
(2006). Association of Perceived Medical Errors with Resident Distress and Empathy: A
Prospective Longitudinal Study. Journal of the American Medical Association. 296(9): 10711078
Xyrichis, A. and Lowton, K. (2008). What Fosters or Prevents Interprofessional Teamworking inPrimary and Community Care? A Literature Review. International Journal of Nursing Studies,45(1): 140-153.
Zubin, J. and Spring, B. (1977). Vulnerability: A New View of Schizophrenia. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology. 86: 103-126.

15

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

Occupational Stress: Are We All Talking About the Same Thing?
MARK LE FEVRE* AND GREGORY S. KOLT**
Abstract
Occupational stress is of increasing concern for employers and employees. The term stresshas multiple, and at times conflicting, definitions and uses in the academic literature. In
addition very little investigation has related to how employees define stress, and whether theirdefinitions have any relationship to those used by academics. This may call into question therelevance of academic research to those who experience, or must attempt to manage, stress.
This paper investigated managers’ experiences and concepts of stress and finds a core ofagreement between managers’ experience of stress and academic definitions.

Occupational Stress: Are We All Talking About the Same Thing?
Stress, and occupational stress in particular, has become a major issue in the public eye. Quite
apart from the often reported costs, physical, mental, and financial of stress (ASCC, 2007;
Atkinson, 2000; Bejean & Sultan-Taieb, 2005; Cartwright & Boyes, 2000; HSE, 2006;
Midgley, 1997) (ASCC, 2007; Atkinson, 2000; Bandler & Grinder, 1982; Bejean & SultanTaieb, 2005; Cartwright & Boyes, 2000; HSE, 2006; Midgley, 1997) most people in casualconversation will admit to some level of stress, often related to their work situation; 91%
according to Lifeline Australia ("<Lifeline Australia - Stressed Out Australia - Survey Sparks
Call for Urgent - 03jul08.pdf>,"). Since at least 1984 (Murphy, 1984) authors have bemoaned
the inconsistency of terminology and definitions used in the literature, and the problems thiscauses. Some (Doublet, 2000) have even gone so far as to suggest that there is no such thing
as stress, partly because its definition is so amorphous. This may represent a fairly extreme
view but the lack of any agreed terminology or definition is a continuing problem (Le Fevre,
2008; Nash et al., 2010; Nasiri Khoozani & Hadzic, 2010).
Recently there have been efforts in the academic literature to develop better definitions ofstress (Nasiri Khoozani & Hadzic, 2010) and more consistent ways of assessing it (Nash, etal., 2010) albeit in the last case primarily in a military setting. Most of this debate, however,is academically centred. It is inward looking and may have little relevance or resemblance towhat most people mean when they talk about stress. It seems important that someconcordance exist between what academic researchers define as stress, no matter how
inconsistently, and what those who express themselves as “stressed” actually mean. i.e., what*

Dr Mark Le Fevre is a Senior Lecturer at Auckland University of Technology (AUT)** Prof Gregory S. Kolt is at the School of School of Biomedical and Health Sciences

16

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

do people mean when they say “I’m stressed”? Without evidence of some agreement therelevance and validity of academic research into stress for practitioners may be called into
question. The academic literature appears to have very few examples of enquiry into so called“lay” definitions of stress (Dewe & O'Driscoll, 2002; Kinman & Jones, 2005) and those thatdo exist have tended to either be a little indirect in their approach (Kinman & Jones, 2005) orhave used a relatively narrow approach using predefined psychometric constructs (Dewe &O'Driscoll, 2002; Rydstedt, Devereux, & Furnhams, 2004).
The study reported here was part of a larger effort examining the effectiveness of stressmanagement interventions (Le Fevre, 2008). As part of that project, managers were asked
about the nature of their job and workplace to give some context to the study and were also
very directly asked “When you say I’m stressed, what does that mean?” This was in order togive some reassurance that what the researcher was investigating based on academic theories
and models bore some resemblance to what the participants were experiencing.

Methodology
MethodA descriptive qualitative approach was used for this study and the research questions being
investigated were:••

How do managers define stress?
What is the workplace like in terms of demand, interpersonal interaction, and change?

ParticipantsParticipants were 14 managers working in the telecommunications industry in New Zealandand Australia.

Procedure
Participants were recruited through e-mailed requests to take part in follow-up interviews
after the end of the SMI project (Le Fevre, 2008). A total of 66 e-mail invitations were sent toall participants. Of these, 19 invitations were sent to participants from the Australianorganisation and 47 to participants from the New Zealand organisation. All e-mail requests
were followed up by telephone, usually resulting in voice mail messages being left. Seven
participants from the Australian organisation replied accepting the invitation andarrangements were made to carry out the interviews over a 2-day period at the organisation’shead office in Sydney. Unfortunately, 2 of the participants were unable to attend thescheduled interviews due to unexpected work commitments so 5 interviews were carried out.
No other replies were received from the Australian organisation, either to repeat e-mails or tovoice mail messages left prior to the deadline for arranging the interview schedules. Fourteen
participants from within the New Zealand organisation replied, 3 declining to take part and
11 accepting. Of the 11 who accepted 2 later had to withdraw, one due to an overseas transfer
within the organisation, and one due to increased work commitments. No other replies werereceived from participants within the New Zealand organisation either to repeat e-mails or tovoice mail messages left prior to the deadlines for arranging the interview schedules.

17New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

Interviews were carried out by the author either in Sydney or in Auckland at the offices of theemploying organisation for each participant. Notes were taken by the interviewer during theinterviews to record gestures or expressions that may have modified interpretation of theaudio record by adding a further dimension to the communication that occurred at the time.
Notes were kept brief to allow the interviewer to concentrate on what was being said and to
appropriately question and probe. A semi-structured interview format (Flick, 2006) was usedwith standard questions maintaining a coherent structure between respondents while allowing
a relatively free discussion to develop where respondents were so inclined. All interviews
were recorded to mini disk for later transcription and analysis.
Analysis
All interviews were transcribed by the researcher and entered as source documents into
NVivo. Transcripts were read several times to begin the process of extracting themes. An
open coding approach was used to develop a coding framework (Bryman & Bell, 2003; Miles& Huberman, 1994). Two parallel approaches were used to code the participants’ responses.
Initial coding consisted of simply gathering together all the participants’ responses to eachquestion using the auto coding feature of NVivo 7. This process enabled the interviews to beread two ways, both as narratives by each respondent and as sets of comparative responses
question by question. From this joint-structure reading approach more narrow areas ofcommonality emerged, were noted, defined as themes, and used to code responses. Where
such themes emerged later in the analytical process, previously coded material was reviewed
to enable the new themes to be included where appropriate. During this process some areas oftext were coded to more than one theme as sufficient of the responses were coded to retain
intact the sense and context within which the coded text occurred.

Findings and Discussion
In the following discussion it should be noted that the participants’ statements used toillustrate particular ideas often emerged as part of the discussion related to questions thatwere not, a priori, associated with that idea. (e.g., statements referring to high pressure in thejob may have been made while responding to a question relating to other issues).
In the following section some conventions are observed to fairly represent the complexity
inherent in the responses, aid clarity, and preserve the anonymity of participants. All directly
quoted material is within quotation marks and is italicised. Where portions of text haveoccasionally been excised to reduce the length of quotes or remove material not necessary tomaintain the meaning and intent, ellipses (…) are used. Quotes are identified as originatingfrom either New Zealand or Australian managers and, where proper names were given by theparticipant they have been replaced by [Name] in the text for personal names or[Organisation Name] for the name of participant, or any, organisations.
Organisational Context
The two organisations from which the interviewees were drawn were the New Zealand andAustralian operations of the same multinational telecommunications corporation. They sharea significant core set of values and, more formally, policies and standard operating

18

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

procedures despite their geographical separation (S. Gotty, personal communication, May,
2005).
Telecommunications is usually characterised as a high-tech, fast-paced and dynamic industry
which seems to be reflected in the reported characteristics of the two subject organisations.
This is demonstrated in the following quotes.
“It’s a dynamic industry and probably a very dynamic organisation.” [Australianmanager]“… it’s mainly what I was saying about fast paced, dynamic, forever changing,
restructures, moving different departments, different projects…” [New Zealandmanager]“…[Name] has often said- the previous CEO - this is the most dynamic environment
he has ever worked in…” [Australian manager]
Against this background of industry-related dynamism these particular two organisations
appear to share a cultural milieu of high pressure and rapid change. All interviewees
mentioned the rapidity with which projects and priorities within the business could change,
and all also related this rapid change to ideas of pressure and lack of control over outcomes.
These are both factors considered to be associated with occupational stress (Spector, 1998;
van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & van Dijk, 2001). Pressure and lack of control are reflected insome of the following examples relating to the fast pace of the environment.
“…because of the pace of change in this industry: you know, if you don’t keep up with
the new technology you’re dead. Things do change before we’ve even had time tolaunch something and it’s already redundant.” [New Zealand manager]“I think with [Organisation Name] it’s such a fast paced environment…we change all
the time, in fact I’ve never worked in such a fast changing environment before. You
start working on a project and then it changes focus or it stops. You know that can bea really hard environment to work in and I think, you know, that’s why we have sucha lot of burnout here at [Organisation Name] because of the nature of theenvironment.” [Australian manager]“A very simple example [of lack of control] our budget constraints. You plan a thing
and then it can’t happen because of the budget constraints.” [Australian manager]“…for instance I was working on a resourcing project for a year, nearly to the end,nearly to the business, and suddenly it got canned, and that sort of pressure and when
you’ve been working on something and it just changes, and it changed because wedidn’t have the budget, and for good reasons but when you put your heart and soul
into something and then it suddenly changes. It’s that that you’ve got to deal with andyou’ve got to become very resilient and just roll with the punches.” (laughs) [NewZealand manager]
Respondents frequently commented on the effect that the felt pace and pressure in theirworking environment had on their lives, both in their work and private capacities. For
example:19New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27“I used to come in to work and work most weekends when I first worked here at[Organisation Name] like [Name] is doing now. Like he is fairly new he’s working
some crazy hours and so are a lot of people around here, crazy hours, and I used tocome in every weekend and I just refuse to do that now and, yeah so I guess I haveadapted (laughing).” [Australian manager]“I do have periods after very exhaustive and quite difficult meetings sometimes goover eight hours I feel really drained and all I can do is go home and sleep.” [NewZealand manager]“I often get quite anxious, quite nervous on a Sunday night about work on a Monday‘cause in my mind I’m always thinking ahead and thinking OK I’ve got to do this thisweek … I get a bit anxious and I find it really hard to sleep on a Sunday night.”[Australian manager]
Despite the repeated perceptions of pressure and stress one can’t help but be struck by thegenerally high energy and enthusiasm of the organisational members as the following quotes
show.
“There’s always something interesting going on. So it goes, up and down; but I am at
the moment on the upward curve because of the change and I’ve got a new area so,up and down and challenge. And the old one is becoming boring, but as long as there
is something to balance and you’re challenged, well the old boring stuff can stay…”[Australian manager]“I took this role and it’s a challenge for me. It’s a totally different skill set so, eventhough I’ve found it to be very difficult, and handover could have been done a lot
better, it has been very challenging and I am enjoying it.” [Australian manager]“I mean today I’m having a great day and I’ve got an awful lot on, but, it’s like‘great’ ‘cause I’ll just get on and do it.” [New Zealand manager]“I like my job very much. Yes I do” [New Zealand manager]
Every meeting room and most work spaces in both organisations have notices, with thecorporate logo and colour, exhorting standards of energetic and enthusiastic work andcustomer service. Unfortunately given the wording of the notices and the nature of thebusinesses it is impossible to directly quote them without instantly identifying theorganisations concerned. The organisational context within which these managers live andwork seems to be one of frequent change due to the dynamic nature of the industry, with thepressure that almost inevitably goes with such rapid change. This is felt by mostorganisational members interviewed as both pressure to perform and some lack of control due
to relatively frequent project changes and, at times, budget restrictions. Long work hours are
frequently reported by managers as illustrated below.
“Oh yeah, by the time it’s time to go home it’s dark. I mean I’m here ‘till six o’clock,maybe a little bit later; it’s dark.” [Australian manager]

20

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27“… the problem with this one is I’ve worked 60 hours for six or eight weeks so I’ve
got a load of extra time there that I’m probably not going to get back and I can’t
necessarily afford now to take a week off because I’ve got the next bit hard on its
heels and still got issues from the first one … Every year we get busier and that will
just continue.” [New Zealand manager]
Not all managers, however, agree with the idea that such long hours are required by theorganisation as is illustrated by the example below.
“[Organisation Name] creates an environment that is not what I’d call apresenteeism culture, but it’s down to the individual to take that on board. Somepeople have worked in other organisations where presenteeism is the culture and theybring it with them. So although the company supports a different culture it’s down to
the individual to take advantage of that. I know for a fact that some people don’t takeadvantage of that but I do.” [New Zealand manager]
It is possible, therefore, that some of the pressure felt may be self-generated although only
one respondent expressed the above opinion and no other members of the respondent’s team
were interviewed. It is quite possible that differences between the cultures of individual teams
within the organisation have a role to play here. Unfortunately the nature of this sample ofparticipants (there are no multiple members from any team) does not allow this possibility to
be examined.
In summary the respondents’ perceptions of the organisational context within which theywork appears to be characterised by high demand, pressure, relatively rapid change, and somelack of control often related to budget restrictions. Most feel that long work hours are
required though two respondents expressed different opinions. One suggested that theperception of a requirement for long hours may be something that people bring with themfrom previous employers, and one makes clear that they no longer work the long hours they
did when they first joined the organisation having realised that “you don’t actually get any
thanks for that and you need to be smarter in how you work.” [Australian manager]
Yet within this environment there is still considerable enthusiasm and energy for the job.

Participants’ definitions and experiences of stress
All participants were asked what they meant when they said “I’m stressed”. In the discussion
following this question, several related themes emerged that may be described under theheadings of “workplace overload”, “general overload”, and “internally focussed conceptionsof stress”. These were related to different aspects of the way stress was defined andexperienced by the participants.
The following quotes may best illustrate the workplace overload theme.
“… overloaded, too much to do, not in control of things.” [New Zealand manager]

21

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27“Too much happening at once, and I used to have a phrase with a friend of mine,
where an “it's all too much moment”, where there's just too many things happening at
once and it really seems like it's just all too much.” [New Zealand manager]“The expression ‘pushing shit uphill’ comes to mind.” [Australian manager]“I think work overload” [Australian manager]
These responses all reflect a primary concern with feelings of having too much to do, or
perhaps too many different things to do in the work place and are reminiscent of the idea ofrole overload as exemplified by the work of Kahn (Kahn, 1974; Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, &Snoek, 1964).
In terms of the general overload theme, one manager specifically referred to a tendency tovoluntarily assume too many responsibilities in and outside work and another referred
directly to other pressures outside the work environment.
“but usually for me it's about taking on too much and then it all kind of hits all at
once so it is my own fault usually” [New Zealand manager]“not having a good work-life balance, so trying to manage you know a property
outside work, on the committee of, the strata committee trying to make all thesechanges there and do everything at work so I’m not really relaxing at home er,
putting too much pressure on myself. Yeah I guess it’s a number of things yeah.”[Australian manager]
This general overload theme may be illustrative of spill-over where stressors outside theworkplace affect occupational stress, and workplace stressors affect general stress levels
outside the workplace, a process which may lead to an overall increased level of stress bothin and out of the work situation (Leiter & Durup, 1996).
Most participants reflected on a more internally focussed conception of potential stressors
and form the third theme.
“I personally after trying to define stress would think it stress is someone not being
able to meet one's own expectations.” [Australian manager]“I think it means a number of things. I feel probably a great weight of responsibility.
When I'm particularly stressed I can feel that it's almost insurmountable whatever theparticular issue is” [New Zealand manager]“I’d associate with that an uncertainty around certain decisions that have to be made,definitely when it affects myself, but probably more so when it is something that isgoing to affect other people. That would probably be more stressful, more anxiety
creating. That would probably be it.” [Australian manager]
As far as these managers were concerned the prime workplace stressors were centred aroundwork pressure and multiple concurrent demands and, for some as expressed above,
uncertainty surrounding decision making. This latter concern recalls ideas related to role22New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

conflict where managers become uncertain about how to act or make decisions in response toa lack of clarity in their work roles, a situation which, it has been suggested, leads toincreased stress (Rizzo, House, & Lirtzmann, 1970). Most respondents also did not closely
distinguish between stress and stressor in their responses to the initial question. This lack of
distinction is perhaps best illustrated by the single reply below, which contains references toexternal pressure and demand, emotional response, and physiological response in a single
answer to the initial stimulus question.
“It's usually just things flying around too much I found too sometimes it’s can’t
concentrate. I found that a bit last week, when I had lots of projects to manage and I
had lots of people coming to me to ask questions and stuff. I'd start something andthen forget what I was doing, be easily diverted into something else. I have on
occasions felt physical, like a couple of occasions when you know, you can't take a
deep breath it's hard to breathe and I guess the other one is you sort of feel more
emotion. I had one like that last week, the really horrible day lots and lots of emotions
running really hot amongst the whole team so I found that I got more angry. And
when I left a particular meeting, I felt quite emotional. I sort of could feel the tears
coming and I don't do that. Those are the things, but usually it is too many things
going on in my head” [New Zealand manager]
When it came to describing their experience of stress participants’ responses covered various
aspects including emotional and physiological responses, perceived cognitive impairment
such as confusion or inability to concentrate, and some behavioural patterns, often in
combinations. Some examples are summarised in Table 1.
The literature concerning non-academic and non-professional interpretations of stress isrelatively sparse (Kinman & Jones, 2005) but it is interesting to note some parallels between
the findings of this study with earlier work, especially the most closely related study ofKinman and Jones. In a similar manner to the current study, Kinman and Jones wereinterested to find what people meant when they said they were stressed. Whereas in thecurrent study that question was posed quite directly “When you say ‘I’m stressed’ what doesthat mean?”, Kinman and Jones were a little more indirect. They asked six questions in asemi-structured interview approach with question one “What do you think the term
‘occupational stress’ means?” (Kinman & Jones, 2005, p. 107) being their slightly less directquestion. The authors specifically stated that they wished to elicit their interviewees’ opinion
on the concept of stress in general rather than their personal, first hand, experiences thereof.
Despite the differences in approach and the potential influence of recent stress management
training and psychometric survey on the current sample there are strong parallels in thefindings.
A third of Kinman and Jones’ (2005) interviewees conceptualised occupational stress as
negative stimuli such as work overload whereas all interviewees in the current study regarded
overload as a prime stress while also acknowledging other more internal aspects such as “agreat weight of responsibility” and uncertainty as contributors to a stress response.

23

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

Table 1: Participants’ descriptions of their experiences of stress with indications ofemotional (E), physiological (P), cognitive (C), and behavioural (B) reference
Quote
E P C
“It could mean that I’m stressed because I just don’t know what to do next. I’ve got x
x
all these things in my head that I know I need to do and I just can’t clearly pick one
out and do it. Or I’ll start doing it … I did it yesterday. I started doing something,
did something else, did something else, having about five different conversations
with people all at the same time em, and like handling three or four tasks. And
yeah, multitasking’s great but there comes a point where I’m saying “Am I really
actually getting anything out of this?” I’m just expending my energy on it and I’m
not getting anything back.” and “Yeah the whole not being able to pinpoint one
thing, not being able to focus. And maybe being a bit agitated and finger tappingand you know that would be a physical attribute of it and sometimes … I don’t likehuffers, but sometimes I’ll have a huff.” and “Just annoyed, just like I know it
doesn’t have to be like this. If it’s someone else that’s put this upon me well that’s
what I hate, but it’s just general annoyedness pissed-off-ness.” [Australianmanager]“Em, I think, a number of things … you often em … for me it’s more of a physical x x x
thing. I can feel it in my body very quickly. I get flushed, (giggled and flushed)tense in my shoulders em, my heart starts to race, em yeah it’s a very physicalreaction to me. I just get very anxious em, my mind becomes a bit cloudy, I startworking really quickly, and em, yeah it’s just a feeling of ‘Oh shit!’ (laughs) yeah.
You just, you just don’t know where to start and you just feel overwhelmed andwhat that must do to your body is just; yeah!.” [Australian manager]“What would that translate to? Probably a typical sensation I would be agitated I x x x
would feel a bit fuzzy in the head, I would probably feel like my blood pressure was
growing up I would feel a bit of pumped up like that. Maybe some other things likea tightness in the neck or the back something like that. And from a mental point ofview I'd say confusion to a certain extent, just being unsure of everything... is clear
in your head, and possibly it leads to a kind of procrastination where there's somuch to do what you do first?” [New Zealand manager]“I think in the first instance it's probably a little bit of anger that you're so busy, x
but I think after that it would probably turn the other way and become oppressive
because you would feel that you, well I would feel that I'm not performing to thebest of my ability so I'd be angry but also distressed and perhaps a little bit
depressed about it.” [Australian manager]“Okay! The symptoms are that inability to focus on one thing plus the feeling of x x x
being out of control kind of a drowning feeling sometimes and increased pulse evenso physical manifestations sometimes even kind of a cold sweat but not quite to then’th degree just very slight.” [New Zealand manager]“There are certain things I do, that I only do in a stressful situation and if I see x
myself doing them I know that I'm stressed: obsessive things, repeating things. If I
ever see myself doing that then I know. Things like shut the car three times andmake sure it is locked, not be happy with something I've written down from notes
and just rewrite it there's really no need to do that, I'll find that I'm preoccupied
with how much I've got ahead of me.” [New Zealand manager]“Where stress for me comes into is when I feel there is little moments where you're xxjust holding on just by the tips of the fingers and then suddenly you don't feelanything (gesturing with fingertips, hands clawed) and you think ‘ shit am I falling,
24

B
x

x

x

x

x

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

am I finding something else.’ And that's exactly how it feels to me and thosesituations are quite simply I don't know what's next, I don't know my diary, I don't
know where things are at, I don't know what stage people are working on things.
It's usually very much a light touch approach when you feel that you haven't got
that, that you think wow! Stop. I've got to go all the way back and re-establish allthat again so I can get my anchor point again, and then I can still just hold on with
fingers I don't need to hold on tight I just need to hold on with fingers that's fine.
That's when I feel stressed is when I just don't have that certainty of just knowing
what's generally going on.” [New Zealand manager]“When I was younger and really worked way too hard I remember driving homeand vomiting in my own lap because I was so stressed and tired and exhausted and
I was about 30 then, that when I was about the worst.” [New Zealand manager]xThose interviewees of Kinman and Jones who conceptualised occupational stress as primarilya response to external stimuli (20% of their sample) showed a range of ways of describing the
response, which Kinman and Jones categorised as physical responses (e.g., departure fromphysical health), cognitive responses (e.g., inability to think clearly), affective responses(e.g., departure from optimum psychological functioning), and as a combination of all ofthese. As shown in Table 1 and elsewhere in the current study, a similar complex multifaceted concept seems to underpin the responses given by this group of corporate managers.
Similarly to Kinman and Jones’ findings, participants in the current study often gave
responses that contained aspects of some or all of emotional, physiological, cognitive, or
behavioural interpretations of stress.
Other researchers (Dewe & O'Driscoll, 2002; Rydstedt, et al., 2004) have also investigated
non-academic interpretations and concepts of occupational stress. Rydstedt et al.
investigated the relationship between lay theories of stress and resulting distress in alongitudinal study and found a small but significant effect in that beliefs regarding the causes
and alleviators of stress were related to longer-term perceptions of mental stress. Dewe andO’Driscol were more directly concerned with managers’ conceptions of stress and how they
related to the actions managers may take to reduce stress in their organisations. The findings
from this study suggested that individuals who perceived they had little control over stressfactors in their workplace were more likely to consider stress and its management as amanagerial responsibility than as an individual responsibility. These studies took a, perhaps,
more narrow stance due to the prime use of psychometric instruments, with their predefinedconstructs, to elicit responses regarding stress rather than the more open approach of Kinman
and Jones (2005), though Dewe and O’Driscol did also employ some more open questions intheir survey. Kinman and Jones employed semi-structured interviews to elicit lay
representations of work stress.

25

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

Conclusion
In summary it would seem clear that despite Doublet’s (2000) claim that there is no suchthing as stress, managers, at least these managers, certainly share a core perception that stressnot only exists but that they experience it. That what they experience is indeed both complex
and difficult to define is also clear, however there does appear to be a common core shared
between these “lay” concepts and academic constructs of stress as shown by the themes thatemerged in this study. i.e. stress is experienced as physical manifestations as well as
psychological and emotional states, and behavioural outcomes often with little differentiation
between these different aspects. The academic use of the term stress to refer to environmental
stimulus, psychological and physiological and psychological manifestation, and behavioural
outcome is therefore reflected in these managers’ experience. Perhaps Doublet (2000) has apoint and a new terminology is required to replace such an ill-defined term. In the meantime,
however, there does appear to be general agreement between academic and non-academic
concepts of stress even though that agreement encompasses considerable confusion.

References
ASCC. (2007). Compendium of workers' compensation statistics Australia 2004 - 05.
Australian Government Retrieved from http://www.ascc.gov.au/ascc/AboutUs/Publications/
StatReports/CompendiumofWorkersCompensationStatistics2004to2005.htm
Atkinson, W. (2000). Managing; The American Institute of Stress reports that stress costs US
businesses between $200- and $300-billion a year in lost productivity, increased workers'
compensation claims, increased turnover, and increased health-care. Electrical, 214(6), 41.
Bejean, S., & Sultan-Taieb, H. (2005). Modeling the economic burden of diseases imputable
to stress at work. European Journal of Health Economics, 50, 16-23.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2003). Business research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cartwright, S., & Boyes, R. F. (2000). Taking the pulse of executive health in the U.K. /Executive commentary. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(2), 16.
Dewe, P., & O'Driscoll, M. (2002). Stress management interventions: What do managers
actually do? Personnel Review, 31(1/2), 143.
Doublet, S. (2000). The Stress Myth. Sydney: Ipsilon Publishing.
Flick, U. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). London: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (2006). Stress-related and psychological disorders
Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/stress.htm
Kahn, R. L. (1974). Conflict, ambiguity, and overwork: three elements in job stress. In A.
McClean (Ed.), Occupational stress (pp. 40-59). Springfield IL: Thomas.
26

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):16-27

Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., & Snoek, J. D. (1964). Organizational stress:
studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Kinman, G., & Jones, F. (2005). Lay representations of workplace stress: What do people
really mean when they say they are stressed? Work & Stress, 19(2), 101-120.
Le Fevre, M. (2008). Somatic and Cognitive Stress Management Techniques: Their Effect on
Measures of Stress and Competency in Managers. PhD, Auckland University of Technology,
Auckland. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10292/374
Leiter, M. P., & Durup, J. (1996). Work, home and in-between: A longitudinal study of
spillover. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 29-47.
Lifeline Australia - Stressed Out Australia - Survey Sparks Call for Urgent - 03jul08.pdf>.
Retrieved from http://www.lifeline.org.au/learn_more/media_centre/media_releases/
2008/stressed_out_australia_-_survey_sparks_call_for_urgent_change[13/07/2010 11:52:02
AM]
Midgley, S. (1997). Pressure points (managing job stress). People Management, 3(14), 36-38.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Murphy, L. R. (1984). Occupational stress management: A review and appraisal. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 57, 1-15.
Nash, W. P., Vasterling, J., Ewing-Cobbs, L., Horn, S., Gaskin, T., Golden, J., . . . Lester, P.
(2010). Consensus Recommendations for Common Data Elements for Operational StressResearch and Surveillance: Report of a Federal Interagency Working Group. Archives ofPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(11), 1673-1683. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.06.035
Nasiri Khoozani, E., & Hadzic, M. (2010). Designing the human stress ontology: A formal
framework to capture and represent knowledge about human stress. Australian Psychologist,
45(4), 258-273. doi: 10.1080/00050061003664811
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzmann, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex
organizations. Administrative Sciene Quarterly, 15(2), 150-163.
Rydstedt, L. W., Devereux, J., & Furnhams, A. F. (2004). Are lay theories of work stressrelated to distress? A longitudinal study in the British workforce. Work & Stress, 18, 245254.
Spector, P. E. (1998). A control theory of the job stress process. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.),
Theories of organizational stress (pp. 153-169). New York: Oxford University Press.
van der Klink, J. J. L., Blonk, R. W. B., Schene, A. H., & van Dijk, F. J. H. (2001). The
benefits of interventions for work-related stress. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 270.

27

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Autonomous motivation and well-being: An alternative approach toworkplace stress management
RICHARD SISLEY∗
Abstract
Task or job autonomy has long been recognised as one of the factors that promote eustress in theworkplace. However, it can also be associated with increased workload and consequent distress.
This article proposes that the much broader construct of autonomous motivation, as understoodfrom a Self-Determination Theory perspective, can provide a comprehensive approach to stressmanagement that avoids these dangers. Strong empirical evidence is presented that thefacilitation of autonomous motivation in a variety of ways promotes individual well-being andhence eustress, to the benefit of both employer and employers.

Introduction
The direct causes of workplace stress, in terms of work overload and inadequate organisational
and/or personal resources have been well-described (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007; Colligan and
Higgins, 2005). More specifically, the causes of distress and eustress (‘negative’ and ‘positive’stress respectively), have been described, with a central role for individual perception in
distinguishing between them (Lefevre, Matheny and Kolt, 2003).
Among other factors, job autonomy has been well established as a means to reduce job distress.
For example, Rousseau, Salek, Aube and Morin (2009) found that perceptions of poor procedural
justice were less likely to lead to psychological distress in the presence of work autonomy; Van
Yperen and Hagedoorn (2003) found in a survey of nurses that job control lessened fatigue, andKalleberg, Nesheim and Olsen (2009) found job autonomy and participation in decision making
reduced stress in a sample of Norwegian workers.
Bakker and Demerouti (2007) note that job characteristics, such as decision latitude, an
important variable in Karasek’s (1979, 1998) demand-control model of job strain, satisfy theneed for autonomy, one of the three basic human needs according to Self-Determination Theory(Gagne and Deci, 2005; Ryan and Deci, 2000a, 2002). The other two fundamental needs – forcompetence and relatedness – can similarly be satisfied by resources such as constructive
feedback on performance, and social support, which “agrees with Hackman and Oldham (1980)
job characteristics theory that emphasizes the motivational potential of job resources at the task
level, including autonomy, feedback, and task significance” (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007: 312).
However, the concept of autonomy used both in the research on causes of workplace distress andin theoretical models like those of Karasek (1979, 1998) and of Bakker and Demerouti (Bakker
and Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner and Schaufeli, 2001) invariably refers,
perhaps not surprisingly, to job or task autonomy, i.e. the degree of latitude an employee has indetermining how they will perform the tasks that constitute their job.

