Next Article in Journal
Impact of Nutrition Interventions on Vitamin and Mineral Intake among Native American Children and Parents: Insights from Food Resource Equity for Sustainable Health (FRESH) Study
Previous Article in Journal
Adapting the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC) Framework for England: Development of a Community Resilience Index
Previous Article in Special Issue
Digital Health Information Provided by Public Health Stakeholders on Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Evaluation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 21
Issue 8
10.3390/ijerph21081013
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Overrepresentation of New Workers in Jobs with Multiple Carcinogen Exposures in Canada

by
Disann Katende
1,
Elizabeth Rydz
1,2,
Emma K. Quinn
1,2,
Emily Heer
1,
Raissa Shrestha
1,
Sajjad S. Fazel
2 and
Cheryl E. Peters
1,2,3,4,*
1
CAREX Canada, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
2
Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
3
BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4R4, Canada
4
BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21(8), 1013; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081013
Submission received: 25 June 2024 / Revised: 29 July 2024 / Accepted: 30 July 2024 / Published: 1 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cancer Prevention Research: Ideas and Opportunities across the Life Course)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background. In Canada, understanding the demographic and job-related factors influencing the prevalence of new workers and their exposure to potential carcinogens is crucial for improving workplace safety and guiding policy interventions. Methods. Logistic regression was performed on the 2017 Labour Force Survey (LFS), to estimate the likelihood of being a new worker based on age, industry, occupation, season, and immigration status. Participants were categorized by sector and occupation using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 2017 Version 1.0 and National Occupational Classification (NOC) system 2016 Version 1.0. Finally, an exposures-per-worker metric was used to highlight the hazardous exposures new workers encounter in their jobs and industries. Results. Individuals younger than 25 years had 3.24 times the odds of being new workers compared to those in the 25–39 age group (adjusted odds ratios (OR) = 3.24, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 3.18, 3.31). Recent immigrants (less than 10 years in the country) were more likely to be new workers than those with Canadian citizenship (OR 1.36, 95% CI: 1.32, 1.41). The total workforce exposures-per-worker metric using CAREX Canada data was 0.56. By occupation, new workers were the most overrepresented in jobs in natural resources and agriculture (20.5% new workers), where they also experienced a high exposures-per-worker metric (1.57). Conclusions. Younger workers (under 25 years) and recent immigrants who had arrived 10 or fewer years prior were more likely to be new workers, and were overrepresented in jobs with more frequent hazardous exposures (Construction, Agriculture, and Trades).

1. Introduction

Almost half of the known or suspected carcinogens defined by the International Agency for Research on Cancer can be found in the workplace and often at exposure levels exceeding those found in the general environment [1]. The hazardous effects of these substances underscore the importance of identifying whether certain workers at the intersections of marginalization could be at disproportionate risk of occupational injury and disease. One group of interest is new workers, generally referring to people of any age that are new to a particular workplace, or facing new hazards in their job for any reason [2].
While the definition of a new worker is not consistent [3], for the present investigation, we define new workers as those who have been on the job for less than 6 months [4]. It is well established that new workers are at a higher risk of occupational injury than established workers, and this risk decreases on a continuum the longer that a worker has been in a current job [4]. This elevated risk of injury and illness at work may be due to inadequate training on occupational hazards, failure to communicate concerns, and uncertainty about workplace expectations [5,6,7]. Additionally, new workers are also more likely to be involved with precarious employment, including temporary work, gig employment, and working for cash outside of a standard work relationship [8,9,10]. Precarious employment is generally less stable and provides fewer workplace protections for employees, which may increase the risk of exposure to hazards, including carcinogens [11]. In Canada and other developed nations, occupational exposure is a significant determinant of cancer incidence [12,13]. In 2011, approximately 4% of all newly diagnosed cancer cases were attributed to workplace-related exposures [12]. This highlights the critical need for stringent occupational health and safety regulations to mitigate cancer risks among workers.
Despite these concerns, data on occupational exposure to carcinogens are rarely (if ever) collected by basic demographics like sex or age, let alone job tenure, that would allow conclusions to be drawn on new workers’ hazardous exposures. In this study, we aim to describe the demographic and job-related predictors of being a new worker (job tenure of less than 6 months) in Canada and descriptively examine carcinogen exposures in jobs and industries where new workers are overrepresented.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design and Data Collection

