Page 1

2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey Final Report Confidential Reproduction in whole or in part is not permitted without the expressed permission of

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland & Labrador WHS001-1010 / 1012

Prepared for:

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Commission December 2012

www.cra.ca 1-888-414-1336


Table of Contents Page Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................2 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................3 Recommendation .....................................................................................................................5 Section I: Areas Jointly Examined in Employers and Injured Workers ESRTW Surveys...... 7 • General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC ....................................................................... 7 • Opinions Concerning ESRTW ......................................................................................... 14 Section II: Injured Workers ................................................................................................ 19 • General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC ..................................................................... 19 • Opinions Concerning the ESRTW Program ..................................................................... 21 Section III: Employers ........................................................................................................ 25 • General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC ..................................................................... 25 • Opinions Concerning the ESRTW Program ..................................................................... 26 Survey Methodology .............................................................................................................. 32


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

1

Introduction The following report presents the findings from the surveys of injured workers and employers who have participated in the Early and Safe Return to Work Program. The overall objective of this survey was to assess satisfaction with the Early and Safe Return-to-Work (ESRTW) program. More specifically, this survey was intended to: •

Assess overall opinion of the WHSCC as well as various aspects of service, among injured workers and employers who have participated in the ESRTW program;

Gauge satisfaction in regards to the ESRTW program;

Assess the level of collaboration between employers and injured workers when using the ESRTW program; and

Determine areas that could be improved regarding the ESRTW program.

This survey was based on telephone interviews with representative samples of injured workers and employers who had participated in the Early and Safe Return-to-Work program. In total, 200 interviews were conducted with injured workers, and 200 with employers. The results from a sample of 200 would be expected to provide results accurate to within ± 6.9 percentage points in 95 out of 100 samples (i.e., a 95% confidence level). This is the first year that a survey has been conducted specifically among injured workers and employers that have participated in the ESRTW program, and therefore the findings reported here serve as a benchmark for future years. This report begins with an executive summary, followed by key conclusions and recommendations provided for the WHSCC’s consideration. The body of the report contains a detailed analysis of the survey findings. A small number of questions were the identical across the injured worker and employer surveys, and therefore these results are presented together for comparison purposes. Accordingly, this report has three discrete sections: i) a combined injured worker/employer section that includes the questions that were asked of both groups; ii) an injured worker section that includes questions administered only to injured workers; and iii) an employer section that includes questions administered only to employers. Please note, sub-group analyses of results in this report are based only on instances where the sample size is 100 or more interviews. Sub-group results should be interpreted with caution. To more closely match the survey results to known population parameters, the final data sets discussed in this report were weighted by region (employers and injured workers) and size of organization (payroll)(employers only). A more complete description of the methodology used to conduct this survey is provided at the back of this report.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

2

Executive Summary Results from the surveys of injured workers and employers who participated in the Early and Safe Return to Work Program indicate that, in general, there are moderate ratings in regards to program service. While the program ratings could not be described as high, there are no glaring service issues identified via the surveys. Specifically, when asked to assess various areas of the program, or to offer suggestions regarding improvements, injured workers and employers do not identify any one problem area in great numbers. Accordingly, it may be stated that these benchmark research surveys offer WHSCC suggestions concerning direction and opportunities for service improvement amongst its ESRTW employer and injured worker clients. Approximately one in four injured workers are dissatisfied with their ESRTW plan, and just under one in five employers are dissatisfied with the ESRTW program. One-half of injured workers are satisfied, as are slightly more employers. Among the specific concerns identified for WHSCC regarding the ESRTW program relate to exploiting opportunities for collaboration between the injured worker and his or her employer in developing an ESRTW plan, as well as further involving the WHSCC in the process. It is noteworthy that participating in developing their RTW plan is the single most important key driver influencing injured worker overall satisfaction with the ESRTW program. Overall, this suggests that the WHSCC could improve service perceptions by enhancing communications with both injured worker and employer ESRTW clients regarding the importance of meeting to develop an ESRTW plan. While the ratings for the WHSCC staff members who assist with developing and managing these plans are not low, consideration could be given to exploring how these ESRTW resources could be improved still further. In terms of employers, there is not full uptake in terms of utilizing WHSCC staff to assist in the ESRTW plan development process, despite the fact that many employers self-report that they feel knowledgeable about the program. An opportunity exists for employers to be further educated by the WHSCC concerning the ESRTW program. In terms of overall perceptions of the WHSCC among injured worker and employer ESRTW clients, results are moderately favourable. It is interesting to note that overall ratings regarding the WHSCC are consistent or similar when comparing general injured worker and ESRTW injured worker results. In contrast, ESRTW employers offer notably lower general ratings of the WHSCC, as compared to results gleaned from the general employers’ population. When queried specifically regarding various aspects of service from the WHSCC, the majority of both ESRTW client groups again offer moderate satisfaction ratings, with selected results being highly favourable. Specifically, injured worker ESRTW clients as well as employer ESRTW clients are highly satisfied with the WHSCC in terms of politeness, respect, and the ability of Commission staff members to answer questions. Finally, given that only one-half of injured workers are satisfied with the extent to which they personally participated with their employer in developing their return-to-work plan, improvements in this area could alleviate injured worker concerns regarding ESRTW generally, and thereby increase satisfaction with, and perceptions of, specific dimensions of the program.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

