Victimizations and surviving of workplace violence against waitresses in southern Ethiopia.

Women are obliged to take on vulnerable forms of employment that fail to protect their basic labor rights. Exposure to workplace violence is especially high for those women who work within the agriculture, the hotels, restaurants and catering, the transport as well as the manufacturing sectors. In this context, we explored workplace violence against women working as waitresses in various hotels, restaurants, cafeterias and grocery stores of Wolaita Sodo town, southern Ethiopia. Cross-sectional study was undertaken with descriptive and exploratory study designs. Qualitative data were collected by using in-depth interview method in which 16 waitresses were interviewed. Data were voice recorded, transcribed, and analyzed searching themes and patterns in the data. While we found that waitresses are highly exposed to workplace violence, the level of exposure to the violence varies across various circumstances, including working in large and small towns, the situation of the owners/supervisors, public's insight of the position, waitresses' ability to speak the local language, the role of the waitresses, customers' behavior and the specific context in which waitresses work. Waitresses were generally exposed to all forms of violence including spitting, throwing objects, simple physical assault, touching on private parts, and intimidation, among which verbal abuse and emotional exploitations are found to be the most common. Furthermore, the results revealed that though waitresses rarely experienced violence from female customers, the most common perpetrators involved in the practice were males. Amid widespread exposure of waitresses to all forms of workplace violence, ignorance, mostly motivated by fear of losing one's job, has been the common way waitresses respond to the violence. The study implies the vulnerability state of waitresses partly due to lack of adequate awareness regarding the rights and obligations expected of an employee when working in such organizations. This is again exacerbated by the lack of formal employment procedures in such organizations. Therefore, awareness creation and supervisory activities are expected from the media, workers' and social security office of the government, police and other concerned bodies.

Introduction

As a result of their increasing participation in the economic activities, women’s reliance on their husbands has decreased and their socio-economic status is improving through time [1]. Women are increasingly participating in the productive economic activities, including the formal sector, representing more than 42% of the global paid working population [2,3]. Following their increased involvement in the public sphere, women meet new health hazards [4]. Women’s participation in the labor force shows the importance and contribution of women to economic productivity, hence, the need for occupational health and safety concerns [5]. However, the beneficial effect of women’s participation in economic activities on the lives partly depends on the nature of work and the work environment, among other things [6].

Though all workers are exposed to occupational violence, women are greatly affected and relatively more vulnerable to workplace violence compared to their men counterparts [7]. Gender inequalities in the workplace have become increasingly important following more women joining the work force [8]. Although men tend to be at greater risk of direct physical assault as a result of their engagement in the commonly ‘men’s jobs,’ such as women are found in many of the occupations with a high-risk of sexual harassment, violence and threats of violence, working in contact with the public in banks, bookmakers, shops and in solitary settings [5,9,10]. According to [11], violence against women is a means of control and oppression by men. Above all, workplace violence should be understood as a reflection of the general phenomenon of violence in many areas of social life [12].

Gender-based violence against women is the most prevalent form of abuse worldwide, affecting one third of all women in their lifetime [13]. It ranges from sexual harassment to rape, domestic violence to trafficking [14]. It is recognized as a health, economic development, and human rights concern that both reflects and reinforces inequalities between women and men [15,16]. A study undertaken in Zimbabwe, for instance, uncovered the impact of gender-based violence on the reproductive health of women [17]. In addition, the negative impacts of gender discrimination on development and poverty alleviation has been found by [18]. While factors such as working alone, working with the public, and in educational settings have been identified as task-related risk factors, the working environment such as organizational setting and managerial style, as well as the workplace culture are workplace risk factors for the prevalence of workplace violence against women [16]. [19] maintain that working with customers or the public is among the factors that put people at increased risk of workplace violence and sellers of alcohol are among the occupational groups that tend to be at risk from workplace violence.

Women are at an increased risk of violence, harassment and bullying both in and outside the workplace [9,20]. Due to the dual burden women shoulder both at home and outside, they are exposed to workplace violence in addition to the one they experience at home [9]. The question of women’s safety in the workplace is at the nexus of women as workers, as mothers, as victims of violence against women, and sexual and gender-based violence [21]. Ethiopia is at the forefront of the countries where women experience violence of all sorts at home and in the workplace to the extent it become a significant and serious human rights and public health issue [22,23]. Women in Ethiopia are affected by discriminatory policies and gender norms; they are nearly three times more likely be unemployed than men and when they are employed, they are forced to take on vulnerable forms of employment [24]. Above all, differences between women and men’s unequal exposure to workplace violence are reinforced by sex-segregated workplaces [16].

According to EU-OSHA [8], the occupational health risks encountered by female workers are especially high for those women who work within the agriculture, the hotels, restaurants and catering, the transport as well as the manufacturing sectors. In Ethiopia, there is a high level of workplace violence against women that often leads to an extended loss of productive working days [25]. Lack of information about women’s rights, limited access to legal services, insensitivity of law enforcement bodies, and the generally poor status of women in the society are some of the main reasons that accounted for the continuation of violence against women in Ethiopia [22].

Findings of previous empirical literatures show exposure of employed women to various types of workplace violence and ill health conditions, including the impacts of such exposure on women’s overall physical, biological, psychological, and social life. For instance, a study of women’s health working in the mining sector by Botha [26] revealed that women are still exploited and sexually harassed in the mining industry. Moreover, Tawiah, et al. [27] found high level of morbidity in the form of headache, body ache, problems with vision, cough and breathlessness in Brick Kiln and Construction industries of India. Widespread prevalence of sexual harassment among women working in the health care has also been noted [28,29]. Furthermore, the findings of a research in to women’s occupational health and safety in the informal economy suggested that maternal market traders face some occupational health risks that have a significant toll on their physical, mental and social health [6]. Moreover, a study of workplace violence among male and female Turkish employees of various sectors undertaken by Akinci, et al. [30] found that nearly half of the workers reported that they had been subjected to a violent event at their workplaces. Workplace violence against women working in the hotel sector, however, is little studied. According to Lippel [7], other types of violence to which women are relatively more exposed than men either at work, because of the nature of their work, or while they travel to and from work, are less often addressed through a gender lens. The characteristics of violence commonly committed against women differ in critical respects from violence commonly committed against men though both can be victims as well as perpetrators of violence [31]. Day to day observations of the hotel, cafeteria, restaurant and liquor selling sectors in Ethiopia reveal that lower level occupational strata and daily routines are predominantly occupied by women while managerial and other “better” positions are held by males. Given the patriarchal nature of the society, women are not only assigned to (often willingly and due to lack of alternatives) less rewarding positions, but also remain highly susceptible to exploitation, gender-based discrimination, and workplace violence. Waitresses working in the sectors under consideration are among these women in Ethiopia whose maltreatment has always been unnoticed and often considered acceptable. Above all, the absence of empirical research findings in the area has also seems to have contributed for the maintenance of the status quo. The objective of the present study was, therefore, to explore workplace violence against women working as waitresses in various hotels, restaurants, cafeterias and grocery stores of Wolaita Sodo town, southern Ethiopia.

Materials and methods

Research design

Cross-sectional study was undertaken with descriptive and exploratory study designs. Using qualitative approach, data were collected from a sample of women working as waitresses pertaining to exposure to workplace violence.

Selection of research participants

The participants of the study were women who have been working as waitresses in different hotels, grocery stores, cafeterias and restaurants of Woliata sodo town, southern Ethiopia. With the aim of analyzing the differential level of exposure to workplace violence within the group, we purposefully selected equal number of participants representing the group of waitresses working in the restaurant, cafeteria, hotel, and grocery store. Both the recruitment of the research participants and the selection of the specific workplaces were made on the basis of random sampling technique. Because the process of employment was mostly undertaken in the informal networks and the target groups are not beneficiaries of the formal social security schemes of the local government, the total number of waitresses working in the area is unknown. In order to enhance the proportional representation of the sample, we have considered the size of employees working in each category while selecting samples. For instance, compared to others, because large hotels in the area employ relatively higher number of waitresses, the largest proportion of the sample have constituted waitresses from hotels. On the other hand, liquor selling shops and grocery stores were mostly operated by one person in the area and hence, research participants from such category were small. Most important during the sampling process is that we didn’t follow as such rigid and predetermined procedures. Instead, the number of waitresses participated in the study was determined on the basis of the point at which data seem to have been saturated. Accordingly, the final sample size participated in the research were 16. Sex and willingness to participate in the study were the major inclusion criteria we used during recruitment. In addition, waitresses who have only recently employed (within in a period of less than a month) were not included in the study.

Method and procedure of data collection

Qualitative data were collected using in-depth interview method. An interview checklist, containing unstructured questions was prepared to guide the interview.

The questions were prepared in the way they can address the specific research objectives that the research intend to achieve, including: 1) how prevalent is workplace violence against the waitresses and its level of exposure 2) the types of workplace violence to which waitresses were most commonly exposed, 3) the age-sex and other characteristics of the perpetrators that commonly inflict workplace violence, and 4) the common ways of responding/reacting to workplace violence. During field visits, we have first contacted the owners/managers of the randomly selected organizations to get access to the waitresses. Once access was gained, interviewees were informed ahead about the purpose and rationale of undertaking the research and provided their oral consent. Then, they were asked the time and place convenient to them to conduct the interview. Data collectors approached the interviewees in a friendly manner and created a rapport which helped to maintain trust. Research participants were asked unstructured questions, followed by probing in the middle of the interview. Both field notes and voice recordings were used in the process.

Method of data analysis

Data collected using field notes and voice recordings in the local language were first transcribed and then translated to English. Then, data were organized according to the identified themes. The four major themes identified in the data were 1) exposure to workplace violence, 2) underlying factors contributing to differential exposure to workplace violence within the group, 3) age-sex and related socio-demographic characteristics of perpetrators, and 4) the coping strategies against workplace violence. The data organized under each theme and sub-theme were analyzed and interpreted vis-à-vis the specific research objectives already set out at the beginning of the study. therefore, thematic data analysis technique was used in the process of manipulating the data for the particular research purpose at hand.

Ethical procedures

The researchers obtained ethical approval from the ethical approval committee of Wolaita Sodo University. In addition, a formal letter was secured from the department of sociology, Wolaita Sodo University. An informed written consent was obtained by informing the research participants about the objectives and rationale of undertaking the research. In addition, during reporting of direct quotes as disclosed by the interviewees, we have refrained from citing the exact names of the research participants and used pseudo names where necessary. Moreover, research participants were informed ahead about the possibility of withdrawing from the study in case the need arises at any time. Above all, all methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Results

Victimizations and incidents of workplace violence

Data have shown that waitresses are highly exposed to workplace violence of different forms. The most reported type of workplace violence was verbal abuse, mostly manifested in insisting the victims to provide their phone number to the male customers as an after-service offer. Whereas compliance on the side of the waitress to the telephone number request usually end up with no further violence, failure to positively reply have been reported to cause subsequent forms of verbal and physical violence. In this regard, insulting with derogatory words and humiliation, bulldozing/scaremongering and intimidation are found to be the common ones. For example, an interviewee (P8, 19 years) disclosed: The most remarkable case I ever experienced was the one I faced in the third month after I joined the work. It happened with a customer who used to come to the restaurant so often and every time he (the customer) comes, he always asks me to give him my phone number. One day, I served him the food he ordered and when he finished eating, he asked me if I could go out with him or give him my phone number. Following my refusal, he warned me that he will not be paying the bill if I continued refusing. And another research participant (P5, 21 years) added: I have done as a waitress in many places and I have witnessed so many customers who drink a lot and disturb. Most of them ask me to give them my phone number and to spend the night with them. Sometimes this job is assumed as prostitution.

In addition to the verbal abuse, incidents of physical violence have also been reported where slapping on the face, beatings, touching on sexual or private parts, spitting, twitting a hand, and other simple physical assaults are commonly experienced by the waitresses. Furthermore, while the victimization of some waitresses was limited to only one or other forms of verbal or physical violence, the case among most interviewees revealed that they are concurrently exposed to both verbal as well as physical violence where the former is followed by the later. The experience of P2 (18 years) would illustrate the scenario:

Once upon a time I was working in a grocery store at a small town called Yabelo. On one occasion, two persons came to my workplace, they were too drunk and asked me to spend the night with them but I kept silent. Meanwhile, they started to insult me; but I still kept silent. They then began to touch my buttock and breast. I patiently replied to them that my job is waitress, if they want a woman to sleep with; they can find prostitutes outside. Then they said to me, ‘Who are you?’ Finally, they started going out without paying the bill; the owner asked me if I took the money. I then replied to him that I didn’t and I went to them (customers) to ask. One of them slapped my face and tore my clothes into two pieces; windows of the house were broken during quarrels. Finally, police officers arrived and arrested the man.

Dynamics of workplace violence

While we found that waitresses were highly exposed to workplace violence in the study area, research participants also disclosed that the level of exposure to the violence varies across the following circumstances.

Working in large and small towns

It was found that incidences of workplace violence against the waitresses tend to increase as one move from larger towns (capital cities) to the smaller ones: …..it varies according to the town where I work. For example, when I worked in Addis Ababa, customers have a lot of respect for the waitresses, but it was very different outside of Addis; there were times when they even think about body posture, customers need a waitress with big thick buttocks. They don’t want the service or came here just to eat or drink something. They think they came here to eat good food with “good looking girl”. They even prefer between waitresses. They say, ‘I don’t want you!’, even if I am assigned to serve of their sit (P1, 20 years). Research participants reported to have worked in various towns of Ethiopia hold the view that customers found in the relatively larger towns and regional or capital cities are better educated and hence respectful of the waitresses.

The situation of the owners/managers

Data revealed that the incidences of workplace violence against waitresses differ on the basis of the situation of owners/supervisors. While some owners/supervisors attempted to be fair and stand by the side of the waitresses, they commonly preferred to act impartially and help the waitresses during upheavals: “The supervisor is always by our side. Whenever some customers try to abuse us, she will always tell them that, ‘the waitresses are here to serve you, so you shouldn’t talk to them like that, and you can leave if you don’t want’. As a result, If it is not a customer that comes to our hotel very rarely, such as a by passer, all customers commonly served here do not dare to insult us, they respect us (P1, 18 years). Conversely, there were supervisors/owners of the organizations that act in favor of the abusive customers. According to the interviewees, such owners or supervisors perceive that ‘a customer is a king whatever way he behaves and no matter he abuses the waitresses.’

The narrative of P11 (20 years) stipulates that some owners are not responsive to workplace violence against waitresses: ….when things get worse, I often report to the owner. But, my pain doesn’t give him sense; what he need is to maintain the safety of the customers at the expense of ours and keep customers coming to the cafeteria. Though I report what happens with my tears flowing, he never felt my pain. Instead, he gives priority to the customers, not to the waitresses. After all, there is no solution from the owners. Furthermore, the absence of sympathy among most owners and supervisors is accompanied by the lack of self-esteem and the presence of high job-insecurity of the waitresses all of which have the effect of exacerbating workplace violence against the waitresses. For instance, the response of P16 (20 years) that: It is impossible to judge the owner; after all, it is business for him and I am a waitress here. If I quit, another waitress will come. But, if a customer quits, the owner will lose a lot. Whatever happens, due attention is given to the concerns of the customers, not the waitresses would illustrate the fact that some waitresses are skeptical of losing their job and willingly opt to accept the abusive conditions.

Public’s insight of the position

It is found that the understanding to the position of waitress and the value placed to the women assuming the status widely varies across customers. And this is related to the manner in which customers and waitresses interact in the workplace. According to the interviewees, the job of waitress is a less prestigious position and the assumption held among some customers is that waitresses are part-time prostitutes. Interviewees believe that one possible source of such perceptions is the dressing norms to which all waitresses must conform which purposively leave some parts of women’s body naked in a way it seduces and retains male customers. In addition, it is also disclosed that some customers believe waitresses have the responsibility of satisfying the [sexual] demands of the customers: Some customers have a distorted view of the job. For example, if you refuse to go out with them, they threaten you saying that they will report to the owner that ‘this girl is not comfortable with us’ so that the owner fires you away (P3, 21 years).

Language

The level of exposure to workplace violence has been found to vary on the basis of waitresses’ ability to speak the local language. While most of the research participants, especially the ones working in big hotels, disclosed that they came from another area in search of job opportunities, they unveiled that their exposure to workplace violence is partly related to their inability of speaking the local language. It is also found that waitresses face various sorts of workplace violence on accounts of their ethnicity too. For instance, P14 (24 years) said: Of course, I was attacked not only because of my sex but also because of my ethnicity. When some customers ask me about my ethnicity, I feel discontented. If I disclose to them that I don’t speak the language, they tend to question my presence in the area. Some perceive that if I am not able to speak their language, I will not be able to handle them well. Moreover, the implication of inability to listen and speak the local language on the emotional/psychological wellbeing of waitresses has also been noted in the present study. Data revealed experiences of feelings of loneliness, sense of being marginalized and excluded, and lack of security among waitresses that do not speak the local language.

The role of the waitresses

Data revealed that waitresses often contributed to workplace violence sometimes by initiating discontent among customers. Failure to serve the right order, errors of sequence committed when a customer who came first is not able to be served first, and extended delay both to receive orders and to bring what is ordered have been found to be the ways by which waitresses play the role of initiating violence. According to the research participants, while some customers politely call and complain to the waitress in charge of their sit, others do not give them a chance to correct their mistakes. The following account of clearly depicts the scenario:

The most memorable day I’ve ever had was here at XXX hotel; it was a holiday(x-mass) and was a tough day because there were so many people (customers). In the meantime, one of the customers shouted aloud at me for I did not bring the food he ordered me on time. Later, when I brought him the food, he threw it on my face; I was shocked in front of such large gatherings of people. I wish I would have died then. Instead of doing that, it would have been better had he beaten me. I lost control of myself; I was wondering why I’m doing this job

(P12, 22 years, hotel).

Customers’ behavior and the context

The incidence of workplace violence against waitresses has been found to vary depending on customers’ behavior during and after drinking alcohol. According to the research participants, workplace violence increases during the night time in which customers get drunk. Week-ends have also been reported to be the days where waitresses are more exposed to the violence since many people; especially employees become free to enjoy and drink alcohol. Furthermore, exposure to workplace violence against women is also influenced by the specific setting in which the waitresses work. We found that waitresses working in grocery stores/bars are relatively more exposed to workplace violence than those working in restaurants and cafeterias.

Data revealed that though waitresses rarely experienced violence from female customers, the most common perpetrators involved in inflicting violence against the victims are males. In addition, differences between male and female customers based on the types of violence they infiltrate to the waitresses have also been noted. In this regard, whereas waitresses mostly become targets of verbal violence from their same-sex customer counterparts, male customers are reported to engage in all types of violence, including physical violence and sexual abuse. Moreover, we found adults and relatively young customers as the most common perpetrators of violence against the waitresses, while elderlies were reported to be least involved as far as the age of the perpetrators is concerned.

Coping with workplace violence

Data revealed that waitresses adopt different mechanisms of surviving workplace violence. Ignorance has been reported to be the most commonly practiced type of coping strategy against workplace violence. Nevertheless, when waitresses choose to ignore responding to abusive circumstances, it is done after rational calculation of other alternative way outs. Interviewees disclosed that ignorance is motivated by fear of further consequences: I will speak nothing, especially to the customer. I might be upset, but I usually choose to immediately leave the area because I know that If I respond countering the deeds of the customer, the worst happens to me to the extent of perhaps losing my job (P1, 19 years). The sense of job insecurity observed among most waitresses is the result of the absence of formal procedures before and during employment. Many interviewees disclosed that both their first contact as well as later attachment to their current workplace has taken place through informal networks. Most have reported that they do not have signed contractual agreement specifying the rights and duties of both the employee and the employer and received no letter that clearly stipulates their roles and responsibilities (job description).

The following quote from an interviewee working in a cafeteria demonstrates this reality: “After completing my 10 grade education, I was just sitting in the house and serving my family because I didn’t get a passing grade to continue preparatory education. In the meantime, I asked my friend who used to work in a cafeteria as a waitress to find me a vacant position. She then succeeded in finding it and told me to report to the owner. I was asked to bring a bail. Then, I called my relative who came and signed on a paper to guarantee accountability. It was in this manner that I started working. Except that, there is nothing I singed and received. (P15,23 years).

While most research participants prefer to pay no attention to quarrelsome circumstances in the workplace, they resort to reporting to the owners/supervisors when ignorance itself couldn’t end the process. We also found that waitresses’ decision to report to the owner/supervisor heavily relies on their trust that the owner is sympathetic and able to impartially understand their cause: …I was very angry and told the owner everything. Fortunately, the owner and the customer know each other. Then, the owner went and talked to him about what happened. Consequently, the customer paid the bill and finally left. Encountering to such violent customers is a common aspect of our daily life in this work. But, we inform to the boss when the insult becomes worse and she warns them not to come any more if they are about to abuse us like that. She will also tell us not to receive orders from such rude customers anymore (P9, 20 years).

Contrariwise, waitresses who are aware that the owner/supervisor is not dependable often resort to reporting to the police or opt to shout to the guards of the hotel. Mentioning that there are supervisors/owners that care about the safety of their employees interviewees disclosed that some are less sympathetic that they take for granted violence against waitresses even when it is undertaken in their presence.

In response to facing frequent incidences of violence at a particular workplace and when other previously discussed avenues are proved not helpful, changing a workplace becomes another way some waitresses respond to workplace violence. Interviewees believe that working in relatively bigger hotels is less risky compared to smaller hotels, grocery stores, and cafeterias. A response of P10, 19 years, for instance, demonstrate the views held among waitresses about the less violent nature of customers to be served in the more prestigious hotels: As a way out, I have now decided not to work in small hotels; I will search for possible opportunities of working in bigger hotels because I think the customers to be served there are well educated and respectful. If I continue facing the same situation there, I change to a new field of work in the future. Furthermore, we found that some waitresses are studying in the extension modalities at private colleges in the area parallel to working as a waitress. Such waitresses unveiled their plan to quit the present job and their aspiration to be employed with the profession of their college trainings.

Data revealed that research participants vary depending on whether they have been informed ahead and hence, expecting the possibility of workplace violence before joining the sector. It is also found that such variations have influenced the extent to which waitresses differently felt the experience of violence and the way they respond to it. Whereas some interviewees disclosed that they were conscious of and expected the likelihood of facing workplace violence, they tend to assume the violence as the normal aspects of the work and are relatively less aggressive in reacting to the incidences. For instance, P12, 22 years disclosed: obviously, I had the awareness; it was my cousin who suggested me to do this job. Because she was a waitress I used to hear from her when she was talking about the heavy workload and her ample experiences of diverse workplace violence. I finally found out that what I have faced and still facing is the same to her. But I already convinced myself before beginning the job. Even though I became angry, cried a lot, and felt lonely but I do not give up because I hope tomorrow will be fine. Others have reported experiences of shocks while encountering the situation being under circumstances of lacking prior knowledge. For instance, the story of P6, 18 years demonstrates that the shock is temporary and some of such waitresses would prefer to remain in the work withstanding the shocks: I had no idea about the job before joining it. I came into it all of a sudden following my failure to get a passing mark in 10 grade. I was unemployed for a long time, and didn’t think I would do this job; I thought I would start my own business. Subsequently, I joined the work just considering it as a temporary solution. Even if I frequently face different maltreatments, I try to convince myself that this time will pass and good days will come and persuaded myself to be patient.

Discussion

The present study particularly focused on women working as waitresses in the various hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, and cafeterias of Wolaita Sodo town, southern Ethiopia. Qualitative data were collected by interviewing 16 (sixteen) waitresses and thematically analyzed. Accordingly, the results of the study have shown that the incidence of workplace violence against waitresses in the study area is high. This result is consistent to Yemane [22] who found that Ethiopia has one of the highest prevalence of sexual, emotional, and physical violence against women in the work place. According to Abera, et al. [25], there is a high level of workplace injuries that often leads to an extended loss of productive working days in Ethiopia, where occupational safety and health services are inadequately organized. Moreover, a study of workplace violence among Turkish employees of various sectors undertaken by Akinci, et al. [30] found that nearly half of the workers reported that they had been subjected to a violent event at their workplaces. According to CCOHS [19] working with customers or the public is among the work factors that put people at increased risk of workplace violence and sellers of alcohol are among the occupational groups that tend to be at risk from workplace violence. Women are at particular risk of violence, harassment and bullying both in and outside the workplace [9,20].