We used two main data sources for our analyses, the Canadian Labour Force Survey (LFS) and carcinogen exposure information from CAREX Canada. The LFS is a national cross-sectional survey that aims to assess labour market conditions and to estimate employment and unemployment rates at the national, provincial, territorial, and regional levels [14,15]. In brief, LFS interviews were conducted monthly by telephone interviewers via computer-assisted telephone interviews or by personal visits from a field interviewer [15]. The sampled households are representative of the civilian, non-institutionalized population 15 years of age or older [14]. Those excluded from the survey are persons living on a reserve and other Indigenous settlements, full-time members of the Canadian Armed Forces, the institutionalized population, and households in extremely remote areas with very low population density (an estimated 2% of the population aged 15 and older) [14].
The LFS categorizes workers by sector and occupation using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 2017 Version 1.0 and the National Occupational Classification (NOC) system 2016 Version 1.0 [15,16,17]. Additionally, the survey collects detailed information on personal characteristics of the working-age population, including age, sex, marital status, educational attainment, and family characteristics. In 2017, the LFS further expanded its scope and included a question on the immigration status of participants [14]. For the present study, all monthly surveys from 2017 were pooled to examine the effect of seasonality and month of the survey, which is important for contextualizing seasonal work and when considering new workers.
New worker status was derived from the job tenure with the current employer (in months). Employees who had worked for less than six months were considered new. Other variables of interest included age (categorized into four groups: <25 years old, 25–39, 40–59, and 60+ years old), season (derived from month of survey, into categories of summer (June-August), fall (September-November), winter (December-February). and spring (March to May)), and immigration status (citizen, recent (<10 years since arrival) immigrant, and former (10+ years since arrival) immigrant).
Since there are no data on occupational exposures for new workers measured in workplaces in Canada to quantitatively examine differences in exposure levels by job tenure, we used carcinogen exposure information from CAREX Canada to highlight the potential for exposures among new workers. CAREX Canada is a national workplace exposure surveillance program that provides estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to a suite of approximately 50 known and suspected carcinogens [1]. We tabulated exposure information from CAREX Canada alongside the industries and occupations where new workers are overrepresented (i.e., they represent more than the national average proportion of new workers in the labour force of Canada).

2.2. Analysis

Bivariate relationships between the outcome and predictor variables in the LFS were performed using Pearson’s Chi-squared test. The significance level was set at α = 0.05, and the p-value was adjusted using the Bonferroni correction for multiple testing. The likelihood of being a new worker was derived with multivariate logistic regression using maximum likelihood (ML) estimation. Four predictors were included in the occupation model: age group, immigration status, occupation, and season. Industry was presented in a separate model from occupation due to the high degree of correlation between these two factors (Figure S1).
Analyses of the LFS were conducted using the R Statistical package (version 4.2.2; R Core Team, 2022) on Windows 10 x64 (build 22621). Study-specific ethics approval was exempted for this study by the Research Ethics Board of the University of British Columbia, as all data were in the public domain [18]. While the LFS is designed to be representative of the Canadian population and the public use microdata files include weights to allow projection to the full working population, we pooled the study participants from each monthly LFS cycle in 2017 to account for seasonal trends in the year, and thus did not apply the developed weights to the calculations.
To descriptively assess the potential risks associated with certain occupations where new workers are overrepresented, we used an exposures-per-worker metric based on CAREX Canada’s estimates of the prevalence of exposure to occupational carcinogens by industry and occupation [1,19]. To calculate the exposures-per-worker metric, the total number of workers exposed to various carcinogenic substances in a specific occupation or industry were summed and divided by the total number of workers in that occupation or industry. The industries and occupations with disproportionately higher proportions of new workers were tabulated alongside their exposures-per-worker metrics, along with a listing of the most prevalent carcinogenic exposures in those settings.

3. Results

The 2017 monthly Labour Force Surveys included 608,724 participants (response rate of 82%). Of these, 66,775 individuals (11.0%) were identified as new workers (Table 1). Younger workers were much more likely to be new on the job than older workers, with 41.2% of workers under 25 years being new, compared to only 3.2% of workers aged 60 and over. Workers with lower levels of education were more likely to be new workers, as were recent immigrants and workers in certain industries, including accommodation and food services, and retail trade. One-third of established workers were union members, compared to just 14.9% of new workers.
New workers were more likely to be employed by smaller firms (28%), which is in contrast to only 17.8% of established workers. Among new workers, 60% had permanent jobs, as compared to almost 90% of established workers with permanent jobs. New workers also had lower salaries than more established workers (Table 1). As expected, a seasonal effect was noted, where more survey respondents reported being new workers in the summer months compared to other times of the year. Finally, although the distribution of workers was similar across all regions, new workers were slightly overrepresented in the Atlantic Provinces and British Columbia, compared to the overall workforces in those regions.
Figure 1 summarizes the odds ratios (ORs) of new worker status for both the occupation and industry models. Statistically significant differences in age, sex, educational attainment, immigration status, occupation, and industry were detected between new workers and established workers. Detailed results from the adjusted logistic regression analyses are presented in Supplementary Table S1. Survey participants under the age of 25 were more than three times as likely to be new workers compared to those in the 25–39 age group (OR = 3.24, 95% CI: 3.18, 3.31). Recent immigrants (less than 10 years in the country) were more likely to be new workers than those with Canadian citizenship (OR 1.36, 95% CI: 1.32, 1.41). In contrast, there was no difference between immigrants that arrived at least 10 years ago and those with citizenship (OR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.00). Survey respondents were more likely to report being a new worker during the summer season (OR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.41, 1.48) when compared to spring.
Compared to the management occupations, all other occupations had an overrepresentation of new workers. However, the most overrepresentation was observed in natural resources and agriculture (OR 3.99, 95% CI: 3.73, 4.27), trades, transportation and equipment operators (OR 2.78, 95% CI: 2.63, 2.95), and art, culture, recreation, and sport (OR 2.58, 95% CI: 2.39, 2.78). Compared to public administration (i.e., governments), the following industries had the most overrepresentation of new workers: business and building services (OR 2.60, 95% CI: 2.45, 2.75), agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (OR 2.51, 95% CI: 2.34, 2.68), and construction (OR 2.43, 95% CI: 2.32, 2.56).
Table 2 and Table 3 are shown below. For the results by industry (Table 2), the overall workforce comprised 11% new workers, with an exposures-per-worker metric of 0.56. New workers comprised 20% of the workforce in accommodation and food services with an exposures-per-worker metric of 0.44, which is relatively low compared to other industries. However, new workers were overrepresented in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (18.4% of sector), as well as construction (16.6% of sector), with exposures-per-worker metrics of 1.29 and 1.34, respectively.
The most common exposures in these industries include solar radiation, pesticides, wood dust, and silica. For occupational groups (Table 3), new workers were most overrepresented in natural resources and agricultural jobs (20.5% of that job title), where they experienced an exposures-per-worker metric of 1.57. They were also overrepresented in occupational groups with relatively low exposures-per-worker, such as art, cultural, recreation, and sport jobs and in sales and service. In line with the results by industry, new workers were overrepresented in trades, transport, and equipment operation jobs (13.6% of that job title), where they experienced an exposures-per-worker metric of 1.98.

