BackgroundThe social gradient in disability pension is well recognized, however mechanisms accounting for the gradient are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between occupational class and subsequent disability pension among middle-aged men and women, and to what extent work-related factors accounted for the association.MethodsA subsample (N = 7031) of the population-based Hordaland Health Study (HUSK) conducted in 1997-99, provided self-reported information on health and work-related factors, and were grouped in four strata by Erikson, Goldthorpe and Portocareros occupational class scheme. The authors obtained follow-up data on disability pension by linking the health survey to national registries of benefit (FD-trygd). They employed Cox regression analysis and adjusted for gender, health (medical conditions, mental health, self-perceived health, somatic symptoms) and work-related factors (working hours, years in current occupation, physical demands, job demands, job control).ResultsA strong gradient in disability pension by occupational class was found. In the fully adjusted model the risk (hazard ratio) ranged from 1.41 (95% CI 0.84 to 2.33) in the routine non-manual class, 1.87 (95% CI 1.07 to 3.27) in the skilled manual class and 2.12 (95% CI 1.14 to 3.95) in the unskilled manual class, employing the administrator and professional class as reference. In the gender and health-adjusted model work-related factors mediated the impact of occupational class on subsequent disability pension with 5% in the routine non-manual class, 26% in the skilled manual class and 24% in the unskilled manual class. The impact of job control and physical demands was modest, and mainly seen among skilled and unskilled manual workers.ConclusionsWorkers in the skilled and unskilled manual classes had a substantial unexplained risk of disability pension. Work-related factors only had a moderate impact on the disability risk. Literature indicates an accumulation of hazards in the manual classes. This should be taken into account when interpreting the gradient in disability pension.
Internet/web‐based forms of communication have increasingly been implemented by welfare agencies. However, there have been few studies of the experiences of welfare service users and the consequences of new technology for welfare service users. To what extent is the new technology adopted by the Norwegian Welfare and Labour Organization (NAV) used, and how do the users apply and experience the new possibilities? Do screen‐to‐screen encounters replace face‐to‐face encounters, and is this trend affected by age, gender, education or type of benefit? To answer these questions, we combine survey data, short‐term fieldwork in welfare reception areas and qualitative interviews with people receiving health and work‐related benefits. Our study indicates that screen‐to‐screen interaction in general does not replace face‐to‐face encounters, as many face‐to‐face encounters are related to screen communication. However, digital competence combined with life circumstances appears to be the source of a new divide between welfare service users.
In this article we study class differences, as measured by the Erikson, Goldthorpe and Portocarero (EGP) class scheme, in long-term sickness absence, and, using data from three years of the Norwegian Level of Living Survey, we investigate the possible explanatory mechanisms for these differences in Norway. Our results show that there are class differences in sickness absence especially among men, but also among women. The two main underlying factors are education and physical work environment. The results suggest that selection mechanisms and material conditions are important, and prompt the question whether psychosocial work environment explains the marked class differences in sickness absence.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.