The most commonly reported type of workplace violence in the present study is verbal abuse, mostly manifested in insisting the victims to provide their phone number to the male customers. Furthermore, waitresses are also found to be exposed to other forms of verbal abuses including insulting and humiliation, bulldozing/scaremongering and intimidation. In addition to the verbal abuse, incidents of physical violence have also been reported where slapping on the face, beatings, touching on sexual or private parts, spitting, twitting a hand, and simple physical assaults are commonly experienced by the waitresses. The finding is consistent to Akinci, et al. [30] who found that the most common type of violence was verbal abuse, followed by bullying, physical assault and sexual harassment. A study of women’s health working in the mining sector by Botha [26] revealed that women are still exploited and sexually harassed in the mining industry. Incidents taking place daily vary from whistling; name calling; use of vulgar or derogatory language; display of body parts; physical contact, ranging from touching to sexual assault and rape; to the exchange of sexual favors for promotion. Melak [32] found a high prevalence of violence against female university students the rate of which ranges from the most frequent form, i.e., verbal harassment in the form of insult and catcall, to complete or attempted rapes which are the rare type of sexual violence against female students.

While we found high incidences of workplace violence against women in the study area, research participants also disclosed that the level of exposure to the violence varies across various circumstances, including working in large and small towns, the situation of the owners/supervisors, public’s insight of the position, waitresses’ ability to speak the local language, the role of the waitresses, customers’ behavior and the specific context in which waitresses work. Workplace violence against women is rooted in perpetrator’s sense of power, control, and entitlement, gender-based stereotypes, perpetrator’s use of alcohol and other drugs, and victim’s blaming ideas, such as the belief that a victim somehow “asked for it” by the way s/he behaves, dresses or lives [33]. According to ILO [16], risk factors for victims include their age, experience, being female, and attitudes and expectations (perceived vulnerability). Workplace risk factors are comprised of the working environment such as organizational setting and managerial style, as well as the workplace culture and external environment. Task-related risk factors include working alone, with the public and/or people in distress, and in educational settings. The main causes for the exposure of females to different forms of violence are legal and structural, such as the absence of sound policy on girls in general and gender-based violence in particular. In addition, the absence of gender sensitivity in the legislations of organizations and the absence of a clear mandate and authority for the existing gender focal point institution is also another serious challenge [32]. The existence of relevant national legislative frameworks on gender-based violence as well as a workplace-level policy and implementation strategy are also important contextual factors [16]. Concerns of workers’ occupational health and safety have been given attention in Ethiopian Federal Negarith Gazeth proclamation no. 1/1995 [34]. Article 42 (2) of the proclamation, for instance, provides that workers have the right to reasonable limitation of working hours, to rest, leisure, to periodic leaves with pay, to remuneration for public holidays as well as healthy and safe work environment.

Findings of the present study reveal that waitresses adopt different mechanisms of surviving workplace violence. Ignorance has been reported to be the most commonly practiced type of coping strategy against workplace violence, followed by reporting to the owners/supervisors, and changing a workplace. The result is once again consistent to Akinci, et al. [30] who found that victims preferred to ignore or deny the violent act instead of fighting against it. According to their study, the most frequently reported way victims react to workplace violence was talking to colleagues about the violent act, followed by talking with family and friends and warning the perpetrator, “doing nothing,” “pretending nothing had happened”, and “getting help from the police.” Fredrickson [35] found that the main reasons that employees do not report workplace violence include fear of their supervisor’s reaction, lack of company procedures/policies, lack of training, becoming the ‘office snitch’, and fear of retaliation. According to the finding of the Fredrickson’s study, employees afraid to report potential workplace violence to their supervisor because they think the supervisor will over-react or think they are unable to handle their own job/responsibilities. Lack of information about women’s rights, limited access to legal services, insensitivity of law enforcement bodies, and the generally poor status of women in the society are some of the main reasons that accounted for the continuation of violence against women [22]. Above all, workplace violence can be considered as a reflection of the general and increasing phenomenon of violence in many areas of social life which has to be broadly viewed at the level of the whole society [12]. The findings of the present study significantly contribute to existing knowledge on workplace violence and gender-based violence. Above all, it narrows the gap in the empirical literature as far as the workplace violence faced by women working in hotels, restaurants, cafeterias, and grocery stores is concerned.

Conclusion

The results of the research indicated that waitresses are highly exposed to workplace violence both on account of their occupation of presumably a ‘less prestigious position’ and their sex. While waitresses are generally exposed to all forms of violence including spitting, throwing objects, simple physical assault, touching on private parts, and intimidation, verbal abuse and emotional exploitations are found to be the most experienced ones. Although waitresses rarely experience violence from female customers, the most common perpetrators involved in the violence were males. Above all, whereas the vulnerability of waitresses to workplace violence has been noted, level of exposure to the violence varies depending on the personal qualities of the owners/supervisors, the nature of the workplace itself and the socio-economic status of the customers served in those workplaces, waitresses’ ability to speak the local language, peoples’ perception of the position and responsibility of the waitresses, the manner in which the waitresses serve the customers, and the particular context in which waitresses work. Ignorance, mostly motivated by fear of losing one’s job, was the common way waitresses respond to the violence. The study implies the vulnerability state of waitresses partly due to lack of adequate awareness regarding the rights and obligations expected of an employee when working in such organizations. This is again exacerbated by the lack of formal employment procedures in such organizations. These circumstances have contributed to waitresses’ lack of job security and the fear of other possible further consequences when deciding to react to violence in the way it safeguards their rights. Furthermore, the wrong perception of the public about the position of waitress and the absence of concern from the side of the owners about workplace violence are also other aggravating factors. Hence, awareness creation and supervisory activities are expected from the media, workers’ and social security office of the government, police and other concerned bodies.