4. Discussion

We sought to examine the new worker population in Canada and situate it in the context of their potential for higher risk of exposure to hazardous substances (known and suspected carcinogens) than established workers in Canada. We found that new workers were more likely to be younger, recent immigrants, earning lower salaries, hired in the summer, holding temporary positions, having lower educational attainment, and working in small-sized firms. We also demonstrated that new workers are overrepresented in certain sectors and occupations with a higher likelihood of exposure to known and suspected carcinogens, most concerning in agricultural and construction settings.
While we identified other sectors and occupations where new workers were overrepresented but had a lower likelihood of multiple carcinogen exposures (e.g., sales and service sector jobs), this does not imply that these workers are risk-free. It is important to note that CAREX Canada does not document all potential chemical, physical, and dust exposures that may occur in these settings. Consequently, workers in these sectors may still face significant exposure to other hazardous substances not currently captured in our data. The “exposures-per-worker” metric serves as an indicator that correlates to the potential for exposure to carcinogens in a given sector or occupation. It should be used and interpreted with caution, as workers may be exposed to multiple agents and thus counted multiple times in their respective sector or occupation [1]. Additionally, with current data limitations, it is impossible to account for additive effects of included agent exposures or other lifestyle factors (such as smoking) that could elevate a worker’s risk of cancer [1].
There was a disparity in sampled populations between the Prairies and Ontario, with the Prairies having a higher sampled population despite a smaller overall population, which is attributed to survey methodology intricacies. Ontario witnessed a substantial decrease of over 900 sampled households per month, offset by increased sample sizes in the three Prairie Provinces and Quebec [14]. Conversely, alterations in sample sizes for the Atlantic Provinces and British Columbia were comparatively modest [14].
Young age was a significant predictor of being a new worker, and this has been consistently demonstrated in Canada and other countries [20,21]. This is an important finding from an occupational health and safety standpoint, as younger workers are at an elevated risk of job-related injuries and potential exposure to carcinogens and other hazards [22,23,24,25,26]. Previous research from our team and others has demonstrated an added potential exposure to hazardous occupational environments [21,22,23,25,26,27,28]. Numerous studies dedicated to occupational safety across Canada and beyond consistently underscore the heightened risk to young and entry-level workers of more frequent occupational injuries as opposed to their more seasoned counterparts [22,27,28]. Additionally, these injuries and the associated hazards are often linked at least partly to limited safety awareness and poor compliance with proper safety protocols [24,28].
The association with younger age is particularly concerning given the level of carcinogenic exposure in many of the occupations where new workers are overrepresented. New workers are often younger and have a well-established increased risk of occupational injury [29], which may extend to an increased risk of exposure to carcinogens [13]. Factors include biological elements (e.g., incomplete cognitive development until around age 25), limited jobsite experience, lack of understanding of hazardous settings, perceived lower ability to voice safety concerns, and a lack of training [13,14,15,16]. Many of these factors that increase workplace risk among younger workers can be applied to new workers generally and suggest that new workers are more vulnerable to carcinogenic exposures than those in more permanent employment.
We found that new workers are exposed to several hazards deemed either carcinogenic or probably carcinogenic by IARC, notably solar radiation, pesticides (glyphosate), wood dust, and silica [30]. These substances are associated with increased risk of lung, laryngeal, nasal cavity, and skin cancer and lymphoma (Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s), as well as silicosis, pulmonary tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cataracts, among others [30]. As many of these diseases can have lifelong health impacts, mitigating exposure should be a priority concern for young workers in industries with the highest exposures. These exposures also often occur in occupation groups where employees are precariously employed [31], specifically in natural resources and agriculture, where there is also the highest proportion of new workers (20.5% versus 11.0% nationally). It is also important to note that, although asbestos was not included in our analysis, as it is not a common exposure, some workers may still be at risk of exposure [32]. Asbestos was banned in Canada in 2018 but older homes and buildings may still contain insulation made with asbestos [33]. This places construction workers at risk of exposure who may be involved in the remediation or demolition of older buildings, putting them at risk of mesothelioma and lung cancer [32]. Preventing asbestos exposure among workers in these occupations should continue to be a priority.
New workers were also more likely to be new immigrants, unlike their Canadian counterparts in our study, which identifies another priority population for possible intervention. Newcomers to Canada face unique challenges in the workforce, particularly concerning working conditions and occupational health [34]. Recent immigrants are likely to face challenges securing employment in their preferred profession, resulting in low-paying and potentially more hazardous jobs [35,36]. Additionally, new immigrants may lack awareness of Canadian labour laws, including the right to refuse unsafe work, and resources for work-related injury support [35,37].
The highest exposures-per-work metric occurred among equipment operators in the trades and transport occupational groups and a modest overrepresentation of new workers compared to the workforce as a whole, who may have frequent exposure to solar radiation and engine emissions. Epidemiologic studies have extensively investigated the effects of particulate matter emitted from gasoline and diesel engines, especially in occupational settings, and classified diesel engine emissions as carcinogenic to humans [38,39,40,41,42]. Exhaust fumes have been linked to several adverse health effects, including renal cancer [43], laryngeal cancer [44], and lung cancer [45]. In Ontario alone, over 200 new cases of lung cancer annually are linked to workers’ exposure to diesel exhaust [46], of which a third (33%) are motor transport operators [46]. These findings highlight the importance of implementing measures to reduce diesel emissions and protect the health of workers.
Several key strengths and limitations to this study should be highlighted. The LFS is a large, recurring, population-based survey which makes the findings generally representative of the working population in Canada. One year (2017) of data was used for this study, selected because it was the most recent public use microdata file available that collected information on immigration status. The 12 monthly surveys from 2017 were pooled to examine the impact of season on new worker status, which is why no survey weights were applied to the analysis. This approach may have double-counted a small number of workers who were asked to fill in the survey more than once that year. The prevalence of new workers was compared by industry and occupation with a semi-quantitative indicator of hazardous exposures from the CAREX system [19]. CAREX Canada is a longstanding, large, and reliable program of research on occupational exposure to carcinogens in Canada, which is a strength of this approach. However, this comparison only serves as an indicator of potentially hazardous working environments for new workers and does not allow comment for any individual or group exposed to carcinogens and severity. Since exposure monitoring data are not available by new worker status, age, or any other demographic dimension, it was required to consider potentially hazardous exposures using the CAREX system. CAREX Canada also only considers exposures to known and suspected carcinogens, and there are many hazards in the industries and occupations identified in our qualitative comparison of new workers as a proportion of the worker group with exposure metrics. Even if the exposure-per-worker metric was low for certain sectors and occupations in our findings (e.g., sales and service occupations), this does not mean these jobs do not carry excess risk of occupational disease for the new workers who make up a large proportion of these worker groups.
Another limitation to the analysis is the industry and occupation data in the LFS, which were based solely on the respondents’ main job the week before the survey was taken. The new worker respondents may likely have held part-time and/or temporary work which may not have been captured in the analysis and could have affected the analysis. Finally, the definition of ‘new worker’ used in this study only takes into account the length of an employee’s tenure and may miss details on those who are changing roles within the same organization.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study has shed light on predictors of being a new worker and explores how these jobs may also experience more hazardous exposures that place them at risk of occupational cancer. A disproportionate number of new workers are employed in industries and occupations (largely related to agriculture and construction) where there are also myriad exposures that can cause occupational cancer. There is a stark lack of data on occupational exposures that take into account demographic factors like age, immigration status, and job tenure, which is why only inferences about the hazard profile experienced by new workers can be made. Employers should ensure that new workers, particularly young and immigrant workers, receive adequate training prior to starting a job. Training will not replace systemic protections for workers but may help ease the immediate burden of injury and illness. This study highlighted an important gap in the understanding of the occupational health risks faced by new workers.
A critical next step in addressing the gap in knowledge of new workers is to collect data on occupational exposures for new workers in specific industries and occupations. This is the only way that researchers will be able to assess whether there are differences in exposure for this population compared to other workers, and this study is a call to action to address this data gap. Further research in this area is crucial to advance the understanding of the diverse experiences of new workers and promote inclusive occupational disease prevention.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph21081013/s1, Figure S1: Collinearity plot of the select model variables; Table S1: Logistic regression results of industries and occupations models.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.E.P.; Data curation, R.S.; Formal analysis, D.K.; Funding acquisition, C.E.P.; Methodology, E.R., D.K. and C.E.P.; Supervision, C.E.P.; Visualization, D.K. and R.S.; Writing—original draft, D.K.; Writing—review and editing, E.R., E.K.Q., E.H., R.S. and S.S.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding and CAREX Canada is funded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent waived due to use of publicly available data.

Data Availability Statement

The data are hosted by the Abacus Data Network Canada and are available in the public domain at https://hdl.handle.net/11272.1/AB2/PO8CWI (accessed on 31 July 2024).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend their appreciation to Lindsay Forsman-Phillips at CAREX Canada, University of British Columbia, for her invaluable administrative support throughout this project.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Peters, C.E.; Ge, C.B.; Hall, A.L.; Davies, H.W.; A Demers, P. CAREX Canada: An enhanced model for assessing occupational carcinogen exposure. Occup. Environ. Med. 2015, 72, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. WorkSafeBC. Young and New Workers. Available online: https://www.worksafebc.com/en/health-safety/education-training-certification/young-new-worker (accessed on 23 January 2024).
  3. Rollag, K. Defining the term new in new employee research. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2007, 80, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Breslin, F.C.; Dollack, J.; Mahood, Q.; Maas, E.T.; Laberge, M.; Smith, P.M. Are new workers at elevated risk for work injury? A systematic review. Occup. Environ. Med. 2019, 76, 694–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Bena, A.; Giraudo, M.; Leombruni, R.; Costa, G. Job tenure and work injuries: A multivariate analysis of the relation with previous experience and differences by age. BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Construction Safety Association of Manitoba (CSAM). Construction Safety. Available online: https://www.constructionsafety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/2018.06.04.CSAM-News-6.pdf (accessed on 17 May 2024).
  7. Breslin, F.C.; Smith, P. Trial by fire: A multivariate examination of the relation between job tenure and work injuries. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006, 63, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Fortune, M.K.; Mustard, C.A.; Etches, J.J.C.; Chambers, A.G. Work-attributed Illness Arising From Excess Heat Exposure in Ontario, 2004–2010. Can. J. Public Health 2013, 104, e420–e426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ceballos, D.M.; Côté, D.; Bakhiyi, B.; Flynn, M.A.; Zayed, J.; Gravel, S.; Herrick, R.F.; Labrèche, F. Overlapping vulnerabilities in workers of the electronics recycling industry formal sector: A commentary. Am. J. Ind. Med. 2020, 63, 955–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Smith, J.; Purewal, B.P.; Macpherson, A.; Pike, I. Metrics to assess injury prevention programs for young workers in high-risk occupations: A scoping review of the literature. Health Promot. Chronic Dis. Prev. Can. 2018, 38, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Gunn, V.; Håkansta, C.; Vignola, E.; Matilla-Santander, N.; Kreshpaj, B.; Wegman, D.H.; Hogstedt, C.; Ahonen, E.Q.; Muntaner, C.; Baron, S.; et al. Initiatives addressing precarious employment and its effects on workers’ health and well-being: A protocol for a systematic review. Syst. Rev. 2021, 10, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Labrèche, F.; Kim, J.; Song, C.; Pahwa, M.; Ge, C.B.; Arrandale, V.H.; McLeod, C.B.; Peters, C.E.; Lavoué, J.; Davies, H.W.; et al. The current burden of cancer attributable to occupational exposures in Canada. Prev. Med. 2019, 122, 128–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Occupational Cancer Risk Factors in Europe-First Findings of the Workers’ Exposure Survey European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2004/37 (accessed on 23 July 2024).
  14. Statistics Canada. Guide to the Labour Force Survey, 2017. Available online: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-543-g/71-543-g2017001-eng.htm (accessed on 17 February 2023).
  15. Statistics Canada. Surveys and Statistical Programs—Labour Force Survey (LFS). Available online: https://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=3701 (accessed on 4 February 2023).
  16. Statistics Canada. North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Canada 2012. Available online: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/subjects/standard/naics/2012/index (accessed on 23 March 2023).
  17. Statistics Canada. National Occupational Classification (NOC) 2016 Version 1.0. Available online: https://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p3VD.pl?Function=getVD&TVD=314243 (accessed on 23 March 2023).
  18. University of British Columbia. Human Research Policy. Published Online 2019. Available online: https://universitycounsel.ubc.ca/files/2022/05/Human-Research-Policy_LR9.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2023).
  19. CAREX Canada. Occupational Exposure Estimates. Available online: https://www.carexcanada.ca/ework/ (accessed on 19 April 2023).
