Italy: EWCO CAR on WORK-RELATED STRESS

  • Observatory: EurWORK
  • Topic:
  • Published on: 22 November 2010



About
Country:
Italy
Author:
Institution:

Disclaimer: This information is made available as a service to the public but has not been edited by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The content is the responsibility of the authors.

After the 2008 implementation of the European Framework Agreement, work-related stress is very high in agenda amongst practitioners and consultants. Notwithstanding several surveys at both company and regional level, especially in banking sector, and guidelines from occupational health services of several regions, Inail (the national work accident insurance) and Ispesl (the National Institute for workplace health and safety) focus on the organisational dimensions, there is no clear evidence of interventions focused on primary prevention.

Q1 Monitoring work-related stress at the national level

1. Are there any instruments in place to monitor work-related stress at the national level, for example, national surveys, sectoral studies, epidemiological studies, action research, or other research programmes? Please describe the main sources of information available on work-related stress in your country (coverage, methodology, definitions used, etc.).

While the Isfol Quality of work survey investigate only general health issues (work accidents or work-related illnesses in general), according to the 2002 “Inquiry over changing work” carried out by Democratici di Sinistra (DS), the main centre-left Italian party (see IT0511NU02), stress is the most reported risk factor, mentioned by 45.7% of respondents: it decreases as hierarchical responsibilities decrease (from 60% amongst managers to 27.3% amongst blue collars).

Inail (Italian national insurance against work accidents) summarizes in its annual report claims of “work-related psychological diseases” for (total or partial) incapacity to work which causal nexus with “ill-functioning of work organization submitted” must be shown by applicant, as all “non tabled” diseases: they include “post-traumatic diseases due to stress” and “disease of chronic adaptation”. Numbers show a moderate increase up to 2007, then a decline in 2008 while claims for work related diseases (WRDs) increase over the whole period. It should be noted that the new eligibility criteria and diseases have been updated in July 2008 and therefore claims they may be affected by a “transitory” phase.

Table 1 Claims for incapacity due to work-related psychological diseases
2004-2008
 

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Agriculture

2

3

4

5

2

Manufacturing and private services

485

511

486

505

429

Public administration

26

24

21

36

29

Total

513

538

511

546

470

Total reported work-related diseases

26596

26752

26787

28778

29704

% total reported work-related diseases

1,9

2,0

1,9

1,9

1,6

Source: Inail, Annual Report 2008

The issue of work-related stress rose in the early 2000s, especially in the banking sector because of impressive transformations since mid 90s: Privatization of public-owned banks (8 over 10 major banks in 1992 were controlled by the State or a public institution, currently just one), fast concentration process and bitter competition focused on market shares caused a substantial breakdown in well-consolidated equilibria in the sector and within banks - the shift focus shifted from conformity to administrative rules supervised by Banca d’Italia to marketing, especially financial products for the retail sector caused a sudden change in well established work routines. Most surveys are carried out at local (regional or subregional) level (Mencarelli et al., 2006; Balestro et al., 2005; Pappone et al., 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008; Giaccone et al. 2010). Only the surveys carried out by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Prevention (Istituto Superiore per la Prevenzione e la Sicurezza del Lavoro, IT0901019I ) and by Ambrosi et al. (2006) are carried out at national-level, this latter restricted to a single company. All these surveys are promoted by or carried out in cooperation with sectoral trade unions, which take in charge the distribution and collection of the questionnaires in order to reduce the cost of the research.

At intersectoral level, Regione Veneto and Ispesl carried out in 2005 the pilot project Health and safety at work in the Veneto region (in Italian, 985Kb PDF) including both a CATI survey on working conditions and health and safety risk prevention with 5,000 interviews and a survey focused on work-related stress submitted by 30 occupational physicians in their companies they had responsibility of health control, according to a methodology very close to the French survey Sumer. They collected 2174 questionnaires in 30 companies covering all industries.

Further surveys dealing with stress were carried out in supermarkets in Marche (Pignoloni, 2006, see also IT0605019I), on the behalf of the service sector trade union Filcams-Cgil, in the clothing factory Corneliani (Cenni et al., 1996), and in the call centres located in Piemonte (Gilardi et al., 2007, see IT0707059I).

Amongst company-level surveys, a survey covering manufacturing firms with more than 20 employees in the province of Reggio Emilia investigates general perception on health and safety, including stress (Antonioli et al., 2007, see IT0710019I).

The Job Content Questionnaire is the most adopted methodology (Busilacchi, 2005; Cenni et al., 1996, Ispesl-Regione Veneto, 2006; Gilardi et al. 2007), each with different adaptations; Ambrosi et al (2006) adopt the test OSI (Occupational Stress Indicator); Mancarelli et al (2006) and Ispesl (2010) adopt the BMI (Burnout Maslach Inventory), the former combined with the COPSOQ (Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire); Balestro et al. (2005) the questionnaire Work Positive (elaborato da Health Scotland e da Health & Safety Authority Ireland; finally, the surveys performed by Pappone et al. (2001-2008) combine the SOS questionnaire, aimed to assess organization-related risk factors, the Zung (1971) SAS (Self-rating Anxiety Scale) inventory in order to assess anxiety symptoms from 20 behaviours or feelings according to a scale ranging “1” (little or none of the time) to “4” (most of the time), and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (SDS) questionnaire in order to assess the reliability.

The sample extent varies from less than 200 interviews in Corneliani (Cenni et al., 1996) to over 10,000 (Balestro et al., 2005). Since the questionnaire collection is usually carried out in a non-professional way by trade unions, none of them adopt a sample design but rather a “snowball approach”, thus questioning their representativeness. However, care adopted in the distribution phase make sometimes the sample very close to some socio-demographic characteristic of the reference population, as mentioned by Giaccone et al. (2010) for gender, professional roles, and unionization rates.

2. Provide, if available, data on the overall level of work-related stress based on the identified sources. If possible, identify the main trends in this matter presenting data (e.g. for the last five years).

Unfortunately, these surveys do not allow for reconstructing any trend since their reference populations are not homogeneous, except in Campania (Pappone et al., 2003, 2008), which allows to draw some trend as the survey was repeated. Unfortunately only the figures from the 2008 survey are engendered while those from 2003 are not.

Pappone, Garofalo (2008) summarize and compare various surveys their research group carried out since 2003. In Campania, the largest southern region, they show an increase of those reporting medium and high levels of anxiety (from 11% of the overall sample to 19% amongst men and 18% amongst women) and a considerable decline amongst those reporting medium anxiety levels (from 30% of the overall population to 3% amongst men and 16% amongst women). No explanation for this trend is provided. The 2005 survey they carried out in another southern region, Puglia, shows by much higher levels of serious anxiety (30% amongst men and 28% amongst women) and comparable levels of medium anxiety (14.2% amongst men and 10.7% amongst women), especially amongst financial product promoters and sellers.

Table 2 - Levels of anxiety amongst employees in bank industry - Campania 2003-2008
Zung Self-Rating anxiety scale, % values
 

Campania 2003

Campania 2008

 

Total

men

women

Well-being

35

47

36

Situational anxiety

32

31

30

Medium anxiety / depression

22

3

16

Serious anxiety

11

19

18

Source: Pappone, Garofalo (2008)

According to Mencarelli et al.(2006) amongst bank employees in Lumbardy, 17% of respondents show burnout symptoms, while 20% of respondents perceive work overload.

According to Ambrosi et al. (2006) focused on bank sector, clerks not handling money (that is those promoting and selling financial products and dealing with enterprises) report the highest levels of stress.

According to Balestro et al. (2005), 70% of respondents perceive “low” or “very low” motivation amongst colleagues, 53% is worried about their health and safety at work and although relationships with both colleagues and supervisors are widely satisfactory, while relationships with customers and organisational change are seen as source of strong stress according to 37% and 45% of respondents respectively. Further, 28% of respondents believe that stress levels “often” prevent them from performing tasks at their best. According to Ispesl (2010) 17.7% report a state of anxiety and 22.7% an uncertain equilibrium.

