Complex Relationships between Injustice and Justice in Organizations: Reducing Child Welfare Workers' Burnout

Background: Organizational justice refers to workers’ perceptions of fairness, encompassing distributive (equal distribution of outcomes), procedural (fair decision-making processes), and interactional (fair and respectful treatment) justice. Organizational justice can affect child welfare workers’ occupational stress, including burnout. However, previous studies conceptualize dimensions of organizational justice differently. Some view injustice as a stressor, whereas others view justice as a buffer to prevent stress. Further research is needed to explore whether injustice differs from justice and how injustice and justice interact and contribute to child welfare workers’ stress. To this end, this study aims to examine whether procedural and distributive justice buffer or dampen the impact of supervisors’ interactional injustice (i.e., abusive supervision) on child welfare workers’ burnout.

Methods: This study analyzed survey data from the third wave of the Florida Study of Professionals for Safe Families, a statewide, longitudinal cohort study of child welfare workers hired between September 2015 through December 2016 (n = 1,500). The wave 3 survey assessed individual, organizational, and occupational characteristics and the well-being of child welfare workers after about 12 months post-baseline. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to generate items that measured workers’ perceptions of abusive supervision (5 items, alpha = .79), procedural justice (4 items, alpha = .77), and distributive justice (4 items, alpha = .62). Workers’ self-reported burnout was measured by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Multiple regression was performed to examine the main and interaction effects of abusive supervision, procedural justice, and distributive justice on workers’ burnout, with a follow-up test to probe the interaction effects using the PROCESS Macro for SPSS 24.

Results: Multiple regression showed that abusive supervision (B = 1.31, p < .05) was positively associated with child welfare workers’ burnout, whereas procedural justice (B = -.39, p < .001) and distributive justice (B = -.39, p < .001) were negatively associated. Procedural justice significantly moderated the association between abusive supervision and burnout (B = 1.19, p < .05), such that the impact of abusive supervision on burnout was strengthened as procedural justice increased. Another interaction effect showed that procedural justice was more effective in reducing burnout when distributive justice was high (B = -.89, p < .01).

Conclusions: Findings suggest that interactional injustice, specifically abusive supervision, is a significant stressor that increases child welfare workers’ burnout. Procedural and distributive justice function as protective factors that can reduce burnout. Furthermore, the effectiveness of reducing burnout is enhanced when procedural and distributive justices are high simultaneously. In addition, findings highlight complex relationships between injustice and justice. The negative outcome of abusive supervision is not buffered by procedural justice. Rather, workers’ burnout worsens with the perceived discrepancy between levels of interpersonal justice and procedural justice. This study points to the importance of balanced efforts to ensure all types of organizational justice in child welfare organizations, maximize the benefits of organizational justice, and prevent burnout resulting from discrepancies between injustice and justice.