In-depth interview guide 1.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

24 Jun 2021

PONE-D-21-09783

Victimizations and Surviving of Workplace Violence against Waitresses in Southern Ethiopia

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zewude,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

As the reviewers mentioned, the findings from this paper have the potential to make important contributions to the work-pace violence field in lower- and middle-income countries, specifically Ethiopia. There are, however, some important issues that need to be addressed for this paper to move forward in the review process. In particular, there needs to be additional clarification/detail about the sampling for the study. Authors need to provide information about the ethical process and considerations in the study (including consent process, protection of participants, confidentiality, and ethics review and approvals). The authors should consider the use of pseudonyms or participant ID codes and inclusion of a statement or two in the methods section clarifying the use of pseudonyms/IDs and/or demographic details of participants (e.g., age). Please also clarify/highlight/discuss key findings and provide a discussion of implications of findings for policy/practice/intervention/future research in the discussion/conclusion.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 08 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Samantha C Winter, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include a copy of the interview guide used in the study, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information, or include a citation if it has been published previously.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: First, I would like to thank the author/researcher in bringing out the issues of workplace violence among female in a developing country. This article will add up some more information in relevant topic. However, it needs more effort in revision. I think the manuscript should be independent in terms of its format rather than being a short-cut version of a research report/thesis. Below are the general comments (except for the specific comments made throughout the manuscript by doing track changes – see attachment) that needs main revision.

Introduction – This section looks good, but it has plenty of information. It needs to be shortened by condensing the information that are related to workplace violence and women, as well as by removing the duplication (in information) and other theoretical description that are not specific with the objectives of the study. For example, this paper only focuses on the status of workplace violence and does not have anything related to policy/legislative aspects. So, it is better to remove that.

Materials and methods – Overall good. However, it needs a bit more clarification on the selection of participants (e.g., the number of participants selected from each store). The method of data analysis needs more detailed description on how the data were analyzed. Ethics related aspects (privacy, confidentiality, ethical approval, etc.) are missing.

Results – This section is very good except the style of presenting the information (layout) and some grammatical errors. Structure or layout needs to be rearranged, such as change of paragraph while mentioning the statement of participants. Some statements given by participants are in present tense, which needs to be corrected. There are names in few statements which does not seems to be ethical. Participant's name must be removed and de-identified, but it does need the other characteristics of participants such as their age and working store. E.g. P12, 26 years, Cafeteria

Discussion – The starting of the discussion section does not seem to be appropriate. It should be started with the background of the results/objectives. Do not repeat the whole results but briefly mention your results and discuss it with other. While discussing, focus on why and how of your findings as well as other study's findings. At the end of discussion section, write few sentences on how your findings are significant or different than other studies and its implication in Ethiopian context.

References – Referencing in the text as well as in the bibliography section does not match the PLOS guidelines. It is meant to be in Vancouver style, but this manuscript adopted Author-Date/Harvard method. It needs major revision. Moreover, references need to be cross checked between the text and the bibliography section.

Reviewer #2: 1. It would be good to have a theory for the study

2. Methodology:

a. The sampling framework needs to be clear. For example, Woliata sodo sounds like a small town and it would be important to mention about how many groceries, restaurants etc that are there, so that we can have a feel of the representation.

b. “We have purposefully selected equal number of participants representing the group of waitresses working in the restaurant, cafeteria, hotel, and grocery store”- this statement can be challenged because some of the places may have fewer workers than others, which means that some organization may end up having more participants than others. Could there be some restaurants, cafeteria having fewer women employees than the selected ten?

c. Another question is the criteria used to select the ten from each organization?

d. Whereas it is fair to say that “data saturation was attained after sixteen waitresses were interviewed”; one is left wondering about the representation of the 16---was there a good representation from the four sectors, that is, restaurant, cafeteria, hotel, and grocery?

e. “Sex and willingness to participate in the study were the major inclusion criteria we used”; again, the question is whether each person was approached and were asked whether they were willing to participate?

f. Ethical issues have not been addressed in this very sensitive topic

g. Research approvals have not been mentioned

3. Results & Discussions: they are very interesting, but it would have been interesting to hear voices from the different industries. For example, from the analysis, what kind of violence is mainly experienced by those in the cafeteria industry/ or to describe the direct quote verses (e.g. said so and so who works in the grocery store. Further, the language needs to be reworked on in this section. For example, is the coping strategy ignorance or ignoring – the two terms are different, and it feels like they have been used interchangeably. Direct quotes need to be restructured so that they make sense to the readers. Some of the paragraphs are too long especially under the discussion heading.

4. In the discussion section, the key findings need to be captured as the existing literature/ empirical findings are discussed.

5. Make the conclusion strong so that we hear the gap that existed and how it has been met through this study.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Submitted filename: PONE-D-21-09783_Reviewers Edit.docx

Click here for additional data file.

25 Jun 2021

Point-by-point Response

Dear Dr. Samantha, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to you for your editorial services and your help in the process of enabling the peer review process to be undertaken within a reasonable time frame. We are also thankful to the reviewers that have devoted their time for reviewing the material and contributed their share for improving the quality of the article. We wholeheartedly believe that the comments and suggestions provided herewith are highly helpful in terms of producing an interesting paper.

Dear all, below is a table containing the comments of the reviewers (and the editor) and a point-by-point response of the authors. We believe that you will find satisfying responses for all the concerns you raised in the paper. If there are further issues that need to be addressed, please do not hesitate to contact us any time. Due to our ambition to get the article published very soon, the corresponding author will be staying 7/24 online attending your emails.

Dear editor, in an attempt to ease the editorial process and thereby fasten the publication, we have revised the reference section and changed the style of the in-text citation (in superscript form) according to the journal’s style. Above all, the data collection instrument has also been attached at the end of this page.

Thank you very much once again!

source of Comment Details of Comments Authors’ Responses

Reviewer #1 • Introduction –-This section looks good, but it has plenty of information. It needs to be shortened by condensing the information that are related to workplace violence and women, as well as by removing the duplication (in information) and other theoretical description that are not specific with the objectives of the study. For example, this paper only focuses on the status of workplace violence and does not have anything related to policy/legislative aspects. So, it is better to remove that. • Corrected accordingly!

• In addition to correcting all the recommended points, we have also revised the whole introductory section, to the extent of paraphrasing it.

• Materials and methods –Overall good. However, it needs a bit more clarification on the selection of participants (e.g., the number of participants selected from each store). The method of data analysis needs more detailed description on how the data were analyzed. Ethics related aspects (privacy, confidentiality, ethical approval, etc.) are missing. • Corrected accordingly!

• The ethics statement is provided as a separate section, data analysis method clarified, sampling again clarified.

• Results –This section is very good except the style of presenting the information (layout) and some grammatical errors. Structure or layout needs to be rearranged, such as change of paragraph while mentioning the statement of participants. Some statements given by participants are in present tense, which needs to be corrected. There are names in few statements which does not seems to be ethical. Participant's name must be removed and de-identified, but it does need the other characteristics of participants such as their age and working store. E.g. P12, 26 years, Cafeteria • corrected accordingly!

