Self-rated Health Level Comparisons by the Criteria of Precarious Employment Status: The Korean Labor and Income Survey.
- Author:
Keunwhoe KIM
1
;
Hun Jong CHUNG
;
Sounghoon CHANG
;
Hyeongsu KIM
;
Daehee NOH
;
Kyunghee JUNG-CHOI
Author Information
1. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Konkuk University Chungju Hospital, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Self-rated health;
Precarious employment;
Longitudinal survey
- MeSH:
Employment;
Female;
Health Status;
Humans;
Korea;
Logistic Models;
Longitudinal Studies;
Male
- From:Korean Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
2010;22(3):240-250
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of precarious employment status on the level of self-rated health, based on various criteria, by participants in the Korean Labor and Income Panel Survey. METHODS: Data were obtained from 3,268 subjects(2,057 men and 1,211 women), who participated in the 2005-2006 Korean Labor and Income Panel Survey. Group A was classified as Non-precarious employment by both the Ministry of Labor (MoLab) and the Korea Labor and Society Institute (KLSI). The group B was classified as Non-precarious employment by the MoLab and as precarious employment by the KLSI. The group C is classified as Non-precarious employment by both MoLab and KLSI. Outcome variables were self-rated health and a panel logistic regression analysis was performed on the data. RESULTS: The level of self-rated health was worse among group B males (OR: 1.45, C.I:1.00~2.11) and group C males (OR: 1.69, C.I:1.35~2.10) compared to group A males. A substantial difference(57.8%) in the level of self-rated health between groups A and B was attributed to the sociodemographic characteristics of the populations. The difference in self-rated health between groups A and C was explained by work environments(15.7%), as well as by sociodemographic characteristics(26.1%). For female workers, the level of self-rated health in group B and C was worse than in group A, but this finding was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested that the policy to improve the working environment, as well as a more comprehensive effort to reduce the disparity, is needed for the precarious employment worker.