3

Conclusions I

Joint Injured Worker and Employer Ratings

General opinions of the WHSCC and its service delivery are moderately favourable. Across a variety of areas examined in both the employers as well as the injured workers ESRTW surveys, including overall opinion, overall experience, quality of service, and specific aspects of service, injured worker and employer ESRTW clients offer moderate levels of satisfaction concerning the WHSCC. There is somewhat lower satisfaction (although ratings remain at the moderate level) concerning ESRTW, when compared with opinions vis-Ă -vis the WHSCC as a whole. Injured workers and employers are generally satisfied with various aspects of service delivery. Injured worker clients as well as employer clients offer high ratings for the WHSCC across a number of areas related to service delivery including politeness, respect, the ability of staff to answer questions, and clarity of letters. Nonetheless, in terms of other service dimensions there are opportunities for service improvement. Satisfaction ratings with ESRTW are moderate. One in two injured worker ESRTW clients are satisfied with their plan, while slightly more employers report satisfaction with the program. Approximately one in four injured workers, and just under one in five employers, are dissatisfied. II

Injured Worker Ratings

ESRTW injured workers offer moderately high ratings of various aspects of service from the WHSCC. Across a number of statements relating to WHSCC service performance, injured workers offer moderately strong ratings. Specifically, injured workers agree that the hours of operation are appropriate, that staff members provided them with a clear understanding of the benefits, that staff members are trustworthy, and written communications are clear and easy to understand. Most also agree their personal information is secure, and that they were clearly explained the workers’ compensation process. In general, injured workers are satisfied with the overall outcome of their claim, although 16 percent of injured workers express dissatisfaction. Among the reasons offered for this dissatisfaction are the amount of money provided through their claim, the fact that they were turned down or cut off, the attitude of WHSCC staff, and the way the claim was handled.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

4

ESRTW injured workers offer moderate ratings regarding their plan, and there may be an opportunity to improve interactions between employers and injured workers in terms of developing an ESRTW plan. The majority of injured workers indicate they have consulted with their employer to develop their ESRTW plan. That said, three in ten have not done so, and only one-half of injured workers are satisfied with the extent to which they participated with their employer in developing a return-to-work plan. Some workers would welcome improvements in communication and collaboration regarding the ESRTW program. Mentions of better support for workers, better cooperation and access are suggested as ways to improve the program. III Employer Ratings ESRTW employers offer moderate ratings of the WHSCC. Improving perceptions of fairness and informing employers of important changes are opportunities. A small majority of employers agree that the WHSCC is fair, with a number of employers offering a neutral response in this regard, indicating that there may be opportunity to improve the perceptions of fairness among employers. In addition, only a small majority perceive the WHSCC as doing a good job of keeping them informed regarding important changes. Similar to issues raised among injured workers, communication and collaboration appears to be a concern among a select group of employers. One in two employers have not utilized a WHSCC staff member to assist with ESRTW plans, thereby suggesting an opportunity for service improvements among this segment of the ESRTW employer population. Approximately one-half of employers have not utilized WHSCC staff members to assist with the development of the ESRTW plans. Notably, given the high level of satisfaction with WHSCC staff members among those employers who have used such staff members in the past, it is recommended that steps be taken to further encourage employers to take advantage of these valuable WHSCC resources. Employers generally have a high level of understanding of the ESRTW program. Very few employers state that they do not understand the ESRTW program model. Moreover, a number of employers are utilizing a variety of sources to glean information about the ESRTW program, such as WHSCC staff members, the Commission’s website, and/or brochures.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

5

Recommendation The following Recommendation is offered for the consideration of the WHSCC, based on the Conclusions drawn from this survey: 1. The WHSCC should examine current communication and collaboration approaches regarding ESRTW, to determine where improvements could be made. Given that overall satisfaction with ESRTW is moderate but not high, an opportunity to improve perceptions and performance is apparent. Injured worker ESRTW clients are notably less likely than are employer ESRTW clients to believe ESRTW has been beneficial, and thus efforts should focus upon taking steps to improve the utility of the program. It is known from trend research conducted among the employer population that there are challenges in terms of communicating and collaborating with this target audience. For example, in larger organizations there may be multiple staff members involved in WHSCC-related activities, as well as various staff members involved in injured worker claim activities. While such limitations are recognized, the findings from the current survey suggest that there are opportunities to enhance communications and collaboration with both the injured worker as well as the employer populations, in regards to Early and Safe Return-to-Work issues. Accordingly, it is suggested that the WHSCC examine current communications and collaboration processes to determine where improvements might be made. For example, employers perhaps could be better informed regarding the utilizing WHSCC staff members to assist with developing and managing ESRTW plans. As well, augmenting communications that promote injured worker-employer collaboration in developing ESRTW plans would be beneficial. Based on CRA’s experience in this domain, it is believed that changes to communication processes often improve perceptions of various service-related matters among surveyed populations. In summary, opportunities exist for enhanced communications and collaboration. Enhanced interactions could take various forms (i.e., employer-injured worker; employer-WHSCC; injured worker-WHSCC), and thus the next steps should be to identify how best to implement specific actions in these areas.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