  20. Tucker, S.; Turner, N. Young worker safety behaviors: Development and validation of measures. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2011, 43, 165–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Young Worker Safety and Health|NIOSH|CDC. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/youth/default.html (accessed on 24 February 2023).
  22. Sweet, C.M.; Telfer, J.M.; Palmer, A.L.; Fazel, S.S.; Peters, C.E. Perspective: Young Workers at Higher Risk for Carcinogen Exposures. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 869232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Turner, N.; Deng, C.; Granger, S.; Wingate, T.G.; Shafqat, R.; Dueck, P.M. Young workers and safety: A critical review and future research agenda. J. Saf. Res. 2022, 83, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Turner, N.; Tucker, S.; Kelloway, E.K. Prevalence and demographic differences in microaccidents and safety behaviors among young workers in Canada. J. Saf. Res. 2015, 53, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hanvold, T.N.; Kines, P.; Nykänen, M.; Thomée, S.; Holte, K.A.; Vuori, J.; Wærsted, M.; Veiersted, K.B. Occupational Safety and Health Among Young Workers in the Nordic Countries: A Systematic Literature Review. Saf. Health Work 2019, 10, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Dragano, N.; Barbaranelli, C.; Reuter, M.; Wahrendorf, M.; Wright, B.; Ronchetti, M.; Buresti, G.; Di Tecco, C.; Iavicoli, S. Young Workers’ Access to and Awareness of Occupational Safety and Health Services: Age-Differences and Possible Drivers in a Large Survey of Employees in Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ministry of Labor, Employment and Integration. Employee Exposure to Carcinogenic Chemicals|DARES. Available online: https://dares.travail-emploi.gouv.fr/publication/les-expositions-des-salaries-aux-produits-chimiques-cancerogenes (accessed on 22 July 2024).
  28. Norman, P.A.; Dosman, J.A.; Voaklander, D.C.; Koehncke, N.; Pickett, W. For the Saskatchewan Farm Injury Cohort Study Team Intergenerational transfer of occupational risks on family farms. J. Rural Health 2022, 38, 527–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Salminen, S. Have young workers more injuries than older ones? An international literature review. J. Saf. Res. 2004, 35, 513–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Carcinogen Profiles & Estimates—CAREX Canada. Available online: https://www.carexcanada.ca/carcinogen-profiles/ (accessed on 17 May 2024).
  31. Safety and Health at Work|International Labour Organization. Available online: https://www.ilo.org/topics/safety-and-health-work#areasofwork (accessed on 21 May 2024).
  32. Occupational Cancer Research Centre. Construction Exposure Profiles: Asbestos. Available online: https://www.odsp-ocrc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/123997-1-PBCTO-Asbestos_Profile-EN.pdf (accessed on 22 July 2024).
  33. CCOHS: Asbestos—Control Strategies for Workplaces. Available online: https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/asbestos/control.html (accessed on 22 July 2024).
  34. Using the Talents of Newcomers to Canada. Available online: https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/using-the-talents-of-newcomers-to-canada/ (accessed on 6 March 2023).
  35. Tiagi, R. Intergenerational differences in occupational injury and fatality rates among Canada’s immigrants. Occup. Med. 2016, 66, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Frank, K.; Hou, F. Over-education and well-being: How does education-occupation mismatch affect the life satisfaction of university-educated immigrant and non-immigrant workers? Ethn. Health 2018, 23, 884–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Côté, D.; Dubé, J.; Gravel, S.; Gratton, D.; White, B.W. Cumulative stigma among injured immigrant workers: A qualitative exploratory study in Montreal (Quebec, Canada). Disabil. Rehabil. 2020, 42, 1153–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Hahn, T.; Botzenhart, K.; Schweinsberg, F. TOXIC EFFECTS OF SOLVENT EXPOSURE. In Handbook of Solvents, 2nd ed.; ResearchGate GmbH: Berlin, Germany, 2014; Volume 2, pp. 535–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Dejmek, J.; Selevan, S.G.; Benes, I.; Solanský, I.; Srám, R.J. Fetal growth and maternal exposure to particulate matter during pregnancy. Environ. Health Perspect. 1999, 107, 475–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Wilhelm, M.; Ritz, B. Residential proximity to traffic and adverse birth outcomes in Los Angeles county, California, 1994–1996. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 207–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Silverman, D.T. Diesel exhaust causes lung cancer: Now what? Occup. Environ. Med. 2017, 74, 233–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Burden of Lung Cancer Attributable to Occupational Diesel Engine Exhaust Exposure in Canada on JSTOR. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26894532 (accessed on 5 September 2023).
  43. McLaughlin, J.K.; Mandel, J.S.; Blot, W.J.; Schuman, L.M.; Mehl, E.S.; Fraumeni, J.F. A Population-Based Case-Control Study of Renal Cell Carcinoma. JNCI J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1984, 72, 275–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Collatuzzo, G.; Teglia, F.; Boffetta, P. Role of Occupation in Shaping Cancer Disparities. Cancers 2022, 14, 4259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Silverman, D.T.; Samanic, C.M.; Lubin, J.H.; Blair, A.E.; Stewart, P.A.; Vermeulen, R.; Coble, J.B.; Rothman, N.; Schleiff, P.L.; Travis, W.D.; et al. The Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study: A Nested Case-Control Study of Lung Cancer and Diesel Exhaust. JNCI J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2012, 104, 855–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Cancer Care Ontario. Cancer Fact: Diesel Engine Exhaust Causes Almost 200 Work-Related Lung Cancers Annually in Ontario. Available online: https://www.cancercareontario.ca/en/cancer-facts/diesel-engine-exhaust-cancer (accessed on 5 September 2023).
Ijerph 21 01013 g001
Figure 1. Estimated odds ratios of new worker status by age, immigration status, season, occupation, and industry, Canada LFS, 2017.
Figure 1. Estimated odds ratios of new worker status by age, immigration status, season, occupation, and industry, Canada LFS, 2017.
Ijerph 21 01013 g001
Table 1. Bivariate relationships between demographic characteristics and new worker status in the 2017 Labour Force Surveys.
Table 1. Bivariate relationships between demographic characteristics and new worker status in the 2017 Labour Force Surveys.
New Worker Status
Total WorkforceYes 1No 1
CharacteristicN = 608,72466,775 (11.0%)541,949 (89.0%)p 2
Age (years) <0.001
<2591,715 (15.1)27,512 (41.2)64,203 (11.8)
25–39204,165 (33.5)21,422 (32.1)182,743 (33.7)
40–59271,763 (44.6)15,730 (23.6)256,033 (47.2)
60+41,081 (6.7)2111 (3.2)38,970 (7.2)
Sex <0.001
Female306,938 (50.4)31,254 (46.8)275,684 (50.9)
Male301,786 (49.6)35,521 (53.2)266,265 (49.1)
Education Attainment <0.001
0–8 years8417 (1.4)1269 (1.9)7148 (1.3)
Some high school49,521 (8.1)10,113 (15.1)39,408 (7.3)
High school graduate124,480 (20.4)15,135 (22.7)109,345 (20.2)
Some postsecondary41,602 (6.8)7705 (11.5)33,897 (6.3)
Postsecondary/Diploma230,205 (37.8)20,791 (31.1)209,414 (38.6)
Bachelor’s degree110,010 (18.1)8665 (13.0)101,345 (18.7)
Above Bachelor44,489 (7.3)3097 (4.6)41,392 (7.6)
Immigration status <0.001
Citizen511,069 (84.0)56,753 (85.0)454,316 (83.8)
Former immigrant (>10 years)60,275 (9.9)4666 (7.0)55,609 (10.3)
Recent immigrant (<10 years)37,380 (6.1)5356 (8.0)32,024 (5.9)
Industry (NAICS) <0.001
Accommodation and Food Services44,403 (7.3)8950 (13.4)35,453 (6.5)
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting9562 (1.6)1761 (2.6)7801 (1.4)
Business and Building Services19,848 (3.3)3487 (5.2)16,361 (3.0)
Construction42,583 (7.0)7078 (10.6)35,505 (6.6)
Educational Services50,543 (8.3)3408 (5.1)47,135 (8.7)
Finance and insurance24,129 (4.0)1451 (2.2)22,678 (4.2)
Health Care and Social Assistance87,596 (14.4)5806 (8.7)81,790 (15.1)
Information, Culture and Recreation22,226 (3.7)3527 (5.3)18,699 (3.5)
Manufacturing62,840 (10.3)5503 (8.2)57,337 (10.6)
Mining, Oil, and Gas15,239 (2.5)1531 (2.3)13,708 (2.5)
Other services21,461 (3.5)2675 (4.0)18,786 (3.5)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical28,444 (4.7)2895 (4.3)25,549 (4.7)
Public Administration40,465 (6.6)2432 (3.6)38,033 (7.0)
Real estate and rental6896 (1.1)783 (1.2)6113 (1.1)
Retail trade77,049 (12.7)10,742 (16.1)66,307 (12.2)
Transportation and warehousing29,114 (4.8)2807 (4.2)26,307 (4.9)
Utilities5874 (1.0)271 (0.4)5603 (1.0)
Wholesale trade20,452 (3.4)1668 (2.5)18,784 (3.5)
Occupation (NOC) <0.001
Manufacturing and Utilities33,087 (5.4)3289 (4.9)29,798 (5.5)
Art, Culture, Rec, and Sport10,699 (1.8)1960 (2.9)8739 (1.6)
Business, Finance, and Administration 97,202 (16.0)8006 (12.0)89,196 (16.5)
Education, Law, Social, and Government72,551 (11.9)5217 (7.8)67,334 (12.4)
Health50,006 (8.2)2769 (4.1)47,237 (8.7)
Management35,902 (5.9)1427 (2.1)34,475 (6.4)
Natural Resources, Agriculture16,349 (2.7)3357 (5.0)12,992 (2.4)
Natural and Applied Science42,053 (6.9)3286 (4.9)38,767 (7.2)
Sales and Service 157,631 (25.9)24,785 (37.1)132,846 (24.5)
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators 93,244 (15.3)12,679 (19.0)80,565 (14.9)
Union membership <0.001
Contract11,771 (1.9)1461 (2.2)10,310 (1.9)
Member188,665 (31.0)9964 (14.9)178,701 (33.0)
Non-unionized408,288 (67.1)55,350 (82.9)352,938 (65.1)
Firm size (employees) <0.001
<20115,292 (18.9)18,796 (28.1)96,496 (17.8)
20–99101,250 (16.6)13,665 (20.5)87,585 (16.2)
100–50089,964 (14.8)9505 (14.2)80,459 (14.8)
500+302,218 (49.6)24,809 (37.2)277,409 (51.2)
Job type <0.001
Contract41,380 (6.8)12,667 (19.0)28,713 (5.3)
Temporary21,414 (3.5)5782 (8.7)15,632 (2.9)
Permanent525,539 (86.3)40,164 (60.1)485,375 (89.6)
Seasonal20,391 (3.3)8162 (12.2)12,229 (2.3)
Hourly rate <0.001
