UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

Date: May 27, 2008

I, Nazanin Tork , hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:

Master of Arts in:

Anthropology It is entitled: 8 The Effects of Gendered Stressors on Female Construction Workers’

Occupational Health and Safety: A Re-Analysis of Qualitative Data

This work and its defense approved by:

Chair: C. Jeffery Jacobson, PhD

Martha Rees, PhD

iii The Effects of Gendered Stressors on Female Construction Workers’ Occupational Health and Safety: A Re-Analysis of Qualitative Data

A thesis submitted to the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the McMicken College of Arts and Sciences

May 27th of 2008

By

Nazanin Tork

B.A., Psychology, University of Cincinnati, June 2004

Committee chair: C. Jeffrey Jacobson, Jr., Ph.D., University of Cincinnati Committee member: Martha W. Rees, Ph.D., University of Cincinnati

Abstract

The consequences of occupational stressors in today’s rapidly changing work

culture and environment are critical issues for the occupational safety and health field.

Previous literature suggests that a variety of health and safety problems are related to

adverse working conditions, but little attention has been given to exploring how gender-

related stressors might influence the occupational health and safety of female

construction workers. For the research described here I conducted a secondary analysis of

9 in-depth interviews collected by Goldenhar and Sweeney (1996) looking for evidence

of gender-specific stressors affecting female construction worker’s safe work practices. I

also evaluated the conceptual fit of the 1988 Occupational Stress Indicator model of

Cooper, Sloan and Williams. I argue that gendered stressors can not be extracted from the

general stressors associated with certain occupations and that gendered stressors are more

apparent in some occupational sources of stressors than others. I also argue that the

construction industry must feminize to a certain extent since gender is embedded in all the dimensions of occupational stress wherever women work in traditionally male dominant industries.

iii

iv Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the faculty and staff of the

Anthropology Department for their support and guidance throughout my graduate school experience. I would like to especially thank Dr. Martha Rees for introducing me to world

of Anthropology as well as taking a genuine interest in guiding me as an undergraduate student unsure of my next step in life. Most importantly I would like to thank my advisor,

Dr. Jeff Jacobson, for all his professional and valuable insights and conversations throughout the painful process of writing a thesis. I thank you for all the long hours and hard work you provided to my research. Thank you Dr. Linda Goldenhar for allowing me to use your data which not only inspired my studies, but also helped me complete my research.

None of this would be possible if it were not for my mother and father’s decision

to move to the United States at such a critical time in our lives. The unconditional love,

support and encouragement has proved invaluable for both my professional and personal

character. Thank you so much for instilling the Persian language and culture in my life as well as providing the incredible opportunities to travel and see other cultures.

Finally, thank you very much Miguel Angel Pelaez for your amazing and

unconditional support, Shahryar Tork for your irreplaceable brotherly love, Sinem Metin

for your unrivaled skills and designs, and the Khalilys for just about everything else that I

didn’t mention but matter so much.

v Table of Contents

Acknowledgements...... v

List of Tables and Figures...... vii

Chapter

1. Introduction...... 1

2. Background…………………………………………………...... 5 Figure 1……………………………………………………….…...18 Table 1…………………………………………………………….19

3. Methods………………………………………………...... 20 Coding and Analysis…………………………………...... 21

4. Results and Findings………………………………………….………...22 Table 2…………………………………………………………….25 Table 3……………………………………………………...……..27 4.1………………………………………………………………....28 Table 4……………………………………………………….....…30 4.2………………………………………………………………....31 Table 5………………………………….………………………....33 4.3………………………………………………………………....34 Table 6…………………………………………...... 36 4.4………………………………………………………………....36 Table 7………………………………………………………….....38 4.5……………………………………………………………..…..39 Table 8…………………………………………………………….41

5. Discussion………………………………………………………………41

6. References……………………………………………………….……...46

vi List of Tables and Figures

Table 1: Goldenhar and Sweeney’s Top Categories of Stressors and the Occupational Stress Indicator Model Sources of Stressors

Table 2: Background of the Female Construction Workers

Table 3: Evidence of the OSI sources of stressors in each transcript

Table 4: Examples of Factors Intrinsic to the Job

Table 5: Examples of Laborers Role

Table 6: Examples of Relationships with Others

Table 7: Examples of Career Developments and Achievements

Table 8: Examples of Organizational Structure and Climate

Figure 1: Occupational Stress Indicator Model

vii Chapter 1. Introduction

“If you are a woman, you have to at least be faster than the oldest guy on the jobsite. Absolutely, I stress to women all the time, they’re making a way for another woman. This contractors probably hiring a woman for the very first time, and she has to make a good impression on him so it can open up the door for another woman.” Mary Whitmore, Training Program Instructor

Gender is a fundamental aspect of an organization’s framework and has for decades been a category within which the modern workplace is structured. The culture of an organization shapes the way individuals act and interact within its space, and according to Itzin (1995) organizational culture is “hierarchical, patriarchal, sex segregated, sexually divided, sexist, misogynist and resistant to change” (36). The consequences of this type of culture are such that women face additional gender-specific job stressors and barriers to career advancement.

The construction workforce, considered to be the last male bastion is a classic example of a gender discriminated industry. It is characterized as both structurally and culturally masculine requiring “long working hours and expectations of geographical flexibility supporting a workplace culture of inflexibility and discrimination” (Dainty,

Bagilhole and Neale, 2001, 299). Male construction workers regard their industry as an

“extremely masculine, physical and tough” homogenous social environment hostile to outsiders (Pyke, 1993, 10). According to Williams (1988) men are territorial about their occupations and view women entering the masculine trades as a threat to the set boundaries between masculine and feminine work. This industry has culturally been structured as “masculine type work” consisting of traveling, working long rigid schedules, lacking clean bathroom facilities and no means of a support system to balance work and family life (Dainty and Lingard, 2006).

1 Several studies of the construction industry have suggested that the gender

discrimination and isolation, lack of sanitary facilities and proper protective equipment

and clothing along with limited safety and health training all promote a hostile, if not

sexist, working environment associated with low job satisfaction and “psychological and

physiological health symptoms and workplace injuries” specific to women (LeBreton and

Loevy, 2000; Goldenhar and Sweeney, 1996; Goldenhar, Swanson, Hurrell, Ruder and

Deddens, 1996). While it is true that both male and female construction workers face

occupational safety and health risks, little is known about the overwhelming effects of

these stressors on female construction workers’ safety and health. Future studies would

benefit from looking further into the safety and health risks specific to female workers in

the construction industry especially since it is considered one of the top three most

hazardous industries for workers’ safety and health, according to the Bureau of Labor

Statistics (BLS) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

(Meyer and Peluga, 2004; NIOSH Program Portfolio, 2004).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates that for 2006 more than 1,200

work related fatalities occurred in the construction industry with construction laborers

accounting for the majority of these cases (BLS, 2006). Although the number of female

construction trade workers suffering from injuries and fatalities was relatively small

compared to men, a rate of 2 per 100, it reflects the general under representation of

women in these worker populations (BLS, 2006). The BLS also began to collect detailed data of nonfatal occupational injuries and illness in 1992, including occupational stressors

as a cause of injury and/or illness. The BLS found that in 1997 there were an estimated

3,420 cases of occupational stress resulting in time away from work (BLS, 1999b). The

2 average number of days away from work for these cases was 23 which was four times

more than the average number of days away from work for all other nonfatal

occupational injuries and illnesses. These data suggest that not only is it important to

consider the high rates of injuries and illnesses but it is also important to see that there are

high levels of stress that lead to these injuries and absenteeism. Information on the relationship between work organization and stress-related disorders is growing (NIOSH,

2008; BLS, 1999a), but relatively little research has been conducted among women in male dominated professions. The idea that additional psychosocial stressors experienced

by women, the gender minority, may threaten their health and well-being is starting to

appear on the radar screen of the occupational health and safety fields.

For this study I took the opportunity to explore the possible relationship between

gender-specific stressors and the occupational safety and health of female construction

workers. I was interested in exploring how gender-specific stressors affect women’s

occupational safety and health in the male-dominated construction industry. This

question was of interest to me both as a woman and an anthropology graduate student,

focusing on the safety and health of workers in the construction industry at NIOSH.

Although information on the relationship between work organization and stress-related

disorders is limited, the occupational safety and health field has emphasized the need for

conducting high quality research and developing affective prevention activities to help

improve the culture of work organization and reduce the occurrence of occupational

stress, illness and injury in the workplace.

I conducted a secondary analysis of in-depth interviews collected by Goldenhar

and Sweeney, as described in Tradeswomen’s Perspectives on Occupational Health and

3 Safety: A Qualitative Investigation (1996). These interviews examined the health and

safety concerns of 50 females previously or currently employed in construction trades.

Goldenhar and Sweeney’s study is significant not only because it looked at a relatively

understudied group of workers in an industry with high rates of injuries and illnesses, but

it also documented the subjective concerns of women in relation to the sexist work

environment, the lack of sufficient education and training and the need for a more

“woman friendly” environment.

For the research described here I used a subset of 9 of Goldenhar and Sweeney’s

interviews and looked for gender-specific stressors affecting women’s safe work

practices. I also evaluated the fit of the 1988 Occupational Stress Indicator (OSI) model

of Cooper, Sloan and Williams. The OSI model identifies six major types of occupational

stressors, which are classified as either internal e.g. work load or external e.g. child care

responsibilities to the organization. It consists of seven items assessing a person’s

attitude towards their job, their state of health, their behavior, interpretation of events

around them, sources of job pressures, and their coping methods. I chose the Cooper,

Sloan and Williams’ model for my analysis because it is a well known, widely accepted

and reliable model for measuring occupational stress levels (Nelson et al., 1990; Young

and Cooper, 1995; Lim and Teo, 1996).

With the application of the OSI model, I provide evidence that female construction workers are exposed to additional, gendered stressors. I also argue that the

construction culture must feminize so that the work environment may improve, both in

terms of health and safety, for male and female construction workers.

4 Chapter 2. Background

“A first when you start out, you have to do a little better than male coworkers did just so that they can say, ‘Oh, you’re all right.’ And after a while, when they see you can pull your own weight, do whatever they do, then they leave you alone. They let you do your work. They figure you’re here to work, they’re here to work.” Leah Rivera, Sheet metal worker

Construction is one the largest and most dangerous industries in the United States.

It employs some 11.7million workers of which 9.6% are female and only 2% work as skilled laborers (BLS, 1999a). For 2006 it was estimated that 4.1 million workers in the

U.S. labor force suffered from work related injuries and illnesses and more than 150,000

of these cases involved construction workers of which 5,000 were women (BLS, 2006). It has been estimated that the number of women entering the construction labor force, as

well as other male dominated careers, is rising significantly as more women are gaining

confidence in their abilities to do the same work as men (Agapiou, 2002). The majority of

these women are in their 20’s and 30’s in search of a good paying job to support themselves and their families (Dainty and Lingard, 2006). Although these women experience challenges such as lack of acceptance by male coworkers, discrimination and the need to acculturate to the dominant male culture, the “higher wages, wider variety of work schedules, and greater personal satisfaction” have been reported as important reasons for why women enter these trades (Goldenhar, Swanson, Hurrell, Ruder and

Deddens, 1998, 19).

Most of the literature focusing on the relationship between gender, discrimination

and health in the construction industry has been published in the U.K. and Australia

(Pringle and Winning, 1998; Agapiou, 2002; Dainty and Lingard, 2006), with a few

studies published in the U.S. A study by Bagilhole et al. (1996) found that male and

5 female construction workers in the U.K. experienced promotions at significantly different rates, with males progressing more rapidly than females. The authors suggest that this disparity is a result of structural organizational factors creating barriers for “promotional opportunities, an incompatibility of construction work with women’s expected societal roles, and a culture which militated against women’s equal participation through the maintenance of an exclusionary and discriminatory work environment” (Dainty,

Bagilhole, and Neale, 2001, 299). In an earlier study by Dainty, Bagilhole and Neale

(2000) it was found that gender played a determining role in a workers opportunity for career development and progress. The likelihood of career advancement for female and male managerial construction workers with similar skills and knowledge was based more on gender than experience, where male workers advanced at higher rates than female workers (Agapiou, 2002). These occupational disparities faced by female construction workers have complex implications when looking at its effects on work performance and satisfaction. There is evidence from past research (Lingard and Francis, 2004;

Sommerville, Kennedy and Orr et al. 1993; Dainty, Neale and Bagilhole, 2000) that these difficult working conditions create increased level of stress among construction workers.

It is also known that stress can be damaging to both personal health and organizational productivity (Djebarni, 1996) however, little attention has been given to exploring how gender might influence occupational stress levels and if this in turn results in unsafe work practices, especially for women in construction.

Measuring and defining stress has been difficult for scientists because of its subjective character and varied definitions and symptoms. Attempts at explaining stress have taken a multidisciplinary approach exploring the relationships between the

6 psychological, social, and physical problems that tax individuals (Cooper, 1996). One

definition of stress, according to Cooper, Sloan and Williams (1988) is “a response to a

situation in which individuals are unable to meet the demands placed on them, resulting

in negative outcomes” e.g. poor and/or unsafe work performance. Fink (2000) defines

stress as “a real or interpreted threat to the physiological or psychological integrity of an

individual which results in physiological (e.g. impaired cognitive functioning) and/or

behavioral responses (e.g. angry violent outbursts)”. Hans Selye, a stress research

pioneer, defines stress as "the non-specific response of the body to any demand for

change" (American Institute of Stress, 2008). These definitions suggest that there are

numerous characterizations as well as multiple sources and outcomes of stress. Most of

these definitions accommodate the idea that an experience is considered stressful if a

challenging demand or change occurs unexpectedly in ones life. These challenging events

are referred to as stressors and can be categorized as either physical insults or

psychological experiences.

In terms of the work environment Cooper (1996) has suggested that we need to

consider not only the factors one faces on the job but also the factors intrinsic to the job,

relationships at work, organizational structure and climate, role ambiguity and conflict,

opportunities for career development and progression and finally home-work interface

(Cooper, 1996). An experience is considered stressful depending on the individual’s

interpretation of the significance of the “harmful, threatening, or challenging event”

(Lazarus, 1976). These “threatening events” are referred to as stressors and can be

categorized as either a physical insult or a psychological experience (Fink, 2000). Some physical insults may include inclement weather, bad language and loud noises. Examples

7 of workplace psycho-social stressors include discrimination, rigid work schedules and

limited job opportunities, all of which may result in a physiological response such as

“impaired cognitive functioning, anxiety, depression, headaches, nausea, and fearfulness

or behavioral responses such as angry or violent outbursts, smoking, or acting irrationally

and recklessly” (Veysey, 2000, 23).

While some of these physiological and behavioral responses can be considered

generalized responses to stressors, research indicates that stressors which affect men and

women on the job are different. Nelson et al. (1990) found that female human resource

management professionals reported significantly higher levels of stress associated with

the workplace than their male co-workers. McDonald and Korabik (1991) found that

women managers in various industries reported higher levels of stress related to

home/work interface, discrimination and gender-based career barriers than their male

counterparts who reported managing lower level employers as stressful. They also found

that men coped with stress by occupying themselves in non-work leisure activities while

women relied on support from family and friends.

Nelson and Burke (2000) found that women face occupational stressors such as

the “glass ceiling” when pursuing achievements in their careers and the “maternal wall”

once they have settled and had a family. In a study by Kanter (1990) women reported experiencing “tokenism”, being the first of their gender to enter a position, as an occupational stressor. As a token the women experienced isolation/exclusion, stereotyping and discrimination from the majority group as well as sexual harassment and non-harassing social-sexual behaviors. The social-sexual behaviors consist of flirting or making sexual jokes, experienced by women in male dominated occupations such as

8 construction and police work, are associated with health symptoms such as “nausea,

headaches and physiological illnesses (Goldenhar, Swanson, Hurrell, Ruder and

Deddens, 1998, 21).

For the rest of this section I discuss four articles looking at the impacts of gender-

specific stressors and work hazards on the health and safety of female construction workers. In the study conducted by Goldenhar et al. (1998) the effects of multiple job stressors on U.S. female construction workers’ physical and mental health were examined

The study assessed the impact of classic job stressors (job demands and job control),

gender-specific stressors (sexual harassment and discrimination) and construction-

specific stressors (skills training) and found that gender-specific stressors were the most

positively related to reports of mental and physical symptoms (Goldenhar et al., 1998).

These findings are consistent with previous studies which indicate that females

who are subjected to sexually hostile work environments experience emotional distress

and physical difficulties (Marshall, 1990; Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, 1995). Mental symptoms were found to be related to skill

underutilization as well as overcompensation on the work site. These stressors are inter- related in the sense that if a female construction worker is not given the opportunity to apply her knowledge and skill it becomes difficult for her to prove herself and be accepted as a competent worker, but on the other hand in order to be accepted by her co- workers the female worker may find herself over-compensating on the job (Goldenhar et al, 1998). Both of these stress factors are thought to contribute to the high rates of injuries and illnesses suffered on the job for female construction workers.

9 In an article by Welch, Goldenhar and Hunting (2000) a review of U.S. medical literature between the years 1960-1999 on the safety and health hazards for female construction workers was conducted for the purpose of finding different patterns of fatal and non-fatal injuries among male and female construction workers. According to this research 17% of all fatal work related injuries and half of all fatal falls occur in construction, which is significant considering the construction industry comprises only

6% of the total U.S. workforce. Moreover Welch et al. found that from 1980-1992 the average fatality rate for FCWs was 1.80 per 100,000 which is relatively high considering the average fatality rate for all-industry female workers was just .82 per 100,000 for the same years. These authors also found that FCWs had higher risks of work fatalities from motor vehicle accidents (related to highway road work) or homicide and less risk of fatality from falls. Overall, female construction laborers experienced fewer fatalities than male laborers from falls, machinery related injuries and injuries caused by an object striking them. Female laborers, however, were at higher fatality risks from motor vehicle injuries than the male laborers.

Welch et al. also looked at Occupational health and injury surveillance data dating from 1989-1992 for Washington state carpenters and found that FCWs experienced higher rates of sprains/strains and nerve conditions of the wrist and forearm than male construction workers (MCWs). FCWs also identified additional health and safety concerns such as lack of adequate sanitary facilities, the masculine workplace culture, ill- fitting personal protective equipment and clothing and lack of proper health, safety and skills training (Welch et al., 2000).