6

Section I: Areas Jointly Examined in Employers and Injured Workers ESRTW Surveys

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

7

Section I: Areas Jointly Examined in Employers and Injured Workers ESRTW Surveys • General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC General opinions of the WHSCC and its service delivery are moderately favourable.

Overall Opinion Two-thirds of injured workers have an excellent or good overall opinion of the WHSCC, while seven in ten employers hold this opinion. Approximately one in ten injured workers and one in twenty employers hold a poor opinion of the organization. These findings are generally consistent with those found in the general injured worker population and general employer population, as employer clients again offer modestly higher ratings than do injured worker clients in terms of this question. ESRTW employers (70%) offer lower overall opinion ratings concerning the WHSCC, than do those in the general employers’ population (78%). ESRTW injured workers (66%) offer overall opinion results consistent with those provided by injured workers in the general population (64%) (Question 1 IW, Question 2 Employers)

Injured Workers: Those who have not filed an appeal are more likely than the overall injured worker population to offer a positive opinion.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

Overall Experience There are moderate levels of satisfaction with the overall WHSCC experience, with just under six in ten injured workers expressing satisfaction (that is, a rating of mostly or completely satisfied), and six in ten employers offer this rating. Ratings from ESRTW employers (60%) are well below the general employers’ population (75%) on this question. ESRTW injured workers’ rating (56%) is consistent with the general injured worker result (55%). (Question 2 IW, Question 3 Employers)

Injured Workers: Those who have not filed an appeal are more likely to be satisfied than the overall injured worker population. Employers: There are few differences in opinion across employer subgroups. Reasons for less than high satisfaction among injured workers are due to not receiving enough money, feeling rushed back to work, their claim was turned down or cut off, the attitude of the staff or having issues with their case worker, they felt like there was too much run around, the claims process took too long, or the process was unfair to workers. (Question 3 IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012

8


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

9

Employers who are less than highly satisfied with their overall experience indicate that staff are hard to reach, rates are too high, there is slow service or waiting periods are too long, there should be a better investigation of claims, the process is not fair to employers, or WHSCC policies are difficult to understand or are not fully communicated. (Question 4 Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

10

Key Drivers of Overall Experience A multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the key drivers of the overall Commission experience. Opinions regarding various statements related to service delivery were entered into the regression model to determine which of these factors were most strongly associated with ESRTW program participants’ overall experience with the WHSCC, both among injured workers and employers. The regression analysis identified three key drivers of satisfaction among injured workers who participated in the ESRTW program, as shown in the graphic below. Together these three drivers account for 60 percent of the variability in injured workers’ ratings of their overall experience with the WHSCC, indicative of a strong model. It is noteworthy that whereas ‘satisfaction with the ESRTW program’ is a key driver of overall experience among employers, it is not a key driver among injured workers. The relative importance of each of the three drivers included in the model is reflected in their beta weights (shown in the arrows below). For injured workers, the overall experience with the WHSCCC is driven primarily by their level of satisfaction with the outcome of their claim, followed by the extent to which they believe they were treated fairly. Also contributing to ratings of overall experience is the ability of WHSCC staff members to answer questions in an understandable way.

Drivers of Overall Experience (IW)

Overall outcome of claim

.43

Fairness

.27

Ability to answer questions

.18

Overall Experience R2 = 60%

The regression model for employers who participated in the ESRTW program provides a different set of drivers of overall experience. For employers, three key drivers of overall experience were identified, as indicated in the graphic below. Together these three drivers account for 63 percent of the variability in employers’ ratings with respect to their overall experience with the WHSCC, again indicative of a strong model. The regression model reveals that, among employers who participated in the ESRTW program, overall experience with the Commission is most strongly tied to perceived fairness to employers. Of note, satisfaction with the ESRTW program itself also makes a significant contribution to ratings of the overall WHSCC experience, as does their level of satisfaction with claims processing.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

11

Drivers of Overall Experience (Employers)

WHSC in NL is fair to employers

.55

Satisfaction with ESRTW program

.18

Overall Experience

Claims processing

.18

R2 = 63%

Quality of Service Two-thirds of employers are satisfied with the overall quality of service they received from the WHSCC, while six in ten injured workers are satisfied in this regard. Approximately two in ten injured workers are dissatisfied, while one in ten employers express dissatisfaction. Ratings from ESRTW employers (67%) are below the general employers’ population (73%) on this question for 2012. ESRTW injured workers’ rating (62%) is consistent with the general injured worker result (65%). (Question 4 IW, Question 5 Employers)

Injured Workers: Those who have not filed an appeal and those with an open date of 2008 or later are more likely to offer heightened satisfaction ratings when compared with others.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

12

Key Drivers of Overall Quality of Service A multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the key drivers of ratings of overall quality of service. Opinions regarding various statements related to service delivery were entered into the model to determine which of these factors were most strongly associated with ESRTW program participants’ ratings of the overall quality of service provided by the Commission. The regression analysis identified five key drivers of satisfaction among the IW population, as shown in the graphic below. Together these five drivers account for 67 percent of the variability in injured workers’ ratings with respect to quality of service, indicative of a strong model. The relative importance of each of the drivers included in the model is reflected in their beta weights (shown in the arrows below). Results reveal that WHSCC staff members’ understanding of the situation provides the strongest contribution to quality of service, followed closely by the overall outcome of the claim. Fairness, decision-making and frequency of contact also make significant contribution to ratings of quality of service.

Drivers of Overall Quality of Service (IW)

Staff understanding

.25

Overall outcome of claim

.21

Fairness

.18

Decision making

.18

Frequency of contact

.14

Overall Quality Of Service R2 = 67%

Results for employers who participated in the ESRTW program show a different pattern of results. In this case, the regression analysis identified four key drivers of perceived quality of service, as indicated below. Together these four drivers account for 64 percent of the variability in employers’ ratings with respect to the quality of service provided by the Commission, again indicative of a strong model. The regression model indicates that perceived fairness to employers, and claims processing, are clearly the strongest drivers of overall quality of service among employers. Frequency of contact and ability to answer questions provide smaller, albeit statistically significant, contributions to ratings of overall quality of service.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

13

Drivers of Overall Quality of Service (Employers)

WHSC in NL is fair to employers

.33

Claims processing

.33

Frequency of contact

.18

Ability to answer questions

.15

Overall Quality Of Service R2 = 64%

Assessing Service Dimensions Injured workers and employers are generally satisfied with various aspects of service delivery. The majority of injured workers and employers are satisfied with the WHSCC across all measures under consideration, although opportunities exist for improvement. Indeed, it is noteworthy that satisfaction ratings vary widely, depending on the service component being assessed. It is perhaps germane that the 2012 general injured workers research, as well as the 2012 general employers research, identified that essentially all of the service dimensions being evaluated are important in the eyes of the populations being surveyed (although frequency of being contacted is of lesser importance to the general population of employers). (Questions 5a-k IW, 7a-i Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

14

• Opinions Concerning ESRTW Satisfaction ratings with ESRTW are moderate. One-half of injured workers are satisfied with their Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan, while slightly more employers are satisfied with this program. Approximately one-quarter of injured worker ESRTW clients are dissatisfied (i.e., they offered a rating of either ‘1’ or ‘2’ on a 5-point scale), along with almost one in five employers. (Question 10 IW, Question 10 Employers)

Satisfaction With Early and Safe Return-to-Work 100% IW (n=200)

Employers (n=200)

80% % Satisfied (4,5) IW = 51% Employers = 56%

60%

37%

40% 26% 20%

14% 5%

11%

9%

17%

30% 21%

19% 9% 2%

0% 1 Completely dissatisfied

2

3

4

5 Completely satisfied

Don't know/No answer

Q.10 [IW][IF ‘YES’ IN Q.9] Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means ‘completely dissatisfied’ and 5 means ‘completely satisfied’, how satisfied have you been with your Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan? Q.10 [Employers][IF ‘YES’ IN Q.9] Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means ‘completely dissatisfied’ and 5 means ‘completely satisfied’, how satisfied has your company been with the Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program?

Employers: There are few differences across employer subgroups, although those who are satisfied with their overall experience with the WHSCC are also likely to be satisfied with the ESRTW program. Those injured workers who are satisfied with their ESRTW plan (n=100) relate that this is because it helped get them back to work, or that they were given modified duties or workplace accommodations. (Question 11 IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

15

Key Drivers of Overall Satisfaction with ESRTW Plan An additional multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify the key drivers of injured workers’ overall level of satisfaction with their ESRTW plan. Opinions regarding specific aspects of the plan were entered into the regression model to determine which of these factors were most strongly associated with plan satisfaction overall. The regression analysis identified three key drivers of satisfaction with their ESRTW plan, as indicated in the following graphic. Together these three drivers account for more than one-half of the variability in injured workers’ ratings of their satisfaction with their plan, indicative of a strong model. The relative importance of each of the three drivers included in the model is reflected in their beta weights (shown in the arrows below). Results reveal that the extent to which injured workers were engaged with their employer in developing their plan is the strongest driver of overall plan satisfaction. The second strongest driver of ESRTW plan satisfaction is the overall performance of their ESRTW facilitator, with the performance of their case manager at the WHSCC also making a significant contribution to plan satisfaction.