∗

Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Faculty of Business and Law, Auckland University of Technology

28

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40
As others have noted, increased task or job autonomy does not always necessarily reduce
distress, and can, indeed, increase it (Kashefi, 2009; Parker and Sprigg, 1999; Van Yperen and
Hagedoorn, 2003). In some cases, its provision can be seen as a control mechanism (Graham,
1995; Lincoln and Kalleberg, 1990) and exploitative (Godard, 2004; Osterman, 2000). The
effects of job or task autonomy are also likely to vary as a function of individual differences,with it having a beneficial effect on those who are autonomously motivated as a trait (see below)
but not on those who are more control motivated (less self-determined) (Fernet, Guay and
Senecal, 2004).
This article argues that autonomous motivation, as understood by Self-Determination Theory(Gagne and Deci, 2005; Ryan and Deci, 2000b, 2002), can act to reduce distress and promoteeustress and well-being in a number of ways above and beyond the effects of simple task
autonomy – ways that perhaps run less risk of becoming exploitative.

Autonomous Motivation, Well-Being and Eustress: definitions
It seems reasonable to construe distress as low or absent well-being. In other words, what
promotes well-being is likely also to promote eustress.
There are several related and overlapping constructs of well-being. For example, the contrast
between hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being (Ryan and Deci, 2000a) closely parallels
that between Subjective Well-Being and Psychological Well-Being (Keyes, Shmotkin and Ryff,
2002). Similarly, more passive forms of happiness or contentment are distinguished from vitality(Nix, Ryan, Manly and Deci, 1999). However, all these constructs reflect positive states of being
and all have been associated more strongly with autonomous as opposed to controlled
motivation.
The constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are well-known and may be defined in thework context as follows:“intrinsic motivation: the motivation to engage in work primarily for its own sake,because the work itself is interesting, engaging , or in some way satisfying” and“extrinsic motivation: the motivation to work primarily in response to something apartfrom the work itself, such as reward or recognition or the dictates of other people”(Amabile, Hill, Hennessey and Tighe, 1994:950).
In the framework of Self-Determination Theory (Gagne and Deci, 2005; Ryan and Deci, 2000b,
2002), autonomous motivation includes both intrinsic motivation and well-internalised (or“integrated”) extrinsic motivation, and is contrasted with controlled motivation consisting of
external motivation (traditional extrinsic motivation, external to the organism) and “introjected”
motivation, which “involves people taking in an external contingency, demand or regulation, but
not accepting it as their own” (Deci and Ryan, 2008:16).1
The motivation to perform a particular action may be clearly autonomous or controlled, but also
at the trait level, an individual can be described as, generally, more inclined to be autonomously
than control motivated, or vice versa, as an individual difference characteristic, and individuals
will vary in how strongly they can be thus typified.

29

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40
In the literature reviewed below, some studies refer to intrinsic motivation and others toautonomous motivation which, as noted, also includes well-internalised forms of extrinsic
motivation. In every case, the extrinsic or controlled motivation they are contrasted with is either
entirely external or a combination of external and poorly internalised “introjected” motivation, so
there is no overlap between the two broad categories of motivation.2

Autonomous motivation increases well-being
A tendency toward more intrinsic as opposed to extrinsic motivation is associated with moretrusting, empathic and stable relationships (Kasser and Ryan, 2001; Sheldon and Kasser, 1995),
whereas a more extrinsic motivational orientation is linked with Machiavellianism (McHoskey,1999). Striving for a goal for self-determined reasons, or to help bring about intrinsic rather than
extrinsic higher level goals, is associated with greater well-being and predicts positive dailymood (Sheldon and Kasser, 1995). Pursuit of autonomous rather than controlled goals increases
happiness both in its hedonic form and its eudaemonic (self-realisation) form, but only the latter
leads to adaptive coping and a consequent reduction in stress and to improved physical health(Miquelon and Vallerand, 2008).
A closer analysis reveals that both what you strive for (intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents)
and why you pursue them (autonomous or controlled motives) independently affect well-being(Sheldon, Ryan, Deci and Kasser, 2004). For example, although both are extrinsic, purchases
made with the intention of acquiring a life experience make people happier than purchases ofmaterial possessions (Van Boven and Gilovich, 2003). Koestner, Lekes, Powers and Chicoine(2002) showed that progress towards goal attainment is associated with positive affect anddecreased negative affect, but actual attainment of goals tends only to enhance well-being if thegoals are intrinsic, not extrinsic (Koestner, 2008; Sheldon and Kasser, 1998). In a study by
Niemiec, Ryan and Deci (2008), the attainment of intrinsic aspirational goals was associatedwith psychological health and well-being, but attainment of extrinsic goals was related to illbeing.
This contrast is visible both at the trait and the state levels. Experimentally induced states ofautonomous motivation enhance subjective vitality (Moller, Deci and Ryan, 2006; Nix et al.,
1999; Ryan and Deci, 2008), and people with higher traits of autonomy and competence tend toreport greater subjective well-being (Sheldon, Ryan and Reis, 1996). This is likely to translate
into more positive behaviour towards other people. For instance, an autonomous orientation in
medical students was associated with higher recognition of the importance of empathy, patientcenteredness and sensitivity to patients’ psychological and social needs, and an increase inautonomous learning predicted both an increase in these psychosocial beliefs and in perceived
competence (Williams and Deci, 1996).
Intrinsically motivated states, and especially the “flow” experience that can occur during
intrinsically motivated engagement in an activity (Csickszentmihalyi, 1990, 1997;
Csikszentmihalyi, Abuhamdeh, and Nakamura, 2005), are pleasurable experiences inducing
positive affect. Hence, we can expect that those experiencing such states more often (i.e. those
who are strongly intrinsically motivated as a trait) will exhibit improved health. This is likely
because positive affect has been shown to have a direct positive influence on physiology,enhancing the immune, cardiovascular and digestive systems (Salovey, Rothman, Detweiler, andSteward, 2000). Similarly positive beliefs such as a sense of meaning, internal locus of control,and optimism, that tend to be associated with autonomous motivation, have physical healthbenefits (Taylor, Kemeny, Bower, Gruenewald and Reed, 2000), and in the case of internal locus
30

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40
of control have also been associated with better job performance and greater job satisfaction(Chen and Silverthorne, 2008).
This expectation has been confirmed. Self-determined goal striving and the pursuit of intrinsic
rather than extrinsic higher goals have indeed proved to be associated with greater physicalhealth (Sheldon and Kasser, 1995) and fewer physical symptoms (Kasser and Ryan, 1996), andgreater personal autonomy is associated with decreased mortality among nursing home residents(Kasser and Ryan, 1999). Exercise frequency and regularity were greater in older adults who
were autonomously motivated, interestingly more so than when they were motivated by the needfor stress management! (Dacey, Baltzell and Zaichkowsky, 2008).
Thus, there is substantial and growing evidence that autonomous motivation, in both state andtrait form, is associated with a number of psychological, emotional, behavioural and physicalhealth benefits in comparison with controlled motivation (Kasser, 2002). In short, it is associatedwith well-being across a variety of parameters and hence with reduced distress.

Autonomous motivation and work performance
Historically, the evidence for a link between work performance and either intrinsic job
satisfaction (Hosie, Sevastos and Cooper, 2007) or intrinsic motivation generally (cf. Kuvaas,
2006 with Hechanova, Alampay and Franco, 2006, and Suh and Shin, 2006) has been weak andinconsistent. However, several recent studies have pointed more strongly to a positive
relationship.
Coaches’ autonomy support was shown by Gillet, Vallerand, Amoura and Baldes (2010) to
improve sporting performance (judo). In a university setting, autonomous motivation was
associated with better grades (Black and Deci, 2000) and with depth of processing and test
performance (Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon and Deci, 2004). In the non-profit sector,
Grant (2008) found the positive connection between the desire to help others (pro-social
motivation) and persistence, performance and productivity in doing so was greatly enhanced by
the presence of intrinsic motivation. As noted earlier, the highly internal locus of control
associated with autonomous motivation leads both to less job stress and to better performance(Chen and Silverthorne, 2008), and Fernet et al., (2004) found autonomous motivation led tobetter work productivity and reduced burnout. Similarly, Rubino, Luksyte, Perry and Volpone(2009) found loss of intrinsic motivation fully mediated the link between poor perceived jobperson fit and the inefficacy aspect of burnout. In a test of the “happy productive worker thesis”,
Hosie et al., (2007) found self-rated affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction predicted
managers’ performance across a range of dimensions.
Taking these findings as a whole, there is increasingly strong evidence that autonomous
motivation not only improves well-being in a variety of ways, which have direct stress-reduction
effects, but also improves performance in a number of contexts. Improved performance not only
rewards employers but usually also reduces, or at least satisfies, performance pressure (jobdemands) on employees, providing an additional indirect path to stress reduction.

31

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Implications for staff selection and task assignment: the importance of choice
Task autonomy satisfies the need for autonomy with regard to how one does the job.
Autonomous motivation, however, can also be a factor in whether one chooses to do thatparticular job, in other words an employee’s decision to apply for a particular position.
This clearly has implications for recruitment and selection, and also for assignment of employees
to specific tasks. Those working on jobs, or in organisations, for which they feel some valuebased identification (i.e. identified or integrated self-regulation in the SDT schema), will
experience autonomous motivation for the work, with the likelihood of the stress-reducing
benefits described in the previous sections.
Similarly, where it is possible to assign employees, or have them assign themselves, to tasks they
actively enjoy, they will experience intrinsic motivation for the activity with, again, thedocumented beneficial effects of autonomous motivation on distress.
Autonomous motivation by definition always implies an element of choice at some level.
According to some theorists (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven and Tice, 1998), any act ofchoice comes at the cost of “ego-depletion” and loss of energy. However, this has been
demonstrated to apply only to controlled choices (i.e. where there is subtle or not-so subtle
external pressure to choose some options over others), but not to genuinely autonomous choices(Moller et al., 2006). A recent meta-analysis of 41 studies showed clearly that “when individuals
are allowed to affirm their sense of autonomy through choice they experience enhanced
motivation, persistence, performance, and production” (Patall, Cooper and Robinson, 2008: 298),
although this effect may be stronger in Western rather than Asian cultures (Iyengar and Lepper,
1999). Thus, employers, in the West at least, who provide their staff with genuine choices
regarding their work will benefit, while at the same time improving employees’ well-being andeustress.

Passion, flow and meaningfulness
PassionIf autonomous motivation has all the benefits, both to employees and to their employing
organisations, expounded above, should we expect the most intense forms of it to have the mostbenefit? This raises the construct of passion for an activity, in this case work activity.
Vallerand’s Dualistic Model of Passion (Vallerand, 2007; Vallerand and Houlfort, 2003) defines
passion as “a strong inclination toward a self-defining activity that one likes (or even loves),
finds important, and in which one invests time and energy” (Vallerand, 2007: 1-2). This passion,
however, can take either of two forms, labelled “harmonious” and “obsessive”; the former
involving a genuinely autonomous and integrative internalisation of the activity into a person’s
identity, and the latter, a controlling, ego-invested internalisation where the drive to perform theactivity comes to control the individual rather than vice versa. As might be expected, harmonious
passion has been shown to predict psychological adjustment and performance, whereas obsessive
passion can lead to damaging over-persistence (e.g. pathological gambling).
Relating this to the work context, Burke and Fiksenbaum (2008) make essentially the same
distinction between what they label Passion and Addiction. Their research found that while bothtypes of behaviour result in higher than normal job investment (involvement, hours worked etc);
passion is correlated with more work satisfaction, greater psychological well-being, and less32New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40
obsessive job behaviours, while addiction has exactly the reverse relationship with all threevariables.
Thus, in terms of both stress management and job commitment, passion for the job is to be
encouraged and selected for, but care must be taken to distinguish it from it’s obsessional,
addictive counterpart.
Flow
A state likely to arise more often in the pursuit of a passion is that of Flow or optimal experience,
wherein the person is intensely involved in the activity, their skills just match the challenges
posed by it, the subjective experience of the passage of time is often altered, and action isperceived as effortless (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, 1997; Csikszentmihalyi et al., 2005). It has
been argued that “flow is a form of eudaimonic well-being.…findings suggest that flow may be a
critical psychological state that is associated with positive mood, a core component of
psychological well-being” (Fullagar and Kelloway, 2009: 610).
Employers cannot create flow states in their employees – nor in fact, can the employees
themselves in any direct and reliable fashion – but they can encourage and facilitate employees
to engage in those activities for which they are highly intrinsically motivated or have a passion,
and which are, hence, more likely to result in flow experiences.
Meaningfulness
Work that seems meaningful to an employee in terms of their own values will, by definition, beautonomously motivating via integrated self-regulation. If passion can be seen as a very highlevel of autonomous motivation, meaningfulness can be construed as a deeper form of it, one thatis a powerful driver of work commitment and job satisfaction (Chalofsky and Krishna, 2009). It
also has associations with workplace spirituality (Emmons, 2006; Kolodinsky, Bowen and Ferris,
2003). A full discussion of work as a source of meaning is beyond the scope of this paper, but
selecting staff who do find a particular job personally meaningful over those with mainly
extrinsic motivation would seem a sensible part of a stress management strategy. A word ofcaution is in order, however. As Lips-Wiersma and Morris (2009) point out, much of theresearch on meaning at work has focused on the management of meaning, which can often prove
to be prescriptive and controlling, and hence not at all supportive of autonomous motivation.

Implications for stress management interventions
The foregoing discussion has presented evidence that practices that support autonomous
motivation improve well-being and promote eustress. This is not to suggest that there is no role
for more traditional primary and secondary stress-management interventions (SMIs).
Despite strong advocacy of primary (organisational level) SMIs (e.g. Cousins, MacKay, Clarke,
Kelly, Kelly and McCraig, 2004), secondary (individual level) SMIs are more widely used
(LeFevre, Kolt and Matheny, 2006) and, generally, more effective (Van der Klink, Blonk, Shene
and Van Dijk, 2001). However, it can be argued (e.g. Gordon, Jauregi and Schnall, 2009) thatemphasising secondary at the expense of primary SMIs allows organisations to shirk some of
their responsibilities towards employees and their welfare, and amounts to telling the “victims”
to “cure” themselves. Conversely, organisations that devote much time and effort to ineffective
primary interventions may aspire to wear the halo of a “good employer”, but are often wastingvaluable resources for little other gain.

33

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40
One solution to this dilemma may be to foster autonomous motivation supporting policies as a
primary SMI while also making autonomously motivating secondary SMIs available in a mannerthat allows maximum choice. Secondary SMIs of any kind, provided they are effective, will
generally be self-reinforcing, simply because they reduce distress and hence, increase well-being.
The great majority are enjoyable to do and, therefore, intrinsically motivating. Those that are not,for example the painful early stages of a vigorous physical exercise programme for someone who
is very unfit, will usually be motivated by well-internalised extrinsic motivation (identified or
integrated regulation in the SDT schema) since the person sees the benefits of the programme inhelping them become the person they want to be, and will, thus, still be autonomously motivated.
In a similar way, some secondary SMIs, especially Eastern meditation and yoga techniques, andsome martial arts, also tap into integrated regulation because they are considered to be a means
to attain self-development goals. At their highest, these goals link to “the meaning and purposeof life” and hence, the deeper form of autonomous motivation represented by meaningfulness.
Since they tend also to be intrinsically motivating such practices are doubly or triply
autonomous!

Conclusion
This article has presented strong evidence that workplace practices that encourage and cater tothe autonomous motivation of employees will increase their well-being in an impressively wide
variety of ways, including improved emotional and physical health and much reduced distress. In
particular, as noted above, when employees are provided with genuinely autonomous choice theyexperience “enhanced motivation, persistence, performance, and production” (Patall et al., 2008:298). Hence, overall their work experiences are of eustress rather than distress, and of better
performance. When the more developed forms of autonomous motivation and the phenomena
associated with it – (non obsessional/addictive) passion for the work, a sense of meaningfulness,and frequent flow experiences – are given the opportunity to flower, the research indicates that
not only eustress but improved job satisfaction and organisational commitment result.
With such benefits both for employers and employees from autonomous motivation, it would
seem obvious that the traditional “carrot and stick” extrinsic/controlled approach to worker
motivation is long overdue for retirement, at least from the majority of jobs in the Western
workplace, and replacement with practices that make daily work something to enjoy rather thanmerely tolerate or even dread. What might such practices look like? Specifics will obviously
depend on the job and the context, but the provision of freedom of choice is the essence, whether
it be choice of job, of the way best to perform a job or tasks within it, of the order in which toperform tasks or, where feasible, a more general executive freedom to make job-related decisions
as circumstances change. Clearly, some jobs lend themselves to such practices much better thanothers, and there still remain some where the carrot and stick have a place, but it is important toemphasise that with a little ingenuity every job has at least some aspects that can be made subject
to autonomous choice.
This article has argued that promotion of such practices constitutes a broad approach to stressmanagement at the primary intervention level that, combined with choices from a range ofautonomously motivating secondary SMIs, will be empowering rather than controlling. As such,it goes well beyond the simple provision of task or job autonomy and will avoid the potentiallystress-increasing effects such policies can sometimes have. Not only should stress levels besignificantly reduced, but performance levels and job-satisfaction increased, to the benefit of allconcerned.
34

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Notes
1Interestingly the intrinsic-extrinsic distinction has recently received support at the level of brain function, withoverlapping but different brain areas becoming active when a person is experiencing intrinsic motivation contrasted
with incentive motivation (Lee, Reeve, Xue and Xiong, 2009).
2

Although it is, of course, perfectly possible to be both intrinsically and extrinsically motivated for the same activity
at the same time (Amabile et al., 1994).

References
Amabile, T.M., Hill, K.G., Hennessey, B.A., and Tighe, E.M. (1994).The Work Preference
Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 66(5): 950-967.
Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources Model: State of the Art.
Journal of Managerial Psychology. 22(3), 309-328.
Baumeister, R.F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M. and Tice, D.M. (1998). Ego-depletion: Is theActive Self a Limited Resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74, 1252-1265.
Black, A. E., and Deci, E. L. (2000). The Effect of Instructors’ Autonomy Support and Students’
Autonomous Motivation on Learning Organic Chemistry: A Self-Determination Theory
Perspective. Science Education. 8: 740-756
Burke, R.J. and Fiskenbaum, L. (2009). Work Motivations, Work Outcomes and Health: Passion
versus Addiction. Journal of Business Ethics. 84:257-263
Work motivations, work outcomes, and health: Passion versus addiction. Journal of Business
Ethics, 84, 257-263.
Chalofsky, N. and Krishna, V. (2009). Meaningfulness, Commitment, and Engagement: The
Intersection of a Deeper Level of Intrinsic Motivation. Advances in Developing Human
Resources. 11(2): 189-203.
Chen, J-C and Silverthorne, C. (2008). The Impact of Locus of Control on Job Stress, Job
Performance and Job Satisfaction in Taiwan. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal. 29(7): 572-582.
Colligan, T.W. and Higgins, E.M. (2005). Workplace Stress: Etiology and Consequences.
Journal of Workplace Behavioural Health. 21(2): 89-97.
Cousins, R., MacKay, C.J., Clarke, S.D., Kelly, C., Kelly, P.J. and McCaig, R.H. (2004).
‘Management Standards’ and Work-Related Stress in the UK: Practical Development. Work andStress. 18(2): 113-136
Csickszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harperand Row.

35

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Csickszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday
Life. New York: Harper Collins.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Abuhamdeh, S. and Nakamura, J. (2005). Flow. In A.J. Elliott and C.S.
Dweck (Eds.) Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 598-608). New York: The Guilford
Press.
Dacey, M., Baltzell, A. and Zaichkowsky, L. (2008). Older Adults’ Intrinsic and Extrinsic
Motivation Toward Physical Activity. American Journal of Health Behavior. 32(6): 570-582
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2008). Facilitating Optimal Motivation and Psychological Wellbeing across Life’s Domains. Canadian Psychology. 49(1): 14-23.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2001). The Job DemandsResources Model of Burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology. 86: 499-512
Emmons, R.A. (2006). Spirituality: recent progress. In M. Csikszentmihalyi and I.S.
Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.) A Life Worth Living: Contributions to Positive Psychology (pp.62-81).
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Fernet, C. Guay, F. and Senecal, C. (2004). Adjusting to Job Demands: The Role of Work SelfDetermination and Job Control on Predicting Burnout. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 65: 3956.
Fullagar, C.J. and Kelloway, E.K. (2009). ‘Flow’ at Work: An Experience Sampling Approach.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 82: 595-615.
Gagne, M. and Deci, E.L. (2005). Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation. Journal of
Organizational Behavior. 26: 331-362.
Gillet, N., Vallerand, R.J., Amoura, S. and Baldes, B. (2010). Influence of Coaches Autonomy
Support on Athletes’ Motivation and Sport Performance: A Test of the Hierarchical Model ofIntrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 11: 155-161.
Godard, J. (2004). A Critical Assessment of the High-Performance Paradigm. British Journal ofIndustrial Relations. 42: 349-378
Gordon, D. R, Jauregui, M, Schnall, P. L (2009). Stakeholder Perspectives on Work and Stress:
Seeking Common Ground. In P.L. Schnall, M. Dobson, E.Rosskam, (eds). Unhealthy Work:
Causes, Consequences, Curses. (pp. 173-192). Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Co.
Graham, L. (1995). On the Line at Subaru-Isuzu. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
Grant, A.M. (2008). Does Intrinsic Motivation Fuel the Prosocial fire? Motivational Synergy in
Predicting Persistence, Performance and Productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology. 93(1): 4858
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

36

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Hechanova, R.M., Alampay, R.B.A. and Franco, E.P. (2006). Psychological Empowerment, Job
Satisfaction and Performance among Filipino Service Workers. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology. 9: 72-78.
Hosie, P., Sevastos, P., and Cooper, C.L. (2007). The ‘Happy Productive Worker Thesis’ andAustralian Managers. Journal of Human Values. 13(2): 151-176.
Iyengar, S.S. and Lepper, M.R. (1999). Rethinking the Value of Choice: A Cultural Perspective
on Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 76(3): 349-366.
Kalleberg, A.L., Nesheim, T. and Olsen, K. (2009). Is Participation Good or Bad for Workers?
Acta Sociologica. 52(2): 99-116.
Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job Demands, Job Decision Latitude, and Mental Strain: Implications for
Job Design. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24: 285-308.
Karasek, R.A. (1998). Demand/Control Model: A Social, Emotional and Physiological Approachto Stress Risk and Active Behaviour Development. In J.M. Stellman (Ed.), Encyclopaedia ofOccupational Health and Safety. (pp. 34.06-34.14). ILO: Geneva.
Kashefi, M. (2009). Job Satisfaction and/or Job Stress: The Psychological Consequences ofWorking in ‘High Performance Work Organizations’. Current Sociology. 57(6): 809-828.
Kasser, T. (2002). The High Price of Materialism. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Kasser, T. and Ryan, R.M. (1996). Further Examining the American dream: Differential
Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 22(3):80-87.
Kasser, T. and Ryan, R.M. (1999). The Relation of Psychological Needs for Autonomy and
Relatedness to Vitality, Well-being, and Mortality in a Nursing Home. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology. 29: 935-954.
Kasser, T. and Ryan, R.M. (2001). Be Careful what You wish for: Optimal Functioning and theRelative Attainment of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals. In P. Schmuck and K.M. Sheldon (Eds.),
Life Goals and Well-being: Towards a Positive Psychology of Human Striving (pp. 116-131).
Goettingen, Germany: Hogrefe and Huber.
Keyes, C.L., Shmotkin, D. and Ryff, C.D. (2002). Optimizing Well-being: The Empirical
Encounter of Two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 82(6): 1007-1022.
Koestner, R. (2008). Reaching One’s Personal Goals: A Motivational Perspective focused on
Autonomy. Canadian Psychology. 49(1): 60-67.
Koestner, R., Lekes, N., Powers, T.A., and Chicoine, E. (2002). Attaining Personal Goals: SelfConcordance plus Implementation Intentions Equals Success. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 83: 231-244.
Kollodinsky, R.W., Bowen, M.G., and Ferris, G.R. (2003). Embracing Workplace Spirituality
and Managing Organizational Politics. In R.A. Giacalone and C.L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.). Handbook
37

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance (pp. 164-180). New York: M.E.
Sharpe.
Kuvaas, B. (2006). Work Performance, Affective Commitment, and Work motivation: The Rolesof Pay Administration and Pay Level. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 27: 365-385.
Lee, W., Reeve, J., Xue, Y. and Xiong, J. (2009). Similarities and Differences in the Neural
Activities of Intrinsic Motivation and Incentive Motivation. Neuroimage. 47(Supplement 1):
S39-S41.
LeFevre, M.L., Kolt, G.S. and Matheny, J. (2006). Eustress, Distress and theirInterpretation in Primary and Secondary Occupational Stress Management Interventions: Which
Way First? Journal of Managerial Psychology. 21(6): 547-565.
Lefevre, M.L., Matheny, J. and Kolt, G.S. (2003). Eustress, Distress and Interpretation in
Occupational Stress. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 18(7): 726-744.
Lincoln, J. and Kalleberg, A. ( 1990). Culture, Control, and Commitment: A Study of Work
Organization and Work Attitudes in the United States and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Lips-Wiersma, M. and Morris, L. (2009). Discriminating Between ‘Meaningful Work’ and the‘Management of Meaning’. Journal of Business Ethics. 88: 491-511.
McHoskey, J.W. (1999). Machiavellianism, Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Goals, and Social Interest:
A Self-Determination Theory Analysis. Motivation and Emotion. 23: 267-283.
Miquelon, P. and Vallerand, R.J. (2008). Goal Motives, Well-being, and Physical Health: An
Integrative Model. Canadian Psychology. 49(3): 241-249.
Moller, A.C., Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2006). Choice and Ego-depletion: The ModeratingRole of Autonomy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 32(8): 1024-1036.
Niemiec, C.P., Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. (2008). The Path Taken: Consequences of Attaining
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aspirations in Post-College Life. Journal of Research in Personality. 43:
291-306.
Nix, G.A., Ryan, R.M., Manly, J.B. and Deci, E.L. (1999). Revitalization Through SelfRegulation: The Effects of Autonomous and Controlled Motivation on Happiness and Vitality.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 35: 266-284.
Osterman, P. (2000).Work Re-Organization in an Era of Restructuring: Trends in Diffusion andEffects on Employee Welfare. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 53: 179-196.
Parker, S. and Sprigg, C.A. (1999). Minimizing Strain and Maximizing Learning: The Role ofJob Demands, Job Control, and Proactive Personality. Journal of Applied Psychology. 84: 25939.

38

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Patall, E.A., Cooper, H. and Robinson, J.C. (2008). The Effects of Choice on Intrinsic
Motivation and Related Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Research Findings. Psychological
Bulletin. 134(2): 270-300.
Rousseau, V., Salek, S., Aube, C. and Morin, E.M. (2009). Distributive Justice, Procedural
Justice, and Psychological Distress: The Moderating Effect of Coworker Support and Work
Autonomy. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 14 (3): 305-317.
Rubino, C., Luksyte, A., Pery, S.J., and Volpone, S.D. (2009). How do Stressors Lead to
Burnout? The Mediating Role of Motivation. Journal of Occupational and Health Psychology.
14(3): 289-304.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000a). The Darker and Brighter Sides of Human Existence: Basic
Psychological Needs as a Unifying Concept. Psychological Inquiry. 11(4): 319-338.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000b). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic
Motivation, Social Development and Well-being. American Psychologist. 55(1): 68-78.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2002). Overview of Self-Determination Theory: An Organismic andDialectical Perspective. In E.L. Deci and R.M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination
Research. (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester press.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2008). From Ego-Depletion to Vitality: Theory and Findings
Concerning the Facilitation of Energy Available to the Self. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass. 2: 702-717.
Salovey, P., Rothman, A.J., Detweiler, J.B. and Steward, W.T. (2000). Emotional States andPhysical Health. American Psychologist. 55(1): 110-121.
Sheldon, K.M. and Kasser, T. (1995). Coherence and Congruence: Two Aspects of Personality
Integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 68: 531-543.
Sheldon, K.M. and Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing Personal Goals: Skills Enable Progress, but not
all Progress is Beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 24: 1319-1331
Sheldon, K.M., Ryan, R.M, Deci, E.L. and Kasser, T. (2004). The Independent Effects of Goal
Contents and Motives on Well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 30: 475-486.
Sheldon, K.M., Ryan, R.M, and Reis, H.T. (1996). What Makes for a Good day? Competenceand Autonomy in the Day and in the Person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 22:
1270-1279.
Suh, T. and Shin, H. (2005). Creativity, Job Performance and their Correlates: A Comparison
Between Nonprofit and Profit-driven Organizations. International Journal of Nonprofit andVoluntary Sector Marketing. 10(4): 203-211.
Taylor, S.E., Kemeny, M.E., Bower, J.E., Gruenewald, T.L. and Reed, G.M. (2000).
Psychological Resources, Positive Illusions and Health. American Psychologist. 55(1): 99-109.

39

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):28-40

Vallerand, R.J. (2007). On the Psychology of Passion: In search of what makes people’s lives
most worth living. Canadian Psychology. 49(1): 1-13.
Vallerand, R.J. and Houlfort, N. (2003). Passion at Work: Toward a new Conceptualization. In
S.W. Gilliland, D.D. Steiner, and D.P. Skarlicki (Eds.). Emerging Perspectives on Values in
Organizations (pp. 175-204). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Van Boven, L. and Gilovich, T. (2003). To do or to have?: That is the question. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 85(6): 1193-1202.
Van der Klink, J.J.L., Blonk, R.W.B., Schene, A.H. and van Dijk, F.J.H. (2001). The benefits ofinterventions for work-related stress. American Journal of Public Health. 91: 270-276.
Van Yperen, N.W. and Hagedoorn, M. (2003). Do High Job Demands increase Intrinsic
Motivation or Fatigue or Both? The Role of Job Control and Job Social Support. Academy ofManagement Journal. 46(3): 339-349.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K.M. and Deci, E.L. (2004). Motivating
Learning, Performance, and Persistence: The Synergistic Effects of Intrinsic Goal Contents andAutonomy-supportive Contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87(2): 246-260.
Williams, G.C. and Deci, E.L. (1996). Internalization of Biopsychosocial Values by Medical
Students: A test of Self-Determination Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
70: 767-779.

40

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59

Unhealthy Work? The policy-practice dividein Australian Call Centres
ZEENOBIYAH HANNIF*, FELICITY LAMM**, AND ANNE VO***
Abstract
Call centres have attracted the attention of researchers globally due to theirimplementation of new forms of work organisation and the implications these represent
for the workforce. While there has been a great deal written on the poor working
conditions within the call centre industry, and some discussion on the impact of these
conditions on the health and safety of workers, there is still little known about theoccupation health and well being policies and practices used in these workplaces. There
has also been scant research on the health and safety experiences of call centre workers.
This paper aims to address these gaps by examining whether the tasks performed and theoccupational health and well being policies and practices in call centres lead to unhealthy
outcomes for workers. A case study methodology is applied to explore these questions in
two Australian call centres which highlight the diversity that exists in the industry. Key
findings based on interviews with case study participants and key stakeholders indicate a
misalignment between policy and practice, which represent various immediate andongoing risks for employees. A number of policy concerns are raised through the data,
particularly where negative occupational health outcomes can be associated with the lackof organisational compliance with employment legislation.

