The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a global pandemic in early 2020. Due to the rapid spread of the virus and limited availability of effective treatments, health and social care systems worldwide quickly became overwhelmed. Such stressful circumstances are likely to have negative impacts on health and social care workers’ wellbeing. The current study examined the relationship between coping strategies and wellbeing and quality of working life in nurses, midwives, allied health professionals, social care workers and social workers who worked in health and social care in the UK during its first wave of COVID-19. Data were collected using an anonymous online survey (N = 3425), and regression analyses were used to examine the associations of coping strategies and demographic characteristics with staff wellbeing and quality of working life. The results showed that positive coping strategies, particularly active coping and help-seeking, were associated with higher wellbeing and better quality of working life. Negative coping strategies, such as avoidance, were risk factors for low wellbeing and worse quality of working life. The results point to the importance of organizational and management support during stressful times, which could include psycho-education and training about active coping and might take the form of workshops designed to equip staff with better coping skills.

It is well documented that exposure to chronic negative working conditions leads to stress. This subsequently impacts sickness absence and attrition, making it a key consideration for policy makers and academics alike. This study therefore seeks to investigate the influence of psycho-social working conditions on stress and related outcomes: sickness presenteeism, job satisfaction and turnover intentions in UK social workers. A cross-sectional survey was used, in addition to a single open-ended question designed to further investigate the sources of stress, to collect data from 1,333 registered social workers. Results demonstrate high levels of turnover intentions, presenteeism and low job satisfaction. Regression analyses found that the interaction between high demands, low levels of control and poor managerial support was related to social worker stress and related outcomes. Qualitative content analysis of the open-ended question corroborated and extended these findings, also demonstrating that poor ergonomic set-up of the work environment and a blame culture were adding to the experience of stress. Policy makers need to consider improvements in these working conditions or face losing a large proportion of the social work workforce. Future research needs to be both longitudinal and interventional to focus on these needed improvements.

Social workers play a vital role in maintaining and improving the lives of the service users that they work with. Despite this, the role is replete with high levels of stress-related sickness absence, turnover intentions and low levels of jobs satisfaction in addition to poor working conditions. This study sought to further investigate working conditions in the UK social workers, as well as the reasons for these working conditions via a mixed-methods survey and interview study. A total of 3,421 responses were gained from the cross-sectional survey which looked at working conditions, perceived stress, job satisfaction and turnover intentions (both migration and attrition), with the semi-structured interview schedule (n = 15) based on survey findings and analysed via thematic analysis continuing through to saturation. Similar to 2018, results demonstrated poor working conditions, irrespective of job role, and regression analysis suggested each of demands, control, managerial support, role and change influenced stress. Qualitative results found that workload, lack of managerial support and service user/family abuse were distinct demands associated with the role, whereas buffering positive resources were the social work role, peer support and positive managerial support. Implications for managerial practice, and harnessing the positive experience of peer support, are discussed.

Summary: UK social workers are exposed to chronically poor working conditions and experience extremely high levels of sickness absence. The aim of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of working conditions and wellbeing of social workers. Seven UK social work employers sent a survey of working conditions, wellbeing, and turnover intentions to all child and family social workers, followed by a series of individual semi-structured interviews with respondents. Data were collected between January and May 2019. Six hundred and seventy-six (41% response rate) completed surveys were returned and 19 interviews undertaken. Findings: Quantitative findings demonstrated that working conditions scored better than previous studies, with positive scores on autonomy, peer, and managerial support. However, the four remaining conditions (demands, relationships, role, and change) each scored worse than 75–90% of respondents in UK-wide benchmarks of individuals from various occupations. Regression outcomes demonstrated that demands, control, change, relationships, and peer support each significantly impacted employee wellbeing. Furthermore, over 20% of respondents suggested that they were frequently exposed to poor service user behaviour. Thematic analysis of interviews suggested that workload (demands), relationships with peers, management, and services users, and the way in which change was communicated were the main difficulties cited. Applications: It is clear that work is needed to support social worker stress and wellbeing at work. Management should support individuals in terms of developing peer and managerial support, and adopting best practice in reflective supervision. Furthermore, a more robust system of caseload allocation would support and improve significant workload pressures.

The United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) has a higher-than-average level of stress-related sickness absence of all job sectors in the country. It is important that this is addressed as work stress is damaging to employees and the organisation, and subsequently impacts patient care. The aim of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of working conditions and wellbeing in NHS employees from three employing NHS Trusts through a mixed-methods investigation. First, a cross-sectional organisational survey was completed by 1644 respondents. Questions examined working conditions, stress, psychological wellbeing, job satisfaction, and presenteeism. This was followed by 33 individual semistructured interviews with NHS staff from a variety of clinical and nonclinical roles. Quantitative findings revealed that working conditions were generally positive, although most staff groups had high levels of workload. Regression outcomes demonstrated that a number of working conditions influenced mental wellbeing and stress. Three themes were generated from thematic analysis of the interview data: wellbeing at work, relationships, and communication. These highlight areas which may be contributing to workplace stress. Suggestions are made for practical changes which could improve areas of difficulty. Such changes could improve staff wellbeing and job satisfaction and reduce sickness absence.

This paper reports and discusses the weekly Clapping for Carers – described as ‘front-line heroes’ that took place across the United Kingdom during the first national lockdown of the coronavirus pandemic. Data are drawn from a UK-wide online survey of health and social care workers, completed in May to July 2020. The survey received 3,425 responses of which 2,541 were analysed; free-text comments were categorised. One question asked specifically: ‘Do you think the “Clap for Carers” was a helpful response from the public?’, and 815 comments were provided. Responses were extracted from these 815 free-text comments and categorised as follows: unequivocally Yes, predominantly Yes, mixed feelings, predominantly No and unequivocally No. Most comments revealed mixed feelings about the helpfulness of Clapping with only a minority being entirely supportive. The free-text comments offer some explanations for these views with many feeling that Clapping distracted from the severity of the pandemic and the inadequate resources. The free-text comments reveal workforce concerns that the support demonstrated for the frontline workforce in Clapping might be transitory and that it may not translate into workforce improvements and political commitment to further funding of health and social care. Some saw the value of Clapping as illustrative of community cohesion. There was little mention of Clapping for heroes, and where it was the notion of heroism was rejected. The demonstration of public support in Clapping for Carers may have directly benefitted the public, but only indirectly the workforce. Future recruitment data may help discern if public support has translated into a desire to join the workforce.