According to Giaccone et al. (2010), 33.6% of respondents consider their work as a source of excessive stress while 19.8% worsen their health: such figures are higher amongst respondents selling and/or promoting financial products (respectively 48% and 21.6%).

According to the intersectoral surveys carried out by Ispesl and Regione Veneto (2005), stress is the most reported disease (26.9% of respondents in comparison to 17.8% reporting backache) and it is more reported as the time working at high pace increases. When investigating organisational stress, 26.6% of 2,174 respondents (40.96% amongst women) are classified as “high strain”(that is with low decision latitude and high job demands, according to the Karasek’s task-control model), with the highest concentration amongst those working in the trade (61.7%) and in the health (43.9%) sectors.

According to Pignoloni (2006), 8.3% of respondents report insomnia and 11.4% anxiety (14.3% amongst women).

According to Antonioli et al. (2007), work-related stress is reported on the increase in 65.6% of workplaces in the manufacturing industry in the province of Reggio Emilia while it declines in 3.7% of workplaces.

Q2 Risk factors for work-related stress

Based on the main or most used monitoring instruments available (identified in Q1), please provide information on the following risk factors for stress.

Note: If available, please provide information on the main changes or trends in text. Any tables with figures illustrating those trends should be included in annex (if possible, breakdown the data by gender and/or other relevant variables).

Quantitative demands: workload, working hours, quantity and intensity of work.

According to Ispesl-Regione Veneto (2005) survey on stress, high strain workers report a higher probability of reporting absences at work and work accidents than low strain ones, that is those employees reporting high levels of decision latitude and low job demands (respectively 70% and 107% higher). Similarly, according to Giaccone and Pullia (2010) high strain workers report more often “work causes an excessive stress” (41.1% with respect to 33.9% as average) and “work worsens my health” (24.8% with respect to the average 19.3%, see table 3).

Qualitative demands: these refer to emotional and cognitive demands at work and may include work-life balance issues, complexity of work, dealing with angry clients and suffering patients, feeling afraid, having to hide emotions, etc.

Mencarelli at al. (2006) and Ispesl (2010) outline that low satisfaction and poor identification with their companies increases the risks of burnout. However, none of them provide any evidence. According to Giaccone and Pullia (2010), both harassment and bullying (38.5%) and pressures (42.6%) from customers are associated with higher levels of “excessive stress” amongst employees in banking industry.

Relations at work which may include social support from colleagues or supervisor, management style and relationships with colleagues/managers/the organisation; violence and harassment at work.

According to Giaccone and Pullia (2010), which investigate organisational determinants of stress amongst employees in banking in the North-Eastern regions, employees reporting psychosocial risk factors report higher levels of “excessive stress”, especially harassment and bullying from superiors (54.3% while the average is 33.6%), while those reporting ergonomic and physical climate risk factors report more often than work worsen their health (table 4).

Autonomy, decision latitude and room for manoeuvre: control over work, including control over pace of work and over job content and decision-making power; predictability of work, use and possibility to develop skills.

The issue is investigated by those surveys using the Karasek Job Content Questionnaire. For instance, according to the Ispesl-Regione Veneto (2005) survey on organizational stress, there is no significant impact of decision latitude per se on both absence from work and reporting a work accident, while they have only when job demands and job latitudes are taken into account jointly.

Individual and collective mechanisms for employees’ involvement, particularly in relation to organisational change and change management, including communication of change.

According to Balestro et al. (2005), 80% of respondents believe that both the planning and the top-down communication of the organisational changes subsequent to mergers amongst banks was “not well” or “badly” managed by the company.

The perception of the role that the employee holds in the organisation and whether the employee is clear about what is expected of them in terms of their job; clarity of the management changes, i.e., how organisations manage and communicate change; motivation; over commitment and reward.

According to Balestro et al. (2005), 74% of respondents report poor or lacking clarity about organization change while just 49.4% are well or fairly well informed about decisions within their team or sector they work in. No evidence is provided about their link with stress.

Conflicts of value and organisational justice.