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

16

Drivers of Overall Satisfaction with ESRTW Plan (IW)

Participation in developing your RTW plan

.41

Overall performance of your ESRTW facilitator

.30

Overall performance of your case manager

.16

Overall Satisfaction with ESRTW Plan R2 = 54%

Perceptions of whether ESRTW Process was beneficial Employers are notably more likely to perceive the Return-to-Work process as beneficial, when compared with injured workers. (Question 14 IW, Question 14 Employers)

100%

Early and Safe Return-to-Work Process Has Been Beneficial IW (n=200)

80%

60%

Employers (n=200)

75%

55%

40%

32% 21%

20%

13% 4%

0% Yes

No

Don't know/No answer

Q.14 [IW] [IF ‘YES’ IN Q.9] Based on the experience at your own workplace, do you think the Early and Safe Return-to-Work process has been beneficial in assisting you return to meaningful work? Q.14 [EMPLOYERS][IF ‘YES’ IN Q.9] Based on the experience at your own workplace, do you think the Early and Safe Return-to-Work process was beneficial in assisting injured employees in returning to their pre-injury job?

Injured Workers: Those who have not filed an appeal are more likely than others to consider the ESRTW program as beneficial, as do those with an open date of 2008 or later. Notably, those injured workers who are satisfied with the ESRTW plan are significantly more likely (80%) to find the program beneficial, when compared with those who are not satisfied (27%). Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

17

Employers: There are few opinion differences across employer subgroups. Those few employers who reported the process was not beneficial were asked specifically why this is the case. The worker being unable to return to the job, the worker did not want to come back to work, general statements that the process did not work, comments regarding the length of time it took, or on the other hand, that the worker returned to work too soon, were mentioned by employers. (Question 15 Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

Section II: Injured Workers

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012

18


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

19

Section II: Injured Workers •

General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC

ESRTW injured workers offer generally high ratings of various aspects of service from the WHSCC. The majority of injured workers agree with a number of statements relating to general service aspects provided by the WHSCC. These questions were not posed specifically in regards to service offered under the rubric of the ERSTW program, instead these queries were posed regarding the WHSCC generally. Over eight in ten injured workers agree that the WHSCC’s hours of operation are appropriate, and a similar number believe staff members provided them with a clear understanding of the benefits, that staff members are trustworthy, and that written communications are clear and easy to understand. Threequarters agree their personal information is secure, while seven in ten agree that staff members clearly explained the workers’ compensation process to them. (Questions 6a-f IW)

Two-thirds of injured workers who went through the ESRTW program are satisfied with the overall outcome of their claim, while 16 percent offer a rating of ‘1’ or ‘2’ (dissatisfaction) in this regard. In comparison, results reported elsewhere indicate a similar level of satisfaction among the general injured worker population (65% satisfied) concerning their level of satisfaction with their claim. (Question 7 IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

20

Those who have not filed an appeal are more likely to offer higher satisfaction ratings. Reasons for ESRTW injured workers being less than highly satisfied with the outcome of their claim include that they did not receive enough money, they did not like the attitude of the staff, their claim was turned down or cut off, or they did not like the way their claim was handled. A small number generally mention that they are dissatisfied with the outcome of their claim. (Question 8 IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

21

• Opinions Concerning the ESRTW Program ESRTW injured workers offer moderate ratings regarding their plan, and there may be an opportunity to improve interactions between employers and injured workers in terms of developing an ESRTW plan. All injured worker respondents report having participated in the ESRTW program by having a plan with their employer. Two-thirds of these ESRTW injured workers consulted with their employer to develop their plan. Those injured workers who have filed an appeal are less likely than those who have not filed an appeal, to agree that they consulted with their employer to develop their ESRTW plan. (Question 12 IW)

When assessing specific aspects of the ESRTW plan, injured workers offer moderate ratings. Specifically, seven in ten are satisfied with the overall performance of their case manager concerning the return-towork plan, and a similar number are satisfied with the extent to which they consulted and collaborated with their case manager about the plan. Six in ten are satisfied with the extent to which they consulted with their ESRTW Facilitator about issues relating to the return-to-work plan, and with the overall performance of the Facilitator at the WHSCC concerning the plan. Finally, just under one-half are satisfied with the extent to which they personally participated with their employers in developing the plan. (Questions 13a-e IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

22

When asked to offer suggestions to improve the Return-to-Work program, a small number of injured workers mention not rushing back to work, listening to and supporting workers, offering better workplace accommodation, better cooperation among parties involved (workers, employers and the WHSCC), better access to treatment and care, and more focus on workplace health and safety. (Question 15 IW)

Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Improvement Suggestions Injured Workers, Total Key Mentions Don't rush workers back to work

13%

Listen to/support for workers

8%

Better workplace accommodation

6%

Better cooperation among all parties (worker/employer/WHSCC)

5%

Better access to treatment/care

4%

More focus on workplace health and safety

4%

Other

9%

Nothing/No problems

10%

Don't know/No answer

33%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Q.15 [IW][TOTAL MENTIONS][IF ‘YES’ IN Q.9] In your opinion, what is the single most important thing that could be done to improve the Early and Safe Return-to-Work program? Anything else? (n=200)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey Four in ten injured workers report they are now back to work after their injury, which is higher among those who have not filed an appeal, and those with an open date of 2008 or later. (Question 16 IW)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012

23


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

Section III: Employers

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012

24


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

Section III:

25

Employers

• General Opinions Concerning the WHSCC ESRTW employers offer moderate ratings of the WHSCC. Improving perceptions of fairness and informing employers of important changes are opportunities. Just over one-half of employers offer a rating of ‘5’ or ‘4’ when assessing the fairness of the WHSCC toward them as employers, while nearly three in ten offer a neutral response of ‘3’. There are few differences in opinion across the various employer types. (Question 6 Employers)

The majority of employers feel their organization’s information is secure at the WHSCC, while two-thirds report the information provided by the WHSCC is useful. Over six in ten feel the WHSCC’s information is easy to understand, while approximately six in ten believe the WHSCC does a good job of keeping them informed about important changes. Four in ten agree that there is too much paper work or unnecessary requirements. In general, larger organizations are more likely to agree (or in the case of the last statement regarding too much paperwork, to disagree) than are smaller organizations. (Questions 8a-e Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

26

• Opinions Concerning the ESRTW Program One in two employers have not utilized a WHSCC staff member to assist with ESRTW plans, thereby suggesting an opportunity for service improvements among this segment of the ESRTW employer population. Approximately one-half of employers report their company has used WHSCC staff members to assist with ESRTW plans. Larger organizations are much more likely to agree that this is the case. (Question 12 Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

27

The majority of employers who used a WHSCC staff member to assist with ESRTW plans report satisfaction in this regard, with just one in ten dissatisfied. (Question 13 Employers)

Employers generally have a high level of understanding of the ESRTW program. Seven in ten employers have a high level of understanding of the return-to-work model, while just five percent indicate they understand very little. (Question 18 Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

28

Information about the ESRTW program is obtained from a number of different sources, including WHSCC staff members, the WHSCC website, and brochures. One in three received ESRTW-related information from other sources. (Questions 19a-d Employers)

Other sources of information utilized by employers include word of mouth, consultants, the NL Employers Council, internal sources, training seminars, NLCSA, or from personal experience. (Question 19dd Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

There is an opportunity to communicate with employers regarding ESRTW. As fewer than one-half of employers have attended education-related events concerning the ESRTW program, this statistic identifies an opportunity for the WHSCC in its communications with employers to explain and elaborate upon the ESRTW program. (Question 16 Employers)

Specific ESRTW-related events attended by employers include return-to-work planning, seminars, information session, the PRIME program, general comments about training, and occupational health and safety. (Question 17 Employers) Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012

29


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

30

A number of employers cannot identify any tools or assistance that the WHSCC could provide to employers about the ESRTW program that would assist employers in implementing the program in their workplaces. A small number mention workshops, seminars and training sessions, handbooks or guides, more accessibility, and more in-person follow-up visits. A small number generally mention providing more information about the program. (Question 20 Employers)

When asked what the WHSCC could do to improve the services it provides to employers generally, that is, potentially including service features above and beyond the ESRTW program, a number of areas were

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

31

raised by employers. Improved communication or more detailed information, more accessibility or contact, provide seminars, workshops and training, more access to information, or better investigation of claims were all named by a small number of employers. Over one-half identified no improvements or were unable to provide a response. In comparison with the overall employer population, results are somewhat similar, with mentions of improvement to communication or processes. That said, the overall employer population is more likely to mention lowering rates than the ESRTW employer population. (Question 22 Employers)

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

32

Survey Methodology A decision was made by WHSCC management in 2012 to undertake a focussed quantitative examination of the Early and Safe Return-to-Work program, from the perspective of both injured worker as well as employer clients. This report represents the culmination of this benchmark survey. Questionnaire Design The injured worker and employer questionnaires utilized for this survey were designed by CRA in consultation with WHSCC staff. Sample Design and Selection The samples for this survey were designed to complete interviews with representative samples of 200 ESRTW injured worker clients, and 200 ESRTW employer clients as supplied by WHSCC databases. The 2012 general employer and general injured worker surveys were administered prior to the ESRTW survey, so as to permit an ‘apples to apples’ comparison of the 2012 general injured worker and 2012 general employer survey data, with data collected in 2010 and earlier. After these general surveys were completed, remaining employers and injured workers ESRTW program sample records were then utilized for the present research project. The sampling frame consisted of injured worker and employer clients who participated in the ESRTW program over the past two years, bearing in mind the caveat whereby some ESRTW sample records would have been included in the general research surveys, as per methodological processes implemented in past years. Survey Administration, Tabulation and Completion Results The employer and injured worker ESRTW surveys were conducted by telephone from April 17, 2012 to June 1, 2012. All interviewing was conducted by fully trained and supervised interviewers and a minimum of 10 percent of all completed interviews were subsequently monitored or verified. Where a sizable percentage of respondents commented that a particular question statement did not apply to them, these respondents were removed from the data tabulation. Among all eligible respondents contacted, the response rates were as follows: Injured Workers

