Workplace stress of occupational safety specialists in Croatia and Serbia

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Numerous studies have shown that work often causes stress in employees and even in occupational safety experts. Occupational stress can lead to serious health consequences for employees. As the job of occupational safety experts is very responsible, they are more exposed to workplace stress and more vulnerable to its consequences. This study resulted with expertise on the work related stress of safety experts in Croatia and Serbia.

OBJECTIVE:

This study examined workplace stress of occupational safety experts in Croatia and Serbia.

METHODS:

Surveys were used to collect original data and statistical methods were used for data processing and analysis.

RESULTS:

There was a correlation between the level of stress on safety expert’s jobs and stress levels related to the status of safety experts as dependent variables and the organization profile related with safety experts’ employment as independent variables. Stress of safety experts related to activities and the status of safety experts were of medium level.

CONCLUSION:

There is a need for preventive protection from stress in this profession. Continuous education of safety experts plays a key role in stress prevention, not only for the safety experts but it also plays a key role in stress management throughout the organization.

Keywords

Expert job stress level prevention reduction

1 Introduction

Over the last few years, workplace stress has considerably increased in the vast majority of developed and developing countries [1] and for many employees working life is an arena where people spend a great part of their lives [2], since work itself can have both a positive and negative impact on employees [3]. Workplace stress can be defined as a specific interaction between employees and the characteristics of a particular workplace and types of jobs in the organisation. It is generated by the pressure of job demands and the response of people to those demands. Lazarus considers that this is a condition in which an individual cannot meet the overwhelming demands of the work environment [4], while Sauter and Murphy define stress as a series of harmful physiological, psychological and behavioural reactions in which job demands are not consistent with the abilities, potentials and needs of the individual [5].

The analysis of relevant literature confirms the influence of various work-related psychosocial risk factors on the emergence of a number of unwanted physiological and psychological reactions to employees, their productivity and the productivity of the organisation itself [6]. Van der Doef and Maes [7], Kahn and Byosiere [8], Örtqvist and Wincent [9] conducted a meta-analysis of 295 studies involving the role of job insecurity and ambiguity, conflict of roles and work overload and their effects on the results of employees. All analysed stressors are related to growing tension (decreased psychological health) and loss of motivation (emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, reduced personal achievement) but also less favourable attitudes to work (job satisfaction, organisational dedication and fluctuation). The fundamental conclusion of the stress theory is that there is a correlation between stress and productivity [9]. The starting idea is that physical stress associated with workplace stress increases performance to a certain level, after which stress causes a drop in performance, as evidenced by numerous scientific researches [10].

Theory and empirical research undoubtedly confirm that work is a source of stress on employees [11, 12]. There is a variety of ways which can alleviate workplace stress through increased social support and development of the feeling of identification and belonging to the organisation, and/or subjective integration in the organisation [13, 14]. Some approaches to stress management combine risk management principles [15], best practice for stress prevention through organisational learning processes [16], organisational development and human resource development [17] and participatory approach. Various studies emphasise the importance of the support provided by the management in managing workplace stress. However, despite a growing body of literature documents the association between occupational injury and poor mental health [18], there is a lack of research focused on workplace stress of the specialists who play a key role in solving the issues of occupational safety and health. Therefore, the subject of this research is the issue of workplace stress related to the jobs of occupational safety specialists in Croatia and Serbia.

In Croatia, the jobs performed by occupational safety specialists are regulated by the [19] and they involve professional assistance to the employer and his authorised persons, workers and trustees for occupational safety and health in enhancing occupational safety, participating in business strategy development and operational plans and business plans of the employer in the area of occupational safety, participating in the implementation of management methods or techniques for performing the strategy, participating in the risk assessment process, internal control of the implementation of occupational safety rules, collecting the data on occupational injuries and professional diseases and preparing written reports of occupational injuries and professionals diseases and production of reports for the employer, co-operating with competent bodies and authorities, training workers, employers and supervisors for safe work, educating occupational safety representatives and assisting them in their work, participating in the workplace protection committee with the employer, co-operating with the employer when designing, building and reconstructing buildings and providing work equipment and other means of work, personal protective equipment and hazardous chemicals, etc.

In Serbia, the tasks of occupational safety specialists are regulated in a similar manner by the Law on Occupational Safety and Health [20]. It provides that these persons participate in the preparation of the Risk Assessment Act, exercise control and advise the employer in the planning, selecting, using and maintaining work resources, hazardous materials and personal protective equipment. They also participate in equipping and organising the workplace, organise preventive and periodic testing of work environment conditions and work equipment, daily monitor and control the implementation of measures for safety and health at work, perform the training of employees for safe and healthy work, cooperate with competent services, keep records, etc. Therefore, there are various tasks and activities that occupational safety specialists should perform at the workplace.

2 Method

The research problem can be identified as the gap in comprehensive knowledge on workplace stress of occupational safety specialists. Consequently, it is not possible to define any guidelines for preventive protection against stress of occupational safety specialists. On the basis of this, we can raise the following, scientifically and socially justified, research question: What is the condition of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists in Croatia and Serbia? The aim of the research is to obtain current knowledge on the issues of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists in Croatia and Serbia.

Based on the identified research problem and est-ablished research goal, we set up a general hypothesis (H0) and derived hypotheses of the scientific research (H1 - H6). General Hypothesis H0: There is a certain level of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists and, accordingly, a need for protection from stress. Derived hypotheses: H1:

There is a correlation between the stress level on occupational safety jobs and profile of occupational safety specialists. H2: There is a correlation between the stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists and the profile of occupational safety specialists. H3: There is a correlation between the stress level on occupational safety jobs and profile of work organisation where occupational safety specialists are employed. H4: There is a correlation between the stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists and profile of work organisation where occupational safety specialists are employed. H5: The stress level of occupational safety specialists related to their job and status is moderate. H6: There is a need for preventive protection against stress of occupational safety specialists.

To accomplish the research goal and verify the hypotheses, it is necessary to carry out the following research tasks:

Create the survey tool: an online questionnaire with established dependent and independent variables.

Perform the online survey on the sample.

Collect the data and conduct a statistical analysis.

Present and interpret the results, including the discussion and conclusions.

2.1 Methods

2.1.1 Survey method

We used the survey to collect original data. The type of the survey is descriptive-analytical, written and online, voluntary and completely anonymous. As a survey tool, we used an online questionnaire with a total of 53 closed questions categorised into 5 groups of questions.

2.1.1.1 Research variables. Independent variables:

Profile of occupational safety specialists (gender, age, level of education, total work experience).

Profile of work organisation (state, number of workers, type, activity).

Dependent variables:

Stress level on occupational safety jobs

Stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists

Assessment of the condition, consequences and needs for preventive stress protection of occupational safety specialists.

2.1.1.2 Research sample. The respondents in the survey are occupational safety specialists employed in the organisations in Croatia and Serbia. The estimated number of potential respondents is 6000 (initial set). The expected, planned and minimum number of respondents who will actively participate in the survey is:

more than 30,

at least 5%of the initial set (at least 300 respondents),

more than the minimum representative sample determined on the basis of the variability of the results of the key dependent variables of the research (minimum scientific sample).

2.1.2 Statistical methods

frequency (N)

percent (%)

sum (Σ)

arithmetic mean, average value (M)

standard population deviation (σ)

population variability coefficient (V), expressed in percentage (%).

Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) –for testing the correlation between the established dependent and independent variables of the research.

2.1.2.1 Survey data. The survey was conducted from 1 March 2019 to 15 March 2019. The on-line questionnaire was posted on the website: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1eOFJZslQLs6nqeQ65nGpBAwMd2orFDmNoA2RfHpAlVw/viewform . A total of 480 respondents participated in the survey. All questionnaires that the respondents filled out were taken as valid for the statistical analysis.

2.1.2.2 Testing the representativeness of the research sample. The representativeness of sample size was tested by calculating the size of a simple random sample, according to the formula: $n^{'} = {[\frac{z_{α / 2} \cdot V}{G_{r}}]}^{2}$ (1)

where:

n’ –previous size of a simple random sample

z_α/2- confidence or reliability coefficient related to the selected probability of estimation (i.e. z_α/2 = 1.96 for the probability of estimation 95 %or z_α/2 = 2.58 for the probability of estimation 99 %)

V - coefficient of population variability, expressed in percentages (%)

Gr –estimation error, relatively expressed in percentages (%).

The confidence or reliability coefficient of 2.58 relates to the selected probability of estimation of 99%. The coefficient of population variability, calculated as the average value of the population variability coefficient of all dependant variables, is 64.04 %. The estimation error was calculated relatively and it is 10%. Therefore, the sample size is n₀ = 273. Since the fraction (f = n₀/initial set) is f = 0.05, the sample size cannot be further reduced so that n_z = 273. The sample can be considered representative as all the criteria were met:

N (480) > 30

N (480) > 5 %n (300), N = 8,00 %n

N (480) > n_z (273).

The sample we used can be considered representative not only in size but also in other significant characteristics with respect to the research goal (the size of the organisation by the number of workers, type of the organisation by ownership, activity), as evidenced in the data analysis of the organisation profile.

3 Results

3.1 Profile of occupational safety specialists

Men make up the majority (70.63%) of respondents (occupational safety specialists), while women are in the minority (29.37%). Considering the age criterion, the most common (31.25%) age group is 51 to 60 years of age, followed by 41 to 50 years (30.63%), 31 to 40 years (22.50%), up to 30 years (8,13 %) and the oldest –over 60 (7,50 %). Most of the occupational safety specialists (65.00%) have a higher and/or high level of education (vocational or university graduate studies), while 20.63%of the respondents attended postgraduate studies. There are 4.38%masters of science among occupational safety specialists and 3.75%doctors of science (more in Serbia than Croatia). 31.25%of the respondents have over 30 years of total work experience, followed by 24.38%of the respondents with 21–30 years of experience, 23.75%with 11–20 years of experience, 16.68%with 4–10 years of experience and only 3.75%with up to 3 years of experience.

3.2 Profile of work organisation

The total of 76.88 %of the respondents are employed in the organisations in Croatia while the rest is employed in Serbia. In small organisations (with up to 50 employees) there are 19.38 %of occupational safety specialists. In medium-sized organisations (51–250 employees) 31.88 %of the respondents are employed. In large organisations (more than 250 employees) there are 48.75 %of occupational safety specialists (31.88 %in organisations with 250–1000 employees and 16.87 %in the organisations with more than 1000 employees). The majority of occupational safety specialists (48.75%) is employed in state and public organisations. Private organisations employ 42.50%of the respondents and mixed organisations (by ownership) employ the total of 8.75%. Industrial organisations hire the majority of occupational safety specialists (28.13%). They are followed by service agencies (22.50 %), public companies (20.00 %), other companies (19.38 %) and financial institutions (0.63 %). Legal or natural persons authorised for occupational safety hire 8.13 %of occupational safety specialists.

3.3 Stress level of occupational safety specialists

Occupational safety specialists rated their workplace stress by selecting the grades from 0 to 10, with 0 being stress free and 10 being the highest stress level.

Table 1
Stress level of occupational safety specialists

Question Jobs of occupational safety specialists Stress level

Lowest score Highest score Average mean 0–10 (M) Standard deviation (σ) Variability coefficient (V) %

9. Professional assistance to the employer and their attorneys in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety 0 10 5.34 2.78 52.08

10. Professional assistance to the employees in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety 0 10 4.61 2.73 59.32

11. Professional assistance to worker protection commissioners in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety 0 10 4.21 2.48 58.96

12. Participation in the development of a business strategy and operational plans and programs of the employer in part concerning occupational safety and participation in the implementation of management methods or techniques for implementing the strategy 0 10 5.39 2.95 54.69

13. Participation in designing occupational risk assessment 0 10 4.99 2.77 55.47

14. Creating instructions for safe work 0 10 4.27 2.88 67.44

15. Organisation of equipment testing 0 10 3.75 2.79 74.37

16. Organisation of environmental testing 0 10 3.61 2.68 74.10

17. Internal supervision of the application of the rules on occupational safety and encouragement and counselling of the employer and their authorised persons to address the inadequacy of workplace safety established by internal supervision 0 10 5.61 2.88 51.38

18. Collecting and analysing data related to accidents, occupational injuries, professional diseases and work-related illnesses and reporting on the incidents of occupational injuries and professional diseases for the needs of the employer 0 10 4.37 3.01 68.82

19. Keeping records on occupational safety 0 10 4.19 3.14 74.99

20. Cooperation with the bodies responsible for labour inspection matters 0 10 5.13 3.13 60.98

21. Cooperation with the institute responsible for occupational safety and health, institute for the improvement of occupational safety, and other state institutions 0 10 3.86 2.94 76.28

22. Cooperation with authorised legal and natural persons for occupational safety 0 10 3.39 2.65 78.32

23. Cooperation with the specialist of occupational medicine 0 10 3.09 2.77 89.55

24. Training workers for safe work 0 10 3.96 3.11 78.52

25. Training the employer and authorised person for safe work 0 10 4.64 2.99 64.46

26. Training workers’ commissioners for occupational safety and assisting in their work 0 10 4.02 2.84 70.65

27. Participation in occupational safety committee with the employer 0 10 4.36 2.89 66.13

28. Cooperation with the employer when designing, constructing and reconstructing buildings intended for work 0 10 4.99 3.07 61.54

29. Cooperation with the employer when purchasing work equipment and other tools for work 0 10 5.19 3.05 58.82

30. Cooperation with the employer when purchasing personal protective equipment 0 10 5.25 3.03 57.80

31. Cooperation with the employer when purchasing hazardous chemicals 0 10 4.26 3.25 76.35

32. Preparation and organisation of occupational safety on construction sites 0 10 4.89 3.35 68.48

33. Supervising the implementation of occupational safety procedures on construction sites 0 10 5.03 3.38 67.30

34. Participation in controlling alcohol and drug consumption at the workplace 0 10 5.26 3.27 62.17

35. Participation in the application of international certification standards for occupational safety, quality, risk management, corporate social responsibility etc. with the employer 0 10 4.46 2.95 66.25

36. Application of IT in occupational safety 0 10 3.59 2.85 79.56

37. Testimony in investigative, misdemeanour and criminal court proceedings 0 10 6.11 3.43 56.09

38. Professional development 0 10 3.59 3.18 88.59

39. Professional examination 0 10 5.08 3.39 66.77

40. Collaboration with professional associations 0 10 3.20 2.91 90.92

41. Participation at professional conferences 0 10 3.59 3.28 91.56

9.–41. Total 0 10 4.46 2.99 68.75

Question	Jobs of occupational safety specialists
9.	Professional assistance to the employer and their attorneys in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety	10	5.34	2.78	52.08
10.	Professional assistance to the employees in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety	10	4.61	2.73	59.32
11.	Professional assistance to worker protection commissioners in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety	10	4.21	2.48	58.96
12.	Participation in the development of a business strategy and operational plans and programs of the employer in part concerning occupational safety and participation in the implementation of management methods or techniques for implementing the strategy	10	5.39	2.95	54.69
13.	Participation in designing occupational risk assessment	10	4.99	2.77	55.47
14.	Creating instructions for safe work	10	4.27	2.88	67.44
15.	Organisation of equipment testing	10	3.75	2.79	74.37
16.	Organisation of environmental testing	10	3.61	2.68	74.10
17.	Internal supervision of the application of the rules on occupational safety and encouragement and counselling of the employer and their authorised persons to address the inadequacy of workplace safety established by internal supervision	10	5.61	2.88	51.38
18.	Collecting and analysing data related to accidents, occupational injuries, professional diseases and work-related illnesses and reporting on the incidents of occupational injuries and professional diseases for the needs of the employer	10	4.37	3.01	68.82
19.	Keeping records on occupational safety	10	4.19	3.14	74.99
20.	Cooperation with the bodies responsible for labour inspection matters	10	5.13	3.13	60.98
21.	Cooperation with the institute responsible for occupational safety and health, institute for the improvement of occupational safety, and other state institutions	10	3.86	2.94	76.28
22.	Cooperation with authorised legal and natural persons for occupational safety	10	3.39	2.65	78.32
23.	Cooperation with the specialist of occupational medicine	10	3.09	2.77	89.55
24.	Training workers for safe work	10	3.96	3.11	78.52
25.	Training the employer and authorised person for safe work	10	4.64	2.99	64.46
26.	Training workers’ commissioners for occupational safety and assisting in their work	10	4.02	2.84	70.65
27.	Participation in occupational safety committee with the employer	10	4.36	2.89	66.13
28.	Cooperation with the employer when designing, constructing and reconstructing buildings intended for work	10	4.99	3.07	61.54
29.	Cooperation with the employer when purchasing work equipment and other tools for work	10	5.19	3.05	58.82
30.	Cooperation with the employer when purchasing personal protective equipment	10	5.25	3.03	57.80
31.	Cooperation with the employer when purchasing hazardous chemicals	10	4.26	3.25	76.35
32.	Preparation and organisation of occupational safety on construction sites	10	4.89	3.35	68.48
33.	Supervising the implementation of occupational safety procedures on construction sites	10	5.03	3.38	67.30
34.	Participation in controlling alcohol and drug consumption at the workplace	10	5.26	3.27	62.17
35.	Participation in the application of international certification standards for occupational safety, quality, risk management, corporate social responsibility etc. with the employer	10	4.46	2.95	66.25
36.	Application of IT in occupational safety	10	3.59	2.85	79.56
37.	Testimony in investigative, misdemeanour and criminal court proceedings	10	6.11	3.43	56.09
38.	Professional development	10	3.59	3.18	88.59
39.	Professional examination	10	5.08	3.39	66.77
40.	Collaboration with professional associations	10	3.20	2.91	90.92
41.	Participation at professional conferences	10	3.59	3.28	91.56
9.–41.	Total	10	4.46	2.99	68.75

Table 2

Stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists

Question	Status of occupational safety specialists	Stress level
		Lowest score	Highest score	Average mean 0–10 (M)	Standard deviation (σ)	Variability coefficient (V) %
42.	Working hours of occupational safety specialists	0	10	4.13	3.10	75.18
43.	Employment obligations of occupational safety specialists	0	10	5.71	3.06	53.66
44.	Responsibilities of occupational safety specialists	0	10	6.73	2.95	43.76
45.	Additional tasks of occupational safety specialists	0	10	6.38	3.04	47.62
46.	Salary of occupational safety specialists	0	10	6.37	3.10	48.66
47.	Additional benefits of occupational safety specialists	0	10	5.19	3.44	66.23
48.	Authority of occupational safety specialists	0	10	5.01	2.97	59.33
49.	Authority of occupational safety specialists before the employer and managers	0	10	5.91	3.19	53.99
50.	Authority of occupational safety specialists in society	0	10	5.12	3.10	60.65
51.	Job security of occupational safety specialists	0	10	5.53	3.25	58.82
42.–51.	Total	0	10	5.61	3.12	56.79

3.4 Stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists

Occupational safety specialists have rated the stress level related to their status by selecting the grades from 0 to 10, with 0 being stress free and 10 the highest stress level.

3.5 Assessment of the condition, consequences and need for preventative protection against workplace stress of occupational safety specialists

3.5.1 Correlation testing

The correlations between dependent and independent variables in the research are tested by Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r).

3.5.2 Limiting values of the correlation coefficient (r):

Degree of freedom (N –2) = 480 –2 = 478

Correlation significance levels:

Very significant correlation^** - the risk of accepting the correlation between the two indicators is lower than 1%(P 0.01), r ≥0.128.

Significant correlation^* - the risk of accepting the correlation between the two indicators is lower than 5%(P 0.05), r ≥0.098.

Table 3
Assessment of the condition and consequences of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists

52. Assessment of the condition and consequences of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists N %

1. There is no workplace stress on the jobs of occupational safety specialists 3 0.63

2. Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is negligible 24 5.00

3. Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is low and acceptable, with no health consequences 114 23.75

4. Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is significant, with possible health consequences 261 54.38

5. Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is very significant, with health consequences 78 16.25

– No answer 0 0.00

Arithmetic mean (M) 3.81 Σ 480 100.00

Standard deviation (σ) 0.79 Variability coefficient (V) % 20.69

52.	Assessment of the condition and consequences of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists		N	%
1.	There is no workplace stress on the jobs of occupational safety specialists		3	0.63
2.	Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is negligible		24	5.00
3.	Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is low and acceptable, with no health consequences		114	23.75
4.	Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is significant, with possible health consequences		261	54.38
5.	Overall workplace stress of occupational safety specialists is very significant, with health consequences		78	16.25
–	No answer		0	0.00
Arithmetic mean (M)	3.81	Σ	480	100.00
Standard deviation (σ)	0.79	Variability coefficient (V) %	20.69

Table 4

Assessment of the need for preventive protection against workplace stress of occupational safety specialists

53.	Assessment of the need for preventive protection against workplace stress of occupational safety specialists	N		%
1.	There is no need for preventive protection against workplace stress of occupational safety specialists		27	5.62
2.	Standard preventive protection against workplace stress is needed, similar to other jobs		291	60.62
3.	Specific and significant preventive protection against workplace stress is needed		162	33.76
–	No answer		0	0.00
Arithmetic mean (M)	2.28	Σ	480	100.00
Standard deviation (σ)	0.56	Variability coefficient (V) %		24.61

Table 5

Correlations between dependent and independent variables

Dependent variables	Independent variables
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	0.001	0.040	0.007	0.002	0.104	0.171	0.034	–0.042
10	–0.098	0.002	0.061	0.018	0.057	0.093	–0.001	–0.114
11	–0.066	0.074	0.159	0.101	0.019	0.113	–0.013	–0.040
12	–0.024	–0.108	–0.030	–0.149	0.094	–0.017	0.085	–0.037
13	–0.086	–0.023	0.044	–0.015	–0.008	–0.007	–0.059	–0.035
14	–0.108	–0.031	0.086	–0.056	0.103	–0.055	–0.020	0.009
15	–0.105	0.013	0.118	–0.009	0.113	–0.094	0.024	–0.029
16	–0.163	0.034	0.144	0.000	0.107	–0.100	–0.075	0.000
17	–0.080	–0.063	–0.044	–0.082	0.038	0.019	–0.020	–0.013
18	–0.079	–0.047	0.061	–0.066	0.120	–0.089	0.054	–0.017
19	–0.227	–0.043	0.163	–0.103	0.005	–0.147	0.043	–0.005
20	–0.149	–0.059	0.101	–0.024	–0.022	–0.047	0.022	0.022
21	–0.169	–0.101	0.151	–0.097	0.087	–0.134	0.059	–0.034
22	–0.141	–0.017	0.124	0.006	0.082	–0.150	–0.015	0.008
23	–0.096	–0.023	0.099	–0.020	0.094	–0.167	–0.004	0.019
24	–0.185	0.010	0.038	0.002	0.098	–0.124	0.054	–0.054
25	–0.055	0.007	0.013	0.016	0.081	–0.032	–0.066	0.005
26	–0.125	–0.037	0.049	–0.024	0.059	–0.005	–0.071	–0.095
27	–0.019	–0.138	0.085	–0.124	–0.002	0.069	–0.073	0.024
28	–0.006	–0.119	0.044	–0.104	0.084	–0.099	–0.037	–0.007
29	–0.008	–0.105	–0.044	–0.082	0.020	–0.070	–0.054	–0.087
30	–0.026	–0.144	–0.012	–0.126	0.023	–0.070	–0.022	–0.031
31	0.011	–0.208	0.086	–0.133	0.033	–0.075	0.026	–0.068
32	0.082	–0.161	0.036	–0.105	0.115	–0.136	0.108	–0.057
33	0.068	–0.126	0.099	–0.078	0.158	–0.090	0.142	–0.052
34	–0.085	–0.025	–0.048	–0.010	–0.053	–0.045	–0.045	–0.063
35	–0.109	–0.017	0.185	–0.028	0.086	–0.015	0.037	–0.050
36	–0.046	0.102	0.163	0.065	0.038	0.012	–0.175	0.022
37	0.076	–0.130	0.021	–0.033	0.022	–0.055	–0.006	0.003
38	–0.098	0.064	0.110	0.090	0.095	–0.109	–0.017	0.009
39	–0.099	0.059	0.063	0.061	0.106	–0.050	0.005	0.105
40	–0.134	–0.003	0.214	0.027	0.069	–0.202	–0.104	0.077
41	–0.069	–0.004	0.151	0.045	0.037	–0.196	–0.099	0.029
42	–0.070	–0.087	0.023	–0.080	0.313	–0.068	0.094	0.001
43	–0.005	–0.134	–0.138	–0.094	0.130	0.014	0.070	0.019
44	–0.025	–0.136	–0.105	–0.116	0.206	0.099	0.135	–0.096
45	–0.080	–0.089	–0.126	–0.053	0.045	0.013	0.035	0.088
46	0.003	–0.048	–0.110	–0.020	0.040	0.069	0.008	0.021
47	0.055	–0.132	0.016	–0.078	0.025	–0.041	–0.016	–0.036
48	–0.030	–0.137	–0.010	–0.097	–0.012	–0.040	0.052	–0.009
49	–0.007	–0.025	–0.033	–0.001	–0.030	0.056	0.052	0.010
50	–0.038	0.018	–0.026	0.032	0.017	–0.061	0.033	0.026
51	–0.021	–0.063	–0.114	–0.068	0.084	0.077	0.060	0.078
52	–0.033	0.032	–0.140	0.116	0.079	0.124	0.094	0.039
53	–0.005	–0.056	0.021	0.055	0.174	0.149	0.035	0.002
Total	7	9	10	2	5	9	3	0
	45

4 Discussion

The average stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists is 5.61 (on 0–10 scale, with 0 being stress free and 10 being the highest stress level) and it is higher than the average stress level of occupational safety specialists, which is 4.46. The overall average stress level, which includes the assessment of stress level on the jobs of occupational safety specialists and assessment of the stress level related to the status occupational safety specialists, is 4.73 (moderate stress level).

In the assessment of the condition and consequences of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists, more than half (54.38%) of the respondents estimate that the overall stress of occupational safety specialists is significant, with possible health consequences. 16.25%of the respondents estimate that the overall stress of occupational safety specialists is very significant, with health consequences. The total of 23.75%of the respondents find workplace stress of occupational safety specialists low and acceptable, with no health consequences. Finally, only 5%of the respondents believe that the stress of occupational safety specialists is negligible, while 0.63%claim that the job of occupational safety specialists is stress free.

The statistical analysis of the correlation coefficient between dependent and independent variables related to the profile of occupational safety specialists has shown the following significant correlations:

Gender. Women experience a lower stress level compared to men on the jobs related to the organisation of work equipment testing, keeping the records of occupational safety, cooperation with bodies responsible for labour inspection, cooperation with relevant institutions, cooperation with authorised legal and natural persons in charge of occupational safety, training the workers for safe work, cooperation with professional associations.

Age. Senior occupational safety specialists experience a lower stress level when working in the committee for occupational safety with the employer, in cooperation with the employer when purchasing personal protective equipment, in cooperation with the employer in the procurement of hazardous chemicals, in the preparation and organisation of occupational safety measures at construction sites, in the testimony in investigative, misdemeanour and criminal court proceedings. Furthermore, senior specialists confront less stress related to their workplace duties, additional benefits related to their status and their authority among workers.

Level of education. Occupational safety specialists with higher level of education experience less stress on the jobs related to professional assistance to occupational safety commissioners in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety, organisation of work environment testing, keeping records of occupational safety, cooperation with competent institutions, participation in the application of international certification standards for occupational safety management, quality, risks, corporate social responsibility with the employer, application of IT in occupational safety, cooperation with professional associations, participation at professional conferences.

Occupational safety specialists with higher level of education experience greater stress related to their workplace duties and give more unfavourable assessment of their stress level and its consequences.

Total work experience.Occupational safety specialists with greater work experience are exposed to less stress regarding cooperation in the development of business strategy, operational plans and business management plans in the part pertaining to occupational safety and participation in the enforcement of management methods or techniques for implementing the strategy. Also, occupational safety specialists with greater work experience less stress in training the workers for safe work.

State organisations. The statistical analysis of the correlation coefficient between the dependent and independent variables regarding the profile of work organisation suggested certain statistically significant correlations. Occupational safety specialists in Serbia have a higher level of stress than their colleagues in Croatia regarding the implementation of occupational safety measures on construction sites, their working hours and their workplace duties and responsibilities. Compared to occupational safety specialists in Croatia, Serbian specialists in this area demonstrate stronger need for preventive protection against workplace stress.

Number of workers in the organisation. Occ-upational safety specialists employed in work organisations with a large number of employees experience greater stress on the jobs regarding professional assistance to the employer and their authorised persons in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety. However, their stress level is lower with respect to the management of all occupational safety records, cooperation with competent institutions, cooperation with authorised legal and natural persons for occupational safety, cooperation with specialists in occupational medicine, preparation and organisation of occupational safety on construction sites, cooperation with professional associations, participation at professional conferences. Occupational safety specialists employed in work organisations with a large number of employees demonstrate stronger need for preventive protection against workplace stress.

Type of organisation.Occupational safety specialists in private organisations experience a higher level of stress on the jobs related to supervising the implementation of occupational safety on construction sites compared to occupational safety specialists in state or public organisations but their stress level is lower concerning the application of IT in occupational safety. Furthermore, occupational safety specialists in private organisations have a higher level of stress related to their duties and responsibilities compared to occupational safety specialists in state or public organisations.

Activity of the organisation. There is no statistically significant correlation between the stress level of occupational safety specialists and the activity of the organisation.

5 Conclusion

The research objective was accomplished because we acquired up-to-date knowledge about workplace stress of occupational safety specialists in Croatia and Serbia. Selected scientific methods have proved to be appropriate for the research subject. Based on the results of the research and verification of the hypotheses, it can be concluded that there is a correlation between the stress level on occupational safety jobs and profile of occupational safety specialists (H1). Research results show that women experience a lower stress level than men on the jobs of occupational safety specialists. Senior occupational safety specialists with greater overall work experience are exposed to less workplace stress. There is also a positive correlation between the stress level and level of education - occupational safety specialists with a higher level of education experience less workplace stress. There is a correlation between the stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists and profile of occupational safety specialists (H2). According to research results, senior occupational safety specialists, specialists with greater overall work experience and with higher level of education experience less stress related to the status of occupational safety specialists. There is a correlation between the stress level of occupational safety jobs and the profile of work organisation where occupational safety specialists are employed (H3). Research results have shown that occupational safety specialists employed in work organisations in Serbia experience more workplace stress compared to their colleagues in Croatia, especially in the field of occupational safety on construction sites. The number of workers in a work organisation correlate with the stress level of occupational safety specialists both positively and negatively. Occupational safety specialists experience more workplace stress in the organisations with a large number of workers, especially when providing professional assistance to the employer and their authorised persons in the implementation and improvement of occupational safety. On the other hand, in the organisations with a large number of workers, occupational safety specialists experience less stress regarding the management of all occupational safety records, cooperation with competent institutions, cooperation with authorised legal and natural persons for occupational safety, cooperation with specialists in occupational medicine, preparation and organisation of occupational safety on construction sites, cooperation with professional associations. Occupational safety specialists employed in private organisations are more exposed to stress compared to their colleagues in state or public organisations regarding the supervision on construction sites, but their stress level is lower in relation to the implementation of IT in occupational safety. There is a correlation between the stress level related to the status of occupational safety specialists and profile of the work organisation of occupational safety specialists (H4). According to research results, occupational safety specialists employed in work organisations in Serbia experience a higher stress level related to their status compared to their colleagues in Croatia, especially regarding the working hours and their duties and responsibilities. Regarding the responsibilities of occupational safety specialists, those employed in private organisations are more exposed to stress than their colleagues in state or private institutions. The stress level of occupational safety specialists regarding their tasks and status is moderate (H5). Research results have also shown that the total average stress level, which consists of the assessment of the stress level on the jobs of occupational safety specialists and assessment of stress level regarding the status of occupational safety specialists, is 4.73, which is a moderate stress level (on a 0–10 scale, where 0 is stress free and 10 the highest stress level). There is a need for preventive protection against stress on the jobs of occupational safety specialists (H6). Research results reveal that most of occupational safety specialists (60.62%) estimate that conventional preventive protection from stress is needed, similar to other jobs, while one third of the respondents (33.76%) consider it necessary to have a significant and specific preventive stress protection. Only 5.62%hold that there is no need for preventive stress protection.

Based on the overall research results, we can confirm the general hypothesis that there is a certain level of stress on the jobs of occupational safety specialists and, accordingly, the need for specific protection against stress (H0). Therefore, the jobs and workplace of occupational safety specialists require special attention within the workplace risk assessment. In addition to some well-known methods of stress reduction, such as physical activity [21], the education of occupational safety specialists, both formal and informal, has a key role in their protection from stress, but also in stress management of the entire organisation, as it is undeniable that work and work conditions affect health [22] and that the organisational safety climate contributes to improving safety and health at work [23, 24] which contributes to the development of a creative, comfortable and safe work environment [25]. With regard to the interdisciplinary approach to the problems of psychosocial risks at work [26], it would be important to employ more occupational safety professionals in one organization since it would reduce the scope of their work and reduce the risk of increased stress. Regular meetings of these persons with employers and other employees would also contribute to improving communication on occupational safety and health problems [27]. In order to improve the well-being of employees, employers could develop short-term and long-term plans for the prevention and reduction of occupational stress and organize annual check-ups of employee’s mental health [28].

Assuming that there have been no similar studies on this topic, the basic limitation of the study is the impossibility of comparing the obtained research results with other results and make broader generalization. In general, there is a surprisingly small number of studies related to occupational safety of occupational safety professionals (especially regarding their workplace psychosocial risks). Also, the results of the research should be interpreted carefully, considering that the research sample consisted of occupational safety professional who work in various business fields. The question is whether we would have obtained similar results if the research had been conducted only in organizations belonging to one business field (e.g. construction industry or some other high-risk industry) or several business fields which are similar in terms of structure and content of their work, number of employees, present risks etc.

In terms of its topic and methodology, this research can be a good model for similar analyses in the countries of the region, which will enable the exchange and comparison of research results. For further research, we can suggest a detailed empirical examination of the causes of workplace stress of occupational safety specialists and the proposals for its preventive protection.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

Conflict of interest

None to report.

References

Cooper

, Dewe

, O’Driscoll

. Organizational stress: A review and critique of theory, Research and Applications. London: Sage; 2001.

Janssona

, Gunnarssonc

. Employers’ views of the impact of mental health problems on the ability to work, Work. 2018;59:585–98.

Ejlertsson

, Heijbelb

, Ejlertsson

, Andersson

. Recovery, work-life balance and work experiences important to self-rated health: A questionnaire study on salutogenic work factors among Swedish primary health care employees. Work. 2018;59:155–63.

Lazarus

. Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1991.

Sauter

, Murphy

. Stress at work. Cincinnati: NIOSH; 1999.

Knani

, Pierre-Sébastien

, Biron

. Psychosocial risks, burnout and intention to quit following the introduction of new software at work. Work. 2018;60:95–104.

Van der Doef

, Maes

. The job demand control (-support) model and psychological wellbeing, A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work and Stress. 1990;13:87–114.

Kahn

, Byosiere

. Stress in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette, L. M. Hough, editors. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992.

Örtqvist

, Wincent

. Prominent consequences of role stress: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Stress Management. 2006;13:399–422.

10.

González-Moralesa

, Neves

. When stressors make you work: Mechanisms linking challenge stressors to performance. Work & Stress. 2015;29:213–29.

11.

Elshaer

NSM

, Mona

SAM

, Mona

, Marwa

IER

. Job Stress and Burnout Syndrome among Critical Care Healthcare Workers. Alexandria Journal of Medicine. 2018;54:273–7.

12.

Groenesteijna

, Commissaris

, Van den Berg-Zwetsloot

, Hiemstra-Van Mastrigt

. Effects of dynamic workstation Oxidesk on acceptance, physical activity, mental fitness and work performance. Work. 2016;54:773–8.

13.

Newton

, Jimmieson

. Subjective fit with organizational culture: An investigation of moderating effects in the work stressor-employee adjustment relationship. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2009;20:1770–89.

14.

Sargent

, Williams

, Hagerty

, Lynch-Sauer

, Hoyle

. Sense of belonging as a buffer against depressive symptoms. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association. 2002;8:120–9.

15.

Cox

, Griffiths

, Rial-Gonzalez

. Research on workrelated stress. Luxembourg: European Agency for Safety & Health at Work, 2000.

16.

And*elković

. Osnovi sistema zaštite [Basics of the Protection System]. Nišu: Univerzitet u Nišsu Fakultet zaštite Fakultet za¡stite na radu u Nišu; 2010.

17.

Kompier

, Cooper

. (Eds.). Preventing stress, improving productivity: European case studies in the workplace. London: Routledge; 1999.

18.

Leibler

, Janulewicz

, Perry

. Prevalence of serious psychological distress among slaughterhouse workers at a United States beef packing plant. Work. 2017;57:105–9.

19.

Zakon o zaštiti na radu [Occupational Health and Safety Act]. Republika Srbija; 2014 [cited November 25, 2019]. Available at [http://www.mrms.hr/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/OSHA.pdf.

20.

Zakon o bezbednosti i zdravlju na radu [Law on Occupational Safety and Health]. Republika Srbija; 2014 [cited November 29, 2019]. Available at https://www.paragraf.rs/propisi/zakon_o_bezbednosti_i_zdravlju_na_radu.html.

21.

Tobin

, Leavy

, Jancey

. Uprising: An examination of sit-stand workstations, mental health and work ability in sedentary office workers, in Western Australia. Work. 2016;55:359–71.

22.

Näswall

, Sverke

, Göransson

. Is work affecting my health? Appraisals of how work affects health as a mediator in the relationship between working conditions and work-related attitudes. Work and Stress. 2014;28:342–61.

23.

Leitao

, Greiner

. Organisational safety climate and occupational accidents and injuries: Anepidemiology-based systematic review. Work and Stress. 2016;30:71–90.

24.

Bergman

, Dellvec

, Skagerta

. Exploring communication processes in workplace meetings: A mixed methods study in a Swedish healthcare organization. Work. 2016;54:533–41.

25.

Rydell

, Andersson

, Bernsand

, Rosen

. Work environment investments: Critical elements for success in optimizing occupational health and safety effects. Work. 2019;64:107–16.

26.

Giorgi

, Leon-Perez

, Pignata

, Demiral

, Arcangeli

. Addressing risks: mental health, work-related stress, and occupational disease management to enhance well-being. BioMed Research International. 2018;1-3. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5130676.

27.

Deouskar

. Impact of knowledge sharing policies of the organization on job satisfaction of the employees. CASIRJ. 2017;8:17–29.

28.

Mentus

. Determinants of mental well-being in Serbia. Sociological Review. 2020;54:216–41.