第1筆 /總和 1 筆
/ 1 筆
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 營造業安全領導對勞工不安全行為及職業傷害之影響=Influence of Safety Leadership on Unsafe Behavior and Occupational Injuries among Construction Workers |
---|---|
作 者 | 蒲永仁; 傅軒筠; 李素幸; | 書刊名 | 勞工安全衛生研究季刊 |
卷 期 | 21:4 2013.12[民102.12] |
頁 次 | 頁498-509 |
分類號 | 412.53 |
關鍵詞 | 安全領導; 不安全行為; 職業傷害; 營造業勞工; Safety leadership; Unsafe behavior; Occupational injury; Construction workers; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本研究以營造業勞工為對象,探討安全領導型態與勞工不安全行為及職業傷害的相關性。本橫斷研究以立意取樣,選取500位來自某國營事業工程處所屬的承攬商工程人員來參與一結構式問卷調查,問卷收集之內容包括:個人基本資料、安全領導型態、不安全行為的評估及職業傷害事件。資料用單因子變異數分析及邏輯迴歸探討安全領導型態在不安全行為表現及職業傷害事件的影響性。研究結果顯示,正向的安全關懷或安全管制都與不安全行為的減少具相關性,而且在相關性上,安全管控優於安全關懷(r=0.32及0.50,p值均<0.0001)。在合併關懷及控制兩因素後,感受到直屬上司的領導型態為高關懷/高控制者,其工作行為均較感受到高關懷/低控制及低關懷/低控制者安全(p<0.0001)。在領導型態對職業災害的影響上,發現相對於高管控領導,低管控領導發生失能傷害OR為3.88(95%信賴區間為1.86~12.73),具顯著意義;且四類領導型態中,相對於高關懷/高控制領導,低關懷/低控制領導發生失能傷害危險的OR為3.75(95%信賴區間為1.11~12.63),也具顯著意義。本研究發現直屬上司的領導型態對勞工的不安全行為及職業傷害有重要影響,相較於安全關懷,安全控管的效益更好,最佳的安全領導類型應是兼具高度關懷及高度控管,雙管齊下的領導方式。 |
英文摘要 | This study aimed at construction workers to investigate the influence of safety leadership on workers' safety behavior and injury events. This study was conducted cross-sectionally, using 500 purposive selected construction workers from southern Taiwan as study subjects. A structured questionnaire was applied to collect information, including demographics, types of workplace safety leadership, safety behavior and injury events. Data analyses used statistical package SAS to perform one-way ANOVA test and logistic regression to examine association of safety leadership and unsafe behavior or injury events. The results showed that positive safety caring and safety management controlling were both correlated with reduction of unsafe behavior and yet the safety management controlling was better than safety caring (r=0.32 and 0.50, both p<0.0001). After combined the factors of safety caring and safety management controlling into four leadership types, the results showed that those who perceived high caring/high controlling from their forefront leaders posed better safety behavior than those who perceived low caring/low controlling or high caring/low controlling (both p<0.0001). Regarding to the association between safety leadership and lost work day injury, the results showed that lost work day injury was not significantly associated with safety caring, but significantly associated with management controlling (OR=3.88, 95%CI=1.86~12.73). Furthermore, in the four types of safety leadership, compared to high caring/high controlling types, those who perceived their forefront leaders as low caring/low controlling had significantly higher risk of lost work day injury (OR=3.75, 95%CI=1.11~12.63). This study found that safety leadership of forefront leaders was associated with subordinate workers' unsafe behavior and occupational injury and that, comparing to safety caring, safety management controlling was more effective. The best type of safety leadership is to combined with both high safety caring and high management controlling. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。