Health differences between multiple and single job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study among Dutch workers
Autoři:
Stef Bouwhuis aff001; Goedele A. Geuskens aff002; Cécile R. L. Boot aff001; Allard J. van der Beek aff001; Paulien M. Bongers aff001
Působiště autorů:
Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
aff001; Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research TNO, Leiden, The Netherlands
aff002; Body@Work, Research Center on Physical Activity, Work and Health, TNO-VU/VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
aff003
Vyšlo v časopise:
PLoS ONE 14(9)
Kategorie:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222217
Souhrn
Introduction
Precarious employment is associated with poor health. Among employees in precarious employment, those with multiple jobs may face additional health risks, e.g. due to combining work schedules and job roles. Our research question is: do differences in health exist between multiple and single job holders in precarious employment?
Methods
Participants in the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey 2012 aged 25–64 years who were not employed through the Act on Social Work Provision and who had a precarious job were included. To select employees in precarious employment (n = 3,609), latent class analysis was performed, based on variables based on indicators described by Van Aerden. Differences in general self-perceived health, burnout complaints, musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence between multiple and single job holders were studied cross-sectionally using logistic regression analyses.
Results
No significant differences were found between multiple and single job holders in precarious employment for self-perceived health (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7–1.3), burnout complaints (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7–1.2), and musculoskeletal health (OR = 1.1; 95%CI = 0.8–1.5). In crude analyses, multiple job holders experienced less sickness absence than single job holders (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.5–0.9). In adjusted analyses, this difference was no longer statistically significant (OR = 0.8; 95%CI = 0.6–1.0).
Conclusions
Despite potential health risks related to multiple job holding, we did not find health differences between multiple and single job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands. More longitudinal research is necessary to provide recommendations for policy makers regarding multiple job holders in precarious employment.
Klíčová slova:
Social sciences – Economics – Labor economics – Employment – Jobs – Salaries – Finance – Psychological stress – Medicine and health sciences – Health care – Public and occupational health – Socioeconomic aspects of health – Mental health and psychiatry – Biology and life sciences – Psychology – Research and analysis methods – Database and informatics methods – Health informatics
Zdroje
1. Van Aerden K, Moors G, Levecque K, Vanroelen C. Measuring employment arrangements in the European labour force: a typological approach. Soc Indicators Res 2014;116(3):771–791.
2. Olsthoorn M. Measuring precarious employment: A proposal for two indicators of precarious employment based on set-theory and tested with Dutch labor market-data. Soc Indicators Res 2014;119(1):421–441.
3. Van Aerden K, Puig-Barrachina V, Bosmans K, Vanroelen C. How does employment quality relate to health and job satisfaction in Europe? A typological approach. Soc Sci Med 2016;158:132–140. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.04.017 27135543
4. Benach J, Vives A, Amable M, Vanroelen C, Tarafa G, Muntaner C. Precarious employment: understanding an emerging social determinant of health. Annu Rev Public Health 2014;35.
5. Ervasti J, Virtanen M. Research strategies for precarious employment. Scand J Work Environ Health 2019.
6. Vives A, Amable M, Ferrer M, Moncada S, Llorens C, Muntaner C, et al. Employment precariousness and poor mental health: evidence from Spain on a new social determinant of health. J Environ Public Health 2013;2013:978656. doi: 10.1155/2013/978656 23431322
7. Koranyi I, Jonsson J, Ronnblad T, Stockfelt L, Bodin T. Precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries—a systematic review. Scand J Work Environ Health 2018 Jul 1;44(4):341–350. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3720 29443355
8. Julià M, Vanroelen C, Bosmans K, Van Aerden K, Benach J. Precarious employment and quality of employment in relation to health and well-being in Europe. International Journal of Health Services 2017;47(3):389–409. doi: 10.1177/0020731417707491 28449605
9. Eurostat. Population in employment having a second job. 2015; Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/employment-and-social-inclusion-indicators/employment-guidlines/indicators. Accessed 01/17, 2017.
10. Bush AM, McKee SE, Bunn TL. Multiple jobholder mortality patterns in Kentucky: An examination of occupational fatalities. Am J Ind Med 2013;56(8):881–888. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22156 23729179
11. Marucci-Wellman H. Precarious employment and occupational injuries in the digital age‒where should we go from here? Scand J Work Environ Health 2018.
12. Leao ALM, Barbosa-Branco A, Turchi MD, Steenstra IA, Cole DC. Sickness absence among municipal workers in a Brazilian municipality: a secondary data analysis. BMC research notes 2017;10(1):773. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-3116-5 29282116
13. Bouwhuis S, Garde AH, Geuskens GA, Boot CRL, Bongers PM, van der Beek A J. The longitudinal association between multiple job holding and long-term sickness absence among Danish employees: an explorative study using register-based data. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2017;90(8):799–807. doi: 10.1007/s00420-017-1243-x 28669035
14. Alali H, Braeckman L, Van Hecke T, De Clercq B, Janssens H, Wahab MA. Relationship between non-standard work arrangements and work-related accident absence in Belgium. Journal of occupational health 2017;59(2):177–186. doi: 10.1539/joh.16-0119-OA 28111414
15. Dorenbosch L, Sanders J, Beudeker D. Multi-jobbing: wenselijke of onwenselijke arbeidsmarktdynamiek? [Multi-jobbing: desirable or undesirable dynamic on the labor market?]. In: Chkalova K, Goudswaard A, Sanders J, Smits W, editors. Dynamiek op de Nederlandse arbeidsmarkt: focus op flexibilisering [Dynamics on the Dutch labor market: focus on increasing flexibility] The Hague: CBS [Statistics Netherlands]; 2015. p. 170–196.
16. Jamal M, Baba VV, Riviere R. Job stress and well-being of moonlighters: The perspective of deprivation or aspiration revisited. Stress Health 1998;14(3):195–202.
17. Bouwhuis S, Hoekstra T, Bongers PM, Boot CRL, Geuskens GA, van der Beek AJ. Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among multiple job holders aged 45 years and older. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2018:1–13.
18. Bamberry L, Campbell I. Multiple job holders in Australia: Motives and personal impact. Aust Bull Labour 2012;38(4):293–314.
19. Bouwhuis S, De Wind A, De Kruif A, Geuskens GA, Van der Beek AJ, Bongers P, et al. Experiences with multiple job holding: a qualitative study among Dutch older workers. BMC Public Health 2018;18(1):1054. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5841-7 30134871
20. Parasuraman S, Simmers CA. Type of employment, work–family conflict and well‐being: a comparative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 2001;22(5):551–568.
21. Koppes L, De Vroome E, Mars G, Janssen B, Van Zwieten M, van den Bossche S. National Working Conditions Survey 2012. Methodology and Global Results. [Nationale Enquête Arbeidsomstandigheden 2012. Methodologie en globale resultaten]. 2013:1–126.
22. Schaufeli WB, van Dierendonck D. UBOS Utrechtse Burnout Schaal: Handleiding. Lisse: Swets Test Publishers; 2000.
23. Brenninkmeijer V, VanYperen N. How to conduct research on burnout: advantages and disadvantages of a unidimensional approach in burnout research. Occup Environ Med 2003 Jun;60 Suppl 1:i16–20.
24. De Vroome E. Burn-outklachtenschaal validatie [Burnout complains scale validation]. 2017.
25. Wu Z, Baimbridge M, Zhu Y. Multiple job holding in the United Kingdom: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey. Appl Econ 2009;41(21):2751–2766.
26. Heineck G, Schwarze J. Fly me to the moon: The determinants of secondary jobholding in Germany and the UK. 2004;IZA Discussion paper: 1358.
27. Friedland DS, Price RH. Underemployment: Consequences for the health and well-being of workers. Am J Community Psychol 2003;32(1–2):33–45. 14570433
28. Marucci-Wellman HR, Willetts JL, Lin T, Brennan MJ, Verma SK. Work in multiple jobs and the risk of injury in the US working population. Am J Public Health 2014;104(1):134–142. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301431 24228681
29. Allebeck P, Mastekaasa A. Chapter 5. Risk factors for sick leave-general studies. Scand J Public Health 2004;32:49–108.
30. Rohde N, Tang KK, Osberg L, Rao P. The effect of economic insecurity on mental health: Recent evidence from Australian panel data. Soc Sci Med 2016;151:250–258. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.014 26826683
31. Marucci-Wellman H. Precarious employment and occupational injuries in the digital age‒where should we go from here? Scand J Work Environ Health 2018;44(4):335–339. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3749 29893979
32. Scott-Marshall H, Tompa E. The health consequences of precarious employment experiences. Work 2011;38(4):369–382. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2011-1140 21508526
33. Ackerman N, Paolucci B. Objective and subjective income adequacy: Their relationship to perceived life quality measures. Soc Indicators Res 1983;12(1):25–48.
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 9
- Jak a kdy u celiakie začíná reakce na lepek? Možnou odpověď poodkryla čerstvá kanadská studie
- Pomůže v budoucnu s triáží na pohotovostech umělá inteligence?
- Spermie, vajíčka a mozky – „jednohubky“ z výzkumu 2024/38
- Skotská studie upřesnila zdravotní benefity aktivního cestování za prací a studiem
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?