Introduction
While call centres offer various economic opportunities in the form of increased efficiency
through business process re-organization, and regional and urban development, poor job
quality is increasingly becoming recognized as a norm across these workplaces. The callcentre industry is frequently described in the literature as engaging in low-profit valueadded activities, characterised by poor wages and conditions, a disposable workforce, andthe implementation of Taylorist principles, all of which have real implications foroccupational health and well being and well being (Wallace et al., 2000 Paul and Huws,
2002).
The growth of the call centre market has been paralleled with the emergence of an
extensive literature on call centre workplaces, yet there has been muted discussion on theoccupational health and well being of call centre workers. Where occupational health andwell being is discussed, much of the existing research merely draws attention to the risks
prevalent in these workplaces. There is little in the way of research that specificallyevaluates the occupational health and well being policies, practices and outcomes in thesecontexts. This paper aims to address these gaps in literature by determining whether the*

Dr Zeenobiyah Hannif, is in the School of Management, University of Technology, Sydney
Ass Prof Dr Felicity Lamm is in the Department of Management, AUT***
Dr Anne Vo is in the School of Management, University of Wollongong**

41

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
tasks performed and the occupational health and well being policies and practices in callcentre workplaces are conducive to ill health. In setting the context for this paper,
literature pertaining to the health of call centre workers will be reviewed. The case study
research design will subsequently be outlined, followed by an overview of the key
findings, and a discussion on the potential implications these represent.

Call Centres and occupational health and well being: the literature
Call centres exemplify the shift towards technology based work, and the new forms ofwork organisation that are emerging in the services economy. Over the past decade, callcentres have represented one of the most important sources of job growth in a number ofcountries including Australia (Batt and Moynihan, 2002 Russell, 2004). Since call centres
started proliferating in the market two decades ago, they have surpassed their traditionalrole as efficient and effective marketing and response mediums, and are increasingly being
realised as profit-centres, representing the first line of consumer contact for a multitude ofbusiness types, across all industries and sectors (Burgess and Connell, 2004). The
tendency for organizations in the new economy to focus on ‘core competencies’ has also
led to greater outsourcing and offshoring of call centre functions, and the growth of
specialist call centre service providers (Australian Communications Association (ACA),
2004).
Although these organizations have grown in prominence, the job quality issues that haveemerged in the broader Australian socio-economic context, particularly with the transition
to the new economy, are also highly relevant to these workplaces (Green, 2005). Firstly,
call centres are characterised by relatively low levels of union representation. The
URCOT (2000) report suggests that although call centres are a growing centre for
employment growth in Australia, union representation and coverage of these organisations
remains scarce. The increase in outsourcing arrangements across call centres also
represents obvious implications for job quality, given that outsourced activities still tend to
be under-regulated, and under-represented where unions are concerned (AustralianCouncil of Trade Unions, 2002).
Technology has played a strong and distinctive role in the labour process of call centres
providing organizations with structure, surveillance and control – essentially theantecedents of this new form of work organization. This raises important implications foroccupational health and well being and job quality, given that these technologies allow
work to be controlled and monitored in a way that was previously not possible, largely
removing control from employees, and placing these in the sphere of consumers andmanagers (Crome, 1998 Callaghan and Thompson, 2001). Further, occupational healthand well being issues are raised due to technology from the ‘information era’ beingcombined with the principles of work organization derived from the ‘industrial era’. Work
organization in call centres is often highly reminiscent of the Taylorist and Fordist
production line system, particularly with the focus on ‘mass production’, ‘mass
consumption’ and the standardisation of processes, organised in an assembly line methodof production (Taylor and Bain, 1999). These processes are familiar, in terms of therepetitiveness of tasks, the scripting of work, and the intense pressure to process as manypotential customers as possible using telephone and computer technology (Holman, 2002
Hutchinson et al., 2000a). The customer becomes the subject and object of the call centre.

42

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
These centres promise lower cost and high returns for the purchaser of service but thedelivery of these services is dependent on an ”automated employee”.
These organizations are also characteristic of the formulation of new and diverse
management ideologies, all of which have the same goal of increasing worker productivity
in the new economy (Green, 2005). On one end of the scale are managerial principles thatendorse high commitment philosophies and team based structures as a means of attaining
normative control (Thompson, Callaghan and van den Broek, 2004), and at the other endof the spectrum are more ‘sacrificial human resources strategies’ which rely on employee
replacement as opposed to employee development as a means of maintaining consistently
high levels of productivity and quality (Wallace et al., 2000).
As started earlier, there is scant research on the occupational health and well being
experiences and outcomes in the call centre literature. Nevertheless, the issue of stress andburnout is the most widely reported occupational health and well being issue in the callcentre literature (Holman, 2002 Healy and Bramble, 2003). The 2009 Its your call surveyof 1,549 Australian call centre employees found stress to be a more prevalent issue in 2009
than what it was 10 years ago. Higher levels of stress could be attributed to increasing job
insecurity concerns with call centre work going overseas, greater phone call monitoring,fewer opportunities for breaks, fewer opportunities to take annual leave, poor ergonomics
and lack of training and support. Over one-third of participants also highlighted theirdissatisfaction with KPI’s and targets, suggesting these are additional workplace stressors.
Call centre work is often target-focused, where non-fulfilment often leads to disciplinary
action (Bain and Taylor, 2002 Shire et al., 2002). In order to avoid being isolated, workers
have to be highly performance driven, and constantly work towards meeting statisticalgoals (Australian Communications Association Research [ACA], 1998 Richardson andMarshall, 1999 Union Research Centre for Organisation and Technology [URCOT], 2000
Paul and Huws, 2002). According to URCOT (2000) these demands can create a great
deal of stress for employees, particularly when statistical targets are unrealistic or
unreasonable. The unpredictable nature of call traffic with job cycle peaks andfluctuations, also contributes to stress by creating uncertainty for workers (AustralianCommunications Association Research [ACA], 1998 Batt and Moynihan, 2002).
Extensive systems of monitoring can also be associated with stress and burnout in callcentres (Richardson and Marshall, 1999 Union Research Centre for Organisation andTechnology [URCOT], 2000 Bagnara and Marti, 2001 Paul and Huws, 2002 Healy andBramble, 2003). Employees are aware that they are under constant management
surveillance and performance monitoring, and this creates greater pressure for workers to
perform. There is also evidence of monitoring being used as a tool to intimidate anddemean staff; the monitoring of toilet breaks, and private calls are two prime examples(see URCOT, 2000). Systematic and often rigorous monitoring mechanisms have beenstrongly associated with turnover in this industry.
Work in the call centre environment can also be very emotionally demanding, particularly
given that employees are often expected to deal with abuse and harassment from
customers (Crome, 1998 Richardson and Marshall, 1999 Wallace et al., 2000 Bagnara andMarti, 2001; Deery and Kinnie, 2002 Paul and Huws, 2002). Crome (1998) suggests
customer frustration is becoming a more common phenomenon in the industry, and isoften associated with organisations’ promises of fast and efficient services, which are not

43New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
always possible to deliver. Being on the frontline, call centre workers are required to deal
with emotionally demanding scenarios on their own, often with little or no time torecuperate because of the constant pressure to continue taking and/or making calls. The
URCOT (2000) study indicates that uneducated callers can have similar effects, creating asignificant amount of anger and frustration for employees trying to maintain theirperformance targets. This issue is also relevant for offshore call centres where CSR’s
often experience language problems (Taylor and Bain, 2004).
Employees working in the call centre environment are largely isolated from their coworkers during shifts, given that the primary interaction is between employees and theorganisations customers. Thus, another cause of call centre workplace stress can beassociated with what ACA (Australian Communications Association Research [ACA],
1998) describes as the “inconvenience of being literally wired to the desk”. The stress of
having minimal social interaction is exacerbated by further expectations on employees toremain seated and attached to telephony and computer equipment for what can sometimes
be, extended periods of time (Australian Communications Association Research [ACA],
1998 Union Research Centre for Organisation and Technology [URCOT], 2000 Paul andHuws, 2002). This aspect of employment can cause significant emotional and physicalstrain.
The issue of ‘emotional labour’ also represents major implications for health and safety incall centre environments, and represents an area that has been examined by a number of
researchers (Frenkel et al., 1998 Houlihan, 2002 Callaghan and Thompson, 2001
Mulholland, 2002). Hochschild (1983) first coined the term “emotional labour” todescribe occupational emotional demands experienced by flight attendants. Emotional
labour is defined by Hochschild (1983) as “the management of feeling to create a publicly
observable facial and bodily display”. Emotional labour is represented by the effort
expended to manage or regulate ones emotional reactions at work in order to exhibit those
performance behaviours valued by the organization, and to suppress the expression of lessacceptable behaviours (Hochschild, 1983; Taylor, 1998). This is particularly the case ininteractive service occupations, which require one-on-one contact with customers (Taylor,1998). Call centre employees are particularly vulnerable to a demand for emotional
labour, as their jobs generally require maintaining a friendly and positive demeanour
despite job characteristics that may engender negative emotional reactions (e.g., irate
customers, complex problem solving, or hectic work pace). As Taylor (1998: 98) noted in
his study of the telephone sales department of a British airline “service sector employers
are increasingly demanding that employees deep act actively work on and change their
feeling to match the display required by the labour process “. These “displayed” emotions
have an economic value, with employees being judged on the basis of customer
satisfaction (Houlihan, 2002 Callaghan and Thompson, 2001). According to Frenkel et al(1999) some of the ‘emotional labour’ capabilities required of call centre workers include
the ability to remain calm despite the pressures associated with responding to a continuous
flow of customer calls; and the ability to maintain a friendly, positive and tactful, attitude
whilst simultaneously remaining disengaged psychologically as a means of defence
against rude and abusive customers.
Physical strain is another key issue, and is associated with the multiple demands placed on
workers at any given time. Not only are employees required to stay seated during shifts,
they are also expected to make and/or receive calls while simultaneously reading scripts
and/or entering data into manual or computerised systems. This is all done under strict

44

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
surveillance as they work to maintain their performance statistics. The restrictive andrepetitive nature of these tasks and the simultaneous use of multiple call centre
technologies, represent a number of hazards for employees’. These include eye sightproblems/computer vision, occupation overuse syndrome/repetitive strain, acoustic
shock/hearing problems, occupational voice loss, sleeplessness, back/postural problems
and headaches (Union Research Centre for Organisation and Technology [URCOT], 2000
Paul and Huws, 2002). In their research, Taylor et al (2003) found that the two mostcommonly reported health and safety complaints were tiredness and mental fatigue. A
quarter of respondents also experienced stiff shoulders and necks, backaches andpains/numbness in hands, wrists or arms. Headaches were also common place – reportedby half of all respondents as a regular occurrence.
The URCOT (2000) report suggests that physical discomfort, including neck and backstiffness persist despite the use of ergonomically designed equipment in the workplace.
Taylor et al’s (2003) research however suggests that ergonomic issues are a concern only
for a minority. Rather, “it is the way in which call handlers’ tasks (are) structured,organized and performed” that is the biggest cause for concern (Taylor et al, 2003: 446).
In other words, there is significant evidence to suggest that the very nature of call centre
work is strongly predisposed to physical stress. Whilst employees surveyed in the
URCOT (2000) study drew attention to the value of regular breaks in minimising theeffects, Taylor et al (2003: 435) suggest “radical job re-design” as the only effective
remedy.

Methodology
It is clear from the international literature that there are occupational health problems
associated with call centre work, particularly stress, fatigue and musculoskeletal disorders.
However, what has generally been overlooked in the literature is an examination of theoccupational health and well being policies, practices and outcomes of call centre work in
the one study. The aim of the research was to close this gap by identifying the extent towhich the policies and practices used in call centres made the work unhealthy for workers.
Two call centres were studied to examine the relationship between these three facets: one
located in the public sector (referred to as “Govtcall”) and the other located in the private
sector (referred to as “Salesplus”). A qualitative case study methodology was adopted tocater for the multiplicity of ‘reality’ captured through subjective experiences, and to allow
for an examination of the experiences of customer service operators (CSOs) in the context
in which they occurred (Marshall and Rossman, 1995). To examine the occupational
health and well being policies utilised in both workplaces policy documents, union
documents (where relevant) and employment agreements were reviewed and analysed.
Data on the occupational health and well being practices and outcomes experienced in thetwo call centres was derived through in-depth face to face interviews with Managers,
Team Leaders and CSOs. A comparative element was also adopted into the research
design to facilitate comparisons between the case study sites.
The profiles of the two call centres are presented in Table 1. Salesplus is located in
Melbourne, and operates as part of a network of outsourced call centres (CCs). This CC
has been in operation for 14 years, and with 1400 CC seats is a very large CC by industry
standards. Salesplus has managed to maintain economies of scale whilst operating wholly45

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
as an outsourcer, providing a variety of fixed term and ongoing services to the 50 plus
clients they service at any given time. This CC involves a balance of inbound andoutbound calls. There is no union presence on site, which is typical of the majority of CCs
in the Australian market. Turnover in Salesplus is recorded at less than 10 per cent, and ismostly associated with students pursuing overseas travel. Exit interviews indicate that
CSOs rarely turnover to join other CCs.

Table 1: Call Centre Type and Location
Location
Sector/ industry
Type
Size
Age
Types of calls
Union presence
TurnoverGOVTCALL
Newcastle
Public/ Government Services
In-house/capacity as outsourcer
226 seats
13 years
Inbound & Outbound
CPSU – 49 per cent unionised
Under 10 per cent

SALESPLUS
Melbourne
Private/ Outsourcer
Outsourcer
1400 seats
14 years
Inbound & OutboundNo presence on site
Under 10 per centWith 226 seats, Govtcall is the largest CC in a network of customer service CCs. Based in
Newcastle, this particular CC has been operating for 13 years. In terms of CC type,
Govtcall largely operates as an in-house CC dedicated to the servicing of 3 specific
Government funded programs which operate as separate business lines. Some 98 per centof the work is inbound – customer service being the primary function. Around 49 per centof the CSOs in Govtcall are members of the Community and Public Sector Union. In
Govtcall, turnover relating to those employees leaving the organization altogether is only 5
per cent. This figure rises to 10 per cent when considering the number that move out of the
CC and into other areas of the organization’s network.
As Table 2 indicates, semi-structured interviews were conducted on site or over the phonewith CSOs, Supervisors/ Team leaders, and Managers. The length of each interview
varied depending on the amount of detail given by interviewees, but generally ranged
from 30 to 80 minutes in length. These interviews were supplemented with workplaceobservations, archival analyses, and document reviews. The number of interviews
undertaken represents around 10 per cent of staff and Govtcall and 3 per cent of staff at
Salesplus. The issue of sample accuracy is always present, especially for Salesplus. The
triangulation of interviews across CSO and managers and the use of documentary
information assisted in improving the validity of the interviews undertaken.
Table 2: Sample Interviewed Within the Two Call Centres
GovtcallCall Centre operators
18
Supervisory staff
6
Managers
3
Total
27

Salesplus
26
8
4
38

46

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59

Findings
This section outlines the key findings relating to occupational health and well being
policies, practices and outcomes in these two call centres. The occupational health andwell being policies from each call centre are outlined in the following table. Key
weaknesses in the policies are also listed as identified by CSOs and TLs during interviews.
Table 3: Occupational health and well being Policies in Govtcall and Salesplus
and Identified Weaknesses
Govtcall

Problems in thepolicyServices & Facilities:- Ergonomically designed heightadjustable work stations- Work stations assessed byaccredited OHS reps and local
area occupational therapists- On-site gym- Referrals to EAP or Call
Centre Social Worker- Hot desking- occupational
health and wellbeing reps notalways available
and occ therapist
on site only once ayear- team meetings
not long enoughand focus more on‘targets’.

OHS Reporting:- Can report to team leaders available to provide assistance- Can call on OHS reps/ OHS
committee members- Union reps available- Local area occupational
therapists- All hazards recorded on
hazard register- All OHS incidences recorded
using online accident reporting
systemMonitoring of OHS:
- At least 1 OHS rep on site at
all times- Workplace assessments
undertaken by accredited OHS
reps- Workplace hazard register(maintained by all staff)

Services & Facilities:•
Ergonomically designed heightadjustable work stations•
Work stations assessed by teamleaders•
Masseuse makes regular site
visits•Referrals to Counselling/ EAP•Stress management courses
and workshops available•
Relaxation/Time out areas
OHS Training & Information:•
OHS induction training•
Staff kept aware of OHS policies
and procedures & updates –available on intranet andhardcopy•
Regular updates from OHS reps•
OHS discussed during 1 on 1’s
with team leaders

OHS Training & Information:- OHS induction training- Staff kept aware of OHS
policies and procedures &updates – available on intranet
and hardcopy- Annual evacuation training andall staff site evacuation- Fire wardens – bi-annual
training for different scenarios- Training and accreditation for
OHS reps/first aid officers- OHS & wellbeing discussed
during team meetings

Salesplus- lack of teamleader training indealing withoccupational healthand well being.
conflicting
demands (withorganisations
objectives)

OHS Reporting:•
Report OHS issues to teamleaders/managers•
Report OHS issues to OHS reps

Problems in thepolicy- stressmanagement
course notmandatory- lack of teamleader training indealing withoccupational
health and wellbeing. conflicting
demands (withorganisations
objectives)- lack of teamleader training indealing withoccupational
health and wellbeing.
- Infrequency of
OHS rep
meetings- low levels ofreporting due tonegative ‘stigma’- lack of action
taken in responseto reports- evidence of
inadequately
trained reps
conducting
assessments- leave has
negative stigma

Monitoring of OHS:•OHS reps ever floor•
Fire wardens on every floor•
Team Leaders consult with
CSOs about OHS issues- large callcentre – not all
CSOs aware ofwhooccupational
health and wellbeing reps are47

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59

Govtcall

Problems in thepolicy- Staff stress/fatigue monitored
via leave and statistical dataattached to it in thiscall centre.

Consultation/CSO
involvement:- Active OHS committee
comprising elected staff reps –hold quarterly meetings- CSOs can influence additional
OHS checks- First aid officer/firewarden/OHS rep roles all
staffed by CSOs

- existence ofcommittee but towhat extent areconcerns being
communicated tocommittee due toinfrequence ofmeetings?

Salesplus

Problems in thepolicyConsultation/CSO involvement:•
First aid officer/fire warden/OHS
rep roles all staffed by CSOs

- generalmanagement teamhave very different
views aboutoccupational healthand well being tothat experienced
on the shop –floor– is information
being adequately
communicatedupwards?
Other:••

Compulsory 5 min
OHS breaks every
hour
Utilise national OHS
policy- Breaks tightly
policed- Inadequate
recognition of‘local’ issues

Other:•

De-briefing with Team Leaders
after stressful calls- reactive rather
than proactive
approach tostressmanagement

The following section summarises findings relating to the occupational health and wellbeing practices and outcomes in the two call centres. CSOs were firstly asked to reflect on
the adequacy of the occupational health and well being policies and practices in theworkplace, and to discuss any occupational health and well being issues they had
experienced as a direct consequence of the work in the call centre (e.g. stress, fatigue, backache etc). The findings are as follows.

GovtcallIn-depth interviews with CSOs from Govtcall suggested employees either had or were still
experiencing occupational health and well being problems due to their work in the callcentre.
Just over a fifth (22 per cent) of Govtcall CSOs interviewees complained that being seatedfor extended periods of time caused them discomfort, although ergonomically designed
workstations had assisted in minimising the severity of outcomes. A number ofinterviewees (22 per cent) had also experienced some form of musculoskeletal disorders –including neck pain, back pain, and repetitive strain injury in their fingers, hands andarms. Two CSOs stated they had seen other CSOs in the workplace experience similar
discomfort.

48

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59“I’ve seen other people go through neck injuries and RSI and it seems to me thatthey are placed under a bit of stress. Some don’t ever report it because of thehassle and they don’t think anything will be done about it anyway” (Govtcall, CSO
12)
CSOs interviewed argued that one of the main reasons why there was an increase in rate ofmusculoskeletal disorders amongst the staff was that they were now regularly required torotate to different workstations, and readjusting the new workstation each time they
moved. The CSOs interviewed also point out that most employees had no or little
experience of correctly adjusting the workstation to suit the individual and their teamleaders also lacked training in this area. As one CSOs interviewee stated:“It’s just at the moment I constantly have to adjust my desk every week because myback will hurt or my shoulders will hurt or I get headaches or something. It’s also
just the frustration that I can’t just have the person who’s trained, and qualified to
do it set me up - and the fact that it’s ongoing is frustrating at the moment. I’vechanged chairs trying to get it to fit in properly. And you can really say too muchabout it, it doesn’t go down nicely, and won’t change anything much”. (Govtcall,CSO 5).
Although the team leaders were aware of the musculoskeletal disorders associated with thenature of the work, with repetitive strain injury (RSI) being the most common problem,
they believed that the musculoskeletal disorders had increased as a result of theintroduction of the self-paced learning tools.
“The number of people complaining of physical pain is extremely high. Not many
report it though. I think the increased use of the mouse and the computer, and theself paced learning things – so now they are not even getting away from thecomputer – it’s all PC based”. (Govtcall, Team Leader 2)
Team leaders stated any cases of musculoskeletal disorders were dealt with promptly andthose experiencing the discomfort were given some flexibility with regard to their targets.
“Straight away – we do something – as soon as they tell us we act on it. The
occupational health and well being rep checks on the desk set up for them, and we
start swapping arms. If it slows them down we don’t care”. (Govtcall, Team
Leader 4)
Stress and fatigue were other prominent occupational health and well being issues. All theemployees interviewed at Govtcall had experienced stress at some time during their work.
The probationary period of their employment was particularly stressful in which they were
continually monitored and were required to achieve 95 per cent accuracy rate in order tobe offered continued employment. In addition, many of the interviewees (44 per cent)stated that the stress they had experienced was as a direct result of the inflexible
managerial practices in the organisation, particularly in relation to work-life balanceissues.
“I know I won’t get time off for when my children start school. There is lack ofsupport here – and no one really to ask for help”. (Govtcall, CSO 1)

49

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
Other management practices that created stress among employees were: excessive
monitoring; the lack of team leader support; greater focus on negative rather than positive
reinforcement in relation to performance; and intimidating behaviour towards theemployees, as the following comments indicate:“They’ll pick up on things like your call handle time which is supposed to be 5
mins, 20secs. Mine might be 5.22 and they’ll pick up on that for two seconds. I
just think that’s so ridiculous and I do get upset about it. If it was 2 seconds in the‘real’ world or another workforce – they’d just let it go”. (Govtcall, CSO 17).
“They won’t notice you when you do something right or well, but they are all overyou if you make one mistake. Like you’ll get an email, and then the team leader
will come talk to you about it, and then another team leader will come talk to you
too a few minutes later. You’re always worried about stuffing up because there’s
no chance of getting away with it”. (Govtcall, CSO 12)“There’s been times when I’ve wanted to put forward ideas and things and they’ll
all squash them because they think they’re stupid. That’s hard to deal withbecause it might be stupid to them, but it definitely isn’t to me or the people aroundme”. (Govtcall, CSO 2)
Negative managerial practices were not the only sources of stress; dealing with rude andaggressive callers also caused a great deal of anxiety. Over a third of the CSOs
interviewees stated that they were required to deal with highly agitated and abusive
customers and yet were expected to suppress their own hurt feelings in order to do theirjob in a professional manner. They also found it upsetting dealing with customers who had
suffered a tragedy or when they were unable to help a distressed customer, as depicted by
the interviewee quotes:“You tend to get some really fiery customers yelling and swearing and sometimes
they can just hit all the buttons to get you going. No matter how pissed off or upset
you get – you have to suck it in and get on with it” (Govtcall, CSO 9)“I had a mother whose 10 year old child died. It wasn’t the greatest call, it wasbad. You have to be able to sympathize with them. Once you’re off the phone you
just start to think about it for a while and put down your head. Take a break,depending on how bad the call is. I generally take a break”. (Govtcall, CSO 12).
“You can really have the stress of the call where you know you want to help
someone but you really don’t know if you can or you don’t feel you can”.
(Govtcall, CSO 3)
Team leaders also acknowledged that their employees were experiencing work-related
stress and attributed the fact that CSOs had to meet high performance demands, whilst
simultaneously dealing with distraught or difficult customers:“About 2 per cent of customers are quite aggressive and it depends on how staff
handle that – some take it to heart and others think ‘whatever’. It can get quite
stressful. It can also get quite stressful because it’s measured. Some people might50

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
try their hardest and hardest and still not meet what they are required to meet”.
(Govtcall, Team Leader 2)“Our CSOs have to deal with some of the tragedies our customers have been
through. There are two sides to the stress mainly, and that’s sort of the people sideof it. And then there’s the performance side to it – if they are not performing weneed to take formal action – I guess that could cause them some distress”.
(Govtcall, Team Leader 6)
When questioned about the support provided by Govtcall in assisting employees
experiencing stress due to dealing with agitated or distressed callers, the general response
was that support was inadequate. CSOs felt they had little option than to take a break, buteven these were monitored. CSOs were left to deal with such issues on their own ascommunication between CSOs was also largely restricted during shifts.
Team work,
particularly on an informal level was not actively encouraged. CSOs largely worked
independently, and were discouraged from speaking to or seeking assistance and advice
from their co-workers as it may reflect negatively on their statistics. Special systems were
set up that dictated that all questions and queries were directed to technical support
officers within the call centre. Over half of the CSOs interviewed however indicated theyoften disabled calls in order to have a much needed chat with other CSOs between calls.
This was done cautiously given the high levels of monitoring in the workplace.
“Sometimes you just need to take a breather, and let it all out, especially if you
have a bad call - you can just turn around. Like today I did a death notice. It’snice to have someone you can just say ‘that lady was so upset’ – it’s nice to havethat communication. I sometimes just put a hold on my calls and have a quick chatwith the person next to me. They don’t like you doing that here – but it’s unhealthy
to keep it in. You’d go crazy if you didn’t”. (Govtcall, CSO 8).
Interestingly, managers had very different perceptions about the level of stress in theorganisation and how stress was managed. They argued that while stress did occur, it was
not a significant problem, and was always closely monitored and dealt with quickly. For
example, if a CSO experienced a bad call, they were required to record the details of thecall online, and complaint was then followed up by the HR staff who would thenimplement remedies.
“It’s something we’re always looking for. We don’t have huge compo claims so
we seem to manage it well and team leaders are really trained in identifying stress.
It’s not a huge issue here.” (Govtcall, Manager 1)
These claims were not supported by CSOs, who stated that reports were rarely followed
up, and when they were, little was done about them. CSOs felt that whilst some teamleaders were supportive, others had little idea about how to deal with stress issues.
Another significant occupational health and well being issue (identified by 90 per cent theemployees interviewed) was the poor scheduling and short length of the breaks and thestrict or arbitrary way the breaks were monitored, as the quotes below illustrate:

51

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59“Schedules can be very difficult to work in sometimes. One day I had training andmorning tea was at 11:00am and my lunch wasn’t scheduled till 3.00pm. That canbe a bit of a stretch and you don’t have much choice in changing it”. (Govtcall,
CSO 16)“Timing is a bit of an issue. Sometimes you’re scheduled for lunch at like 20 past
11 in the morning. They don’t even make kindergarteners go to lunch at that time
so I guess that’s where the control aspect comes in. No one can really argue withthe breaks because they are in our agreement”. (Govtcall, CSO 18)“Sometimes you only need three minutes and then sometimes you need longer. In
the first couple of months when I had morning sickness, I was in the toilet once for10 minutes and I had a team leader come in and ask me why I was taking so long –I had just come out of the toilet and my face was all pale and I was so angry that I
had to explain I had morning sickness and I wasn’t feeling well. It was justridiculous that she waited for me outside the toilet after trying to track me down”.
(Govtcall, CSO 10)“I don’t like the fact that if you get up even to go to the fax machine or thephotocopier or whatever, then technically you don’t get a break anymore. I
disagree with that. If I go to the fax machine - I do it because I have to. I’m notthinking about rolling my head or stretching my wrists and arms and stuff. I’m notthinking about those things when I’m still in work mode”. (Govtcall, CSO 9)“They call them occupational health and well being breaks and too right – you’re
stressed the whole time you’re on it because you know you have to be back withinfour minutes or face their wrath”. (Govtcall, CSO 4)“It’s really prison like in that once you reach the end of your tea time you have to
get straight back. And there are instances where people around me have gotten acall at the time they should have gone on a tea break and they’ve had someone
come up and tell them they should have gone then”. (Govtcall, CSO 1)
Some 28 per cent of the CSOs interviewed stated they often came into work sick because
their employer took a heavy-handed approach to sick leave. Most CSOs complained that
there were frequent outbreaks of viral and bacterial diseases spread through the airconditioning system and that the root cause was the pressure put upon them by theemployer not to take sick leave, as highlighted by the following statement:“There’s a bit of a stigma about taking personal so more often than not people
come to work sick then pass on their germs; and with the type of air conditioning
system that we have - it’s not a bad system and it is environmentally friendly, but
because there’s the stigmas that you shouldn’t take personal leave people come towork sick so it passes it on to the next person and because there’s so many of us itjust goes round and round the office. That’s frustrating”. (Govtcall, CSO 5)
Finally, there was a general lack of autonomy and the micro-management style illustrated
by the managers’ inflexible approach to break times and personal and sick leave at
Govtcall was a perennial complaint. There appeared to be a great deal of rhetoric aroundoccupational health and well being, but in reality there were significant pressure on

52

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
employees to keep working in order to make their quota of telephone calls. This lack ofautonomy interviewees argued had a direct impact on their health and wellbeing.

