Organisational justice and smoking: the Finnish Public Sector Study

Study Objective: To examine the extent to which justice of decision-making procedures and interpersonal relations is associated with smoking. Setting: Ten municipalities and 21 hospitals in Finland. Design and Participants: Cross-sectional data derived from the Finnish Public Sector Study were analysed with logistic regression analysis models with generalized estimating equations. Analyses of smoking status were based on 34 021 employees. Separate models for heavy smoking (>20 cigarettes per day) were calculated for 6295 current smokers. Main results: After adjustment for age, education, socio-economic position, marital status, job contract, and negative affectivity, smokers who reported low procedural justice were about 1.4 times more likely to smoke >20 cigarettes per day compared with their counterparts with high justice. In a similar way, after adjustments, low justice in interpersonal treatment was significantly associated with an elevated prevalence of heavy smoking (odds ratio (OR) = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.77 for men and OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.83 for women). Further adjustment for job strain and effort-reward imbalance had little effect on these results. There were no associations between justice components and smoking status or ex-smoking. Conclusions: The extent to which employees are treated with justice in the workplace seems to be associated with smoking intensity independently of established stressors at work.

Effort-reward imbalance and sedentary lifestyle: an observational study in a large occupational cohort

Objectives: To investigate the association between effort-reward imbalance (ERI) at work and sedentary lifestyle. Methods: Cross-sectional data from the ongoing Finnish Public Sector Study related to 30 433 women and 7718 men aged 17-64 were used (n = 35 918 after exclusion of participants with missing values in covariates). From the responses to a questionnaire, an aggregated mean score for ERI in a work unit was assigned to each participant. The outcome was sedentary lifestyle defined as <2.00 metabolic equivalent task (MET) hours/day. Logistic regression with generalized estimating equations was used as an analysis method to include both individual and work unit level predictors in the models. Adjustments were made for age, marital status, occupational status, job contract, smoking, and heavy drinking. Results: Twenty five percent of women and 27% of men had a sedentary lifestyle. High individual level ERI was associated with a higher likelihood of sedentary lifestyle both among women (odds ratio (OR) = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16) and men (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.33). These associations were not explained by relevant confounders and they were also independent of work unit level job strain measured as a ratio of job demands and control. Conclusions: A mismatch between high occupational effort spent and low reward received in turn seems to be associated with an elevated risk of sedentary lifestyle, although this association is relatively weak.