2012 Employers Survey Final Report Confidential Reproduction in whole or in part is not permitted without the expressed permission of
Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland & Labrador WHS001-1012
Prepared for:
Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Commission December 2012
www.cra.ca 1.888.414.1336
Table of Contents Page Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 3 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 4 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 6 Detailed Analysis ................................................................................................................... 7 Overall Assessment of the WHSCC ................................................................................... 7 Assessing Service Dimensions ........................................................................................ 11 Commission Communications ........................................................................................ 14 Prevention Services Department .................................................................................... 15 Assessment Services Department ................................................................................... 17 Worker Services Division ................................................................................................ 19 Telephone and Online Services ...................................................................................... 21 Suggestions for Service Improvements ........................................................................... 23 Quality of Service Index ....................................................................................................... 24 Study Methodology ............................................................................................................. 26 Sampling, Survey Administration, Tabulation, and Completion Results ........................... 28
2012 Employers Survey
1
Introduction This report presents the results from the 2012 Employers Survey, conducted by Corporate Research Associates Inc. (CRA) on behalf of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland & Labrador. This study is part of a multi-part stakeholder research agenda aimed at addressing opinions of employers, injured workers, and Commission employees. The Employers Survey was re-designed in 2011-2012 given that it had been 10 years since this tracking research commenced, and it was determined that the time was appropriate to revisit the survey methodology and content, to ensure current needs of the WHSCC and its clients were best being met by the research regimen. A detailed description of the consultations leading to the 2012 Employers Survey methodology and questionnaire is included in the Methodology section at the back of this report. The Commission’s current research agenda seeks to understand the thoughts and dispositions of its employers’ stakeholder group. It is also interested in stakeholders’ views concerning the type, level, and quality of service that the Commission provides. As part of this research agenda, the Commission first contracted Corporate Research Associates, Inc. (CRA) to conduct a survey of Employers in 2002. Since then, CRA has conducted five additional studies, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008 and the current 2012 study to track changes in key areas compared to the benchmark study. The WHSCC also commissioned research in this area in 2010. Specifically, the research objectives for the 2012 Employers Survey included the following: 1.
To better understand the opinions of employers concerning a broad range of Commission services;
2.
To identify steps that could be taken by the Commission to improve its performance in the eyes of its employer stakeholder group; and
3.
To establish updates on selected benchmark measures for a variety of service variables, allowing the Commission in the future to further measure service performance along these dimensions and thereby gauge service improvements or declines.
To meet these objectives, a quantitative research study was undertaken consisting of 300 random telephone surveys with a representative sample of employers from the Commission’s employer database. A sample of this size drawn from the population of the Commission’s database would be expected to provide results accurate to within ± 5.7 percentage points (in 95 out of 100 samples). This survey was conducted from April 18 to May 1, 2012. Regional and organizational size (based on payroll) weights were established to ensure the final data set matched the actual representation of employers across the province. A more complete description of the methodology is provided at the back of this report. Throughout the report, survey questions are denoted by question number for easy reference. All results are presented as a percentage.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
2
Also included in this report are results of a gap analysis comparing employers’ ratings of the importance of various criteria when evaluating the Commission as well as their perceptions of the Commission’s performance on these criteria. Such an analysis provides a useful tool for identifying opportunities for improvement with respect to overall opinions of employers in the province. Throughout this report, the bulk of the analysis focuses on trends and levels of satisfaction or agreement with various question statements. In general, only where there are pronounced (i.e., 10 percent or more) levels of dissatisfaction or disagreement, are these levels discussed. A 5-point satisfaction scale of ‘1’, meaning completely dissatisfied, to ‘5’, meaning completely satisfied, was employed on several occasions throughout this study. In such instances, the reporting of employers who indicate ‘4’ is meant to represent those who are mostly satisfied. Top-2 box scores represent the proportion of employers who are completely or mostly satisfied (i.e., who indicate ‘5’ or ‘4’ on the 5point scale). Similarly, the percentage who indicate ‘4’ on a 5-point importance scale, where ‘1’ means not at all important and ‘5’ means critically important is meant to represent those who rate a factor as important. Please note, it is important to underscore that in implementing in many instances in 2012 a 5-point question scale rather than a 4-point scale (which had been used in many instances in previous WHSCC-commissioned research) has permitted, among other things, a more robust understanding of the survey data collected. For example, the percentage of those most comfortable offering a moderate opinion has now been identified via the 5-point scales (i.e., those offering a score of ‘3’ on the 5-point scale). The following report provides a detailed analysis of findings, as well as conclusions and recommendations, and an executive summary based on those findings.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
3
Executive Summary On the whole, the results of the 2012 Employers Survey reflect well upon the WHSCC’s service performance among its employer client base. The Commission continues to be viewed favourably in the eyes of employers, both in terms of overall opinion, and their overall experience with the WHSCC. Likewise, the majority of employers are satisfied with the overall quality of service provided by the WHSCC, and feel the Commission is fair to its clients. The small number of employers who are dissatisfied typically attribute their displeasure to high assessment rates, and difficulty reaching WHSCC staff members when desired. Employers assert that basically all aspects of the Commission’s service delivery are important, with almost all areas being rated critically important by at least one-half of those surveyed. Furthermore, employer clients maintain that the Commission is doing a good job in the areas that were examined. In order to identify opportunities for improvement, a gap analysis was performed to flag factors for which importance was high, but satisfaction lagged somewhat. Results of this analysis were generally favourable, yet they did reveal that there may be an opportunity for the Commission to improve frequency of contact, accessibility, fairness, and promptness. Employers assert that the Commission is doing a good job in many aspects of communications. As well, employers are especially pleased with the level of security the WHSCC implements regarding information. Nonetheless, selected employers hold that the amount of paperwork required can be excessive. Of note, while use of the toll-free inquiry number has increased over the years, a sizeable minority would welcome an increased focus on online service offerings, and away from in-person or telephone services. Awareness of the Prevention Services Department has increased since 2010. Still, relatively few clients are making use of the services this Department has to offer. Regardless, those who have interacted with the Prevention Services Department are generally satisfied with the service they have received. Likewise, satisfaction among user clients is high vis-à -vis the offerings of the Assessment Services Department. Those not satisfied with Assessment Services often feel that rates are too high or that communications could be clearer. Much like the Prevention Services Department, usage of the Worker Services Division is low. Here again, a high Divisional satisfaction level is evident from the ratings offered by those relatively few who have called upon the Worker Services Division. Complaints concerning the Division, while rare, tend to centre on difficulty in reaching staff, concerns over communication clarity, and the attitude of selected staff members. Finally, few employers offer suggestions concerning how the Workers Health, Safety and Compensation Commission could improve the service it offers. Those who do provide feedback tend to request lower assessment rates and improved communications.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
4
Conclusions The Commission continues to be viewed positively in the eyes of most employers. General opinions of the WHSCC continue to be favourable, in certain respects mirroring those recorded in 2010. Overall satisfaction levels with the Commission experience also remain high, and, as shown through regression analysis, are driven by perceptions regarding the Commission’s fairness to employers and the ability to answer employer questions. Those employers who offer lower levels of satisfaction typically attribute their displeasure to high assessment rates and difficulty reaching WHSCC staff members when desired. A large majority of employers are also satisfied with the overall quality of service provided by the WHSCC, and most maintain that the Commission is fair to its employer clients. Most aspects of service are important to employers, and satisfaction levels are generally high. Employers assert that all aspects of the Commission’s service are high priority. In fact, all items, with the exception of frequency of contact, are rated as critically important by over one-half of employers. Factors regarded as most important to overall service include fairness, clarity of letters, ability to answer questions, and accessibility. Employers are generally satisfied with the Commission’s performance on these aspects, though a gap analysis indicates that there is room for improvement in the areas of frequency of contact, accessibility, fairness, and promptness. Employer perceptions of the Commission are generally favourable in terms of communications delivery. For the most part, employers provide high marks in terms of the Commission’s communications. Clients are especially pleased with the security levels implemented when handling information, and hold that information provided by the Commission is easy to understand. One notable area identified for improvement concerns the amount of paperwork required, as selected employers maintain that certain requirements in this regard are unnecessary. Awareness of the Prevention Services Department has increased, but relatively few employers call upon its services. Awareness of the WHSCC’s Prevention Services Department has increased notably since 2010. Despite this fact, use of the services offered by Prevention Services remains relatively low. It is noteworthy, however, that among those who have used Prevention Services, the vast majority are satisfied with their experience. Employers who offer an opinion are, for the most part, satisfied with the level of service provided by the Assessment Services Department; some regard rates as too high. Among those who have interacted with the Assessment Services Department, most are satisfied with the level of service they have received. Those not satisfied generally feel that rates and assessments are too high, or that the Department’s communications could be clearer.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
5
While usage of the Worker Services Division is limited, the satisfaction level with the Division is generally high among those who have called upon its offerings. Less than one-quarter of employers has made use of the services offered by the Worker Services Division. Still, those who have used the Division’s services tend to be happy with their experience. Complaints from those few who are not satisfied with the Division include a perceived difficulty in reaching staff members, a feeling that communications could be clearer, and concerns regarding the attitude of selected Division employees. Usage of the toll-free telephone inquiry line has increased over the years, and there is a desire among certain employers to move selected services online. An increasing number of employers have made use of the toll-free inquiry number, and among those who have, there is a decided tendency to be satisfied with the service. Nonetheless, many employers would welcome a shift from in-person and telephone delivery to online offerings. In particular, employers assert that many of the Commission’s forms currently filed in person could easily transition online. Some employers look to the WHSCC to lower rates or improve communications, but most are unable to identify improvements the Commission could make to enhance its service. When asked how the WHSCC could improve the service it provides employers, most are unable to identify specific or even general product or service areas. Among those who do offer one or more suggestions, most would welcome improved communications, lower assessment rates, or a better assessment process.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
6
Recommendations The following Recommendations are offered for the consideration of the WHSCC, based on the Conclusions drawn from this study: 1.
The Commission should maintain current initiatives and practices. No serious or immediate problem service areas are identified by way of the 2012 Employers Survey. Results of the current study suggest that all key measures (e.g., overall satisfaction, satisfaction with the overall quality of service, fairness, communication, satisfaction with Departments/Divisions) are highly rated by employer clients. These findings thus prompt a recommendation that the WHSCC should ‘stay the course’ as current initiatives appear to be working well. While minor changes may be made, perhaps implementing steps recommended immediately below, for the most part it is recommended that large-scale shifts in service delivery be avoided.
2.
There likely are opportunities for the Commission to increase usage of it various departments and divisions. Despite garnering high satisfaction ratings among those who make use of Commission services, the Prevention Services Department and Worker Services Division, in particular, are being used by relatively few employers. An increased focus on promoting the value of the Commission’s various services may engender a greater number of employers to indeed utilize services helpful for their organization. It is recognized that not all employers would have a requirement or need to call upon certain Commission services, and thus this recommendation is somewhat muted by this consideration. Nonetheless, by more employers becoming aware of and using available Commission services, client employers likely would perceive still higher value in the Commission overall, an important consideration arising from making greater use of the WHSCC’s strong service offerings.
3.
The WHSCC should further consider the transition to online services. One-quarter of employers say they would be extremely interested in moving interactions with the WHSCC from in-person or telephone meetings, to an online forum. Indeed, a small segment of the employer population would welcome all Commission services being offered online. Perhaps a more mainstream perspective is the belief that online offerings would be best suited to tasks such as completing forms. Further consideration and analysis should be dedicated to this topic, both as a means to improve client satisfaction, and as a way to mitigate costs associated with in-person or telephone service delivery.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
7
Detailed Analysis Overall Assessment of the WHSCC The Commission continues to be viewed positively in the eyes of most employers. As was the case in 2010, employers were asked their overall opinion of the WHSCC. Results indicate that employers continue to view the WHSCC in a positive light, as eight in ten rate their opinion as either excellent (26%; up 4 points) or good (52%; down 4 points). One in ten say their opinion is only fair (14%; up 1 point), while few view the WHSCC poorly (4%; unchanged). No statistically significant changes are evident compared to 2010. (Question 2)
Analysis at the subgroup level indicates that large organizations are more likely to provide favourable ratings of the WHSCC than are small ones. Overall satisfaction with the WHSCC experience remains high, as three-quarters of employers say they are either completely (38%; up 5 points) or mostly satisfied (37%; unchanged). As was the case in 2010, few say they are dissatisfied with their experience with the WHSCC (8%; up 1 point). Satisfaction levels are similar across most various subgroups. (Question 3)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
Those who were not completely or mostly satisfied were asked why their satisfaction with the WHSCC was not higher. The most common reason, by far, is a belief that rates are too high (50%). Some employers also feel it is difficult to reach WHSCC staff (10%). (Question 4)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
8
2012 Employers Survey
9
A regression analysis was conducted to identify the key drivers of satisfaction with the overall Commission experience. Employers’ opinions regarding various statements related to service delivery and the awareness of initiatives were entered into the model to determine which of these factors were most strongly associated with employers’ level of satisfaction with the WHSCC. The regression analysis identified two key drivers of satisfaction: the ability to answer questions in an understandable way, and agreement that the WHSCC is fair to employers. Together these two drivers account for 58 percent of the variability in employers’ satisfaction ratings, indicative of a strong model. The relative importance of each of the drivers included in the model is reflected in their beta weights. Results reveal that perceived fairness provides the strongest contribution to satisfaction, followed by the ability to answer questions.
Regression Model for Satisfaction with Overall Experience
Fairness of the Commission to employers: 61%
Satisfaction with Overall Experience with WHSCC
Ability to answer questions: 26%
R2 = 58%
Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service Employers were asked to rate their satisfaction with the WHSCC’s overall quality of service. Overall, three-quarters are satisfied (giving either a ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale). In contrast, just 5 percent of employers say they are dissatisfied with the level of service they have received from the WHSCC. Again, results are similar across most various subgroups. (Question 5)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
10
As was the case with satisfaction with overall experience, a regression analysis was conducted in order to identify the drivers of satisfaction with overall quality of service. The regression analysis identified three key drivers of satisfaction: fairness to employers, promptness (how quickly clients received a response), and the ability to answer questions in an understandable way. Together these three drivers account for 59 percent of the variability in employers’ satisfaction ratings, indicative of a strong model. The relative importance of each of the drivers included in the model is reflected in their beta weights. Results reveal that perceived fairness provides the strongest contribution to satisfaction with overall quality of service, followed by promptness, and finally the ability to answer questions.
Regression Model for Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service Fairness of the Commission to employers: 55%
Promptness: 22%
Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service R2 = 59%
Ability to answer questions: 15%
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
11
For the most part, perceptions of fairness also reflect positively on the WHSCC. At present, two-thirds of employers agree that the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador is fair to employers. There continues to be room for improvement in this regard, however, as just one-third of employers completely agree with the statement under examination. Of note, 10 percent offer low agreement ratings. (Question 6)
Perceptions of fairness are higher for larger organizations, and those with a claims history show higher levels of agreement than those that have not made a claim.
Assessing Service Dimensions Most aspects of service are important to employers, and satisfaction levels are generally high. Employers were asked how important various aspects are to them when evaluating the overall service provided by the Commission. All items, with the exception of frequency of contact, are rated as critically important by over one-half of employers. These results suggest that most aspects of the Commission’s service are a priority to employers. In terms of factors that are critically important, fairness tops the list, followed by clarity of letters, ability to answer questions, accessibility, and politeness. (Questions 7a-i)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
After rating the importance of the factors mentioned above, employers were asked to assess their satisfaction with the Commission in these same nine areas. Satisfaction was rated on a scale of 1 to 5, where ‘1’ indicates completely dissatisfied and ‘5’ indicates completely satisfied. Levels of satisfaction prove to be generally high, as all factors are rated as either a ‘4’ or ‘5’ by at least two-thirds of employers. (Questions 8a-i)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
12
2012 Employers Survey
13
Gap Analysis By collecting ratings of importance and satisfaction, it is possible to conduct a gap analysis. Such an analysis compares employers’ expectations on a set of service factors on the one hand, with an organization’s performance on these same factors, on the other hand. A gap analysis permits the prioritization of factors to identify those in which there is a gap in performance, that is, areas in which the organization is not meeting client expectations. Gap scores are calculated as the percentage of employers who rate a factor as highly important (‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale) and also provide a rating of less than either ‘4’ or ‘5’ on the 5-point satisfaction scale. Higher gap scores indicate greater gaps between expectation and performance, and represent areas in which Commission attention could be focused in terms of improvement. A gap analysis was conducted for the nine aspects of WHSCC service outlined above in Questions 7 and 8. Gap Analysis Calculation: Example Accessibility
“Satisfied (‘4’ or ‘5’ on 5-point scale)”
Not “Satisfied (‘4’ or ‘5’ on 5-point scale)”
Total
205
47
252
“Highly Important” Not “Highly Important” Total
6
5
11
211
52
263
As illustrated in the preceding table, 252 employers (or 96% of all 263 who offered an opinion on this matter) rate accessibility as a highly important aspect in terms of evaluating Commission performance. Of those 252 clients, 19% (47 employers) are neither completely nor mostly satisfied with the organization’s accessibility. Thus, out of all 263 employers offering an opinion, 47 believe accessibility is of high importance but are not completely or mostly satisfied with the organization in terms of accessibility, producing a gap score of 47/263 = 18 percent. In other words, approximately two in ten employers are of the opinion that accessibility is a highly important factor and the Commission is not completely or mostly meeting their expectations in this regard. As the table below highlights, the largest gap scores are witnessed for frequency of contact, accessibility, fairness, and promptness, suggesting these are the areas where the WHSCC should focus efforts for improvement. (Questions Q8a-i) Gap Analysis – WHSCC Service Factors Categories
GAP
Frequency of contact
20%
Accessibility
18%
Fairness
17%
Promptness
15%
Clarity of letters
13%
Ability to answer questions
12%
Reporting
12%
Claims processing
11%
Politeness
7%
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
14
Commission Communications Employer perceptions of the Commission are generally favourable in terms of communications delivery. Employers were asked their level of agreement with several statements related to the Commission’s communications. On the whole, the results are favourable. Of the positive statements investigated, at least seven in ten employers expressed agreement. Conversely, one-half of employers also agreed there is too much paperwork or unnecessary requirements, suggesting the opportunity for the WHSCC to improve performance in this regard. (Questions 9a-e)
Overall, employers are most likely to believe the Commission does a good job of keeping their organization’s information secure, offering information that is easy to understand, and provides information that is useful to them.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
15
Prevention Services Department Awareness of the Prevention Services Department has increased, but relatively few employers call upon its services.
Awareness of the Prevention Services Department Employers, after being informed of the Prevention Services Department and its role, were asked if they were previously aware that this Department was responsible for promoting occupational health and safety. Awareness of the Prevention Services Department is up from 2010 results, with three-quarters of employers reporting awareness of the Department (77%; up 10 points). (Question 10)
Awareness of Prevention Services Department % saying ‘yes’ 100% 2002 80%
71%
2003
2004
2005
2008
75%
74%
2010
2012 77%
76% 67%
67%
60%
40%
20%
0% Yes, was aware Q.10 Prior to today, were you aware there is a Prevention Services Department in the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission that is responsible for promoting occupational health and safety? (2012 n=300)
Usage of Prevention Services Department Services While awareness of the Prevention Services Department has increased, relatively few employers have made use of its products or services. In fact, just one-quarter (25%) of those aware say they have used the Department, while seven in ten (69%) have not. Large organizations are more likely than smaller organizations to have made use of the Department’s services, and usage is also higher among those with a claims history. (Question 11)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
Satisfaction with Prevention Department Services Those organizations that have used the Prevention Services Department’s programs or services were asked how satisfied they were with the Department overall. Results indicate that while the Department’s programs and services are not widely used, those that have taken advantage of the Department’s offerings are satisfied. Almost one-half (45%) are completely satisfied and another onethird rate their satisfaction as ‘4’ out of ‘5’ (33%). (Question 12)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
16
2012 Employers Survey
17
Among the very few (n=11) who are not satisfied with the Prevention Services Department, the most common complaint was that the WHSCC could do a better job of promoting the prevention of workplace injuries. (Question 13)
Assessment Services Department Employers who offer an opinion are, for the most part, satisfied with the level of service provided by the Assessment Services Department; some regard rates as too high. Employers were asked to indicate their satisfaction concerning the service performance of the Assessment Services Department using a 5-point scale, where ‘1’ indicates complete dissatisfaction and ‘5’ indicates complete satisfaction. Generally speaking, employers are satisfied with the level of service associated with the Assessment Department. Approximately three-quarters are satisfied (‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale), with four in ten being completely satisfied. Just 9 percent of employers are dissatisfied with the Assessment Services Department. Satisfaction levels are generally consistent across subgroups. (Question 14)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
18
Those less than highly satisfied with the Assessment Services Department were asked what was driving their lack of satisfaction. The most common complaint among these employers relates to rates or assessments that are too high (32%). Others feel the Department’s approaches and documents are difficult to understand and could be better communicated (15%). (Question 15)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
19
Worker Services Division While usage of the Worker Services Division is limited, the satisfaction level with the Division is generally high among those who have called upon its offerings.
Usage of Worker Services Division Employers, after being informed about the Worker Services Division and its role within the WHSCC, were asked if their firm has ever had service interactions with the Division. Approximately one-quarter (23%) of employers have made use of the Division’s services, while seven in ten (71%) have not. Use of the Worker Services Division tends to be higher among larger organizations, and those with a previous claims history. (Question 16)
Satisfaction with Worker Services Division Those relatively few employers with experience with the Worker Services Division were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with the Division overall. Results are generally favourable, as almost eight in ten (77%) say they are satisfied (‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale). (Question 17)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
20
It is noteworthy that larger organizations tend to be more satisfied with the Worker Services Division, as compared to smaller ones. Those very few organizations that are less satisfied with their dealings with the Worker Services Division tend to feel it is difficult to reach Division staff (17%), or that approaches and documents are difficult to understand and could be better communicated (17%). Others take issue with the attitude of Division staff (16%), or a perceived lack of timeliness (15%). (Question 18)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
21
Telephone and Online Services Usage of the toll-free telephone inquiry line has increased over the years, and there is a desire among certain employers to move selected services online.
Toll-free Inquiry Telephone Number Employers were asked if they had used the Commission’s toll-free inquiry telephone number in the past year. Results reveal that usage has increased significantly since 2010, as over four in ten say they have utilized the number in the past 12 months (43%; up 11 points). (Question 19)
Usage of the toll-free number tends to be higher among larger employers and those with a claims history. Among those that have used the toll-free inquiry telephone number, satisfaction with the service is high. A strong majority (78%) of employers are satisfied (i.e., ratings of either ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale), while only 5 percent are dissatisfied. Results show little variation across subgroups. (Question 20)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
22
Online Interactions In order to gauge the appetite for an increased WHSCC online presence, employers were asked how interested they would be in transitioning certain interactions from in-person or telephone services, to online services. Results indicate that the interest level is moderate. Four in ten (39%) employers express a high level of interest in moving toward an online service model. Indeed, one-quarter of employers (25%) say they are extremely interested in following this path. (Question 21)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
23
Employers were also asked which interactions they would most like to transition from in-person or telephone services, to online delivery. “Forms that could be completed online” was the most common mention (12%), while one in ten (9%) said they would like to see all services moved online. Others would like the ability to access payroll (7%) and pay assessments (6%) online. (Question 22)
Suggestions for Service Improvements Some employers look to the WHSCC to lower rates or improve communications, but most are unable to identify improvements the Commission could make to enhance its service. Employers were once again this year asked how the WHSCC could improve the services it provides. Results suggest there is little consensus regarding specific service improvements that need to be made at the Commission. Indeed, two-thirds of employers either say there are no improvements that they can suggest or identify, or they offer a “don’t know” response. Of the many and varied specific service improvements that are identified, the most common suggestion is to lower rates (8%; down 1 point). Some employers would also like to see improved communications (5%; down 3 points), or improvements to the assessment process (4%). (Question 23)
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
24
What the WHSCC Could do to Improve Services it Provides to Employers Key Mentions
2002
2003
2004
2005
2008
2010
2012
Lower rates
14%
8%
9%
8%
3%
9%
8%
Improve communication/ More detailed information
7%
11%
6%
4%
7%
8%
5%
Improve assessment or evaluation process
12%
5%
7%
9%
2%
4%
4%
Provide seminars/ workshops/training
2%
3%
4%
3%
2%
3%
3%
More accessible/More contact
8%
8%
5%
3%
3%
4%
2%
Other
11%
7%
6%
7%
4%
12%
9%
None/No improvements
19%
21%
30%
25%
35%
48%
17%
Don’t know/No answer
27%
36%
28%
31%
39%
7%
49%
Q. 23 What, if anything, do you think the WHSCC could do to improve the services it provides to employers? Please feel fee to add your comments about any aspect of service provided by the WHSCC. Anything else? (2012 n=300)
Quality of Service Index New for 2012, CRA created an index to provide a method for tracking the Commission’s performance with respect to opinions of employers in Newfoundland and Labrador. Specifically, the Quality of Service Index includes employers’ satisfaction levels with: the overall quality of service from the WHSCC (Q5), staff accessibility (Q8a), staff promptness (Q8b), staff’s ability to answer questions (Q8c), clarity of letters received from the WHSCC (Q8e), and the WHSCC’s fairness to employers (Q6). The following table outlines the relative ratings given by employers on each of the component questions of the Index. The numbers in the table reflect the percentage of employers offering “top 2 box” ratings (i.e., ratings in either of the two highest categories) with regard to each question.
Index Question
2012 Top 2 Box (%)
Q5 – Satisfaction with the overall quality of service provided by the WHSCC
73%
Q6 – Agreement that WHSCC is fair to employers
64%
Q8a – Satisfaction with WHSCC staff accessibility
70%
Q8b – Satisfaction with WHSCC staff promptness
68%
Q8c – Satisfaction with WHSCC staff’s ability to answer questions
71%
Q8e – Satisfaction with the clarity of letters received from the WHSCC
78%
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
25
In creating the Index, individual employer’s ratings on each of these six questions were averaged and transformed into a scale ranging from a low of 0 to a high of 100. Thus, the maximum possible score on the index is 100, while the minimum is 0. Any question on which a response of “don’t know” was given was eliminated from the calculation with the Index score for that respondent being calculated out of the remaining questions. At present, the Quality of Service index stands at 79.0, which will provide a baseline for future comparison.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
26
Study Methodology As noted in the Introduction above, the 2012 Employers Survey reflects a re-design that emerged from Stakeholder consultations in 2011-2012. The following offers highlights of this consultation: •
Corporate Research Associates (CRA) conducted qualitative research to gain the input of employers and WHSCC staff members into the survey and research re-design process. On December 13, 2011, separate focus groups were conducted with employers as well as Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (WHSCC) staff members.
•
CRA met with the WHSCC’s Survey Committee to gain a high level understanding of their roles and perceptions concerning the survey and research re-design process.
•
CRA conducted in-depth interviews with two external, non-WHSCC representatives, to gain their insights and to understand their perspective concerning the WHSCC’s survey and research regimen: the Executive Director of the Newfoundland and Labrador Employers Council, and the President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Injured Workers Association.
•
CRA conducted in-depth interviews with six internal WHSCC management representatives, so as to ascertain their perspectives on previous research processes and content, as well as their expectations and wishes for upcoming research.
•
CRA reviewed various WHSCC research documents along with publicly available written materials concerning the Commission, to better understand the organization’s research approaches as well as future corporate directions.
•
CRA organized a Research Summit held in Halifax on March 1, 2012, at which time representatives of all four workers compensation organizations in Atlantic Canada gathered to discuss a wide variety of research content and process matters. Many of these topics were germane to the WHSCC of NL’s review of its employers’ research.
From a research process perspective, CRA recommended that a telephone methodology should remain the principal means of quantitative data collection for the employers’ population. While many people consulted perceived advantages or merits in gathering data via online means (e.g., the respondents could complete the survey at his/her preferred time), the limitations inherent in sampling employers workers (some of whom do not have an e-mail address on file with the WHSCC), at the present time make impractical a transition to online data collection from this population. From a research content perspective, there was widespread agreement that in some respects the questionnaires could be refined and strengthened. The internal WHSCC in-depth interviews undertaken by CRA indicated, not surprisingly, that individual directors or managers are greatly concerned about their specific areas of responsibility, and wished to ensure (where appropriate) that questions for employers
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
27
address issues and concerns specifically related to their jurisdiction. Of course, it is impossible in a relatively short questionnaire to accommodate all such requests, even though individually, in isolation, such requests may be meritorious. Overall, it was noted that in CRA’s experience, representative, random samples of employer respondents would be aware of the broad brush strokes of WHSCC practices and approaches, but would perhaps not know or recall granular specifics. Accordingly, to administer still more detailed questions to such respondents, of the nature sought by individual WHSCC directors concerning their specific areas of responsibility, would be counter-productive. CRA believed, however, that there was a decided value in administering client satisfaction employers’ surveys, of the nature commissioned by the WHSCC, to such representative random samples. CRA’s rationale was that such sampling and data collection permits an overall portrait of opinions to emerge from the targeted populations, free of emphasis upon one or another sub-segment of these populations. While many employer respondents interviewed as a result of such a sampling approach would not have a detailed understanding of WHSCC mechanics and approaches, these respondents nonetheless are indeed representative of this target stakeholder population, and therefore it is prudent to in some measure continue to solicit their high level input and feedback concerning the WHSCC. On the other hand, as suggested above, CRA heard on many occasions from WHSCC directors that they would most benefit from detailed information from their clients, concerning the specific programs under their purview. This is a valid argument, and thus a refashioned research regimen was designed for the employer population that meets this information need as well. That is, it was recognized that there is value in, on the one hand, having a general, high level survey questionnaire that would capture overall perceptions of the WHSCC, while, on the other hand, having sections of the survey that could be administered (at least from time to time) to targeted sub-population segments that would be able to ‘go beyond the general’ and critically examine and assess specific WHSCC programs and services. Thus in 2012, a ‘drill down’ survey of WHSCC Early and Safe Return to Work (ESRTW) clients also was undertaken by CRA, and this research project is reported upon under separate cover.
Questionnaire Design The questionnaire used for this study was designed by Corporate Research Associates, in consultation with Commission staff. A decision was made in 2012 to rationalize and streamline the questionnaires utilized across the various employer and injured worker studies, to the extent possible. This endeavour entailed, among other steps, implementing uniform 5-point agreement and satisfaction scales on the questionnaires. In only a select number of instances were scales maintained that were utilized in previous waves of these studies.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
28
Specifically, where it was held to be critically important to maintain tracking, the scales used previously were maintained. Introducing 5-point number scales rather than maintaining, for example, 4-point word scales, permits more robust analysis of the survey data in many respects. Prior to being finalized, the survey was pre-tested on a small number of WHSCC injured worker clients to ensure the appropriateness of the questions and response categories being utilized. The sample for this study was designed to complete a representative sample of 300 Commissionregistered employers across Newfoundland and Labrador. A current database of employers was provided by the Commission. Quotas were established across five regions to ensure geographic representation. The table below presents the composition of each region. Large employers were defined as those in the top twentieth percentile in terms of payroll in the province. In real terms, this meant that organizations with an annual payroll of $214,134 or more were defined as large. One-third of all interviews (or 99 of the 300 completed interviews) were conducted with representatives from large organizations. Region
Areas Included
Avalon
St. John’s, Ferryland, St. Mary’s, Argentia, Conception Bay/Trinity Bay South
Southwest
Corner Brook, Stephenville, Port aux Basques
Burin/Bonavista
Burin Peninsula, Clarenville, Bonavista
Northern Peninsula/Labrador
Deer Lake, Northern Peninsula, Labrador
Central
Grand Falls-Windsor, Botwood, Bonavista North, Gander, Springdale, Baie Verte
Sampling, Survey Administration, Tabulation, and Completion Results Minor enhancements to the sampling frame were made in the 2012 iteration of this study. Self-insured employers, as well as employers coded in the WHSCC database as being outside Newfoundland and Labrador, were included in the sampling frame. The surveying was conducted by telephone from April 18 to May 1, 2012 from Corporate Research Associates’ data collection facilities in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Fully trained and supervised interviewers conducted all interviewing, and a minimum of 10 percent of all completed interviews was subsequently verified. The average length of time required to complete an interview was 13 minutes. Where a sizable percentage of respondents commented that a particular question statement did not apply to them, these respondents were removed from the data tabulation. Response rate is calculated as the number of co-operative contacts (355) divided by the total of eligible numbers attempted (2,591). The final disposition of all telephone numbers called is shown below in the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association’s Standard Record of Contact Format, the method typically utilized in the survey research industry in Canada.
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
2012 Employers Survey
29 COMPLETION RESULTS 2,745
A. Total Numbers Attempted Discontinued Number/Not In Service
82
Fax/Modem
33
Non Business Number
8
Wrong Number/Duplicate
31 2,591
B. Eligible Numbers Busy Signal
18
Answering Machine
1070
No Answer
160
Scheduled Call Back
612
Mid Call Back
4
Illness, Incapable
2
Language Problem
12
Qualified Not Available
81
C. Total Asked
632
Gatekeeper Refusal
64
Respondent Refusal
134
Mid Terminate
9
Never Call List/Hang up
80
D. Co-operative Contacts
355
Complete
300
Did Not Qualify (Does not deal with the WHSCC)
55
Response Rate
Size of Sample
14%
Sample Tolerances for Percentage Results by Sample Size 10 or 90%
20 or 80%
30 or 70%
40 or 60%
50%
300 Interviews
3.4
4.5
5.2
5.5
5.7
200 Interviews
4.2
5.5
6.3
6.8
6.9
100 Interviews
5.9
7.8
9.0
9.6
9.8
50 Interviews
8.3
11.1
12.7
13.6
13.9
Corporate Research Associates Inc., 2012
Survey Questionnaire
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey
Final
2
Hello, could I please speak to the person in your organization who is responsible for interactions with the WHSCC, that is the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission? My name is _____________________ and I am calling from Corporate Research Associates, a professional marketing research firm. We are conducting a survey on behalf of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador, to find out how employers feel about the services provided by the WHSCC. All individual information collected on this survey is completely confidential, and will be reported to the WHSCC only at the group level. May I have about 10 or 12 minutes of your time to ask some questions? IF ASKED: If you have any concerns about this survey, you may contact Lana Collins in the Communications Department of the WHSCC, toll-free at 1-800-563-9000. ARRANGE CALLBACK IF NECESSARY – IF RESPONDENT HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SURVEY, PLEASE RECORD NAME AND NUMBER AND S/HE WILL BE CONTACTED. PLEASE FORWARD THIS INFORMATION TO PETER MacINTOSH. ENSURE DATA COLLECTORS HAVE ACCESS TO THE MRIA NATIONAL SURVEY REGISTRATION VERIFICATION TELEPHONE NUMBER, TO PROVIDE TO RESPONDENTS AS NEEDED: 1-888-602-6742, EXTENSION 8728. IF THE RESPONDENT WISHES TO CONTACT CORPORATE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, PLEASE ASK THEM TO CALL PETER MacINTOSH AT 1-888-414-1336. A.
Are you the person in your company who looks after issues related to workplace health, safety and compensation? CONTINUE IF “YES.” IF “NO” OR “DON’T KNOW/NO ANSWER,” ASK TO SPEAK TO APPROPRIATE INDIVIDUAL 1 2 8
Section A: 1.
Yes No Don’t know/No answer General Overview
To begin, I would like to ask you some questions about your organization. Which one of the following four statements best describes your role within your organization? Are you responsible for…: READ STATEMENTS IN ORDER – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY 1 Health and safety issues, such as Occupational Health and Safety Committees 2 Assessment (i.e., rates and payments) issues 3 Reporting injuries and claims issues 4 Are you responsible for all of claims, assessments, as well as health and safety issues? VOLUNTEERED 8 Don’t know/No answer 9 Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 2.
Final
3
In general, do you have an [READ RESPONSES IN ORDER] opinion of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission? CODE ONE ONLY 1 Excellent 2 Good 3 Only fair, or 4 Poor VOLUNTEERED 8 Don’t know/No answer
3.
And how satisfied are you with your overall experience with the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission? Are you...: READ RESPONSES IN ORDER – CODE ONE ONLY 1 Completely satisfied 2 Mostly satisfied 3 Somewhat satisfied 4 Somewhat dissatisfied, or 5 Completely dissatisfied VOLUNTEERED 8 Cannot say/No answer
4.
[POSE Q.4 ONLY IF CODES 3, 4, OR 5 IN Q.3] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied with your overall experience? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 98 99
Rates too high Workers improperly receive benefits WHSCC should do better job promoting prevention of workplace injuries Injured worker did not receive enough money Hard to reach WHSCC staff Attitude of WHSCC staff members Injured worker was rushed back to work WHSCC did not answer questions/adequate information WHSCC policies difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around from the WHSCC Turned down injured worker/injured workers’ claim cut off Too much paper work Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 5.
4
On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with the overall quality of service you receive from the WHSCC? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8
6.
Final
Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer
And using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely disagree” and 5 means “completely agree,” to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY “Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation in Newfoundland and Labrador is fair to employers.” 1 2 3 4 5 8
Section B:
Completely disagree
Completely agree Don’t know/No answer Assessing Service Dimensions
I would like to ask about specific aspects of service from the WHSCC . . . 7.
On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “not at all important” and 5 means “critically important,” how important are each of the following in terms of evaluating the service provided by the WHSCC? Starting with …: ROTATE SERVICE ASPECTS – CODE ONE ONLY PER ASPECT – PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE a. b. c. d. e.
Accessibility – How important is it to reach WHSCC staff members when you need to? Promptness – How important is a quick response to your questions to WHSCC staff? Ability to answer questions – How important is it that WHSCC staff members answer your questions in an understandable way? Frequency of contact – How important is ongoing contact with the WHSCC about your account or claims activity? Clarity of letters – How important is it to receive clear and understandable letters from the WHSCC?
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey
Final
5
f. g. h. i.
Politeness – How important is it that WHSCC staff members be polite? Fairness – How important is it to be treated fairly? Reporting – How important is the WHSCC’s reporting process for your payroll? Claims Processing – How important is the WHSCC’s methods of processing claims from workers who report injuries
1 2 3 4 5 8
Not at all important
Critically important Don’t know/No answer
And I would now like you to rate these same specific aspects of service… 8.
For each of the following, using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied have you been with the service you have received from the WHSCC? Please state if a statement is not applicable to your circumstances. PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY PER ASPECT – ROTATE STATEMENTS a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.
1 2 3 4 5 7 8
Accessibility – How easy it was to reach WHSCC staff members when you needed to Promptness – How quickly WHSCC staff members were able to respond to your questions Ability to answer questions – How well the WHSCC answers your questions in an understandable way Frequency of contact – How often the WHSCC contacts you about your claim Clarity of letters – How clear and understandable the letters are that you receive from the WHSCC Politeness – How polite WHSCC staff members are Fairness – Being treated fairly Reporting – How satisfied you have been with the WHSCC’s reporting process for your payroll Claims Processing – How satisfied you have been with the WHSCC’s methods of processing claims from workers who report injuries Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied Not applicable Don’t know/No answer
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 9.
Final
6
And using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means “completely disagree” and 5 means “completely agree,” to what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please say if the statement does not apply to your company. READ AND ROTATE STATEMENTS – PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY PER STATEMENT a.
The WHSCC does a good job of keeping you informed about important changes
b.
The WHSCC’s information is easy to understand
c.
Information provided by the WHSCC is useful to you
d.
There is too much paper work or unnecessary requirements
e.
You feel your organization’s information is secure at the WHSCC
1 2 3 4 5 7 8
Completely disagree
Completely agree Not applicable Don’t know/No answer
READ AND ROTATE SECTIONS C, D, AND E Section C:
Prevention Services
Moving along, the WHSCC’s Prevention Services Department promotes Health and Safety in workplaces. Some of its services include: Health and Safety education; Health and Safety Auditing; and Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Committees, certificate training standards and PRIME, and the WHSCC’s employer incentive program. 10.
Prior to today, were you aware there is a Prevention Services Department in the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission that is responsible for promoting occupational health and safety? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8
Yes, was aware No, was not aware Don’t know/No answer
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 11.
Yes, has used No, has not used Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.12 ONLY IF “YES...” IN Q.11] On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied has your firm been with the WHSCC’s Prevention Services Department? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8
13.
7
[POSE Q.11 ONLY IF “YES...” IN Q.10] To the best of your knowledge, has your firm ever used any Prevention Department programs or services? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8
12.
Final
Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.13 ONLY IF CODES 1, 2, OR 3 IN Q.12] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied with the WHSCC’s Prevention Services Department? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
WHSCC should do better job promoting prevention of workplace injuries Hard to reach Department staff Attitude of Department staff members Department did not answer questions/adequate information Department approaches/documents difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around from the Department Too much paper work Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey Section D:
Final
8
Assessment Services
Moving along ... The WHSCC’s Assessment Services Department provides services related to such things as assessment rates, classifications, financial auditing, payroll reporting, PRIME experience rating, clearances, payment plan and collecting of assessments. 14.
On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied has your firm been with the WHSCC’s Assessment Services Department? Please state if you have not had any direct interaction with the Department. PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 7 8
15.
Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied No interaction with Department Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.15 ONLY IF CODES 1, 2, OR 3 IN Q.14] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied with the WHSCC’s Assessment Services Department? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Section E:
Rates too high/Assessments too high Too much paper work Hard to reach Department staff Attitude of Department staff members Department did not answer questions/adequate information Department approaches/documents difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around from the Department Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________) Worker Services Division
The WHSCC’s Worker Services Division is also known as the case management area. This Division looks after the adjudication of claims, medical management of a worker’s claim, monitoring the Return-to-Work activities, and paying worker benefits.
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 16.
Yes No Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.17 ONLY IF “YES ...” IN Q.16] On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” how satisfied has your firm been with the WHSCC’s Worker Services Division? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8
18.
9
To the best of your knowledge, has your firm ever had any service interactions with the Worker Services or case management division? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8
17.
Final
Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.18 ONLY IF CODES 1, 2, OR 3 IN Q.17] a. What is the single most important reason why you are less than highly satisfied with the WHSCC’s Worker Services Division? PROBE: b. Any other reasons? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY – RECORD FIRST/SUBSEQUENT MENTIONS SEPARATELY 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9
Hard to reach Division staff Attitude of Division staff members Division staff members did not answer questions/adequate information Division’s approaches/documents difficult to understand/not fully communicated Too much run around from Division staff members Too much paper work Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey Section F: 19.
Communications
Yes, have used No, have not used Don’t know/No answer
[POSE Q.20 ONLY IF “YES ...” IN Q.19] On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “completely dissatisfied” and 5 means “completely satisfied,” over the past year how satisfied has your firm been with the WHSCC’s general inquiries telephone service? PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 8
21.
10
Moving along ... To the best of your knowledge, has your firm used the WHSCC’s general inquiry telephone line in the past year, either by calling a local 778 telephone number in the St. John’s area, or by calling the WHSCC’s toll free 1-800 number from outside the St. John’s area? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 8
20.
Final
Completely dissatisfied
Completely satisfied Don’t know/No answer
And next ... How interested would your organization be in transitioning certain interactions it has with the WHSCC, away from in-person or telephone interactions, towards online interactions? Please use a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “not at all interested” and 5 means “extremely interested.” PROBE TO AVOID ACCEPTING A RANGE – CODE ONE ONLY 1 2 3 4 5 7 8
Not at all interested
Extremely interested Depends on the type of interaction that would be transitioned Don’t know/No answer
Corporate Research Associates, 2012
2012 Employers Questionnaire – General Survey 22.
11
[POSE Q.22 ONLY IF CODES 3, 4, OR 5 IN Q.21] What types of interactions with the WHSCC would you be interested in transitioning, away from in-person or telephone interactions, towards online interactions? PROBE: Anything else? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 98 99
23.
Final
Paying assessments on-line Email to send or receive claim information Email to send or receive assessment account information Registration and account maintenance Access to claims information PRIME status reports Early and safe return-to-work plan Industry injury statistics Questions about prevention/occupational health and safety issues Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________)
Finally, what, if anything, do you think the WHSCC could do to improve the services it provides to employers? Please feel free to add your comments about any aspect of service provided by the WHSCC. PROBE: Anything else? DO NOT READ RESPONSES – CODE AS MANY AS APPLY 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 97 98 99
Encourage staff to be more pleasant More access to information Provide more money/higher benefits Better follow-up Should investigate claims better More accessible/More contact Reduce paper work Provide seminars/workshops/training Improve communication/More detailed information Hire more staff Lower rates None/No improvements Don’t know/No answer Other (SPECIFY: ____________________) This concludes the survey. Thank you very much for your participation.
Corporate Research Associates, 2012