Organisational justice and change in justice as predictors of employee health: the Whitehall II study

Mika Kivimäki, Jane E Ferrie, Jenny Head, Martin J Shipley, Jussi Vahtera, Michael G Marmot, Mika Kivimäki, Jane E Ferrie, Jenny Head, Martin J Shipley, Jussi Vahtera, Michael G Marmot

Abstract

Objective: Organisational justice has been proposed as a new way to examine the impact of psychosocial work environment on employee health. This article studied the justice of interpersonal treatment by supervisors (the relational component of organisational justice) as a predictor of health.

Design: Prospective cohort study. Phase 1 (1985-88) measured relational justice, job demands, job control, social support at work, effort-reward imbalance, and self rated health. Relational justice was assessed again at phase 2 (1989-90) and self rated health at phase 2 and phase 3 (1991-93).

Setting: 20 civil service departments originally located in London.

Participants: 10 308 civil servants (6895 men, 3413 women) aged 35-55.

Outcome measure: Self rated health.

Main results: Men exposed to low justice at phase 1 or adverse change in justice between phase 1 and phase 2 were at higher risk of poor health at phase 2 and phase 3. A favourable change in justice was associated with reduced risk. Adjustment for other stress indicators had little effect on results. In women, low justice at phase 1 predicted poor health at phase 2 and phase 3 before but not after adjustment for other stress indicators. Adverse change in justice was associated with worse health prospects irrespective of adjustments.

Conclusions: The extent to which people are treated with justice in workplaces seems to predict their health independently of established stressors at work. Evidence on reduced health risk after favourable change in organisational justice implies a promising area for health interventions at workplace.

References

    1. Psychol Med. 2003 Feb;33(2):319-26
    1. Psychother Psychosom. 2000 Mar-Apr;69(2):86-94
    1. Science. 2000 May 5;288(5467):850-2
    1. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 Jul;54(7):484-93
    1. Health Psychol. 2000 Jul;19(4):393-8
    1. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:527-53
    1. J Appl Psychol. 2001 Jun;86(3):418-24
    1. Psychosom Med. 2001 Sep-Oct;63(5):724-33
    1. Am J Public Health. 2002 Jan;92(1):105-8
    1. Occup Environ Med. 2002 Nov;59(11):777-84
    1. Occup Environ Med. 2003 Jan;60(1):27-33; discussion 33-4
    1. Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Dec;31(6):1162-8
    1. Nature. 2003 Feb 27;421(6926):911-2; discussion 912
    1. Health Psychol. 2003 May;22(3):287-93
    1. Occup Environ Med. 2003 Jul;60(7):468-74
    1. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Aug;57(8):565-70
    1. BMJ. 2003 Aug 16;327(7411):364
    1. Nature. 2003 Sep 18;425(6955):297-9
    1. Am J Public Health. 1988 Oct;78(10):1336-42
    1. Lancet. 1991 Jun 8;337(8754):1387-93
    1. Int J Health Serv. 1994;24(1):105-29
    1. J Health Soc Behav. 1997 Mar;38(1):21-37
    1. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1997 Feb;51(1):35-40
    1. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 May;50(5):517-28
    1. N Engl J Med. 1998 Jan 15;338(3):171-9
    1. J Occup Health Psychol. 1996 Jan;1(1):27-41
    1. J Occup Environ Med. 1999 Apr;41(4):216-23
    1. Occup Environ Med. 1999 May;56(5):302-7

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa