Purpose Most research on the work conditions and family responsibilities associated with work-family conflict and other measures of mental health uses the individual employee as the unit of analysis. We argue that work conditions are both individual psychosocial assessments and objective characteristics of the proximal work environment, necessitating multilevel analyses of both individual- and team-level work conditions on mental health. Methodology/approach This study uses multilevel data on 748 high-tech professionals in 120 teams to investigate relationships between team- and individual-level job conditions, work-family conflict, and four mental health outcomes (job satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, perceived stress, and psychological distress). Findings We find that work-to-family conflict is socially patterned across teams, as are job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion. Team-level job conditions predict team-level outcomes, while individuals’ perceptions of their job conditions are better predictors of individuals’ work-to-family conflict and mental health. Work-to-family conflict operates as a partial mediator between job demands and mental health outcomes. Practical implications Our findings suggest that organizational leaders concerned about presenteeism, sickness absences, and productivity would do well to focus on changing job conditions in ways that reduce job demands and work-to-family conflict in order to promote employees’ mental health. Originality/value of the chapter We show that both work-to-family conflict and job conditions can be fruitfully framed as team characteristics, shared appraisals held in common by team members. This challenges the framing of work-to-family conflict as a “private trouble” and provides support for work-to-family conflict as a structural mismatch grounded in the social and temporal organization of work.

Background:As interventions increasingly emphasize early child care settings, it is necessary to understand the state regulatory context that provides guidelines for outdoor physical activity and safety and sets standards for child care environments.Methods:Researchers reviewed regulations for child care facilities for 50 states, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands. We compared state regulations with national standards for 17 physical activity- and safety-related items for outdoor playground settings outlined in Caring for Our Children: National Health and Safety Performance Standards: Guidelines for Out-of-Home Child Care Programs (CFOC). State regulations were coded as fully, partially or not addressing the CFOC standard and state-level summary scores were calculated.Results:On average, state regulations fully addressed one-third of 17 CFOC standards in regulations for centers (34%) and family child care homes (27%). Data suggest insufficient attention to outdoor play area proximity and size, equipment height, surfacing, and inspections.Conclusions:Considerable variation exists among state regulations related to physical activity promotion and injury prevention within outdoor play areas. Many states' regulations do not comply with published national health and safety standards. Enhancing regulations is one component of a policy approach to promoting safe, physically active child care settings.

Background: Social support resources are thought to buffer stressful life events and have been associated with numerous health outcomes in industrialized countries. Because the nature of supportive relationships varies by culture and social class, we studied the relationship of informal social support and networks to self-rated health among low-income women in northeastern Brazil. Methods: Participants included 595 randomly sampled mothers from nine low-income communities in Teresina, Piauí, Brazil. Data on sociodemographic variables, social support, quality of the partner relationship, and selfrated health were collected cross-sectionally in 2002. Using multivariable logistic regression, we modeled the association between different aspects of social support and self-rated health. Results: Poor or fair health was reported by 47% of participants. Women with poor partner relationships had an increased likelihood of poor or fair health (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.7), as did those with no material support for food or money (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2, 2.0) and no support to resolve a conflict (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1, 2.1). Likewise, women with the lowest scores of the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) social support survey were more likely than other women to report poor or fair health (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0, 2.1).Conclusions: Poor quality of a partner relationship, lack of support to resolve a conflict, and lack of material support as well as such sociodemographic variables as low education, poor sanitation, and depressive symptomatology are associated with lower health status in a population of low-income women from northeastern Brazil.

No abstract

No abstract