Reframing “Dirty Work”: The Case of Homeless Shelter Workers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Torelli ◽  
Antony Puddephatt
Keyword(s):  
Homeless Shelter ◽  
Dirty Work ◽  
Shelter Workers

scholarly journals Piecing Together the Meaning of “Dirty Work”

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-105
Author(s):  
Julian Torelli
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Learning By Doing ◽  
Social Constructionist ◽  
Ethnographic Research ◽  
Dirty Work ◽  
Research Focus ◽  
Shelter Workers ◽  
Constructionist Approach

I reflect upon Dr. William Shaffir’s influence on my approach to ethnographic research and my study of homeless shelter workers. Dr. Shaffir introduced me to his own brand of the craft of qualitative field work, but also introduced me to important sociologists and ideas in the symbolic in­teractionist tradition. Most central was Everett C. Hughes’ notion of “dirty work,” which helped shape my research focus. Building from Hughes’ concept, but expanding it with Shaffir and Pawluch’s (2003) social constructionist approach to occupations, I was better able to conceptualize the process of how workers themselves piece together the meaning of “dirty work.” Beyond gaining these conceptual insights, I also reflect on Dr. Shaffir’s teaching philosophy of qualitative methods, that is, the impor­tance of learning by doing. I conclude with some thoughts regarding Shaffir’s perspective on the wider ethnographic task of describing, in situ, members’ understandings and definitions. Following Everett Hughes, I call on interactionists to give more attention to “dirty work” as a generic and transcontextual process.    

scholarly journals Occupational exposures and mitigation strategies among homeless shelter workers at risk of COVID-19

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0253108
Author(s):  
Carol Y. Rao ◽  
Tashina Robinson ◽  
Karin Huster ◽  
Rebecca L. Laws ◽  
Ryan Keating ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Work Environment ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Occupational Exposures ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Homeless Shelter ◽  
Occupational Risk Factors ◽  
Shelter Workers

Objective To describe the work environment and COVID-19 mitigation measures for homeless shelter workers and assess occupational risk factors for COVID-19. Methods Between June 9-August 10, 2020, we conducted a self-administered survey among homeless shelter workers in Washington, Massachusetts, Utah, Maryland, and Georgia. We calculated frequencies for work environment, personal protective equipment use, and SARS-CoV-2 testing history. We used generalized linear models to produce unadjusted prevalence ratios (PR) to assess risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results Of the 106 respondents, 43.4% reported frequent close contact with clients; 75% were worried about work-related SARS-CoV-2 infections; 15% reported testing positive. Close contact with clients was associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (PR 3.97, 95%CI 1.06, 14.93). Conclusions Homeless shelter workers may be at risk of being exposed to individuals with COVID-19 during the course of their work. Frequent close contact with clients was associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Protecting these critical essential workers by implementing mitigation measures and prioritizing for COVID-19 vaccination is imperative during the pandemic.

scholarly journals Occupational exposures and mitigation strategies among homeless shelter workers at risk of COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Y. Rao ◽  
Tashina Robinson ◽  
Karin Huster ◽  
Rebecca Laws ◽  
Ryan Keating ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Work Environment ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Occupational Exposures ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Homeless Shelter ◽  
Occupational Risk Factors ◽  
Shelter Workers ◽  
Staff Person

AbstractObjectiveTo describe the work environment and COVID-19 mitigation measures for homeless shelter workers and to assess occupational risk factors for COVID-19 infectionMethodsBetween June 9 and August 10, 2020, we conducted a self-administered, web-based survey among homeless shelter workers in Washington, Massachusetts, Utah, Maryland, and Georgia, in shelters where at least 1 staff person had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We calculated frequencies for demographics, work environment, personal protective equipment use, and SARS-CoV-2 testing history. We used generalized linear models with a binary outcome (COVID-19 positivity) and a log link, clustered by shelter network, to produce unadjusted prevalence ratios (PR) for demographics, work environment, and mitigation measures.ResultsOf the 106 respondents, 43.4% reported frequent close contact with clients and 85.8% reported wearing a mask most or all of the time; 75% reported being worried about being infected with SARS-CoV-2 at work; 15% reported testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Of those who reported testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, 80% (12/15) believed they were infected at work. Frequent close contact with clients was significantly associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (PR 3.97, 95% CI 1.06, 14.93).ConclusionsHomeless shelter workers may be at higher risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the course of their work.