Salesplus
Unlike Govtcall, three-quarters of Salesplus CSO interviewees stated their working
environment was satisfactory. The interviewees also indicated they were aware of thecompany’s health and safety policies, the regular occupational health and well being
meetings and the company’s occupational health and well being officers. They recalled
occupational health and well being training being included in the induction process, andstated there were regular refresher courses held throughout the year. CSOs suggested
team leaders paid good attention to occupational health and well being and regularly
questioned them about their occupational health and well being needs during one-to-one
sessions. Full-time CSOs also stated that because the organisation did not employ “hotdesking” or move them around, their workstations can be set up to meet their uniqueergonomic needs. Workstations were specifically set up for each of the employee’s
requirements, and checked on a regular basis by qualified occupational health and wellbeing officers. Moreover, CSOs also indicated they were kept up to date with all
developments, including occupational health and well being. Other measures identified toaid employee well-being included an onsite masseuse, ‘get fit’ competitions, aerobics
training programs conducted in the organisation, boot camps, and lunch-time ‘fun in thepark’ activities, all the things that Govtcall did not provide.
Nevertheless, 50 per cent of CSOs identified ill-health and injury associated with the job
as negative consequences of the job. Although it was noted that team leaders encouraged
staff to take regular breaks, 19 per cent of the CSOs interviewed stated being seated forlong periods of time caused them moderate to significant muscular discomfort. All the
CSOs interviewed stated Salesplus was highly supportive providing necessary equipment(e.g. glare screens); carrying out necessary assessments and djustments to workstations,and referring staff to the on-site masseuse.
Some 25 per cent of Salesplus interviewees stated they regularly experienced negative
stress. These were most likely those employees who had their performance- based pay
calculated around key performance indicators (KPIs) calculated at the end of each month.
The increasing pace of work, the lack of control over rosters and the number and length ofbreaks were also identified as causes of stress, although there were conflicting views.
Overall, CSOs stated that that their breaks were generally adequate and if requested, thetime allocated and length of the breaks could be altered.
“Our project manager is quite lenient and has given us the option of taking breaksat the times that we actually want to take them because we don’t have the influx ofcalls coming through. So if you want to have lunch at 12:00pm instead of 2:00pm
and have someone else rostered in for you, it makes it a lot easier. It makes it a loteasier especially if you’re not hungry, or you’re not ready to go out again andyou’re in the middle of something then there is flexibility to change”. (Salesplus,
CSO 11)

53

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59“If you go for your 30 minute lunch break for 40 to 50 minutes they’ll obviously
pull you up on it. But otherwise – no not at all. They don’t make a fuss if you’re acouple of minutes late, but we all know how far we can push it”. (Salesplus, CSO
12)
In addition to three breaks throughout the day, Salesplus CSOs stated they were allocatedan additional ten minutes a day of personal time, which could be used for whatever
purpose, including going to the toilet, recuperating after a difficult call, getting a drink,etc. Several CSOs expressed a need for more personal time during the shift, particularly
when they were feeling unwell. These same CSO interviewees did, however, suggest thatteam leaders currently allowed them to go over the ten minutes allocated if there was aneed for it. In addition, a small number of CSOs stated that breaks were sometimes not
distributed evenly enough, and could be scheduled either too close together or too farapart.
“It’s not spread out very well sometimes. Sometimes you may have just come inand have to go again just when you’re getting back into it. Other times it’s toolong sitting on the phone in front of a computer, especially when it’s not busy.”(Salesplus, CSO 27)
For many CSOs, particularly those on performance-based pay, intermittent outbound calls
was another source of stress. CSOs stated they often had days where every second or third
call that was dropped through went through to an answering machine or a disconnected
number, which diminished their ability to meet their sales targets which in turn meant a
reduction in their pay. However, dealing with disgruntled and abusive customers was theprimary cause of stress among all the CSO interviewees, as the quotes illustrate.
[Have you experienced any negative stress as a result of the work itself?] “YES –and you can put that in capital letters. But that’s from the customers though – it’s
not from the people here. Particularly with our project you get a lot of complaints,
it can be really frustrating”. (Salesplus, CSO 22)
One team leader commented that stress was most often experienced by those teammembers who were of Indian origin, who became the target of abuse by customers who
assumed they were dealing with a call centre in India.
“Ultimately the public is cruel. We have a lot of Asian, East Asian workers, so
customers do have the misapprehension that we are in India from time to time.
Also Australians are a bigoted bunch of people and a lot of them tend to take it out
on our staff”. (Salesplus, Team Leader 4).
The call centre was seen to provide staff with a number of avenues to reduce the level ofworkplace stress:“There is a lot of support – they have offered counselling. Also we have teamdevelopment meetings, and they come up to us all the time and see how we aregoing. And we also have one-on-ones with our team leaders, and we can request a
one-on-one with the project manager if something is really bugging us”.
(Salesplus, CSO 18)

54

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
Team leaders also stated that they endeavoured minimise the level of stress and outlined
the various measures in place, as indicated below:“One of my jobs is to ensure that my staff are in a mindset that they are (A) willing
and able to make sure that persons call is terminated – I will not have my staff deal
with people like that, and (B) that they are assuring that they are not taking thatbaggage home with them. I make sure they are ok by having a chat with themevery so often to see that they are doing ok. I have referred CSOs to counselling in
the past, and many have taken the stress management course we offer”.
(Salesplus, Team Leader 3)
Both the managers and team leaders interviewed maintained that in general, the work itself
was not inherently unsafe or unhealthy, and that the organisation had sufficient
occupational health and well being measures in place to deal with any health or safetyissues or incidents.
“I don’t think there’s much in terms of physical injuries or things like that, at least
not in my area. But if something comes up we deal with it straight away and as
best we can”. (Salesplus, Team Leader 5)“Being a call centre, the work itself is not intrinsically unsafe. The office typeenvironment in fact suits most of our employees. If there is a chance of anything
occurring, our call centre has all the procedures and policies in place to deal withthese things if they do arise”. (Salesplus, Manager 4)

Discussion and Conclusions
A number of parallels can be drawn between the health issues raised in the two callcentres. Around 20 per cent of CSOs drew attention to the negative physical outcomes
they had experienced as a direct consequence of the work, and a further 50 per centfrom Salesplus and 89 per cent from Govtcall drew attention to negative stressoutcomes. Across both case studies, the causes of the negative physical outcomes
were largely attributed to, as described in ACA (1998: 6) the “inconvenience of being
literally wired to the desk”, which refers to the extended periods that CSOs have toremain seated and ‘attached’ to technology in order to do their jobs. The job-related
stressors and stress outcomes reported by CSOs in the two call centres (emotional
labour, monitoring of calls, KPI’s, lack of variety of job tasks, lack of control) werealso reminiscent of much of the call centre literature (e.g. ACA 1998; Richardson &Marshall, 1999; URCOT, 2000; Paul & Huws, 2002).
While some of the elements of call centre work that lead to negative occupational
health outcomes can be described as inherent to the job (e.g. the repetitive handling of
telephone calls; being restricted to a particular workspace – remaining seated forextended periods of time, and being “literally tied to the phones”; the lack of control
over work timing – calls automatically ‘dropped-in’; the lack of control over workflows – unpredictable, fluctuating work flows; & dealing with distraught or disgruntled
customers) the mere presence of these conditions cannot determine whether or not thework will necessarily lead to negative health consequences. This is because in any callcentre context, those factors that are inherent to the nature of the work itself operate

55

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
simultaneously alongside factors that can be controlled. This was demonstrated
through the Salesplus example where despite the presence of the aforementioned
conditions, the CSOs reported more positive occupational health outcomes than thosein Govtcall. This could largely be attributed to perceptions of there being a supportive
culture where health and well being issues are concerned.
Conversely, in Govtcall the range of musculoskeletal issues and stress generating
factors was more comprehensive, a fact largely attributed to the hard outcome
orientated human resources management approach used in the call centre which
focussed on performance and the achievement of KPIs. The issue of emotional labour
for instance, was identified as a strong workplace stressor, however the negative
outcomes associated with this process were heavily exacerbated by the lack of either asupportive or systematic approach in managing these issues in practice. These findings
confirm earlier studies that occupational health outcomes and experiences are
significantly influenced by the attitudes held by senior management and the broader
philosophies of the company (Lloyd and James, 2008). They also add weight toNoblet’s (2003) assertion that ‘social support’ is an important avenue for creating work
settings that protect and enhance employee health and wellbeing.
The findings of this study also highlight some of the more systemic issues in the
management of occupational health and well being in call centres. Whilst policies give
an impression of compliance, various working practices may in fact negate theirapplication in practice. In this study, working practices including hot-desking, theinsufficient number of health and safety representatives, insufficient team meetings
and the lack of team leader training, particularly in Govtcall, represented an explicit
departure from policy documents. For instance, as far as reporting of occupational
health and well being was concerned, while policies state that CSOs are able to raiseoccupational health and well being concerns during team meetings, these wereconsidered too short and more focussed on ‘targets’ and ‘KPI’s’ to represent a goodoutlet for employees to discuss occupational health and well being concerns. Whilesystems for reporting on occupational health and safety issues were available, in
Govtcall the negative stigma attached to reporting could be attributed to the underreporting of occupational health and well being issues; the lack of communication
about occupational health and well being issues to the occupational health and safetycommittee, and the lack of recognition by the general management team about theseverity of occupational health and well being concerns. Furthermore, althoughpolicies place emphasis on team leaders as playing an important role in managing
occupational health and well being on a day-to-day basis, their lack of training in
occupational health and well being matters and the conflicting demands placed onthem within the call centre environment often saw occupational health and well being
under prioritised.
These issues also tie in to the broader concept of perception – something that also
arose as a contributing factor to negative health outcomes. Findings from this study
provide strong evidence of negative health outcomes becoming an acceptable aspect ofcall centre work. This is further augmented by the lack of recognition on the part of
employee, TLs and managers of the health risks present within the work environment.
Indeed, most significantly, the perceptual divide between management’s views of theextent and significance of negative health outcomes and the experiences reported by
CSOs raises important questions surrounding the level of consultation, involvement

56

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
and engagement with CSOs in the area of occupational health issues. This again ismore so a concern in Govtcall, the unionised call centre where greater levels of
engagement and better occupational health outcomes would generally be expected(Bohle and Quinlan, 2000).

References
Australian Communications Association (ACA) (2004) The 2004 Australia Call Centre
Industry Benchmark Study: an operational view of the call centre market. Sydney,call.centres.net.
Australian Communications Association Research [ACA] (1998) Call Centre Hang-ups
The Call Centre Agent Report. Sydney, ACA Research Pty Ltd,
Australian Council of Trade Unions (2002) Call Centre Minimum Standards Code.
accessed 29th June 2005 www.actu.asn.au/public/papers/minstandscode.html.
Bagnara S. & Marti P. (2001) Human Work in Call Centres: A Challenge for Cognitive
Ergonomics. Theoretical Issues in Cognitive Science, 2, 223-37.
Bain P. & Taylor P. (2002) Concolidation, ‘Cowboys’ & the Developing Employment
Relationships in British, Dutch and US Call Centres in U Holtgrewe, C Kerst & K Shire(Eds.) Re-organising Service Work: Call Centres in Germany and Britain. England
Ashgate.
Batt R. & Moynihan L. (2002) The viability of alternative call centre production models.
Human Resources Management Journal, 12, 14-35.
Bohle P and Quinlan M, 2000 Managing occupational health and safety: A
multidisciplinary approach, (2nd ed), MacMillan Publishers, South Yarra.
Burgess J. & Connell J. (2004) Emerging Developments in Call Centre Research. Labourand Industry, 14, 1-14.
Callaghan G. & Thompson P. (2001) Edwards Revisited: Technical Control and Call
Centres. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 22, 13-37.
Crome M. (1998) Call Centres: battery farming or free range. Industrial and Commercial
Training, 30, 137-45.
Deery S. & Kinnie N. (2002) Call centres and beyond: a thematic evaluation. Human
Resource Management Journal, 12, 3-14.
Frenkel S., Tam M., Korzynski M. & Shire K. (1999) Beyond Bureaucracy? Work
Organisation in Call Centres. The International Journal of Human Resources
Management,9, 957-79.
Healy J. & Bramble T. (2003) Dial ‘B’ for Burnout? Labour and Industry, 14, 39-59.

57

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
Holman D. (2002) Employee well being in call centres. Human Resource Management
Journal, 12, 35-51.
Hochschild, A. (1983) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling.
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Houlihan M. (2002) Tensions and variations in call centre management strategies. Human
Resources Management Journal, 12, 67-86.
Hutchinson S., Purcell J. & Kinnie N. (2000a) Evolving high commitment management
and the experiences of the RAC call centre. Human Resource Management International
Digest, 10, 63-79.
Lloyd C and James S. (2008) Too much pressure? Retailer power and occupational healthand safety in the food processing industry, Work Employment Society, 22: 713
Marshall C. & Rossman G. (1995) Designing Qualitative Research (2nd ed) California,
Sage.
Mulholland K. (2002) Gender, emotional labour and team-working in a call centre.
Personnel Review, 31, 283-304.
Noblet A. (2003) Building health promoting work settings: identifying the relationshipbetween work characteristics and occupational stress in Australia, Health Promotion
International, 18 (4): 351-359.

Paul J. & Huws U. (2002) How Can We Help? Good practice in call centre employment.
for the TOSCA Project. Analytical Social and Economic Research Ltd,
Richardson R. & Marshall J. (1999) Teleservices, call centres and urban and regional
development. The Service Industries Journal, 19, 96-117.
Rose, E. and Wright, G. (2005). 'Satisfaction and dimensions of control among CSRs'.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16: (1), 136-160.
Russell B. (2004) Are All Call Centres the Same? Labour and Industry, 14, 91-110.
Shire K., Holtgrewe U. & Kerst C. (2002) Re-organising Customer Service Work: An
Introduction in U Holtgrewe, C Kerst & K Shire (Eds.) Re-organising Service Work: Call
Centres in Germany and Britain. England, Ashgate.
Taylor, S. (1998). Emotional Labour and the New Workplace. Workplaces of the Future.
P. Thompson and C. Warhurst. London, Macmillan: 84-104.
Taylor P. Baldry C. Bain P. Ellis V. (2003) A Unique Working Environment': Health,Sickness and Absence Management in UK Call Centres, Work Employment & Society,17 (3): 435-458

58

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):41-59
Taylor B. & Bain P. (2004) Call Centre Offshoring to India: The Revenge of History?
Labour and Industry, 14 15-39.
Union Research Centre for Organisation and Technology [URCOT] (2000) Call Centres:
What kind of future workplaces? , RMIT School of Social Sciences and Planning,
Victorian Trades Hall Council,
Wallace C., Eagleson G. & Waldersee R. (2000) The Sacrificial HR strategy in Call
Centres. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 11, 174.

59

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Call Centre Work and Health and Safety Issues
VIVIENNE HUNT*, ERLING RASMUSSEN** AND FELICITY LAMM***

Abstract
Previous research has found variation in terms of employment outcomes, job satisfaction andcareer opportunities across various industries, type and size of call centre and different
management approaches. This paper continues to explore the work experiences of call centre
workers and is based on research in New Zealand conducted in public sector call centres.
Insights from focus groups of trade union delegates informed the development of a survey which
was circulated across 22 organisation, drawing responses from 845 call centre workers. The
findings show that over half of the workers consider their call centre work is enjoyable most of
the time, their work is strategically important and there are a number benefits. The benefits
include career enhancements, new skills and developing social capital. However, despite thepositives described in open ended survey questions and the ranking of attributes important to callcentre workers, almost half of the respondents have health concerns about the nature of theirwork or the call centre workplace. It is this particular finding that is the focus of the paper. It
illustrates the need for an occupational health focus to be extended to call centre employment in
New Zealand.

Introduction
There has been considerable research on call centres with much academic interest focussed on
the labour process used in call centre employment and a common theme of the international
research has been the criticism of the call centre workplace and the practices used within it.
Many studies demonstrate that stress and the nature of call centre jobs leads to the high levels ofstaff attrition, sickness and/or health problems (Callaghan & Thompson, 2001, 2002; Holman,
Batt, & Holtgrewe, 2007; Taylor & Bain, 1999; van den Broek, 2004).
The extensive range, depth and spread of the literature reflects keen academic interest as callcentres provide an interesting and unique loci for exploring contemporary work. The use ofstandardised work practices in call centres to deliver service with the adoption of technology tomeasure human performance have provided fruitful research directions. Such research has
become more important as the number of call centre employees continues to grow, representing
a signification proportion of the paid workforce in many countries. A question behind theresearch undertaken for this paper is whether call centres provide decent work and whether thenegative portrayal of the nature of work in studies located in the UK, Australia and Europe isrepresentative of the New Zealand context.
To date the research undertaken on employment in New Zealand call centres has shown mixed
evidence. One study suggests the work meets the New Zealand Department of Labour’sdefinition of precarious work (Hannif & Lamm, 2004). The same data was analysed for* Dr Vivienne Hunt is at UniServices, University of Auckland** Prof Erling Rasmussen is in the Department of Management, AUT*** Ass Prof Dr Felicity Lamm is in the Department of Management, AUT
61

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
evidence of occupational health and safety concerns and found in two contrasting case studies
that workers facing certain health risks are a result of their call centre work practices (Hannif &Lamm, 2005). An earlier study demonstrated that the adoption of technology in bank callcentres was both enabling and beneficial for new skills development (Sayers, Barney, Page, &Naidoo, 2003), while an ethnographic study on a call centre offering social services found callcentre workers had problems reconciling their front line work with their non-work lives (Copas
2004). Case study research across six sectors explored the work experience of promoted female
call centre workers and found many positive accounts of career trajectories and the call centre
work experience (Hunt, 2004a, 2004b, 2006, 2008; Hunt & Rasmussen, 2006 2007; Hunt,
Rasmussen, & Lamm, 2006). While Hunt (2008) does not claim such findings are generalisable
across call centres, her research suggests a more positive image of call centre work is possible.
She found that the call centre work experience of new entrants to the labour market – forexample, immigrants, students or return-to-work mothers – can be invaluable for career
progression externally or within call centres.
Despite the large body of research on call centres, little is known about the occupational healthand safety (OHS) policies and practices used in these workplaces. There has been scant researchon the health and safety experiences of New Zealand call centre workers. Hannif and Lamm
(2005) sought to address that gap by examining whether the tasks performed and the OHS
policies and practices in call centres made the job dangerous or unhealthy for workers. Casestudy methodology was used to explore such questions in two call centres, selected to epitomise
the diversity that exists in the industry. Their findings based on interviews with case study
participants and key stakeholders showed that OHS policies and practices in these call centres
represented various risks with negative OHS outcomes demonstrated by a lack of organisational
compliance with the New Zealand employment legislation (Hannif & Lamm, 2005).
Internationally the occupational health problems in call centres were first noted as early as 1999
when a study was initiated by London School of Economics and International Federation ofCommercial, Professional and Technical Employees (FIET). The British affiliate in the banking
sector, BIFU at this time had drawn attention to the increased risk of Repetitive Strain Injury(RSI) to which telephone operators are exposed because of their constant use of the computer.
The union had also detected that operators in the call centres were losing their voices, with theworst affected being part-time employees who could work up to five hours without a break(Demaret, Quinn, & Grumiau, 1999).
While many studies on call centre work have noted the stressful nature of the job, the concern
about health issues in call centres was not systematically researched until Taylor et al. (2003)
investigated a former public utility in central Scotland. Their work explored the physical andsocial work environment of the call centre using a combination of qualitative and quantitative
method. This included responses (n=634) to a self-completed questionnaire to gain informationfrom call handlers (74% of respondents) and non-customer facing respondents about frequencyof health complaints and reports on their levels of discretion and control. They also sought
information on physical working conditions and their findings highlight the importance of
having a framework that management and workers agree to work within. While they question
whether “one can generalise from a single case study …. to call centres more broadly”, they dosuggest that unless radical change in work organisation in call centres is instituted, widespreadwork-related ill health will be persistent within the call centre environment (Taylor, Baldry,
Bain, & Ellis, 2003).

62

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
In their paper on occupational safety and health in the New Zealand call centres Hannif andLamm (2005) note too, a “muted discussion” on the impact of call centre practices on the healthof the workers. Similarly our paper explores concerns raised about health in call centre
employment. The study was initiated by a trade union seeking to measure quality of work-life,
as it gathered evidence about how workers felt about call centre employment. Questions about
what attributes of the call centre job are enjoyed, what aspects of the job are important and key
worker concerns, were included in the research. More importantly the study asked workers what
they would like to change if they could. Initiated in 2008 and completed in 2009, using mixed
methods of focus groups and responses to a self-completed email questionnaire, the study
gathered responses from call centre representatives (n=845) and union delegates (n= 45).
Respondents worked in 22 call centres operated by the public service sector which represents thelargest segment of call centre employment in New Zealand.

Health and Safety in New Zealand
Health and safety issues associated with call centre employment must also be seen in its wider
context of regulatory and public debate of occupational health and safety (OHS) issues. In thelast two decades, there has been considerable pressure to adjust OHS legislation and workplace
practices in New Zealand. The pressure has been generated by: a perceived inadequate
legislative approach; high profile court cases (legal precedent); an unsustainable rise in accident
compensation expenditures; and rising public concerns about work-life balance and stress issues.
The perceived inadequate legislative approach has prompted two major legislative reforms – theHealth and Safety in Employment Act 1992 and the Health and Safety in Employment
Amendment Act 2002 (see Lamm, 2009). These reforms have moved towards “one act and one
enforcement authority” and have ushered in a new approach to OHS management with anemphasis on workplace hazard identification and prevention (Hannif and Lamm, 2004).
Thereby the main responsibility and accountability for OHS rests primarily with the employer,
and this has become a major managerial pre-occupation. The message to take OHS “seriously”
has also been bolstered by financial penalties and incentives being increased dramatically: there
are higher fines available; there have been several high profile court cases awarding large
compensations; and organisations are faced with higher accident insurance premiums or rebates
associated with a stellar OHS prevention record (Rasmussen and Anderson, 2010). The
Amendment Act 2002 also introduced OHS committees for organisations with more than 30
employees, and with active union support, it appears likely that OHS issues will be a common
agenda item in many managerial meetings (Lamm, 2010).
In terms of call centre employment, the focus on work environment, stress and work-life balancehas been particularly important. There has been more emphasis on ergonomics and noise(hearing aids subsidies being a major accident compensation expenditure), with the Departmentof Labour sponsoring several intervention campaigns. Stress and fatigue are now recognised asa potential work hazard in the New Zealand legislation, following a handful of legal precedentcreating court decisions where employers received substantial fines (Caisley, 2004: 71). Thishas put the spotlight on the intensive nature of working in call centres, and countering stress andfatigue has been a topic at conferences held in New Zealand and Australia (Hannif & Lamm,
2005). While ergonomics, stress and fatigue are obvious targets in a call centre environment,
some research has suggested that some work-life balance issues can be solved by appropriate
call centre scheduling and managerial attendance to employee needs (Hunt and Rasmussen,2006).

63

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Research Methods and Findings
Qualitative insights about the issues facing public services call centre workers were first gainedby holding focus groups with trade union delegates. Three focus groups attracted around 45
delegates from across New Zealand, and their discussions and concerns about call centre work
were recorded and transcribed. These transcripts were analysed and used to develop thequestionnaire that had been used in earlier surveys of call centre workers (see Hunt 2008). An
internet-based questionnaire link was emailed to delegates across 25 call centres, and members
were encouraged to complete the survey. At most of the call centres, management supported thesurvey being completed during work time, which probably assisted in 845 surveys being
returned. Most of the respondents were entry-level workers from 17 different call centres. The
findings from the survey are presented below, using a combination of statistical software SPSS
and Nvivo.

Respondent Characteristics
Seventy nine percent of respondents completing the survey were employed full time (see table3), and seventy four percent belonged to the largest union. Nineteen percent (159) recorded thatthey did not belong to any union, and 2% (16) reported they belonged to an “other” unspecified
union. Cross tabulations shows that 23% of those who do not belong to the union were employedpart time.
Table 1: Gender (N=845)
FemaleMale
Missing
Total

Frequency
620
208
17
845

Table 2: Position in Organisation
Frequency
CSR
679
Other
71
Professional/Technical40
Team Leader
34
Case Coordinator
1
CC Manager
1
HelpDesk
1
Representative
1
Social Worker
1
Missing
16
Total
845

Percent
73.4
24.6
100.

Percent
80.36%
8.40%
4.73%
4.02%
0.12%
0.12%
0.12%
0.12%
0.12%
1.89%
100.0%

Table 3: Employment Contracts
Full TimePart time
Fixed Term
Missing

N
671
143
5
26
845

Percentage of Total
79%
17%
1%
3%
100%
64

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Qualification Levels
Respondents demonstrated that they were reasonably well qualified, with 32% having
University-level qualifications, 21% having college and polytechnic diplomas, and 11% having
trade certificates (see Table 4).
Table 4: Tertiary Qualifications
Frequency
University274College
176
Polytechnic Diploma
179
Other Trade Certificates 97
Missing
119845Percent
32%
21%
21%
11%
14%
100%

Importance of Call Centre WorkThe questionnaire was designed to seek to understand the attributes of the call centre job thatwere important to workers. Employees were asked to agree or disagree with a number ofstatements as to what was important in the job using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 was strongly agree
and 5 was strongly disagree. Table 5 below notes the mean rating of all responses. The strongest
positive response was a mean of 2.00 to the statement that “call centre work is strategicallyimportant”. This was followed by “the supervisor is helpful” (mean of 2.05). The strongest
negative reaction (disagree) was 4.02 recorded against the statement that “being time efficient ismore important than fully addressing the customer query” (see Table 5).
Table 5: What is important in the Call Centre Job
Statements that workers were asked to rate on a scale from 1 to 5 (with ‘strongly
agree’ being 1 and ‘strongly disagree’ being 5)N

Mean
Ratings

Being time efficient is more important than addressing customer query

827

4.02

Outsourcing is a concern

825

3.77

Pay rates are good

822

3.25

Rest of Org is positive to the call centre

825

3.09

Managers listen to my concerns

828

2.97

I have control over my work

826

2.90

Monitoring is meaningful

822

2.89

HR staff are helpful

823

2.64

I enjoy my work most of the time

828

2.48

Unions are important

828

2.41

Environment is good

825

2.41

Technology enables me to do my job

831

2.29

I have learned technical skills

825

2.21

Collective Bargaining is important

821

2.14

Supervisor is helpful

830

2.06
65

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
Statements that workers were asked to rate on a scale from 1 to 5 (with ‘strongly
agree’ being 1 and ‘strongly disagree’ being 5)N

Mean
Ratings

Being time efficient is more important than addressing customer query

827

4.02

Outsourcing is a concern

825

3.77

Pay rates are good

822

3.25

Rest of Org is positive to the call centre

825

3.09

Managers listen to my concerns

828

2.97

I have control over my work

826

2.90

Monitoring is meaningful

822

2.89

HR staff are helpful

823

2.64

I enjoy my work most of the time

828

2.48

Unions are important

828

2.41

Environment is good

825

2.41

Technology enables me to do my job

831

2.29

I have learned technical skills

825

2.21

Collective Bargaining is important

821

2.14

Supervisor is helpful

830

2.06

Call centre work is strategically important

827

2.00

The results indicate that the call centre workers consider their work is important; that they havesome control and discretion over their jobs; and that they learn technical skills. A neutral
response to “monitoring is meaningful” contrasts many of the international studies on this
aspect. (See for example, Deery, Iverson, & Walsh, 2002; Demaret et al., 1999; Holman, 2002;
Houlihan, 2000; Kjellseup, 2001; Poynter, 2000; Union Research Centre for Organisation andTechnology, 2000; van den Broek, 2004; Yeuk-Mui, 2001)
Figure 1: Most Important Reasons for Seeking job in the Call Centre
Ranking of reasons for Seeking Work in CC% of respondents (n=815)70%m os t im portant, im portant (1,2)

60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

EnhancecareerHourly rate of Need to learn Flexible hours
payskills66

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
Why Work in a Call Centre?
Much of the international research which deplores call centre employment has not established
why workers continue to seek jobs at call centres. To understand more about this motivation,
respondents were asked to rank a number of statements about what had attracted them to work intheir current call centre. The four reasons ranked most important or important (1 or 2) are noted
in Figure 1 below. While hourly rate of pay was noted by half of the respondents, just over 60%
ranked “enhancing their careers” as most important, with the need to learn skills ranked as
number three. This finding contradicts the international research findings which demonstrate
career development opportunities are not consistent with working in call centres.

What are the Key Benefits of Call Centre Work?
To understand more about what call centre employees found positive about their work, an open
ended question asked respondents to describe the key benefits of their job in their particular callcentre. This generated a total of 756 written responses (88% of all respondents), and the analysisof these responses used Nvivo software to identify a number of key themes. The analysis isbased on developing a code book and establishing nodes in order to group responses. The Nvivo
references show the number of references to the particular concern and a measure of thepercentage coverage of the text. Table 6 shows that new skills and career prospects followed byconditions of employment and then job satisfaction are important to workers. The latter includes
many references to flexible hours and hours that suit individual workers (see table 6).
Table 6: Breakdown of Themes Describing the Benefits of Call Centre Work (as codedwith Nvivo Software)
No. of References
New Skills\Career
Node 1
Career Prospects
Knowledge of Organisation's BusinessCommunication, Customer Service, People
SkillsNew Skills Learned
General Work Experience
Computer Skills
Working for Govt Dept or Corporation
Confidence - Personal Development
Job Satisfaction
Node 2
Helping People
Working with and Meeting Different People
Fulfilling Work
Variety of Work/Diverse Roles/Challenging
Work
Applying my Skills and Knowledge
Consistency

404
107
97
96
61
60
33
33
24

147
49
40
27
23
4
4

67

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Conditions of
Employment
Node 3

Environment
Node 4
Node 5
Node 6
Node 7

Pay/Financial Incentives/Benefits
Hours Suit Me
Flexible Hours
Conditions of Employment
Other

236
84
79
30
25
18

Environment
Training and Support
Physical Environment
Fun/Friendly Place to Work

165
68
54
37
6

Verbatim responses demonstrate too that an important attribute of the call centre job is that itprovides career prospects. Under the node “skill/career” there are a total of 404 references with“career prospects”, “knowledge of the business”, “customer and people skills” being mostfrequently noted. The references to conditions of employment are more widely spread however“hours that suit” and “flexible hours” contribute to over one hundred references. The thirdlargest node that categorises the most frequently mentioned benefits is “job satisfaction”. This
includes many mentions of “helping people” illustrating the importance of people gaining
satisfaction from helping others in life. The following are illustrative examples of the type ofverbatim responses recorded in Table 6 and 7.
Table 7: Examples of Responses
Node 1: New Skills/Career Prospects
Learning about policies, government, work environment.
A great deal of scope for career development.
Gaining experience to further my career.
Work is immediate and satisfying.
I enjoy fast pace of work.
Node 2: Job Satisfaction
Huge sense of satisfaction when I know I've been instrumental in making a difference to someone.
The variety of work and the challenges provided by the role I am in.
Node 3: Conditions of Employment
Flexible Hours:
Being a working Mum, the hours suit me because I can take care of my youngest child, but at thesame time be able to work. Centrally located and easy to get to work.
Node 4: Environment
The environment is phenomenal, awesome bubbly and colourful workplace, the activities andbenefits for coming to work not only makes you want to go to work but most importantly helps you
feel comfortable. Fantastic working environment.
Node 5: Training and Support
The training was a good introduction to the role; it was in depth and good support whilst training.
I think that the on-the-job training is absolutely fantastic and the fact that this is always evolving
and changing to meet the needs of staff is brilliant.
You learn a lot from your workmates when you are in a contact centre environment.

