Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T18:59:34.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Development and Utility of an Interactive Assessment Protocol for Evaluating Company Based Responses in Managing Employees on Long-term Absence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2017

Julie M. Thome ,
Donal F. McAnaney ,
Herbert C. Biggs  and
Richard F. Wynne
Julie M. Thome*
Affiliation:
NUI, Dublin (UCD), Ireland
Donal F. McAnaney
Affiliation:
Rehab Croup, Department of Research and Innovation, Ireland
Herbert C. Biggs
Affiliation:
Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Richard F. Wynne
Affiliation:
Work Research Centre (WRC), Ireland
*
Rehab Group, NTDl Building, Beechwood Close, Boghall Rd, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Ireland, Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This paper presents the results of Phase 3 of The RETURN Project, a European Study which aimed to reduce long term absenteeism in the workplace. Phases 1 and 2 have been described in detail elsewhere. The study adopted an iterative approach that explored LTA from three different perspectives: the System, the Expert and the Employer. This paper describes how the outputs of both the System and the Expert phases in combination with other tools focused on Disability Management (DM) were used to generate an interactive multi-jurisdictional assessment protocol tool for evaluating company based responses in managing employees on long term absence. The RETURN Protocol was field tested in different regulatory contexts using a company case study approach. Results of the field test carried out in six European companies are presented and the future and appropriate use of the protocol tool is discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , January 2002 , pp. 50 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akabas, S., Gates, L., & Galvin, D. (1992). Disability Management: A complete system to reduce costs, increase productivity and ensure legal compliance. New York: Amacom.Google Scholar
Australian Capital Territory Government. (1997). The Injury Management Agency Self-Evaluation Method. Canberra: Workplace Injury Prevention and Management Group, Office of Strategy and Government Business, Chief Ministers Department.Google Scholar
Bruyere, S., & Shrey, D. (1991). Disability management in industry: A joint labour management process. Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 34(3), 27–41.Google Scholar
Gardner, J.A. (1991). Early referral and other factors affecting vocational rehabilitation outcome for the workers' compensation client. Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 34(3), 197–209 Google Scholar
Gladnet/ILO. (1998). Key issues-international research project on job retention and return to work strategies for disabled workers. Geneva: ILO.Google Scholar
Grundemann, R.W.M., & Van Vuuren, T. (1997). Preventing absenteeism at the workplace: European research report. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.Google Scholar
Heitzmann, A. (1989). Increasing productivity and decreasing insurance costs: Prevention and intervention plan development for employers. Journal of Applied Administration, August, 81–84.Google Scholar
Ilmarinen, J. (1999). Ageing workers in the European Union: Status and promotion of work ability, employability, and emoployment. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Ministry of Social Affiars and Health, and Ministry of Labour, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Lesher, C. (1987). Rehabilitation practice in business and industry. Rehabilitation Education, 1, 119–121.Google Scholar
Lohan, M. (2001). Return to work? European responses to long term absent employees. Paper presented at the 7th Congress of Research in Rehabilitation, Madrid (04 1–6).Google Scholar
McAnaney, D. (2001, 04–June). Early intervention policies and practice: Transnational perspectives on work based rehabilitation. Paper presented to the Australian Society of Rehabilitation Counsellors Biennial Conference. Surfers Paradise Marriott Resort, Gold Coast, Australia.Google Scholar
McAnaney, D., Webster, B., Lohan, M., & Wynne, R. (2001). Disability Management: A system of response or a response to a system. Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling, 7(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
National Institute of Disability Management and Research. (1997). Strategies for success: Disability management in the workplace. Port Alberni, British Columbia: Author.Google Scholar
National Institute of Disability Management and Research. (2000). Disability Protocol – Worksite Disability Management Audit (WDMA). Port Alberni, British Columbia: National Institute of Disability Management and Research.Google Scholar
RETURN. (2000). Summary results of first phase of research. Dublin: NUI Dublin, (UCD).Google Scholar
RETURN. (2001). Interim report on phase 2 of research. Dublin: Work Research Centre.Google Scholar
RETURN. (2002). Employers good practice guide. Dublin: Work Research Centre.Google Scholar
RETURN & Workforce Plus. (2001a). The RETURN protocol. Dublin: NUI Dublin, (UCD).Google Scholar
RETURN & Workforce Plus. (2001b). The RETURN protocol (rev. ed.). Dublin: NUI Dublin, (UCD).Google Scholar
Schwartz, G. (1984). Disability costs: The impending crisis, Business and Health, 1, 25–28.Google Scholar
Shrey, D., & Lacerte, M.E. (1995). Principles and practices of disability management in industry. Florida: GR Press.Google Scholar