10 In a more recent study by Loosemore and Waters (2004) the effects of gender on

occupational stress levels in the UK construction industry were analyzed by utilizing

Cooper, Sloan and William’s OSI model. Loosemore and Waters set out to find if

differences existed in the sources and levels of stress between male and female managerial workers in the U.K. construction industry. A total of 190 anonymous surveys

were sent out via postal mail to managerial male and females workers (i.e. construction

superintendent, general manager, project engineer) of seven large international

companies based in Australia with a response rate of 69%, providing a sample of 84 men

and 47 women. Since the authors only focused on occupational sources of stress they

used the portion of the questionnaire related to different sources of stress related to work.

This section is made up of 61 items and uses the Likert-scale as a tool for

measuring a respondent’s agreement or disagreement with a statement. The study found that overall men had scored higher levels of stress for all five components of the model

and that significant differences did exist for some items between professional men and

women’s sources and levels of stress. Stressors that male and female managerial

construction workers shared included high levels of responsibility, pressurized and

confrontational work environment and the transient nature of the workforce (Loosemore

and Waters, 2004). Stressors which appeared to affect men more than women were

making important decisions, having to take risks, managing or supervising work of other

people, disciplinary roles, implications of mistakes, impending redundancy, and changing

jobs for career progression (Loosemore and Waters, 2004). Women experienced higher

levels of stress regarding opportunities for personal development, rates of pay, lack of

11 encouragement from supervisors, keeping up with new ideas, business travel and

changing the way they are accustomed in doing their job (Loosemore and Waters, 2000).

Interestingly, discrimination was not found to be a higher source of stress for

women than men. It is not clear however if this finding would hold true if the respondents

were blue-collar site workers instead of white-collar managerial workers. It would also be

interesting to conduct the same study among cohorts in the U.S. to see if similar responses exist within a different cultural group. Nonetheless, this study revealed that although men still make-up the majority of the senior positions in the industry the women occupying the lower positions have a higher sense of security in their jobs and are therefore free of stressors related to impending redundancy and changing jobs to progress their career.

It is important to mention that these changes in the demographics and acceptance of women in the construction industry are possibly due to the improving governmental and organizational policies in Australia. The findings from Loosemore and Waters suggest that the Australian construction industry has been undergoing a progressive cultural shift with the number of women entering these occupations and maintaining their

sense of security increases. The Builders Labourers’ Federation of New South Wales,

Australia encouraged women during the 1970’s women’s movements to take up jobs as

builders and laborers (Pringle and Winning, 1998). The 1980’s brought about the ‘girls

can do anything’ movement promoting and advertising to both school aged girls and

mature women the notion of changing women’s roles. A goal of this movement was to

prepare and provide an array of job options for school-girls once they completed their

education. The late 90’s saw programs, such as the Tradeswomen on the Move, providing

12 school-aged girls the opportunity to meet and work with tradeswomen. Some colleges

incorporated the Technical and Further Education (TFE) program which provided courses

teaching women the skills needed to work in such trades. The Australian federal

government also participated by funding the TFE as long as women’s enrollment met

target goals. Among the many efforts TFE has been considered the most successful for

increasing the number of female apprentices by allowing women to train in cohorts and

not feel like a minority in the masculine work environment. These proactive

organizations and movements have helped increase the presence of female trade workers in places such as New South Wales and Queensland, however there is much room left for improving the acceptance and equality of female construction workers in these trades. It is also important to view the efforts that have taken place in Australia as both promising and encouraging for female workers in the U.S. as well as other countries.

For the remainder of this section I discuss in greater detail the qualitative study by

Goldenhar and Sweeney (1996) which is also the source of data for this study. I chose

this study because it provided a sample of female construction workers with a wide range

of experiences while at different stages in their careers while being focused on the

different sources of stressors in the workplace. Unlike the Loosemore and Waters study,

Goldenhar and Sweeney interviewed non-managerial construction workers whose

comments provided a different look at a sub-culture of the construction workforce. Also,

Dr. Linda Goldenhar is a leading U.S. researcher studying gender, stress, psychological

and physiological health within female construction workers and I was given the opportunity to use her data for the purpose of my thesis research. I describe the processes

used in the sample selection, data collection and data analysis. My secondary analysis

13 readdresses the question of gender related stressors and how they affect female

construction workers’ occupational safety and health (OSH). Additionally, it attempts to

examine the fit of a modified version of Cooper, Sloan and William’s OSI model to that

of Goldenhar and Sweeney’s data set with new questions addressing the effects of

gender-related stressors on OSH. In doing this I propose how gender-specific stressors

negatively affect female construction workers’ safety and health in the work site while

partly disputing the findings from Loosemore and Water’s study.

In Goldenhar and Sweeney’s Tradeswomen’s Perspectives on Occupational

Health and Safety: A Qualitative Investigation (1996) the investigators used an in-depth

interview approach to determine the major health and safety concerns of U.S. female

construction workers (FCWs). The study used purposeful sampling in order to ensure that all respondents had experienced work in the construction industry or in another closely related male dominated trade such as carpentry, welding, electrical, plumbing, laboring and mill work. Female construction workers from all over the U.S. were recruited for this study. This type of sampling also allowed for more specific information to be collected on particular issues within a particular work context. Data were collected with a variety of methods including focus group interviews, in-depth interviews and open-ended self- administered questionnaires totaling a sample size of 51 women.

The research described for my study is based on an analysis of 9 in-depth one-on-

one interviews. Respondents for the in-depth interviews and open-ended questionnaires

were asked all of the following questions: “What is your trade?”, “How long have you

been in your trade?”, “Do you participate in the strain and sprain programs?”,

“Compared to other sites you have worked on how does the present one compare in

14 terms of being a woman?”, “What do you believe are the 2 or 3 most important health

and safety issues you face on the job?”, “Are there any special health and safety

concerns for women working in the trades?”, and “ What changes would make your job

ideal in terms of being less stressful, healthier and safer?” The respondents also

participated in a pile sort exercise where they selected from a series of cards the major

stressors they were concerned with on the work-site. The use of content analysis helped

identify themes within the data set with a second author review to ensure coding reliability. The major stressors identified by the respondents in their analysis were ranked and categorized under the four major themes. These were exposure to physical and chemical agents, injuries resulting from lifting, bending and twisting, lack of sufficient workplace safety education and training, and gender-related issues.

Below I provide at greater length some of the findings from Goldenhar and

Sweeney which I consider essential for understanding the everyday types of gender-

specific stressors affecting FCWs’ occupational health and safety as well as why I chose

to use the Occupational Safety Indicator model. At first when examining the Goldenhar

and Sweeney data I saw a number of examples of mentioned stressors which fit the OSI

model. As I read the interviews in more depth I realized that parallels existed between the

four major stressors from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s study and the five sources of stressors from the OSI model. This fact was very important for my research since I planned on applying the model to the same data set, yet focusing on the gender-related issues. Finally, I think it is important to illustrate the findings from the Goldenhar and

Sweeney study in light of the Loosemore and Waters findings which found that gender discrimination was not an issue for female managerial workers in the Australian

15 construction industry. Since the findings from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s study suggest

that there is some evidence of gender-specific discrimination and stress among blue collar

FCWs in the U.S, it is possible then by having only looked at white collar FCWs

Loosemore and Waters may have overlooked the existence of gender-specific

discrimination and stressors among blue-collar female construction workers.

The number one ranked stressor from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s 1996 study was

exposure to physical and chemical agents. One woman stated “I'm really concerned

about…all the different dusts that we’re exposed to. I think that (dust) would be my

highest priority because those are the kinds of things that you do not really notice ‘til the end of the day. It’s nothing that affects you at that particular time.” The second ranked stressor was injuries resulting from lifting, bending and twisting and a quote from an interview states “…how to lift and how to bend…I didn’t learn this until I ended up on physical therapy. I think that it’s something that we really need to look at, especially for individuals going into non-traditional work, is the way you life and bend and move.” The third ranked stressor was lack of sufficient workplace safety education and training with a woman stating that “Many do not want to go to safety meetings. I do not know if it’s a machismo thing or what…but then there’s always the contractor or boss breathing down your neck, saying ‘How come this work wasn’t done?’ The boss doesn’t say, ‘You’d better go to that safety meeting because I do not want my worker’s comp bill going up this year’.”

The final ranked stressor from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s study concerned gender- related issues such as lack of properly fitting protective clothing and tools, overcompensating in work in order to prove themselves to their male co-workers, lack of

16 availability and cleanliness of restroom facilities, and psychosocial stressors. One woman

stated “I’ve been around the older journeymen and a few others who really do not want to see women out there…They need to understand that were there, were just a hungry, we have just as many financial obligations and, most important, is that we have a lot of self worth when we go out on these job site.” Another woman mentioned “...you can be hurt…if you happen to have a pair of gloves on and they’re too big…that glove could get wrapped up in a fan belt…anything…with moving parts…you can get hurt…if your clothing is not fitted right.” and another woman mentioned that “… the guys have problems also, but they take it for granted. They accept the conditions as part of this rough world that they function in. And also, many times if there is no near bathroom, they’ll just pee….”