68New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
Health Concerns in Call Centres
Following concerns raised by union delegates about health issues in call centres in the focus
groups, an open-ended question was included in the survey with respondents being asked if they
had any health concerns. If they replied yes they were asked to describe them. Table 8 below
shows the results of categorising the open-ended written responses using Nvivo software.
The single largest response was OOS (occupational over-use syndrome) with 109 references
made to OOS in the open-ended responses. The text coverage is slightly misleading as many
responses were simply OOS. Some of the quotes below speak about:“Overuse (sore back, over use of hands, sore eyes, and sore tailbone), RSI in the wrists
and arms, having to sit all day at a desk, hunching over all the time as well as eyesightdeterioration from using keyboard and VDU all day.”
The physical working environment is the next most frequently mentioned concern with 89references, and the most frequently mentioned one being the air conditioning. Stress and mental
health concerns are a frequently described health issue, and there are 67 coded references to this.
The references to stress are mainly noted as different aspects of the job, for example, “constantnoise in the ear”, “constant call after call”, “system failures” and “dealing with difficult calls
and managing relationships with team leaders”. The physical working environment is also
included in mentions of stress. One quote, “being treated more as a labour unit rather than an
individual”, draws attention to the factory like organisation of a call centre operation.
Contrasting the earlier neutral responses to a question on monitoring and supervision,‘‘monitoring practices and team leaders” are noted as the cause of a stress and “intimidation”.
An often repeated quote mentions that management do not recognise the stress that customer
service operators are under as attested by the following quote: “the managers here don't fully
understand the stress our call centre staff are under from their customers”.
Table 8: Breakdown of Themes Describing Health Concerns
Nvivo Analysis of Text References by Node
Node No.

Description of Node1

OOS Related• OOS/RSI mentions• Sore fingers/wrists
Physical Working Environment• Air-Conditioning• Seats/Equipment• Easy to get sick in CC
Stress /Mental Health• Stress• Mental HealthEyesight/ Hearing Related• Eye/Vision Impairment• Hearing Problems
Sedentary Nature of job

2

3

4

5

% Coverage
Text
4.01%

Total
References
139
109
13

7.64%

89
25
15
15

4.65%

67
54
13

2.40%

57
40
7

3.09%

46
17

6

Back, Neck, Shoulder Complaints• Back• Neck/Shoulders
•

1.84%

37
33
4

69

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
7

8

Other
• Headaches• Sore Throats• Posture Problems• Exhaustion• Bullying• Breaks
Sick Leave Issues

2.62%

31
4
2
2
1
1
3

0.71%

TOTAL NUMBER OF REFERENCES/MENTIONS CODED

9247

What Should Change
One of the last questions in the questionnaire asked respondents to describe what they would justchange if they could change just one thing at their current call centre workplace. This question
generated a total of 199 responses which were also analysed and sorted into nodes using the
Nvivo software (Table 9). The most commonly recorded response was around the “conditionsof work”. This included “pay”, “flexitime” and “hours of work”, with the latter being noted
more frequently than pay. Management practices, the nature of work and the use of KPI’s areanother aspect that call centre workers would like to change. There are 31 mentions of theenvironment and team work, while health concerns are only raised 11 times. This is somewhat
surprising given that so many respondents described concerns about health issues in the previous
question. Variety of work and “upskilling opportunities” are mentioned confirming the desire toseek job variation given the repetitive nature of the work (refer to Tables 9 and 10).
Table 9: Examples of Regarding Specific Health Concerns
NODE
Quotations Regarding Specific Health Concerns
NO
1

Repetitive work has lead to some discomfort in my arms, back and hands.
RSI in wrists and arms, etc.
Overuse (sore back, over use of hands, sore eyes, sore tail bone).
Just normal hazards when working with keyboard/computer.

2

Just the normal OOS issues, repetitive work.
Illnesses spread through air conditioning.
Working in such a closed environment there are often times when you get sick due to so many otherpeople being sick and the air conditioning carries this round.
People having to come into work because of the high level of calls, and most of the people at thecall centre are sick. This puts stress on people and others get sick at the same time.
Women workers having to walk alone along dark streets after shifts due to lack of parking provided.

3

Mental and emotional stress are not “recognized” enough.
The job is stressful and not enough recognition has been given to this.
Constant noise in the ear, constant call after call, system failures cause lots of stress.

4

Stress! Both from customers, and management, not a day goes by where we don’t get abusive
callers. The nature of our customers range from beneficiaries, mental health patients to exprisoners, as well as immigrants with little English.
Deterioration of eye-sight from using and concentrating on computers daily for long periods of time.
Personally my eyesight has gradually gotten worse but that's because my previous job didn't involveme sitting in front of a TV screen all day.

70New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
I have also become slightly short sighted since working here. Up until earlier this year I had prettymuch perfect eye sight.
Hearing tends to be affected with the different volumes of call coming in daily which give me
migraines sometimes but not often. Also vision gets affected with constantly looking into a
computer PC.
Computer damaging my eye-sight. Also head phones can affect my hearing on one side.
5

The inactivity of the job. I have gained a lot of weight as well as health problems since joining.
Sitting constantly all day without being able to get up and move around while doing work.
Increased weight due to sitting for the whole day.

6

Back issues - sitting on a phone all day.
Long hours on phone/computer can cause back problems.
Tensed back and shoulders will lead to back pains and headaches.
Sitting for long periods - lower back pain, aching arms and upper back pain from repetitive typing.

7

I get migraines from the lights.
Headaches from staring at a PC constantly.
Voice strains, constant talking can be aggravating to the voice.
Can get cancer with earphone close to your brain.

8

Sick leave is high. This may be a symptom of Call Centre work.
High rate of sick leave.

Table 10: Analysis of Key Themes: Responses to Question about what would you change?
Node
References included in the node
No. of Refs
Description(% text)
Nature of Work
• Specific mention of job tasks/duties. Includes mention ofneed for variety; dealing with difficult customers.
119 (11.4%)

KPIs, QC andCompliance
IssuesConditions of
Employment•

Desire to “upskill”/train/ do“greentime work”/movearound departments.1••

Includes mention of any “AHT” (Average Handling Time).
“ADH” (Adherence); “CHT” (Call Handling Time); andother QC measures that were part of KPI’s.
Key Performance Measurements / reporting / monitoring /targets / performance appraisal measures.
Any mention of general conditions of employment (e.g.
pay levels, hours, workloads, rosters).
Annual leave provisions (allowances for “flexi-time”,
breaks, staffing levels).
More specifically:
o Pay (47%)
o Flexi-time (32%)
o Hours of work (48%)

•
•
•
•

1

87 (6.5%)

174 (7.4%)

May also be double coded under “Management Practices”

71New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Discussion
Given the international evidence on call centre employment, findings that suggest there arehealth concerns in call centres operated in New Zealand should not be surprising. The problemsof stress, repetitive strain injury or occupational overuse syndrome as described above aresimilar to findings reported elsewhere. More surprising given New Zealand’s employment law
and emphasis on safety and health in employment is that these call centres are operated by the
public sector, usually seen as an exemplary employer.
Apart from the exploratory study by Hannif and Lamm (2005), health issues in call centres were
not detected in other New Zealand research. Hunt’s research over four years found someevidence of concern from management about healthy food snacks because staff tended to be overweight which could be attributable to stress and the sedentary nature of the work (Hunt, 2008).
The research finds contradictory evidence about the quality of the call centre work occupation.
Workers, despite stated concerns about the occupational health of their jobs, seem to enjoy
working in call centres. They find that the employment experience is useful for enhancing theircareer prospects. This suggests other attributes of the job outweigh the concerns workers may
have about the health risks associated with the job.
The responses to questions about what workers enjoy and why they choose to work in callcentres provides some clue as to attributes considered important to workers. Flexible work
practices accommodating some work life balance, opportunities to meet and interact with people
and work experience helping to gain employment elsewhere provide rational explanation as towhy employees work in a call centre. What the research does not show is how long call centre
workers stay at such workplaces and whether the turnover associated with the job helps manage
the health issue or at least keeps it under wraps. Perhaps turnover helps to maintain the health ofworkers and is a necessary part of call centre employment?

Conclusion
It is clear that workers have mixed reactions to their employment in these public service callcentres. Many enjoy the social and interactive nature of their work and claim that one key
benefit is the job satisfaction they derive from assisting people over the phone. Some suggest
they learn new skills and can enhance their career prospects by recording such a work
experience on their CV’s. Moreover, almost half of the respondents, however, feel that there arehealth concerns in their call centre job, with the key ones being Occupational Overuse Syndrome
and stress. Surprisingly, when asked about the changes workers would introduce if they could,“addressing the health concerns” was not mentioned frequently. The physical environment,
however, is noted as problematic with a key complaint being the operation of the air
conditioning, not least for its role in the spread of sickness.
The research does not provide insights as to why workers who have health concerns about theiremployment would continue to work in the call centre. Further research needs to ascertain the
choices workers have regarding other employment opportunities and establish whether callcentre work is a job of last resort or a temporal solution to employment for a limited period. The
research should seek to measure the impact of the health concerns on both the workers and theorganisation. Answering such questions may be helpful for deciding whether this type of
employment represents decent work.

72

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75

Finally, under the current occupational health and safety regime in New Zealand, it is evident
that management is not taking responsibility for the health of their workers in the featured callcentres. This could be taken up more proactively by the union delegates but with New Zealandcurrently experiencing rising levels of unemployment, it seems that job security may be a more
important attribute than healthy employment.

References
Caisley, A. (2004) ‘The law moves in mysterious ways.’ In Rasmussen, E. (ed.) Employment
Relationships: New Zealand’s employment Relations Act. Auckland University Press, Auckland.
Callaghan, G., & Thompson, P. (2001). Edwards revisited: Technical control and call centres.
Economic & Industrial Democracy, 22(1), 13-37.
Callaghan, G., & Thompson, P. (2002). 'We recruit attitude': The selection and shaping ofroutine call centre labour. Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 233-254.
Deery, S., Iverson, R., & Walsh, J. (2002). Work relationships in telephone call centres:
Understanding emotional exhaustion and employee withdrawal. Journal of Management Studies,
39(4), 471-496.
Demaret, L., Quinn, P., & Grumiau, S. (1999, 27 Feb 2006). Call Centres - The New AssemblyLines. Retrieved 10th March 2006, from http://www.icftu.org.
Hannif, Z., & Lamm, F. (2004). Precarious Employment in the New Zealand Call Centre
Industry. Labour, Employment and Work in New Zealand, 14.
Hannif, Z., & Lamm, F. (2005). Occupation Health and Safety in the New Zealand Call Centre
Industry ESC Working Paper No 2005/8 Retrieved 3rd March, 2006, from http://www.unionnetwork.org/uniindep.nsf//$FILE/OHS-CC-NZ.pdf
Holman, D. (2002). Employee wellbeing in call centres. Human Resource Management Journal,
Vol 12 (No 4), 35-50.
Holman, D., Batt, R., & Holtgrewe, U. (2007). The Global Call Centre Report: International
Perspectives on Management and Employment. New York: Cornell University.
Houlihan, M. (2000). Eyes Wide Shut? Querying the depth of call centre learning. Journal of
European Industrial Training, 24(2,3,4), 228..240.
Hunt, V. (2004a). Call Centre Work : Careers for Women? International Employment Relations
Review, 10(2), 111-131.
Hunt, V. (2004b). Call Centre Work for Women: Career or Stopgap? Labour and Industry,
14(3), 139 -153.
Hunt, V. (2006). Call Centres Get Women back to Work. New Zealand Herald,73

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
Hunt, V. (2008). Call Centre Work - Careers for Women Exploring the Work Experience ofWomen Working In New Zealand call centres. Unpublished Doctorate, University of Auckland,
Auckland.
Hunt, V., & Rasmussen, E. (2006 ). Call Centre Employment: Helping to Juggle Work Life
Balance. Paper presented at the International Labour Process Conference. London 2006
Birkbeck University.
Hunt, V., & Rasmussen, E. (2007). Turnover and Retention in a Tight Labour Market:
Reflecting on New Zealand Research. Paper presented at the AIRANZ. Auckland, 2007.
University of Auckland.
Hunt, V., Rasmussen, E., & Lamm, F. (2006). From Black and White to Shades of Grey:
Research of Call Centre Employment, . Paper presented at the Labour, Employment and Work
Conference. Wellington, 2006. Victoria University.
Kjellseup, N. (2001, 2001). Unions and the Benefits of Call Recording. Retrieved 2001, 2001,
from www.callcentres.com.au
Korczynski, M. (2003). Communities of coping: Collective emotional labour in service work.
Organization, 10(1), 55-79.
McManus, B. (2006, 17th August). India's gain could be Australia's loss,. Retrieved 21st
August
2006,
2006,
from
http://www.theage.com.au/news/tv--radio/comparing-callcentres/2006/08/16/1155407816573.html
NASSCOM-McKinsey Report. (2002). Robust Growth for Indian IT Services and IT EnabledServices Industry. from http://www.products.nasscom.org/
Pandian, S. (2006). Globalisation and Development: Impact on Indian Women Workers
Retrieved 15th August, 2006, fromhttp://www.capstrans.edu.au/about/projects/globaldev.html#top
Poynter, G. (2000 ). ‘Thank you for Calling’..The Ideology of Work in the Service Economy’.
Telematics and Informatics, Soundings,(14, Spring), 151-160.
Sator, C. (2006). British companies recalling their call centres from India. Retrieved 28th June
2006,
from
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/business/article_1175957.php/British
companiesrecallingtheircall_centresfromIndia
Sayers, J., Barney, A., Page, C., & Naidoo, K. (2003). A Provisional "Thumbs Up" to New
Zealand Bank Call Centres. University of Auckland Business Review, 5(1), 30-40.
Sechu, G. (2003). The Global Beck and Call Service: Stress in the sunshine sector. Retrieved
July 20, 2005, from http://www.indiatogether.org/2003/jul/wom-gendbudg.htm
Srivastava, S., & Theodore, N. (2006). Off-Shoring: The View from Wall Street. In J. Burgess &J. Connell (Eds.), Developments in the Call Centre Industry (pp. 10-50). Oxon: Routledge.
Taylor, P., & Bain, P. (1999). An assembly line in the head: work employee relations in the callcentre. Industrial Relations Journal, 30(2), 101-117.

74

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):60-75
Taylor, P., & Bain, P. (2004). No Passage to India? UK Unions, Globalisation and theMigration of Call Centre Jobs. Paper presented at the Work Employment and Society, 2004,
Manchester.
Taylor, P., & Bain, P. (2005). 'India calling to the far away towns': the call centre labour process
and globalization. Work Employment and Society, 19(2), 261-282.
Taylor, P., Baldry, C., Bain, P., & Ellis, V. (2003). A unique working environment': health,sickness and absence management in UK call centres. Work Employment and Society, 17(3),435-458.
Union Research Centre for Organisation and Technology. (2000). Call Centres: What kind of
futureworkplaces?
Retrieved
10th
March,
2006,fromhttp://www.ohsrep.org.au/storage//documents/Call%20Centres%20URCOT%20report.rtf
van den Broek, D. (2004). Monitoring and Surveillance in Call Centres : Some Responses from
Australian Workers. Labour and Industry, 12 (3).
Wong , W. M. (2006). Singapore call centres ranked second in survey of six Asian countries.
Singapore
News
Retrieved
5th
July,
2006,
from
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews
Yeuk-Mui, M. T. (2001). Information technology in frontline service work organization. Journalof Sociology, 37(2), 177-206.
Zapf, D., & Holz, M. (2006). On the positive and negative effects of emotion work inorganizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 1.

75

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Flexible Work Schedules and Employee Well-Being
JEREMY HAYMAN*

Abstract
This paper aims to improve understanding of the relationship between the use of flexible work
schedules and employee well-being. Using a sample of 336 employees operating on two flexible
work schedules (flexitime and telecommuting), clear evidence was found of the positive
relationships between flexible work practices, job satisfaction and work/life balance. The resultsof the study also indicate that flexitime schedules can reduce the impact of role overload and jobinduced stress. However, the findings suggest that telecommuting does not always enhance role
overload and work/life balance. In addition, employees operating under flexitime work schedules
displayed significantly higher levels of work/life balance than their counterparts utilising
telecommuting arrangements. The study findings are discussed in relation to theories of
employee flexibility and the implications for employees and organisations are addressed.
Keywords: Flexible work arrangements; work schedules; well-being; job satisfaction; work/lifebalance.

Introduction
There have been many changes to global business, international work forces and in employees’
lives that have led to increased concern for the boundary between work and non-work. For
example, the challenges created by the present financial crisis have led to more internationalorganisations focusing on flexibility as an alternative to redundancy (Andrews, 2009). A further
example of the ambiguity of the pursuit of balancing work and non-work is demonstrated by theincreasing incidence of dual career couples, dual income families, and single parent families witheither child or elder care responsibilities (Baird, 2006). Indeed, the number of working
individuals with children or elder dependents for which they need to care seems to be increasing(Pocock, 2004). Furthermore, a greater number of employees telecommute (work from home), orbring work home, thus blurring the boundaries between work and non work (Hill, Hawkins,
Ferris and Weitzman, 2001). Together, these factors have resulted in employees spending moretime attempting to balance multiple responsibilities, and ultimately, increasing the concern forthe boundary between work and personal life. To adapt to these changes, many organisations
have implemented flexible work arrangements to help employees balance their work and nonwork lives.

*

Dr Jeremy Hayman is a Senior Lecturer in the Business Faculty at AUT University76New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

The impact of flexible work arrangements on employee and organisational outcomes has been
well documented. For instance, research (Rubin, 1979; Ronen and Pimps, 1981; Stains andPleck, 1986; Barber, Dunham and Formisano, 1992; Pierce and Dunham, 1992; Baltes, Briggs,
Huff, Wright and Neuman, 1999; Saltzstein, Ting and Hall Saltzstein, 2001; Kossek, Lautsch andEaton, 2006; Baker, Avery, and Crawford, 2007) examining the impact of flexible work
arrangements has generally shown that these initiatives have a positive influence on the work andnon-work attitudes of employees. However, these results are not supported by other studies. For
example, empirical investigations (e.g., Hicks and Klimoski, 1981; Dunham, Pierce andCastaneda, 1987; Hill, Miller, Weiner and Colihan, 1998) exploring the work related benefits offlexible work arrangements have concluded that in some cases these initiatives can have little
influence on employee attitudes.
The primary objective of the research was to assess the relationships between flexible work
schedules and employee well-being of office based employees. To accomplish this objective asurvey questionnaire was administered to office based employees in an Australian organisation.
Evaluating the relationship between flexible work arrangements and employee well-being isappropriate as Australia is still generally considered to be underrepresented in the work-life
literature (Baird, 2006). Four dimensions of employee well-being are assessed for the purpose ofthis research: work/life balance, role overload, job- induced stress and job satisfaction.

Theory Development and Hypotheses
Evidence presented in the literature suggests that greater autonomy provided to employees withthe use of flexible work schedules can provide employees with positive outcomes (Ronen andPimps, 1981; Pierce, Newstorm, Dunham and Barber,1989; Baird and Litwin, 2005; Baker et al.,2007). In addition, it is also been suggested that greater work schedule flexibility will lead toenhanced work/life balance perceptions for professional employees (Tausig and Fenwick, 2001).
Flexible work programmes offer employees more flexibility and work schedule control than
traditional working hours (Ronen, 1981). Therefore, it is logical to assume that organisational
programmes that offer employees greater flexibility (e.g., flexitime and flexiplace) should
provide employees with a better ability to balance work and non work responsibilities comparedto their counterparts working on traditional fixed hour schedules.
Flexitime and Well-being
Flexitime work schedules (also referred to as flex-time or flexible hours) have been linked tonumerous work and non-work benefits for employees. The review of the work/life literature
revealed that flexitime schedules that offer the most benefits for employees are those with shortcore hours, the accumulation of hours, and the ability to change schedules daily or weekly(Olmstead and Smith, 1994). While there may be some limitations when utilising flexitime work
schedules (Bailyn, 1993; Pocock, 2004), working flexible hours is generally considered to have apositive influence on employee attitudes such as job satisfaction (Ronen 1981; McGuire andLiro, 1986). Furthermore, flexitime can enhance work and personal life balance (Hayman, 2009).
Indeed, flexible work schedule research (Owen, 1977; Pierce and Newstrom, 1980; Tausig andFenwick, 2001; Saltzstei et al., 2001) has established a positive relationship between flexitime77

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

operating schedules and work and non-work integration. Better integration of work and personal
life leads to less work/life conflict which can have a positive impact on job related stress (Bairdand Litwin, 2005). Consequently, it is predicted.
Hypothesis 1: The utilisation of flexitime work schedules will be positively related to employee
well-being.
Flexiplace and Well-being
The impact of flexible work schedules, such as flexitime on employee attitudes, has received agreat deal of attention (Hicks and Klimoski, 1981; Ronen, 1981; Hill, et al. 1998; Pierce, et al.
1989; Eaton, 2003). In spite of the abundance of literature exploring flexible work hours, theimpact of working at home, or telecommuting has not received the same attention (Rasmussen
and Corbett, 2008). One study by Hill et al, (1998), which is, generally, considered to be the firstin the world to compare virtual office workers with their office-based counterparts, foundtelecommuting had moderate effects on employee productivity, flexibility and work/life balance.
Other more obvious employee benefits of flexiplace initiatives include reduced commuting time,
reduced stress, role overload and more time for personal and family activities (Kossek et al.,2006). Moreover, research (Grzywarc and Marks, 2000) has found in certain situations
telecommuting can help manage role overload. Flexiplace schedules also help support diverse
work and life patterns of employees and improve job satisfaction and well-being (Felstead,
Jewson, Phizacklea, and Walters, 2002; Baker et al., 2007). Most research examining the impact
of flexiplace initiatives suggests that the effect on work and non-work attitudes of employees issimilar to flexible work schedules, such as flexitime (Rodgers, 1992). Therefore, it isconceivable that flexiplace or telecommuting work arrangements will also positively impact
employee well-being. Consequently, the subsequent relationship between flexiplace work
schedules and well-being is expected.
Hypothesis 2: The utilisation of flexiplace (telecommuting) work schedules will be positively
related to employee well-being.

Methods
Research Setting and Participants
An Australian university was selected as an appropriate setting to conduct the study. The
organisation is a large employer of office-based administrative staff with comprehensive accessto flexible work schedules. Indeed, the participating university has utilised a variety of flexible
work arrangements and work/life programmes and these are entrenched in the organisational
culture. Furthermore, employees have had access to flexible work schedules including, flexible
hours and working from home, since 1990. Consequently, this setting provides a unique
opportunity to assess how flexible work practices influence the well-being of office based
employees.

78New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Respondents in the study were 336 administrative employees. 211 of the survey respondents
used flexitime work schedules, with 125 respondents operating on flexiplace work schedules. A
prominent feature of the sample characteristics was the majority of respondents were female (64and 60 percent of respondents respectively), reflecting the nature of the administrative staff
employed within the universities (Healthy Life Style Office, 2002). The second feature of thestudy sample related to job function; specifically, office-based administrative employees makeup a large percentage of the non-academic university workforce, and indeed, a further feature ofjob function was that 93 percent of the incumbents were in the category of administrative andprofessional staff. Another feature of the sample was that all age groups were relatively well
represented. A final feature of the sample was that over 50 percent of respondents in bothorganisations had children living at home and nearly 12 percent of the survey staff had eldercare
responsibilities. Overall, the characteristics of the sample generally represented thedemographics of the universities office based employees.
Measures
Work/Life Balance
Employee work/life balance was measured with a 15 item scale adapted from an instrument
reported by Fisher-McAuley, Stanton, Jolton and Gavin (2003). The original scale consisted of
19 items designed to assess three dimensions of work/life balance: work interference withpersonal life (WIPL), personal life interference with work (PLIW), work/personal life
enhancement (WPLE). Respondents were asked to indicate the frequency of feeling a particular
way during the past three months using a seven point time related scale (e.g., 1=Not at all,4=Sometimes, and 7=All the time). The factor analysis of the items confirmed the three
dimensions of the work/life balance scale. Cronbach alpha values for the three factors were 90
for WIPL, .86 for PLIW, and .77 for WPLE. Higher arithmetic means indicate that respondents
report having experienced that situation more frequently. For the WIPL and PLIW, sub scales
higher means are purported to indicate lower levels of work/life balance. The WPLE sub scale isworded positively and higher means indicate higher levels of perceived work/life balance.
Work Role Overload
Role overload was measured using a six item scale reported by Arynee, Srinivas and Tan (2005).
Work role overload is defined as a sense of feeling that there is too much work to do in the time
available. Responses were obtained on a seven point response scale (anchored from 1=strongly
disagree to 7=strongly agree). Example items include: ‘It often seems like I have too much workfor one person to do’ and ‘there is too much work to do everything well’. An arithmetic mean of
the six role overload items was obtained (coefficient alpha = .87).
Job-induced Stress
A measure of job-induced stress was used based on an instrument previously reported by House
and Rizzo (1972). The seven item instrument was adapted from a six point scale to a seven point
likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree) for consistency with the other measures inthis study. Previous research (Macky and Boxall, 2009) using the measure of job-induced stressfound acceptable reliability statistics for the instrument. Higher scores represent greater felt
stress and the coefficient alpha obtained was .90.
79

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Job Satisfaction
The overall level of job satisfaction was assessed using a section of the Job Diagnostic Survey(Hackman and Oldham, 1975). Using samples of white collar professional employees in a seriesof studies with office workers, the five item scale reported an overall internal reliability
coefficient of 0.77 (Oldham, Hackman and Stepina, 1978). These results provide someconfidence for using this instrument, which is a popular method for measuring global job
satisfaction. An overall, rather than a facet measure, was chosen for the use in this study because
the researcher is interested in how work/life balance relates to job satisfaction as a whole, rather
than how work/life balance relates to specific aspects of the job. The instrument developed by
Hackman and Oldham (1975) consists of five items referring to satisfaction with work, the job
and how often they (the employees) feel like quitting their job. Two items are reversed scored.
Responses were made on a seven point Likert scale (ranging from 1=strongly disagree to7=strongly agree). An arithmetic mean of the five job satisfaction items was acquired with acoefficient alpha of .85.
Flexible Work Schedule
The analyses are based on 336 respondents who reported having used either flexitime or
flexiplace (telecommuting) work schedules for a minimum period of one year. Of these, 211
employees utilised flexitime arrangements and 125 employees worked on flexiplace schedules,
generally from a home office. Employees were asked how many days per week they worked
from home. All employees worked from a home office for a minimum of two days per week.
The instrument used to measure the use of flexible work schedules was adapted from an
instrument reported by Hayman (2009). The three items relating the utilisation of individual
work schedules were measured on a seven point scale (coefficient alpha = .91).

Analyses and Results
To test the research hypotheses and the overall fit of the model, structural equation modelling ora path analysis approach was used. AMOS (Analysis of Moment Structures) was employed toestimate path coefficients among the variables while simultaneously removing the effects ofmethod factor bias. Modelling the two groups simultaneously provides more efficient parameter
estimates than two single-group models (Bollen and Long, 1993), while also providing a test forthe significance of differences between the two groups. Following the recommendations ofBollen and Long (1993) to report multiple fit indices, four goodness-of-fit measures were
employed simultaneously in the assessment of model fit. First, the normed chi-square (chi-square÷ degrees of freedom), in which a ratio of between 1.0 and 3.0 indicates an acceptable fit(Carmines and McIver, 1981) was employed. Furthermore, the Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index(AGFI) and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) were also employed in the analysis. For the AGFIand CFI a value above .90 indicates an acceptable model fit (Bentler and Bonett, 1980). Lastly,
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), where a value of 0.06 or less represents
a close fit, and the RMSEA should not exceed 0.10 (Bentler, 1990).

80

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for all the study variables were assessed using
seven point scales, with means score ranging from 4.89 to 3.60. Higher means indicate higher
levels of the particular variable. All of the examined variables are significantly inter correlated,but not above the recommended level of .65. Flexible work schedules are significantly correlated
to WIPL (r = .46, p < .001), PLIW (r = .28, p < .001), and WPLE (r = .44, p < .001), role
overload (r = .30, p < .001), job-induced stress (r = .36, p < .001) and job satisfaction (r = .54, p< .001).
Figure 1: Path Model (n=211)

WIPL-.30**

PLIW-.24**
Flexitime

.55**

WPLE

-.10*
-.33**

Role
Overload.47**
Job-Induced
StressJob
Satisfaction

Notes:

a. Standardised estimates of the path coefficients are shown. Non significant path is in bold.
b. χ² /df = 1.144, AGFI = 0.929, CFI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.041
c. WIPL = Work interference with personal life, PLIW = Personal life interference with work,
and WPLE = Work and personal life enhancement. d. * p < .01, and ** p < .001.

The results presented in Figure 1 indicate that the conceptual model, and the data generally fit
well (normed χ² = 1.144, AGFI = 0.929, CFI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.041). Furthermore, thestandardised path estimates reported in Figure 1 show significant coefficients at the p < .01 level.
The results of the path analysis suggest flexitime work schedules were significantly related to thethree work/life balance dimensions of WIPL, PLIW and WPLE. Indeed, flexitime wassignificantly related to role overload, job-induced stress and job satisfaction. These findings
indicate flexitime work schedules generally enhance employee well-being. Consequently,
81New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Hypothesis 1 was fully supported; suggesting flexitime work schedules are positively related to
employee well-being.
The results presented in Figure 2 indicate that the data generally fit well (normed χ² = 1.240,
AGFI = 0.910, CFI = 0.937, RMSEA = 0.061). Moreover, the majority of the standardised pathestimates reported in Figure 2 show significant coefficients at the p < .01 level. The path analysis
results suggest that flexiplace work schedules were significantly related to two of the work/lifebalance dimensions of WIPL and WPLE. However, flexiplace schedules were non-significantly
related to PLIW. These results imply that flexiplace schedules do not reduce the impact of
personal life interference with work. Indeed, flexiplace arrangements were non-significantly
linked to role overload and only marginally significant to job-induced stress. Hence, the findings
suggest telecommuting did not positively impact role overload. Furthermore, there was a positive
relationship found between flexiplace work schedules and job satisfaction. Consequently,
Hypothesis 2 was marginally supported, which indicates flexiplace work schedules are only
moderately related to employee well-being.
Figure 2: Path Model (n=125)

WIPL-.34**
PLIW
-.04
.27**
Flexiplace
-.06
-.10*

WPLE
Role
Overload.39**
Job-Induced
StressJob
Satisfaction

Notes:

a. Standardised estimates of the path coefficients are shown. Non significant path is in bold.
b. χ² /df = 1.240, AGFI = 0.910, CFI = 0.937, RMSEA = 0.061
c. WIPL = Work interference with personal life, PLIW = Personal life interference with work,
and WPLE = Work and personal life enhancement.
d. * p < .01, and ** p < .001.

