The Interactive Process of Negotiating Workplace Accommodations for Employees with a Mental Health Condition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Employee mental health claims have become a costly burden for Canadian workplaces, therefore many organizations are seeking to adopt progressive disability management strategies to support employees with mental health conditions who are either returning to work or trying to remain at work. Developing and implementing effective workplace accommodation practices is one such strategy to support employees. Negotiating workplace accommodations has been recommended in the literature to be an interactive process between the employee and workplace stakeholders. However, there is very limited knowledge regarding the ways in which discussing and negotiating accommodations unfolds, or how employees and stakeholders experience the process of negotiating accommodations. This thesis includes the results of a qualitative study exploring how negotiating accommodations unfolds between employees with mental health conditions and workplace stakeholders, and a sub-analysis of the larger study data exploring how social capital can impact the negotiation process. In order to capture varied perspectives, in depth interviews were conducted with employees in diverse roles who self-identified as having a mental health condition that required accommodation, and stakeholders who were experienced in negotiating accommodations. A qualitative descriptive design was used to iteratively collect and analyze data. Constructive and interpretive strategies including initial and focused coding, memo writing and clustering were used to identify themes about negotiating accommodations. The negotiation process, as reported by participants in this study, was found to be a non-linear, social and political process that unfolded as a combination of micro formal and informal sub-processes, in contrast to the concrete, formal accommodation process mandated by some organizational policies. In addition, there were a number of factors that were experienced as either helpful or challenging in the process of negotiating accommodations. Social capital arose as an important element influencing how employees with mental health conditions accessed accommodations. The findings of a qualitative sub-analysis of the original data set focused on the ways in which workplace social capital impacted the experience of requesting and negotiating accommodations. Some elements of social capital were found to be dynamic, with workers able to accumulate, rebuild and spend social capital in the course of their employment. Employee reputation, employee self-confidence and likeability with coworkers and managerial staff arose as key elements of social capital. Other elements of social capital were external perceptions constructed by coworkers and workplace stakeholders, such as return-on-investment of accommodating and judgements of value to the organization. Overall, workplace social capital appeared to impact how employees experienced the process of requesting and negotiating accommodations, but it was not the determining factor of whether accommodation requests were granted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".