Dirty Work? Development And Validation Of A Measure Of Perceived Occupational Stigma

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwenith G. Fisher ◽  
Kevin M. Walters ◽  
Lauren M. Menger
Keyword(s):  
Dirty Work ◽  
Development And Validation

Images of the Hospice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Baron ◽  
John Hassard ◽  
Fiona Cheetham ◽  
Sudi Sharifi
Keyword(s):  
General Public ◽  
Palliative Medicine ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Hospice Care ◽  
Care Work ◽  
Dirty Work ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Host Organization ◽  
Local Healthcare

This chapter looks ‘outside’ the Hospice at issues of the organization’s image. The authors talked to staff, volunteers, and members of the general public, as well as to a number of key stakeholders in the local healthcare community, in order to gauge their views on the host organization. The analysis examines the problems associated with the image of hospices and discusses attempts of staff and volunteers to ‘dispel the myths’ about the nature of hospice care work—a form of labour which potentially runs the risk of being characterized as ‘dirty work’. The chapter then examines how the Hospice is seen in the eyes of other healthcare professionals and discusses the choice of palliative medicine as a career for junior medics. Finally it discusses a degree of ‘confusion’ that staff and volunteers claim exists in the minds of GPs and consultants in specialist cancer hospitals about the role of hospices.

Assertiveness: The Meek Inherit the Dirty Work

1978 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 9-11
Author(s):  
Beverly Nussbaumer
Keyword(s):  
Dirty Work

scholarly journals Killing Them ‘Softly’ (!): Exploring Work Experiences in Care-Based Animal Dirty Work

2021 ◽  
pp. 095001702110087
Author(s):  
Linda Tallberg ◽  
Peter J Jordan
Keyword(s):  
Modern Society ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Processing Plant ◽  
Work Experiences ◽  
Animal Shelter ◽  
Dirty Work ◽  
And Control

Working with animals is a daily occurrence for millions of people who often complete tasks which are tainted, in spite of the work being seen as essential in modern society. Animal shelter-work is such an occupation. This article contributes to a deeper understanding of the caring–killing paradox (a dissonance that workers face when killing animals they are also caring for), through an insider ethnographic study. We find that care-based animal dirty work consists of unique ambiguities and tensions related to powerlessness, deception and secrecy in the work based on a ‘processing-plant’ framework which informs how workers deal with unwanted animals. We find competing ideologies of care and control to be foundational in this work.

scholarly journals Follow-Up Rates at a Free Ophthalmology Clinic at a Homeless Shelter

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. e51-e56
Author(s):  
Lauren Hennein ◽  
Kimberly A. Spaulding ◽  
Veronika Karlegan ◽  
Ogonna N. Nnamani Silva ◽  
Alejandra G. de Alba Campomanes
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Primary Care Provider ◽  
Nonprofit Organization ◽  
County Hospital ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Homeless Shelter ◽  
High School Diploma

Abstract Objective Eye health among the homeless community is important, as poor vision makes this population vulnerable and adds significantly to the social and health burden. There is limited knowledge on patient follow-up rates for their eye conditions and barriers to accessing care in this population. The purpose of this retrospective chart review study is to examine follow-up rates and barriers to care for patients referred from a free, medical-student run ophthalmology clinic at a homeless shelter. Methods All patients evaluated at a free ophthalmology clinic from September 2017 to September 2018 were included; no patients were excluded. If indicated, patients were referred for advanced ophthalmologic care at a local county hospital and free eyeglasses at a nonprofit organization. Primary outcomes were follow-up rates at the county hospital and nonprofit organization. Secondary outcomes included prespecified baseline variables hypothesized to be associated with follow-up rates. These categorical variables were compared with Chi-square testing to determine their association with follow-up rates. The hypothesis being tested was formulated before data collection. Results Of the 68 patients, 84% were males with a mean age of 50 years. Overall, 40 patients were referred for free eyeglasses and 17 to the county hospital. Of those referred, 14 patients presented for free eyeglasses and 7 presented to the county hospital. About 79% of patients with a pre-established primary care provider presented to their appointment compared with 20% of those without one (p = 0.03). The 44% of patients with a high school diploma presented while all patients without a high school diploma failed to present (p = 0.04). Vision-threatening conditions identified at the shelter clinic did not affect follow-up rates (p = 0.79). Conclusion Less than half of referred patients in our study presented to their appointments. Barriers to presentation included no primary care provider and lower educational status, with no improvement in follow-up rates among those referred for vision-threatening conditions. Interventions such as health coaching with particular attention to educating patients on the effects of vision-threatening conditions may be warranted, particularly for those not looped into the health care system and those of lower educational attainment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document