82

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Discussions and Conclusions
The main focus of this paper was to explore the relationships between flexible work
arrangements and well-being with a sample of office based employees. The hypotheses presented
in this paper predicted that flexitime and flexiplace work schedules would be related to three
dimensions of work/life balance: WIPL, PLIW and WPLE. Indeed, the expectation that flexitime
would be linked to WIPL, PLIW, and WPLE was substantiated by the statistical results, althoughflexiplace schedules were not significantly related to PLIW. Overall, the results demonstrate theimportance of organisational flexible work policies to reducing the negative impact of work
conflicting on personal life and personal life interfering with work. In addition, these results
provide empirical confirmation that flexitime and working from home was generally associatedto positive enhancement of personal life on work and vice versa. With the exception of a small
number of researchers (Eaton and Bailyn, 2000; Daves, 2004; Hayman, 2009), limited attempts
have been made to empirically assess the importance of flexible work policies to positive
experiences and well-being of office based employees. These findings make a significant
contribution to the work/life literature as it is likely that organisational flexibility policies are
related to a host of work and non work attitudes of employees (Eaton, 2003; Voydanoff, 2004).
Consequently, future researchers may wish to consider the importance of other attitudinalvariables when assessing flexible work practices.
The study also has implications for human resource practitioners. The results of this study imply
that flexible work schedules make a significant contribution to employee well-being and to theability of employees to balance their work and personal life. Consequently, an implication for theuniversity managers and human resource practitioners who want to develop comprehensive
work/life policies is to how to improve the degree of schedule flexibility provided to professional
employees. In addition, university leaders may consider the importance of the type oforganisational flexibility policies implemented, and attempt to provide a culture that supports
and encourages the use of flexible work arrangements. Hence, there is an opportunity foruniversity administrators to follow the requests of respondents who suggested that training
programmes might improve the understanding of supervisory staff on the importance of schedule
flexibility and access to flexible work policies for office based employees.
The study results should be interpreted with the following limitations. Firstly, the simultaneouspath analyses results should be interpreted with some caution as the better model fit of theflexitime data may be attributed to the different data set numbers. Secondly, the study sample
was limited to 336 administrative employees from the university, albeit at four geographicallydispersed locations. Therefore, future researchers may wish to test the hypotheses in anotheruniversity environment, or in other industries that utilise flexible work schedules with officebased professional employees. Thirdly, a cross sectional research design was employed, so as aresult, causality among the variables cannot be determined, but inferences can be made from theassociations. The fourth aspect of the study is the self-report data collected in the quantitative
questionnaire to assess the study variables. Although this method bias, due to the use of a selfreport approach, may have possibly inflated the magnitude of the observed correlations, thiseffect would not alter the statistical significance of the observed linkages between the study
variables (Carmines and McIver, 1981; Kent, 2001). Indeed, the constructs included in the83New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

present study were assessed by asking employees to report their own attitudes and perceptions,as work/life balance is in the eye of the beholder (Fisher, 2001). Consequently, the use of selfreport questionnaires is an appropriate and convenient method for collecting the study data.
Despite the potential wealth of knowledge presented in this study, the research has arguably only
begun to elucidate the complex relationships that might transform management practice andresearch interest. Indeed, the findings presented in the article are possibly suggestive, but animportant consideration is that the results are not definitive. Furthermore, it is possible thatalternative conceptual paradigms of work/life balance may be explored in future studies. Future
researchers might also consider the model developed for this research across different cultural
settings, in particular where flexible work arrangements are utilised by office-based employees,
which may provide further understanding and consolidation of the study findings. Moreover,there may be the need for the current investigation to be extended by thorough empirical researchthat has the potential to refine work/life theory and design, and add knowledge to management
practice. Finally, continued research on work/life balance has immense potential for improving
organisational efforts to enhance the quality of people’s work and personal lives.

References
Andrews, J. (2009). Flexibility in the new economy: Is the four day work week the shape ofthings to come? Workplaceflexibility.com. Retrieved November 11, 2009, fromhttp://www.workplaceflexibility.com.au/flexibility_in_a_new_economy.html
Arynee, S. Srinivas, E.S. and Tan, T.D. (2005). Rhythms of Life: Antecedents and Outcomes ofWork-Family Balance in Employed Parents. Journal of Applied Psychology. 90(1): 132-146.
Baker, E., Avery, G.C. and Crawford, J. (2007). Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity when
Professionals Work from Home. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 15(1):110-126.
Bailyn, L. (1993). Breaking the Mold: Women, Men, and Time in the Corporate World. New
York: The Free Press.
Baird, M. (2006). The Gender Agenda: Women, Work and Maternity Leave. In M. Hearn and G.
Michelson (eds). Rethinking Work: Time, Space, Discourse. (pp.39-59). Melbourne, Australia:
Cambridge University Press.
Baird, M. and Litwin, A. (2005). Rethinking Work and Family Policy: The Making and Taking
Parental Leave in Australia. International Review of Psychiatry. 17(5): 385-400
Baltes, B., Briggs, T.E., Huff, J.W., Wright, J.A. and Neuman, G.A. (1999). Flexible andCompressed Workweek Schedules: A Meta-Analysis of their Effects on Work-Related Criteria.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 84(4): 496-513.

84

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Barber, A.E., Dunham, R. and Formisano, R.A. (1992). The Impact on Flexible Benefits on
Employee Satisfaction: A Field Study. Personnel Psychology. 45(1): 55-76
Bentler, P.M. (1990). Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models. Psychological Bulletin.
107(2): 238-246
Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significant Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis
Covariance Structures. Psychological Bulletin. 88(3): 588-606
Bollen, K. A. and Long, J. S. (1993). Introduction. In K.A. Bollen, and J.S. Long (eds). Testing
Structural Equation Models. (pp.11). Newbury Park: Sage.
Carmines, E.G. and McIver, J.P. (1981). Analyzing Models with Unobserved Variables. In G.W.
Bohmstedt and E.F. Borgatta. (eds). Social Measurement: Current Issues. (pp.79). Beverly Hills:
Sage
Daves, J.L. (2004). Family-Friendly/Work-Life Balance Policies: Employee Preferences,Supervisor and Organisational Support, and Retention Outcomes. Dissertation Abstracts
International, Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, No AAT 3134711,
November 2004.
Dunham, R.B., Pierce, J.L., and Castaneda, M.B. (1987). Alternative Work Schedules: TwoField Quasi-Experiments. Personnel Psychology. 40(2): 215-242
Eaton, S.C. (2003). If you can use them: Flexible Policies, Organisational Commitment andPerceived Performance. Industrial Relations. 42(2): 145-166
Eaton, S.C. and Bailyn, L. (2000). Career as Life Path: Tracing Work and Life Strategies in
Biotechnology Professionals. In M. Pieper., M. Authur., R. Goffee and T. Morris. (eds). Career
Frontiers: New Conceptions of Working Lives. (pp.177-198). Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Felstead, A., Jewson, N., Phizacklea, A. and Walters, S. (2002). Opportunities to Work at Homein the Context of Work-Life Balance. Human Resource Management Journal. 12(1):54-76.
Fisher-McAuley, G., Stanton, J., Jolton, J. and Gavin, J. (2003). Modelling the Relationship
Between Work-Life Balance and Organisational Outcomes. Annual Conference of the Society for
Industrial-Organisation Psychology: Conference Proceedings. (pp.1-26). April 12, 2003
Fisher, G. (2001). Work/Personal Life Balance: A Construct Development Study. Dissertation
Abstracts International, Number 002119, August 2001.
Grzywacz, J.G. and Marks, N.F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the Work-Family Interface: An
Ecological Perspective on the Correlates of Positive and Negative Spillover between Work andFamily. Journal of Occupational Health and Psychology. 5(1): 111-126
85

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journalof Applied Psychology. 60(2): 15-170
Hayman, J.R. (2009). Flexible Work Arrangements: Exploring the Linkages between Perceived
Usability of Flexible Work Schedules and Work/Life Balance. Journal of Community, Work andFamily. 12(3): 123-138.
Healthy Life Style Office. (2003). Quality of working life survey report 2003. Curtin Universityof Technology, Planning and Staff Services: Perth, Western Australia.
Hicks, W.D. and Klimoski, R.J. (1981). The Impact of Flexitime on Employee Attitudes.
Academy of Management Journal. 24(2): 333-341.
Hill, J.E., Hawkins, A.J., Ferris, M., and Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding an extra day a week: The
positive influence of perceived job flexibility on work and family life balance. Family Relations:Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 50: 49-58.
Hill, J.E., Miller, B.C., Weiner, S.P. and Colihan, J. (1998). Influences of the Virtual Office on
Aspects of Work and Work/Life Balance. Personnel Psychology. 51(3): 667-683
House, R.J. and Rizzo, J.R. (1972). Role Conflict and Ambiguity as Critical Variables in a
Model of Organizational Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 7: 285306
House, R., & Rizzo, J., (1972), Role conflict and role ambiguity as critical variables in a model ofbehavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 7, pp. 467-505.

Kent, R. (2001). Data Construction and Data Analysis of Survey Research. New York: Palgrave.
Kossek, E.E., Lautsch, B.A. and Eaton, S.C. (2006). Telecommuting, Control and Boundary
Management: Correlates of Policy Use and Practice, Job Control and Work-Family
Effectiveness. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 68(2): 347-367
Macky, K. and Boxell, P. (2009). Employee Well-Being and Union Membership. New Zealand
Journal of Employment Relations. 34 (3): 14-25.
McGuire, J.B. and Liro, J.R. (1986). Flexible Work Schedules, Work Attitudes and Perceptionsof Productivity. Public Personnel Management. 15(1): 65-74
Oldham, G.R., Hackman, J.R. and Stepina, L.P. (1978). Norms for the Job Diagnostic Survey.
New Haven: Yale University School of Organisation and Management
Olmstead, B. and Smith, S. (1994). Creating a Flexible Workplace. (2nd ed). New York:
American Association of Management.
86New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):76-87

Owen, J.D. (1977). Flexitime – Some problems and solutions. Industrial and Labor Relations
Review. 30(2): 152-161.
Pierce, J.L. and Dunham, R.B. (1992). The 12-hour Work Day: A 48, Eight-day Week. Academyof Management Journal. 35(5): 1086-1999
Pierce, J.L. and Newstrom, J.W. (1980). Toward a Conceptual Clarification of Employee
Responses to Flexible Working Hours: A Work Adjustment Model. Journal of Management.
6(2): 117-134
Pierce, J.L., Newstorm, J.W., Dunham, R.B., and Barber, A.E. (1989). Alternative Work
Schedules. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Pocock, B. (2004). Long Hours Kills Work-Life Balance Without Delivering Productivity. HR
Report. Thomspon CP, April, 1: 1-3
Rasmussen, E. and Corbett, G. (2008). Why Isn’t Teleworking Working. New Zealand Journalof Employment Relations. 33(2): 20-32.
Rodgers, C.S. (1992). The Flexible Workplace: What have we learned? Human Resource
Management. 31(3): 183-199.
Ronen, S. (1981). Flexible Work Hours: An Innovation in the Quality of Work Life. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Ronen, S. and Pimps, S.B, (1981). The Compressed Work Week as Organisational Change:
Behaviourial Outcomes and Attitudinal Outcomes. The Academy of Management Review. 6: 6174
Rubin, R.S. (1979). Flextime: Its Implementation in the Public Sector. Public Administrative
Review. 39(3): 277-279
Saltzstein, A.L., Ting, Y. and Hall Saltzstein, G. (2001). Work-Family Balance and Job
Satisfaction: The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies on Attitudes of Government Employees.
Public Administration Review. 61(4): 452-467
Stains, G.L. and Pleck, J.H. (1986). Work Schedule Flexibility and Family Life. Journal of
Occupational Behavior. 7: 147-153
Tausig, M. and Fenwick, R. (2001). Unbinding Time: Alternate Work Schedules and Work-Life
Balance. Journal of Family and Economic Issues. 22(2): 101-119
Voydanoff, P. (2004). Implication of Work and Community Demands and Resources for Workto Family Conflict Facilitation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 9(4): 275-28587

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96

Commentary - Occupational Stress and Workers’
Compensation: Getting out of the kitchen?
NADINE MCDONNELL*

Introduction
Most people accept that employers should compensate workers for work-related injury
and disease. Workers’ compensation law defines a work-related injury as an “injury
arising out of and in the course or employment”. The rule seems clear – if there isevidence that someone has suffered a work-related injury, they should be compensatedfor this harm or loss by their employer. However, workers’ compensation has neverbeen straightforward.
When it started a hundred years ago workers’ compensation provided compensation forworkmen who suffered physical injuries in work place accidents. Psychological injury,
occupational diseases and conditions that arose over time were simply not accepted as
work-related.
Over the years since coverage has been expanded to include
psychological injuries as well as occupational disease but the need to prove that the
injury is somehow caused by the employment remains. Before workers receive workers’
compensation, they must prove that the injury or disease is work-related. As Arthur
Larson rightly pointed out forty years ago, the problem of obtaining workers’
compensation was always easier when the injury was ‘physical’:“[H]ow could it be real when. . . it was purely mental?
This poignant judicial cry out of the past … contains the clue to almost all of thetrouble that has attended the development of workmen's compensation law related
to mental and nervous injuries. This equation of “mental” with “unreal”, or
imaginary, or phoney, is so ingrained that it has achieved a firm place in ouridiomatic language. Who has not at some time, in dismissing a physical complaintof some suffering friend or relative, airily waved the complaint aside by saying,“Oh, it's all in his head?”” (Larson, 1970, at 1234)
Proof is also more difficult when the condition arises over time instead of at one specificmoment. Quite simply it is easier to show that an injury is work-related when it happens
in an instant, like a car accident, rather than over several days or months. Many claims
for occupational stress present difficulties for workers’ compensation because they lacka clear physical component and often arise over time.
Another problem is that the relationship between stress and injury is not wellunderstood. Stress is associated many different types of work - with tedious andrepetitive work, physically demanding and risky work, work with difficult and abusive
co-workers or supervisors, work dealing with the public and work in isolation, work*

Dr Nadine McDonnell is a Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Occupational Health and Safety
Research, AUT and is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Auckland.

88New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
occasioned by dangerous or violent incidents and so on. And it is not at all clear how
much stress is too much stress. Different workers react differently to similar stressors.
Some workers may thrive while others get sick. All of these factors make it difficult toprove that the worker’s injury or illness was work-related. Even if a link between thework stress and the injury is proven, the stress may be seen as an acceptable aspect of
the job and the problem is not the job but the worker. Some believe that when theworker accepts a stressful job and the pay that goes with it, they accept the stress and if
the stress is too much and they get sick, then they should find another job. As the saying
goes, “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”.
The basic rule is that workers should be compensated for work-related injuries anddiseases, but this rule is hard to apply when the injury and its cause are related tooccupational stress. Below I discuss how ‘personal injury’ is defined by workers’
compensation schemes and examine how this definition determines which claims are
accepted as work-related injury or disease. As discussed below, the problem is thatoccupational stress is seen as an illness arising over time and therefore rarely meets thestrict criteria imposed by workers’ compensation agencies covering work-related injury.

Personal injury - this and not that
Workers’ compensation is shaped by dichotomies – the duality of this and not that. The
obvious duality shaping workers’ compensation is that of work and non-work. Workers’
compensation covers work-related injuries and does not cover non-work injuries. While
many people feel as though they are working all of the time, if they count the hours, they
will discover that they only work for 25 to 30 percent of their time. Any injury that
occurs while they are not working, in the sense that they are not being paid to do what
they are doing when hurt, is not covered by workers’ compensation. This means that formost people if they are hurt doing something while at home, playing sports, or driving
they cannot rely on workers’ compensation to pay for their medical care or lost wages.
For most workers, (although not those working in New Zealand)), workers’
compensation is the only income insurance they have. If they are seriously injured andcannot work most workers face financial ruin, losing their savings and at times theirhomes, unless the disabling condition can be shown to be work-related. This has meantthat in many jurisdictions, (again except New Zealand), workers have a strong
motivation to prove that their injury was work-related. Moreover, in order to have theirclaim accepted, the worker must establish that their injury was a personal injury and thatit arose out of and in the course of their employment. That is, the requirement is that the
injury must be a personal injury.
The term ‘personal injury’ denotes the next set of dualities – that of personal injury
versus property damage and that of injury versus disease. Injury is hurt or harm andpersonal injury is hurt or harm to the person, but does not include damage or harm totheir property. When workers’ compensation schemes were first established in the earlypart of the 20th Century, they generally covered physical injuries caused by accident.
Damaged clothing or tools were not covered, although modern workers’ compensation
schemes will pay for damaged eyeglasses, dentures and prostheses. When first enacted,
workers’ compensation was to compensate injured workmen (initially the scheme did
not cover women or women’s work) for strains, sprains, cuts, bruises and broken bones
caused by work-related accidents. Compensation covered physical, not mental, injury

89

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96(and death) caused by accidents that happened on the job. As stated above, the objectiveof workmen’s compensation (as it was called for many years) was to provide
compensation to workmen injured at work or if they were killed at work, to pay
compensation to their widows. Workers’ compensation was never intended to cover all
misfortunes of life. The scheme was designed as a means to compensate workers who
suffered personal injuries which happened during and because of work.
In most jurisdictions under workers’ compensation schemes personal injury is now
defined as including mental as well as physical injury as well as illness suffered as theconsequence of identified diseases. For example, in British Columbia personal injury isdefined by policy as “…any physiological change arising from some cause, for example,
a limitation in movement of the back or restriction in the use of a limb.” This definition
resembles that offered in Larson’s Workers’ Compensation which defines ‘personal injury’
as including:“… any harmful change in the body. It need not involve physical trauma, but may
include such injuries as disease, sunstroke, nervous collapse …” (Larson, 1984, at
Chapter 42.00)
In New Zealand the Accident Compensation Act 2001 provides a long and rather
complex definition for personal injury. The definition demonstrates some of thechallenges drafters face when trying to offer a precise definition. The definition offeredby Section 26 distinguishes between physical and mental injury and limits coverage fora mental injury to those injuries which are the result of a physical injury or are the resultof a sex crime or a work-related mental injury as defined under the Act. Non-workmental injuries, which are not a consequence of a physical injury, are covered by the
ACC scheme only if they are the result of a sex crime as defined by scheme. Despite thewider contemporary definition of ‘personal injury’, the traditional notion of personal
injury as physical harm to the worker’s person caused by traumatic accident continues toinfluence compensation decisions.
An understanding of what is meant by ‘personal injury’ also requires an appreciation of
the other ‘twosomes’, that is injury’ and disease and accident and disease, as outlined intable 1. These two dualities taken with the further twosome of cause and effect underpin
the definition of personal injury in most compensation schemes. First, with respect tocause and effect, the duality of injury and disease represents the consequence or effect ofsome event, while the duality of accident and disease is concerned with the cause. Here
confusion seems inevitable as the word ‘disease’ is used to refer to both the cause andeffect – the word refers to both the illness and the process, which causes the sickness. A
disease is an unhealthy condition of the body (or part of it) or the mind but it is not an
injury.

90

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
Table 1: Duality of Terms
Cause

EffectAccident- specific event- identifiable trauma- internal to the body

Injury (mental or physical injury)- strain, sprain, bruise, break, cut

Disease- process over time
- uncertain trigger- internal to the body

Disease (mental or physical illness)

In British Columbia ‘injury’ is defined as a harmful physiological change in the body or
mind arising from some cause, but not a condition which is also a disease (WorkSafeBC,
2011, at Paragraph C3-12:00). Under most workers’ compensation legislation, including
the New Zealand Accident Compensation Act, injury is distinguished from disease. This
fits with the ordinary understanding of the words. People who are injured are notgenerally thought of as sick, at least not initially. This distinction is maintained byworkers’ compensation organisation’s rules, which state that any sickness or disease
suffered by a worker is not to be treated as a personal injury unless the specific disease isrecognized as a condition that is to be treated as a personal injury. And the distinction
between what is seen as an injury and what is a disease depends on its cause, whether
the condition was caused by an accident or whether it was caused by a disease or disease
like process. Basically, an injury is harm caused by an accident while a disease is harmcaused by a disease.
The distinction between injury and disease thus turns on the distinction between accident
and disease and thus the definition of an accident. The Oxford Dictionaries defines
accident as: “an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly;…an event that happens
by chance and is without apparent cause deliberate cause”1. This definition is similar to thatset out in Larson’s Workers’ Compensation which defines ‘by accident’ as “…an unlooked
for mishap or an untoward event which is not expected or designed” (Larson, 1984, at
Chapter 37.00). The key is that an accident is an event (or series of events) and not aprocess. While the idea that an ‘accident’ is unexpected is important, this does notnecessarily distinguish accident from disease because no one really expects to get sick.
Another quality of an accident is suggested by the British Columbian definition of‘personal injury’ as physiological change “for some reason”. Both accidents and diseases
are unexpected and unwanted events, but an accident, unlike a disease, is assumed to
involve some element of human agency. An accident is unexpected but a human mishap
involves some element of human action or failure to act. Disease is mysterious and attimes, beyond human understanding. There may be no reason why one person gets sick
while another does not. So where the mishap cannot be attributed to any human activity oragency (in the sense that no person could reasonably bear any responsibility for the harm),
1

See http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/accident?view=uk

91

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
then it might as well be assumed that the cause was natural and where human health isconcerned, the cause must be a disease. In this way a disease is an Act of God, like ahurricane; a storm is not thought of as an accident. Similarly becoming ill is not usually
thought of as the result of an accident, but if some human act is identified as the cause of
the sickness, then the disease is accidental. And because accidents are felt to be result orconsequence of human activity, they should be prevented. This sentiment underlies thebelief that employers should take steps to safeguard their workers. Where such measures
fail to protect the worker from those events which are within human control, then theworker should be compensated. But what responsibility should employers have forcontrolling diseases, when the unexpected and unwanted events are beyond human control?
In a perfect world, all accidents would be avoided but diseases would only be contained. In
this sense, aging can be seen as the quintessential disease. Very few accidents are as
debilitating as old age but aging like many diseases is a process, not one event, and very
little is understood about the process. In New Zealand the Accident Compensation Act,
2001 treats aging is a natural event and any mishap “substantially due to aging” is notconsidered to be a personal injury for the purposes of compensation. The distinction
between accident and disease thus rest on the view that an accident is a discrete unfortunate
but explicable event while a disease involves a poorly understood process.
This distinction means that accidents are easier to identify and explain than diseases.
Furthermore, for the purposes of workers’ compensation this means that it is easier to provethat an accident arose out of and in the course of employment, than it is to prove that a
disease is caused by work. More precisely, an accident is an event, or series of events,
which happened in a certain place and at a specified time and as result of some humanact or omission. An accident can be witnessed, documented and proven to have
happened in a certain place at a certain time. In contrast, there can be no first hand
evidence that a disease, a poorly understood process possibly manifesting over decades
and involving multiple workplaces and employers, arose out of and in the course of
employment. The ease by which an accident can be explained is often reflected in theease with which the resulting injury is proven to be compensable. It is simply much
simpler to show that an accident is work-related than it is to prove that a disease is dueto the worker’s work activities or environment. In contrast, it can take years of
expensive epidemiological research to demonstrate that an illness is due to the nature ofcertain employment. Diseases must be recognized by the compensation system as related
to employment, as industrial or occupational diseases, before most workers can expect
any compensation for them. The burden of providing evidence linking the injury or
disease to the employment is often born by the individual worker in the sense that theworker absent the proof, the worker will not receive workers’ compensation. But theproof of a causal relationship between a disease and a work activity (or environment)
cannot be made on a case by case basis.
At the same time, the ease with which an accident is determined to be work-related does
not mean that the distinction between an injury and disease (as the harm or effect) isclear cut for the purposes of workers’ compensation. A worker pricked by a tainted
needle might get a disease by accident and for the purposes of workers’ compensation
would have a personal injury whereas another worker who injured their back lifting apatient and was found to have an underlying back condition may be deemed to have a
disease (ie degenerative disc disease). The injury or disease as an effect, requires aninvestigation of its cause and will be covered by the compensation scheme as ‘personal
injury’ only if the cause can be determined as an ‘accident’. Where the cause is92

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
determined to be a disease or disease like process, then further inquiry is needed in order
to find out if the disease has been recognized as an occupational disease.
In most jurisdictions in order for a worker to have a claim for occupational disease
accepted, they must prove three things. First, they must prove that they suffer from a
specific illness (i.e. that an appropriate medical expert has diagnose the worker assuffering from a certain disease). Second, the worker must establish that the diagnosed
illness is an occupational disease (i.e. an illness which epidemiological evidence has
been accepted by the compensation authorities as proving the disease is one which canbe caused by work-related activities or conditions). Third, that the worker must provethat the activities or conditions at their particular work were similar to those which havebeen accepted as causing their condition and thus were likely to have caused theirillness.
Given that workers’ compensation is established primarily for work-related injuries, theseeming bias towards accident and against disease makes sense. That is, employers
should only have to compensate workers for conditions that can be shown to be workrelated. An injury caused by an accident on the job can bee seen by all concerned as
work-related. A disease, however, cannot be so easily linked to a particular job. It took
years of study and a lot of epidemiological evidence to persuade governments andemployers to accept that some diseases could be caused by employment activities andconditions. For example it took many years to establish that the work environment wasa significant cause of respiratory diseases rather than smoking or other urban pollutants.
And while the list of industrial or occupational diseases continues to grow, the bias
against claims for conditions that arise over time and as a result of a gradual process
remains because the scheme is for work-related injury and disease.
Thus, it is important to understand that the categories which structure workers’
compensation rules are shaped by the dualities of work and non-work, physical andmental, and injury and disease and are set against the backdrop of assumptions about
accidents and diseases. It is this conceptual and complicated milieu that provides thecontext in which occupational stress claims are considered and helps explain why
occupational stress presents workers’ compensation with such difficulties.

Classifying Claims
A further duality – namely, mental and physical – is used to classify workers’
compensation claims. Mental and physical as cause (trauma) and effect (injury) describe
the four basic kinds of compensation claims. Every claim can be placed in one of thesefour categories, as outlined in table 2.
Table 2: Duality of Mental and Physical Injury
Cause / EffectPhysical injury
Mental injury
Physical / Mental
Physical trauma Physical / PhysicalMental / PhysicalMental / Mental
Mental trauma

93New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
The first category is that of claims for physical trauma causing physical injury. An
example of a physical/physical claim is when a worker breaks his thumb while
hammering a nail. If the worker was hammering as part of his job, then the evidence toestablish a workers’ compensation claim is easy to find; that is, the injury is the broken
thumb and the cause is the hammering. While physical injury involves harm or hurt tothe body, physical trauma involves force, such as gravity, and its effect on the body.
Physical trauma can be observed and incidents involving physical trauma and resulting
in physical injury can be witnessed. All that is needed to establish the compensability of
the injury is evidence that hammer blow which broke the thumb occurred while theworker was working and as a result of their work activities.
The second category is that of physical/mental claims in which physical trauma iscaused by emotional or mental injury. Mental injury is not usually defined incompensation legislation but is described in most jurisdictions as involving significant
psychological illness. Transient upset, such as humiliation, embarrassment or anger
would not qualify as mental injury. In both New Zealand and British Columbia a
diagnosis using the American Psychiatric Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders is required before compensation is considered. Before a physical/mental
claim is accepted the evidence needs to support a conclusion that the physical trauma
and, in most cases the resulting physical injury, arose out of and in the course of
employment and the medical evidence needs to link the claimant’s mental injury to thisphysical trauma and the consequence of the compensable physical injury. For example,
a worker who suffered a disabling injury and who subsequently became depressed
would likely be compensated for the depression if the evidence supported a conclusionthat the depression was caused by the physical injury.
The third category of claims is mental/physical claims where mental or psychologicalstimulus results in a physical injury. Here the precipitating event may be a sudden noise,a gun shot, with physical consequences, such as a heart attack. The event is ‘mental’ inthat there was no physical contact with the worker, but the effect of the mental stimulus
was physical in that the worker suffered an injury. The evidence needed to establish theworker’s claim for compensation would be medical evidence of a direct link between themental stimulus and the physical injury. In particular, in this type of claim, expert
medical evidence would be needed to explain why the stress of the psychologicalstimulus caused the physical harm. The difficulty is that if the cause and effect cannot
be witnessed then no one is able to observe the mental stimulus causing physical harm.
Also the mental stimulus or trauma must be an event. Heart-related conditions may be
accepted as compensable but only if the medical evidence also establishes that they weredirectly caused by a specific work-related event rather than by a gradual onset of heartdisease. The condition must fit the requirements of an injury as opposed to a disease. In
most jurisdictions it is difficult to obtain sufficient medical evidence to do this and heartdisease is rarely recognized as an occupational disease. With the exception of certain
occupations, such as fire fighters, most workers who suffer a heart attack at work would
be found to be suffering from a non-compensable disease. Also mental/physical claims
would not include claims where the sudden noise caused someone to fall as in thoseclaims the cause of the injury would be identified as the fall, not the noise (even though
the noise was the cause of the fall).

94

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96
The fourth category of claims is that of mental/mental claims where mental trauma or
stimulus causes a mental injury. An example of a mental/mental claim would be theclaim for mental injury suffered in a robbery. The claim could be significant if theworker was disabled, unable to return to work, because of their psychological reaction to
the shock of the hold-up. In most jurisdictions mental injury caused by mental trauma or
stimulus (mental/mental claims) is accepted, but only when the evidence supports a
conclusion that the mental trauma was analogous to an accident and if the accident aroseout of and in the course of employment. For example, Section 5.1 of the Workers’
Compensation Act in British Columbia states that a worker is entitled to compensation
for a mental stress only where three the injury is “…an acute reaction to a sudden andunexpected traumatic event arising out of and in the course of the worker's
employment”. Similarly the New Zealand Accident Compensation Act Section 21B
provides similar conditions for mental/mental claims. The event must be sudden andunexpected causing immediate mental harm, just like an accident.
For the purposes of workers’ compensation, occupational stress claims are best
described as claims involving mental trauma. They can be classified as mental/physicalor mental/mental claims. In such claims the worker is alleging that they suffered amental rather than physical trauma experience during work and because of thatexperience at work, it resulted in either physical or mental injury or both. Problems
arise when the cause (mental trauma) and the effect (mental injury) resemble a disease.
In particular, the more the cause is attributed to events that occurred over time and thatthe condition is a disease (as in mental illness rather than injury), then the less likely it isthat the claim will be accepted.
‘Occupational stress’ refers to a cause of human injury or illness, not the condition itself.
As discussed above, ‘an occupational disease’ is the term used to refer to those diseases
that are recognized as being work-related. In contrast, occupational stress is the cause of
injury or disease, not the effect, as with occupational disease. As the workers’
compensation rules in both New Zealand and British Columbia demonstrate, the injury
caused by occupational stress will only be accepted where the evidence establishes thatthe trauma was, in effect, an accident, that is, an unexpected, traumatic event resulting in
immediate harm. Claims involving a process rather than an identifiable event are simply
not accepted. While this reflects understanding of accidents and disease as cause andeffect, when applied the rules seem quite harsh. But in the past workers’ compensation
rules were often harshly applied. For years, workers suffered illness and death as resultof many different occupational diseases before the disease was recognized as an‘occupational disease’. What is needed is evidence that proves the link between
occupational stress and mental and physical injury. However, the task of getting
evidence linking stress to employment is compounded by difficulties in defining what ismeant by ‘occupational stress’ and in understanding the link between stress and injury or
disease. Complicating this relationship is the view that stress is a ‘natural’ part of manyjobs and as such would be better covered through wages than workers’ compensation.
And with this view, of course, comes the sentiment that if the worker cannot stand theheat, then they should get out of the kitchen. This, however, suggests that the problem isstressed workers, not stressful work.

