Working Conditions Study

Contents of this article:

• Introduction
• Study Scope
• Study Methodology
• Study Focus
• Study Results
• Workplace Measurement Indexes

Joint study by CAW-Canada and McMaster University, Labour Studies. The study had two objectives:

1) to assess the impact of managerial initiatives such as lean production on working conditions, and;

2) to provide a balance to the increased use of competitive benchmarking studies which approach workplaces from a very narrow perspective of efficiency and productivity.

McMaster University Labour Studies was asked to join the study to provide methodological expertise and statistical analysis.

STUDY SCOPE:

One of the most extensive working conditions surveys of industrial workers and probably the largest study of auto assembly plant workers.

Surveyed workers in 9 assembly plants in Canada operated by GM, Ford, Chrysler & CAMI (late fall 1995).

Benchmark study provides a snapshot of working conditions at a plant, company and sectoral level.

Provides plant by plant, company by company comparisons.

STUDY METHODOLOGY (see Appendix 1 of Study Report)

46 question survey, confidential individual responses

large sample size with high return rate (57 per cent)

over 2,400 completed surveys from 9 plants

data processing & statistical analysis by McMaster University

STUDY FOCUS:

answers grouped into 6 Working Conditions Indexes:

workload

change in workload

physical risks

stress risks

autonomy/control

relations with management

STUDY RESULTS: Workers Report Inadequate Working Conditions!

Autoworkers are insecure(72 per cent). Too many report that they are working in physically awkward positions (51 per cent) and in pain for too much of the time (55 per cent). They are working either too fast or too overloaded with not enough time or not enough people to do the work (75 per cent). They are tired (69 per cent) and tense (64 per cent). They often have little energy for their families (77 per cent). And they doubt whether they can keep the pace of their work until they are 60, never mind 65 (78 per cent).

Conditions Are Getting Worse!

Compared to a couple of years ago, people are more tired (62 per cent) and more tense (53 per cent). Their workload has increased (73 per cent) and they are monitored more closely by management (63 per cent).

General Motors Tops The List Of Worst Plants:

Out of the six working conditions indexes, General Motors ranks the worst on five -- workload, workload change, physical risks, stress risks, autonomy/control.

On the sixth (relations with management) they are edged out of the worst spot by CAMI (GM-Suzuki joint venture) but on a plant basis, it is GM, Oshawa #1.

WORKPLACE MEASUREMENT INDEXES

Table 3.3 provides a more detailed picture of workload at our four companies. It includes both direct and indirect production workers. GM consistently reports heavier loads on all four of our workload measures.

Table 3.4 provides a more detailed picture of which elements of work have increased at each of the companies in the study. Workers at General Motors were almost twice as likely to respond that their work had become heavier, faster, or had to be done in less time.

Table 3.5 provides a more detailed picture of physical health risks at our four companies. GM workers were 10 to 20% more likely to respond yes to each of the questions asked.

Table 3.6 provides a more detailed picture of stress related health risks. While GM consistently reported the highest levels of stress related health risks, the differences between companies were smaller and in some cases the level of stress reported at CAMI was as high as that at GM.

Table 3.8 provides a more detailed picture of management relations at our four companies. In general, workers were least likely to report dissatisfaction with their immediate supervisor and most likely to report that management was uninterested in their welfare. CAMI workers reported the highest levels of dissatisfaction in terms of the fairness of management policies and the extent to which management was interested in worker welfare.

These charts combine the results of five of the six indexes to provide a quick summary of how companies scored overall and how workers viewed their working conditions. The charts indicate that working conditions were the worst at GM followed by CAMI. Conditions were better at Ford and Chrysler but it is important to keep in mind that even where Ford and Chrysler reported better results, that they fell considerable below the threshold of good working conditions. The results are also provided as a plant by plant comparison.


Click here to return to the main CAW Digital Collections index page