Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Health: Occupational
Status Effects1 Ronald J. Burke
Interest in work stress, employee satisfaction and important as previous work has emphasized the
health has grown considerably over the past two work experiences of managerial and professional
decades. Much of this work has been conducted women (see Burke and McKeen, 1994; Burke,
under a stress-strain framework (Cooper and 1996). This sample also permitted a preliminary
Payne, 1988) and accumulating research findings examination of occupational status effects, linking
have increased our understanding of this complex more traditional work stress research with the
phenomenon (Schabracq et al., 1996; Cooper, fields of medical sociology and epidemiology.
1996). Most of the published literature on work
stress and health is based on the experiences of
men (Offermann and Armitage, 1993). Although Work stressors women face
this situation is gradually changing, women’s
health has received relatively little research atten- Davidson and Cooper (1983, 1992), in two
tion (Nelson and Burke, 2000a, b). Messing books on managerial women and stress, found
(1997) suggests two reasons for the historical that managerial women felt isolated at work,
neglect of women’s occupational health issues: exhibited Type A behavior, and experienced
women’s jobs are safer than men’s and health greater strain than did men. Extra pressures on
problems identified among women workers result managerial women included lack of self-confi-
from their being unfit for the job or unneces- dence and subtle forms of discrimination. The
sary complaining. With increasing in numbers study confirmed the impression that working
of women in the labor force, it is critical that women still carry the major burden of home and
more attention be given to understanding the family problems (Hochschild, 1997). Hochschild
effects of work stress and women’s health. (1997) estimates, based on major time-use
Women may also have different work stress and studies, that women in dual career families work
health issues than men (Langan-Fox, 1998). For an extra month of 24 hour days each year
example, Collins et al. (1997) suggest that compared to men. This extra time is spent on
women may be uniquely affected by work con- what she terms “second shift” work, work
ditions (e.g., exposure to chemicals and repro- outside paid employment such as housework,
ductive health), disproportionately affected (work home management, and childcare. Together,
and family roles) or differently affected (women’s these studies suggest that managerial women may
experience of workplace stress). experience more stress than men and that the
This research examines the relationship of sources of stress are gender-related; that is, related
work stress and women’s health, utilizing a to the expected and actual roles of women in
diverse sample of women respondents. This is society, and to the fact that, despite progress,
executive women still occupy minority status in
Ronald J. Burke is Professor of Organizational Behavior, organizations. There are some stressors, however,
School of Business, York University. His research that may be particularly important for working
interested focus on organizational restructuring and women. These include organizational politics,
downsizing. tokenism, barriers to achievement, overload,
social-sexual behavior, work/home conflict, and effects in multiple regression analyses with most
organizational restructuring and downsizing. of the other measures.
Borooah (1999) examined the relationship
between occupational class and health inequality
Occupational status, social class and health in large samples of men and women in Britain.
Respondents were placed into three categories
Most of the research on work stress and health (professional, managerial or technical; skilled
has involved managerial and professional women. manual or non-manual; semi- or unskilled).
There is, however, an emerging body of work Those who were skilled had higher illness rates
examining social class and health, sometimes than those who were skilled who, in turn, had
including measures of occupational status and higher illness rate than those occupying man-
work stress, that covers a greater range of occu- agerial professional/technical positions.
pations. Social class refers to the underlying Bartley et al. (1999a) examined the relation-
structure of industrialized societies in which ship of two different but highly correlated
many social and economic characteristics, such measures of social position and cardiovascular
as employment conditions, level of pay, housing risk factors. Bartley and his colleagues had
quality and prestige tend to vary. The term two measures of social position, one based on
“socio-economic status” refers to social position employment relations, the other based on general
and blurs the distinction between two concepts: social advantage and lifestyle. Social inequality
economic circumstances (income and wealth) and has several dimensions, so it is important to use
prestige (status). distinct measures of each. It is also vital to clearly
Pearlin (1989) suggested that greater vulnera- specify the hypotheses which link specific dimen-
bility to stress exists in social roles reflecting “the sions of some position and circumstances to
unequal distribution of resources, opportunities health. They found that for men, the two social
and self-regard” (p. 245). Inequalities in income, position measures were related to most of the
occupation and education, all indicators of social behavioral, physiological and psychosomatic risk
class, are recognized as major determinents of factors for heart disease: risks were higher in
individuals mental health (Veenstra, 2000; those with less favorable employment conditions
Humphries and van Doorslaer, 2000; Diez-Roux and lower levels of general social advantage and
et al., 2000). living standards. Similar patterns were present for
Aston and Lavery (1993) collected data from women as well.