The findings from Goldenhar and Sweeney include environmental agents,

ergonomics, training and education, and gender-related issues. Interestingly, Goldenhar

and Sweeney saw gender-related issues as an important stressor yet they distinguished it

by separating it from the others. To a certain extent the Goldenhar and Sweeney categories are recognized in the OSI model, however in this model they are divided into

the following categories: factors intrinsic to the job, laborers role, relationship with

others, career development and training, and organizational structure and climate (see

Figure 1).

17

Figure 1. Occupational Stress Indicator Model, adapted from Cooper, Sloan and Williams, (1988)

In Table 1, I illustrate the connection between the Goldenhar and Sweeney findings and the OSI model, although imperfect. The concern about exposure to physical and chemical agents, which was considered the top stressor in the Goldenhar and

Sweeney study, largely overlaps with the meaning of Factors Intrinsic to the Job which includes poor or unsafe working conditions from Cooper, Sloan and Williams’ OSI model. The second concern, injuries resulting from lifting, bending, and twisting, can be considered a conflicting job demand which is an example of Laborers Role from the OSI model. The third stressor, lack of sufficient workplace safety education and training, from

Goldenhar and Sweeney corresponds with the inadequate training and education example under the OSI’s Career Development and Achievements component. The final and more

18 general concern from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s findings, gender-related issues, includes psycho-social stressors such as masculine standards of behavior and conduct which are examples of OSI’s Organizational Structure and Climate component. I was not able to connect a category of stress from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s findings with the OSI

Relationship with Others source of stress (see Table 1.)

In re-examining the Goldenhar and Sweeney data in light of the OSI model I also found some examples of coping strategies which I discuss in passing cases.

Table 1. Goldenhar and Sweeney’s Top Categories of Stressors and the Occupational Indicator Model Sources of Stressors Goldenhar and Sweeney Top Cooper, Sloan and Williams Categories of Stressors OSI Sources of Stressors Exposure to physical and chemical agents Factors Intrinsic to the Job Injuries resulting from lifting, bending *Laborers Role and twisting *X Relationship with Others Lack of sufficient workplace safety Career Development and Achievement education and training Gender-related issues i.e. lack of properly Organizational Structure and Climate fitting protective clothing and tools, overcompensating, lack of availability and cleanliness of restroom facilities, and psychosocial stressors * Modified from Managerial Role to Laborers Role for the purpose of this study * X indicates no connection between Goldenhar and Sweeney’s top categories of stressors with the OSI sources of stressors

It appears from Table 1 that to a certain degree the five components of Cooper,

Sloan and Williams’ OSI model are related to Goldenhar and Sweeney’s top categories of concern. It can be deduced from the information above that both groups of authors had similar theoretical concepts of the types and sources of stressors affecting construction workers, but neither emphasized on the gender dimension of the stressors. For my research question I used the OSI sources of stressors as a guide for finding evidence of

19 gendered stressors from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s interviews. My aim was to explore

how gender-specific stressors affect women’s occupational safety and health in the male-

dominated construction industry.

Chapter 3. Methods

This secondary analysis of Goldenhar and Sweeney’s 1996 study focuses on what

they consider the fourth major stressor, gender-related issues. I chose this stressor

because while Goldenhar and Sweeney collected good information on this subject, it was not a major focus of their publication and therefore much data was left open for analysis.

Also, since the 2004 Loosemore and Waters study (see above) suggested that gender discrimination was not experienced by white collar managerial female construction workers in Australia, I decided to explore the possibility of this phenomenon by only looking at the blue-collar workers.

I re-analyzed 9 one-on-one interviews, in the form of transcripts ranging from 12-

26 pages, between Goldenhar and the interviewees. Having access to the complete

transcripts from each interview I was able to read them over a period of a couple of

weeks, in order to become more familiar and comfortable with the data. For this study I

carried out a largely deductive, structured analysis, unlike Goldenhar and Sweeney’s

grounded, and largely inductive thematic analysis. For my analysis I tried to fit the OSI

model to the data. As noted above the components of the OSI model are factors intrinsic

to the job, laborers role, relationship with others, career development and achievements,

and organizational structure and climate (see Figure 1). As I read the interviews I looked

for gendered examples that would both correspond and dispute the OSI sources of

stressors.

20 I chose to use Cooper, Sloan and Williams’ OSI model for several reasons. First, I

wanted to illustrate that most, if not all, sources of stress stemming from the work-place

in the OSI model were experienced by the female construction workers interviewed by

Goldenhar and Sweeney. I was also interested in demonstrating that the concerns

Goldenhar and Sweeney found to be non-related to gender-related issues were in fact

related. For their findings Goldenhar and Sweeney differentiated between gendered

issues and non-gendered issues. I however considered all the concerns to be related to

gender-related issues and I discuss them as such in the results/findings chapter. Finally, I

chose this model because it evaluates both work and home stress which are important for

assessing women’s occupational stressors since they have traditionally taken a greater

sense of responsibility in the home. However, since my focus was primarily on work-

based stressors I did not explore the effects of home-based stressors.

Chapter 3.1 Coding and Analysis

As mentioned above I carried out a structured deductive analysis by reading each transcript and highlighting statements made by the respondents which I considered to be

evidence in support of the OSI model. I was also alert to the fact that some women may

deny that there are any gendered dimensions of stress and made sure to document those

findings. As noted before, I identified what I thought were examples of coping strategies

used by the women in the face of these stressors. The final categorization of the data was

based on my discretion of the best fit source of stress for each statement. This coding

schema was reviewed by a second party to reduce the subjectivity of my interpretations

of the statement. Once I was certain of how to categorize the data I created tables to

summarize my findings.

21 For the purpose of this paper I changed the Managerial Role (from Cooper, Sloan and Williams 1981 model) to Laborers’ Role since the data I analyzed only included laborers and not managers. For Role I included such things as the understanding of work objectives, co-expectations of one’s self, scope of responsibilities, conflicting job demands and unhappiness with tasks. I also did not include the home-based or the home- work interface sources of stressors which are part of the original model. While these two components are important for understanding work-related stressors, especially among female workers, my study primarily focused on work-based factors and therefore I did not include them in my research.

The deductive analysis methods I used for this paper allowed me to find examples from the Goldenhar and Sweeney interviews that connect with the OSI sources of stressors in a gendered dimension. I thoroughly examined the gendered and non-gendered examples of stressors from the interviews in terms of the OSI sources of stressor and provide them in following Results and Findings section as sub-chapters.

Chapter 4. Results and Findings

In this section I introduce the female construction workers, offer evidence of the types of stressors described by Cooper, Sloan and Williams, provide tables illustrating my findings, and consider coping methods when relevant.

Although the transcripts do not provide detailed life histories or socio- demographic information, they do provide sufficient amount of data regarding the struggles female construction workers (FCWs) have endured. To give a sense of the motives and experiences that are typical in the interviews I briefly describe here three pseudonymous participants from Goldenhar and Sweeney’s interviews. “Betty” started

22 working for the construction industry in 1978 after her divorce. She stated that “It looked

like something fun.” and she soon began her career as one of the few female iron worker

in the state of Washington. “Barbara” began working as an electrician in 1979 after she

sued the union and contractors for discrimination. Unfortunately she felt she was still

experiencing discrimination and so she began working as a traveler (title for contract

workers who take short-term employment opportunities across the nation), so that she

could have more control over her work and pay. “Sally” entered the construction industry

during the Reagan administrations efforts to recruit more females into the male-

dominated trades. She mentioned being pushed off tanks and boilers and purposely being

given faulty equipment and respirators by male co-workers so that she would quit the

trade.

I turn now to examine the fit of the OSI stress model in the occupational work

experiences of these women. Of the nine FCWs there were 4 electricians, 3 laborers, 1

insulator and 1 steam-fitter (see Table 2). There was one African-American interviewee

and eight white-American interviewees. At the time of the interview six women had

achieved journey-level (title for level of skill) status in their trades, two were at entry- level and one was an apprentice (for the insulation trade a journey level worker is referred to as a mechanic) (see Table 2). The average number of years the women worked in the construction industry was 9.8. Three women had been working for 16+ years, three women had been working for almost 10 years, one had been working for 5 years and two had been working for less than 2 years (see Table 2). Five of the women worked as travelers which allowed them to travel and have more autonomy over their work and pay compared to non-travelers who work in the same city, with the same crew

23 while receiving a lower pay in many cases. Six of the women were older than 40 and one older than 50 and three of the women were between 20-35 years of age. Reasons for entering the trade varied for each FCW, however consistent motives were better pay, work autonomy, traveling, working out-doors, and family members in the trade (see

Table 2).

