1. Quality of jobs: Indexing European working conditions and policy proposals Prof. Dr. Dr. Andranik Tangian Hans-Böckler-Foundation, Düsseldorf & University of Karlsruhe Visiting researcher at the ETUI andranik-tangian@boeckler.de & ATangian@ETUI.org andranik-tangian@boeckler.deATangian@ETUI.org ETUC conference ‘Facing the jobs crisis’ Madrid, March 2-3, 2010

2. 2 Data source: 4th European Working Conditons Survey 2005 31 Countries: EU-27, CH, NO, HR, TR 23,788 employees from totally 29,860 persons interviewed 143 from over 200 variables (objective and subjective factors) aggregated into 15 sub- indicators as in the DGB Gute-Arbeit Index + 1 variable General satisfaction with working conditions

3. 3 The indicator structure as of DGB indicator Gute Arbeit

4. 4 Dimension 1. Qualification and development possibilities (a) Training opportunities –Training paid for or provided by employer during the past 12 months, in number of days (q28a) –On-the-job training (co-workers, supervisors) during the past 12 months, Y/N (q28c) – Other forms of on-site training and learning (e.g. self- learning) during the past 12 months, Y/N (q28d) – Educational leave over the past 12 months, Y/N (q34ab) (b) Training-requiring working conditions –Complex tasks, Y/N (q23e) –Learning new things at work, Y/N (q23f) –Necessity of different skills (in rotating tasks) Y/N (q26a1) –Necessity of further training, in 3 grades ( q27)

5. 5 Two ways of weighting/scaling Normalization (HBS method): min, max → 0,100 Normalization introduces equalizing weights, according to the range of variables Standardization (OECD method): μ, σ →0,100 Standardization introduces equalizing weights, according to standard deviations Unless no other information is available, equal weights have the maximal likelihood, moreover questions with higher weights favor those for whom these questions are important In stepwise aggregation, the variables in larger groups are lower weighted Correlations between variables make weighting less important

6. 6 HBS-OECD country rank correlation 1. Qualification possibilities.9883 2. Creativity.9948 3. Career chances.9996 4. Possibilities for influence.9895 5. Communication and transparency.9867 6. Quality of management.9677 7. Industrial culture.9863 8. Collegiality.9976 9. Meaningfulness of work.9996 10. Working time arrangements.8516 11. Intensity / exhaustiveness.9976 12. Physical strains.9714 13. Emotional strains.9742 14. Job stability.9915 15. Income.9750 Total quality of work.9895

7. 7 Quality of jobs: at best medium and poor learning possibilities …………………………………………………..

8. 8 Quality of jobs: below average in flexible employment

9. 9 Quality of jobs: by far better in finances

10. 10 Quality of jobs: men have 9 of 15 aspects better

11. 11 Importance of factors for satisfaction with working conditions …………………………………………………

12. 12 Flexibility and precariousness ……………………………………………

13. 13 Flexibility and precariousness : Factual ≠ institutional flexibility Strictness of employment protection legislation ~ external numerical flexibility (OECD 2004) Work with no contract ~ outside legislation (EWCS 2005) United Kingdom Switzerland Sweden Germany … Turkey 0.4 1.1 1.6 1.8... 4.9 130 of 875 = 15% 26 of 847 = 3% 1 of 968 =0.1% 32 of 911 = 4% … 302 of 454 = 67%

14. 14 Flexibility and precariousness 1.No country in the flexicurity corner 2.Flexibility- precariousness dependence is statistically certain: Regression on 23788 employees with P-value=0.0000 Conclusion: flexicurity is hardly attainable in practice Flexicurity domain: no country

15. 15 Flexibility and precariousness: flexibility hits just employability

16. 16 Proposals : Workplace tax/bonus The worse working conditions (“social pollution” indexed), the higher the tax paid by the employer –Stimulation of improving working conditions –Instrument to improve production quality → competitiveness of European economy –Compensation of health and safety risks at work and of bad working conditions Prototypes: –French precariousness premium at the end of a temporary contract (10% of total earnings) –Green tax which stimulates enterprises to consider the natural environment (social environment)

17. 17 Proposals : Flexinsurance Employer's contribution to social security is proportional to the flexibility of the contract indexed –Compensation of unemployment risks –Motivation to hire employees more favorably with no rigidly restricting labour market flexibility –Flexible instrument to regulate deregulation: adjustments need no new legislation –Moral aspect: social justice Prototypes of “dismissal taxes” –Progressive: American experience rating –Flat: Austrian Abfertigungsrecht

18. 18 Proposals: Politicization and internationalization of unions No strong left parties with strong political claims easing collective bargaining on economic issues → political engagement of unions, or creating union’s parties Multi-national companies are unattainable for national unions → creation of union multi- nationals (e.g. Coca-Cola union, Ford union) Accounting of bargaining outcomes, monitoring of collective bargaining

19. 19 Proposals : Constraining financial markets Foreign investments mean export of jobs Employers are given a legal instrument for pressure on European governments: ‘If you do not accept our requirements, we move jobs abroad’ The way out is where the way in → Constraining financial liberty

20. 20 Towards a majority-friendly Europe Economic priorities are good primarily for employers (increasing inequality, precarious work, in-work poverty) → Actual sustainable development with economic priorities is good for employers (minority) rather than employees (majority), and is therefore non- democratic → For a majority-friendly Europe, sustainable social development is required It needs a change of political philosophy All errors in politics and morals are based on philosophical errors.Condorcet (1743–1794)