Balestro et al. (2005), Ambrosi et al. (2006), Giaccone et al. (2010) report that financial products promoters and sellers report the highest levels of stress amongst those working in the bank industry because they often have to sell “junk” financial products as “good quality” ones, of tight control on target achievement set up by marketing top management. On the other hand, Pappone et al. (2006) report higher levels of serious anxiety within bank clerks working in the back-office rather than those handling money in the front office (29%) and selling financial products (26.4%, table 5).

Precariousness of work (i.e. nature of the employment contract).

According to the DS “Inquiry over changing work”, respondents having a non-permanent contract report lower levels of stress (32.6%) than those reporting job insecurity in general (41.9%) and the overall average (45.7%). This is due to the discontinuity of work and lower domestic responsibilities characteristic of younger workers (Carrieri et al., 2005).

If there are no surveys or large scale research programmes available, please provide information on how stress is measured/assessed in other sources: qualitative research data on stress risk assessment at company level or sectoral level, studies with a focus on specific occupations, etc.

Q3 Work-related stress outcomes

Please provide information (including references to the sources or studies) on stress-related outcomes:

Individual outcomes (e.g. mental health illnesses, including depression and anxiety, and physical illnesses, such as cardiovascular diseases, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), disabilities, fatigue and sleeping problems);

According to Gilardi et al. (2007), which investigates risk factors and health in call-centres located in Piementonte, 69.2% of men and 77.9% of women working in call centres report insomnia, anxiety and depression and 27.7% of men and 35% of women reported they needed medical intervention - such mental diseases are the fourth reported health problem after problems with vision, headaches and MDSs. Amongst psychological diseases, anxiety is the most reported symptom (63.2% amongst women, 49.2% amongst men) with the most widespread need of medical intervention (respectively 28.7% and 18.5% of respondents, table 6). Further, 77% of employees report the raise or worsening of those symptoms after working in the call centre, and 11% report being absent in last four weeks for an average of 6 days.

According to the Giaccone and Pullia (2010) study, which investigates organisational determinants of stress amongst employees in banking in the North-Eastern regions, both high strain and active workers (employees reporting both high decision latitude and high job demands) display worse health symptoms than low strained colleagues (displaying high levels of decision latitude and low job demands), especially for overall fatigue (respectively 74.4% of high strained, 73,3% of active workers and 30% of low strained), irritability (respectively 64%, 67.2% and 30%), anxiety (respectively 61.2%, 55.2% and 16.7%) stomach ache (respectively 52.8%, 52% and 26.7%), allergies (respectively 14%, 20% and 10%), thyroid problems (respectively 6.6%, 6.4% and 0%), and other endocrine and metabolism problems (respectively 8.1%, 10.4% and 0%). Similarly, when respondents report good quality social relationships at work symptoms reported are all below average.

The social construction of stress by group of workers: can you provide references and main findings of research discussing this issue; factors acknowledged as stressful by some group of workers; groups which refer to stress or not to describe unsatisfactory situations

Gilioli and Palmi (2005) investigate post-traumatic stress diseases (PTSD) amongst 22 employees in Lumbardy who have been victims of robbery at workplace. The interview includes several tests: Questionnaire for the survey of subjective symptoms, the DSM-IV structural clinical interview for Post traumatic stress disorders (PTSD), the Big Five questionnaire, the Wartegg test, the Raven PM38 and the scale of emotional weakness. However, since the interviews were carried out few months after the robbery, underestimation is supposed because of PTSD long latency periods.

Boccalon (2001) investigated burnout amongst workers of the health sector. By using the MBI test, 56% of physicians and 70% of nurses show some signs of burn-out, although they mainly attribute their feelings of fatigue to the non-work environment: while amongst the former such symptoms decline with age (from 64% within physicians younger than 29 years to 52% amongst those aged 40-49), the opposite is observed among the latter (from 28% amongst nurses younger than 29 to 72.9% within those aged 40-49).

Organisational outcomes (effects that individual stress outcomes have on organisations, e.g. absence from work, job satisfaction, morale, level of commitment, productivity, and the impact of these outcomes on organisations’ costs, performance, or innovation capacity);

Cenni et al. (1996) and Boccalon (2001) outline the impact of stress and burnout over absenteeism: in this latter study, physicians, which report lower burnout symptoms than nurses (respectively 56% and 70%) also report lower absence from work (respectively 9.3% and 16.3%).

