Organisational Policies and Practices for the Inclusion of Vulnerable Workers: A Scoping Review of the Employer's Perspective.
A Kersten, M van Woerkom, G A Geuskens and 1 others
PMID 36083361WHAT IT FOUND
Employers reported workplace inclusion practices for vulnerable workers, mostly disabled employees.
Employer studies on migrants were absent, and coverage of other vulnerable groups was sparse. Effect evidence was limited.
Key findings
01The review found seven types of employer-reported inclusion practices: senior management commitment, recruitment and selection, performance management and development, job accommodations and redesign, supportive culture, external collaborations, and monitoring.
0236 of the 38 included articles addressed disabled workers.
03Only seven studies examined relations between practices and inclusion outcomes, and their designs did not support causal conclusions.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review maps employer-reported practices; it does not test whether any practice improves inclusion. Only seven studies examined relations between practices and inclusion outcomes, and their designs did not allow causal conclusions. The evidence was concentrated on disabled workers: 36 of the 38 articles addressed disability, no articles were found for migrant workers, and only two covered long-term unemployed or low-educated workers. Many included studies used small, convenience, or sector-specific samples, so representativeness was limited. Many studies reported only importance or application of practices, not validated outcomes or variance estimates. The review included only English peer-reviewed articles, so practices described in other languages were missed. The exact content of many practices was unclear, such as what disability awareness training should contain. Employer perceptions were reported; these may differ from employee experiences or objective inclusion results.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the listed practices as proven ways to increase inclusion. The review mostly reports what employers value or apply, and only seven studies examined relations with inclusion outcomes without causal designs.