• The starting of the discussion section does not seem to be appropriate. It should be started with the background of the results/objectives. Do not repeat the whole results but briefly mention your results and discuss it with other. While discussing, focus on why and how of your findings as well as other study's findings. At the end of discussion section, write few sentences on how your findings are significant or different than other studies and its implication in Ethiopian context. • Corrected according to the suggestion.

• As far as inclusion of just major findings is concerned in the discussion, we have made at most effort of not missing interesting findings while at the same trying not to go to unnecessary details.

• Referencing in the text as well as in the bibliography section does not match the PLOS guidelines. It is meant to be in Vancouver style, but this manuscript adopted Author-Date/Harvard method. It needs major revision. Moreover, references need to be cross checked between the text and the bibliography section. • corrected accordingly

Reviewer #2 • It would be good to have a theory for the study • Dear reviewer, thank you for your insightful suggestion. we are afraid that inclusion of additional literatures would make the introductory section unnecessarily too much. Of course, it could have been done by reducing some portions from the introductory section. But we still believe that sufficient background and justification have been provided in the section. We hope you will understand and share our concern.

• The sampling framework needs to be clear. For example, Woliata sodo sounds like a small town and it would be important to mention about how many groceries, restaurants etc that are there, so that we can have a feel of the representation. • Dear reviewer, it is true that Wolaiata Sodo is relatively a small town-actually not that too small. The problem is not from the size of the town, rather it is about the availability of data from the concerned gov’t office. When asked, what the officers give us is just an estimation arrived without data.

• In fact, we have made certain clarifications to the sampling section

• “We have purposefully selected equal number of participants representing the group of waitresses working in the restaurant, cafeteria, hotel, and grocery store”- this statement can be challenged because some of the places may have fewer workers than others, which means that some organization may end up having more participants than others. Could there be some restaurants, cafeteria having fewer women employees than the selected ten? • we have revised the section accordingly!

• thank you

• Another question is the criteria used to select the ten from each organization? • revised

• Whereas it is fair to say that “data saturation was attained after sixteen waitresses were interviewed”; one is left wondering about the representation of the 16---was there a good representation from the four sectors, that is, restaurant, cafeteria, hotel, and grocery? • the section has been revised accordingly

• “Sex and willingness to participate in the study were the major inclusion criteria we used”; again, the question is whether each person was approached and were asked whether they were willing to participate? • Willingness of waitresses to participate in the study was asked after inclusion at the initial sampling stage-40. Dear reviewer, the 16 were the ones who finally given their full consent to participate.

• Ethical issues have not been addressed in this very sensitive topic • now addressed

• Research approvals have not been mentioned • now considered

• Results & Discussions: they are very interesting, but it would have been interesting to hear voices from the different industries. For example, from the analysis, what kind of violence is mainly experienced by those in the cafeteria industry/ or to describe the direct quote verses (e.g. said so and so who works in the grocery store. Further, the language needs to be reworked on in this section. For example, is the coping strategy ignorance or ignoring – the two terms are different, and it feels like they have been used interchangeably. Direct quotes need to be restructured so that they make sense to the readers. Some of the paragraphs are too long especially under the discussion heading. • revised

• In the discussion section, the key findings need to be captured as the existing literature/ empirical findings are discussed. • revised

• Make the conclusion strong so that we hear the gap that existed and how it has been met through this study. • Considered. The gaps and how they were addressed, the difference with previous studies, and the contribution of the study all are discussed in the discussion in addition to the conclusion.

In-depth Interview guiding questions

1. How prevalent is gender-based violence in your work place?

1.1. Have you ever faced gender-based violence now or before while working in similar work places?

1.2. Would you please tell me some of the violence types that you faced?

1.3. ………..also ask her to specify where, when (what time), by whom ( whether she has faced it from the side of customer/client, employer/owner, owner’s family/relative, stranger, etc)

1.4. ……also specify if she faced the violence on account of her gender, ethnicity, religion, social class, or any other stratifying variable?

1.5. Have you ever faced violence or discrimination on the basis of your ethnicity, religious affiliation, or belongingness to a social group that is perceived to as a different/minority in the area?

2. How did you react or respond to the violence you have faced?

2.1. What did you do after facing the violence or discrimination in your work place?

2.2. Have you ever reported to the police, managers/supervisors, [body] guards, the owner, etc……or you just kept silent?

2.3. ……….and why did you do that ……or not did so?

2.4. If you have ever reported, then how did they/it respond to your complaints?

2.5. …………..What is the most common thing you do whenever you face such violence?

3. What physical, psychological, and social challenges have you faced because of the violence?

……… social exclusion, physical damage, illness or sickness, fear or feelings of intimidation, depression, anxiety, loneliness, feelings of helplessness, feelings of worthlessness, etc

4. What was your expectation regarding the possibility of being exposed to gender-based violence in such work places?

4.1. Have you ever expected or were you expecting to be exposed for such workplace violence when you decide to work here?

4.2. ….if yes, then, have you convinced yourself to accept victimizations?

4.3. …….what strategies have you planned to cope-up with the situation?

No (code) Variable Categories Frequency

Age

Marital status

Education

Years in the work

Submitted filename: Point-by-point response.docx

Click here for additional data file.

20 Sep 2021

PONE-D-21-09783R1Victimizations and Surviving of Workplace Violence against Waitresses in Southern EthiopiaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zewude,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The authors made important changes to the manuscript in the revision; however, the manuscript needs some additional revision before acceptance for publication. The authors changed the in-text referencing style from one which used author names and dates such as APA (e.g., Adams, 2019) to a numerical referencing style; however, when they did this, all of the references to specific studies in the introduction and throughout the discussion became inappropriately referenced, (e.g. according to [8],...). These need to be corrected. Additional proofreading for typographical, editorial, and grammatical errors is needed. Please see detailed reviewer comments below.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 04 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Samantha C Winter, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I would like to thank authors for their effort in revising the manuscript. Although most of the comments have been addressed, the manuscript still needs revision especially in sentence structure, grammar, and format/style. I highly recommend authors to take referencing pattern/citation seriously and revise it. Also, I recommend the authors to seek professional editing for grammar and sentence structure.

I have highlighted some errors in the file but those are not all. Please do a thorough proof reading.

Below are some of the errors that still exist in the manuscript.

In abstract (very initial pages, not the text one), correct the capitalization on keywords.

There are still some issues in referencing. For example, in the introduction section, there are few sentences that says According to [8], various sectors undertaken by [30], health working in the mining sector by [26] revealed. This is not the way how you do citation. You can write the author's name in this type of sentences (although it is in Vancouver) and mention the references in number at the end of the sentence OR write it as a finding and keep the reference at the end. For example ----- Instead of writing "Moreover, [27] found high level of morbidity in the form of headache, body ache, problems with vision, cough and breathlessness in Brick Kiln and Construction industries of India" simply write "high level of morbidity in the form of headache, body ache, problems with vision, cough and breathlessness in Brick Kiln and Construction industries of India [27].

No need to put reference in the first sentence of 'research design'

Keep an eye on the capitalization of middle words. Example – "Selection of Research participants"

Under the section "selection of research participants", there are notable errors in grammar. Methodology should be always in past tense, not in present tense. Same types of errors still exist in 'Findings'. Example – "Data reveal that waitresses adopt", "data reveal that waitresses often contribute to", "Data revealed that though waitresses rarely experience"…… and so on.

In findings section, it's good to break the paragraph rather than placing chunk of information and quotations in one paragraph. For example, see the sub-section "the situation of the owners/manager".

To sum up, revision stll requires in sentence structure, grammar, and references.

Reviewer #2: The author(s) have improved on the document and critically looked into the issues that were raised during the first review. The issues has been presented well and I hope the findings will get to the necessary policy makers or influencers of the same.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr. Julia Kagunda

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Submitted filename: PONE-D-21-09783_R1_reviewer_highlighting errors.pdf

Click here for additional data file.

21 Sep 2021

source of Comment Details of Comments Authors’ Responses

Reviewer #1 • Although most of the comments have been addressed, the manuscript still needs revision especially in sentence structure, grammar, and format/style. I highly recommend authors to take referencing pattern/citation seriously and revise it. • Revised

• In abstract (very initial pages, not the text one), correct the capitalization on keywords. • Corrected

• There are still some issues in referencing. For example, in the introduction section, there are few sentences that says According to [8], various sectors undertaken by [30], health working in the mining sector by [26] revealed. This is not the way how you do citation. You can write the author's name in this type of sentences (although it is in Vancouver) and mention the references in number at the end of the sentence OR write it as a finding and keep the reference at the end. For example ----- Instead of writing "Moreover, [27] found high level of morbidity in the form of headache, body ache, problems with vision, cough and breathlessness in Brick Kiln and Construction industries of India" simply write "high level of morbidity in the form of headache, body ache, problems with vision, cough and breathlessness in Brick Kiln and Construction industries of India [27]. • Revised

• No need to put reference in the first sentence of 'research design' • Removed

• Keep an eye on the capitalization of middle words. Example – "Selection of Research participants"

Under the section "selection of research participants", there are notable errors in grammar. Methodology should be always in past tense, not in present tense. Same types of errors still exist in 'Findings'. Example – "Data reveal that waitresses adopt", "data reveal that waitresses often contribute to", "Data revealed that though waitresses rarely experience"…… and so on. • Revised

• In findings section, it's good to break the paragraph rather than placing chunk of information and quotations in one paragraph. For example, see the sub-section "the situation of the owners/manager". • Corrected

Reviewer #2 • The author(s) have improved on the document and critically looked into the issues that were raised during the first review. The issues has been presented well and I hope the findings will get to the necessary policy makers or influencers of the same. • Thank you

Editors’ comments • The authors changed the in-text referencing style from one which used author names and dates such as APA (e.g., Adams, 2019) to a numerical referencing style; however, when they did this, all of the references to specific studies in the introduction and throughout the discussion became inappropriately referenced, (e.g. according to [8],...). These need to be corrected. • Revised

• Additional proofreading for typographical, editorial, and grammatical errors is needed. • Revised

Submitted filename: Response to reviewrs & the editor - 2.docx

Click here for additional data file.

14 Dec 2021

Victimizations and Surviving of Workplace Violence against Waitresses in Southern Ethiopia

PONE-D-21-09783R2

Dear Dr. Zewude,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Please take a look at Reviewer #1's comments about reviewing the manuscript for technical and grammatical issues, and correcting the statements they pointed out in their final comments (attached below).

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Samantha C Winter, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: It has lots of improvements now. The only thing that needs further improvement (in few places) is the layout based on the journal requirements (e.g. see the subsections of 'results'). I hope this would be corrected during the editing process. Please edit the grammar for the following sentences from 'results' section which needs to be in the past tense.

The narrative of P11 (20 years) stipulates that some owners are not responsive to workplace violence against waitresses: (owners were not)

Data revealed that waitresses adopt different mechanisms of surviving workplace violence. (reveals and adopted)

While most research participants prefer to pay no attention to quarrelsome circumstances in the workplace, they resort to reporting to the owners/supervisors when ignorance itself couldn’t end the process. (preferred to pay)

Contrariwise, waitresses who are aware that the owner/supervisor is not dependable often resort to reporting to the police or opt to shout to the guards of the hotel. (who were aware)

Although waitresses rarely experience violence from female customers, the most common perpetrators involved in the

violence were males (In Conclusion) (rarely experienced)

It is good to go. However, I request the authors to re-read the manuscript because all the grammatical errors (minor) could not be reflected in reviewer's comment and those can corrected by the authors themselves.

Thank you.

Reviewer #2: The review comments by the reviewer have been worked on.

The only outstanding thing is the paragraphs are very long and need to be worked on. The following have been worked on:

a. Methodology issues like the selection according to the ‘industry- hotel, restaurant, grocery and store has been explained and the representation of the same;

2. Results & Discussions: Different types of violence discussed and the most severe highlighted while the discussion is rich, including other empirical studies

3. Make the conclusion strong so that we hear the gap that existed and how it has been met through this study.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

16 Dec 2021

PONE-D-21-09783R2

Victimizations and Surviving of Workplace Violence against Waitresses in Southern Ethiopia

Dear Dr. Zewude:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Samantha C Winter

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE