Disability Prevention Among Michigan Employers, 1988-1993
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Upjohn Institute Technical Reports Upjohn Research home page 9-1-1993 Disability Prevention Among Michigan Employers, 1988-1993 H. Allan Hunt W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, [email protected] Rochelle Virginia Habeck Michigan State University Brett VanTol W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research Susan M. Scully W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research Follow this and additional works at: https://research.upjohn.org/up_technicalreports Part of the Workers' Compensation Law Commons Citation Hunt, H. Allan, Rochelle Virginia Habeck, Brett VanTol, and Susan M. Scully. 1993. "Disability Prevention Among Michigan Employers, 1988-1993." Upjohn Institute Technical Report No. 93-004. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. https://doi.org/10.17848/tr94-004 This title is brought to you by the Upjohn Institute. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DISABILITY PREVENTION AMONG MICHIGAN EMPLOYERS 1988-1993 Upjohn Institute Technical Report No. 93-004 Final Report Submitted to Safety Education and Training (SET) Division Bureau of Safety and Regulation Michigan Department of Labor H. ALLAN HUNT, Project Director W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research ROCHELLE V. HABECK, Principal Investigator Michigan State University College of Education BRETT VanTOL, Research Associate W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research SUSAN M. SCULLY, Research Associate W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research September 1993 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A project of this magnitude owes debts to many people. First and foremost, our thanks go to Doug Earle, Director of the Bureau of Safety and Regulation of the Michigan Department of Labor, who kept faith with his professional conviction that Safety Pays and who had enough confidence hi our capabilities that he thought we could find a way to prove it. Our continuing gratitude also goes to Ed Welch, former Director of the Bureau of Workers© Disability Compensation. His fertile mind first grasped the potential payoff to this line of research way back in 1986 and his support has been unflagging ever since. The leadership of the Safety, Education and Training (SET) Division also has played an important role hi the research, especially Maryann Markham and Ayalew Kanno. Their assistance at the end of the project was particularly valuable. Sandy Hart, our SET grant administrator, was the model of support and understanding during nearly four years of proposal submission, project development, quarterly progress reports, pursuing the research plan, disseminating the results, and completing the final report. Our deep gratitude also goes to Bill Vandrese, Gerald Medler, Connie O©Neill, Micshall Patrick, Bob Stout and Dave Luptowski. These SET Consultants did their best to transplant their years of experience into our brains in a very few days. We sincerely hope the results have been worth their efforts. The other SET Consultants also provided valuable feedback and support at important decision points in the study. The Advisory Committee for the project was extremely valuable in reacting to our ideas and providing guidance and support at every critical turn in the project. They always went out of their way to keep us aware of current developments and in tune with our audience©s need for clarity and simplicity. Thanks especially to Mike Taubitz, Peter Rousmaniere, Bruce Barge, Dan Jones, Libby Child, and Len Sawisch for the important substantive contributions they made to our thinking. We leaned heavily on your knowledge as well. A select group of peers and consultants were also invaluable to us in pursuing the study. Stephen Raudenbush of MSU was critically important in helping with design and analysis issues. He expanded our thinking and tightened our focus throughout the project. Ron Serlin of the University of Wisconsin provided expert consultation on the reduction of our survey questions to workable independent variables. There were also a large group of content experts from around the country who were instrumental in evaluating our attempts to conceptualize what it was we were trying to accomplish in the project. Thanks to all for lending your expertise to the project. The staff at the Upjohn Institute provided more than adequate support for this project. Further, they did it with good humor and a remarkable lack of fuss. Elizabeth Anderson provided the connections that kept us all moving in the same direction. Ken Kline did all the data analysis for the project without complaint, no matter how many times we changed the definition of the variables. Leslie Lance contributed her good judgment and fine eye to the graphics presentations, both in the report and in our public presentations. Donna Donovan handled literally hundreds of phone calls and saw that they got to their proper destination. Of course, we owe the greatest debt of all to the 220 employers who responded to our survey, answered our follow-up questions, reacted to our reports of their disability prevention and management performance, turned out for the final briefing, and generally paid us the honor of taking the project seriously. For the 32 employers who granted our request to visit with them and review their performance and the policies and practices that caused that performance hi detail, we cannot tell you how much we learned from you. Our hope is that you have learned at least a little something from us in return. Finally to our families and loved ones, thank you for covering for us when deadlines got near, and for understanding when other commitments had to be delayed. A project of this scope takes on a life of its own, and now that it is laid to rest, we fervently hope that you can see how important your sacrifices were to the success of the project. HAH RVH BVT SMS n TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ...................... 1-1 Problem Addressed ........................................... 1-1 Origins of the Project .......................................... 1-3 SET Project Timeline .......................................... 1-6 Administrative Data Analysis ..................................... 1-7 Survey of Employers .......................................... 1-9 Employer Site Visits ......................................... 1-12 Theoretical Model and Research Hypotheses ........................... 1-13 Limitations to Research Design ................................... 1-15 CHAPTER 2 DATA COLLECTION ................................ 2-1 Survey Instrument Development ................................... 2-1 Literature Review Process .................................. 2-2 Expert and Field Consultation Process ........................... 2-3 Scale and Item Development ................................. 2-6 Instrument Finalization and Pretesting .......................... 2-12 Survey Methodology ......................................... 2-14 Response Bias Analysis ........................................ 2-19 Site Visit Methodology ........................................ 2-21 Sampling Design ....................................... 2-21 Interview Protocol Development .............................. 2-22 Site Visit Procedures ..................................... 2-24 Qualitative Data Reporting ................................. 2-25 CHAPTER 3 SURVEY EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS ....................... 3-1 Introduction ............................................... .3-1 Performance Measures (Dependent Variables) ........................... 3-1 iii Covariates (Control Variables) .................................... 3-7 Policy and Practice Measures (Independent Variables) ..................... 3-11 Refinement of Original Scales ............................... 3-11 Presentation of the Final Independent Variables .................... 3-17 Interpretation of the Independent Variables ....................... 3-21 CHAPTER 4 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS ........................... 4-1 Introduction ............................................... .4-1 Measurement Issues .......................................... .4-4 Dependent Variables ..................................... .4-4 Independent Variables ..................................... 4-4 Covariates ........................................... .4-5 Time Period of Observation ................................. 4-6 Statistical Significance .................................... .4-7 Reverse Causation ...................................... .4-7 Prevention Model ........................................... .4-8 MIOSHA Recordables Per 100 Employees ........................ 4-8 Lost Work Day Cases .................................... 4-12 Workers© Compensation Claim Rate ........................... 4-14 Disability Management Model ................................... 4-15 Lost Work Day Case Rate ................................. 4-16 Lost Work Days Per Case ................................. 4-18 Workers© Compensation Claim Rate ........................... 4-19 Managerial Model ........................................... 4-21 Lost Work Day Rate ..................................... 4-22 Workers© Compensation Payments ............................ 4-23 Summary Model ............................................ 4-24 Lost Work Day Rate ..................................... 4-25 CHAPTER 5 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS ............................ 5-1 Introduction ............................................... .5-1 Confirmation of Quantitative Findings ................................ 5-2 Validating the Stability of Performance .......................... 5-2 Validating