150 likes | 159 Views
This final conference of the InGRID project in Brussels explores job quality and vulnerability-at-work indicators in Europe, aiming to characterize vulnerable employee groups and develop methods for future surveys. The session covers state-of-knowledge on employment vulnerability, Spectrum of vulnerability drivers, InGRID outputs, & conclusions. It delves into defining vulnerability, typology of jobs, and measuring cumulative risks at the workplace, providing insights and strategies to address vulnerabilities.
E N D
Final conference InGRID projectBrussels, 17 January 2017 Job quality and vulnerability-at-work indicators in Europe Majda SEGHIR (CEET, CNAM)
Introduction • Purpose: • Characterising vulnerable groups of employees to poor WC (Working Conditions) and OSH (Occupational Safety and Health) issues • Developing methods to facilitate the identification of these vulnerable groups in future WC&OSH surveys • Why? • EU strategy on inclusive labor markets / revised European Employment strategy • Prevention policy design targeting vulnerable groups: • Prevent the emergence of vulnerable employees • Mitigation: addressing the causal risk factors • Coping strategies design: avoiding further harm
Outline State of knowledge on employment vulnerability Spectrum of vulnerability drivers InGRID outputs Conclusion
State of knowledge • Employment vulnerability: “precarious work that places people at risk of continuous poverty and injustices resulting in imbalance of power in the employer-worker relationship” (TUC commission) • Vulnerable workers: • ILO: own-account workers + contributing family workers • Structural vulnerabilities: women, migrants, minorities, disabled workers • Life-cycle vulnerabilities: children, the elderly, youth • Limitations: a lack of clear conceptual framework • Definition: targeting all the employees • Data: adequacy, comparabilityacross countries and over time • Assessmentmethodology: ex-post approach
Spectrum of vulnerability drivers • Macro-level: • Economic drivers: economic downturn, financial crisis, austerity, change of work organisation,... • Institutional and legal drivers: collective bargaining coverage, minimum wages, deregulation, privatisation, welfare policies,… • Technological change: technology development, ICT advances and use, changing working environment and organisation • Micro-level: • Socio-demographic drivers: gender, education, age • Job content: work complexity, task autonomy, work intensity • Employment conditions: fixed-term contract, temporary agency working, self-employment, working schedule • Working environment: social climate, physical environment
HIVA: Typology of jobs • 8 job types (specific configurations of job quality indicators): active, saturated, low strain part time work, repetitive, emotionally demanding, passive, high strain • Assessment methodology: • Selection of 20 relevant job quality indicators (e.g. complexity, autonomy, voice, wage) to get the job types relying on Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) • Multiple linear regressions to model the relationship between job types and job quality outcomes (e.g. satisfaction, sustainability, security)
CEET: Vulnerability measure • Definition of vulnerability: • the existence and the extent of cumulative risks at the workplace • the danger of adverse working conditions (AWC) that may threaten the worker’s well-being • Assessment methodology: • Construct a composite indicator of cumulative AWC • Create a pseudo panel from the repeated cross-section of the EWCS • Define a threshold of AWC above which an employee is considered at risk • Estimate vulnerability as the probability that an employee will have a level of AWC above the predefined threshold • Vulnerable employees are those having a probability of 50% to have AWC above the predefined threshold
CEET: AWC indicator • Aim: the AWC composite indicator is developed to measure the cumulative risks at the workplace • Components: • Adverse social climate • Adverse physical environment • Atypical working time • High work intensity • Low work complexity
CEET: ranking of Average vulnerability per survey edition and per country
Conclusion • Two complementary approaches to identify vulnerable groups across European countries: • Job types entry: emotional demanding work, passive work, high strain work • Advantage: this method provides an improvement guide for each job type • Employees’ characteristics entry: employees with fixed work arrangement / high skilled blue collars / workers in the industrial sector within small-sized firms • Advantage: this method provides a warning system of employees at risk • Future development: • Integrating the last edition of the EWCS (2015) • Robustness tests with different thresholds of probabilities