Labour Market or Societal level outcomes (the ‘costs’ to society of stress). This could include issues such as higher levels of unemployment and of recipients of incapacity benefits, costs to health and welfare systems, loss of productivity.

The issue is yet unexplored.

Q4 Interventions on work-related stress management

What relevant information is available about interventions on work-related stress management and their effectiveness?

  • Are any interventions in place to prevent or manage work-related stress? If so, what kind of interventions are they? Please describe them making reference to coverage, effectiveness, since when they are in place, etc.

  • Which organisations are promoting these interventions? E.g. at national level (health and safety authority, labour inspectorate, social partners, government), at sectoral or at company level?

  • Are the interventions devised to be implemented at the primary (action on causes) / secondary (action on individuals) or tertiary (action on the consequences of stress) stage?

  • Are any common instruments to measure stress at organisational level being used, developed, tested or assessed? Please describe them, indicating since when they are in place.

  • Please identify and describe up to three examples of good practice and their effectiveness in terms of stress management, with a special focus on the lessons learned. These can be at national, sectoral or organisational level.

  • Are there any public discussions and/or interventions that address specifically the identification, prevention and management of stress due to organisational change and restructuring? If yes, please summarise them.

According to trade union experts on health and safety (H&S) issues, poor attention on organisational aspects of stress induces a shift from primary to secondary prevention, although most guidelines stress the importance of primary prevention: both Ispesl in 2002 and Inail in 2005 issued national guidelines for the prevention of work-related stress, this latter as a part of its H&S management system (a certification standard agreed with social partners in 2001). On 2010 the Inter-regional workplace prevention committee and Ispesl issued new guidelines on prevention of WR-stress, both outlining its organizational dimension and the need of workers’ involvement and their representatives.

This trend seems exacerbating after the 2008 implementation of the 2004 framework agreement on work-related stress. Further guidelines have been issued by regions, which are responsible for occupational health policies and inspections .

Primary prevention meets different difficulties in SMEs and in large enterprises: while the former tend to consider H&S as a cost to minimize and mental disease as an individual problem unless there is an “objective” risk (eg. drivers in logistic areas), the latter tend to change continuously their organisational structure, thus making more problematic to establish a nexus (from the enterprise point of view) between an “organisation” having a permanently temporary status and mental disease (see Rubini, 2010 for a critical appraisal).

Social partners consider the case of Corneliani, a medium-size clothing manufacturing plant based in Mantua, as the seminal approach to primary prevention according to a participative approach based on active intervention of both workers’ representatives and occupational health services in order to face the increase of absenteeism after a re-organization according to a time-to-market approach (13.4% over 783 employees, 78% of them women) combined with highly repetitive tasks and short production cycles: the increase in demands and the lower control over their tasks raised widespread stress. Results of the survey above mentioned allow company’s management and trade union to bargain several adaptations in work organization by tailoring the pace of work, training and improving social support: after such intervention, absenteeism declined as a clear signal of more sustainable working conditions.

Q5 Commentary

Please provide your own/your institution/centre view on work-related stress, referring to, for example, national debates about the topic or any other issue considered important from your national perspective which was not covered by this questionnaire.

Work-related stress is currently very high on the agenda of practitioners, human resources and health and safety consultants because of the simultaneous implementation of the European framework agreement on work-related stress and new legislation on health and safety in 2008. These new regulations change the intervention perspective, by introducing a shift from the tertiary prevention of the most blasting phenomena such as mobbing, where several regions introduced specific measures, in favour of a primary and secondary approach: this notwithstanding the 2002 and 2005 guidelines, issued respectively by Ispesl (the national institute for safety at work) and Inail (the national insurance against work accidents) stressing the importance of primary prevention.

However, the participatory approach does not seem very widespread at company-level, including in those industries, such as banking, where trade unions deserve a strong attention to the issue. This depends on the close links between stress and managerial prerogatives over work organization, as stated by the Italian civil code.

