Citation

Arcury TA, Grzywacz JG, Anderson AM, Mora DC, Carrillo L, Chen H, Quandt SA. Am. J. Ind. Med. 2013; 56(2): 180-188.

Affiliation

Department of Family and Community Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, North Carolina; Center for Worker Health, Wake Forest School of Medicine, North Carolina. tarcury@wakehealth.edu.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2013, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/ajim.22101

PMID

22847579

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This analysis describes the work safety climate of Latino poultry processing workers and notes differences by worker personal characteristics and employer; describes the use of common personal protective equipment (PPE) among workers; and examines the associations of work safety climate with use of common PPE. METHODS: Data are from a cross-sectional study of 403 Latino poultry processing workers in western North Carolina. RESULTS: Work safety climate differed little by personal characteristics, but it did differ consistently by employer. Provision of PPE varied; for example, 27.2% of participants were provide with eye protection at no cost, 57.0% were provided with hand protection at no cost, and 84.7% were provided with protective clothing at no cost. PPE use varied by type. Provision of PPE at no cost was associated with lower work safety climate; this result was counter-intuitive. Consistent use of PPE was associated with higher work safety climate. CONCLUSIONS: Work safety climate is important for improving workplace safety for immigrant workers. Research among immigrant workers should document work safety climate for different employers and industries, and delineate how work safety climate affects safety behavior and injuries. Am. J. Ind. Med. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Language: en