Current considerations related to physiological differences between the sexes and physical employment standards.

Delia Roberts,Deborah L Gebhardt,Tanja C Roy,Steven E Gaskill,Marilyn A Sharp

doi:10.1139/apnm-2015-0540

Abstract

The use of physical employment standards (PES) has helped ensure that workers have the physical attributes necessary to complete their jobs in a safe and efficient manner. However, PES used in the selection processes have not always reflected the critical physical requirements of the job tasks. Women generally have smaller anthropometric stature than men, less muscle mass, and therefore less strength, power, and endurance, particularly in the upper body. Nonetheless, these attributes in themselves are not valid grounds for exclusion from employment in physically demanding occupations. Selection standards based upon size or strength, irrespective of the job requirements, have resulted in the barring of capable women from physically demanding jobs, claims of gender bias, and costly litigations. To ensure all individuals are provided with equal access to employment, accurate characterization of the critical physical requirements of the job is paramount. This paper summarizes the existing research related to disparities between the sexes that contribute to sex differences in job performance in physically demanding occupations including physical and legal factors. Strategies for mitigating these differences in the setting of PES and the meeting of minimum employment standards are discussed. Where available, injury rates for women and men in physically demanding occupations are presented and the etiology considered. Finally, areas for further research are identified.

Highlights

Throughout history women have performed tasks involving strenuous physical labour (Barlow et al 1993)
It may have been the institution of physical employment standards (PES) that inadvertently began to re-open physically demanding occupations to western women
Manual materials handling performance in both men and women is increased by approximately 5% to 35% depending on the type of task, as well as the specific exercises, duration, and intensity of the training program (Knapik and Gerber 1996; Harman et al 2008)

Summary

Introduction

Throughout history women have performed tasks involving strenuous physical labour (Barlow et al 1993). It is important to note, that stature is often associated with physical capacities, size does not predict safe and efficient critical job-related task performance, and the use of body dimensions is not a legally defensible means of setting PES (Jackson 1994). The impact of a high V O2max on repetitive performance of physically demanding tasks suggests that the use of minimum required standards for V O2max may be an acceptable assessment metric for PES, if the aerobic requirements of the job are accurately defined.

Results

Conclusion