CAD 15.00 and less150,664 (24.8)33,344 (49.9)117,320 (21.6)
CAD 15.25–CAD 22.00152,057 (25.0)16,436 (24.6)135,621 (25.0)
CAD 22.00–CAD 32.50152,576 (25.1)10,223 (15.3)142,353 (26.3)
> CAD 32.50153,427 (25.2)6772 (10.1)146,655 (27.1)
Season <0.001
Spring150,995 (24.8)13,964 (20.9)137,031 (25.3)
Summer155,501 (25.5)20,540 (30.8)134,961 (24.9)
Fall152,760 (25.1)17,480 (26.2)135,280 (25.0)
Winter149,468 (24.6)14,791 (22.2)134,677 (24.9)
Region <0.001
Atlantic92,331 (15.2)10,822 (16.2)81,509 (15.0)
British Columbia70,410 (11.6)8591 (12.9)61,819 (11.4)
Ontario163,118 (26.8)16,780 (25.1)146,338 (27.0)
Prairies176,954 (29.1)19,177 (28.7)157,777 (29.1)
Quebec105,911 (17.4)11,405 (17.1)94,506 (17.4)
1 n (%); 2 Pearson’s Chi-squared test; p: adjusted p-value using Bonferroni correction for multiple testing; NAICS: North American Industry Classification System Canada 2017 Version 1.0; NOC: National Occupational Classification 2016 Version 1.0.
Table 2. Proportion of new workers by sector (industry) and CAREX Canada exposure prevalence data, 2016.
Table 2. Proportion of new workers by sector (industry) and CAREX Canada exposure prevalence data, 2016.
IndustryNew Workers (%)Common ExposuresExposures-per-Worker Metric
Accommodation and Food Services20.2Night shift work, Gasoline engine exhaust, Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons0.44
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and hunting18.4Solar radiation, Glyphosate, 2,4-D1.29
Business, building & other support services17.6Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, Night shift work0.56
Construction16.6Solar radiation, Silica, Wood dust1.34
Information, culture and Recreation15.9Night shift work, Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, 0.21
Retail trade13.9Night shift work, Gasoline engine exhaust, Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons0.28
Other services12.5Gasoline engine exhaust, Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Welding fumes0.63
Real estate and rental11.4Gasoline engine exhaust, Night shift work, Solar radiation, 0.43
Professional, Science and Tech10.2Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, Ionizing radiation0.14
Mining, quarrying, Oil and Gas10.0Diesel engine exhaust, Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust1.18
Transportation and warehousing9.6Diesel engine exhaust, Gasoline engine exhaust, Solar radiation 1.61
Overall workforce11.0Night shift work, Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust0.56
Table 3. Proportion of new workers by occupation and CAREX Canada exposure prevalence data, 2016.
Table 3. Proportion of new workers by occupation and CAREX Canada exposure prevalence data, 2016.
Occupational GroupsNew Workers (%)Common ExposuresExposures-per-Worker Metric
Natural Resources, Agriculture and related production20.5Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, Diesel engine exhaust1.57
Art, culture, recreation and sport18.3Solar radiation, Night shift work, Chloroform0.19
Sales and service occupations15.7Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Gasoline engine exhaust, Night shift work 0.35
Trades, transport and equipment operators13.6Gasoline engine exhaust, Diesel engine exhaust, Solar radiation 1.98
Manufacturing and utilities9.9Night shift work, Benzene, Wood dust0.77
Business, Finance, and Administration8.2Night shift work, Gasoline engine exhaust, Solar radiation0.14
Natural and applied sciences and related occupations7.8Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, Night shift work0.20
Education, law and social, community and government services7.2Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust, Night shift work0.23
Health care5.5Night shift work, Antineoplastic agents, Ionizing radiation 0.38
Management4.0Solar radiation, Night shift work, Second hand smoke0.15
Overall workforce11.0Night shift work, Solar radiation, Gasoline engine exhaust0.56
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Katende, D.; Rydz, E.; Quinn, E.K.; Heer, E.; Shrestha, R.; Fazel, S.S.; Peters, C.E. Overrepresentation of New Workers in Jobs with Multiple Carcinogen Exposures in Canada. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21, 1013. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081013

AMA Style

Katende D, Rydz E, Quinn EK, Heer E, Shrestha R, Fazel SS, Peters CE. Overrepresentation of New Workers in Jobs with Multiple Carcinogen Exposures in Canada. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2024; 21(8):1013. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081013

Chicago/Turabian Style

Katende, Disann, Elizabeth Rydz, Emma K. Quinn, Emily Heer, Raissa Shrestha, Sajjad S. Fazel, and Cheryl E. Peters. 2024. "Overrepresentation of New Workers in Jobs with Multiple Carcinogen Exposures in Canada" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 21, no. 8: 1013. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081013

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop