The third iteration of NSH’s COVID-19 Survey received fewer responses than the first two surveys, closing August 3rd with 192 responses, compared to the original survey’s 704. This survey asked the same questions as the second iteration of the survey, in which “Returned to Work” was added as an option for work situation, to gauge the number of people returning to employment. Though there were fewer responses, the primary demographics for the respondents remained the same, with respondents from all areas, but with a majority being technicians/scientists from community hospitals from within the US and Canada.
More than half of the respondents (63%) had not experienced any job loss. This is slightly down, but very close to the 66% reported in the second survey. The number who reported reduced work was down, from 17% to 10.42%. Similarly, furloughed/laid off was down from 8% to 6.77%. The number who reported having lost work but were now returned was up from 11.4% in the second survey, to 16.67% in this survey.
Travel remains restricted, with only 14.66% reporting that there had been no restrictions placed on their travel. The number who reported that their employer has banned all travel is up from 28.5% to 34.55%.
Region V is reporting one of the smallest back to work segments. Region V had been reporting some of the highest levels of layoffs during the first two iterations of the survey. Reduced work is only being seen in certain Regions, for example, Regions I, II, V, and VI didn’t have anyone who reported still being on reduced work. Job loss was also significantly down in most of the regions. Region III did not report any job loss, but had higher percentages of reduced work and those returning to work.
As in previous versions of the survey, supervisors and managers were less likely to be furloughed or experience job loss. There were large segments of these individual who are back to work and experiencing no change. With fewer respondents there were very small segments of educators and industry sales, but these groups also experienced no change.
The results of the third survey are consistent with the first. The first survey showed those in private labs more likely to be furloughed or reduced work, which explains why there is a sizeable private lab segment in this survey’s back to work category. Research/University respondents were more likely to have experienced no change to their job, as opposed to being furloughed or reduced work, and have now returned to work as well.
This question was expanded upon in the second survey to determine why people were not allowed to travel. Private labs were less likely to ban travel completely, however, there were some that were impacted by budget cuts and state restrictions. Community hospitals were more likely to have employees quarantined upon return from travel, either by the employer or by the state. Those in research were more likely to ban travel or have budget cuts preventing travel.