95

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):88-96

Some Concluding Thoughts
Most people believe that workers should be compensated for injury and ill health causedby their work. For over a century workers’ compensation has provided compensation toworkers who suffered physical injury caused by an accident which arose out of and in
the course of their employment. Over the years workers’ compensation coverage has
expanded to include mental injury and occupational diseases as well as injuries arisingover time seemingly caused by a disease like process but there remains a bias towards
physical injury caused by accidents. This, of course, is the root of the problem withmany forms of occupational stress. Occupational stress is not easily accepted ascompensable first, because it manifests as mental, not physical injury, and second
because its cause is often mental rather than physical trauma which has occurred overtime rather than as the result of one incident or event. There is a level of institutional
resistance to providing workers’ compensation for occupational stress claims first
because they are mental claims but this resistance increases if the cause is also shown to
be stress (ie mental trauma) which has occurred over time. And so while people believethat workers deserve compensation for work related injury, they may also accept thatworkers suffering from occupational stress which has arisen over time should simply
find a new and less personally stressful job.
Occupational stress, however, is not simply the worker’s problem. Stress related injury
and illness is calculated to cost employers and the economy a great deal of money every
year. In the United States it is estimated that stress-related absenteeism costs the
economy hundreds of billion dollars a year in absenteeism, reduced productivity andmedical expenses (French 1998). There is a need for investigation of both stressed
worker and stressful work. Every form of work presents some level of stress and thequestion should be, when does stress become unacceptable? There also needs to be abetter understanding of the different kinds of stress which workers experience and thereasons why some workers get ill while others do not. At the same time there should bea discussion as to how best to compensate workers suffering injury or illness as a resultof occupational stress. Still it may well be that workers’ compensation is not theappropriate vehicle for compensation for occupational stress. This then leads to thequestion that if not workers’ compensation, then what? Should there be a return to tort
for occupational stress? If occupational stress arising over time is not covered byworkers’ compensation, perhaps workers should have the right to sue their employers forintentionally inflicted emotional harm under the rules of tort. Stressed workers mightwell leave the kitchen but why should they do so without their pound of flesh?

References
Larson, A. (1970). Mental and Nervous Injury in Workmen's Compensation. Vanderbilt
Law Review, 23(6), 32.
Larson, A. (1984). Workers' Compensation Law: Cases, Materials & Text (First ed.).
New York: M. Bender.
WorkSafeBC. (2011). Rehabilitation Services and Claims Manual Volume II (Vol. II).
Richmond BC: Work Safe BC (formerly known as the Workers Compensation Board ofBC).
96New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

Research Note: Stress Management Practice: Is it Effective?
CLARE GEORGE* AND MARK LE FEVRE**
Abstract
We present a review of the recent literature focussing on the effectiveness of stressmanagement interventions (SMIs) in organisational settings. Empirical studies carried out
between 2006 and 2010 inclusive are reviewed. Though there is some improvement inmethodology, experimental protocols and long-term follow up studies are still rare. We
suggest that SMIs in future should include both primary and secondary approaches, and thatsuccess should be measures against both individual and organisational outcomes.

Introduction
There have been several reviews of the literature on stress management interventions (SMIs)
since de Frank and Cooper’s 1987 paper. In the intervening years there has been an increasein the proportion of studies employing empirical research methods. There is a suspicion,
however, that there are scant rigorous experimental designs and repeat and longitudinalstudies. Therefore, in order to discern the effectiveness of current SMI practice and toascertain the robustness of the methodologies applied in the studies, we present a recent
review of the extant literature. We restrict our analysis to empirical studies which focus on
occupational stress and its reduction in organisational settings. We have chosen a metasynthetic rather than a meta-analytical approach. Given the wide range of outcome measuresand intervention designs employed it is doubtful that combining the data in a single analysis
would yield reliable estimates.

Stress Management Interventions
Many organisations have implemented Stress Management Interventions (SMIs) in an
attempt to reduce levels of stress and to help mitigate the detrimental effects of occupational
stress (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Barry & Kuemmel, 2006; Le Fevre, 2001). The
European Commission (2002) stated that:“...work related stress may be prevented or counteracted by job redesign (e.g. byempowering the employees, and avoiding both over- and under-load), by improvingsocial support, and by promoting reasonable reward for effort invested. And ofcourse, by adjusting occupational physical settings to the workers abilities, needs andreasonable expectations” (cited in Coffey, Dugdill & Tattersal 2009:.99).

*

Clare George is a Lecturer at Auckland University of Technology (AUT)** Dr Mark Le Fevre is a Senior Lecturer at Auckland University of Technology (AUT)97

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
This statement illustrates how SMIs can be implemented at many levels starting at anindividual level and moving through to initiatives aimed at the culture and fundamentals of
the organisation (Coffey et al., 2009; Le Fevre, 2001). SMIs can be classified into threegroups: primary interventions that deal with the source of the stress at a group or workplacelevel (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Le Fevre et al., 2006; Le Fevre, 2001; Randall et al.,2007): secondary interventions that focus on the individual (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008;
Le Fevre et al., 2006; Le Fevre, 2001); and tertiary interventions that focus on assisting
individuals with existing issues (Le Fevre et al., 2006; Richardson & Rothstein, 2008). The
subsequent sections will focus on primary and secondary level SMIs.
Organisational-level SMIs (Primary SMIs) are designed to deal with the source of the stress –that is, creating a balance between demands placed on the individual and providing theresources available for dealing with the demands (Cox, 1993; Randall, Cox & Griffiths,
2007). Although the focus for primary interventions is essentially based around theorganisation, it can be either employee or organisation focused (Le Fevre, 2001; De Frank &Cooper, 1987; van der Hek & Plomp, 1997; van der Klink et al., 2001). Medical benefits,
staff counselling, employee assistance programmes (EAP’s), stress management training
workshops, are examples of employee focused interventions (Le Fevre, 2001). Job structure
and rotation, organisational development, and organisational restructuring are examples oforganisation focused interventions (Le Fevre, 2001; Richardson & Rothstein, 2008). Le Fevre
et al., (2006) state that the objective of these interventions is to create an environment orculture that aims to remove sources of stress in the workplace, rather than treating present
stress in employees. By attempting to remove stressors (Le Fevre et al., 2006), primaryinterventions can be an effective means of protecting and enhancing employee well-being in
the medium to long-term (Randall et al., 2007). Typically, primary SMIs are run for over 12months, this in contrast to secondary interventions that are more short-term.
Secondary interventions focus on the individuals within an organisation and can be broken
down into three groups; somatic, cognitive, and multi-modal (Le Fevre et al., 2006). Somatic
techniques include relaxation methods (e.g. Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Kohler & Munz,
2006), cognitive techniques may involve affirmations and thought stopping (Le Fevre, 2001;
Bunn, et al.,2007; Hampel, et al., 2007 ), and the third, multi-modal, is a combination of theprior two groups including techniques such as transcendental meditation and programmesthat mix cognitive and somatic methods (Le Fevre, 2001). These techniques are often short induration and, depending on the type of technique implemented, can vary in length (e.g. one
meditation session, monthly workshops). Each one has the intention of teaching employees
coping strategies to deal with stress by equipping them with skills they may require in the
future (Barry & Kuemmel, 2006). Such skills as assertiveness and positive thinking (Barry &Kuemmel, 2006) are taught in attempts to reduce the severity of stress symptoms before
situations become uncontrollable (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008). Altering the way
individuals appraise stressful situations is intended to change reactions to stress in the future(Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Soriano, 2009).
Primary interventions have been criticised in the past for placing the responsibility of dealing
with stressful situations on the individual and thereby removing the obligation frommanagement to address such problems (Le Fevre et al., 2006; Kenny & Cooper, 2003). Le
Fevre et al. (2006) suggest that this has been used as an argument against the implementationof secondary interventions, and to support primary interventions as first choice. Le Fevre,
Kolt and Matheny (2006: 562) conclude with:98New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118“...there may be advantage in employing individual focused, secondary approaches asa first step in interventions designed to reduce organisational job stress at theindividual level, rather than as complements to an initial organisational-based
approach”
It is the relationship between people and their environment that is the core focus whenaddressing the issue of stress. The person-environment fit (P-E fit) theory refers to thealignment or congruence of a person to their environment (Edwards, 2008). Under theheading of ‘environment’ comes the social environment, other individuals, groups,
organisations, or vocations. In this theory stress is not related specifically to the individual or
the environment, the focus is the fit between “attributes of the person and characteristics ofdifferent vocations” (Edwards, 2008:168). P-E fit offers an explanation for stress in theworkplace; “when there is a mismatch between the person and their environment” (Le Fevre,
2001, p.3) stress is likely to be the result. As De Frank and Cooper (1987:8) rightly note:“There is great need to consider variation within persons and their environment as
determinants of both levels of perceived stress and the effectiveness of stressmanagement…”
Thus, understanding individual’s interactions with the environment is important in theevaluation of the stressors, that same evaluation may predict whether individuals will accept
and continue practicing secondary interventions offered (i.e. relaxation techniques, coping
strategies). The adoption of the intervention by employees is essential if a long-term change
is to be achieved (Appelbaum & Lefrancois, 2007; van der Hek & Plomp, 1997). Knowing
the situational and individual factors that ensure the adoption of change may also predict thelikelihood of a successful primary intervention adoption (De Frank & Cooper, 1897; Vakola& Nikolaou, 2005). It is hard to know the extent to which employees continue with thetechniques taught post-intervention due to the limited number of follow ups conducted.
According to De Frank and Cooper (1987) many organisations have not created a culture nor
have implemented structures to maintain such practices, highlighting the need to see
secondary and primary interventions implemented in concurrence with each other.
In essence, “occupational stress has been of increasing concern to both employers andgovernments for over 20 years” (Le Fevre, 2001:1). A rise in compensation claims, highturnover rates, and employees dealing with stress-related illnesses are all issues that areencouraging employers to address and find a solution for the damaging effects of stress (vander Klink et al., 2001; Tisza & Mottl, 2003).

Search Strategy
In this review of empirical studies the authors conducted a search of studies between 2006
and 2010. A library and internet based search (Dedovic, D’Aguiar, Pruessner, 2009) was used
to obtain information about Stress Management Interventions (SMIs), the history behind theterms strain, stress, and stressors, and empirical research from 2006 to 2010 on theapplication of SMIs. ProQuest, Emerald Full Text, ABI inform, EBSCO, and OVID weresearch engines used to conduct the searches. The search strategy included using the peer
reviewed option and nine search terms producing a large number of articles that did notsatisfy the requirement for this review (Sparrenberger, et al., 2008). To refine the results,
searches were conducted within the results with a further six terms adopted for this purpose.
99

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
The search strategy also included using alternative terms for key words (i.e. stressmanagement intervention/programme). Additionally the authors searched the references fromsignificant articles using key words and title names. Original articles were sourced if they
offered significant contribution to the theory or study being analysed. The restrictions applied
to the search were date limits, peer reviewed, full text, search within the citation, searchwithin the title, search for the author.
Among the thousands of results found in an original search, the refining process brought the
number of more relevant examples down to 115. From these studies selected 55 satisfied therequirements of having a relationship to Stress Management Interventions (SMIs), and stressin the workplace. Ten studies satisfied the requirement of being empirical trials of SMIs. Of
the ten, eight were individual focused interventions (secondary). The majority of theparticipants for the interventions were volunteers, the main tool for measurement was selfreported questionnaires, and there were limited follow up time-frames for the interventions
and the people involved.

Criteria for the Inclusion of Studies
The review was restricted to articles written between 2006 and 2010. The reasons why some
papers were not included are: they did not report on the findings from an empirical study; theresults relied too heavily on personal accounts of what happened; or the focus for theintervention was rehabilitation after a traumatic event or severe illness. In the reviewed
papers the majority of participants were female, from large organisations or alternatively
university students, and took part on a voluntary basis. Studies that reported on SMIs atmanagement level, employee level, and organisational level were included. The majority ofthe studies used groups that were not actively seeking assistance in the area of stress. In orderfor the studies to be included there had to be an intention to reduce an identified stress orstressor. Two studies that had no control group were included, though this was not ideal, theauthors gave insight in to alternative control group options. All studies were published peerreviewed journal articles (van der Klink, 2001).

Extraction of Data
At first, the titles and the abstracts of the articles were used to determine the relevance of thearticle and whether they would sufficiently meet the criteria (Sparrenberger, et al., 2008).
Most articles were discarded due to the mainly medical focus or they did not featureempirical studies; although it must be noted that not all medical articles were overlooked assome offered an interesting insight into the often stressful nursing industry. The article’s fulltext was used as a final level of evaluation and source of data (Sparrenberger, et al., 2008).
The ten studies featuring empirical research used a variety of measuring instruments but the
majority used rating scales, self reports, and questionnaires. Stress was defined differently by
the authors of each paper, however, when there was uncertainty between the terms strain,stress, and stressor we used a definition put forward by Le Fevre, Matheny, and Kolt (2003).
“Stressor will denote the external force or situation acting on the individual, and stress will
denote the deformation or changes produced in the individual as a result of those forces” (LeFevre et al., 2003:728).

100

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
The review has highlighted an issue in attempting to measure the effectiveness of SMIs andcomparing one type of intervention from another. The immense variation in resources
available, the many stakeholders involved, and the type of intervention adopted which in turnmakes measurement and comparison a difficult task. The difficulty in measurement andequally, the difficulty in implementation of primary or organisational level interventions may
deter researchers and managers respectively from producing the required information foranalysis (van der Hek & Plomp, 1997) resulting in a low ratio of organisational to individuallevel interventions in the literature.
Many of the studies had a short follow up time frame, again making it difficult to assess thesustainability of the interventions implemented. Two out of the ten did not have control
groups and cannot, therefore, be considered as experimental. That is, experimental
interventions enable treatment groups to be compared against control groups to enable theone to take account of organisation wide change that is common to both groups (Cook &Campbell, 2002, cited in Holeman, Axtell, Sprigg, Totterdell, & Wall, 2009).

Stress Management Interventions: Empirical Research
De Frank and Cooper (1987) and van der Hek and Plomp’s (1997) past reviews evaluated theeffectiveness of SMIs and this review uses their information as a starting point. The review
offers an evaluation of current practice from organisations and whether the concerns from thepast reviews (i.e. no long term follow ups, credibility of the interventions, cost effectiveness,
effectiveness of intervention) have been addressed (van der Hek & Plomp, 1997).

The Effectiveness of Current Stress Management Interventions 2006 - 2010
Ten studies conducted from 2006 to 2010 met the criteria outlined above and are summarised
in detail in appendix 1: table 1. Eight of the ten studies focused solely on primaryinterventions, one a combination of organisational and individual (though more the former),and one study was located at an organisational level only. Of the eight primary interventions,four studies involved a strong focus on relaxation techniques (i.e. meditation, muscle
relaxation) as a way of dealing with present perceived stress and future stress. A majority ofthe studies involved education of some sort, in particular teaching the theory of stress,
occupational stress, and coping strategies.
The two interventions implemented at an organisational level (Elo, Ervasti, Kuosma, &Mattila, 2008; Holman, Axtell, Sprigg, Totterdell, & Wall, 2009), focused on improving
communication and communication training. However, there were differences. The aim of
the first organisational intervention (Elo, et al., 2008) was slightly ambiguous and directedeach member of the staff to attend specific workshops and seminars. The aim of the second
intervention on the other hand (Holman, et al, 2009) specified exactly that the interventions
were proposed to change the level of stress among the employees and took a less directive
approach, gathering suggestions from all levels of the organisation regarding the different
ways to approach SMIs. The duration of interventions in both studies ranged from one-off
short, twenty minute workshops to full day retreats. The average length of time of theinterventions was three months. Although, there was no obvious relationship between lengthof sessions and results, it has been postulated by Rausch, et al., (2006), van der Hek andPlomp, (1997) and van der Klink, et al., (2001) that the shorter, secondary level interventions
101

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
are most effective. In this sample of empirical reviews, the primary level interventions ran fora longer period of time, consistent with the findings of van der Klink, et al., (2001).
There was great variation in the techniques used in the secondary interventions. The sessions
included; meditation, Indian head massage, mindfulness-based stress reduction techniques,progressive muscle relaxation, and cognitive behavioural theory.
Measurements for the outcomes also varied from questionnaires, focus groups, self-reportstress scales, to self-reported symptoms. The limited number of organisational levelinterventions is consistent with the findings of van der Klink, et al. (2001). “Although there is
general recognition that work and organisational problems are the major causes ofoccupational work stress there is still a lack of research into interventions on this level” (vander Hek & Plomp, 1997:135) but, as pointed out earlier, this may be due to methodologicalproblems.

Discussion
The reviews by De Frank and Cooper in 1987, van der Hek and Plomp in 1997, and van derKlink in 2001 communicate a shared concern for the way that SMIs are measured andreported. In particular, while there has been a considerable improvement in the standard ofresearch since the first review was written twenty two years ago, more progress is still needed
in developing a framework that allows robust comparisons of the different SMIs. It is
acknowledged, however, that comparisons are difficult to make given the unique nature ofeach organisation and more importantly because of the variances of each person within theorganisation. Moreover, each organisation has many variables that affect the outcomes of the
SMI’s therefore making them difficult to compare.
Nonetheless, the literature sets out a number of criteria necessary for an effective
implementation of SMIs. First, prior to the implementation, the aim of the intervention
should be clear and agreed upon and motivating goals need to be carefully designed in orderto guide the SMI process (van der Hek & Plomp, 1997; Elo, et al., 2008). Second, the link
between the intervention and lowering the person’s stress levels should also be established at
the beginning of the intervention. Moreover, identifying those individuals most at risk andwhat constitutes a stressful situation, is a more effective way of addressing the particularoccupational stress issues (Elo, Ervasti, Kuosma, & Mattila, 2008). Third, it is argued that
determining the success of the SMI outcomes can only be done when measured against theorganisation’s specific objectives. Thus, tailoring the SMI to the organisation’s environment
and not the other way around may be a way of avoiding unsuccessful outcomes. Finally,
cultural factors need to be considered carefully when planning future interventions and aclear motivating goal may need to be designed to guide the SMI process (Elo, et al., 2008).
However, if the environment and the conditions are a determining factor behind successful
implementation of SMIs, then why do the primary level interventions have limited or noaffect on reducing stress in the workplace (van der Klink, et al., 2001). The review of theliterature offers some suggestions why this may be the case. For example, managers may
often be reluctant to enter into such an undertaking due to the amount of resource required
and the level of disruption to employees. Successful implementation requires fullmanagement support and has significant impact on the whole organisation (van der Hek &Plomp, 1997; Bunn, et al., 2007; Hampel, et al., 2007). In addition, implementing such a102

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
change, (bearing in mind change causes uncertainty and often stress), requires full support
from employees and other stakeholders involved. (Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005; Kohler &Munz, 2006; Coffey, et al., 2009; Appelbaum, et al., 2007). Individual perception and coping
skills may also be necessary to ensure that the change process (in this case, the SMI) is
successful (van der Klink, et al., 2001). Educating and equipping employees with the skills
to deal with stress are very much similar to the skills required to deal with change; skills thatare often taught in secondary level interventions. Once those skills have been taught andadopted it requires a supportive culture with job control and job design to ensure sustainable
use of the acquired skills (Le Fevre, et al., 2006). What Le Fevre et al. (2006) suggest is that
there is great benefit in implementing individual focused, secondary, approaches prior to theimplementing an intervention at the organisational level. Holeman, et al., (2007) produced theonly paper that demonstrated the combined effects of job redesign interventions andemployee well-being interventions. The interventions produced multiple improvements in job
characteristics (i.e. job control, skill utilisation, participation, and feedback). Participative job
redesigns allowed the organisation to achieve multiple changes in job characteristics and offsite educational sessions produced improvements in employee well-being - a successful
combination of the two interventions.
Consistent with prior research and the analysis of the studies above, it appears as thoughsecondary interventions are the most effective (van der Hek & Plomp, 1997; van der Klink, etal.,2001; Le Fevre, 2001) and in general employees do receive greater benefit from suchinterventions as cognitive-behavioural theory and coping strategies (Bunn, et al., 2007;
Hampel, et al., 2007; van der Hek & Plomp, 1997; van der Klink, et al.,2001). Some studies
however, have not had such success with the implementation of interventions that have beensuccessful in others. This was mentioned by van der Klink, et al. (2001) in their observationof evaluative studies and appeared again in a more current review (Bilfilco et al., 2007). It isconsistent with the idea that it is not the SMI that is deemed to be effective or ineffective but
more importantly the way it is implemented and whether or not the environment has been
evaluated properly to highlight the need for this type of intervention. A combination of bothsecondary and primary interventions may help to evaluate the organisation’s current
environment as well as address the needs of the individuals (Elo, et al., 2008; Le Fevre et al.,2006).
Elo, et al. (2008) conducted a primary stress management intervention with the intention of
positively increasing employee wellbeing through changes in the organisational environment.
The results showed statistically significant results in all the measures that were organisation
wide (clarity of work goals, information flow, work climate, and supervisor support).
Interestingly there were no significant benefits at the individual level. An organisational SMI
may improve the work climate and encourage effective communication, but the effects on
individual well-being may be limited. In fact, in this case, work-ability decreased in theparticipants of the experimental group, (Elo, et al., 2008). This again suggests that combining
both primary and secondary interventions may be more effective in decreasing stress. Le
Fevre (et al., 2006:547) suggest that “secondary approaches be employed prior to theintroduction of primary methodologies within a client organisation”.
Difficulty of measurement of SMI effectiveness has haunted this area of research and eachreview, including this one, still finds only small improvements in clarity and accuracy ofoutcome measures (van der Hek & Plomp, 1997; van der Klink, et al., 2001). Extensive
variation on outcome measures, a relatively low and unreliable presence of control groups
and sound follow ups, and significant differences between organisations and studies makes it
103New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
very difficult to determine which type of intervention may be most effective. Although there
has been a significant increase in methodologically sound studies, the results from the above
review still produce inconsistent results that are difficult to compare (i.e. expensive trials withlow success rates, cognitive behavioural theories producing great results in some and notothers, long duration of SMI with some good results). Insight into the conditions surrounding
the SMI may ensure a greater ability to make accurate comparisons (van der Klink, et al.,2001).

Conclusion
As a result of this review, and the reviews conducted in the past (De Frank and Cooper, 1987;
van der Hek & Plomp in 1997; van der Klink 2001) it appears that secondary interventions
have the greatest record of successfully reducing the levels of stress in the workplace.
According to Le Fevre et al., (2006) the correct structures must be in place to support any
secondary level interventions if the desire is to ensure stress reduction in the long-term. Thiswas supported in one paper that implemented both secondary and primary level interventions(Holeman, 2009); they reached their desired objectives and were able to maintain the desired
results for a significant amount of time. According to Elo et al., (2008) organisation wide
interventions may improve communication and work climate but do little to improve thewell-being of individuals. Cognitive training (individual specific) would enable employees tobetter deal with the changes caused by organisation wide interventions. Organisation wide
interventions may help to ensure the longevity of the secondary SMIs so long as they are in
combination with well-fitted secondary organisation (Elo et al., 2008).
Once the interventions had been implemented, however, it was often difficult to ensure
continued practice of the education and exercises. The majority of studies did not havesignificant follow-up periods. According to Hampel et al., (2008) time was the mostsignificant factor to ensure a successful outcome (p=0.01 in Experimental group x time).
Thus, here lies a gap for future research. If the source of stress is identified as the relationshipbetween the individual and the environment then surely both need to be addressed in order tosee long-term, effective change? Time as a factor for success implies the need for a culturechange to the organisation to ensure a sustainable and supportive environment for any current
and future SMIs (Elo et al., 2008). Further research into combining both secondary andprimary level interventions is recommended and also how this can be done cost effectively
and with the support of the employees. Holeman et al., (2009) in particular had success with abottom-up intervention incorporating the staff and their ideas into the change process. It is
recommended, therefore, that future studies looking at the effectiveness of SMIs useorganisation-specific goals to assess whether a SMI is to be deemed successful or not. Eachorganisation has specific risks and issues that will not respond to a “blanket-approach”
solution for reducing stress levels. In short, any movement towards reducing stress for
employees and encouraging active and support workplace cultures is a “worthwhile goal for
employers, employees, and researchers alike” (De Frank & Cooper, 1987).

104

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

Reference List
Appelbaum, S. H., Lefrancois, F., Tonna, R., & Shapiro, B. T. (2007). Mergers 101 (parttwo): Training managers for culture, stress, and change challenges. Industrial andCommercial Training, 39(4), 191-200.
Boven, R. (2010). Catching up with Australia. New Zealand Herald.
Bunn, A., Bifulco, A., Lorenc, A., & Robinson, N. (2007). Solutions on stress (SOS):
Programmes, packages and products for helping teenagers. Young Consumers, 8(1), 29-35.
Cannon, W.B., (1914). The interelations of emotions as suggested by recent physiologicalresearchers. The American Journal of Psychology, 25(2),256-282.
Coffey, M., Dugdill, L., & Tattersall, A. (2009). Designing a stress management intervention
in social services. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 2(2), 98-114.
Cooper, C. L. (1998). Theories of organizational stress. Manchester: Oxford.
Cooper, C. L., & Dewe, P. (2004). Stress: A brief history. Oxford: Blackwell.
Dedovic, K., D'Aguiar, C., & Pruessner, J. C. (2009). What stress does to your brain: A
review of neuroimaging Studies. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 54(1), 6.
Dedovic, K. B. P., D'Aguiar, C. B., & Pruessner, J. P. (2009). What Stress Does to Your
Brain: A Review of Neuroimaging Studies. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 54(1), 6.
DeFrank, R. S., & Cooper, C. L. (1987). Worksite stress management interventions: Their
effectiveness and conceptualisation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2, 4-10.
Edwards, J.R. (2008). Person-environment fit in organisations: An assessment of theoreticalprogress. The Academy of Management Annuals, 2(1), 167-230.
Elo, A.-L., Ervasti, J., Kuosma, E., & Mattila, P. (2008). Evaluation of an organizational
stress management program in a municipal public works organization. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 13(1), 10-23.
Hampel, P., Meier, M., & Kümmel, U. (2008). School-based Stress Management Training for
Adolescents: Longitudinal Results from an Experimental Study. Journal of Youth andAdolescence, 37(8), 1009.
Hampel, P., Petermann, F., & Dickow, B. (2001). The German Coping Questionnaire by
Janke and Erdmann adapted for children and adolescents.Gottingen: Hogrefe.
Holeman, D. J., Axtell, C. M., Sprigg, C. M., Totterdell, P., & Wall, T. D. (2009). The
mediating role of job characteristics in job redesign interventions: A serendipitous quasiexperiment. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 31, 85-101.
Journal of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics; Study examines effectiveness of stressmanagement programs in the workplace. (2006). Managed Care Law Weekly, 83.

105

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
Kenny, D. T., & Cooper, C. L. (2003). Introduction: Occupational stress and its management.
International Journal of Stress Management, 10(4), 275-279.
Khan, R.L. & French, J.R.P Jr, (1962). A summary and some tentative conclusions. Journalof Social Issues, 18, 122-127.
Kohler, J. M., & Munz, D. C. (2006). Combining individual and organisational stressinterventions: An organisational development approach. Consulting Psychological Journal,
58(1), 1-12.
Lazarus, R.S. (1993). From psychological stress to emotions: A history of changing outlooks.
Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 1-21.
LeFevre, M. (2001). Occupational stress: A review of theoretical explanations and stressmanagement interventions. Auckland University of Technology.
LeFevre, M., Kolt, G. S., & Matheny, J. (2006). Eustress, distress and their interpretation inprimary and secondary occupational stress management interventions: Which way first?
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(6), 547-565.
LeFevre, M., Matheny, J., & Kolt, G. S. (2003). Eustress, distress, and interpretation in
occupational stress. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(7), 726-744.
Levi, L. (1990). Occupational stress: Spice of life or kiss of death. American Psychologist,
45(10), 1142-1145.
Mansell, A., Brough, P., & Cole, K. (2006). Stable predictors of job satisfaction,
psychologica strain, and employee retention: An evaluation of organisational change within
the New Zealand customs service. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(1), 84107.
Matthews, G., Emo, A. K., Funke, G., Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M., Jr, P. T. C., et al.. (2006).
Emotional intelligence,personality, and task-induced stress. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 12(2), 96-107.
MYMOP. (2010). Retrieved from http://sites.pcmd.ac.uk/mymop/
Rausch, S. M., Gramling, S. E., & Auerbach, S. M. (2006). Effects of a single session oflarge-group meditation and progressive muscle relaxation training on stress reduction,
reactivity, and recovery. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(3), 273-290.
Redfern, D. C., Rees, C. J., & Rowlands, K. E. (2008). Occupational stress: consensus ordivergence? A challenge for training and development specialists. Industrial and Commercial
Training, 40(6), 287-294.
Richardson, K. M., & Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Effects of occupational stress management
intervention programs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13(1),69-93.

106

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
Ruotsalainen, J., & Marine, A. (2008). Systematic review of interventions for reducing
occupational stress in health care workers. Journal of Work, Environment, and Health, 34(3),169.
Schneider, B., & Kuemmel, A. (2007). Treating work-related stress in professionals that heal.
American Psychological Association, 52(33).
Searle, B. J. (2008). Does personal initiative training work as a stress management
intervention? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13(3), 259-270.
Soriano, D. R. (2009). Manage stress. Management Decision, 47(8), 1382-1384.
Sparrenberger, F., Chichelero, F., Ascoli, A., Fonseca, F., Weiss, G., & Berwanger, O.
(2008). Does psychosocial stress cause hypertension? A systematic review of observational
studies. Journal of Human Hypertension, 23, 12-19.
Stress Update. (2007). Retrieved. from www.dol.govt.nz.
Vakola, M., & Nikolaou, I. (2005). Attitudes towards organizational change: What is the roleof employees’ stress and commitment? Journal of Employment Relations, 27(2), 160-174.
VanDerHek, H., & Plomp, H. N. (1997). Occupational stress management programmes: A
practical overview of published effect studies. Occupational Medicine, 47, 133-141.
Walach, H., Nord, E., Zier, C., Dietz-Waschkowski, B., & Kersig, S. (2007). Mindfullnessbased stress reduction as a method for personal development: A pilot evaluation.
International Journal of Stress Management, 14(2), 188-198.
Walsh, H., Nord, E., Zier, C., Dietz-Waschkowski, B., & Kersig, S. (2007). Mindfullnessbased stress reduction as a method for personal development: A pilot evaluation.
International Journal of Stress Management, 14(2), 188-198.
Willert, M. P., Thulstrup, A. P., Hertz, J. P., & Bonde, J. D. M. S. (2009). Changes in stressand coping from a randomized controlled trial of a three-month stress management
intervention. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 35(2), 145.

