Stress Survey, 2000-2001

Edge Hill Branch,

National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE)

Findings

We endeavoured to provide all academic members of staff the opportunity to complete the survey. In total, 88 of those people found the time to do so. Many detailed responses to the questions were received. In this section we have: listed the questions asked, provided some indication of the numbers of people who responded to the survey and, illuminated some of the responses they provided.

As the information provided is so detailed (from responses to the last three questions especially - see Appendix 3), it is impossible to raise all of the issues here. However, in the following section we have identified a number of issues we believe to be of importance.

This question was included in order that any broad differences between the replies provided by male and female respondents could be analysed. The number of women who responded to the survey outnumbered men. Sixty percent were female as opposed to forty percent male. At January 2001, the number of female academic employees was 146 (52 percent) compared to 136 (48 percent) male. This may indicate a greater willingness on behalf of women to communicate their experiences of work-related stress.

This question was included to give respondents an opportunity to indicate their ethnic origin and to allow us to identify whether or not there were any relevant differences between the responses provided by people of different ethnic origin. The vast majority of the respondents to the survey were white and of UK origin. This is unsurprising as the overwhelming majority of academic staff in the institution are white and of UK origin. There were no significant differences between the responses provided by academic staff of UK origin and those of other ethnic origins.

This question was posed so that we could compare the responses provided with the employment status of those who completed the survey.

Eighty-one (92 percent) of the 88 people who responded to the survey were full-time members of staff, 6 (7percent) were part-time members who worked 8 hours and above, 1 (1 percent) person was a part-time member who worked less than 8 hours. To some extent, the low response rate of part-time members of staff will be affected by the amount of time spent on campus and whether up-to-date records of their employment circumstances have been accurately maintained. Further, this response rate may have been affected by misunderstandings about who the survey was aimed at. There were no significant differences between the responses provided by part-time and full-time staff.

The number of people who have experienced work-related stress in the current academic year is indicated below.

Of the 88 people who responded, 77 (88 percent) stated that they had experienced the effects of work-related stress in this academic year whereas 11 (12 percent) stated that they had not.

The symptoms included in this question were chosen because they have been highlighted in HSE Occupational Stress Fact Sheet 3. As can be seen from the questionnaire (Appendix 1, question 5), respondents were able to indicate multiple symptoms of work-related stress if they wanted to.

The following list indicates the percentage of respondents who reported experiencing each of the symptoms:

Muscular Problems: 22 Dizziness: 17

Eye Strain: 42 Headache: 51

Rashes: 8 Emotional: 47

Back Pain: 25 Other: 56

The most common symptoms of work-related stress experienced by academic staff at Edge Hill are headaches, emotional reactions, eyestrain and back pain. However, there were a number of significant symptoms expressed in the 'other' section.

These symptoms included strokes (twice), gastric problems, increased asthmatic attacks, insomnia, anxiety, inability to concentrate, chest pains, swollen glands, shingles, confusion, alcohol abuse, palpitations, mouth disorders and high blood pressure. The most common of these symptoms were insomnia and gastric problems.

For those people who had experienced work-related stress, this question gave them the opportunity to indicate whether or not they had raised the issue with a medical practitioner.

Of the 77 people who have experienced work-related stress in this academic year, 39 had been to see a doctor about the symptoms of work-related stress. Therefore, just over 50 percent of those people who had reported experiencing work-related stress had been to discuss their symptoms with a medical practitioner.

This question was included to give us a broader understanding of the extent to which work-related stress was experienced by the respondents. A content analysis was carried out that allowed us to categorise the responses provided to this question.

Forty-nine percent of those respondents who answered this question stated that they experienced symptoms of work-related stress on a frequent basis. Twenty-one (27 percent) of the respondents indicated that they experienced work-related stress at particular times of the year (for example when teaching load is at its highest, or when assessment marking is required). Eighteen (24 percent) of the respondents stated that they experienced work-related stress on an occasional basis.

Particular issues of importance were raised by some of the staff members in explaining why they experienced the levels of work-related stress reported. As the following quote suggests, the levels of work-related stress can:

For this respondent, the levels of work-related stress experienced are influenced by the management approach adopted. It may be that the management style chosen heightens or lowers the levels of work-related stress experienced. Individual managers play a significant role in determining whether academic staff at Edge Hill experience work-related stress. The build-up of work at particular times of the year has a detrimental impact upon the levels of work-related stress. Some of the symptoms are experienced on a more common basis than others.

This question provided the opportunity to indicate whether line managers and/or human resources were approached about work-related stress. The respondents were asked to comment on how their concerns were handled by the party informed.

Of the 77 people who reported suffering from work-related stress in this academic year, 48 (62 percent) had not been to see either their line manager or human resources. Twenty-seven (35 percent) had raised the issue with their line manager alone, while 2 (3 percent) people had been to both HR and their line managers. In answering this question, those respondents who did approach their line manager and/or human resources were given the opportunity to indicate whether the matter was handled to their satisfaction. A content analysis was used to categorise the responses provided.

In all, thirteen people stated that the issue was not dealt with appropriately. The same number said that the issue was dealt with well enough or to some extent at least. There were

further issues raised in response to this question that give us grounds for concern. After approaching their line manager with issues relating to work-related stress, one respondent was told to "work on managing [their] own stress levels". The respondent felt very strongly that this was an inadequate response. Many staff members were reluctant to express concerns to line managers and human resources. One person reported that:

It is revealing that respondents are twenty times more likely to speak to a doctor about work-related stress than they are to speak to the Human Resource Department. This despite the fact that it may be more difficult to arrange an appointment with a doctor than to arrange an appointment with the Human Resources Department.

This question was included to further explore the respondents’ feelings about how work-related stress is dealt with at Edge Hill.

Of the 88 respondents, 62 (70 percent) stated that the mechanisms available at Edge Hill for dealing with work-related stress were inappropriate, 6 (7 percent) stated that they felt the mechanisms available were appropriate, while 20 (23 percent) did not feel that they could answer the question accurately. Most of those who could not answer the question accurately had not experienced work-related stress in this academic year. Of those respondents who felt that appropriate mechanisms for dealing with work-related stress were available, not one had been to HR to discuss their concerns.

This question was aimed at analysing the impact of work-related stress on the respondents’ social relations and interactions outside of Edge Hill. The respondents' experiences inside the workplace can have a dramatic impact upon family and social life. This can lead to a stress cycle as work-related stress can create problems outside work that, in turn, can lead to a further heightening of work-related stress.

Eighty-one (92 percent) of the 88 respondents chose to provide an answer to this open-ended question. The responses have been wide-ranging and extremely informative. As a result of their experiences of work-related stress, some respondents have reported that behavioural changes resulting from work-related stress have negatively impacted upon family and social life. One person wrote:

Many of the respondents indicated that they carry out work-related activities at home including assignment marking and research beyond standard working hours. A 1994 Association of University Teachers study (cited in Kinman, 1998) analysing the workloads of academic staff in the UK suggested that approximately 40 percent of work was carried out in the evenings and weekends. The need to frequently work outside contractual working hours raises questions about whether or not appropriate time is made available for academic staff to carry out effective research and teaching.

As more time is being spent on work-related activities in the workplace and at home, the quality and quantity of time spent with family members has, for many, lessened. In effect, a cycle of stress commences.

Once such a cycle begins, it can be extremely difficult to break. Often, those people experiencing work-related stress feel unable to remove the causes. This then leads to frustration and further compounds the stress experienced. For many of the respondents to our questionnaire, such a cycle of work-related stress has been experienced. It is questionable; therefore, that Edge Hill is indeed a 'family friendly' organisation and whether the college is adequately investing in people.

The burden of overwork was further highlighted in the recent Costing and Pricing Exercise where it was indicated that, on average, academic staff at Edge Hill work 10 hours above the norm of 37 hours per week indicated in the staff handbook. Reference to such an average should not conceal the experiences of those workers who in fact work much more than the average hours.

The responses to this question would suggest that there is a broader expectation placed on academic members of staff to work long hours - frequently above contractual obligations. Academic staff would not be in position to meet the expectations placed upon them if they did not work beyond the standard hours of work.

Of the 88 respondents, 86 (98 percent) chose to respond to this, the second of the open-ended questions. The responses provided by them have been summarised in the two sub-sections below. In (a) we discuss the extent to which the burden of work has impacted upon the levels of work-related stress experienced. In (b) we examine some of the experiences of management support and consider whether that support has been adequate.

(a) The burden of overwork

The clearest source of stress mentioned in response to this question is the pressure of overwork. From her survey of higher education establishments, Kinman (1998) indicates that as hours worked increases stress levels also rise. At Edge Hill, high student numbers and student support (including assessment marking) when combined with research expectations have ensured that many academic staff feel seriously overworked. One person indicated that they regarded the principle source of stress as:

The changing nature of the students recruited by Edge Hill has ensured that many of those students now require a greater breadth and depth of support. The responses to this question suggest that the burden of overwork can detrimentally impact upon the standard of teaching being undertaken. This is further compounded by the lack of faith in the current support structures available for academic staff when they encounter difficulty.

The workload for many people is intensified during particular times of the year. One respondent commented that the period of time during which assignments are to be marked is not long enough. For others, there is an "endless treadmill of assessment".

An underlying cause of these problems is that the student to staff ratio is too high to be managed effectively. A high administrative burden results from such a high student to staff ratio. The burden of administration was another frequently mentioned source of stress. A number of the respondents have questioned Edge Hill management’s expectation that they should be carrying out repetitive, mundane tasks.

(b) Management support

Some of the respondents declared their lack of faith in senior managers at Edge Hill and the decisions being taken by them. One person wrote that:

The undemocratic nature of decision-making appears to be a broader problem, with some of the respondents expressing concern about the ways in which managers at Edge Hill make decisions. One person replied that they felt a need to defend their "academic interests against arbitrary decisions by senior managers".

Another replied that "a combination of gross incompetence and vindictiveness by management" was the principal source of stress. Yet another stated that there are "managers (at all levels) who are unaware, and frankly don't care, about the burden of work they place on staff". Even when members of academic staff do carry out an increasingly burdensome workload, there is a feeling that due recognition is not forthcoming.

A question such as this one was deemed necessary as it allowed the respondents to inform us of any further issues regarding work-related stress they felt to be important. It allowed them to include relevant issues that the previous questions in the survey did not allow for. Of the 88 respondents, 62 (70 percent) chose to provide further comments on the management of work-related stress at Edge Hill.

There is a strong feeling that work-related stress is not taken as seriously as it should be. As the quote below suggests, it is sometimes only when certain other people intervene that the issue is acknowledged as being a problem:

A lack of understanding about the seriousness of work-related stress is a college-wide problem. This lack of understanding can have serious implications for the levels of work-related stress experienced and, therefore, the impact work-related stress has upon the physical and mental well-being of academic staff. This was highlighted effectively by one of the respondents:

Some members of staff felt that college policies contribute toward work-related stress. The following quote indicates how the sickness policy, for example, was annoying for one person:

Many of the respondents recognise that broader structural forces are at play and that those forces impact upon the ways in which work-related stress is handled. One person commented:

The levels of work-related stress are further aggravated by a lack of appreciation for the work carried out by some academic staff:

Edge Hill management is regarded with contempt by some. As the comments below highlight, there is a feeling that managers are aware of the problems resulting from work-related stress but that not enough is being done to combat the causes.

Heavy workloads can mean that those people who would otherwise be engaging in further professional development are given insufficient opportunity to do so. Lack of opportunity in itself can lead to a further increase in work-related stress.

Click here to return to index page.