The European Working Conditions Survey An Overview

Transcription

1 The European Working Conditions Survey An Overview ETUI Conference Brussels, March 2012 David Foden Head of Unit Working Conditions and Industrial Relations Eurofound

2 Contents Main characteristics of the (5th) EWCS Dimensions of the quality of work and employment Learning and developing on the job Work intensity and job autonomy Exposure to physical and psychosocial risks Work organisation and social innovation: (productive and innovative) Working time and work-life balance Conclusions sustainability towards 2020? :

3 5 th European Working Conditions Survey 5 waves: 1991, 1995, 2000, 2005 and 2010 Covering EU and neighbouring countries 5 th EWCS (2010): 34 countries: EU27 + NO + ACC3 + IPA3 43,816 interviews ( interviews per country) Cross sectional survey Surveying workers employees and self-employed (15+; LFS definition) Face to face interviews at peoples homes Average duration 40 minutes Same questionnaire translated in all languages 2010: 25 languages and 16 language variants Dataset on the essex data archive from December 2011

4 Learning and developing on the job: Employer paid training by country, employees 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Finland Netherlands Slovenia Sweden United Kingdom Czech Republic Norway Ireland Denmark Austria Belgium Estonia Slovakia Luxembourg Germany Poland Malta Spain Portugal Cyprus Latvia Hungary Italy France Lithuania Romania Albania Kosovo Croatia Greece FYROM Montenegro Turkey Bulgaria Employer paid training Asked for training but did not get it

5 Trends in creative work and task variation 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Solving unforeseen problems Complex tasks Learning new things Applying ow n ideas Not monotonous tasks Not repetitive tasks Creative w ork Task variation EU EU EU EU

6 Trends and country comparisons in work intensity Tight deadlines (at least ¼ of the time) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% EU12 EU15 EU Turkey Cyprus Germany Finland Malta Ireland Slovenia Austria United Kingdom Sweden Norway Hungary Czech Republic France Greece Kosovo Croatia Estonia Netherlands Romania Denmark Belgium FYROM Italy Albania Luxembourg Spain Latvia Slovakia Montenegro Poland Bulgaria Lithuania Portugal

7 Trends and country comparisons in autonomy Ability to choose or change methods of work 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% High-skilled clerical Low-skilled clerical High-skilled manual Low-skilled manual Malta Denmark Norway Sweden Albania Finland Estonia Latvia Luxembourg Italy Belgium Netherlands Germany Lithuania Portugal Kosovo Slovenia Montenegro United Kingdom Poland France Hungary Spain Greece Austria Ireland Czech Republic Romania Slovakia Turkey Croatia Cyprus FYROM Bulgaria

8 Work intensity, decision latitude and sustainability of the work 80% 16% 70% 14% 60% 12% 50% 10% 40% 8% 30% 6% 20% 4% 10% 2% 0% low demand, low control low demand, high control high demand, low control high demand, high control low demand, low control low demand, high control high demand, low control high demand, high control 0% Doing job at 60 Percentage 55+

9 Work intensity and job autonomy 0,9 0,85 Managers 0,8 0,75 Skilled agricultural workers Job autonomy 0,7 Agriculture Professionals Other services Financial services 0,65 Technicians Education Public administration 0,6 Health Clerical support workers Construction 0,55 Wholesale & retail Service and sales workers Industry Craft and trades workers 0,5 Elementary occupations Transport 0,45 Plant and machine 0,4 operators 0,25 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45 0,5 0,55 Work intensity

10 Trends in physical risks Vibrations Noise High temperatures Low temperatures Breathing in smoke/ dust and/or vapours Chemical substances 1991 EC EC EU EU EU EU EU27 Tiring or painful positions Heavy loads Repetitive hand or arm movements 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

11 Percentage of workers thinking their health or safety is at risk because of their work, by country and gender 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Denmark Netherlands Ireland Italy United Kingdom Germany Czech Republic Kosovo Norway Austria Belgium France Finland Portugal Luxembourg Albania Turkey Montenegro Malta Lithuania Slovakia Cyprus Hungary Poland Spain Croatia Romania Slovenia Estonia Bulgaria Greece Sweden FYROM Latvia Men Women Total

12 Change in exposure to physical risks (index) between 2000 and 2010, by country EL DK HU FR PT BG EE FI LU SI MT LT SE BE LV SL IT PL AT DE CZ UK IE NL ES RO CY

13 Subject to adverse social behaviour 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Kosovo Turkey Cyprus Albania FYROM Italy Portugal Montenegro Spain Romania Poland Hungary Malta Bulgaria Greece Croatia Ireland Slovenia EU27 Slovakia Netherlands Sweden Lithuania Luxembourg Germany Denmark Estonia Latvia France United Kingdom Belgium Czech Republic Norway Finland Austria Men Women

14 Social innovation (employees 10+ only) : you are consulted before targets for your work are set, you are involved in improving the work organisation or work processes of your department or organisation, you can influence decisions that are important for your work. 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 Kosovo Denmark Netherlands Norway Ireland Finland Sweden Malta Estonia FYROM Latvia Slovenia United Kingdom Czech Republic Belgium Croatia Luxembourg Hungary Cyprus Poland Lithuania Austria EU27 Slovakia Albania Romania Portugal Spain France Germany Bulgaria Italy Greece Turkey

15 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Different types of teamwork Denmark Sweden Finland Norway Ireland Luxembourg Lithuania Kosovo United Kingdom Malta Belgium Austria FYROM Poland Germany Netherlands Montenegro Croatia Czech Republic France Slovenia Estonia Romania Bulgaria Slovakia Hungary Latvia Turkey Italy Albania Greece Cyprus Spain Portugal no teamwork team with some autonomy team with no autonomy team with much automomy

16 Task rotation : empl ,00% 80,00% 60,00% 40,00% 20,00% 0,00% Denmark Netherlands Norway Austria Sweden United Kingdom Germany Finland Ireland Malta Belgium EU27 Estonia Slovenia Luxembourg Lithuania Croatia France Spain FYROM Kosovo Bulgaria Greece Latvia Slovakia Romania Italy Albania Poland Cyprus Czech Republic Portugal Hungary Turkey no task rotation autonomous fixed task rotation autonomous multitasking management controlled fixed task rotation management controlled multitasking

17 Working long hours Working less than 48h Working 48 h or more Problems with work life balance Work affects my health negatively Work intensity (high speed > ½ time) Consulted for your work targets 16% 38% 23% 37% 44% 54% 22% 29% I feel at home at work 22 % 33 %

18 Working time duration Working time is decreasing on average From 40.5 hrs/week in 1991 (EC12) to 37.5 hrs/week in EU27 (2010) - On average men work 7 hrs more than women in paid empl - However: paid + unpaid work: women work more Time segregation - Women work more shorter hours - Men work more longer hours 20 or less or more Male 6.6% 5.9% 56.8% 9.7% 21.0% Female 19.5% 19.0% 45.4% 6.0% 10.1%

19 And if we look at all working time FT male PT male FT female PT female paid w ork commuting time second job unpaid w ork

20 Working shifts, on call Problems with WLB Work affect my health negatively Work intensity (high speed ½) Consulted for your work targets I feel at home at work Shift work No shift work On call Not on call 29% 15% 26% 17% 33% 23% 31% 23% 55% 44% 51% 44% 40% 48% 52% 46% 60% 62% 69% 69%

21 Working all around the clock? Working time organisation Standard working time still the norm for the majority of workers (9 to 5 jobs / same hours/ same nr of days etc) This is more the case for women than for men But a considerable proportion of workers work at other times 16% of the workers work long days (5+ times/month) 10% of workers do night work (+ 3 times/month) 17% of the workers do shift work 20% work on call 53% work at the weekend at least once a month 26% work at least one Sunday a month

22 Work life balance 18% of workers have problems with work-life balance Men > women esp. men yrs old Dissatisfaction for women more evenly spread over career But flexibility of workers and employers One third of the workers can easily take 1 hour off Easier for men than for women More than one third of the workers work in their free time Slightly more men and for women Nearly 20 % (both men and women) do this more than once per week

23 Job sustainability and working conditions Male Female Male Female Autonomy Low Posturerelated index Low Work intensity Social innovation Work well done High High Low Job offers possibilities for career development Low High High Low Work-life balance unfit High fit never Learning new things Low Always High 63 60

24 Able and willing to do the same job at 60? 100,00% 80,00% 60,00% 40,00% 20,00% 0,00% NL DE IE NO DK UK SE FI CY IT EE EU27 LV BE AT RO LT CZ MT SK LU BG PL AL ES HR HU FR EL ME KO PT MK SI TR Yes, I think so I would not want to No, I do not think so

25 Conclusions Sustainability : emerging dimension of the EU debate Slow improvements over time, important variations. Improvement of working conditions across all dimensions of quality of work and employment matter Exposure to physical risks factors : No inevitable improvement Good job design : reducing work intensity? Modern work organisation Work life balance fit Learning environment Not all measures are costly. Can we change work to make it better (as well as more productive)?

26 Next steps Overview report launch April 12 th, European Parliament Analytical reports Quality of work and employment; working time and WLB; employability and security; work and well-being; sustainable work and ageing; work organisation and innovation; work and gender; sectoral analysis Data available Prepare