A survey of the work and sleep patterns of Great Barrier Reef Pilots

Results and Discussion

8.0 FEELINGS WHILE WORKING ON THE BRIDGE

The potential impact of fatigue on performance and accidents has been highlighted by several recent reports. For instance, the US Coast Guard Research and Development Centre identified that 16 percent of critical vessel casualties and 33 percent of personnel injury casualties occurring in US coastal waters between 1 July and 31 December 1995, had some fatigue contribution (McCallum et al. 1996). The Japan Maritime Research Institute (1993) documented that ‘lack of alertness’ and ‘dozing during navigation’ accounted for approximately 53 percent of groundings and strandings and 38 percent of collisions occurring between 1985 and 1991. Additionally, while official statistics indicate 9.2 percent of shipping casualties occurring in Australian waters between January 1994 and January 1998 were fatigue-related, some authors have suggested that a figure closer to 30 percent would be more realistic when performance impairments due to chronic fatigue are considered (Filor 1998). These, and other findings (Sanquist et al. 1996), seem to indicate that fatigue is a widespread problem in the maritime industry and that a significant number of marine accidents are fatigue-related. Thus, the examination of experiences of fatigue during bridge work was highly relevant to the present study.

The purpose of this section was to gain a general impression of the experiences of Great Barrier Reef pilots while working on the bridge. Where appropriate, comparisons between the beginning and end of work assignments were made. Items addressed feelings of tension and fatigue, factors contributing to fatigue, strategies used by pilots to reduce fatigue, the extent of fatigue-related performance decrements and periods of vulnerability to performance decrements across the 24 hour cycle. While it is acknowledged that a high degree of variation exists from one pilotage assignment to another, respondents were encouraged to provide responses based on average experiences.

8.1 Tension

Respondents were asked to rate how frequently they experienced feelings of tension while working on the bridge, at the beginning and end of a work assignment. Table 8.0 shows the item content and distribution of scores for this measure. Approximately half the sample reported ‘never’ or ‘almost never’ feeling tense at the beginning and end of a work assignment. Most of the other pilots reported that they ‘seldom’; or ‘sometimes’ felt tense during bridge work, while a small minority (9%) reported ‘usually’ or ‘almost always’ feeling tense at the beginning or end of a work assignment. Further analysis of the data revealed no significant time effect in the frequency of tension and/or anxiety between the beginning and end of a work assignment (p = 0.062).

Commentaries from pilots indicated that feelings of tension on the bridge increased when bridge teams demonstrated poor navigational skills and low competency levels. Additionally, the competitive environment in which Great Barrier Reef pilotage operations are now performed was also reported as contributing to greater levels of stress and tension during bridge work.

8.2 Fatigue

Also presented in Table 8.0 is the distribution of scores for the frequency of experiencing fatigue while working on the bridge. At the beginning of a work assignment, approximately 71% of the sample reported ‘never’ or ‘almost never’ experiencing fatigue or tiredness, while the remaining 29% of the sample reported experiencing fatigued ‘seldom’ or ‘sometimes’. However, at the end of a work assignment, approximately 24% reported ‘never’ or ‘almost never’ feeling fatigued, 56% reported they ‘seldom’ or ‘sometimes’ felt fatigued and 21% indicated they ‘usually’ or ‘almost always’ felt fatigued. These changes across time were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and indicate that feelings of tiredness and fatigue are more frequently experienced during bridge work at the end of work assignments than at the beginning.

Table 8.0 Distribution of scores across the items comprising tension and fatigue on the bridge

8.3 Onset of fatigue

To gain further understanding about the onset of feelings of tiredness and fatigue during bridge work, respondents were asked to indicate how long after beginning work on the bridge they experienced fatigue. Table 8.1 shows the distribution of scores for this measure.

The majority of respondents indicated that fatigue was experienced either ‘towards the end’ or ‘never’ at the beginning of a work assignment. However, at the end of a work assignment, most pilots experienced fatigue ‘towards the end’ or ‘midway’ through the bridge period. Further analysis of the frequency data revealed strong evidence (p = 0.002) that fatigue on the bridge occurred earlier at the end, than the beginning of a work assignment.

The present findings of reported fatigue were not unexpected given the knowledge of work and sleep patterns of pilots. Depending on the shipping route, work assignments of Great Barrier Reef pilots can vary from 12 to 60 hours in duration, with around 50% of ship time being undertaken at night. These findings, combined with the fact that sleep patterns and duration are significantly compromised while at sea, most likely contribute to increased fatigue towards the end of work assignments. Specific details of Great Barrier Reef pilotage work and sleep across the 24 hour cycle is required to confirm this association.

Table 8.1 Distribution of scores for the onset of fatigue at the beginning and end of a work assignment

8.4 Factors contributing to fatigue on the bridge

The following items were designed to examine the extent to which a number of pilotage work specific factors contributed to fatigue on the bridge. The factors have been previously identified as potential contributors to fatigue, decreased alertness, and performance decrements (Couper 1996; Sanquist et al. 1996). Respondents were asked to rate the degree to which each of the 13 factors contributed to their levels of fatigue. Factor analysis did not provide a clear grouping so the items have been treated singly.

Table 8.2 shows the item content and distribution of scores across the 13 items. Approximately 30% of respondents indicated items such as the length of time on task, length of tour, tour route, crew competency, sleeping facilities and environmental conditions contributed ‘very much’ to feeling fatigued while on the bridge.

For 65% of respondents, factors such as boredom, lack of sleep, workload, and time of day contributed ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’ to fatigue. Issues such as poor bridge team competency and poor sleeping facilities have also been reported as contributors to fatigue levels in comments from pilots.

Interestingly, two thirds of the group reported that weather and sea conditions did not contribute to fatigue. This finding may be due to the fact that pilots are well accustomed to poor weather, and their time spent at sea is relatively short. Previous survey results of Australian seafarers have also shown that poor weather and rough seas do not greatly impact on stress levels (Parker et al. 1997).

That no single contributing factor was clearly identifiable as contributing to fatigue highlights the multi-factorial nature of this condition. Most respondents reported that many of the factors contributed ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’ to fatigue.

Table 8.2 Distribution of scores across the thirteen items comprising the contributing factors to fatigue scale

8.5 Strategies used to combat fatigue

Items in this section covered six strategies used to combat fatigue. Respondents were asked to rate "how effective the strategies were in combating fatigue during bridge work". Factor analysis did not provide a clear grouping so the items have been treated singly. Table 8.3 shows the item content and distribution of scores across the six items.

Of the strategies listed, respondents indicated that stretching and performing light exercise was the most useful technique for combating fatigue. Ninety-four percent of the sample rates this strategy as either being ‘quite a bit’ or ‘very’ effective. Another popular strategy was taking a quick shower, with 80% of respondents rating this as being ‘quite a bit’ to ‘very’ effective. At the other end of the scale, rotating duties and tasks was not considered by many as being very effective in alleviating fatigue. The two strategies of ‘drinking coffee/soft drinks; eating candy/sweets’ and ‘keeping busy’ were considered as being somewhat effective, with 76% of the sample rating these strategies as being between ‘a little’ to ‘quite’ effective. Pilot’s use of caffeine to combat fatigue was similar to caffeine consumption by long haul truck drivers for this purpose (Arnold & Hartley 1998; Williamson et al. 1992). Overall, the majority of pilots considered that most strategies were effective to varying degrees in overcoming fatigue. Active rather than passive strategies were perceived to be more effective.

Table 8.3 Distribution of scores across the six items comprising strategies used to combat fatigue

8.6 Performance decrement on the bridge

To gain an impression of the degree to which fatigue related performance decrements are experienced, pilots were asked: (I) whether fatigue caused their performance to decrease; and (ii) how severely their performance decreased. Table 8.4 presents the distribution of scores for these two items.

The majority of respondents (71%) indicated that fatigue contributed to performance decrements ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’. This finding appears to be consistent with the fact that there are a number of potential fatigue factors present in pilotage work. For example, the work schedule analysis highlighted factors such as irregular work hours, irregular breaks, long on-duty periods, night work and disrupted sleep. Two respondents indicated tiredness did not contribute to performance decrements at all.

With regard to the severity of performance decrements, 18 pilots (53%) gave ratings between ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’, while 3 respondents (9%) indicated performance did not decrease ‘at all’.

Table 8.4 Distribution of scores for the two items relating to the extent of performance decrement on the bridge

8.7 Factors affecting performance levels on bridge tasks

Respondents were asked a series of 10 questions which examined to what extent fatigue-related factors affected bridge performance. The factors examined have previously been associated with fatigue (Couper 1996; Dinges 1992; McCallum et al. 1996). For example, impaired decision making, narrowing of attention, lowered levels of vigilance and memory problems are but a few of the ways in which fatigue related performance decrements may manifest (Couper 1996; Dinges 1992). On the basis of factor analysis, three sub-scales were identified.

8.7.1 Performing tasks and making decisions

This sub-scale comprised of three items. Table 8.5 shows the item content and distribution of scores across the response categories. The majority of respondents reported that trouble making decisions and trouble with simple tasks did not affect performance during bridge work, while a minority group considered that these tasks affected performance ‘a little’. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88.

Table 8.5 Distribution of scores and item content for the three items comprising the performing tasks and making decisions scale

8.7.2 Concentration

This sub-scale comprised of two items. The items and their content are shown in Table 8.6. Trouble concentrating and maintaining attention was considered by approximately 71% of pilots as affecting bridge performance to some extent, while memory problems were rated by 66% of the sample as contributing ‘a little’ to decreased performance levels. The remaining respondents did not believe either of these factors caused performance decrements. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.75.

Table 8.6 Distribution of scores and item content for the two items comprising the concentration scale

8.7.3 Physical effects

The third sub-scale identified comprised of five items. These items and their content are shown in Table 8.7. In general, most pilots considered that the physical tasks listed within the sub-scale did not affect bridge performance at all, while a minority group indicated ‘a little’ effect. The only exception to these results were for the items ‘body motions’ and ‘problems with sense of balance’, with 1 pilot rating these items as affecting bridge performance ‘quite a bit’. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.85.

The absence of any notable impact on physical tasks is consistent with findings showing that cognitive tasks display greater effects from fatigue and performance decrements than motor tasks (Rosekind et al. 1996; Sanquist et al.,1996).

Table 8.7 Distribution of scores and item content for the six items comprising the physical effects scale

8.8 Vulnerability to performance decrements across 24 hours

Alertness and performance exhibit distinct circadian rhythms, with both of these attributes falling off during the early morning hours, and to a lesser extent, in mid afternoon. As a consequence, working during these time periods is associated with an increased risk of performance decrements and accidents (Brown 1994; Folkard 1997; Summala & Mikkola 1994).

To assess whether Great Barrier Reef pilots were aware of any changes in performance over time, respondents were asked to rate their vulnerability to performance decrements while working on the bridge. Table 8.8 shows the item content and distribution of scores across the six four-hour periods.

The majority of respondents indicated they were ‘not at all’ vulnerable to performance decrements during the hours between 0800 and 2000 (i.e. predominantly day time hours). However, between the hours of 2400 and 0800, approximately 50% of respondents indicated their vulnerability to performance decrements ranged from ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’, while 2 respondents (6%) indicated that they were ‘ very’ vulnerable to performance decrements between the hours of 2400 and 0400. This pattern in results is consistent with established circadian variations in performance.

That at least half of the group reported being vulnerable to performance decrements during the early hours of the morning suggests educating personnel about fatigue symptoms and how to minimise its impact could be beneficial.

Table 8.8 Distribution of scores across the six time periods comprising the vulnerability to performance scale

8.9 Pilotage specific experiences

The 10 items included in this section were designed to assess the prevalence of specific experiences in Great Barrier Reef pilotage work. These experiences were included after consultation between Pilot Advisory Group members and the research team. In general, the items addressed issues specific to pilotage duties and the changing technological and operational conditions encountered by pilots. Respondents were asked to rate "how frequently each of the situations arose in pilotage work". On the basis of factor analysis four sub-scales were identified.

8.9.1 Boredom

This sub-scale comprised of two items. The item content and distribution of scores across the response categories are shown in Table 8.9. Twenty two pilots representing 65% of the sample indicated that the nature of pilotage work was ‘never to seldom’ conducive to falling asleep, while 11 pilots (32%) considered pilotage work as ‘sometimes’ being conducive to falling asleep. One pilot indicated pilotage work was ‘usually’ conducive to falling asleep.

With regards to the prevalence of boredom in pilotage work, 11 pilots (32%) gave ratings of ‘never to seldom’, 50% indicated pilotage work was ‘sometimes’ boring and 6 pilots (18%) indicated it was ‘usually or almost always’ boring. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.69.

Studies have shown that situations of work underload typically result in reduced levels of arousal and boredom. The high levels of vigilance, watchkeeping, and monitoring required of pilots requires their constant attention but these functions may provide minimal task variety. Consequently, additional effort is required to maintain appropriate levels of arousal (Costa 1993; Dyer-Smith 1983 ) and this in turn causes greater fatigue levels. The situation is exacerbated during night work where light workloads increase pre-existing fatigue from other factors such as circadian dissociation or long working hours (Luna 1997).

Table 8.9 Distribution of scores across the two items comprising the boredom scale

8.9.2 Critical need to be alert

The second sub-scale identified in the factor analysis comprised of three items. The item content and distribution of scores across the response categories are shown in Table 8.10. Almost all pilots (97%) considered that pilotage work was ‘usually to always’ dependent upon not making errors in judgement. Judgments are based on local knowledge of the shipping region, tides and weather, combined with high levels of skill and experience in navigation and ship handling tasks. Similarly, all respondents indicated that the alertness level of the pilot and bridge team was ‘usually’ to ‘always’ an important factor in ship safety.

Almost 60% of pilots indicated that assumptions about the role of technological advances ‘sometimes’ led to complacency among the bridge team, with approximately 30% reporting that complacency was ‘usually’ to ‘always’ associated with the reliance on high-technology equipment. Commentaries from pilots indicated that in some cases bridge teams rely almost totally on equipment and fail to perform basic skills such as lookout duties. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.57.

Table 8.10 Distribution of scores across the three items comprising the critical need to be alert scale

8.9.3 Ship safety

This sub-scale comprised of two items. Table 8.11 shows the item content and distribution of scores across the two items. Forty-seven percent of respondents indicated risk taking strategies were ‘sometimes’ to ‘usually’ prevalent in pilotage work, while 6% of respondents indicated they were ‘almost always’ to ‘always’ prevalent. The remaining 47% reported that risk taking prevailed ‘never’ to ‘seldom’. The majority of the sample (82%) considered that boredom impacted on ship safety between ‘sometimes and always’. The reliability of the index as determined by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.42.

Table 8.11 Distribution of scores across the three items comprising the ship safety scale

8.9.4 Common fatigue

The fourth sub-scale identified comprised of three items. The item content and distribution of scores across the three response categories is shown in Table 8.10. Nineteen pilots (56%) considered fatigue to be ‘sometimes to always’ widespread in pilotage work, while 15 respondents (44%) indicated that the prevalence of fatigue ranged between ‘seldom and never’. The analysis of the work schedule files highlighted the presence of a number of potential fatigue factors within the work of Great Barrier Reef pilots, thereby suggesting that fatigue may be prevalent at least some of the time.

With regards to the impact of economics on shipping safety, pilots responses were fairly evenly spread across the categories. Thirty-two percent of the sample felt that economic and commercial pressures ‘never to seldom’ impacted on safety, 35% believed it ‘sometimes to usually’ impacted on safety while 32% indicated these issues ‘almost always to always’ impacted on safety.

Since 1993, competition between pilotage companies has become an integral part of pilotage work in the Great Barrier Reef region. Each company is trying to secure enough work to make their operation economically viable. Comments from pilots strongly indicated that commercialisation of pilotage had negatively affected safety. For example, respondents reported that in some instances substandard ships, equipment and safety breaches were not reported for fear of the pilotage company losing a client. Competition between pilotage operators has also resulted in pilots having to work more in order to maintain an adequate income, which in turn could negatively affect safety. Additionally, international data has suggested that some shipping companies are reducing running costs by minimising the amount of maintenance and upgrading work being performed on their vessels (National Research Council 1994).

Some authors have advocated against competition in marine pilotage operations. For example, Sparks (1998) has indicated that competition is incompatible with compulsory pilotage; it is bad for the public, for the shipping industry and the pilotage profession. Competition may compromise safety, particularly when pilots are expected to exercise independent judgment and resist pressures which are inconsistent with the interests of safety (Sparks 1998).

The third item included in the common fatigue sub-scale related to pilotage management’s role in developing work schedules which promote pilot well-being and ship safety. Most pilots (65%) reported that pilotage management ‘usually to always’ considered pilot well-being and ship safety; however 7 respondents (21%) indicated this was ‘never to seldom’ the case. Pilotage management is directly responsible for allocating work to pilots in such a way that there is equality between pilots in workload, rest breaks and income. Thus, while pilots are often questioned about fatigue following an incident, it should be remembered that pilots follow instructions from management personnel in terms of the number of work assignments to be performed across a tour.

Table 8.12 Distribution of scores across the three items comprising the common fatigue scale

8.10 Summary

Feelings of tension were not particularly problematic for the current group of pilots, as most respondents reported feeling tense only ‘seldom to sometimes’ during work assignments. Fatigue, however, was somewhat more prevalent, especially towards the end of work assignments. The analysis of factors contributing to fatigue highlighted the multi-factorial nature of this condition. Boredom, lack of sleep, workload and time of day were common factors considered by pilots as contributing to fatigue ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’. Active strategies were more frequently used to combat fatigue, with ‘stretching and performing light exercise’ and ‘taking a shower’ the most frequently used techniques.

Fatigue was felt by most pilots to contribute to bridge performance decrements ‘a little’ to ‘quite a bit’; however the severity of the performance decrements were not reported as being especially great. In particular, performance decrements seemed to manifest in the form of experiencing increased difficulty in concentrating and maintaining attention and memory problems. Physical tasks were generally not affected to any significant extent. Pilots reported being most vulnerable to reductions in performance levels between 2400 and 0800 hours.

Pilotage work was considered by approximately half the sample as being boring some of the time, while most pilots indicated that boredom impacted on ship safety 'sometimes to always’. Correct judgment and high levels of alertness were considered to be important factors in pilotage work and ship safety. Fatigue was considered by around half the respondents as ‘sometimes to always’ being prevalent in pilotage work. Most pilots felt that economic and commercial pressures had some impact on safety issues.

9.0 JOB SATISFACTION

Two items were included in the questionnaire to provide information on the level of job satisfaction/dissatisfaction experienced by Great Barrier Reef pilots. The questions required respondents to list the five best and worst features of working as a Great Barrier Reef pilot. Pilots were also asked whether, with hindsight, they would join the Great Barrier Reef pilotage service.

9.1 Best Features of Great Barrier Reef pilotage work

A listing of the common themes representing the best features of Great Barrier Reef pilotage work are shown in Table 9.0.

Table 9.0 Frequency of the best features of working as a Great Barrier Reef pilots

Job satisfaction (which encompassed comments revolving around satisfaction with a job well done) was the most frequently rated best feature of pilotage work. The satisfaction level with pilotage work was related to the level of responsibility, mental stimulation and challenges associated with navigating ships through the Great Barrier Reef region. Pilots also enjoyed the variability of ship types, crew and weather associated with pilotage duties.

Further rewarding features of the work included being part of a group that shared the same professional background, utilising one’s ship handling and navigational skills and meeting and working with professional international seafarers. Moreover, being self-employed and independent from the usually daily shipboard life were also rated highly.

The current job satisfaction levels are consistent with previous reports of job satisfaction in a sample of the present pilots. In a recent investigation of Australian seafarers, Great Barrier Reef pilots reported higher levels of job satisfaction than other seafaring groups (Parker et al. 1997). Specifically, job satisfaction in this earlier data was related to the level of responsibility, status and authority associated with marine pilotage work.

Other pilotage groups have also indicated high job satisfaction levels. For example, pilots from the United Kingdom (Shipley 1978), the Port Phillip region of Australia (Berger 1984) and the United States (Sparks 1992) have indicated high levels of job satisfaction relating to the status, authority, responsibility and utilisation of their high levels of technical skills.

9.2 Worst Features of Great Barrier Reef Pilotage Work

Presented in Table 9.1 are a listing of common themes representing the worst features of working as a Great Barrier Reef pilot.

Table 9.1 Distribution of the worst features of working as a Great Barrier Reef pilot

The most frequently expressed factor causing dissatisfaction amongst Great Barrier Reef pilots related to financial issues arising directly or indirectly from the recent commercial changes in the structure of pilotage operations. This factor totalled just over 23% of all comments within this section. Some common financial concerns included the level and irregularity of income, absence of indexation, and allocation of sufficient funds for superannuation.

Time away from family and the disruption pilotage work causes to family life were also an unattractive feature of the job. This finding is consistent with the results of previous studies in which pilots documented discontent over the home and away nature of their work (Berger 1984; de Vries-Grierer 1982; Parker et al.1997; Shipley 1978; Shipley & Cook 1980; Sparks 1992).

The frequency analysis highlighted that most of the unsatisfactory features of Great Barrier Reef pilotage work related to extrinsic aspects of the job rather than intrinsic factors. Pilots indicated factors associated with changes in pilotage had negatively impacted on job satisfaction. For example, the role and attitude of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority in implementing changes, and the commercial parameters of deregulation have resulted in feelings of uncertainty relating to pilotage work and career stability. Similarly, previous research indicated that structural changes in the airline industry negatively affected career satisfaction of airline pilots (Little et al. 1990).

Other negative features of Great Barrier Reef pilotage related to substandard ships and bridge teams, unhygienic conditions on board some vessels and concern over the impact of competition on safety issues.

9.3 Rejoining the Great Barrier Reef pilotage service

Very few pilots indicated they would definitely join the Great Barrier Reef pilotage service if they were to start their pilotage careers again. Approximately a third of the sample considered they would have second thoughts, while the remaining pilots reported they would definitely not join. These findings highlight that a certain level of discontent currently exists amongst members of this service.

9.4 Summary

The best feature of working as a Great Barrier Reef pilot was the job satisfaction associated with a job well done at the completion of a work assignment. The level of responsibility, mental stimulation and utilisation of high level navigational and ship handling skills were also rated highly and related to the overall satisfaction levels. Job dissatisfaction revolved around the impact of competition on income levels, irregular payment for work and safety issues. Time away from family also caused some dissatisfaction.

10.0 DYADIC ADJUSTMENT

The quality of interpersonal relationships and particularly the relationship with a spouse or partner can substantially influence quality of life and the ways in which people cope with their working and private lives. The Spanier Dyadic Adjustment Scale was designed to assess the quality of a relationship for both married and cohabiting couples. The item content and distribution of scores across the seven items is detailed in Table 10. Respondents were asked "How well do the following statements describe the relationship between you and your partner"?

The distribution of responses to this series of questions was skewed towards the end of the scale indicating satisfaction with the dyadic relationship. Twenty-seven pilots (86%) indicated things went well between themselves and their partner ‘most to all of the time’. Only 1 respondent (3%) believed things were never going well, and one respondent (3%) was considering divorce. A further 5% expressed difficulty confiding in their partners. Just over 30% of respondents felt that they ‘got on each others nerves’ at least some of the time. In contrast to the other aspects of the questionnaire, there were no qualitative comments on the quality of marital relationships, perhaps suggesting that respondents found it difficult to comment on personal aspects of their life.

For the purposes of this study the level of dyadic satisfaction was treated as a dichotomous variable. A scale score of between 10 and 40 was considered to represent a low to moderate level of satisfaction with the relationship. A score between 41 and 50 was considered to indicate a high level of satisfaction. On this basis, seven respondents (approximately 25% of the sample) reported a moderate to low level of satisfaction with their relationship, while 21 respondents (75% of the sample) reported a high level of satisfaction

Stressful interpersonal relationships can have a profound affect on personal well-being and workplace performance. Previous studies on maritime pilots (Berger 1984; de Vries-Grierer 1982; Parker et al. 1997; Shipley & Cook 1980;) and other Australian Seafarers (Parker et al. 1997) have highlighted the important role of a stable home life in a mariner’s work. Similarly, literature from the aviation industry has shown that the pilot’s spouse is a key figure in promoting flight safety. A stable marriage with a supportive spouse or partner enables the aviator to perform more reliably and effectively (Cooper & Sloan, 1985; Karlins et al. 1989). These authors have also shown that when a home and away pattern of work exists, there are considerable positive or negative interactions between a pilot’s home life, work situation, work performance and well-being (Cooper & Sloan 1985; Karlins et al. 1989).

Table 10.0 Distribution of scores across the seven items comprising the marital satisfaction scale

Accessibility | Copyright & Privacy
ABN 65 377 938 320