JOB INSECURTY AND MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES

JOB INSECURTY AND MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES: AN ANALYSIS USING WAVES 1 AND 2 OF HILDA Marc L. Adam and Paul Flatau Department of Economics Murdoch University Summary • What is the impact of job insecurity on mental health outcomes? • HILDA Waves 1 and 2 utilised to examine this issue • Two self-assessed measures of job insecurity available in HILDA – „I have a secure future in my job‟ [Base variable] • 1 to 7 scale – „Per cent chance of losing job in the next 12 months‟ [Alternative variable] • Mental Health and Well-being – SF-36 (mental health, general health perceptions, physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, and role limitations due to emotional problems) • Use two mental health constructs from the SF-36 Summary • Key results – Those with higher self-assessed job security (using the base measure) report significantly better mental health outcomes than those with poorer job security. Evidence not so strong for the alternative measure. • This result continues to apply controlling for other determining factors. – Decreases in self-assessed job security result in a significant deterioration in mental health outcomes. Background • Flatau, Galea and Petridis (2000): 1995 Health Survey and the 1997 Mental Health Survey. – What is the relationship between unemployment and mental health outcomes? • Mental Health scale of the SF-36 used in the 1995 NHS • Mental health conditions depression and nerves, nervousness, tension used in the 1997 MHS • Both analyses showed significantly lower mental health outcomes for the unemployed relative to the employed. Background • Sverke, Hellgren and Naswall (2002) divide the consequences of job insecurity into four main categories: – Job attitudes; organisational attitudes; health; and work related behaviour. Significant and negative correlations were found between job insecurity and each of the above four categories, with the strongest reported relationship being found in respect to job and organisational attitudes. Background • In terms of job and organisational attitudes perceptions of job insecurity among employees lead to: – Higher levels of job dissatisfaction (Ashford, Lee and Bobko, 1989; Davy, Kinicki and Sheck, 1991); – A reduction in organisational trust (Ashford, Lee and Bobko, 1989); – An increase in non-cooperative behaviour at work (Lim, 1996) – Lower safety motivation and compliance (Probst and Brubaker, 2001). Background • In terms of direct mental health outcomes, increased job insecurity results in: – An increase in negative physical health outcomes (Burchell, 1994; Heaney, Israel and House, 1994; Dooley, Rook and Catalano, 1987; Kuhnert, Sims and Lahey, 1989; Roskies and Louis-Guerin, 1990); – Higher reports of psychological distress (Burchell, 1994; Bussing, 1999; De Witte, 1999; Hellgren, Sverke, Isaksson, 1999; Lim, 1996; Dekker and Schaufeli, 1995; Probst, 2000) – Greater feelings of mental, emotional and physical exhaustion (Dekker and Schaufeli, 1995; Kinnunen et al., 1999) – Only a limited number of longitudinal studies showing a causal relationship between job insecurity and work and health related variables (Burchell, 1994; Dekker and Schaufeli, 1995; Hellgren and Sverke, 2003). Measures of Mental Health • The SF–36 is a widely used self-completion measure of general health status and has proven test-retest reliability and sound psychometric qualities (Ware and Gandek, 1998). • The SF–36 measure eight domains of health: mental health, general health perceptions, physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, and role limitations due to emotional problems. Measures of Mental Health • SF–36 mental health score - scale of 0 to 100. Lower scores on the mental health score represent greater mental impairment. • Factor analysis of correlations among the eight SF–36 scores have consistently identified two factors interpreted as “physical” and “mental” dimensions of health status (Ware, Kosinski and Keller 1994). – The mental health dimension is referred to as the Mental Component Summary scale (MCS). The MCS is a psychometrically-based combination of all eight summary scales, but most heavily weighted on the mental health, role-emotional, and social functioning scales. – The summary score is also a widely used