Evaluation of Underreporting of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses in the United States Military

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2020-06-22

Access

Authors

O'Connell, Floyd

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

East Carolina University

Abstract

The purpose of the research was to characterize underreporting of occupational illnesses and injuries among the United States (U.S.) military veterans. The researcher interviewed 100 U.S. veterans and 100 U.S. civilians. A semi-structured interview questionnaire was used to collect both qualitative and quantitative data in an effort to identify the causes of underreporting of injuries and illnesses among U.S. military veterans. A similar survey evaluated U.S. civilians' perceptions and experience of underreporting of injuries and illnesses and allowed for comparison. Due to the lack of empirical research on employee underreporting, the questions were derived from literature reviews, reflections with the thesis committee, and the researcher's life experiences as a U.S. Disabled Veteran. The surveys were designed so that they could help answer and measure the three research questions that the researcher had. The researcher wanted to know to what degree is underreporting occurring in the military. Secondly, does underreporting of work-related injuries and illnesses continue after the military. Finally, is underreporting of work-related injuries and illnesses higher during the military or after the military. The surveys, which were conducted through in-person and telephone interviews, focused on understanding the participants' experience related to incentive programs, fear of reporting, and the stigma associated with reporting. The research showed that underreporting is a significant problem in the military and different factors can influence how often it happens. Underreporting in the U.S. workforce was less than the military, but it was still higher than expected. The research also showed that different factors influence underreporting in the military when compared to the U.S. workforce.

Description

Keywords

Citation

DOI