References

  • Ambrosi L., R. Zefferino, F. Fischetti (2006) Attività lavorativa in ambito bancario e rischio psichico, studio dell’organizzazione del lavoro e della tipologia delle mansioni (“Work activities in banks and psychic risks, organization study and type of tasks”). ISPESL- Università di Foggia 2006. Available online at: http://www.csspd.it/download/ALLEGATI_CONTENUTI/310706_Ambrosi_Zefferino_Fischetti_studio.pdf

  • Antonioli, D., Delsoldato, L., Mazzanti, M. and Pini, P., Dinamiche innovative, relazioni industriali, performance nelle imprese manifatturiere (Innovative dynamics, industrial relations, performance in manufacturing companies), Milan, Angeli, 2007.

  • Balestro S., M. Ciani, D. Ferrazza, C. Frascheri, A.P. Jeri, M. Minora, M. Mocci, B. Pighi, E. Tagliarini (2005), Stress in ambiente bancario (“Stress in banking environment”). Available online at: http://www.fiba.it/iniziative-documenti/ricerche/indagine-stress/stress-in-ambiente-bancario.pdf

  • Boccalon G. (2001), “Chi cura rischia di bruciarsi” (“Who takes care risks to burn”) Il Sole 24 ore – Sanità e management.

  • Carrieri M., Damiano C., Ugolini B. (2005), Il lavoro che cambia (“The changing work”). Rome, Ediesse.

  • Cenni P., F. Barbieri, G. Germani (1996), Influenze individuali e organizzative sull’insorgenza dello stress occupazionale nelle lavoratrici del comparto tessile (“Individual and organisational influences on the insurgence of occupational stress amongst female employees in textile industry”), Cgil Lombardia, http://www.lomb.cgil.it/sedi/mn/corneliani/indice_piu_rapporto.htm.

  • Censis (2006), Personale delle banche: identità e sviluppo di una risorsa in trasformazione. Fabi 2006.

  • Giaccone M., Pullia G. (2010) “Lo stress fra i lavoratori del credito” (“Stress amongst bank workers”, temporary title). Forthcoming.

  • Ispesl (2010), Rischi psicosociale, partecipazione attiva e prevenzione (“Psychosocial risks, active participation and prevention”), available online: http://www.ispesl.it/documenti_catalogo/RischiPsicosocialiSettoreCredito.pdf

  • Gilardi L., Fubini L., Falcone U., Migliardi A., D’Errico A., Mamo C., Quarta D., Silipo G., Fattori di rischio occupazionale nei call centres (Occupational risk factors in call centres), available online at. http://www.dors.it/alleg/0201/reportmaggio2007.pdf

  • Mencarelli, Di Bisceglie M., Castiglioni F. (2006), Benessere lavorativo e rischi psicosociali nella professione bancaria: una indagine in Lombardia. (Well-being at work and psychosocial risks in banking occupations: a survey in Lumbardy”). Available online at: http://www.uilca.it/genfile.php?id=794

  • P. Pappone (2006), Indagine conoscitiva per la valutazione dello stress e del disagio organizzativo in alcuni istituti bancari operanti in Puglia. Analisi d’insieme dei risultati, (“Survey in order to assess stress and organisational risk factors in some banks in Puglia: an overall analysis of results”). Available online at: http://www.fisacpuglia.it/Stress/relazionePAPPONE%20BARI06%20corr.pdf

  • Pignoloni L. (2006) Sicurezza e salute dei lavoratori nella grande distribuzione organizzata (“Workers’ health and safety in retail chain”). Available online at: http://www.iresmarche.net/attivita.htm

  • Zung WWK (1971). “A rating instrument for anxiety disorders”. Psychosomatics. 12.

Appendix

Table 3 - Impact of work on health by level of strain in banking industry
North-Eastern regions, % values
 

No impact

Work improves my health

Work worsens my health

Work source of acceptable stress

Work causes excessive stress

Total

Active workers

3,6

0,0

17,6

43,0

35,8

65,6

High strain

4,0

0,8

24,2

29,8

41,1

23,9

Low strain

30,0

3,3

13,3

50,0

3,3

5,7

Passive workers

24,0

0,0

24,0

44,0

8,0

4,9

Total

6,2

0,4

19,3

40,3

33,9

100.0

Source: Giaccone and Pullia (2010)

Table 4 - Risk factors by impact of work over health in banking industry
North-Eastern regions, % values
 

No impact

Work improves my health

Work worsen my health

Work source of acceptable stress

Work causes excessive stress

Ergonomic factors

2,9

0,4

25,6

34,0

37,0

Lay out

5,7

0,4

19,4

39,2

35,2

Physical Climate

4,5

0,3

23,4

36,0

35,7

Noise

3,6

0,0

20,3

37,5

38,5

Hygienic services

1,9

0,6

19,6

41,1

36,7

Robbery risk

2,7

0,9

16,2

43,2

36,9

Harassment and bullying from colleagues

4,0

0,0

16,0

52,0

28,0

Harassment and bullying from superiors

2,2

0,0

15,2

28,3

54,3

Harassment and bullying from customers

0,0

0,0

15,4

46,2

38,5

Pressures from colleagues

3,0

1,0

17,8

39,6

38,6

Pressures from superiors

1,9

0,3

19,6

34,4

43,7

Pressures from customers

0,7

0,0

17,6

39,0

42,6

Discriminations to myself

5,6

0,0

20,3

30,8

43,4

Discriminations to colleagues

4,6

0,0

17,6

36,1

41,7

Total

6,2

0,2

19,8

40,1

33,6

Source: Giaccone and Pullia (2010)

Table 5 - Anxiety by professional activity in the banking industry
% values, Puglia 2005
 

Sellers

Front office clerks

Back office clerks

Headquarters

Supervisors

Serious anxiety

26.4

29

33.9

20.5

25.3

Medium anxiety

12.6

13.4

9.4

10.2

9.5

Situational anxiety

29.1

28.7

26.8

27.0

21.1

Well-being

31.9

29

29.9

42.3

44.2

Source: Pappone, 2006

Table 6 Reported psychological problems and need for medical intervention, by sex
Call centres’ employees in Piemonte, % values

 

Men

Women

 

Reported

Need for medical intervention

Reported

Need for medical intervention

Insomnia

47.7

17.9

52.5

20.4

Anxiety

49.2

18.5

63.2

28.7

Depression

40.0

14.4

43.0

19.1

Source: Gilardi et al. (2007)

Table 7 - Symptoms by job content in the banking industry
North-Eastern Italy, % values

 

Active workers

High strain

Low strain

Passive workers

Total

Back pain

57,7

61,3

46,7

64,0

58,3

Overall fatigue

72,3

74,4

30,0

56,0

69,6

Upper limbs pain

20,9

28,0

20,0

32,0

23,1

Headache

61,2

72,0

46,7

44,0

62,1

Vision Problems

54,2

66,4

46,7

60,0

57,0

Anxiety

61,2

55,2

26,7

40,0

56,7

Lower limbs pains

18,2

23,2

16,7

20,0

19,4

Irritability

64,0

67,2

30,0

44,0

61,8

Hearing problems

11,0

13,6

6,7

4,0

11,1

Respiratory diseases

8,4

15,2

0,0

8,0

9,5

Dermatologic problems

19,4

16,8

13,3

16,0

18,3

Allergies

14,0

20,0

10,0

4,0

14,8

Stomach ache

52,8

52,0

26,7

24,0

49,7

Traumas

4,8

8,8

3,3

0,0

5,4

Cardiovascular diseases

5,1

6,4

0,0

8,0

5,2

Inappetency

11,0

9,6

0,0

4,0

9,7

Thyroid problems

6,6

6,4

0,0

4,0

6,0

Diabetes

1,8

0,0

0,0

0,0

1,2

Obesity

7,5

7,2

3,3

0,0

6,8

Other endocrinous and metabolism problems

8,1

10,4

0,0

8,0

8,2

Source: Giaccone and Pullia (2010)

Mario Giaccone, Cesos

Useful? Interesting? Tell us what you think. Hide comments

Lisa kommentaar