women in managerial or professional occupations Muntaner et al. (1998) analyzed data from two
and in clerical occupations. Managerial women large U.S. surveys in a study of social class, assets,
reported more intrinsic rewards, and extrusic organizational control and the prevalence of
fewer intrinsic concerns, and higher on self- common groups of psychiatric disorders. In one
esteem. However no differences were found survey of 8098 respondents, they report a
in depression, quality of life and symptoma- negative relationship between financial and
tology. physical assets and mood, anxiety, alcohol and
Kempen et al. (1999) examined the moder- drug disorders. The second survey also revealed
ating effect of level of education as an indicator a negative relationship between financial and
of socio-economic status on the relationships physical assets and anxiety, alcohol and drug dis-
between chronic medical morbidity and six orders. The second survey also showed that lower
domains of health-related quality of life (physical level supervisors presented higher rates of depres-
function, role function, social function, health sion and anxiety disorders than higher level
perceptions, bodily pain and mental health) in a managers. Inequalities in assets and organizational
large (N = 5279) community-living elderly control, as well as commonly used measures of
sample. Level of education was significantly social class, were associated with specific psychi-
related to each of the other seven measures. In atric disorders.
addition, level of education produced addictive Bartley et al. (1999b), in a sample of British
Work Stress and Women’s Health 93
women, examined the relationship of two satisfaction and well-being. The important
indicators of social position with health. question was whether the work stressors would
One indicator used five categories (profes- have significant relationships with satisfaction
sional/administrative, routine non-manual, self and well-being, controlling for individual
employed, skilled manual workers, non-skilled demographic and work setting characteristics.
manual workers). The second indicator was a Measures of work-family conflict were then
rating of social and material advantage and added as a fourth block, to determine whether
lifestyle. They found a strong relationship these would explain significant increments in
between social position and self-assessed health variance in the work satisfaction and well-being
using data from 1984 and 1993. They found a indicators controlling for individual and work
stronger relationship with health for the general setting characteristics and work stressors. The
social and material advantage scale than for the diversity of the sample made the use of such
employment conditions measure in both years as controls critical in examining the job demands
well. and health relationship. Indicators of satisfaction
and well-being were representative of most
research in this area and included job satisfaction,
The present study psychosomatic symptoms and days of illness.
TABLE I
Demographic characteristics
Work-related psychosomatic symptoms symptoms reported during the past month. Single
women indicated higher levels of psychosomatic
Respondents indicated how often they experi- symptoms, and those with less formal education
enced eight symptoms as a result of work (α = reporting more symptoms. Women who had
0.79). Responses were made on a five-point scale lower personal incomes reported more
(1 = everyday, 3 = About once a week, 5 = psychosomatic symptoms; those working more
Never). Items included stomachaches, back hours per week reported more psychosomatic
problems, headaches and arthritis/pains in your symptoms. Women reporting more work stres-
joints. sors indicated higher levels of psychosomatic
symptoms. Women in more physically
demanding jobs also reported more psychoso-
Work-family conflict matic symptoms. And women reporting greater
family-work conflict indicated higher levels of
Work-family conflict were assessed by three psychosomatic symptoms during the past month.
single items. One item asked respondents to Second, two of the four blocks of predictors
indicate how many hours per week they spent (personal demographics and work stressors)
doing things for their household, including accounted for significant amounts or increments
cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping, doing in explained variance on global job satisfaction.
laundry and dishes, doing repairs, paying bills, Women reporting more work stressors indicated
making arrangements and, caring for children. less job satisfaction. Women reporting greater job
A second item using a four-point scale (1 = insecurity indicated less job satisfaction; those in
often, 4 = never) asked whether family or jobs exposing them to more physical hazards
personal responsibilities/problems at home ever indicated less job satisfaction; and those reporting
made it difficult for them to do their job. The more harassment in their workplaces indicated
third item, also using a four-point scale (1 = very less job satisfaction.
easy, 4 = difficult) asked respondents in their job, Third, all four blocks of predictors accounted
how easy was it to make arrangements to deal for significant amounts or increments in
with family or personal responsibilities/problems explained variance on work-related psychoso-
at home. matic symptoms. Single women and women
working more hours per week reported more
work-related psychosomatic symptoms. Women
Work stressors, work-family conflict and indicating more work stressors, women in
women’s health jobs having greater physical demands, women
reporting more harassment in their workplaces,
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were women in jobs exposing them to more physical
undertaken in which the indicators of women’s hazards, and women reporting greater family-
health were separately regressed on the four work conflict indicated higher levels of psycho-
blocks of predictors. Predictors were entered in somatic symptoms.
a specified order. Table II presents the results of Fourth, two of the four blocks of predictors
these analyses. Individual measures having (work situation characteristics and work stressors)
independent and significant relationships with accounted for significant increments in explained
particular health outcomes within blocks variance on days of illness during the past year.
accounting for significant amounts or increments Women having longer job tenure and women in
in explained variance, are also indicated with jobs exposing them to greater physical demands
accompanying βs. The following comments are reported more days of illness.
offered in summary. A few more general observations are worth
First, all four blocks of predictors accounted noting. First, the four blocks of predictors
for significant amounts or increments in accounted for more variance on the measures of
explained variance on levels of psychosomatic job satisfaction and psychosomatic symptoms
Work Stress and Women’s Health 97
TABLE II
Work stressors, work-family conflict and women’s health
than on days of illness. Second, three of the four status occupations indicated lower levels of
blocks of predictors (personal demographics, formal education lower levels of personal and
work situation characteristics, work stressors) had family income, held a greater number of current
significant relationships with three or more of the jobs and worked fewer hours per week. Other
health outcomes. Third, work stressors accounted significant correlations further added to our
for considerably more explained variance on the understanding of the occupational status measure.
health outcomes than did the other blocks of pre- Thus, women in low status occupations were
dictors. The measures of work stressors and more likely to indicate disability status, were
physical demands had significant and indepen- younger, were less likely to be currently married,
dent relationships with three of the four health yet spent more hours per week on household
outcomes. duties and responsibilities. Occupational status
had no relationship with visible minority status,
parental status, tenure in present job or organi-
Occupational status and personal zational size.
demographics
Table III presents the correlations between the Occupational status and work experiences
measure of occupational status and a number of
personal demographic characteristics and work The correlations between the measure of occu-
situation factors. Almost two-thirds of these cor- pational status and a number of work experiences
relations were significantly different from zero are presented in the top half of Table IV. All but
(p < 0.001). It should be noted that the sample one of the eight correlations were significantly
sizes were large (about 2000) and many of the
personal and work situation characteristics were TABLE IV
themselves significantly correlated. Occupational status, work experiences and health
Some of the significant correlations are con-
sistent with the operationalization of the occu- Occupational
pational status measure. Thus, women in lower statusa
Work experiences
TABLE III
Job stress 0.20***
Occupational status and personal demographics
Harassment 0.11***
Hostile work environment 0.11***
Personal demographics Occupational statusa
Job insecurity 0.16***
Physical hazards 0.19***
Visible minority 0.03
Physical demands 0.34***
Disability status 0.10***
Air quality 0.00***
Level of education –0.43***
Temperature 0.13***
Martial status 0.09***
Parent status 0.00
Work outcomes
Hours household 0.08***
Personal income –0.52*** Job satisfaction 0.16***
Family income –0.40*** Days of work missed 0.15***
Age 0.17***
Number of jobs 0.11*** Health outcomes
Organization size 0.02 Days of illness 0.14***
Job tenure 0.02 Psychosomatic symptoms – work 0.13***
Hours worked –0.22*** Psychosomatic symptoms 0.09***
different from zero (p < 0.001). It should be health in the month preceeding the survey,
noted that the work experience measures them- poorer work related health, more days of illness
selves were themselves significantly correlated in in the preceding year and lower levels of work
the majority of cases. satisfaction.
Women working in lower status jobs indicated The measure of occupational status explained
high levels of job stress, more harassment in their relatively small amounts of variance in these
workplaces, a more hostile, harassing work envi- outcomes however. This finding was consistent
ronment, greater job insecurity, greater exposure with the relatively low correlations between the
to physical hazards at work, greater physical occupational status measure and work experi-
demands (e.g. bending, lifting) in their jobs, and ences and health (see Tables III and IV).
less comfortable workplace temperatures. Job
status had no relationship with measures of air
quality and ventilation. Conclusions and implications
TABLE V
Occupational status, work satisfaction and health
R R2 ∆R2 P
rarely included in job demands research. Second, (harassment, physical demands, physical hazards)
these findings highlighted the need to devote and well-being (low job satisfaction, more psy-
more research attention to women (and men) in chosomatic symptoms and more days of illness).
lower occupational status jobs. There seems to
have been a trend away from these occupations
toward more examination of managerial and pro- Occupational status and women’s health
fessional jobs.
A combination of factors seemed to converge The present study also examined the influences
on women in these lower occupational status of occupational status on women’s work experi-
positions. These included personal demographics ences, work satisfactions and health. Consistent,
(lower education, lower income), work stressors though moderate effects, of occupational status
Work Stress and Women’s Health 101
were found (see Tables III and IV). First, there Notes
was support for the occupational status measure
1
used in the research. That is, relationships of Preparation of this manuscript was supported in
particular personal demographics likely to be part by the School of Business, York University. The
associated with occupational status (i.e., educa- research was funded by the Ontario Workplace Health
tion, income) were evident. and Safety Agency and the Ontario Disease Panel. I
In addition, as expected, women in lower thank the Centre for Health Studies, York University
occupational status jobs indicated less satisfaction and the Institute for Social Research, York University,
for making the data available. Graeme Macdermid
at work and poorer emotional and physical
assisted with data analysis. Sandra Osti prepared the
health. One potential explanation for these manuscript.
findings lies in the work experiences reported 2
All measures were developed specifically for the
by women in low status jobs. These women study.
reported more negative work experiences,
ranging from heightened job insecurity and work
stress to a more hostile and hazardous workplace.
References
Thus there seemed to be a constellation of factors
operating in the work lives and family lives of
Aston, J. and J. Lavery: 1993, ‘The Health of Women
women in lower status jobs that posed potential
in Paid Employment: Effects of Quality of
health risks to them. Work Role, Social Support and Cynicism and
A large body of research evidence exists in the Psychological and Physical Well-being’, Women and
fields of medical sociology and epidemiology Health 20, 1–25.
highlighting the role played by occupational Bartley, M., A. Sacker, D. Firth and R. Fitzpatrick:
status and social class in explaining levels of 1999a, ‘Understanding Social Variation in
satisfaction and health (Pearlin, 1989; Borooah, Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Women and Men:
1999). Researchers and policy makers interested The Advantage of Theoretically Based Measures’,
in gender, work stress and health need to expand Social Science & Medicine 49, 831–846.
their samples to include women in jobs having Bartley, M., A. Sacker, D. Firth and R. Fitzpatrick:
lower occupational status to fully understand the 1999b, ‘Social Position, Social Roles and Women’s
nature and magnitude of women’s health Health in England: Changing Relationships
1984–1993’, Social Science & Medicine 48, 99–116.
concerns and the focus at potential remedial
Borooah, V. K.: 1999, ‘Occupational Class and the
actions. Probability of Long-term Limiting Illness’, Social
We need more research on work and health Science & Medicine 49, 253–266.
among women. More attention must also be paid Burke, R. J.: 1996, ‘Work Experiences, Stress and
to women who work in jobs other than man- Health Among Managerial and Professional
agerial and professional ones. We need to include Women’, in M. J. Schabracq, J. A. M. Winnubst
measures of work conditions, how the work is and C. L. Cooper (eds.), Handbook of Work and
experienced and measures of a variety of well- Health Psychology (Wiley, New York), pp. 205–230.
being and health indicators in this research as Burke, R. J. and C. A. McKeen: 1994, ‘Work and
well. This is important if we are to understand Career Experiences and Emotional Well-being
the broader relationships of social class and of Managerial and Professional Women’, Stress
health. Medicine 10, 65–79.