19%

Employers

34%

Response rate is calculated as the number of cooperative contacts (or those having completed an interview and those having been who did not proceed past the screening process,). The final disposition of all telephone numbers called is shown below, using the format derived from the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association. Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


2012 Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Survey

33

COMPLETION RESULTS Injured Workers

Employers

1424

812

Discontinued Number/Not in Service

54

15

Fax/Modem

3

8

Cell Phone/Pager

2

0

Wrong Number/Blocked Number

24

17

1341

772

Busy Signal

12

0

Answering Machine

601

133

No Answer

170

5

Scheduled Call Back

180

163

Mid Call Back

2

0

Illness, Incapable

6

0

Language Problem

0

1

Qualified Not Available

12

76

C. Total Asked

358

394

Gatekeeper Refusal

8

29

Mid Terminate

6

3

Respondent Refusal

53

66

Never Call List

2

2

Hang Up

38

33

D. Co-operative Contacts

251

261

7

51

Completed Interviews

244

210

Useable Interviews (excludes, for example, employers and injured workers who did not acknowledge participating in the ESRTW program)

200

200

A. Total Numbers Attempted

B. Eligible Numbers

Did Not Qualify

Sample Size and Tolerances As margins of error for various sub-samples will vary based on sample size and proportion of the obtained result, a selection of sampling tolerances is presented in the following table: Proportion

Sample Size 90%/10%

80%/20%

70%/30%

60%/40%

50%/50%

50

8.3%

11.1%

12.7%

13.6%

13.9%

100

5.9%

7.8%

9.0%

9.6%

9.8%

200

4.2%

5.5%

6.3%

6.8%

6.9%

Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012


Survey Questionnaire


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

Final

2

Hello, may I speak with ______________________? My name is _____________________ and I am calling from Corporate Research Associates, a professional marketing research firm. We are conducting a survey on behalf of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador, to determine what injured workers think about the service provided by the WHSCC. All individual information collected on this survey is completely confidential, and will be reported to the WHSCC only at the group level. The survey should take about 8 minutes to complete. IF ASKED: If you have any concerns about this survey, you may contact Lana Collins in the Communications Department of the WHSCC, toll-free at 1-800-563-9000. ARRANGE CALLBACK IF NECESSARY – IF RESPONDENT HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SURVEY, PLEASE RECORD NAME AND NUMBER AND S/HE WILL BE CONTACTED. PLEASE FORWARD THIS INFORMATION TO PETER MacINTOSH. ENSURE DATA COLLECTORS HAVE ACCESS TO THE MRIA NATIONAL SURVEY REGISTRATION VERIFICATION TELEPHONE NUMBER, TO PROVIDE TO RESPONDENTS AS NEEDED: 1-888-602-6742, EXTENSION 8728. IF THE RESPONDENT WISHES TO CONTACT CORPORATE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, PLEASE ASK THEM TO CALL PETER MacINTOSH AT 1-888-414-1336. Section A: 1.

General Overview

In general, do you have an [READ RESPONSES IN ORDER] opinion of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission? CODE ONE ONLY 1 Excellent 2 Good 3 Only fair, or 4 Poor VOLUNTEERED 8 Don’t know/No answer

2.

And how satisfied are you with your overall experience with the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission? Are you …: READ RESPONSES IN ORDER – CODE ONE ONLY 1 Completely satisfied 2 Mostly satisfied 3 Somewhat satisfied 4 Somewhat dissatisfied, or 5 Completely dissatisfied VOLUNTEERED 8 Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

3.

3

[POSE Q.3 ONLY IF CODES 3, 4, OR 5 IN Q.2] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 98 99

4.

Final

Length of time to process claim Did not receive enough money Hard to reach staff Staff attitude Rushed back to work Did not answer questions/adequate information Policies difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around Turned down/claim cut off The way the claim was handled Waiting period too long Dissatisfied with outcome of claim Too much paper work Poor internal review process Problems with the Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)

On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with the overall quality of service you receive from the WHSCC? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8

Completely dissatisfied

Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

Section B:

Final

4

Assessing Service Dimensions

I would like to ask about specific aspects of service from the WHSCC... 5.

For each of the following, using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with the service you have received from the WHSCC? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY – AFTER SIXTH SERVICE ASPECT, SAY: “AND CONTINUING ON NOW WITH A FEW MORE” – ROTATE STATEMENTS a.

Accessibility – How easy it was to reach WHSCC staff members when you needed to

b.

Promptness – How quickly WHSCC staff members were able to respond to your questions

c.

Ability to answer questions – How well the WHSCC answers your questions in an understandable way?

d.

Frequency of contact – How often the WHSCC contacts you about your claim

e.

Clarity of letters – How clear and understandable the letters are that you receive from the WHSCC

f.

Politeness – How polite WHSCC staff members are

g.

Fairness – Being treated fairly

h.

Staff understanding – How satisfied were you in terms of WHSCC staff members understanding your specific situation

i.

Decision-making – How clear and understandable the WHSCC’s decisions are regarding your claim

j. k. 1 2 3 4 5 7 8

Involvement – How satisfied were you with your level of involvement in making decisions on your case or claim Respect – How satisfied are you in terms of WHSCC staff members treating you with respect Completely dissatisfied

Completely satisfied Not applicable Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

6.

Final

5

And using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely disagree” and 5 means “completely agree,” to what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please say if the statement is not applicable to your personal situation. DO NOT READ BOLDED TEXT – PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY – ROTATE STATEMENTS a.

WHSCC staff members provided you with a clear understanding of your benefits [ENTITLEMENT/COMMUNICATIONS]

b.

WHSCC staff members clearly explained the workers' compensation process to you [EDUCATION/COMMUNICATIONS]

c.

The WHSCC 's hours of operation are appropriate to meet your needs [CONVENIENCE]

d.

The WHSCC kept your personal information secure [SECURITY]

e.

The WHSCC’s staff members are trustworthy [TRUST]

f.

Overall, the WHSCC’s written communications to you were clear and easy to understand [COMMUNICATIONS]

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 Section C: 7.

Completely disagree

Completely agree Not applicable Don’t know/No answer Overall Outcome

And using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied were you with the overall outcome of your claim? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8

Completely dissatisfied

Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

8.

Section D:

Length of time to process claim Did not receive enough money Hard to reach staff Staff attitude Rushed back to work Did not answer questions/adequate information Policies difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around Turned down/claim cut off The way the claim was handled Waiting period too long Dissatisfied with outcome of claim Too much paper work Poor internal review process Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________) Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program

The WHSCC has an Early and Safe Return-to-Work Program. To the best of your knowledge, have you participated in this program by having an Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan with your employer? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8

10.

6

[POSE Q.8 ONLY IF CODES 1, 2, OR 3 IN Q.7] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied with the outcome of your claim? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 98 99

9.

Final

Yes No Don’t know/No answer

[POSE Q.10 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9] Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with your Early and Safe Return-toWork plan? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE - CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8

Completely dissatisfied

Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

11.

Final

7

[POSE Q.11 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9, BUT DO NOT POSE IF CODE 8 IN Q.10] a. What is the single most important reason why you are [SAY: “less than highly” IF CODE 1, 2, OR 3 IN Q.10] satisfied with your Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? RECORD VERBATIM – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY FIRST MENTION: a. _________________________________________________________ OTHER MENTIONS: b. _________________________________________________________ 98 Don’t know/No answer

12.

[POSE Q.12 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9] Did you and your employer consult and develop together your Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8

13.

Yes No Don’t know/No answer

[POSE Q.13 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9] Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with the following aspects of your Early and Safe Return-to-Work plan? ROTATE SERVICE ASPECTS, EXCEPT ALWAYS POSE ASPECT “a” FIRST, AND POSE ASPECTS “b” AND “c” TOGETHER, AND ASPECTS “d” AND “e” TOGETHER – CODE ONE ONLY PER SERVICE ASPECT – PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE a.

The extent to which you personally participated with your employer in developing your return-towork plan

b.

The extent to which you consulted and collaborated on an ongoing basis with your case manager at the WHSCC, about issues related to your return-to-work plan

c.

The overall performance of your case manager at the WHSCC, concerning your return-to-work plan

d.

The extent to which you consulted and collaborated on an ongoing basis with your Early and Safe Return-to-Work Facilitator at the WHSCC, about issues related to your return-to-work plan

e.

The overall performance of your Early and Safe Return-to-Work Facilitator at the WHSCC, concerning your return-to-work plan

1 2 3 4 5 8

Completely dissatisfied

Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer

Corporate Research Associates, 2012


2012 Injured Workers Questionnaire – Early and Safe Return-to-Work Survey

14.

Yes No Don’t know/No answer

[POSE Q.15 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9] a. In your opinion, what is the single most important thing that could be done to improve the Early and Safe Return-to-Work program? PROBE: b. Anything else? RECORD VERBATIM – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY FIRST MENTION: a. _________________________________________________________ OTHER MENTIONS: b. _________________________________________________________ 98 Don’t know/No answer

16.

And are you now back to work after your injury? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8

Section F: 17.

8

[POSE Q.14 ONLY IF “YES” IN Q.9] Based on the experience at your own workplace, do you think the Early and Safe Return-to-Work process has been beneficial in assisting you return to meaningful employment? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8

15.

Final

Yes No Don’t know/No answer Closing

And in closing, what is the highest level of education you have completed? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Elementary school (Grades 1-8) Some high school Graduated high school/vocational Some community/technical college Graduated community/technical college Some university Graduated university Refused Other (SPECIFY: ____________________) This concludes the survey. Thank you very much for your participation.

Corporate Research Associates, 2012

2012 esrtw report and survey  

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission 2012 Early and Safe Return to Work report

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you