Transcript wp.2.e
Quality in work Dimensions and indicators in the EES Bakground Lisbon and Nice Councils: key priority for EES Stockholm Summit (March 2001): list of criteria for quality in work COM(2001)313: "Employment and social policies: a framework for investing in quality" EMCO indicators list: Laeken (Nov 2001) COM(2003)728:" Improving quality in work: a review of recent progress" Central issue in employment and social policies Quality in work: guiding principle of Social policy agenda One of the three overarching objectives in the Employment Guidelines 2003-2005 The 10 dimensions and main indicators agreed in 2001 1. Intrinsic job quality Ind.: Transitions between non-employment and within employment 2. Skills, lifelong learning and career development. Ind.: % of working age population participating in education and training 3. Gender equality Ind: Ratio of women's hourly earnings index to men's for paid employees at work 15+ hours The 10 dimensions : continued 4. Health and safety at work Ind: Evolution of the incident rate (number of accidents at work per 100.000 persons in employment 5. Flexibility and security Ind: % of employes working part-time and those with fixed-term contracts 6. Inclusion and access to the labour market Ind.: Transitions between employment, unemployment and inactivity The 10 dimensions : continued 7.Work organisation and work-life balance Ind.: Absolute difference in employment rates without the presence of any children and with the presence of a child aged 0-6, by sex. 8. Social dialogue and worker involvement (no agreed indicator so far) The 10 dimensions:continued 9. Diversity and non-discrimination Only context indicators: employment and/or unemployments gaps of 55-64 old, immigrants, disabled people 10. Overal work performance Ind.: Growth in labour productivity, measured as chage in the levels of GDP per capita of the employed population and per hour worked (in %) Employment growth ↔ quality in work. Sustainable employment growth needs: • better balance between flexibility and security; • real opportunities for upwards mobility for low quality jobs; • improved upwards quality dynamics for more employment; • stability and employability. Productivity ↔ quality in work. Higher productivity comes from: • better work organisation; • improved working conditions; • better quality investment in human capital; • more efficient and effective training. Major differences between Member States: → Some perform well under most quality indicators: Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and Austria. → Some others display consistently less favorable performance: Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal. → The rest are mixed: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Luxemburg, UK and Ireland. Best quality performers (DK, NL, SE, AT) : • highest employment rates; • high share of permanent contracts; • high collective agreement coverage; • above average GDP per hour worked. Less favourable performers (IT, EL, ES, PT) : • lowest self registered job satisfaction; • high share of fixed term contracts; • low participation of adults in education/training; • least good gender unemployment gaps. But: • • average (EL and ES) above average (PT) older workers employment rates; good performance unemployed to employed (PT); • reasonable accident statistics (EL). Overall assessment. Progress, if uneven, is evident in : - education and skills - employment gender gaps - transitions from unemployment to employment - flexibility and share of part-time contracts Overall assestment There is scope for considerable improvement in : - employment rate for older workers gender pay gaps reducing segmentation in the labour market better work-life balance integration of immigrants and disabled people health and safety at work Overall assestment More determined policy action is needed: - in reinforcing prevention and activation policies - in reducing unemployment and poverty . . . Social partners must have strong involvement and commitment