107

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118
Appendix 1: Table 1.

108

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

109

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

110

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

111

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

112

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

113

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

114

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

115

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

116

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

117

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):97-118

118

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130

Chronicle: February 2010 – May 2010

February 2010
Signals of more proposed changes to employment legislation became apparent in
February. Both the Dominion Post and the Press reported that the Government wasconsidering a ‘revamp’ of personal grievance legislation. These proposed changes
would also see a control of ‘frivolous claims’ and rules to control advocates who were‘seen to be ramping up claims against employers’. Minister of Labour the Hon Kate
Wilkinson stated that she had an ‘open mind’ on the necessity for change but sheannounced the release of a discussion document and a questionnaire to survey whatchanges, if any, were required. Prime Minister John Key also become involved in thediscussion and stated that the Government “share]d] concern from many quarters
about the fairness and consistency of personal grievance claims”. It was claimed that
employers were forced to pay out to ‘no win no fee’ advocates and that somefrivolous claims were clogging the system. Wilkinson did concede that industrial
relations law was generally working well, and did not need radical change. Combined
Trade Union (CTU) President Helen Kelly noted that the no win no fee advocatestended to operate amongst non-unionised workers and that the CTU was not too
concerned about moves to regulate them. However, she did express concern over a
Government who viewed procedural fairness and natural justice as an impedimentwhen an employee was dismissed and added that the remedies that were won throughpersonal grievances were too low. Business NZ chief executive Phil O'Reilly said thatfor many years, New Zealand businesses had complained the personal grievancesystem was too bureaucratic and there was too much emphasis on form oversubstance.
A later Independent Financial Review article quoted Wilkinson as saying that she had
anecdotal evidence that the law might not be working. New Zealand Law Society(NZLS) Employment Committee convenor Michael Quigg said that the NZLS would
support a system that allowed meritorious personal grievance claims, but discouraged
frivolous ones saying that "[w]e do not want a system clogged by frivolous claims
made by speculative individuals, or groups, just to claim 'go-away' money." Business
New Zealand chief executive Phil O'Reilly even claimed that frivolous claims
discouraged companies from hiring new employees, especially those who wereunskilled or unqualified. He was quoted as saying that “[w]hat we need to be careful
about is that we don't exclude people from the workforce unnecessarily because offears that if things go wrong they're going to get an ambulance-chasing lawyer or
representative after them.”
In a timely article on employment disputes taken to the ERA the Dominion Post
provided a summary of the numbers of cases taken since 2007. In 2007, 295 claims
were taken to the ERA, 62 per cent were successful, with an average payout of $5998.
In 2008, there were 328 claims, with 58 per cent being successful with an average
payout of $5063. In 2009, there were 363 claims, 47 per cent were successful andreceived an average payout of $5116. The figures showed in fact that although there
119New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
was an increase in cases, the success rate was dropping and the average payout was
less, contradicting the claims made by employer representatives that there has been asteady increase in the level of personal grievance payouts issued by the ERA toemployees.
The Waikato Times also reported on the trends in ERA cases and noted that thefigures, along with other factors, indicated that there were likely to be changes to theway personal grievance cases were administered by the ERA for a number of reasons.
Firstly, Prime Minister John Key, in a speech to the Combined Trade Unions
conference, noted the potential for abuse and costly nature of personal grievanceprocesses. He indicated that the Minister of Labour would be looking at the personal
grievance processes. Secondly, employers may well be able to recover losses
attributable to poor performance from employees. The article cited a case as an
example where an employee who was found to be unjustifiably dismissed wasawarded over $5,000. On appeal, the Employment Court found that he employee had
been responsible for shoddy work that cost the employer a considerable amount ofmoney to rectify and ordered the employee to pay $12,000 in compensation.
However, the article did note that while employers often complained about theperceived imbalance in favour of employees, the statistics from a survey (refer to
Dominion Post article above) showed that the ERA ruled in favour of employees 66
per cent of the time. Also recent case law suggested that the Employment Court was
taking a more pragmatic approach and that minor procedural errors did not necessarily
undermine an otherwise justifiable dismissal.
The Sunday Star Times published an article claiming that employer groups wanted the
90 day probation rule (which originally applied to just small businesses) to beextended to all businesses employing more than 20 persons. The reasoning behind
this was that it would stimulate job growth and hasten the country's economic
recovery. According to the press release, from an employer’s point of view, the ability
to hire staff on a trial basis without risk of a personal grievance had proved very
successful. Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern) employment
relations manager David Lowe claimed that: “…[the trial period] is something thathas eased the mind of employers. This just gives them the confidence and the ability
to get on with their business and hire people when they may not have hired at all.”
The Minister of Labour the Hon Kate Wilkinson said that there were no current plans
to extend the legislation but the government was willing to look at anything thatencouraged business to give people a chance to succeed. Wilkinson said that
anecdotally she had heard good things and that the hysteria surrounding its
introduction was unfounded.
The usual procession decisions of the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) during
February were reported. The most noteworthy being the case of the former CEO of
the Tainui administrative body who claimed that he was unjustifiably dismissed.
Reports on this case received extensive coverage in the Waikato Times over February.
The NZ Herald also reported on the case of the ANZ bank which took a complaint to
the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) regarding one of its former employees
who fled to Australia after authorising a number of over inflated mortgages. The
fraud cost the bank over $3.5m and the ERA found that the employee had breached
his duty to apply bank credit risk policy in 18 transactions and fined him $54,000.

120

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
The dispute between Ministry of Justice Court staff and their employer continued on
through the month of February. Provincial papers reported the frustration that Court
users were experiencing because of the disruption. For example, the Southland Times
said that a trial had to be delayed. The Nelson Mail reported on chaos in the local
Court as 144 cases were affected by a one day walkout by Nelson Court staff. Whennews of the strike was announced there was an angry outburst in the public gallery of
the Court which in turn prompted calls from the staff for increased security at the
court to deal with frustrated defendants and supporters in the event of future walkouts
Once again Air NZ was in the news regarding accusations from company
management and unions that the Police were making ‘unsubstantiated and illconsidered’ claims about a drink-drive culture amongst staff. The Dominion Post
reported that according to Police at least seven Air New Zealand staff had been
convicted of drink-driving since 2007. At least two of the employees were caught
driving to work with an excess blood alcohol reading. In particular for one pilot it
was the fourth time he had been caught drink driving. In a NZ Herald article internal
Police memos revealed concerns over an Air New Zealand culture that “... accepts
alcohol consumption, prior to working, as acceptable”. Air NZ CEO responded in a
letter to the Police claiming that the claims were ‘unsubstantiated and ill-considered’and criticised the ‘loose language’ of the Police.

March 2010
A Dominion Post editorial argued that ‘both employers and employees would benefit
from a regime that attached more weight to the substance of dismissals and less tolegal technicalities’. The current system created a legal minefield for employers whowant to dismiss an employee. A case where an employee was dismissed for stealingfrom his employer but was subsequently found to be unjustifiably dismissed because
the employer had not followed a proper process was used as an example. In its rulingthe Employment Court ordered the employer to pay $12,000 lost wages and $7,000
costs. While the editorial did concede that there are also poor employers, it welcomed
the proposed review by the Minister of Labour of the personal grievance provisions of
the Employment Relations Act.
A further Dominion Post article reported that unions and the Government were at‘loggerheads’ over the review. CTU president Helen Kelly stated that she was also
concerned about potential changes to the definition of 'justified dismissal' and theoption of reducing the importance of bosses following correct processes when
dismissing workers. Kelly was quoted as saying that there were some “... pretty nasty
proposals for consideration...” The Minister of Labour the Hon Kate Wilkinson
insisted that she was “...open-minded about it. I want to really see what comes out of
this discussion, and we’ll take it from there.” Business New Zealand CEO Phil
O'Reilly said that employers regularly complained about the weight given toprocedures compared to the substance of complaints. He said that while natural justicemattered, the relative weight given to process was what caused the trouble for
employers. Labour party employment relations spokesman Trevor Mallard questioned
the need for the review saying that there was no evidence that the present system was
not working.

121

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
The debate about the proposed changes continued on throughout March. Helen Kellyof the CTU wrote a Dominion Post comment starting with the example of ‘Andrea’
who was a night manager at a hotel in charge of a staff member who inadvertently
went into a room where a guest was asleep. The resultant attempt at dismissal by her
employer was avoided by the requirement for the employer to follow a fair and proper
process and to listen to her version of events. The article surmised that without these
protections in place an unscrupulous employer would have dismissed her instantly.
Once again statistics were used to show how the current system was working. Only
2500 cases went to the ERA on average with a thousand of these reaching the firststage investigative meeting. These figures were compared to the estimated 800,000
workers who change jobs every year. Arguably the average compensation paid toworks at around $2,800 was dismal given the economic and reputational
consequences of a dismissal. In a counter to the Government view that payouts for
personal grievances are made to make the worker go away, Ms Kelly stated thatpayments are made before personal grievances escalate because both parties are being
pragmatic. In many cases the employee has been treated unfairly and the employer
has often breached their rights. She once again confirmed that unions had no problem
with the regulation of the ‘no win no fee’ advocates who typically do not work forunions and are often insufficiently trained to bring about a settlement. In conclusion,
she argued that unions would not pursue a personal grievance case purely formonetary reasons where the employee clearly does not have solid evidence. She
added that fellow workers often resented their trade union representing workers who
clearly were poor performers. As noted previously, Kelly’s argued that the current
system is working well and that instead of trying to reform the system, New
Zealanders should be concerned about the Government’s moves to reduce the rightsthat workers enjoyed for decades.
Left wing commentator Chris Trotter added his view in an commentary written for the
Independent Financial Review in which he condemned the short sightedness of the
proposed changes. Trotter questioned why the Government seemed to be
implementing its ‘employer driven agenda incrementally’ rather than with a ‘king hit’
Employment Contracts Act type response. The article argued that Government policy
was short sighted and had forgotten the crucial role that universal personal grievance
mediation played ‘in bedding in the Employment Contracts Act and making it work’.
Trotter argued that the universal availability of personal grievance mediation played avital role in the ‘de-unionisation of the New Zealand workforce’. Trotter stated thatthe rationale for de-unionising New Zealand was that individualistic, self-confident
workers did not need to join a union as the disputes resolution and mediation
procedures outlined in the Employment Contracts Act and strengthened under the
Employment Relations Act, 2000, gave employers a strong incentive to act fairly
towards their employees. Moreover, such procedures denied the unions horror stories
which were needed to maintain and strengthen their membership. Viewed objectively,
Trotter claimed that the employers’ demands to weaken the legislative guarantees of
personal grievance mediation appeared to be self-defeating. He said that it was‘deeply troubling that 20 years after the passage of the Employment Contracts Act’
that Business NZ could claim that the elimination of what few protections were left
for workers would lead to an improvement in economic performance. It suggested
that the business community had learned nothing from the experience of the
Employment Contracts Act and that there was a group within the business community
who were willing to ‘deprive their fellow citizens of their rights’ for personal gain.

122

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
The article concluded that while short term gains could perhaps be made by adoptinga regime where workers ‘toil harder for less’, an exerted, continuous, downward
pressure on wages was not going to achieve the goal of parity with Australia by 2025.
The dispute between the Ministry of Justice and court staff continued with the
Employment Court ruling that pay negotiations should resume after they stalled in late2009. The latest industrial action resulted in staff walking off the job for 23 hours.
Public Service Association (PSA) general secretary Richard Wagstaff said that theaction stemmed from the Ministry's failure to resume negotiations after the court
ruling.
The Waikato Times reported on a series of planned strikes at Waikato Hospitals
involving radiographers and attendants. The radiographers belonging to the
Association of Professional and Executive Employees (Apex) planned to strike fortwelve hours. The Waikato District Health Board also received notice from Unite
Incorporated that its hospital attendants would strike for 24 hours. According toDistrict Health Boards New Zealand (DHBNZ) spokesperson Phil Cammish, it isestimated the Association of Professional and Executive Employees pay claims would
increase the DHBNZ’s wage and salary bills for the radiographers by 15 per cent per
annum.
The Nelson Mail reported on a nationwide strike by community support workers in
IHC homes. The community support workers (who normally slept over as part of theirjob) began a staggered series of strikes. The Service and Food Workers Union had
been negotiating on behalf of it members for a 2 per cent pay increase with IHC since
October 2009. The IHC management countered offered with a 12-month pay freeze.
A Union spokesperson said that the staff supported a vulnerable section of thecommunity and “deserved to be valued for the valuable work that they're doing”. The
IHC's general manager of human resources, David Timms, stated that: “[w]e simply
can't afford to do what the union is asking”.
Once again there was a raft of cases from the Employment Relations Authority during
March. The more noteworthy ones included two cases reported in an article in the
Waikato Times that focussed on the change of law surrounding 90 day trial periods
introduced in 2009. The first involved a Napier Bar Manager who had a one monthtrial period. The terms of the probationary period included a chance to respond to any
concerns voiced by her employer about her performance and her employment would
not be terminated unless she was advised of any required improvements to be made in
her performance a week prior to the review. She was later contacted by telephone andinformed that she was dismissed. The ERA found that the calculation of theprobationary period started when she commenced employment and found that she wasdismissed outside of her probationary period and therefore her employer did not meetthe obligation under the employment agreement. The ERA concluded that theemployee was unjustifiably dismissed and was awarded lost wages and compensation.
In a fairly similar fact case an office worker was also dismissed effective immediatelyby her employer without any reason given and one month into her employment. The
ERA found that regardless of a trial period being in place, employers were not exempt
from the duty of good faith and should provide an employee with an opportunity to beheard when dismissal was contemplated. In this case, the employer failed to do so andthe employee's claim was upheld.

123

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130

The Press ran an article on the case of a highly regarded Christchurch firefighter, whoclaimed he was dismissed because of his history of mental illness. The former
firefighter claimed to the ERA that he was unjustifiably dismissed by the NZ Fire
Service in 2008 after an investigation showed he had not disclosed his history ofdepression and post-traumatic stress disorder on a pre-selection form. The ERA foundthat the NZ Fire Service was entitled to screen for mental illness and to dismiss anemployee who misled it. The man joined the service in 2003 and was an exemplary
employee but in 2008 his supervisor became concerned that he was a suicide risk andspoke to police, who visited the man at home. He convinced them they should notintervene, but he later made an attempt on his life and required hospital treatment.
Subsequent reports requested by the Fire Service showed a history of mental illness
and the failure to declare his previous health issues when he was recruited. The manargued that the questions breached the Human Rights Act prohibition on employers
discriminating against candidates with mental health problems but the Fire Service
said it used its questionnaire not to discriminate, but to assess whether a candidate's
condition was consistent with them safely carrying out all parts of the job. The ERA
accepted that mental health was an important consideration in whether a person can
properly and safely perform the role of firefighter.
The Herald on Sunday, the Nelson Mail and the Press reported on the Marlboroughlabour hire company that paid vineyard workers as little as $2 an hour lost a legal
battle over unpaid wages. The Department of Labour took a case against New ZealandVines Ltd to the Employment Relations Authority who awarded them back pay. It
was the second time in seven months that the company had been caught paying wages
below the legal minimum rate. The manager of the company claimed that most cases
were down to misunderstandings and that some of the employees had complained to
the Department of Labour before he had a chance to pay them. He claimed that theworkers were not fast enough to earn the equivalent of the minimum wage. The
Department of Labour had experienced ongoing problems with the company
managers who had failed to keep proper employment records and to abide by New
Zealand employment law. Marlborough wine grower’s spokesperson said that hisorganisation was fighting to get rid of rogue operators.

April 2010
The Nelson Mail reported that the Employment Relations (Workers' Secret Ballot for
Strikes) Amendment Bill passed its first reading and was sent to the industrial
relations select committee for public submissions. The private member's bill draftedby National MP Tau Henare was supported by the Labour opposition with MP Trevor
Mallard sating that Labour had no problems with it because it largely reflected current
practice.
The decision by the ERA to intervene in the dispute between the IHC and its support
workers was reported by the Nelson Mail, the Manawatu Standard and the Dominion
Post. The ERA granted an application by the Service and Food Workers Union thatwould allow it to make a non-binding decision on the matters involved in the pay
dispute which had lead to five weeks of industrial action.

124

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
Some regional papers namely the Northern Advocate and the Marlborough Express
reported on the withdrawal of threatened strike action by radiographers. The removalof the threat did cause logistical problems as plans had been implemented to manage
the disruption which left hospital officials struggling to return to normal operating
capacity.
The education sector, which had been relatively quite, was back in the media with athreat that teachers would strike within a month. The threatened strike, (reported in
the Dominion Post) was in reaction to the Minister of Education the Hon Ann Tolley
who insisted that Post Primary Teachers Association’ demands must reflect theeconomic climate. The Association voted to push for a 4 per cent rise in the upcoming
employment negations with the Ministry of Education. Ms Tolley, the Minister of
Education, claimed that every 1 per cent increase for primary, secondary and earlychildhood teachers would cost taxpayers an extra $50 million a year.
In a noticeable trend a number of articles in the media relating to employment are
written by leading employment lawyers using case law to illustrate a particular issue.
The following articles illustrated the trend. Susan Hornsby-Geluk from Kensington
Swan (voted the best dressed lawyer in 2008) wrote an article in the Dominion Post
about what to wear at work stating that as companies move further away from thetraditional white collar/blue collar moulds, work wear was becoming increasingly
contentious. The point was illustrated by the case that went before the ERA about ashop assistant in a fashion store who was told to wear makeup. The ERA found thatthe requirement to wear makeup was not in the employee’s employment agreement
therefore the employer had no right to insist that she wore it. The article concluded
that if a dress code is necessary on health and safety grounds then it may still bejustifiable even though it is potentially discriminatory. A case in point would behygiene reasons which would require staff in a food factory to be clean shaven could
be justifiable even though such a rule arguably discriminates against certain religious
groups. Andrew Scott-Howman an employment law specialist at Luke, Cunningham
and Clere wrote an article in the Dominion Post on employee absenteeism throughsickness and argued that a contract of employment prohibits an employer from taking
disciplinary action as a result of being frustrated that the employee is unable to work
due to illness. Instead an employer must accommodate the employee’s illness andincapacity to work and can only terminate the relationship for reasons of ‘frustration’when he or she can (in the words of the Arbitration Court) “freely cry halt”. The caseof the Air NZ flight attendant who was addicted to party pills and eventually was
dismissed was cited as an example. In this case the employee’s recovery plan went on
for two years before Air NZ finally dismissed her. Howman said that the case
operated as an indication to employers of the need to indulge medically incapacitatedemployees prior to reaching a decision to dismiss.
The subject of bullying in the workplace is still a subject of newspaper reporting. The
Dominion Post published extracts on a report of a joint university research team on
bullying in the workplace. The team from the Universities of Auckland, Waikato,
Massey and London surveyed more than 1700 workers from the health, education,
hospitality and travel sectors. One of the findings was that at least one in five New
Zealand workers had at one stage suffered from workplace bullying. The highest
incidence occurred in the education and health sectors, and the hospitality industry.
The types of bullying included managers harassing employees, workers harassing

125New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
colleagues and even employees intimidating their managers. It was estimated that thecost of bullying including absenteeism, high staff turnover, lower staff satisfaction
and investigation bullying claims was ‘a billion-dollar problem’. The findings of thesurvey were questioned by David Lowe of the Employers and Manufacturers
Association (Northern). Citing one of the self report questions whether respondents
felt they were being bullied either ‘several times a week’ or ‘almost daily’ yielded thefar smaller figure of 3.9 per cent. Lowe claimed that what people would normallydescribe as bullying and two negative acts in the workplace are not one and the same.
He argued that the definition of ‘bullying’ used in the survey was too wide. The
Department of Labour which commissioned the survey accepted the findings andintends to develop resources for employers and staff, to assist workplaces to manage
bullying issues as they arose.
The exploitation of foreign workers by a ‘minority of employers’ was raised in aSouthland Times article. The report quoted a Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) worker
who said that Queenstown was the main culprit with an increase in employment
related problems being recorded. A previous article reported that the CAB had urged
foreign workers to make sure they signed employment contracts, after several
complaints a day were being received from disgruntled workers. The CAB had seen anumber of mainly foreign workers, who had been told by employers in the hospitality
industry that they were not entitled to holiday pay because they had not worked for ayear. A young Chilean man had informed that New Zealand public holidays did not
apply to foreign workers’ pay rates.
In yet another article on workplace stress a medical expert was quoted as saying thatthe onset of workplace stress was like twilight – ‘you can’t see it coming, or identify
at what point it happened - but when evening falls, you know it’. Lawyer Susan
Hornsby-Geluk wrote that most employers would struggle to describe workplacestress, and may not be able to recognise it until after the damage has been done. It wasa ‘massive issue requiring lots of sensitivity’. Two landmark cases which cost
employers hundreds of thousands of dollars were cited: (a) the police photographer
who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after taking crime scene photographs; and(b) the probation officer who suffered stress due to the high volume of his work stress
was related to volume of work. Business New Zealand's manger of employer relations
and policy, Paul Mackay, stated that subsequent employer awareness about stressmeant that there had been no other significant awards for work related stress claims.
He went on to say that there was awareness that stress itself is not the problem, but‘the harm caused by stress’. The article went on to say that for many staff, overwork
became an issue during a recession and quoted a recent PSA survey of almost 2000
public servants that revealed that 40 per cent of those surveyed were working at leastan additional three unpaid hours per week. Almost half of those surveyed felt theirworkload was negatively affecting their family life or other responsibilities. Some of
the reasons given for this increased workload included loss of experienced staff,
unfilled vacancies, slow staff replacement and lack of administrative support.
Employment lawyer Barbara Buckett said the crucial factor in Personal Grievancestaken by employees for stress is the way the staff member is managed and the attitudeof the employer. She said that people under performance regimes could raise the bullyor stress card added that there were “ways of flushing that out” with a medical
opinion. Her view was that a lot of employers think that people use stress when it is
not genuine and it made it much worse if an employer denied that the employee was126

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
under stress which could be devastating. At the end of the day, Ms Hornsby-Geluk
said a stress claim came down to was the damage foreseeable and caused by theemployer?

May 2010
The Daily Post reported on a speech in Parliament by the local Member of Parliament
for the Waiariki electorate Te Ururoa Flavell. In the speech during the first reading of
the Employment Relations (Rest Breaks and Meal Breaks) Amendment Bill heclaimed that one element of the Bill could create a “real, big, enduring problem for
New Zealand industrial relations.” The Bill had the provision where the duration ofrest and meal breaks should be agreed between the employer and the employee. If
this does not occur then a stalemate would ensue, thus creating a significant on-goingproblem. However despite that misgiving the Maori Party gave support to the Bill at
its first reading. Flavell did indicate a concern that young workers in particular who
were not covered by a collective agreement including those in the hospitality sector,
hotels and food outlets would be affected.
The stakes were raised in the education sector with both teacher unions, Post Primary
Teachers Association and NZEI, threatening industrial action over their latest pay
claims. Two separate items in the Dominion Post identified the issues. The first itemin the paper stated that the Post Primary Teachers Association, (PPTA) which
represented 18,000 secondary teachers, was planning strike action in support of their 4
per cent pay rise. The Government responded that the request was unrealistic.
However, the PPTA spokesperson stated that they had a clear mandate from theteachers to take industrial action and indicated that teachers were prepared for thelong haul and reiterated that the last long running contract negotiations in 2001/02
included strike action and lasted for 16 months.
At the same time the primary school teacher's union the NZEI which covers 27,000
primary school teachers was to presents its claims to the Government. NZEI
Negotiations leader Frances Guy said that teachers were keen to avoid strike action
striking was an option if the government played ‘hard ball’. The union was still
finalising its claim, a figure of 2 per cent pay was discussed at stop work meetings.
The response from the Ministry of Education was that the claim was unrealistic andthat teachers like other state servants must accept that they are subject to the same
constraints as other state servants.
In another Dominion Post article, the NZEI lodged a claim before the ERA over therefusal of the Ministry of Education to introduce an agreed pay model. The Ministryclaimed that the model was introduced on a trial basis and more work was required
before it was implemented. The model was to ensure that 7000 of 27,000 primaryteachers with a teaching diploma, rather than a degree, were entitled to higher pay
scales. If the legal action was successful it was likely that the top pay scale for ateacher with a diploma would rise from $54,000 to $65,000. The Ministry of
Education claimed that evaluation had shown that a more sophisticated system was
required and claimed that it was made clear to the NZEI that if the trial was not
successful further implementation would not go ahead.

127

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
The usual reporting of decisions by the ERA brought up the more sensational andnewsworthy cases. The Herald on Sunday and the Sunday News reported on the‘Shakespearean tragedy’ that had become ‘high farce’ after a Christian high school in
Kerikeri dismissed a teacher for using a ‘morally defiling’ King Lear text in class.
The teacher had used a modern text of the play which she failed to check with school
officials who found it embarrassing, corrupting and morally defiling. The ERA while
expressing sympathy for the teacher was forced to uphold the dismissal. Yet anotherpersonal grievance issue involving an Air NZ employee was reported. The NZ Herald
reported on an Air NZ flight attendant who was dismissed, for mistakenly sending a‘highly derogatory and offensive’ about a manager to the man himself. The man was
dismissed for serious misconduct and appealed to the ERA on the basis that thedismissal was harsh and failed to consider his length of time working for thecompany. Although the contents of the email were not revealed the ERA described
them as vitriolic and deliberately constructed to be offensive. The employee wasseeking urgent reinstatement but the ERA ruled that it was not appropriate the ERA
reserved the case for a later substantive hearing.
In another NZ Herald article prominent business communication company Ogilvy
New Zealand was ordered by the ERA to pay a former deputy managing director
nearly $350,000 after it made her redundant. The woman had been employed by
Ogilvy and its predecessors since 1993 but was told in July 2008 by the managing
director Greg Partington that he had appointed a new deputy managing director. She
was offered a seat on the Ogilvy board if she relinquished her job title but some days
later she was told through her lawyer that she had never been deputy managing
director, and the offer of a directorship was withdrawn. The ERA found that the
woman’s employment agreement had been seriously breached by a unilateralvariation, unreasonably terminating the consultation process, and the claim that she
never did the deputy's job, despite her having filled the role for more than three years.
Employment in the viticulture industry featured again in the media.
The
Marlborough Express reported on a vineyard contractor New Zealand Vineyard
Estates Limited who was ordered to pay compensation to four employees because of
maltreatment. The ERA did not accept the claim that they were full time employees
rather than casual but found they had been disadvantaged in their employment as they
were not treated fairly and in good faith. The workers were told they were no longer
employed as their work performance was not a good as the other casuals but had notbeen previously informed of the concerns over their performance. Moreover, they
were not told how they could have either improved their performance to the standard
expected and/or at least not have been left without an understanding as to why work
was no longer to be offered to them. In a later Marlborough Express article thechairman of the New Zealand Winegrowers Association claimed that ‘the good apples
will squeeze out the bad in the labour contracting game’ but the union representing
vineyard workers said that it was the bad employers who have the upper hand. The
dispute highlighted the wider issue of the employment of illegal workers in which theCentral Amalgamated Workers Union Marlborough organiser Steve MacManus statedthat while practices had been tidied up there were still a number of unscrupulous subcontractors who employed only illegal migrant labour. He added that good contractors
were being undercut and could not complete with those non-compliant employers
who paid illegal migrant workers very little (if at all).

128

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
The NZ Herald and the Dominion Post reported on a simmering dispute amongst thecountry’s firefighters and the Fire Service with several senior officers facing
disciplinary action for refusing to follow orders over the storage of fire appliances infire stations. The officers claimed the diesel fumes posed a health risk. The
Professional Firefighters Union said they had been working for years to get extractor
systems to deal with diesel fumes inside fire stations. There was an agreement with
the Fire Service under which the extractor systems will be installed but the union was
upset at local area managers taking disciplinary action. Fire Service employment
relations manager Larry Cocker said the measures were taken after some firefighters
refused to take the vehicles inside even after the agreement was reached. He said that
the Fire Service had done everything it could to meet the concerns of the union over ahealth risk and considered it a minimal risk.
In yet another dispute the Dominion Post reported that firefighters were defying a new
operation procedure that restricted the response of fire appliances to buildings withsprinkler systems. The Fire Service was reported to be implementing disciplinary
procedures for employees who failed to follow the orders. Professional Firefighters
Union vice-president Peter Hallett claimed that the ‘bizarre’ new policy wasendangering lives. Fire Service assistant national commander Bill Butzbach said 26
officers, had been spoken to about breaking the rules - though opposition had begun
to quieten down.
The NZ Herald printed a number of articles about the case of an immigrant fromSouth Africa who was offered a job with a $55,000 salary but was asked by her
employer to pay her own taxes and wages in order to stay legally in New Zealand.
The allegation was made before the Employment Court. The woman claimed thearrangement was in order to deceive Immigration officials into thinking that she wasbeing employed at $55,000, as an associate consultant which was the minimum salaryfor her to meet skilled migration requirements. The recruitment company claimed thatthe allegations were false and that the woman had full knowledge and was inagreement of the arrangement between them. The case sparked a wider debate on
immigrants who entered these scam agreements with employers to pay their own
taxes and wages in order to obtain New Zealand permanent residence. The illegal
scheme even had its own name PYO (pay your own). Employment advocates and the
National Distribution Union claimed that the practice was rampant and had been
going on for years, with possibly hundreds gaining residence by paying their own way
to meet immigration requirements for skilled migration. Some suggested the practice
was kept quiet because much of the arrangements occurred within migrantcommunities. The woman who sparked the original media attention lost her casebefore the ERA and was forced to return to South Africa.
The long running issue which involved Air Nelson employing replacement workers
during a strike by its employees reached its zenith with a decision by the Supreme
Court. The Court stated that Air Nelson acted within the law to bring in thereplacement workers. Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union secretary
Andrew Little said the decision was significant in that the ruling was the last place theargument could go and secondly the decision was very confusing and it was hard todiscern what it would mean in practice. The appeal in the Supreme Court centred on
several sections of the Employment Relations Act intended to prevent employers from129

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 35(2):119-130
using strike-breaking techniques, such as engaging contractors or new employees
during industrial action.
Counsel for Air Nelson, Christopher Toogood QC, said the strike-breaking provisions
did not apply in instances where striking and non-striking workers routinely carriedout similar tasks. The Supreme Court said the approach adopted by the Employment
Court, that the contract engineers had not been performing the work of striking
employees but had been performing their own work, was correct.

Colin Ross & Erling Rasmussen
Auckland University of Technology

130