24 Table 2. Background of the Female Construction Workers

I.D. Trade Years of Background Experience Sue Electrician 1 Apprentice-level at time of interview. Most of the men in her family were electricians and so she was familiar with the construction culture. She considered herself a “real friendly person” which caused problems with male co-workers. Betty Electrician 16 Journey-level traveler at time of the interview. She began her career in construction as a pioneer in 1979. She sued the union and contractors so that she could enter the trade. Jane Electrician 10 Journey-level traveler at time of the interview. She entered the trade after she divorced and started dating an electrician. They travel from site to site in their R.V. and work together as a team. She would like her daughter to join the trade, but her son-in-law disapproves. Dee Electrician 5 Recently received her Journey-level title at time of the interview. She has a sister and brother-in-law in the same trade so she was familiar with the construction culture. Mary Laborer 9 Entry-level traveler at time of interview. She began working in the construction industry because she “needed money to take care of her kids” and a friend of hers got her in the trade without any formal training. Her daughter, who received formal training, also works as a laborer on the same site. Anne Laborer 2 Entry-level at time of interview. Did not receive formal training before entering trade. She dated a construction worker and was introduced to the trade. He was her foreman on a site she worked on when she first began. Sally Laborer 20 Journey-level laborer and consultant at time of the interview. She started out as the only female iron- worker in her district in the late 70’s. She had a friend who was an iron-worker and after her divorce decided to enter the trade. Barbara Insulator 16 Mechanic-level traveler at time of the interview. She entered the trade during the Regan administration’s efforts to recruit women into the construction industry. She refers to herself as “an old 60’s radical”. Terri Steam- 9 African-American journey-level traveler at time of the Fitter interview. She mentioned not having any relatives and having to survive alone. * The highlighted sections are the cases discussed at the beginning of the Results/Findings chapter.

25 In terms of fit with the OSI model I illustrate evidence of the OSI model components from each of the transcripts. All 9 transcripts had evidence of at least three stressors from the OSI model (see Table 3). All 9 transcripts also mentioned at least one example of a stressor from Factors Intrinsic to the Job and Organizational Structure and

Climate (see Table 3). 7 out of 9 FCWs mentioned stressors from Laborers Role, 8 mentioned stressors from Career Development and Achievements and 5 mentioned stressors from Relationships with Others (see Table 3). Out of the 9 FCWs, 5 were missing one stressor and 1 was missing two stressors (see Table 3). Even though I was able to find evidence for each example of each factor, not all transcripts provided examples for all 5 sources of stressors (see Table 3).

Below I have provided examples of the type of statements I used as evidence for the existence of work-related stressors found in the OSI model. For Factors Intrinsic to the Job I included examples such as lack of clean bathroom facilities or no facilities, work load, work deadlines and exposure to chemicals. For the Laborers Role stressor I included examples of over-compensating on the job, expected behaviors at work and boring work tasks. For Relationship with Others I included examples such as lack of support from co-workers/foremen and personality clashes. For Career Development and

Achievement I found examples such as the need for better training programs, pay inequalities, lack of responsibilities and lack of respect. Finally, for Organizational

Structure and Climate I included examples such as conflicts between male and female workers, masculine culture of the industry and lack of communication and cohesion between laborers and supervisors. The above examples are just a handful of quotes and statements I wanted to present in this section to provide a clearer picture of the stressors

26 the 9 female construction workers confront while at work. Where important I also

consider the coping methods women developed in response to these stressors.

Table 3. Evidence of the OSI sources of stressors in each transcript Factors Laborers Relationships Career Organizational I.D. Trade Intrinsic Role with Others Development Structure and to the and Climate Job Achievements Sue Electrician X X X X Betty Electrician X X X X X Jane Electrician X X X X Dee Electrician X X X X X Mary Laborer X X X X X Anne Laborer X X X X Sally Laborer X X X Barbie Insulator X X X X Terri Steam-Fitter X X X X

For the remainder of this section I go through the five dimensions of the OSI

model and examine the type of statements that are suggestive of gender-related stressors

while at the same time examining the applicability and fit of the model. Although there

are examples of each of the five sources of stressors in all nine interviews, due to time and space constraints I provide examples for each component of the OSI model from only four of the interviews. Referring to Table 3 will provide a more complete report of the presence of OSI sources of stressors from each interview.

27 Chapter 4.1 Factors Intrinsic to the Job

As noted before, examples of stressors related to Factors Intrinsic to the Job are poor or unsafe working conditions, number and scope of tasks, number and variability of hours worked, monotony of a job, time pressures/deadlines, and implications of mistakes.

Below I have provided a table with examples of Factors Intrinsic to the Job from four different interviews (see Table 4). The statements very clearly fit the descriptions that Cooper et al. provided as well as encompassing what Goldenhar and Sweeney have categorized as the Exposure and Injury concerns. This source of stress can be considered non-gendered and universal especially when looking at an industry that consists of high levels of work load and stress, however further examinations suggest that gender is a critical feature of this stressor.

“Jane” mentioned the implication of making mistakes as a female working in a male work environment. She described that making mistakes as a FCW is perceived as an error due to her gender and not the actual work or experience involved. She stated “…if you do one little thing that might be unsafe then she’s a woman… and then you get a wire screwed up… that was a big doo, doo. Because you’re a woman.” Even though the mistake could have been due to a malfunctioning tool, bad weather, difficult task or the work site itself the blame is put on the female worker and her perceived incompetence.

This becomes a stressful and distracting situation for women when performing a job because they find themselves worrying about making mistakes and having to deal with the situation afterwards. This example unfortunately illustrates that double-standards determine male workers’ responses to mistakes and other errors made on the job by

FCWs.

28 “Dee” discussed a stressor which I found to be a concern for all of the women interviewed. She mentioned the lack of bathroom facilities as a source of stress on the job which is related to poor and unsafe working conditions. Many work sites either do not provide portable latrines or have very unclean ones available. For this FCW not having a clean toilet is a stressful issue and she states “I like to absolutely have a place to wash my hands, place to clean up…Absolutely important. Somewhat stressful if they do not exist.”

This is a gendered-stressor because women do not have the option, as men do, to make use of a corner or woods as a facility. In a many cases women hold their urine and bowel movements and do not use the bathroom when necessary which results in health problems such as bladder and kidney infections (OSHA, 1995). This stressor is a clear example of a masculine work culture in need of both feminizing and improving so that all employees have access to sanitary bathroom facilities.

“Mary” gave an example of the poor and unsafe working conditions found on construction work sites. She mentioned the daily stress she experiences while working with or near chemicals and other hazardous materials. She accepted the fact that she chose to work in a dangerous industry as a laborer, but the hazards and risks have proven to be stressful for her. She recalled an event where “…we had a chemical spill yesterday...It’s very stressful.” Even though this may not seem to be a gendered stressor it actually illustrates a possible difference between MCWs’ and FCWs’ perceptions and exposures of danger. This concern indicates that FCWs as well as MCWs are often working on dangerous sites which may lead to risks of injuries and fatalities as well as stress.

29 “Sally” provided an example of work load related to the number and scope of

tasks. She described her daily responsibilities as a laborer working with contactors and

supervisors saying “I have a tremendous work load on most days. I have about 70

contractors, and Entel (contracting company), and TDC (contracting company) to answer

to.” While in this case she does not refer gender as a contributing factor to her stress we

can not be certain that there is not some gendered element in this stressor. The tough and

macho behavior she takes on can be an indication of a coping strategy she uses to deal with the possibly gendered stressor. While it is true that construction work is intrinsically demanding would all construction workers with her level of responsibility feel the same

amount of stress?

By its very definition this factor at first glance has everything to do with the job and

nothing to do with the gender of the worker. But after a closer analysis it appears that no

aspect can solely be related to factors intrinsic to the job and that being a woman does

change the dynamics. Pulling the gender element out of the formula creates a difficult

and problematic approach since gender is an integral part of a person’s identity.

Table 4. Examples of Factors Intrinsic to the Job I.D. Trade Factors Intrinsic to the Job

Jane Electrician “And if you do one little thing that might be unsafe then she’s a woman. She do not [doesn’t] have sense enough to know what she’s doing out here.” Dee Electrician “I like to absolutely have a place to wash my hands, place to clean up, clean lunch areas. Absolutely important. Somewhat stressful if they do not exist.” Mary Laborer “We know we have to work here, but it’s, because this is our job, but it’s, we had a chemical spill yesterday… It’s very stressful.” Sally Laborer “I have a tremendous work load on most days. I have about 70 contractors, and Entel, and TDC to answer to.”

30 Chapter 4.2 Laborers Role

As previously stated, examples of stressors related to Laborers Role are role ambiguity (understanding work objectives, co-workers expectations of one-self, and scope of responsibility) and role conflict (conflicting job demands, unhappy with tasks).

For this source of stress I found statements which I considered to be clear examples of role ambiguity and role conflict as described by Cooper et al. while at the same time including examples of the psychosocial stressors as found in Goldenhar and Sweeney’s gender-related category. Some of these examples can be seen in Table 5. If we examine these statements in more detail, as I did with Factors Intrinsic to the Job, it appears that while all the women did not key in on the gender aspects of the stressful situations gender still seems to be ever present. I saw Role as having an inherent possibility to be gendered and with the examples I used to illustrate the presence of this stressor in the women’s interviews the role of gender as a factor becomes much more obvious.

“Betty” discussed feeling “shut off” from the trade and culture of construction work every time she is given a task which does not require much “responsibility, experience and skill”. She mentioned that as a woman she finds herself doing the type of work that the men would not tolerate doing. She expresses her frustration with the type of responsibility she is given and therefore finds herself in a conflicting role. She also mentioned quitting work crews because of gender and pay discrimination. This behavior can be interpreted as a coping strategy to the inequity she faced on the job. This example demonstrates that discrimination as well as the lack of skilled work opportunity for

FCWs results in stress, most likely related to her gender.

31 “Jane” mentioned the ubiquitous stressor of proving oneself to others in order to

be accepted and respected. Even though her situation is unique because she and her

husband both work as traveling electricians together, she still mentioned the need to

prove herself. She stated that “Every job you go on you have to prove yourself to your

foreman. Because you walk in and they look at you like, “Oh, great, here I have a

husband and wife.” This scenario can be quite stressful and dangerous when a FCW finds

herself doing work competitively and in some cases unsafely so that stereotypes do not

come about affecting her image as a capable construction worker.

“Anne” made the interesting statement that as long as she works like one of the

guys, she is treated like one of them. She discussed the fact that if she expects the same

pay, responsibilities and respect as her male co-workers, then she has to do the same

work as well as being a part of the masculine culture. She stated that her male co-workers

treat her “just like one of the guys”. She did not mention being uncomfortable with her relationships with male co-workers but this could be because she has internalized some kind of male character as another way to cope with the gendered stress.

“Terri” also discussed the expectations others have of her because of her gender as a stressor. She mentioned the draining efforts of proving herself as a journey person and over-compensating every time she works with new MCWs who have negative preconceptions of FCWs. She stated “I mean it’s exhausting. Every job I go on I have to prove myself. If I was a man walking in to a job and I have the title journeyman, they would assume that I had certain skills. Whereas I have to prove that I know, I have to prove that I can do, and then they’ll go, well, she’s pretty good. Yea, she’s a woman, but

32 she’s pretty good.” This competitive gendered stressor adds to the already dangerous

working environment of the construction industry.

The examples I provided for Laborers Role indicate that the female construction

workers find themselves overcompensating and overworking so that they fit the Role of a traditional construction worker, as perceived by the male construction work culture. The

“role playing” does not allow the women to behave as female construction workers nor fully concentrate on their work; they have to act like men or constantly worry about impressing their male co-workers. While some of the examples found in Table 5 are more gendered than others, it is evident that for female construction workers the role of gender can not be removed from this component of the OSI model.

Table 5. Examples of Laborers Role I.D. Trade Laborers Role Betty Electrician “They do not see woman as being productive or innovative in what they call, I think, traditionally men’s tasks. They will shut you off. And the kind of work that they think is woman’s work in the trades. Something repetitive, something boring, something that a man just wouldn’t tolerate. And I can’t stand it.” Jane Electrician “Every job you go on you have to prove yourself to your foreman. Because you walk in and they look at you like, ‘Oh, great, here I have a husband and wife’.” Anne Laborer “They treat me just like one of the guys…because if I’m getting the same pay I better do the same work.” Terri Steam-Fitter “I mean it’s exhausting. Every job I go on I have to prove myself. If I was a man walking in to a job and I have the title journeyman, they would assume that I had certain skills. Whereas I have to prove that I know, I have to prove that I can do, and then they’ll go, well, she’s pretty good. Yea, she’s a woman, but she’s pretty good.”

33 Chapter 4.3 Relationships with Others

As stated before, examples of stressors related to Relationships with Others include workers’ interactions in the work setting (lack of support from co-workers, lack of encouragement from superiors, dealing with ambiguous/delicate situations, and personality clashes). By looking at Table 6 it is evident that the examples I chose both fit the descriptions of Relationships with Others as provided by Cooper et al. and incorporate the gender-related issues discussed in Goldenhar and Sweeney’s findings. It is also evident from the examples I provided that this source of stress is inherently gendered.

“Sue” mentioned a situation where a male co-worker interrupted her as she was working on some pipes instead of offering her help and support with the task. The lack of support along with the clashing personality of the MCW not only was a direct disrespect to her status as a FCW and colleague but it also suggests one of the ways that MCWs undermine their female co-workers. She stated that the co-worker worker “comes up and he just takes over and he just bends it himself, and I was like, ‘Well, excuse me.’ And that really bothered me. I do not know if that was a woman thing or not or if it was just his attitude.” This type of behavior makes it difficult for men and women to have friendly relations on the job as well as creating a stressful working environment for FCWs.

“Betty” mentioned the lack of a support system as a source of occupational stressor. She discussed the difficulty of not having a support system similar to that available to MCWs. According to “Betty”, the social and professional networks available to the MCWs allow them to have a sense of job and financial security. She stated that

“It’s a social network. Most of us do not have that kind of social networking availability

34 to us.” This example suggests that many women in these trades may not have the

available networks to help alleviate the social and economic stressors which come along with the job.

“Dee” mentioned the character clashes she encounters with male co-workers who

do not want to work with FCWs. She discussed the stressful and sometimes aggressive

situations where MCWs who do not think that women can do the work or either do not

want the women working as construction workers. She stated that “You’re still going to

have fellows who do not want you there, do not think you should be there, do not think

you can do the work, aren’t willing to give you a shot at it. They’ve made up their minds

that’s the way it is.” This illustrates not only character clashes between the male and

female workers, but also the lack of support and hostility FCWs face on the job.

“Barbara” recalled very disturbing events she experienced because of her gender

(see Table 6). Being the only female on her crew she received much hostility from male

co-workers who did not accept nor respect her decision to be a FCW. She stated “being

pushed off tanks, thrown off boilers, given faulty equipment” all to drive her away from

construction work (see Table 6). Despite her horrific and stressful struggles “Barbara” continued to work in the trade as a pioneer.

This source of stress is a good example of the lacking encouragement and support available to female construction workers from both co-workers and supervisors. It

appears that this masculine work culture is a difficult environment for women to forge

inter-personal cross gendered relationships. Relationships with Others establishes the

quality of the work environment and when women feel unwelcome and unsafe it is easy

35 to see that without support the hostile relations and environment can take a toll on their mental/physical health.

Table 6. Examples of Relationships with Others I.D. Trade Relationships with Others Sue Electrician “He comes up and he just takes over and he just bends it himself. And I was like, ‘Well, excuse me.’ And that really bothered me. I do not know if that was a woman thing or not. Or if it was just his attitude.” Betty Electrician “It’s a social network. Most of us do not have that kind of social networking availability [available] to us.” Dee Electrician “You’re still going to have fellows who do not want you there. Do not think you should be there. Do not think you can do the work. Aren’t [are not] willing to give you a shot at it. They’ve made up their minds that’s the way it is.” Barbara Insulator “I get pushed off of tanks. I’ve been thrown off of boilers. I’ve been given faulty equipment. I’ve been electrocuted twice. I was given wrong respiration. I’ve got a brick of asbestos in me. I’ve got a cold for over 3 weeks. I still cough it up.”

Chapter 4.4 Career Development and Achievement

As mentioned before, examples of stressors related to Career Development and

Achievements are lower rates of pay, restricted flexibility and independence, lack of responsibility, discrimination and prejudice, barriers to progression, and inadequate training and experience. As illustrated in Table 7 the statements clearly fit the descriptions of Career Development and Achievements that Cooper et al. provided as well as including what Goldenhar and Sweeney have categorized as lack of sufficient workplace training and education and gender-related issues. Since many types of people in various occupations can experience this type of stressor it can be considered non- gendered, however in this example the stressors are gender-related as evident from Table

7.

36 “Mary” mentioned her experience with her male foreman as disagreeable because

of his lack of respect for women. She described discrimination as well as the lack of training she received because her supervisors did not like having a woman work for them.

She stated “He didn’t have a whole lot of respect for women so it was…we did have some problems.” This statement is a clear example of a gender-related stressor and it

demonstrates the effects of her conflicting relationships with supervisors on the learning of new skills and working productively.

“Anne” discussed her conflict with performing tasks that would be considered

acceptable by her supervisors because she does not receive proper training. She states

“Most of us are trained pretty good [well], we know what we’re doing, but the way

someone else want [s] it is different” and the foreman will say ‘Well, you know how to do

it’ without teaching or explaining to her his expectations.” This example suggests that at

times male co-workers and supervisors may not accept women as a part of their crew and

therefore they do not need to take the time to explain or teach them the proper and safety

way to perform tasks. This is an example of gender subjugation resulting in a gendered-

stressor and possible hazards.

“Sally”, who previously mentioned the heavy work load as a source of occupational

stress also brought up an interesting point regarding the lack of available training and

educational classes for women. She mentioned the overemphasis on classes focusing on

men’s behavior (i.e. sexual harassment) but no classes promoting women’s advancement.

She states “I would like to see instead of just having classes come in on sexual harassment,

I would like to see a few classes for women. Trying to kind of desensitize [the women].”

This is a good example illustrating the lack of classes designed for women’s needs in terms

37 of skills training. But it also suggests that some of these women would rather learn to

become desensitized to the sexist and discriminatory behavior as opposed to classes that are

positively oriented towards gender sensitivity.

