Background: While there is evidence that workers in nonstandard employment arrangements are disproportionately exposed to recognized occupational hazards, existing studies have not comprehensively examined associations between employment precarity and exposure to occupational hazards for these workers in the USA. The aim of this study was to examine relationships between employment precarity and occupational hazards in two contiguous high socio-economic hardship neighborhoods in Chicago. Methods: Using a community-based participatory research approach, community researchers administered a community-developed survey to 489 residents of Greater Lawndale who reported current or recent employment in a job that met at least one characteristic of precarious employment (e.g. unpredictable schedule, insecure work, no living wage/benefits). Employment precarity was calculated using a modified version of the Employment Precarity Index (EPI) developed by the Poverty and Employment Precarity in Southern Ontario group. We modeled the association between employment precarity and occupational exposures using logistic regression models. Results: We identified a high prevalence of precarious employment in this sample, as well as a high prevalence of self-reported exposure to recognized occupational hazards. Increases in relative employment precarity were significantly associated with self-reported exposure to chemical and biological hazards, physical hazards, and slip, trip, strike, fall, trap or crush hazards at work. Conclusions: Results highlight the importance of using community research approaches and robust measures of employment characteristics, such as the EPI, to evaluate associations between employment precarity and hazardous exposures. These results suggest that variability in employment situations and resultant relative employment precarity are important predictors of exposure to recognized occupational hazards. Findings also suggest that health inequities observed among precariously employed workers may be partly explained by increased risk for exposure to occupational hazards, which has implications for community health and should be investigated in future longitudinal research.

Background: There is a growing appreciation of the importance of health and well‐being and of the complex set of factors, within and outside the workplace, that interact to affect the well‐being of workers. Migrant and seasonal farmworkers experience particular challenges, and measurement of factors that influence their health and well‐being is important to the ethical sustainability of this critical workforce. Methods: To examine the applicability of the NIOSH Worker Well‐Being Framework to the health and well‐being of farmworkers, we conducted a literature review to (1) explore the ways in which the domains, subdomains, and constructs of the framework are described in studies of farmworkers, and (2) identify additional constructs that are not described or not in alignment with the framework. Results: Four reviewers used a thematic analysis approach to identify and summarize key areas of alignment and non‐alignment of 163 included articles. We found alignment with the five framework domains and their sub‐domains, though several are understudied or narrowly operationalized in studies of farmworkers. The vast majority of studies addressed contributors to poor health. We found five additional cross‐cutting or unaligned themes (legal status, discrimination, exploitation, fear of retaliation, fear of deportation). Conclusions: External and work‐related social factors are important to the well‐being of the farmworker workforce. Contextual determinants of employment precarity, hazardous occupational and nonoccupational exposures, and social safety nets should be considered in comprehensive assessments of worker well‐being. Other precarious and immigrant workforces may also require expansion of the NIOSH Worker Well‐Being Framework.

Objectives: To document local health department (LHD) COVID-19 prevention or mitigation activities at workplaces in the United States and identify facilitators for and barriers to these efforts.Methods: We conducted a web-based, cross-sectional national probability survey of United States LHDs (n = 181 unweighted; n = 2,284 weighted) from January to March 2022, collecting information about worker complaints, surveillance, investigations, relationships and interactions with employers/businesses, and LHD capacity.Results: Overall, 94% LHD respondents reported investigating workplace-linked COVID-19 cases; however, 47% reported insufficient capacity to effectively receive, investigate and respond to COVID-19-related workplace safety complaints. Prior relationships with jurisdiction employers and LHD personnel with formal occupational health and safety (OHS) training were predictors of proactive outreach to prevent COVID-19 spread in workplaces (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001). LHD size predicted OHS personnel and sufficient financial resources to support workplace investigation and mitigation activities (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Differences in LHD capacity to effectively respond to communicable disease spread in workplaces may exacerbate health disparities, especially between rural and urban settings. Improving LHD OHS capacity, especially in smaller jurisdictions, could facilitate effective prevention and mitigation of workplace communicable disease spread.

Universities may be well poised to support knowledge, skill, and capacity-building efforts to foster the development of multi-level interventions to address complex problems. Researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) engaged organizations interested in developing policy- and systems-level initiatives to address the drivers of precarious work in a six-meeting Action Learning (AL) process, in which the researchers served as technical assistance (TA) providers focused on facilitating learning and promoting critical thinking among participants. This exploratory qualitative study examined the role, facilitators, challenges, and impacts of university facilitation in this context. A total of 22 individuals participated in this study, including UIC TA providers, content expert TA providers from labor-focused organizations, and TA recipients from health-focused organizations. Results from interviews and a focus group highlight the utility of a university connecting organizations from different disciplines that do not traditionally work together, and suggest that the TA provided by UIC helped participants think concretely about precarious work and ways in which their organizations might work collaboratively to bring about sustainable change. Findings from this study suggest that university facilitation using an AL approach may be effective in increasing knowledge to action.

Summary: Precarious work has recognized adverse impacts on the health of workers; however, there are few policy, systems and environmental (PSE) change public health interventions that target the causes and consequences of precarious work. To build the capacity of health organizations to develop and implement such interventions, researchers engaged representatives from health organizations in a six-session learning process, entitled the healthy work collaborative. Representatives of labor organizations were engaged as technical assistance (TA) providers, which involved sharing content and skill knowledge with health participants. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with providers and participants to examine perceptions of the role of TA; providers’ motivations for providing TA; and providers’ and participants’ perceptions of the impact of TA on learning and preparing for subsequent intervention. Results suggest that the provider–participant engagement evolved from one-way knowledge translation to a robust, two-way knowledge exchange with potential for collaborative intervention development and implementation. These results highlight the ways in which this provider–participant model facilitated engagement between representatives from sectors that had not previously worked together and suggests that such a model may be effective in catalyzing multi-level, multi-sectoral PSE change to address precarious work.

Temporary staffing has an increasing role in world economies, contracting workers and dispatching them to work for leasing employers within countries and across borders. Using Illinois as a case study, co-authors have undertaken investigations to understand the occupational health, safety, and well-being challenges for workers hired through temporary staffing companies; to determine knowledge and attitudes of temp workers and temp staffing employers; and to assess temporary staffing at a community level. Temporary staffing workers in Illinois tend to be people of color who are employed in the most hazardous sectors of the economy. They have a higher rate of injury, are compensated less, and often lose their jobs when injured. Laws allow for ambiguity of responsibility for training, reporting, and compensation between the staffing agency and host employers. Our findings illustrate the ways in which principles of fairness and equity are violated in temporary staffing. Shared responsibility for reporting injuries, providing workers’ compensation insurance, and training workers should be mandated in law and required in contractual language between temporary staffing and host/contracting employers. Monitoring, enforcement, and adjustment of the law based on experience are required to “promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and decent work for all.