measure of mental health. The MCS scale is standardised to have a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10. – Sanderson and Andrews (2002) define „moderate poor mental health‟ as a MCS score of less than 40 while „severe poor mental health‟ is taken as a score less than 30. Measures of Job Security • Two job security variables from the HILDA survey – „I have a secure future in my job‟. Base case variable. • The (base) variable uses a scale of 1 to 7 – „Per cent chance of losing job in the next 12 months‟. Alternative measure. • The (alternative) variable is measured from 1 to 100. • The (alternative) variable may be restrictive in the sense that it refers to a specific time period (one year) and may be difficult to interpret by respondents. – Some employees may have contracts organised of over one year, but the sense of insecurity can still be high. – An advantage of the short time approach may be that it captures an immediate sense of insecurity among workers facing job loss. Mean Mental Health by Job Security (Base) (MCS: 0-10) 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 'I have a secure a secure future in my job' Mean Mental Health by Job Security (Alternative) (MCS: 0-10) 4 .3 4 .2 M ean M CS 4 .1 4 .0 3 .9 3 .8 .0 0 1 .0 0 2 .0 0 3 .0 0 4 .0 0 5 .0 0 6 .0 0 7 .0 0 8 .0 0 9 .0 0 1 0 .0 0 ' L ik e lih o o d o f lo s in g jo b in n e xt 1 2 m o n t h s ' Change in Mean Mental Health by Change in Job Security (Base) Two Waves of HILDA 1.2 1.0 .8 .6 .4 .2 0.0 -.2 -.4 -6.00 -5.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 .00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Change in 'I have a secure future in my job' Change in Mean Mental Health by Change in Job Security (Alternative) Two Waves of HILDA .6 .4 .2 0.0 -.2 -.4 -.6 -.8 -10.00 -8.00 -6.00 -4.00 -2.00 .00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 Change in 'Per cent chance of losing job in next 12 months' Cross-section Results (OLS, Wave 1- Dependent Variable MCS) Unstand. B Stand. B Constant Job Security Married Age Child 0 to 4 Smoke Long-Term Health Condition Male Wealth Alcohol Underemployed (1-9) Underemployed (10-19) Underemployed (20-29) Underemployed (30+) Overemployed (1-9) Overemployed (10-19) Overemployed (20-29) Overemployed (30+) R-squared R-squared adjusted 49.869 0.674 1.549 0.367 -5.104 -0.459 -2.788 1.291 1.117E-06 -0.936 -0.740 -0.773 -1.184 -1.822 -1.062 -1.961 -2.015 -1.527 0.106 0.099 0.148 0.094 0.058 -0.054 -0.072 -0.114 0.078 0.073 -0.051 -0.022 -0.021 -0.016 -0.016 -0.039 -0.082 -0.054 -0.026 Sig. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.132 0.136 0.248 0.247 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.062 Cross-section Results (OLS, Wave 2- Dependent Variable MCS) Unstand. B Constant Job Security Married Age Child 0 to 4 Smoke Long-Term Health Condition Male Wealth Alcohol Event Separated Event Injured Event Victim of Violence Underemployed (1-9) Underemployed (10-19) Underemployed (20-29) Underemployed (30+) Overemployed (1-9) Overemployed (10-19) Overemployed (20-29) Overemployed (30+) R-squared R-squared adjusted 50.700 0.830 0.514 0.452 -2.140 -0.271 -1.728 1.394 0.000 -0.024 -3.935 -1.398 -3.931 -0.614 -0.551 -1.323 -2.270 -2.239 -1.965 -2.050 -1.636 0.143 0.136 Stand. B 0.178 0.032 0.072 -0.024 -0.042 -0.068 0.086 0.041 -0.005 -0.099 -0.041 -0.060 -0.018 -0.015 -0.020 -0.017 -0.081 -0.085 -0.058 -0.038 Sig. 0.000 0.000 0.041 0.000 0.091 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.734 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.217 0.300 0.154 0.214 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 Differenced Regression (Wave 1 to Wave 2) Unstand. B Constant Change to Job Security Job Loss Change to Physical Function Transition: Unemployment to Employment Transition: Employment to Not in Labour Force 22.963 0.995 2.652 0.062 -0.334 1.529 Stand. B 4.371 0.120 0.094 -4.357 0.094 Sig. 0.000 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.000 0.254 • Job security effects remain strong • Job loss and unemployment to employment effects perverse Conclusion • The overall conclusion from our analysis is that those with higher levels of job insecurity have poorer mental health outcomes • An increase in job insecurity leads to a significant reduction in mental health outcomes • Job gain and job loss effects appear perverse