Políticas del reconocimiento de la diversidad cultural en el territorio

environment, paying special attention to the null hypothesis; which presupposes that, there is no relationship between the levels of employee participation and the perception of a safe work environment.

5.4.4.1. Question 43 asked respondents the following question: Do you obey the safety rules because this makes the workplace safe?

Almost all respondents (99.1%) answered “Yes”, that they obeyed the safety rules because this made the workplace safe. See table 5.35.

Table 5.35: Question 43 - Safety rules and a safe workplace

Frequency Percent

1.00 116 99.1

2.00 1 .9

Total 117 100.0

The results of One Sample T tests indicates that all the t values are highly significant at the 1% level, meaning that all the mean values of the answers to the scale items are significantly higher than 4. This implies that the employees agreed with all the statements in the scale. The t value of the composite index, employee participation within a safe place (t=23.129, P=.000<.01) is also highly significant – implying that in general, employees perception is that employees participate within a safe workplace.

180

5.4.4.2. Relationship between type of participation and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace

Table 5.36. shows the relationships between different types of participation and perceptions on employee participation within a safe workplace.

The results in the table indicate that all types of participation except Employee Directed Participation (r=-.010, P=.912), are related to the perception about Employee Participation within a safe Workplace.

Table 5.36. Relationship between types of participation and employee participation within a safe workplace

Employee Directed Participation Employee Involvement Employee Proactive Participation Employee Ownership Employee Participation within a Safe Workplace Employee Directed Participation r 1 .286** .212* .261** -.010 P .002 .022 .005 .912 Employee Involvement r .286** 1 .454** .410** .280** P .002 .000 .000 .002 Employee Proactive Participation r .212* .454** 1 .761** .465** P .022 .000 .000 .000 Employee Ownership r .261** .410** .761** 1 .551** P .005 .000 .000 .000 Employee Participation within a Safe Workplace r -.010 .280** .465** .551** 1 P .912 .002 .000 .000

181

5.4.4.3. Position and employee participation within a safe workplace

Table 5.37. shows the ANOVA results on the relationship between position and the perception of employee participation within a safe workplace. The results indicate that there is no significant relationship between position and the perception of employee participation within a safe workplace (F=.769, P=.548>.05).

Table 5.37.: Relationship between position and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F P Between Groups 2.101 4 .525 .769 .548 Within Groups 76.547 112 .683 Total 78.648 116

Using the Tukey multiple comparison method, it was also found that none of the mean differences in the perception between positions was significantly different to zero according to the t values whose P values were higher than 0.05, the level of significance.

Also an independent samples T test was performed to test for the relationship between position and the perception of employee participation within a safe workplace when positions 2, 3, 4 and 5 were combined. The following results in table 5.39 were obtained.

Table 5.38.: Relationship between position and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace (positions 2, 3, 4 and 5 combined)

182 Position N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Employee Participation to create a Safe Workplace

1 71 5.6977 .85315 .10125

2, 3, 4

and 5 46 5.8579 .77434 .11417

The t value (t=-1.049, P=.296>.05) is not significant at the 5% level. So, this also implies that position does not influence the perception of employee participation within a safe workplace. Furthermore the Tukey multiple comparisons show that none of the mean differences is significant as well.

T-tests and ANOVA were performed for the employee participation within a safe workplace to find out whether there is any significant difference in employee participation in occupational health and safety activities gender, age, bargaining, working cycle and work experience. The following were the results.

5.4.4.4. Gender and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace

Table 5.39. shows the results for gender.

Table 5.39. : Relationship between gender and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace.

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Employee Participation

within a Safe Workplace

1 99 5.7249 .80932 .08134 2 18 5.9573 .89560 .21110

Independent Samples Test

t-test for Equality of Means

P

Mean Difference Employee Participation within

a Safe Workplace

Equal variances assumed .273 -.23232 Equal variances not

183

All probabilities for the t values are higher than 0.05 the level of significance, which imply that gender does not affect the decision-making process. In other words, there is no relationship between gender and any of the decision-making process component or the decision-making process in general.

5.4.4.5. Working cycle and employee participation within a safe workplace.

Table 5.40 shows the results for the working cycle (with 3 categories).

Table 5.40.: Relationship between working cycle and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace.

Working

Shift N Mean Std. Deviation Employee Participation

within a Safe Workplace

1.00 75 5.8636 .79907

2.00 40 5.5942 .85852

Group Statistics

Working Shift Std. Error Mean Employee Participation within a Safe

Workplace

1.00 .09227

2.00 .13574

The results of the independent T-tests indicate that employee participation within a safe workplace (1.824, P=.071<.1) is positively related to the job cycle.

5.4.4.6. Working experience vs employee participation within a safe workplace

Table 5.41.: Relationship between working experience and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace.

Sum of Squares Df

Mean

Square F P Employee Between Groups 3.431 3 1.144 1.718 .167

184 Participation within

a Safe Workplace

Within Groups 75.218 113 .666

Total 78.648 116

The results indicate that employee participation within a safe workplace is not positively related to work experience.

5.4.4.7. Age profile versus employee participation within safe workplace.

Ages 2 and 3 were combined to avoid having too few data points for an age group. The results are shown on table 5.42.

Table 5.42.: Relationship between age and perception about employee participation within a safe workplace.

ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Employee Participation

within a Safe Workplace

Between

Groups 1.190 2 .595 .875 .419 Within

Groups 77.459 114 .679 Total 78.648 116

The results indicate that employee participation within a safe workplace is not positively related with the age profile of the respondents.

5.4.4.8. Job profile (Manager vs Blue Collar Worker) and employee participation within a safe workplace.

Manager = 1

185 Employee Participation in a Safe

Workplace

1 36 5.8440 .82018

2 81 5.7236 .82722

The results indicate that employee participation within a safe workplace is not significantly related with job profile.