Integrating Business Ethics into Occupational Health and Safety: An Evaluation Framework for Sustainable Risk Management

Abstract

Occupational health and safety (OHS) is a critical component of sustainable work practices, guaranteeing employee well-being in parallel with minimizing business operation threats. The integration of ethics in OHS practices, however, poses a major obstacle, given that most businesses prefer complying with regulations rather than adopting proactive, ethically directed risk avoidance. This study employs a systemic process in assessing business ethics integration in practices of OHS, emphasizing leadership, employee engagement, and precautionary safety. This quantitative survey research sought to gauge the utilization of OHS practices among firms in the construction industry. This study examined critical factors such as employee training, absenteeism patterns, wellness programs, and usage of safety practices. Our study outcomes identify a reduction in accidents in workplaces, lower absenteeism, and improved monitoring of employee well-being when a blend of systemic safety programs and ethically directed strategies is utilized. This study emphasizes the imperative of a proactive, ethically comprehensive strategy in practices of OHS, which calls for improved leadership, constant safety learning, and enhanced wellness programs. The findings contribute to the development of sustainable risk management frameworks, offering practical insights for businesses, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to improve workplace safety culture.

1. Introduction

Occupational health and safety (OHS) forms a critical part of modern-day organizational practice, with a strong focus placed on protecting workers’ welfare, compliance with legislative frameworks, and enhancing overall business viability [1,2]. Business ethics form a basis for an ethical model in which companies can conduct responsible business towards all interested parties, including workers, buyers, communities, and the environment [1,2]. As both subjects have been researched in detail individually, the integration of both subjects—namely, ethical aspects pertaining to workplace health and safety—has received relatively little academic analysis. Traditionally, the effective development of frameworks for OHS has been seen predominantly as a technical and operational issue, with direction drawn from legislative frameworks and international standards, such as ISO 45001:2018, and directives drawn from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) [3,4]. Nevertheless, workplace safety involves more than compliance alone; it is underpinned in its most basic form by an ethical imperative. Organizations have a moral imperative to establish secure working environments and to conduct fair, respectful, and humane treatment towards workers [5,6]. Principles such as transparency, accountability, and diversity have a significant role in enhancing trust, motivation, and collaboration—factors critical to successful and effective OHS programs [7,8].

The relationship between ethics in business and occupational health and safety (OHS) is particularly important in high-risk sectors, including construction, manufacturing, and medical care. Empirical research has proven that companies with sound ethical leadership and concern for workers’ welfare have fewer workplace incidents of hazards, together with high job satisfaction and reduced workforce attrition [9,10]. On the other hand, ignoring the ethical aspects of OHS can have disastrous consequences, such as workplace accidents, loss of goodwill, and legal consequences, such as in the case of Bangladesh’s Rana Plaza disaster [11,12]. Although its critical role cannot be overestimated, current frameworks have focused almost exclusively on compliance and technical controls with regard to hazards, at best ignoring and at worst sidelining broader ethical factors. Several obstacles have been researched, including prioritizing financial gain over workers’ safety, the unequal application of protective interventions between workers, and a lack of a participatory workplace for deciding about OHS [13,14]. All these barriers serve to illustrate the imperative for a complete model combining ethical values in its consideration for OHS frameworks, not simply for workers’ safety but for workers’ mental and psychological safety, too.

This study seeks to respond to gaps in modern practice through suggesting an evaluation model that incorporates ethical values in the sphere of occupational health and safety (OHS). In detail, objectives include evaluation of current use of ethical values in OHS practice in a range of industries, determination of critical values such as fairness, accountability, and transparency, and formulation of a workable model for companies to apply ethics in harmony with OHS policies and practice. To contribute to a deeper level of awareness regarding ethics and its positive impact on OHS and, in turn, towards safer and fairer working environments, this study seeks to make a meaningful contribution towards both practitioner and policymaker communities. In addition, through the examination of ethics and workplace safety interrelationships, this study addresses a significant gap in current studies in terms of technical and operational dimensions of ethics and workplace safety [15,16]. As such, therefore, this research holds high potential for contributing to workplace welfare, developing trust and job satisfaction for workers, and enhancing organizational resilience. In addition, the integration of ethics in practice in OHS can enable companies to respond effectively to increasingly high compliance requirements and social accountability requirements [17,18].

The organization of this paper is such that Section 2 involves a review of theoretical and empirical literature in both business ethics and occupational health and safety (OHS) and identifies gaps and integration opportunities. Section 3 describes the methodology adopted, namely a survey via a questionnaire addressed to OHS professionals and managers. Section 4 describes the survey results, with a focus placed on key findings in relation to the level of current integration in ethics in OHS practice. Section 5 considers the implications of such findings and proposes an evaluation model for use in integration practice. Finally, Section 6 concludes the study and proposes future research recommendations.

2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review

2.1. Principles and Theoretical Foundations of Business Ethics

Business ethics involve infusing an organization’s decision and conduct processes with moral values and codes of ethics. Business ethics deal with a wide range of factors such as governance, social responsibility, workers’ welfare, and relations with both workers and customers [1,2,19]. In their most basic form, business ethics seek to harmonize an organization’s conduct with society’s values and aspirations and, in turn, build trust, accountability, and long-term success. Applied in the case of OHS, business ethics create a platform for dealing with an organization’s moral duties towards its workers, specifically regarding safe and fair working environments. Several principles form the basis for practice in ethics in business, and in shaping responsible decision-making, one such principle is fairness and justice, with a view of providing fair and equitable treatment of workers at all levels in an institution regardless of position, demographic, or level of workplace exposure [20]. In terms of OHS, fairness entails a fair distribution of protective resources and a uniform application of policies [20]. Another principle that is critical is accountability, with a view of holding institutions responsible for actions, most specifically in cases of failure in ethics and in safety [8]. Not only does accountability promote transparency, but it also enables institutions to learn from failures and mitigate future danger [8]. Likewise, transparency promotes trust; through offering transparent and truthful information regarding workplace danger, policies for safety, and reports of incidents, an environment of trust and dignity is facilitated [19]. Lastly, a principle that values workers’ lives and welfare and regards them as an intrinsic value and in compliance with a key purpose of OHS, namely protecting workers’ lives and enhancing both workers’ safety and mental safety, is a principle of respect for human dignity [15].