“Barbara” discussed her problems with receiving equal pay and respect from her

co-workers and supervisors. She states “I have not been able to get that extra buck or that

ounce of respect or that, you know, just, you know, here’s another mechanic, let’s go to

work.” Her comment indicates although she takes her work seriously and just wants to get the job done she finds herself assuming a role as part of coping with the gendered-stress and discrimination. She suggests that she has not received the same pay or respect as her male co-workers even though she has acquired the same level of skill. This statement is a

clear example of how gender shapes a construction worker’s career achievements and development.

Even though this stressor can be non-gendered in some industries the examples provided here suggest that they are very strongly linked to gender and unfortunately affect the ability of a female construction worker to advance in her career.

Table 7. Examples of Career Development and Achievements I.D. Trade Career Development and Achievements Mary Laborer “He didn’t have a whole lot of respect for women so it was…we did have some problems.” Anne Laborer “Most of us are trained pretty good [well], we know what we’re doing, but the way someone else want it is different” and the foreman will say ‘Well, you know how to do it’ without teaching or explaining to her his expectations.” Sally Laborer “I would like to see instead of just having classes come in on sexual harassment, I would like to see a few classes for women. Trying to kind of desensitize [the women]” Barbara Insulator “I have not been able to get that extra buck or that ounce of respect or that, you know, just, you know, here’s another mechanic, let’s go to work.”

38 Chapter 4.5 Organizational Structure and Climate

As stated before, examples of stressors related to Organizational Structure and

Climate include behaviors which inhibit participation in decision making, create a sense

of isolation and insignificance, and have poor communication. Others sources of stressors

related to organizational climate or work culture include accepted standards, values and

codes of conduct and behavior, and conflicts and confrontations promoting a masculine

work culture. The statements which exemplify this component of the OSI clearly fits the

descriptions provided by Cooper et al. They also represent what Goldenhar and Sweeney

discussed as psychosocial stressors which they categorized under gender-related issues.

Unlike Goldenhar and Sweeney I am arguing that in fact all the stressors have a gendered

element which can not be separated.

“Sue” mentioned the character clashes she has with male co-workers. She stated that the men say “You’re just too nice, too friendly.” She responds “You have to have this attitude all the time. And it’s really awful. It’s too bad it has to be that way.” This

statement illustrates that a worker’s attitude and behavior are considered acceptable only

when it is “macho”. Her “friendly” behavior was not welcomed by male co-workers who

have set the codes of conduct and behavior promoting a cold unfriendly masculine work

culture.

“Betty” had a similar statement as “Sue” regarding conduct and behavior in the

construction work place. She states “Men have made the rules of behavior, as well as

what will be tolerated as far as health and safety goes.” Her statement raises two concerns

1) maintaining a macho image and work culture possibly jeopardizes a worker’s health

and safety on the job and 2) women have potentially submitted to this accepted standard

39 which essentially becomes a gendered-stressor. It seems that the women’s perceptions of

proper safety procedures as well as interpersonal behaviors are ignored. It is also possible

that “Betty” has internalized the masculine role as a coping method to deal with the

gendered stress.

“Jane” mentioned the daily exposure to sexist language and cursing while on the

work site and her disapproval of the behavior. She states “Swearing… and then talking

about girly magazines or that sort of thing” is frustrating. She said that if she asks the

men to stop their behavior they will but that they will also “shun” her for spoiling their fun. The shunning behavior suggests that the male workers either do not acknowledge her presence among them or they expect her to conform to the work culture that has existed before women started entering these trades. This behavior represents not only sexual harassment, but also the uncivil nature of the work culture.

“Terri” mentioned a concern along the same lines as the other women in this

section: the inherent masculine work culture of the construction industry. She states “If I do not want to work in the trade again then I can [I do not have to]. There’s all sorts of avenues, but this is a brotherhood and there are certain things you have to do within.” It seems that although she is aware that she has other work options she has accepted the

“brotherhood” of this work culture and has, like previously mentioned FCWs, internalized a kind of masculine role as a coping method.

For women in construction workforce, Organizational Structure and Climate

stressors are an inherently gendered stressor regardless of the industry or occupation. I can deduce from the examples in Table 8 that Organizational Structure and Climate really seems to capture the idea of what we consider dimensions of a male work culture

40 such as the rules of behavior, the interpersonal attitude at work, sexist topics of

conversation, and the sense of “brotherhood.” The examples also suggest that women may be internalizing masculine roles as a coping method to the gendered-stressors which are part of structure and climate of this industry

Table 8. Examples of Organizational Structure and Climate I.D. Trade Organizational Structure and Climate Sue Electrician “You’re just too nice, too friendly. You have to have this attitude all the time. And it’s really awful. It’s too bad it has to be that way.” Betty Electrician “Men have made the rules of behavior, as well as, what will be tolerated as far as health and safety goes.” Jane Electrician “Swearing… and then talking about girly magazines or that sort of thing” Terri Steam-Fitter “If I do not want to work in the trade again then I can, there’s [there are] all sorts of avenues, but this is a brotherhood and there are certain things you have to do within.”

Chapter 5. Discussion

For this research I set out to explore the relation between what conventionally

have been conceptualized as distinct forms of occupational stressors among women in

traditionally male occupations. In particular I explored whether gender-related stressors

can be distinguished from non-gender related stressors for women working in these

industries.

Relatively little research has been conducted on this topic in the U.S. and the relatively limited number of studies that have looked at this directly have either found limited differences in gender-related stressors or have like Goldenhar and Sweeney, distinguished a priori between gender-related stressors and non-gender related stressors.

For example, Goldenhar and Sweeney categorized lack of education and training and

41 physical injuries as separate from the gender-related issues. I suggest that the lack of training and education is directly related to the fact that some male construction workers do not want to spend the time to train women because they do not accept them as part of the work crew. The problem is not so much that there are not enough educational courses so much as there are not enough classes focusing on women’s issues and concerns. I also suggest that the injuries related to lifting, bending, and twisting are a result of insufficient work clothing and safety gear available for women’s body types as well as the lack of proper training, as previously mentioned, that is essential for learning how to perform tasks safely and properly.

Since the majority of the literature and studies I found suggested that women, in

varying occupational circumstances, do not experience much gender related stress, I

chose to use the widely accepted OSI model to guide an examination of the gender-

related stressors found in the interviews Goldenhar collected. When I analyzed the

interviews of the female construction workers I noticed some discrepancies with

Loosemore and Waters findings which suggested that gender discrimination was not a

significant factor of stress for female construction managerial workers. In the interviews

examined here “Sally” described antagonistic behaviors by male co-workers who

purposely gave her faulty respirators and threw her off a tank because they wanted to get

rid of her. The “brotherhood” of the construction workers apparently did not like the idea

of a woman joining their culture and therefore created an unwelcoming work

environment. “Terri” like many other women pointed out the stressors involved with

proving herself and overcompensating so that she would be accepted by the male co-

workers. The “rite of passage” new workers undergo is a part any work culture, but the

42 fact that women experience these pressures for the majority of their careers indicates that

maybe the construction work culture is more demanding of women’s work skills than of men’s. Many of the female construction workers insinuated at “coping mechanisms” as a response strategy to the sexist and discriminatory work environment. These coping strategies not only take away from FCWs’ focus and concentration on their tasks, but it also illustrates the masculine work cultures resistance to change. The stressors and discriminations these women experienced suggest that gendered stressors exist and that the construction work environment may not be a favorable occupation for women.

There is growing research literature connecting occupational stress and

occupational injury in industries such as agriculture, oil platform and nursing. A study by

the NIOSH Iowa Farm Family Health and Hazard Survey and the Iowa Farm and Rural

Life Poll looked at the role of stress as a risk factor for agricultural injuries of farmers in

Iowa (Thu, Lasley, Whitten, Lewis, Donham, Zwerling and Scarth, 1997). The study

found that certain dimensions of stress are strongly associated with agricultural injuries.

A study by Chen, Huang, Yu, Lin, Ling, and Tang (2002) looking at occupational stress

and other socio-psychological factors and work-related injuries among off-shore oil

platform workers found that perceived stress related to management problems and

relationships with other were significantly related to work-place injuries in the previous

year. A study looking at nursing professionals found that work-related injuries as well as

withdrawal behaviors e.g. turnover and absenteeism are a significant problem in terms of

occupational stress and occupational injury due to the high stress and responsibility

associated with this job (Hemingway and Smith, 1999). It seems that if a positive

43 relationship exists between occupational stress and occupational injury then the addition

of gendered stressors would only add to the injuries workers face on the job.

I chose to use Cooper, Sloan and Williams’ OSI model for a number of reasons.

C.L. Cooper’s psychometric tools are widely recognized and utilized by researchers

internationally. The OSI model appealed to me because it incorporates the home and work components of stress. Working women face a number of dilemmas when they leave their home and family responsibilities to work in a traditionally and historically male

industry. In some cases they are accused of abandoning their socially constructed

domestic duties when in reality they need to support themselves and their family and

working as a construction laborer provides them with the opportunity to make a decent

living. My analysis suggests that it is difficult to separate the gendered psychosocial

dimensions of stress from the male dominated occupations. Moreover, it suggests that

gender is embedded in all the dimensions of occupational stress wherever women work in

traditionally male occupations and that the construction work culture must feminize to a

certain extent. The availability of gender sensitivity training, equal pay and job status,

properly fitting safety clothing and equipment as well adjustments to interpersonal

interactions must occur to improve the safety and health of all workers in this industry.

This study is challenged with a few limitations. First, the small sample size (n=9)

does not provide a sufficient representation of the working woman’s gendered

experiences in male cultured work places. Another limitation is that the interviews I

analyzed were collected for a slightly different research purpose. Even though the

interviewer did not ask the women specific questions on gendered stressors I was still

able to underline gender as a key dimension of the stressors, and this indicates that gender

44 and stress are inseparable when looking at female workers in traditionally male

occupations. A third limitation is the application of Cooper, Sloan and Williams’s

psychometrically supported OSI model to a secondary qualitative data set. This

conceptual approach may not have been the best test of a standardized instrument such as

the OSI model.

For this research I have argued that gendered stressors can not be extracted from

the general stress associated with certain occupations. I have also suggested that gendered

stressors are more apparent in some occupational sources of stressors than others. While

this research can not definitively say that women in traditionally male bastioned

occupations are at a higher risk for injuries due to gender-related stressors there is good

reason to believe both from previous research and the evidence provided in this paper that women are experiencing an excess of stressors affecting their work performance and potentially heightening their risk for injury. If in fact these gendered psychosocial stressors are causing additional occupational stressors for workers then future research should be able to find that women who are experiencing greater rates of injuries and illnesses are also experiencing greater levels of gendered stress.

45 References

Agapiou, A. “Perceptions of Gender Roles and Attitudes Toward Work Among Male and Female Operatives in the Scottish Construction Industry.” Construction Management and Economics, 20: 697-705, 2002

Applebaum, H.A., Royal Blue: The Culture of Construction Work. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1981

Bagilhole, B., Dainty, A.R.J., and Neale, R.H. “Women in Construction; a view of contemporary initiatives in the United Kingdom, and a proposal for international collaborative research.” Presented at the Gender and Science and Technology Conference, Ahmedabad, India, January, 1996

Barthorpe, S., Duncan, R., and Miller, C. “The Pluralistic Facets of Culture and its Impact on Construction.” Property Management, 18(5): 335-351, 2000

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1999a). Issues in Labor Statistics. Retrieved January 5, 2008, from: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/pdf/opbils35.pdf

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1999b). Occupational Stress: Counts and Rates. Retrieved February 23, 2008, from: http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/archive/fall1999brief4.pdf

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006). National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in 2006. Retrieved February 11, 2008, from: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf

Chen, W., Huang, Z., Yu, D., Lin, Y., Ling, Z., and Tang, J. “An Exploratory Study on Occupational Stress and Work-Related Unintentional Injury in Off-Shore Oil Production” Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi, 23(6): 441-444, 2002.

Cooper, C.L. Handbook of Stress, medicine and health. CRC Press, 1996

Cooper, C.L., Sloan, S. and Williams, P. Occupational Stress Indicator Management Guide, NFER- Nelson, Windsor, UK, 1988

Dainty, A.R.J. and Lingard, H., “Indirect Discrimination in Construction Organizations and the Impact on Women’s Careers.” Journal of Management in Engineering, 22(3): 108-118, 2006

Dainty, A.R.J., Bagilhole, B.M., and Neale, R.H. “Male and Female Perspectives on Equality Measures for the UK Construction Sector.” Women in Management Review, 16(6): 297-304, 2001

Dainty, A.R.J., Bagilhole, B.M., and Neale, R.H. “A Grounded Theory of Women’s Career Underachievement in Large UK Construction Companies.” Construction Management and Economics, 18(2): 239-250, 2000

46 Djebarni, R. “The Impact of Stress in Site Management Effectiveness.” Construction Management Economics, 14(2): 281-293, 1996

Fink, G. “Stress, Definitions and Concepts of.” Encyclopedia of Stress, Academic, New York, 2000

Gale, A.W., “The Construction Industry’s Male Culture Must Feminize if Conflict is to be Reduced: The Role of Education as Gatekeeper to a Male Construction Industry.” Construction Conflict Management and Resolution, Fenn, P. and Gameson, R. University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology: 416-427, 1992

Goldberger, L. and Breznitz, S., Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. The Free Press, 1993

Goldenhar, L.M., Swanson, N.G., Hurell Jr., J.J., Ruder, A., and Deddens, J., “Stressors and Adverse Outcomes for Female Construction Workers.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3(1): 19-32, 1998

Goldenhar, L.M., Hurrell, J.J., Swanson, N., Ruder, A., and Deddens, J. Effects of On- the-Job Harassment: Outcomes for Women Construction Workers. Preliminary Survey Findings. Presented at APA-CDC Conference on Women's Health, Washington DC, September, 1996.

Goldenhar, L.M. and Sweeney, M.H. "Tradeswomen's Perspectives on Occupational Health and Safety: A Qualitative Investigation." American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 29(5): 516-520, 1996.

Hemingway, M.A. and Smith, C.S. “Organizational Climate and Occupational Stressors as Predictors of Withdrawal Behaviors and Injuries in Nurses.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72(3): 285-299, 1999

Iacuone, D., “Real Men Are Tough Guys: Hegemonic Masculinity and Safety in the Construction Industry.” The Journal of Men’s Studies, 13(2): 247-266, 2005

Itzin, C. and Newman, J. Gender, Culture, and Organizational Change: Putting theory into practice. Routledge, 35-49, 1995

Kanter, R.M. “Token Women in the Corporation.” Sociology: Windows on Society, 186- 294, 1990

Latour, J. “Live! From New York: Women Construction Workers in Their Own Words.” Labor History, 42(2): 179-189, 2001

Lazarus, R.S. Patterns of Adjustment. McGraw-Hill, 1976

47 LeBreton, L.W. and Loevy, S.S. Breaking New Ground: Worksite 2000. Chicago Women in Trades, Chicago, 1996.

Lim, V., and Teo, T. “Gender Differences in Occupational Stress and Coping Strategies among IT Personnel.” Women Management Review. 11(1): 20-28, 1996

Lingard, H. and Francis, V. “The Work-life Experiences of Office and Site-Based Employees in the Australian Construction Industry.” Construction Management Economics, 22(9): 991-1002, 2004

Loosemore, M. and Waters, T. “Gender Differences in Occupational Stress Among Professionals in the Construction Industry.” Journal of Management in Engineering, 20(3): 126-132, 2004

Maharaj, A. and Edigheji, S. “Women in Construction: Breaking Ground.” Agenda, 42, 1999

Marshall, N.L. “Women in the Trades: Final Report of a Survey of Massachusetts Tradeswomen.” Working Paper #195, Wellesley College, Center for Research on Women, 1989

Meyer, S.W. and Pegula, S.M. “Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities in Construction, 2004.” Retrieved February 2, 2008, from: http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/sh20060519ar01p1.htm.

McDonald, L.M., and Korabik, K. “Sources of Stress and Ways of Coping Among Male and Female Managers.” Handbook on Job Stress, Select, New York, 185-199, 1991

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.(2008). Stress at Work. Retrieved February 9, 2008, from: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/stress/.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.(2004). NIOSH Program Portfolio. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/programs/const/risks.html.

Nelson, D.L. and Burke, R.J. “Women Executives: Health, Stress and Success.” Academy of Management Executives, 14: 107-121, 2000

Nelson, D.L., Quick, J.C., and Hitt, M.A. “What Stresses HR Professionals?” Personnel, 36-39, 1990

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), ACCSH “Women in the Construction Workforce: Providing Equitable Safety and Health Protections.” A Final Report for Health and Safety of Women in Construction, 1995

Price, V., “Race, Affirmative Action, And Women’s Employment in US Highway Construction.” Feminists Economics, 8(2): 87-113, 2002

48 Pringle, R. and Winning, A. “Building Strategies: Equal Opportunity in the Construction Industry.” Gender, Work and Organization, 5(4): 220-229, 1998

Pyke, J. “Women in Building- The Missing 51%: A Report on Employer Practices and Attitudes Towards Women in the Building Industry.” Canberra: AGPS

Sommerville, J., Kennedy, P., and Orr, L. “Women in the U.K. Construction Industry.” Construction Management Economics, 11(3): 285-291, 1993

The American Institute of Stress. “Reminiscences of Hans Selye, and the Birth of Stress.” Retrieved March 5, 2008, from: http://www.stress.org/hans.htm.

Thu, K., Lasley, P., Whitten, P., Lewis, M., Donham, K.J., Zwerling, C., and Scarth, R. “Stress as a Risk Factor for Agricultural Injuries: Comparative Data from the Iowa Farm Family Health and Hazard Survey (1994) and the Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll. Journal of Agromedicine, 4(3/4): 181-191, 1989

Veysey, S. “Study Names Stress Biggest Concern in UK Workplaces.” Business Insurance, 12(11): 22-25, 2000

Welch, L.S., Goldenhar, L.M., and Hunting, K.L. “Women in Construction: Occupational Health and Working Conditions.” Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association, 55(2): 89-92, 2000

Williams, C. “Gender Differences at Work: Women and Men in Non-Traditional Occupations.” Berkeley, University of California Press, 1988

Young, K.M. and Cooper, C.L. “Occupational Stress in the Ambulance Service: A Diagnostic Study.” Journal Of Management Psychology, 10(3): 29-36, 1995

49