The effects of ownership, staffing level and organisational justice on nurse commitment, involvement, and satisfaction: A questionnaire study

Background: Elderly care systems have undergone a lot of changes in many European countries, including Finland. Most notably, the number of private for-profit firms has increased. Previous studies suggest that employee well-being and the quality of care might differ according to the ownership type.

The Association of Ownership Type With Job Insecurity and Worry About Job Stability The Moderating Effects of Fair Management, Positive Leadership, and Employment Type

This study examined whether the ownership type is associated with job insecurity and worry about job stability and whether the type of employment contract, positive leadership, and fair management moderated these associations. Survey data from 1249 Finnish female elderly care staff aged 18 to 69 years were used. Job insecurity and worry about job stability were highest in not-for-profit sheltered homes. However, positive leadership and fair management were able to mitigate this insecurity and worry. Job insecurity was highest among fixed-term employees in public sheltered homes or not-for-profit nursing homes. Thus, promoting good leadership and fair management would be of importance.

Ownership type and team climate in elderly care facilities: the moderating effect of stress factors

Aims. This paper is a report of a study examining the association between ownership type and perceived team climate among older people care staff. In addition, we examined whether work stress factors (time pressure, resident-related stress, role conflicts and role ambiguity) mediated or moderated the above mentioned association. Background. There has been a trend towards contracting out in older people care facilities in Finland and the number of private for-profit firms has increased. Studies suggest that there may be differences in employee well-being and quality of care according to the ownership type of older people care. Methods. Cross-sectional survey data was collected during the autumn of 2007 from 1084 Finnish female older people care staff aged 1869 years were used. Team Climate Inventory was used to measure team climate. Ownership type was divided into four categories: for-profit sheltered homes, not-for-profit sheltered homes, public sheltered homes and not-for-profit nursing homes. Analyses of covariance were used to examine the associations. Results. Team climate dimensions participative safety, vision and support for innovation were higher in not-for-profit organizations (both sheltered homes and nursing homes) compared to for-profit sheltered homes and public sheltered homes. Stress factors did not account for these associations but acted as moderators in a way that in terms of task orientation and participative safety employees working in for-profit organizations seemed to be slightly more sensitive to work-related stress than others. Conclusion. Our results suggest that for-profit organizations and public organizations may have difficulties in maintaining their team climate. In consequence, these organizations should focus more effort on improving their team climate.

Informed Consent: Autonomy and Self-Ownership

Using the example of an unconsented mouth swab I criticise the view that an action of this kind taken in itself is wrongful in respect of its being a violation of autonomy. This is so much inasmuch as autonomy merits respect only with regard to ‘critical life choices’. I consider the view that such an action is nevertheless harmful or risks serious harm. I also respond to two possible suggestions: that the action is of a kind that violates autonomy; and, that the class of such actions violates autonomy. I suggest that the action is wrongful in as much as it is a bodily trespass. I consider, and criticise, two ways of understanding how morally I stand to my own body: as owner and as sovereign. In respect of the latter I consider Arthur Ripstein’s recent defence of a sovereignty principle. Finally I criticise an attempt by Joel Feinberg to explain bodily trespass in terms of personal autonomy.

Moral Compromise

A moral compromise is a compromise on moral matters; it is agreement in the face of moral disagreement but where there is agreement on the importance of consensus – namely that it secures a morally desirable outcome. It is distinguishable from other forms of agreement, and an important distinction between moral compromise with public agreement and moral compromise with public disagreement is also made. Circumstances in which the former might be permissible are outlined, and the sense in which it is allowed all things considered to agree is made clear. The relevant discussions of Dan Brock and Mary Warnock on the role of the philosopher to public policy are critically reviewed. Finally, a brief list is offered of the considerations relevant to an estimation of whether and, if so, when such compromise is allowed.