The ethical frameworks discussed in this article draw on a variety of theoretical frameworks underpinning moral analysis in workplace conundrums. Deontological ethics, developed through Kantian theory, judge actions in terms of moral value or lack of value, regardless of consequences. In terms of OHS, this theory holds that companies have a moral imperative to maintain standards and protect workers, even when such actions cause a contradiction with short-term financial interests [15]. On the other hand, utilitarianism judges actions according to whether they promote overall happiness or maximize pleasure and minimize pain. In terms of OHS, such a view compels companies to introduce policies and interventions designed to produce the greatest overall benefit for most workers, such as widespread training in safe working practice and ergonomically designed work environments [21,22]. Another theory, in addition to these, is Freeman’s theory of stakeholders [23], with important application in terms of its encouragement for the consideration of all groups impacted through organizational actions and decision making. Stakeholder theory is specifically relevant to OHS, in terms of its encouragement for balancing and prioritizing workers’, investors’, regulators’, and other groups’ aspirations and requirements. For instance, investing in protective interventions not only maximizes workers’ protection but creates a positive corporate reputation and compliance with legal requirements and ethical codes. Lastly, virtue ethics, derived through Aristotelian theory, place a high value on moral character in decision-makers. Leaders with strong moral values such as fairness, sympathy, and accountability can develop a healthy work environment for enhancing workers’ welfare and, in a long-term view, creating a harmonious and successful workplace [1,24].

The integration of ethics and theory in practice in OHS is critical in resolving the complex paradoxes encountered in modern organizations. For example, organizations often face paradoxes such as balancing cost-saving strategies with investments in safe infrastructure and harmonizing contradictions in the application of safety policies between groups of workers [16,25]. Ignoring these ethical factors can have dire consequences, such as workplace incidents, loss of reputation, and even legal consequences. On the other hand, the integration of ethics in OHS frameworks can have positive consequences, such as creating fair and participatory safety interventions, trust with workers, and compliance with legislation and ethics requirements. Theory in business ethics is important, but practice in OHS requires systematic frameworks that bridge theory and practice. In an endeavor to bridge such a divide, the current study aims to explore the contribution of ethics in OHS and to develop a model operationalizing such ethics values and, in doing so, to enable organizations to develop safer and fairer working environments.

2.2. Occupational Health and Safety Standards

OHS standards represent frameworks, directives, and legislation carefully crafted to promote workers’ health, security, and well-being in the workplace. Overall, the objective of such standards is to manage work-related dangers, avert workplace disease and injury, and promote a safe working environment in organizations. Over centuries, national and international bodies have developed thorough frameworks for OHS, allowing companies to apply effective safety management frameworks, comply with legislation, and develop work environments with lasting values.

Some of the most important international standards include ISO 45001:2018, a systemic model for work-related safety and health management. ISO 45001:2018 puts significant value in the proactive management of danger, workers’ participation, and ongoing improvement, and through such, it enables the development of safer working environments [3]. ISO 45001:2018 promotes a hazard-based model for safety, mandating a review of potential danger, determination of applicable factors of danger, and development of effective controls to mitigate or remove danger factors. In addition, ISO 45001:2018 prioritizes workers’ active participation at all times, with workers’ concerns and requirements incorporated in a manner integral to security policies and processes in companies. America’s critical role of its Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in developing standards for OHS cannot be overemphasized. As an administratively enforceable model, directives under OSHA include specific requirements for industries with various danger vulnerabilities. Examples include requirements for hazard communication, fall protection, safeguarding machines, and the safe disposal of dangerous chemicals [4]. Compliance with OSHA directives not only protects workers but protects companies from legal claims and helps preserve companies’ integrity with citizens and communities at large.

In addition to ISO 45001 and OSHA, conventions and directives under the aegis of the International Labor Organization (ILO) cover important dimensions of workplace safety and health. In particular, ILO’s Convention 155 promotes national policies for OHS, and Convention 187 promotes a preventative culture of safety [25,26]. These conventions represent an international agreement about the importance of OHS and serve as a harmonization model for nations worldwide. Apart from international standards, many countries have developed national legislation specific to their respective legal, financial, and cultural environments for OHS. For instance, in the European Union, Framework Directive 89/391/EEC compels employers to promote workers’ safety and welfare in relation to all work-related factors. In contrast, this directive promotes a preventative workplace safety orientation, with a focus on hazard analysis, training for workers, and effective establishment of safety committees [27].

Industry-specific standards have been developed to effectively manage specific hazards in specific industries. For instance, in the UK, explicit requirements in terms of construction activity, including workers, contractors, and designers’ roles and responsibilities, were addressed in the 2015 Construction (Design and Management) Regulations. Likewise, mining operations follow specific protocols, including the International Council for Mining and Metals (ICMM) Health and Safety Principles, specifically developed to avert deaths and injuries in high-risk environments [27]. Conformity with OHS standards is a legal requirement, but its moral value is no less important. Ethical concerns often go beyond compliance with legislation, with a concern for companies’ moral obligation to protect workers’ lives and welfare. For instance, compliance with OHS legislation must not exclusively revolve with the objective of avoiding penalties and satisfying legal requirements but must strive towards supporting workers’ entitlement to a safe working environment [25,28]. Practicing ethical leadership and participatory approaches in managing workers form critical parts in developing a safety culture that prioritizes workers’ welfare over profit [28].

In high-risk industries, failures in terms of safety have particularly high moral implications [29,30,31]. Incidents remind companies of the moral necessity to have effective controls in terms of safety, proper training, and accountability at all management levels [16,32,33]. In view of general OHS standards, companies often face difficulty in effectively practicing such requirements. Common sources include a lack of financial and human resources, poor leadership, and individual resistances to change. In addition, in developing countries, poor compliance and lack of awareness about OHS standards can hinder effective practice [19]. In a quest to overcome such barriers, companies must actively integrate ethical values in their frameworks for managing safety, and in so doing, they promote a work environment with accountability and ongoing improvement.

2.3. Intersection of Business Ethics and Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)

The intersection of ethics and OHS forms a critical field in which moral values inform workplace safety practice development, application, and enforcement. Where traditional approaches to OHS have focused on compliance with laws and technical approaches to managing risk, the incorporation of ethical thinking can make them more effective in a manner that addresses not only workers’ overall welfare but that promotes a workplace environment with a strong underpinning of fairness, accountability, and dignity [34,35]. The contribution of ethics in OHS extends beyond compliance with minimum legal requirements, prioritizing the consideration of workers’ dignity, social justice, and workers’ participatory approaches, creating not only safe but fair and equitable work environments.

Business ethics is a key component in the development of an organizational safety culture, encompassing the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes toward occupational health and safety in the workplace. Ethical leadership, characterized by values such as transparency, accountability, fairness, and ethical decision-making, significantly influences employees’ perceptions, behaviors, and adherence to safety procedures [2,14,15]. Organizations that maintain strong ethical standards are likely to develop strong safety cultures, with a focus on proactive measures over reactive measures. Ethical values, especially those that promote transparency, support open communication regarding safety risks, incidents, and prevention measures. Organizations that practice transparent safety practices share relevant information voluntarily, thus promoting trust among employees and encouraging accurate reporting and prompt action against safety risks [19]. Accountability is essential in reinforcing safety culture through the explicit assignment of safety duties, compliance with safety policies, and fair, constructive action against safety violations. Leaders and employees who practice accountability positively influence a safety culture with a shared commitment to safety duties [21,32]. The values of fairness and ethical decision-making improve employees’ perceptions of safety and fair treatment, ensuring the consistent application of safety procedures and policies. Organizations that promote ethical fairness in their safety practices witness an increase in employee participation, enhanced cooperation in safety programs, and increased morale, all of which are critical in sustaining a strong safety culture [19]. Ethical values form a basis for an understanding and resolution of moral concerns in workplace safety. Central to these values is the value of dignity for persons, according to which workers have a fundamental right to a safe and healthy work environment. This value corresponds with an ethical imperative of companies to prioritize workers’ welfare over cost-saving and profit maximization objectives. For instance, companies have a role to ensure that safeguarding requirements are not compromised in a quest for production objectives, even in times of financial constraint. Equity and fairness form a critical value, with a strong imperative for the fair and even-handed treatment of all workers in terms of safety concerns. This involves offering fair access to safety training, protective gear, and safety tools regardless of an individual’s position, demographics, and work status [20]. Ethical practice in OHS must, in addition, address inequality in workplace safety in terms of socioeconomic and cultural diversity, such that marginalized groups, including migrant workers and workers in insecure jobs, receive proper safety cover.

The principle of accountability in its essence prioritizes the moral accountability of companies with regard to workplace safety. Ethical accountability involves the transparent reporting of workplace incidents, constant assessment of safety protocols, and a strong commitment to improvement through learning from errors, with a view of preventing future injuries [8]. This principle is most important in high-risk industries, in which failures can have disastrous consequences for workers and society at large. In contrast, companies often face considerable obstacles in effectively putting such ethical values into practice in workplace safety. One significant impediment is in competition between financial performance and ethical conduct. For example, cost-saving interventions can cause underinvestment in safety infrastructure and subcontracting dangerous work to contractors with poor safety controls [16,36]. Not only does such behavior destroy workers’ trust, but it can also expose companies to potential reputational loss and legal actions.

An additional issue concerns a worker’s role in workplace safety decision-making processes. Despite many frameworks for OHS recognizing workers’ contribution towards workplace safety, hierarchical values and structures can act as a barrier to effective two-way communications. Workers have a perceived fear of reprisal when reporting workplace issues and offering improvements; therefore, contribution towards a safer workplace is hindered. Overcoming such barriers involves ethical leadership focused on transparency, participative values, and workers’ empowerment at all organizational levels. The involvement of ethics in OHS is not only an ethical necessity but a key to a competitive edge for companies. The application of ethical approaches in OHS promotes heightened trust, job satisfaction, and workers’ retention and, in consequence, a positive work environment for long-term success [9]. For example, studies have proven that companies with strong ethical leadership and a strong workplace safety commitment have fewer occurrences and a high level of workers’ participation [37,38].

Furthermore, the integration of ethical OHS practice can help companies navigate complex webs of legislation and respond to the demands of responsible social stakeholders. With investors and buyers increasingly valuing social responsibility, taking an ethical stance towards OHS can contribute immensely to an organization’s social and competitive positioning in the marketplace [17]. In industries such as manufacturing, medical care, and construction, workplace safety constitutes a key benchmark for success; therefore, this issue is most relevant in such sectors. Historical examples of ethical failure in OHS make it imperative to integrate moral values in safety protocols. Integrating ethics in OHS constitutes a systemic intervention that actualizes moral values in all aspects of organizational processes, policies, and practice. In its advocacy, in this work, a model that integrates ethical values with OHS aims is proposed, allowing companies to face moral dilemmas and deliver sustained performance in safety. Central to such a model is ethical leadership, workplace participative approaches, transparent communications, and fair distribution of assets. By closing gaps between ethics and OHS, companies can develop work environments not only in compliance with legislative requirements but with social and moral values as well.

Despite the growing body of studies concerning OHS and business ethics individually, the nexus between these two important areas is not yet well researched. There have been studies, for instance, that have examined at considerable length the technical, legislative, and managerial aspects of OHS, with a specific focus on compliance structures, risk analysis, and preventive interventions for workplace accidents [7,13,16]. Similarly, the field of business ethics has produced a rich corpus of studies regarding moral decision-making, social responsibility, and shareholder–shareholder relations [1,17]. However, there is a significant lack of studies specifically examining in detail how ethical values can formally be incorporated in frameworks for OHS in a manner best contributing to both workers’ welfare and organizational effectiveness.

OHS is a critical determinant of workers’ wellbeing and productivity in the workplace. An effective OHS system not only protects workers against workplace danger but is also a key player in absenteeism reduction and overall workers’ welfare improvement [39,40]. Sufficient evidence attests to the complex interrelationship between absenteeism, OHS, and welfare; many studies have proven that a strong safety culture is critical in enhancing workers’ overall state of health, improving job satisfaction, and minimizing work-related absenteeism [37]. Employee absenteeism is a state in which workers miss work in case of illness, workplace injuries, and private concerns, and it can cause significant financial and operational strain in an organization [41]. Empirical studies have proven that poor working environments, workplace injuries, and prolonged work-related tension contribute immensely to absenteeism. Workers subjected to poor ergonomics, toxic chemicals, high decibel levels, and psychological tension have a high chance of developing work-related disease and, in extreme cases, prolonged sick leave and absenteeism [42]. An effective OHS system, including preventive actions such as workplace danger assessments, training, and medical surveillance, can effectively counteract workplace danger and subsequently reduce absenteeism. Empirical studies have proven that companies with strong OHS programs have much less absenteeism compared to companies with poor safety interventions [43]. In addition, performance measures such as near-miss reporting and proactive safety inspections have been proven to have a direct impact on curving work-related absenteeism [44].

Moreover, employee wellbeing is a multi-faceted concept with dimensions including physical, mental, and overall job satisfaction. As researched, a successful OHS system promotes well-being through minimizing workplace stress and burnout and installing a feeling of safety in workers [45]. An efficient work environment, supported through a strong OHS culture, promotes psychological well-being through valuing and protecting workers and enhancing motivation and work-related drive [46,47]. The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model [48] is a theoretical model explaining how an OHS system promotes well-being in workers. According to the model, high job demands (like high workloads and workplace dangers) can lead to work-related strain and burnout; nevertheless, proper job resources (like supportive workplace policies and ergonomic interventions) act as protective factors for well-being and durability. Organizations prioritizing an OHS system can develop a positive work environment with less workplace tension, increased work-related vigor, and increased job satisfaction.

Aside from its direct impact on absenteeism and well-being, an OHS system is important for overall performance in an organization. Well and safe workers are normally productive, involved, and committed to attaining work-related aims. Empirical studies reveal that companies investing in an OHS system have increased employee retention, increased morale, and increased efficiency in operations [49]. In addition, a strong work-related environment promotes a reduction in compensation claims, medical expenses, and workforce turnover, with significant financial savings for companies [50].

2.4. Risk Management in Occupational Safety and Health

Risk management is a core theoretical and practical aspect of OHS, involving a systematic process for the identification, assessment, control, and mitigation of occupational risks [4,51,52]. Successful risk management in the context of OHS involves the implementation of the following series of sequential steps: identification of hazards, risk evaluation and prioritization, targeted control measure implementation, monitoring, and continuous improvement. Together, these steps form a systematic approach to protecting employees from work-related injury and illness while improving organizational health and productivity. In occupational contexts, risks can be generally divided into physical and psychosocial categories [18,34,51]. Physical hazards typically include accidents, ergonomic issues, faulty equipment, exposure to harmful substances, and emergency situations like fires or natural disasters. In contrast, psychosocial risks involve factors such as workplace stress, mental illness, burnout, harassment, bullying, and interpersonal conflicts, all of which significantly affect employees’ psychological well-being and overall organizational performance. The skilled management of these diverse risk factors is essential to the effective management of OHS practices [2].

Organizations that successfully integrate structured risk management processes conduct thorough and periodic hazard assessments to systematically identify potential risks [2]. These organizations prioritize identified risks based on severity and likelihood, enabling them to effectively implement targeted, evidence-based interventions. Common risk mitigation practices include safety training sessions, ergonomic work-place adjustments, employee wellness programs, mental health initiatives, and regular emergency preparedness drills [3,10]. Empirical evidence indicates that proactive OHS risk management substantially improves organizational preparedness and reduces the incidence and severity of workplace incidents. Organizations employing structured risk management frameworks typically demonstrate lower rates of absenteeism, enhanced employee satisfaction, and higher overall productivity due to fewer occupational injuries and illnesses [51,52].

Moreover, effective risk management in OHS is closely associated with ethical leadership practices. Principles such as transparency, accountability, fairness, and clear communication underpin the successful implementation and acceptance of safety measures by employees. Ethical leadership fosters a workplace culture in which employees feel valued, respected, and empowered to participate actively in safety related activities, thereby reinforcing the effectiveness of risk management practices [19,21]. In summary, integrating systematic risk management into OHS practices significantly benefits organizational safety culture, reduces health-related risks, enhances employee morale, and contributes positively to overall organizational performance. The theoretical connection between risk management and OHS emphasizes the necessity for organizations to adopt structured and ethical approaches to workplace safety and health.

3. Methodological Framework

3.1. Research Design

This study adopts a structured questionnaire-based survey as its primary research method to systematically collect data on the OHS practices of manufacturing enterprises in the Region of Macedonia and Thrace in Northern Greece, with an emphasis on construction companies. The use of a questionnaire allows for an effective and efficient mechanism for collecting uniform information in a heterogeneous sample, allowing both quantitative analysis and access to qualitative information to become feasible. In view of the aims of this investigation, such an instrument is best designed for analyzing the prioritization and practice of OHS in a range of types of companies, such as micro-enterprises and multinational companies. The use of a questionnaire stems from its ability to generate a range of information in a uniform manner, with uniformity in collection guaranteed. In academic investigations, questionnaires have long been seen to act as useful tools for measuring behavior, perception, and practice in an organization [53,54]. For the current study, a purpose-made questionnaire covering key factors relevant to OHS—such as preventive actions, use of leading indicators, and the development of a safety culture in an organization—was constructed.

This study employed an exploratory approach to investigate the interrelationships between business ethics, safety culture, and OHS practices in construction companies based in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, a geographically remote region in Northern Greece. The economic structure of the region is mainly comprised of micro and small companies, with limited representation of large corporations. Therefore, the sample mirrors the economic and organizational profile of the region. Even though the sample size limits the degree to which the findings can be generalized to a national level, it yields important insights pertinent to the regional and sectoral conditions. Representativeness was pursued through stratification by company size and role, including responses from directors, safety officers, and production managers, ensuring a multi-perspective view of organizational practices. The questionnaire was grouped into a range of sections to effectively respond to the objectives of research, as analytically explained below. Participants in the survey included persons with significant familiarity with an OSH practice in an enterprise, including owners, CEOs, directors, supervisors, and safety technicians. The use of a purposeful sampling scheme in this case guaranteed respondents enough qualifications to make knowledgeable responses in relation to role and expertise. Organizational sizes were classified based on the following predefined categories within the questionnaire: micro and small enterprises (1–20 employees), small-to-medium enterprises (21–50 employees), medium enterprises (51–250 employees), and large enterprises (251 employees and above). Although these categories slightly deviate from standard EU definitions (e.g., EU defines microenterprises as fewer than 10 employees), this grouping was necessary due to the questionnaire structure. This classification limitation has been acknowledged, and its implications for interpreting the results have been carefully considered in the discussion [55,56]. The research design process followed in this study is analytically presented in Figure 1 below.

3.2. Data Collection and Analysis

The questionnaire was distributed electronically using Google Forms, a platform chosen for its accessibility and ease of use. Survey feedback collection took place between February and May 2021, with a long enough period for collecting feedback. To promote attendance and assuage concerns about the purpose of the study, follow-up phone calls to respondents took place. That follow-up contact provided information regarding the survey and encouraged attendance, countering a prevalent drawback with survey approaches that suffer low attendance [57,58]. It is acknowledged that the data used in this study were collected in 2021. While this temporal limitation might limit the immediate applicability of some results to fast-changing organizational settings, the essential conclusions regarding the interrelatedness of ethics, safety culture, and organizational health and safety practices remain valid and relevant. The timing of data collection, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, provides unique perspectives on organizational behavior and safety procedures in exceptional conditions. The analyses and results of this study, therefore, consider this particular time frame to promote transparency and clarify potential limitations. The application of a questionnaire survey helped to include leading indicators as an integral part of an investigation. Leading indicators such as workplace inspections’ frequency, near-miss reporting, and attendance in workplace programs for workers increasingly act as effective tools in predicting and improving workplace health and safety (OHS) performance [59]. By gauging the suitability of such indicators in organizations in a target region, this study helps in a deeper analysis of how proactive actions regarding workplace safety promote the establishment of a strong safety culture.

The development of the questionnaire took its cues from the purpose of the study and included questions in several dimensions of administration in OHS. The questionnaire was structured into four main sections, each focused on the investigation of a particular aspect of the research goals. The first section gathered professional and demographic information, including variables representing the participants’ gender, age, highest level of educational qualification, professional experience in years, size of the organization, job title, and number of employees managed. The second section focused on organizational compliance with OHS legislation, emphasizing the activity of a safety technician and the use of accredited OHS management systems (e.g., OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001) [3,4]. The third section reviewed historical workplace safety records by asking about employee health issues and rates of absenteeism reported over the past five years. The last section assessed proactive OHS and well-being programs, including the frequency and scope of training offered, the extent of implementation of recommendations presented by the safety technician, and the provision of incentive and well-being schemes. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire that consisted entirely of closed-ended questions using nominal and ordinal response categories. This design allowed for an in-depth examination of both compliance and proactive aspects of OHS management, and it also allowed for capturing organizational ethics and leadership influences. To promote transparency and dependability, a pilot survey with a small group of respondents was performed. The survey questionnaire structure and responses’ format are analytically presented in

Table 1. Structure of the survey questionnaire and response format.

Section	Question	Response Format
1. Demographic and Professional Information	Gender	Female, Male, Other
	Age	20–30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60, >60
	Education background	Technical University, University, MSc/MBA, PhD
	Number of employees in the company	1–20 (Micro), 21–50 (Small), 51–100 (Medium), 101–250 (Medium), 251–500 (Large), >500 (Large)
	Role in the company	Owner/Board Member, CEO/Managing Director, General Manager, Director of OHS, Production Manager, Department Supervisor, Health and Safety Officer, Other
	Number of years in the company	0–5, 6–10, 11–20, >20
	Number of employees under responsibility	1–10, 11–20, 21–50, 51–100, >100
2. OHS Compliance	Does the company employ a safety technician?	Yes/No
	Does the company implement an occupational health and safety management system (OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001)?	Yes/No
3. Workplace Safety Performance (Past Incidents)	Have employees developed health problems due to work (musculoskeletal, respiratory, hearing impairments, etc.) in the last 5 years?	Yes/No/Not Registered
	If yes, how many employees have reported work-related health problems in the last 5 years?	1/2–5/>5
	What has been the total absenteeism due to general health issues (physical and mental) in the past 5 years/	Very Short (up to 1 month), Short (1–3 months), Moderate (3–6 months), Long (6–12 months), Very Long (more than 12 months)
4. Proactive Occupational Health & Safety Measures	Is training provided to staff on occupational health and safety (OHS) topics?	Very Rarely (once or less every 3 years), Rarely (1–2 times/year), Occasionally (2–3 times/year), Often (once a month), Always (every week)
	Is training provided to newly hired staff on occupational health and safety and accident prevention?	Very Rarely (once or less every 3 years), Rarely (1–2 times/year), Occasionally (2–3 times/year), Often (once a month), Always (every week)
	To what extent are the safety measures recommended by the safety technician implemented?	30%/50%/80%/100% (all recommendations are implemented)
	Are employees actively motivated to support OHS initiatives (incentives, campaigns, safety talks, etc.)?	Never, Very Rarely (once or less every 3 years), Rarely (1–2 times per year), Sometimes (2–3 times per year), Often (once per month), Always (every week)
	Are there initiatives implemented to promote employees’ overall wellbeing?	Never, Very Rarely (once or less every 3 years), Rarely (1–2 times per year), Sometimes (2–3 times per year), Often (once per month), Always (every week)

.

This study did not adopt formal null or alternative hypotheses but was guided by research questions informed by the existing literature [7,12,19,49,52]. The following main questions were addressed: (1) To what extent do ethical practices correlate with proactive OHS measures? (2) How does company size affect the frequency and consistency of OHS implementation? (3) What role does leadership accountability and fairness play in shaping OHS performance? These questions were examined through the quantitative analysis of structured, closed-ended survey responses. The use of ordinal and nominal scales allowed for comparative analysis across different organizational profiles and practices.

To ensure high response rates, follow-up phone contacts were made with target respondents. The purpose of taking part in the study and any questions about participating in the survey were addressed in these contacts, and an invitation to answer was extended. Personal contact helped to counteract a common problem with surveys, namely, non-response [56]. Anonymity in all phases helped in enhancing objective and truthful feedback regarding sensitive information, such as compliance with OHS legislation and workplace concerns. By the end of the collection period, feedback for 35 construction companies had been received. Responses were anonymized and then entered into a database for future analysis. The information collected represented a strong basis for investigating OHS practice and gaps and for suggesting improvements specific to the construction sector in the region.

The data collected with a designed questionnaire underwent analysis through quantitative techniques, acknowledging that the survey consisted of a high proportion of closed-ended questions. Quantitative analysis helped in the determination of trends, patterns, and relationships in the dataset, and in providing quantitative information about the practice of OHS in Macedonia and Thrace region industries. An important part of analysis included descriptive statistics, and these statistics have an integral role in effectively describing and representing the collected information. Frequencies and percentages for categorical information, such as types of interventions with regard to OHS, workplace inspections, and senior management’s level of participation with regard to OHS, were determined. In an attempt to report information about the average level of activity with regard to specific activity, such as reporting near-miss occurrences or providing training programs for workers at specific times, central tendency measures, such as mean and median, for continuous information were calculated.

To further explore the data, a comparative analysis was conducted to explore discrepancies in OHS practice between different enterprise sizes. For example, feedback was grouped according to enterprise size (e.g., micro, medium, and large enterprises), and comparisons were drawn between specific OHS actions taken between groups. Through such an analysis, the determination of whether larger companies showed a greater propensity for using sophisticated OHS practice over and above smaller ones, in agreement with current studies regarding the availability of resources and organizational capacity [54], could be determined. The data collected were subjected to rigorous quantitative analysis. First, descriptive statistics were calculated to describe the demographic and organizational characteristics. Then, inferential statistics were applied to determine inter-variable relationships. Specifically, a Chi-square test was used to test the relationship between the frequency of well-being activities and employee absenteeism duration. The results of the Chi-square test (χ² = 127.96, df = 42, p < 0.001) revealed a statistically significant correlation, showing that the frequency of well-being activities significantly influences the duration of employee absenteeism. The high Chi-square statistic (χ² = 127.96) indicates a strong correlation, depicting significant variations in absenteeism duration with respect to varying frequencies of wellness activity implementation. A p-value of less than 0.001 reinforces the strength of these results, resulting in the rejection of the null hypothesis, which assumed independence between well-being frequency and absenteeism duration. Therefore, organizations that carried out wellness activities with greater frequency showed significantly lower absenteeism rates, especially in the context of long-term absenteeism for more than six months. Confidence intervals were computed at a 95% level of confidence to test the precision and reliability of the observed correlations. This analysis further supported the strength of our results and allowed for a more subtle interpretation of the practical implications for organizations aiming to maximize employee attendance and overall workplace well-being. Finally, statistical procedures were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26, which offered advanced statistical methods and ensured effective data management. Preliminary data cleaning, exploratory testing, and visualizations were performed using Microsoft Excel 2019, thereby providing an open and methodologically reliable foundation. Furthermore, this study conformed to high ethical standards in a quest for integrity and safeguarding participants’ rights [56]. Ethical concerns were incorporated at all stages of the study, including collection, analysis, and reporting of information. The confidentiality of participants represented a key feature of the study’s design. Responses were handled in a confidential manner so that individual respondents and organizations could not be discerned from information collected. The electronic survey was constructed in a manner that avoided the collection of information that identifies a person, such as contact information and name. By utilizing such a method, a conducive environment for the collection of truthful and correct feedback from respondents about their occupational health and safety practice was attained. Informed consent was received for all respondents before completing the survey. In the introductory section, a concise statement of purpose for the study, its voluntariness, and use of information collected was included. Respondents were notified in a clear manner of their freedom to withdraw at any stage, thus allowing an educated decision about participating in a study. It is also noted that the study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Ethics Committee of Democritus University of Thrace (protocol code 25012/158, date of approval: 20 December 2021). This approval ensured adherence to ethical research standards, safeguarding the rights and welfare of participants involved in the study.

Moreover, data protection policies were in place to secure information that had been compiled. All information was stored in password-protected databases, accessible only to the research group. National and international laws for protecting data guided the conduct of the study, and in compliance with such, participant anonymity and confidentiality at all phases of the study were guaranteed. Transparency characterized the conduct of the study, with participants being given thorough information about the purpose and aims of the study. Participants’ welfare was scrupulously guarded, including provisions for not causing any discomposure when answering questions about work-related practice for health and safety at work. All questions were posed in a nonintrusive format, dealing with concerns relevant to work-related affairs; therefore, a feeling of ease in offering truthful information was facilitated. By following such ethical protocols, such a study guaranteed integrity in its results and dignity and consideration for the welfare and rights of all participants involved. Compliance with such ethical protocols helped in providing assurance in both the conduct and results of such a study.

4. Results

This section outlines the paper’s results, focusing on the demographic profile of participants, organizational position, and key observations regarding OHS practices in construction companies in Macedonia and Thrace. The results highlight the importance of prioritizing the controls of OHS, use of leading indicators, and safety procedures varying in line with company size and management responsibilities. The analysis presents a snapshot of companies managing safety in the work environment, pointing to areas of strength, weakness, and potential areas of improvement in applying OHS.

The demographic, employment, and organizational profile of participants (n = 35), shown in

Table 2. Demographic, employment, and organizational characteristics of participants (n = 35).

Variables	Descriptive Statistics n (%)
Age
20–30	2 (5.71)
31–40	9 (25.71
41–50	12 (34.29)
51–60	11 (31.43)
>60	1 (2.86)
Gender
Female	22 (62.85)
Male	13 (37.15)
Education Background
Technical University	7 (20.00)
University	11 (31.43)
MSc/MBA	15 (42.86)
PhD	2 (5.71)
Role in the company
Owner/Board Member	8 (22.86)
CEO/Managing Director	3 (8.57)
General Manager	4 (11.43)
Director of Occupational Health and Safety Department	3 (8.57)
Production Manager	4 (11.43)
Department Supervisor	4 (11.43)
Health and Safety Officer	5 (14.28)
Other	4 (11.43)
Number of years in the company
0–5	11 (31.43)
6–10	8 (22.86)
11–20	9 (25.71)
>20	7 (20.00)
Number of employees under responsibility
1–10	14 (40.00)
11–20	3 (8.57)
21–50	7 (20.00)
51–100	6 (17.14)
>100	5 (14.29)
Number of employees in the company
1–20	6 (17.14)
21–50	5 (14.29)
51–250	19 (54.29)
>250	5 (14.28)

Where: MSc refers to Master of Science; MBA refers to Master of Business Administration; PhD refers to ‘Doctor of Philosophy’; CEO refers to Chief Executive Officer.

, indicates a heterogeneous and experienced group, with a high percentage of professionals aged between 41–50 (34.29%) and 51–60 (31.43%) years and a high percentage of females (62.85%) among participants. The educational background of participants was mainly postgraduate (42.86% MSc/MBA, 31.43% university graduates, 20.00% technical university graduates, and 5.71% PhD holders), indicating a high level of proficiency in their respective areas of work. The participants held diverse job titles, such as owners/board members (22.86%), health and safety officers (14.28%), production managers (11.43%), and supervisors of departments (11.43%), hence providing a representative view of managing OHS.

Experience within the company varied, with 31.43% having 0–5 years of tenure, while 20.00% had more than 20 years, indicating a mix of fresh insights and institutional knowledge. In terms of managerial responsibility, 40.00% of respondents oversaw 1–10 employees, while 14.29% managed more than 100 employees. The represented companies ranged in size, with 17.14% classified as micro-enterprises (1–20 employees), 54.29% as medium enterprises (51–250 employees), and 14.28% as larger medium enterprises (>250 employees), ensuring a broad representation of workplace safety practices. This diverse sample provides a robust foundation for understanding how factors such as company size, managerial role, and educational background influence OHS policies and implementation in construction enterprises.

The results presented in

Table 3. Percentage distribution of workforce training frequency on occupational health and safety by company size.

	Very Rarely (Once or Less Every 3 Years)	Rarely (1–2 Times/Year)	Occasionally (2–3 Times/Year)	Often (Once a Month)	Always (Every Week)
Workforce Training on Occupational Health and Safety
1–20	5.56	38.87	55.56	0.00	0.00
21–50	14.29	21.43	35.71	21.43	7.14
51–250	10.71	25.00	44.64	17.86	1.79
>250	0.00	46.66	40.00	6.67	6.67
Newly hired personnel receive training on Occupational Health and Safety and accident prevention.
1–20	0.00	27.78	33.33	16.67	22.22
21–50	28.57	0.00	28.57	21.43	21.43
51–250	10.71	14.29	21.43	19.64	33.93
>250	6.67	6.67	6.67	26.66	53.33

indicate notable differences in the frequency of workforce training on OHS across company sizes. For companies with 1–20 employees, a very large majority (55.56%) reported conducting OHS training sporadically, i.e., 2–3 times a year, with no companies reporting more frequent training. In companies with 21–50 employees, there was more variation, with about 36% conducting sporadic training, in addition to considerably higher percentages conducting training more frequently (21.43% monthly and 7.14% weekly). Mid-sized firms (51–250 employees) also showed a pattern of infrequent training (44.64%), though a significant percentage also conducted monthly training (17.86%). In contrast, larger organizations (those with more than 250 employees) mostly provided training infrequently (46.66%) or sporadically (40.00%), despite a small percentage that conducted monthly and weekly training (6.67% each). Additionally, when considering the provision of OHS and accident prevention training for new employees, it was noted that larger companies (>250 employees) were the most active, with more than half (53.33%) conducting weekly training. In contrast, small businesses (1–20 employees) provided this training less frequently, mostly within the occasionally (33.33%) to weekly (22.22%) frequency range.

Figure 2 presents the relationship between the frequency of well-being actions and the percentage of companies reporting different absenteeism duration categories. Most companies do not implement well-being actions frequently, with only 1 of the 35 respondents reporting weekly implementation. All the cases of long-term absenteeism (more than 6 months) are reported in companies that never or very rarely implement well-being actions. A rare implementation of well-being actions is accompanied by zero long-term absenteeism (more than 6 months) but with a higher level of short-term absenteeism (1–3 months). This suggests that well-being actions, when implemented inconsistently, are not sufficient to prevent prolonged absences in the workplace. The sporadic implementation of well-being actions (sometimes) is accompanied by balanced responses in the absenteeism level, suggesting that there is no clear impact of well-being actions when these are applied 2 to 3 times a year.

Figure 3 presents the relationship of absenteeism duration with the frequency of employee motivation actions aimed at engaging employees in OHS-related activities. These actions include incentive systems, speeches, campaigns, and events. Companies that “Never” or “Very Rarely” implement well-being actions experience both very short and long-term absenteeism (6+ months). Infrequent well-being actions (“Rarely”) seem to eliminate long-term absenteeism. The only groups that consistently eliminate long-term absenteeism (6+ months) are the “Often” and “Always” categories. In the “Always” category, short-term absenteeism (1–3 months) remains, suggesting that, while frequent well-being actions reduce absenteeism, they do not completely prevent it.

The data presented in Figure 4 illustrate the correlation between safety measure implementation and work-related health problem identification in construction companies. The results present the following clear trend: when safety measures are increasingly implemented, there is a corresponding increase in companies reporting work-related health issues. In particular, in the 30% implementation range, a large percentage of companies reports that there is no health problem or that there is no health problem to be found, indicating poor safety surveillance procedures in place. In the 50% and 80% ranges of safety measure implementation, a higher percentage of companies report one or more work-related health issues, indicating that more sophisticated safety systems lead to better identification of health hazards in workplaces. In the 100% range of safety measure implementation, a high percentage of companies report work-related health issues, indicating that total safety systems lead to the identification of hazards in work settings. The patterns established in this study point to the need for integrated occupational health and safety systems to support health surveillance in workplaces and allow for timely interventions to manage long-term health hazards.

Overall, survey results show that companies implement a variety of well-being actions, with the most commonly mentioned being mental health and resilience programs, smoking reduction initiatives, exercise and physical fitness programs, nutrition programs, and work–life balance programs.

To ensure coherence between theoretical discussions on ethics and empirical findings, the survey findings were thoroughly examined through the lens of ethical values, with a special focus on absenteeism and measures designed to induce well-being. Organizations that emphasize ethical leadership and open communication are more likely to have systematic wellness programs, such as mental health services and work–life balance measures. This adherence to ethical values led to significantly low levels of absenteeism, especially of chronic absenteeism lasting more than six months. On the contrary, organizations that perceived OHS practices primarily as regulatory compliance rather than ethical obligations implemented fewer and less consistent well-being actions. Such ethical gaps were clearly linked to increased instances of prolonged absenteeism, underscoring the moral and practical imperative of integrating ethics into workplace safety management. Medium-sized enterprises demonstrated stronger adherence to ethical values in managing employee well-being, highlighting the critical role of fairness and accountability in fostering a supportive and engaged work environment.

5. Discussion

The findings of this research provide considerable evidence of OHS practices in construction companies in Macedonia and Thrace, indicating notable trends in employee training, wellness programs, absenteeism, and health problem identification. The results indicate that, though companies place great importance on OHS, such practices are applied in a sporadic manner and depend on company size, managerial duties, and accessible resources. The results of this research support the current body of work, in particular, regarding the efficacy of formal OHS programs in improving safety in workplaces and reducing absenteeism. The smaller companies were found to provide training more sporadically compared to their mid-sized counterparts, affirming earlier studies indicating that fewer resources limit smaller companies in applying OHS practices in their entirety. However, the evidence that large companies do not always provide more frequent training compared to mid-sized companies debunks the hypothesis that more financial resources automatically equate to better safety practices. This reveals that organizational commitment to safety and prevailing safety culture are more decisive variables determining the efficacy of safety efforts in OHS.

The evidence of a strong correlation between wellness programs and absenteeism reductions is also confirmed in this study, indicating that companies that fail to provide wellness and motivational programs for their employees witness high instances of chronic absenteeism. This finding aligns with earlier studies that have similarly demonstrated the positive impact of structured wellness interventions on reducing absenteeism [12,45,47].

Despite the demonstrated benefits of OHS initiatives, several barriers hinder the ethical integration of safety practices in organizations. One of the key challenges is the tension between cost efficiency and ethical responsibility [2]. Smaller enterprises, which often operate under financial constraints, may struggle to allocate sufficient resources for regular safety training and well-being programs, leading to a reactive rather than proactive approach to workplace safety. Larger enterprises, despite having more resources, may focus on meeting regulatory requirements rather than fostering a genuine safety culture, highlighting a gap between compliance and ethical responsibility. Another significant challenge is the lack of employee engagement in safety initiatives, as hierarchical organizational structures and concerns about job security often discourage workers from actively participating in OHS decision-making. Additionally, regulatory enforcement gaps contribute to inconsistencies in safety compliance, particularly in smaller firms that may lack formal oversight. Addressing these challenges requires shifting from a compliance-based approach to an ethically motivated, employee-centered OHS strategy that prioritizes well-being and proactive risk management [36]. Furthermore, the ethical dimensions integrated into our results shed new light on how organizational ethics, such as fairness, accountability, and transparency, significantly enhance OHS outcomes. Consistent with prior research by [2,10,15], organizations displaying higher ethical leadership levels experienced notably better adherence to safety protocols, resulting in practical improvements, such as reduced absenteeism and better emergency preparedness.

This study’s findings offer important implications by providing evidence-based insights for businesses aiming to enhance OHS practices ethically and effectively. Specifically, the demonstrated link between ethical leadership, structured wellness programs, and reduced absenteeism provides employers with actionable strategies to improve employee health, productivity, and morale. These results contribute to the scientific literature by reinforcing the importance of ethical considerations in developing sustainable OHS interventions, offering employers clear guidance for policy development and practice improvement. Organizations must integrate safety training as a continuous process rather than an occasional compliance measure, ensuring that employees are regularly educated on workplace hazards and risk management. The results suggest that companies with structured and frequent training programs report stronger OHS outcomes, highlighting the need to embed safety education into organizational culture. Additionally, businesses must recognize well-being initiatives as fundamental components of OHS rather than optional benefits. The evidence that frequent well-being initiatives are associated with lower absenteeism rates reinforces the importance of mental health support, fitness programs, and work–life balance strategies in fostering a stable and productive workforce. Beyond training and well-being, companies should adopt predictive and proactive safety measures rather than relying solely on reactive indicators, such as accident reports. The study demonstrates a statistically significant positive correlation between the level of implementation of safety training and the prevalence of emergency evacuation drills (Spearman’s ρ = 0.291, p = 0.0029). This finding highlights the applied value of frequent safety training in improving organizational preparedness and responsiveness, thus providing strong empirical support for organizations to prioritize the significance of systematic safety training programs. This finding also supports the previous literature [18], highlighting that frequent safety training is a vital aspect in complementing emergency preparedness and the effectiveness of response operations.

The research remains relevant to OHS policy, regulatory frameworks, and existing industry practices. Policymakers should consider providing targeted support to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to facilitate organized OHS instruction and application. In response to the revelation that smaller entities struggle to sustain regular safety instruction, the provision of industry-specific guidance and monetary rewards would help SMEs in embracing comprehensive OHS programs without placing undue financial pressures. Regulatory agencies should also strengthen surveillance mechanisms to ensure that large companies do not limit their OHS programs to compliance-oriented behavior. The revelation that large companies do not automatically deliver more regular instruction to their workers, even though they possess more resources, means that enforcement mechanisms need to address not just smaller firms but also complacency in large companies. In addition, OHS standards should encompass principles of ethical leadership to ensure that managers engage their staff in safety decision making and support participatory safety management. This work highlights the need to place a stronger emphasis on leading indicators in OHS systems to support the argument that regulators should focus more on predictive safety indicators compared to reactive compliance strategies.

This study recognizes a limitation with respect to the categorization of enterprise size used in the analysis. That is, the boundaries offered in the questionnaire (1–20, 21–50, 51–250, >250 employees) show slight deviations from the standard definitions of the European Union, which further distinguishes microenterprises as those employing fewer than 10 people. The smallest category considered (1–20 employees), therefore, combines micro- and small-sized enterprises and may obscure the finer differences between these two categories. Such a classification strategy requires careful interpretation of the findings, especially in reaching conclusions about the separate practices of microenterprises compared to small enterprises. Nevertheless, the findings are considered important, providing for the effective identification of existing trends and differences in occupational health and safety practices by organizational size. This study must also be recognized as having been conducted within the Eastern Macedonian and Thracian construction industry, which is geographically remote in Northern Greece. The final sample consisted of 35 respondents from organizations of different sizes. Although this provided for the attainment of valuable initial insights, it is recognized that the sample size, and in particular the representation of a single firm employing in excess of 500 employees (n = 1), is small. As such, the findings were interpreted cautiously and within the exploratory context of region-specific case studies. The conclusions drawn from these findings are not considered for generalization but rather aim to shed light on emerging trends and invite the further investigation of ethical and safety practices within organizational contexts, especially in geographically and economically remote regions.

Moreover, this study explored the dimensions of ethical leadership, employee training, and wellness-oriented practices as core components of proactive OHS management. Although the financial means of organizations were not determined as a significant variable, it is important to note that the survey administered did not assess the availability and application of technical controls—namely, personal protective equipment (PPE), engineering controls, and physical safety systems—separately. Similarly, while the study touched on psychosocial aspects of safety culture, such as stress, mental health, and absenteeism, it did not go as far as providing a comprehensive list of risk management measures or investigating organizational experiences regarding non-OHS-related risks, such as business continuity and information security. These issues are outside the scope of the present study and are recognized as important areas for further research to improve the understanding of the intersection of integrated risk management measures with the development of occupational health and safety practices. Overall, this research enhances our understanding of how businesses address OHS, challenges of implementation in terms of ethics, and the wider impact on employee well-being and absenteeism. The results of the study indicate that financial resources alone do not determine the effective management of OHS, but that organizational commitment, leadership of high order, and employee engagement play a decisive role in it [10,32]. In order to close existing gaps, companies need to embed formal training, put well-being programs at the top of their agendas, and apply safety management proactively. Policymakers and business regulators also need to help SMEs, strengthen mechanisms of control, and facilitate using lead indicators in order to build a safety culture. In the end, OHS should be regarded not just as a regulatory expectation but also as a basic ethical imperative that has a direct impact on the health of employees, organizational sustainability, and financial stability.

6. Conclusions

This study explored OHS practices in construction companies in Macedonia and Thrace, focusing on areas such as employee training, well-being programs, absenteeism, and identification of work-related health issues. The results of this analysis point towards considerable differences in OHS protocol application influenced by company size, management role, and resource allocation to them, highlighting the need for a more strategically planned and ethically based approach to ensuring safety in work settings. Medium-sized companies displayed a more holistic approach towards OHS training when compared to small companies, which struggled to maintain regular training programs owing to resource constraints, while large companies failed to use their financial strength to boost the number of training programs. This would indicate that having financial strength is not enough to provide a guarantee of the efficacy of OHS programs; more crucial is organizational commitment coupled with a strong safety culture.

Key findings reveal that organizations that persistently apply organized wellness programs show significantly lower rates of absenteeism, particularly regarding long-term absenteeism that goes beyond six months. These wellness programs, which incorporate elements of mental health support, stress reduction techniques, and work–life balance programs, have a direct effect on employee levels of engagement and overall productivity. In addition, the study revealed a statistically significant positive relationship between the number of safety training sessions held and the frequency of emergency evacuation drills. This finding emphasizes the critical nature of formalized safety training in preparing employees for emergency situations and reducing occupational hazards, thereby facilitating safer workplace settings.

This research highlights the critical role played by ethical leadership in enabling the effective implementation of wellness and safety initiatives. Organizations that maintain high levels of ethical standards, such as fairness, responsibility, transparency, and decision-making based on ethical considerations, are likely to record much better results in areas of employee health, safety, and overall morale. This type of ethical leadership promotes a healthy organizational culture, thus building employee trust, cooperation, and adherence to occupational health and safety standards. Practically, the findings provide clear recommendations to organizational leaders, managers, and policymakers that successful occupational health and safety programs should include formal wellness programs and extensive safety training, all underpinned by effective ethical leadership. Companies that seek to achieve sustainable health and safety performance improvements must consciously incorporate ethical standards into operational frameworks and managerial practices.

This study also identifies several promising avenues for future research, including longitudinal analyses to evaluate the long-term effects of wellness and safety programs and sector-specific studies that might apply these general findings to specific industrial settings. In addition, a holistic analysis of organizational culture, ethical leadership, and worker responses to safety legislation might significantly add to the current body of literature in occupational health and safety research, thus providing essential insights into the further development of workplace safety.