Abstract
Introduction:
The burden of injury is high in Aotearoa/New Zealand (NZ), with the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) annual report (2023) noting two million new injury claims were accepted in the 2022/2023 year, with a claims-related expenditure of over six billion dollars. Approximately 10% of these injuries are work-related, which can exact a great ‘human’ toll, including negative health and well-being outcomes, along with profound socioeconomic and well-being impacts on individuals, families, communities, and workplaces.
The demographics of the NZ population are changing, with approximately 29% of the overall population reported to be non-NZ born in 2020, compared with only 15% in 1990. Alongside this, the demographics of the NZ workforce are changing. Overseas studies have highlighted a ‘ghettoization’ of migrant workers into certain types of occupations, such as those characterized by the ‘3 D’s’: dirty, demanding, and dangerous (and potentially, demeaning), with some evidence of this phenomenon in NZ. Despite this, little is known about migrants’ experiences of work-related injuries (WRIs) in NZ, and in particular, longer-term experiences and outcomes, including how these are ‘lived’ within (and alongside) other important life experiences, representing an important knowledge gap.
To address this gap, the aim of this study is to understand the WRI experiences and outcomes of NZ migrants, previously injured in a workplace setting, to identify potential social, structural, and systemic opportunities to improve outcomes and workplace health and safety policies for NZ migrants.
Methods:
A media review of NZ mainstream media representations of migrants’ WRI experiences and outcomes was undertaken to understand the broader social contexts of migrants’ WRIs in NZ. Following this, a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature investigated migrants’ WRI experiences, both in NZ and other countries. Findings from the media and scoping review informed the focus of in-depth qualitative interviews with 10 NZ migrant women, who identified as non-NZ born, who registered a claim with ACC for a WRI, and were recruited into the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study (POIS) in 2007-2009. Findings from all three components (the media review, scoping review and qualitative interviews) were used to inform the development of a conceptual model, and recommendations for WRI stakeholders.
All research components were grounded in a social constructivist paradigm. Qualitative methods included a thematic analysis of identified mainstream media news articles, a descriptive analysis of empirical publications (following application of developed screening criteria and processes) and Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of interview data.
Key findings:
Media review findings identified a lack of media attention to the WRI experiences of NZ migrant women, with a ‘default’ media representation of these as occurring to migrant men, and typically, working in primary industries. Similarly, the scoping review also found a lack of attention to the experiences of migrant women (including longer-term outcomes), with no findings identified specifically for NZ migrant women. These findings precipitated a focus on the experiences of occupationally injured NZ migrant women in qualitative interviews.
Migrant women interviewees ‘located’ their WRIs within their migration journeys and NZ work environment, including adverse experiences related to being perceived as ‘cultural outsiders’ in the workplace (often instantiated through discrimination and bullying). Further, the WRI had a negative impact on work opportunities and the overall career pathway, particularly for those injured during the period of attempting to reskill in order to register professional qualifications in NZ. Interviewees reflected on experiences of ‘becoming aware’ of post-WRI supports (including from ACC) emphasising the importance of ‘knowing what to ask for’ in order to receive appropriate supports, for which they were entitled.
The conceptual model (developed from key thesis findings) consists of five stages within the migration and WRI experience, including stages of “Reimagination” (planning and engagement with the migration process), “Recalibration” (of identity as a migrant and as a professional in NZ), “Disruption” (as both a cause and effect of WRI), “Pivoting” (in response to the disruptive event, i.e., WRI) and lastly, “Redefinition” (strategies to reconceptualise a ‘way forward’ in the host country following WRI).
This model is intended to allow the identification of key potential moments and types of intervention, which could contribute to positive WRI experiences and outcomes for NZ migrant women. Further, it contributes to a richer understanding of their WRI experiences and outcomes, as nested within the migration journey, and alongside other important work and life experiences. Importantly, this model centres the voices of NZ migrant women (voices which were identified as ‘hidden’ through this research) thus contributing to a richer understanding of the WRI ‘landscape’ as experienced by migrant women in NZ.