重返工作岗位协调员对其相对于工人的角色的看法:话语分析。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-24 DOI:10.1007/s10926-023-10167-7
P Hopwood, E MacEachen, M Crouch, E Neiterman, E McKnight, C Malachowski
{"title":"重返工作岗位协调员对其相对于工人的角色的看法:话语分析。","authors":"P Hopwood, E MacEachen, M Crouch, E Neiterman, E McKnight, C Malachowski","doi":"10.1007/s10926-023-10167-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This paper describes how Canadian Return to Work coordinators (RTWC) framed their job roles relative to workers in ways that went beyond the usual professional norms of helping worker recovery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth interviews were conducted with 47 RTWCs across Canada in 2018-2019. We used critical discourse analysis to analyze the way coordinators viewed workers in the complex, multi-stakeholder system of RTW.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified four ways that RTWCs positioned themselves relative to workers: as trust builders, experts, detectives and motivators. These roles reflected RTWCs position within the system; however, their discourse also contributed to the construction of a moral hierarchy that valued worker motivation and framed some workers as attempting to exploit the RTW system.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RTWCs' positions of power in the coordination process warrant further investigation of how they exercise judgement and discretion, particularly when the process depends on their ability to weigh evidence and manage cases in what might be seen as an objective and fair manner.</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"783-792"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Return-to-Work Coordinators' Perceptions of Their Roles Relative to Workers: A Discourse Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"P Hopwood, E MacEachen, M Crouch, E Neiterman, E McKnight, C Malachowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10926-023-10167-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This paper describes how Canadian Return to Work coordinators (RTWC) framed their job roles relative to workers in ways that went beyond the usual professional norms of helping worker recovery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth interviews were conducted with 47 RTWCs across Canada in 2018-2019. We used critical discourse analysis to analyze the way coordinators viewed workers in the complex, multi-stakeholder system of RTW.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified four ways that RTWCs positioned themselves relative to workers: as trust builders, experts, detectives and motivators. These roles reflected RTWCs position within the system; however, their discourse also contributed to the construction of a moral hierarchy that valued worker motivation and framed some workers as attempting to exploit the RTW system.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RTWCs' positions of power in the coordination process warrant further investigation of how they exercise judgement and discretion, particularly when the process depends on their ability to weigh evidence and manage cases in what might be seen as an objective and fair manner.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"783-792\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-023-10167-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-023-10167-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本文描述了加拿大重返工作岗位协调员(RTWC)如何以超越帮助工人康复的通常专业规范的方式,构架他们相对于工人的工作角色:2018-2019 年,我们对加拿大各地的 47 名 RTWC 进行了深入访谈。我们使用批判性话语分析来分析协调员在复杂的多利益相关者 RTW 系统中看待工人的方式:我们确定了 RTWC 相对于工人的四种定位方式:信任建立者、专家、侦探和激励者。这些角色反映了 RTWC 在该系统中的地位;然而,他们的话语也有助于构建一种道德等级制度,这种制度重视工人的积极性,并将一些工人诬陷为试图利用 RTW 系统:RTWCs 在协调过程中的权力地位值得进一步调查他们如何行使判断力和自由裁量权,尤其是当协调过程依赖于他们以可能被视为客观公正的方式权衡证据和管理案件的能力时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Return-to-Work Coordinators' Perceptions of Their Roles Relative to Workers: A Discourse Analysis.

Purpose: This paper describes how Canadian Return to Work coordinators (RTWC) framed their job roles relative to workers in ways that went beyond the usual professional norms of helping worker recovery.

Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 47 RTWCs across Canada in 2018-2019. We used critical discourse analysis to analyze the way coordinators viewed workers in the complex, multi-stakeholder system of RTW.

Results: We identified four ways that RTWCs positioned themselves relative to workers: as trust builders, experts, detectives and motivators. These roles reflected RTWCs position within the system; however, their discourse also contributed to the construction of a moral hierarchy that valued worker motivation and framed some workers as attempting to exploit the RTW system.

Conclusions: RTWCs' positions of power in the coordination process warrant further investigation of how they exercise judgement and discretion, particularly when the process depends on their ability to weigh evidence and manage cases in what might be seen as an objective and fair manner.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law.  A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Tensions of Low-Back Pain and Lifting; Bridging Clinical Low-Back Pain and Occupational Lifting Guidelines. Correction: Organisational Policies and Practices for the Inclusion of Vulnerable Workers: A Scoping Review of the Employer's Perspective. Social Insurance Literacy Among the Sick-listed-A Study of Clients' Comprehension and Self-Rated System Comprehensibility of the Sickness Insurance System. Evaluating Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation Services Among Injured Workers Treated in a Canadian Workers' Compensation System: A Population-Based Study. Return-to-Work Coordinators' Perceptions of Their Roles Relative to Workers: A Discourse Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1