Purchase individual online access for 1 year to this journal.
Price: EUR 250.00
ISSN 1051-9815 (P)
ISSN 1875-9270 (E)
Impact Factor 2024: 1.7
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal's subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.
WORK occasionally publishes thematic issues, but in general, issues cover a wide range of topics such as ergonomic considerations with children, youth and students, the challenges facing an aging workforce, workplace violence, injury management, performing artists, ergonomic product evaluations, and the awareness of the political, cultural, and environmental determinants of health related to work.
Dr. Karen Jacobs, the founding editor, and her editorial board especially encourage the publication of research studies, clinical practice, case study reports, as well as personal narratives and critical reflections of lived work experiences (autoethnographic/autobiographic scholarship),
Sounding Board commentaries and
Speaking of Research articles which provide the foundation for better understanding research to facilitate knowledge dissemination.
Narrative Reflections on Occupational Transitions, a new column, is for persons who have successfully transitioned into, between, or out of occupations to tell their stories in a narrative form. With an internationally renowned editorial board,
WORK maintains high standards in the evaluation and publication of manuscripts. All manuscripts are reviewed expeditiously and published in a timely manner.
WORK prides itself on being an author-friendly journal.
WORK celebrates its 25th anniversary in 2015.
*WORK is affiliated with the Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists (CAOT)* *WORK is endorsed by the International Ergonomics Association (IEA)* *WORK gives out the yearly Cheryl Bennett Best Paper Award*
Abstract: The authors outline the development and scope of the National EEOC ADA Research Project which resulted from a cooperative agreement between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Virginia Commonwealth University. Research questions, the EEOC database, extraction of study data, limitations of the data, the organization of research teams, and the contents of this special issue of WORK are described.
Abstract: Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with diabetes is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with diabetes and persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the nature of discrimination (i.e.,…type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or resolution of these complaints. Findings indicate that persons with diabetes were more likely to encounter discrimination involving discharge, constructive discharge, discipline and suspension – all job retention issues. Persons with diabetes were less likely to encounter discrimination involving hiring, reasonable accommodation, non-pension benefits, and layoff. They were also more likely to encounter discrimination when they were older or from specific ethnic backgrounds, or when they worked for small employers or in the Southern United States. Implications for policy and advocacy are addressed.
Show more
Abstract: Data compiled by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in its Integrated Mission System, provide documentation regarding the employment discrimination experience of Americans who are deaf or hard of hearing. This paper presents an analysis of 8,936 allegations filed by persons with hearing impairment and closed by EEOC…between July 26, 1992 and September 30, 2003, as compared to 165,674 allegations filed by individuals with other physical or sensory disabilities. The investigators compare and contrast demographic characteristics of Charging Parties, characteristics of Respondents, the nature of allegations, and the outcomes of the allegations in order to illustrate how these variables differ between the two groups, herein referred to as HEARING (deaf, hard of hearing, or other hearing impairment) and GENDIS (general disability). Most allegations derived from both groups were filed against larger Respondents (those with 500+ workers). The most common allegation issues in the HEARING group involved matters of discharge, reasonable accommodation, and hiring. Outcomes derived from HEARING allegations were more likely to result in merit resolutions when compared to GENDIS, by a 25% to 21% margin.
Show more
Abstract: Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with missing limbs is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with missing limbs and persons with back and other non-paralytic orthopedic impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the nature of…discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or resolution of these complaints. Findings indicate that persons with missing limbs were more likely to encounter discrimination if they were male, under 20 or over 65 years of age, and White or Native American. They were also more likely to encounter more frequent discrimination when they worked for employers in the Southern United States, those with 200 or fewer employers, or whose industry designation involved manufacturing, construction, or transportation. Finally, the nature of job discrimination experienced by Americans with missing limbs is more likely to involve hiring, promotion, or job training than other issues. Implications for policy and advocacy are addressed.
Show more
Abstract: This article utilizes data from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Integrated Mission System database to document the levels of employment discrimination involving individuals with HIV/AIDS. The researchers explore the theory that the nature of HIV/AIDS related employment discrimination is rooted in deeper stigmatization than discrimination against other disability groups. Researchers compare and contrast key demographic characteristics of Charging Parties and Respondents involved in HIV/AIDS related allegations of discrimination and their proportion of…EEOC merit resolutions to those of persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Findings indicate that, in contrast to the general disability group, HIV/AIDS was more likely to be male, ethnic minorities, between the ages of 25–44, in white collar jobs, in the South and West and to work for businesses with 15 to 100 employees. Additionally, the allegations in HIV/AIDS were more likely to receive merit resolution from the EEOC by a large difference of ten percent.
Show more
Abstract: Employment discrimination of persons with cumulative trauma disorders (CTDs) was explored using the Integrated Mission System dataset of the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Demographic characteristics and merit resolutions of the Charging Parties (persons with CTD) were compared to individuals experiencing other physical, sensory and neurological impairments. Factors compared also included industry designation, geographic region, and size of Respondents against which allegations were filed. Persons with CTD had proportionately greater allegations among…large Respondents (greater than 500 workers) engaged in manufacturing, utilities, transportation, finance insurance and real estate. The types of discrimination Issues that were proportionately greater in the CTD group included layoff, failure to reinstate, and failure to provide reasonable accommodation. The CTD group was significantly less likely than the comparison group to be involved in discrimination Issues such as assignment to less desirable duty, shift or work location; demotion; termination, or failure to hire or provide training. Persons with CTD had higher proportions of merit Resolutions where allegations were voluntarily withdrawn by the Charging Party with benefits.
Show more
Abstract: Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with disfigurement is documented. Key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with disfigurement and persons with missing limbs are compared and contrasted. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of Charging Parties; the industry designation, location and size of Respondents/employers; the discrimination Issue (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or…Resolution of these allegations. Charging Parties with disfigurement who are female or between 30 and 39 years of age are more likely to encounter employment discrimination than their counterparts with missing limbs. Harassment and Non-wage Benefits are the Issues that emerge in higher proportion. Allegations derived from persons with disfigurement are more common in among mid-size employers, those located in the South, or those in Retail or Service industries. Following investigation, allegations derived from persons with disfigurement are less likely to have Merit Resolutions than those brought by Charging Parties with missing limbs.
Show more
Abstract: Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with traumatic brain injury is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with traumatic brain injury and persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the…nature of discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the outcome or resolution of the investigations. Findings indicate that persons with traumatic brain injury were more likely to encounter discrimination after obtaining employment as opposed to during the hiring process. They were also more likely to encounter discrimination when they were younger or Caucasian or when employed in the Midwestern or Western United States. Implications are addressed.
Show more
Abstract: The purpose of this paper was to determine what drives workplace discrimination against people with disabilities. These findings are then compared to available literature on attribution theory, which concerns itself with public perceptions of the controllability and stability of various impairments. The sample included 35,763 allegations of discriminations filed by people with disabilities under the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Group A included impairments deemed by Corrigan et al. [1988]…to be uncontrollable but stable: visual impairment (representing 13% of the total allegations in this study), cancer (12%), cardiovascular disease (19%), and spinal cord injuries (5%). The controllable but unstable impairments in group B included depression (38%), schizophrenia (2%), alcohol and other drug abuse (4%), and HIV/AIDS (7%). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had resolved all allegations in terms of merit Resolutions (a positive finding of discrimination) and Resolutions without merit. Allegations of workplace discrimination were found to center mainly on hiring, discharge, harassment, and reasonable accommodation issues. Perceived workplace discrimination (as measured by allegations filed with EEOC) does occur at higher levels in Group B, especially when serious issues involving discharge and disability harassment are involved. With the glaring exception of HIV/AIDS, however, actual discrimination (as measured by EEOC merit Resolutions) occurs at higher levels for Group A.
Show more
