| Literature DB >> 32331457 |
Samuel Yaw Lissah1,2, Martin Amogre Ayanore3, John Krugu4, Robert A C Ruiter1.
Abstract
Domestic waste collectors play key roles in the collection and disposal of solid waste in Ghana. The work environment and conditions under which domestic waste collectors operate influence their job satisfaction ratings and health outcomes. This study investigated psychosocial risk factors, work-related stress and job satisfaction needs among municipal solid waste collectors in the Ho Municipality of Ghana. A phenomenological design was applied to collect data among 64 domestic waste collectors, 12 managers, and 23 supervisors of two waste companies in Ho Municipality, Ghana. Data were collected from June-August 2018 using in-depth interview and focus group discussion guides. Interviews were supplemented by field observations. Data were analyzed using inductive and deductive content procedures to form themes based on the study aim. Four themes emerged from the study. The study results revealed that domestic waste collector's poor attitudes and safety behaviors such as not wearing personal protective equipment, poor enforcement of safety standards by supervisors and managers, and work-related stress caused by poor working environments impact negatively on domestic waste collector's health and safety. Other factors such as poor enforcement of standard company regulations, poor work relations, non-clear work roles, lack of social protection to meet medical needs, poor remuneration, negative community perceptions of domestic waste collectors job, work environments, and workloads of domestic waste collectors were reported to negatively impact on work stress and job satisfaction needs. In conclusion, the findings are important in informing the necessary waste management policies aimed at improving decent work environments, as well as improving the health and well-being of domestic waste collectors in both the formal and informal sectors in Ghana.Entities:
Keywords: Ghana; domestic waste collectors; job satisfaction; psychosocial risk; safety standard; solid waste; work-related stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32331457 PMCID: PMC7215998 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082903
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the study participants.
| Characteristics | Company A | Company B | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manager/Supervisor | DWC | Manager/Supervisor | DWC | |
|
| n | n | n | n |
| 21–30 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 31–40 | 12 | 10 | 4 | 5 |
| 41–50 | 6 | 17 | 2 | 10 |
| 51–60 | 4 | 11 | 2 | 4 |
| 61+ | - | 3 | - | 1 |
|
| ||||
| Ewe | 22 | 42 | 10 | 19 |
| Other | 3 | 1 | - | 2 |
|
| ||||
| Single | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Married | 22 | 27 | 7 | 13 |
| Divorced/separated | - | 3 | - | 1 |
| Widow/Widower | - | 8 | - | 4 |
|
| ||||
| Christian | 18 | 27 | 8 | 14 |
| Muslim | 2 | 3 | - | 1 |
| Traditionalist | 2 | 11 | 1 | 5 |
| No religion | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
|
| ||||
| MSLC | - | 11 | - | 5 |
| JSS | - | 9 | - | 5 |
| Vocational training | - | 3 | - | 2 |
| None | - | 20 | - | 9 |
| SHS | 15 | - | 8 | - |
| Tertiary | 10 | - | 2 | - |
|
| ||||
| Female | 4 | 29 | 2 | 13 |
| Male | 21 | 14 | 8 | 8 |
|
| ||||
| Below 1 year | - | - | - | - |
| 1–5 years | 6 | 8 | 3 | 8 |
| 6–10 years | 17 | 23 | - | 13 |
| 11–15 years | 2 | 7 | - | - |
| 16–20 years | - | 5 | - | - |
| 21 and above | - | - | - | - |
MSLC—Middle School Living Certificate, JSS—Junior Secondary School, SHS—Senior High School, n—number of study participants.
Overview of Inductive thematic processes and final themes that emerged among DWC.
| Convergent Views from Transcripts | Inductive Step I&II (Open Coding, Cross Validation | Inductive Step III (Subthemes Selectionand | Final Themes Emergent | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Standards and practices of solid waste management. | Potential of health risks | associated with the job. | Enforcement of health | and safety rules. | workplace. | Knowledge gap at the work | behavior | |
| 1.1. Poor adherence to safety standards and practices along the waste collection value chain. | 1.2. Although most of DWCs acknowledge associated risk with | | Poor adherence to safety standards & practices | Adherence to and enforcement of safety standards on waste management |
| 2. Relationship among DWCs | & supervisors/managers. | Job descriptions & schedule. | Drivers of health work habits | & work output. | |
| 2.1. Respectful inter and intra-familial associations among DWCs | 2.2. Different task roles involve team work and cooperation | 2.3. To meet this demand for efficiency & reduce any potential | | Relationship among DWCs, managers and supervisors | Relationships at work and working conditions | ||
| 3. Health and Safety at the | and insurance. | |
| 3.1. Psychosocial well-being and overall work balances affect their health. | 3.2. Displeasure about current arrangements that ignore largely their health needs at the expenses of improving environmental safety & hygiene. | 3.3. DWCs paid for their own health insurance, neither were they guaranteed of any medical refund as a results of any ill-health resulting from work. | |
| Inadequate care of health and wellbeing at the expense of keeping the environment clean, | None benefits of health insurance and difficulties | | Social protection and job insecurity | |||
| 4. Job satisfaction /dissatisfaction. | Motivation, psychosocial risks, and work-related | stress among DWCs. | Capacity building and | training. | |
| 4.1. Negative attitude and perception of the community towards DWCs, families and friends. Poor understanding of the burdensome of the job often results in uncontrolled stress and poor job satisfaction for DWCs. | 4.2. DWCs perceive that community members view them | |
| Poor job dissatisfaction & motivation | Poor understanding of the job, and DWCs | | Job satisfaction |