Qualidade de vida no trabalho e fatores associados: um estudo com trabalhadores de uma universidade pública

Abstract

Introduction: Quality of Work Life (QWL) is still underexplored in public institutions. Objective: To analyze the perception of workers at a Public University in the State of Minas Gerais regarding QWL and assess the sociodemographic and occupational predictors of QWL. Method: Field research, cross-sectional, quantitative. Data collection occurred through a QWL evaluation questionnaire, developed by Ferreira (2011), consisting of 61 Likert-scale items with 10 response points, assessing five structuring factors (Working Conditions, Work Organization, Socioprofessional Relationships, Professional Recognition and Growth, and Work-Life Social Link), and a questionnaire with sociodemographic and occupational data, made available in digital format from March to August 2022 for all workers. Results: 488 workers participated, with the majority (63.9%) being women, over 41 years old (53.5%), with higher/specialization/master's education (51.8%), statutory employees (administrative staff) (58.8%), stationed in the Rectorate / Vice Rectorate / Institutes / Rotating / Placement / Municipalities (71.9%), and engaged in on-site work (69.7%). The factor with the lowest average was Work Organization, and the one with the highest average was the Work-Life Social Link. Having been absent due to a work-related accident/illness predicted a lower average in the factors of working conditions (p=0.015), work-life social link (p=0.005), socioprofessional relationships (p=0.031), and professional recognition (p=0.039). Placement in the HC/Clinics predicted a lower average in the factors of working conditions (p=0.015), socioprofessional relationships (p=0.004), and work organization (p=0.001). Remote work predicted a lower average in working conditions (p=0.001), socioprofessional relationships (p=0.001), and work organization (p=0.006). Being a statutory employee (teaching staff) predicted a lower average in the factors of professional recognition (p=0.047) and working conditions (p=0.030), with the latter also being predicted by doctoral/postdoctoral education (mostly composed of faculty) (p=0.030). Conclusion: The results provide information that will enable the planning of interventions based on real needs and different groups, contributing to the development of a fair and effective QWL program capable of promoting the health of these workers.