Challenges of Occupational Safety Specialists Scale: A Scale Development Study

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 76 - 84, 10.08.2019

Şeyhmus Aksoy , Nihal Mamatoğlu

https://doi.org/10.35365/ctjpp.19.1.09

Öz

The object of this study was to develop challenges of occupational safety specialists scale for Turkish sample. The universe of this research is occupational safety specialists who works in private sector. Scale consist of two parts that were the main challenges and organizational challenges part. 332 participants responded main challenges part and 314 participants responded organizational challenges part. The results of the Exploratory Factor Analysis ( EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) showed that organizational challenges part
have to be assessed as a separate scale from main challenges part. 6 factor was obtained for main challenges with 28 items which were named as ‘insufficient awareness of employees’ (13 items), ‘providing lack of resources’ (3 items), ‘ignorance of employees’ (3 items), ‘unwillingness of employees to participation’ (3 items), ‘legislative challenges’(3 items) and ‘law based challenges’ (3 items). Additionally, 1 factor was obtained for organizational challenges part with 6 items. As a result, psychometrics specifics of both main challenges scale and organizational challenges scale showed that scales were valid and reliable for Turkish sample.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

challenges, organizational challenges, occupational safety specialist, scale development

Kaynakça

• Akboğa Kale et al..(2018). İş güvenliği uzmanlığı sisteminin gelişimi üzerine bir alan çalışması. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1 -14.
• Akın, L. (2012). Sendikaların İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliğinin Sağlanmasına Katkısı. Çalışma ve Toplum, 34, 101-123.
• Arslan, V. & Ulubeylı̇ , S. (2016). A field research for problems of occupational safety experts. Çalışma ve Toplum, 1321-1340.
• Atherley, GRC and Hale, AR. (1975). Prerequisites for a profession in occupational safety and hygiene. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 18, 321-334.
• Başkan Takaoğlu, Z, Çelenk Kaya, E & Ölmezoğlu İri, N. (2018). The problems of occupational safety specialists. Gümüşhane University Journal of Health Sciences, 7(2), 1-9.
• Biyikci, E.T. (2010). İş sağlığı ve güvenliğinin sağlanmasında iş güvenliği uzmanlığı (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa, Turkey.
• Cattaruzza, E and Huguet, M. (1993). Training of prevention experts: summary report. Paris: International Social Security Association, Section on Education and Training in Prevention, Caisse Regionale d’Assurance Maladie d'Ile de France.
• ÇSGB, ILO (2017). İş Güvenliği Uzmanlarının Görev ve Sorumluluklarının Yürütülmesi ile ilgili Araştırma. Ankara, Turkey.
• Dawson S., Poynter P. & Stevens D. (1984). Safety Specialists in Industry: Roles, Constraints and Opportunities. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 5(4), 253- 270.
• Emiroğlu, C. & Koşar, L. (2012). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanunu üzerine. TTB Mesleki Sağlık ve Güvenlik Dergisi, 43, 2-15.
• European Commission. (1989). Directive concerning the execution of measures to promote the improvement of the safety and health of workers at their work and other subjects (framework directive). Official Journal of EC, 12 June.
• Garrigou, A., Peissel-Cottenaz, G., 2008. Reflexive approach to the activity of preventionists and their training needs: results of a French study. Safety Science, 46, 1271–1288.
• Gerbing, D.W. & Anderson, J.C. (1992). Monte Carlo evaluations of goodness of fit indices for structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 21(2), 132-160.
• Güzey, Z. (2014), 6331 sayılı yasa çerçevesinde iş güvenliği uzmanlarının sorunları, Mühendis ve Makina Dergisi, 55(155).
• Hale, A.R, Bianchi G., Dudka, G., Hameister, W., Jones, R., Perttula, P. & Ytrehus I. (2005). Surveying the role of safety professionals: objectives, methods & early results. Safety Science Monitor, 9 (1).
• Hale, A.R, Guldenmund F.G. (2006). Role and tasks of safety professionals: some results from an international survey. Safety science group.
• Hale, A.R., Piney, M and Alesbury, R. (1986). The development of occupational hygiene and the training of health and safety professionals. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 30(1), 1-18.
• Hovden, J., Lie, T., Karlsen, J.E., Alteren, B., (2008). The safety representative under pressure. A study of occupational health and safety management in the Norwegian oil and gas industry. Safety Science, 46, 493–509.
• INSHPO (International Network of Safety and Health Practitioner Organisations). (2017). The Occupational Health and Safety Professional Capability Framework: A global framework for practice. International Network of Safety and Health Practitioner Organisations (INSHPO). Park Ridge, IL, USA.
• Ilhan, M. & Çetin, B. (2014). Lisrel ve Amos programları kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen yapısal eşitlik modeli (yem) analizlerine ilişkin sonuçların karşılaştırılması. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 5(2), 26-42.
• Jones, R., (2005). In: IOSH (Ed.), What Practitioners Do - A Survey of UK Registered Safety Practitioners to Determine Their Roles and Tasks. IOSH, Leicestershire.
• Leitão, S, Mc carthy, V.J.C. & Greiner, B.A. (2018). Health and safety practitioners health and wellbeing — the link with safety climate and job demand-control-support. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 119, 131-137.
• Namal, B., Kanber, H. & Kavas, M.V. (2016). The ethical problems that occupational safety specialists face because of getting their wages from the institutions they inspect. Turkish Journal of Bioethics, 3(3), 146-164.
• Orhan, S. (2014). The problem of job security for occupational safety specialists. HAK-İŞ Uluslararası Emek ve Toplum Dergisi, 3(6), 70-89.
• Schumacker, R. E. (2006). Conducting specification searches with Amos. Structural equation modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13 (1), 118- 129.
• Taşkiran, G. (2016). Unsecured occupational safety specialists, marketable occupational safety: A Field Research. Çalışma ve Toplum, 4, 1747-1768.
• Yener (2015). Psikolojik rahatlık ölçeğinin türkçe formunun geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması, Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 280 – 305.