Although some research suggests that perceptions of HRM practices are associated with lower levels of employee well-being, other research shows just the opposite. In the present study, we attempt to reconcile these discrepant findings by incorporating the role of HRM attributions. Our model posits that when employees perceive that their organisation's HRM practices are intended to improve their job performance, they experience higher levels of job involvement, which leads to lower levels of emotional exhaustion. Conversely, when employees believe that their organisation's HRM practices are intended to reduce organisational costs, they experience work overload, which translates into higher levels of emotional exhaustion. Parallel mediation analyses of survey data collected from employees of a construction and consultancy organisation at two time periods (n = 180) supported this theoretical model.

Purpose: Due to increasing cost pressures, and the necessity to ensure high quality patient care while maintaining a safe environment for patients and staff, interest in the capacity for HRM practices to make a difference has piqued the attention of healthcare professionals. The purpose of this study is to present and test a model whereby engagement mediates the relationship between four HRM practices and quality of care and safety in two different occupational groups in healthcare, namely, nurses and administrative support workers. Design/methodology/approach: Structural equation modelling was used to analyzequestionnaire data collected by the National Health Service in the United Kingdom as part of their 2011 Staff Survey (n=69,018). We tested the hypotheses for nurses and administrative support workers separately. Findings:Training, participation in decision-making, opportunities for development, and communication were positively related to quality of care and safety via work engagement.The strength of the relationships was conditional on whether an employee was a nurse or administrative support worker.Originality/value: This is the first paper to examine the mediating role of engagement on the relationship between four relevant HRM practices in the healthcare context, and outcomes important to healthcare practitioners. We also add value to the HRM literature by being among the first to use the Job Demands Resources Model to explain the impact of HRM practices on performance outcomes. Moreover, we provide insight into how HRM practices affect outcomes in the world's largest publicly funded healthcare service.Keywords: perceptions of HRM practices; engagement; safety; quality of care; healthcare PERCEPTIONS OF HRM PRACTICES ENGAGEMENT HEALTHCARE 2Research has established the critical importance of Human Resource Management (HRM) practices in the healthcare sector for promoting positive outcomes for patients, staff, and organizations (e.g. Ang et al., 2013;Baluch et al., 2013;Townsend et al., 2013).Although this budding area of HRM research indicates the capability of HRM practices to make a difference, there remain a number of pressing unanswered questions. For instance, few studies have focused on the effect of HRM practices on outcomes that are tailored to the healthcare context, and still fewer have examined individual HRM practices, rather than bundles of HRM practices on such outcomes. Moreover, little is known about the psychological mechanism that explains the relationship between HRM practices and outcomes of strategic importance to healthcare organizations. This study was designed to address these gaps in the literature. Indeed, the purpose of the present study is to develop and test a model of the mediating role of engagement on the relationship between HRM practices and quality of care and safety (Veld et al., 2010). In other words, our research question is:Does engagement mediate the relationship between HRM practices and outcomes of relevance to healthcare organizations? Engagement is at t...

We find that only 17% of FTSE 100 company websites refer directly to transgender ('trans') individuals, illustrating the extent to which trans voices are unheard in the workplace. We propose that these voices are missing for a number of reasons:voluntary silence to protect oneself from adverse circumstances; the subsumption of trans voices within the larger 'LGBT' community; assimilation, wherein many trans voices become affiliated with those of their post-transition gender; multiple trans voices arising from diversity within the transgender community; and limited access to voice mechanisms for transgender employees. We identify the negative implications of being unheard for individual trans employees, for organizational outcomes, and for business and management scholarship, and propose ways in which organizations can listen more carefully to trans voices. Finally, we introduce an agenda for future research that tests the applicability of the theoretical framework of invisible stigma disclosure to transgender individuals, and calls for new theoretical and empirical developments to identify HRM challenges and best practices for respecting trans employees and their choices to remain silent or be heard.

Despite the legal progress made over the past 20 years, i.e. Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999, Gender Recognition Act 2004 and UK Equality Act 2010, surveys conducted by charities in support of transgender rights show that the unemployment rate among transgender persons is 7 per cent higher than the general population and 26 per cent get fired because of their gender identity. In the USA, up to 90 per cent of transgender workers report that they have been harassed, discriminated against or mistreated in the workplace, whereas in the UK, 38 per cent have experienced actual physical intimidation or threats. For these reasons, up to 46 per cent of transgender persons hide their gender identity in the workplace.Whereas the increasing participation of organizations in diversity initiatives such as the Corporate Equality Index and the Workplace Equality Index shows a willingness to adopt a more inclusive environment, there is a danger of treating equality as a "box-ticking exercise." Only a small percentage of companies that promote themselves as "highly inclusive" genuinely arefor example, despite openly promoting diversity, 80 per cent of large UK organizations fail to provide non-discrimination policies for transgender employees and only 17 per cent of FTSE100 companies even mention the word "transgender" on their websites.Although human resource management (HRM) practitioners tend to be the first point of contact when a transgender employee comes out at work, many indicate that they have never had to support a gender transition and lack knowledge and training on the recommended good practice. Managers' responses when a transgender employee comes out not only have legal implications but can also affect the employee's sense of dignity, fair treatment and acceptance in the workplace. Overall, organizations do not know how to react when an employee discloses that he or she is going to transition at work, and corporate policies do not adequately address the issues of gender identity or expression. DesignA questionnaire with a combination of quantitative and qualitative items was developed based on the National Centre for Transgender Equality report and the Government Equalities Office's guidance for employers (The recruitment and retention of transgender

No abstract