Non-Voluntary Separation

Most participants reported that their separation from the service role was for reasons beyond their control, including health related issues. When separation is not wholly voluntary, two issues emerge. The first concerns how non-voluntary separation affects individuals when the job was their chosen long-term career. The second is understanding how this affects job satisfaction in future roles.  

Many participants suffered medical issues that resulted either in a mandatory medical discharge or forced resignation for medical reasons. In neither instance do the participants consider it to be a voluntary separation from their employment. Similarly, those participants who were influenced to resign because of family issues, or organisational pressures, do not consider their resignation to be voluntary. Whilst they are realistic about the impact of the job on their health and understand that their choices were limited, the participants found themselves separated from a job they loved. The resounding issue here is the fact that the participants felt it was not truly their choice to leave. Instead external factors, including mental health considerations, weighed so heavily that they had no alternative. The participants were questioned about their claim for compensation when suffering work-related injury, and many participants advised they did not pursue recompense for their medical condition because, as Alastair explained ‘I just didn’t have the energy to fight’. Vanessa was the single participant successful in her compensation claim for physical injury. However, the loss of income from no longer being fully operational, even when compensated, was substantial and she confirmed ‘I sold my house’ to cope with the financial loss. Vanessa was financially affected by the decision to leave, and stated that, by being compensated, she was now answerable to the ambulance service until age 61. That is, she has to report at set intervals on her medical condition, is limited in employment opportunities she is allowed to pursue, and has to reveal any business undertakings. No participants viewed post-service compensation as a positive thing, although they did not discount the fact that they thought they were entitled to some sort of compensation. 

That the choice to leave the service position was not always understood as a choice by the participants per se is a crucial finding as it highlights the complicated nature of their separation. Many participants reported that they would still be in the service role if their circumstances had been different. This cannot be ignored as it potentially shapes their perspective on post-service employment. However, whilst possibly influential it is also part of their total transition experience and needs to be seen as an element of the whole experience. This is particularly so, because regardless of their desire to stay in the service role, many participants could not have continued, especially with mental health issues at play. This creates a dilemma for the participants because they know that they had no choice but to leave, yet had things been different they would have stayed. Some reported that they would even return given the opportunity, even though they know it would adversely affect their health. All these factors play a part in post-service job satisfaction for the participants. The connection to the service role is more apparent when the individual considers their separation not to have been completely voluntary and within their control. Job satisfaction can rely upon comparisons between previous and current employment experiences (Lévy-Garboua & Montmarquette, 2004) and the circumstances of separation further affect this comparison. When the comparison between past and present roles is not positive, post-service employment becomes problematic.  

This finding starts to describe the way in which these individuals both define and perceive job satisfaction. If the preferred experience of the participants remains with their service role (Lévy-Garboua & Montmarquette, 2004), then they establish an ongoing connection to their former employment that is problematic for their post-service employment. This connection is based in their training within the hegemonic masculine environment that focuses them on the strengths of the collective goal and being an operational member of a team, as discussed in Chapter 4 (King, 2006). Post-service employment that lacks this environment fails to meet their conscious or perhaps unconscious preference for the employment environment. This means that their job satisfaction is affected, and they remain unwilling and less motivated to disconnect from their former service role. The important learning here is that job satisfaction for the participants in the post-service environment is less about their new job and more about their ongoing connection to the service organisation. The participants show no reflective awareness of this situation. 

Contributing to their seemingly unconscious and strong connection to their former service is their reasons for leaving. The challenge faced by employees in these organisations when separating is that most enlist or join with the intention to stay in the job for the long term. This is particularly the case for the older participants in this study. Therefore, the decision to leave long before retirement comes as a shock. With the less than voluntary nature of the separation, the individuals are left disillusioned and confused as to what their future looks like. This is one of the major contributing factors in the transition difficulties and is the same for the participants from all three service groups, with no discernible differences between the men and women.