Collins, B. S., R. B. Hollander, D. M. Koffman, R.
There is also a need to be aware of and link
Reeve and S. Seidler: 1997, ‘Women, Work and
our research in work and well-being to an Health: Issues and Implications for Worksite Health
increasing and well conducted body of scholar- Promotion’, Women & Health 25, 3–18.
ship produced by others interested in health Cooper, C. L.: 1996, Handbook of Stress, Medicine and
(medical sociologists, epidemologists). Health (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL).
Cooper, C. L. and R. Payne: 1988, Causes, Coping
and Consequences of Stress at Work (John Wiley, New
York).
102 Ronald J. Burke
Davidson, M. J. and C. L. Cooper: 1983, Stress and Nelson, D. L. and R. J. Burke: 2000a, ‘Women,
the Woman Manager (St. Martin’s Press, New York). Work Stress and Health’, in M. J. Davidson and
Davidson, M. J. and C. L. Cooper: 1992, Shattering R. J. Burke (eds.), Women in Management (Sage
the Glass Ceiling (Paul Chapman, London). Publications, Newbury Park, CA), pp. 177–191.
Diez-Roux, A. V., B. G. Link and M. E. Northridge: Nelson, D. L. and R. J. Burke: 2000b, ‘Women
2000, ‘A Multi-level Analysis of Income Equality Executives: Individual and Organizational Health
and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors’, Social Issues’, Academy of Management Executive 14,
Science & Medicine 50, 673–688. 107–121.
Hochschild, A. R.: 1997, The Time Bind Offermann, L. R. and M. A. Armitage: 1993,
(Metropolitan Books, New York). ‘Stress and the Woman Manager: Sources, Health
Humphries, K. H. and E. van Doorslaer: 2000, Outcomes, and Interventions’, in E. Fagenson
‘Income-related Health Inequality in Canada’, (ed.), Women in Management: Trends, Issues, and
Social Science & Medicine 50, 663–672. Challenges in Managerial Diversity (Sage Publications,
Kempen, G. I. J. M., E. I. Brilman, A. V. Ranchor Newbury Park, CA).
and J. Ormel: 1999, ‘Morbidity and Quality of Life Pearlin, L. I.: 1989, ‘The Sociological Study of Stress’,
and the Moderating Effects of Level of Education Journal of Health and Social Behavior 30, 241–256.
in the Elderly’, Social Science & Medicine 49, Schabracq, M. J., J. A. M. Winnubst and C. L.
143–150. Cooper: 1996, Handbook of Work and Health
Langan-Fox, J.: 1998, ‘Women’s Careers and Psychology (John Wiley, New York).
Occupational Stress’, in C. L. Cooper and I. T. Veenstra, G.: 2000, ‘Social Capital, SES and Health:
Robertson (eds.), International Review of Industrial An Individual-level Analysis’, Social Science &
and Organizational Psychology (John Wiley, New Medicine 50, 619–630.
York), pp. 273–304.
Messing, K.: 1997, ‘Women’s Occupational Health:
A Critical Review and Discussion of Current
Issues’, Women & Health 25, 39–55. York University,
Muntaner, C., W. W. Eaton, C. Diala, R. C. Kessler Faculty of Administrative Studies,
and P. D. Sorlie: 1998, ‘Social Class, Assets, 4700 Keele Street,
Organizational Control and the Prevalence of M3J 1P3,
Common Groups of Psychiatric Disorders’, Social North York,
Science & Medicine 47, 2043–2054. Ontario, Canada