1 | P a g e
Insecure Employment and Social Protection
A Qualitative Study into Zero-Hour Contract worker’s in the
Netherlands
and
United Kingdom
.
John O’Donnell – 11252588 – johnodonell1988@yahoo.co.uk
Master’s Thesis in Sociology: Comparative Organisation and Labour Studies University of Amsterdam – 14-08-2017
1st supervisor dr. J. Ruitenberg 2nd supervisor dr. J.J. De Deken
2 | P a g e
Abstract
Since the 2008 global financial crisis there has been a significant increase in the use of “Zero-Hour” contracts, as employers try to find cost saving ways of meeting short term staffing needs. This particular type of ‘non-standard employment’, operates on the premise of no guaranteed hours of work, and workers are only paid for those hours when the employer calls on their labour. There has been an abundance of academic literature published regarding the economic uncertainty from which the expansion of the “zero-hour contract” can be contextualised, however, there is comparatively little published in relation to the experiences of employees working within this unstable form of employment and how its effects directly impact on a person’s sense of security - or insecurity. This thesis focuses on zero-hour contract workers in the Netherlands and United Kingdom. Feelings of security are also influenced by the protection that is provided by the state, both in terms of welfare and employment law. Therefore, social and institutional differences between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom will be compared to explore how the impact of insecure zero-hour employment for workers, is relative to the formal safety net that surrounds them. The aim of this research was to conduct cross national qualitative research, carried out through semi structured interviews with employees in both the Netherlands and the United Kingdom; all of which are employed under zero-hour employment contracts. The study found that the amount of security one has, can be correlated with the level of responsibility one has in the household. Workers in the Netherlands appear to feel more protected by the formal safety net (employment and welfare state protection), however, this is largely due to the fact that workers in the UK feel very minimally protected in terms of unemployment benefit, with a system that is complicated in its formation. Some of the participants reported that the insecure nature of the job had impacted upon their mental health and well-being. Almost all the research participants want to work more hours and feel under-employed.
3 | P a g e
Table of Contents
Abstract ... 2 List of tables ... 6 List of figures ... 6 Introduction ... 81. Theoretical Framework
... 121.1 Standard employment relationship (SER) ... 12
1.2 The rise of flexibility in the labour market ... 15
1.3 Employment under Neo-Liberalism ... 17
1.3.1 Functional flexibility... 20
1.3.2 Numerical flexibility (internal / external)… ... 20
1.4 Consequences of flexible labour on the Well-Being of employees ... 22
1.5 Labour Law and Social Protection ... 25
1.6 Job Insecurity ... 28
2. Method and Research Design
... 312.1 Research Design ... 32
2.2 Data Gathering Strategy ... 32
2.3 Research particpants and sample groups ... 35
3. Social and Institutional differences –
Netherlands
and United
Kingdom
... 363.1 Labour Law and Dismissal Protection ... 37
3.2 In work poverty ... 39
4 | P a g e
3.4 Unemployment Provision. ... 43
Netherlands (WW) (WWB) ... 44
United Kingdom (JSA) (UC) ... 46
Unemployment net replacement rates ... 49
Genorosity waiting days ... 52
3.5 Child Benefits ... 52
3.6 Pension build up ... 54
3.1.1 Net pension replacement rates... 58
3.1.2 % Income poverty rates for pensioners by age and gender ... 59
4. The Zero Hour Contract
... 604.1 Zero Hour Contract United Kingdom ... 62
4.1.1 Underemployment ... 63
4.2 Zero Hour Contract Netherlands ... 65
4.2.1 Underemployment ... 66
5. Findings and discussion
... 695.1 How do Zero Hour workers experience their employment postion in terms of security and its effects on psychological well-being? ... 69
5.1.1 Household Compostion... 69
5.1.2 Psychological and behavioural consequences ... 71
5.2 Welfare State Assistance (formal safety net) ... 73
5.2.1 Unemployment Benefit ... 74
5 | P a g e
5.2.3 Pensions ... 76
5.2.4 Labour Law and Dismissal protection ... 77
5.2.5 Sickness absenteeism .. ... 78
5.3 In what ways do people adapt their lifestyle to the Zero Hour Contract? ... 79
5.3.2 Attitudes towards spending and saving money ... 80
5.3.1 Housing ... 79
5.4 Underemployment ... 81
5.5 How do Zero Hour Contract Workers view their posotion on the labour market? ... 83
Conclusion... 85
Limitations ... 85
Bibliography... 90
6 | P a g e
List of tables
Table 1: Different forms of flexibility ... 19
Table 2: Share of permanent and temporary employment (%) ... 38
Table 3: In-work at-risk-of-poverty rate, employed persons aged 16-64, before and after social transfers (%) ... 40
Table 4: Net replacement rates in first month after unemployment for single person 60% Average Wage, no children – and with 2 children (%) ... 50
Table 5: Net replacement rates in first month after unemployment for single 100% Average Wage, no children - and with 2 children (%) ... 50
Table 6: Net replacement rates in first month after unemployment for single 120% Average Wage, no children - and with 2 children (%) ... 51
Table 7: Social expenditure on unemployment (cash benefits) as a % of overall GDP ... 51
Table 8: Dutch child benefit (kinderbijslag) – and UK Child benefit ... 53
Table 9: Net pension replacement rates for male and females: 2014 ... 58
Table 10: % Income poverty rates for pensioners by age and by gender: 2014 ... 59
7 | P a g e
List of figures
Figure 1: The SER-situation according to Vobruba. ... 26
Figure 2: Recent developments according to Vobruba... 27
Figure 3: Job Insecurity Model ... 29
Figure 4: National minimum wage per hour – 25 years and above... 41
Figure 5: Zero Hour Contracts: UK... 63
Figure 6: Unemployment rate in the United Kingdom ... 64
Figure 7: Zero Hour Contracts: Netherlands ... 65
8 | P a g e Key words: Job insecurity: Zero Hour Contract: Numerical Flexibility.
Precarious employment.
1.1 Introduction
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) affirms that, since the 1990’s there has been a surge in non-standard, “flexible” forms of employment throughout the world’s most industrialized countries (OECD 2015). Data suggests that more than half of all jobs created since 1995 (within the OECD area) have been formed on the basis of a ‘Non-Standard’ form, a figure which accounts for more than one third of total employment. Organizing employment relations on a flexible basis is very attractive to employers; facilitating them with the control to strategically organize employees working hours to best suit company needs; thus, enabling them to maximise outcomes in terms of productivity and efficiency. An issue with this flexibility approach, however, is its effect on the workforce, be that it is not a strategy which focuses on the wellbeing of people, but on the wellbeing of business.
The economic crisis unleashed by the banking failures of 2008, the most severe since the crash of the 1930s, has resulted in a period of deep economic stagnation, which still persists in large parts of the European economy, resulting in significant numbers of employees; despite working in advanced societies, being exposed to higher levels of economic uncertainty than they had been accustomed to in recent decades (Crouch 2015). This economic situation has created a climate in which insecure non-standard forms of employment have continued to rapidly increase creating an environment in which workers suffer increased levels of anxiety in relation to their job security (OECD 2015).
Businesses operating in the Netherlands and United Kingdom (UK) have, since the financial crash, increasingly adopted employment policies which embrace the use of “Zero Hour” Contracts; a particular type of ‘non-standard employment’, which operates on the premise that there are no guaranteed hours of work, and, as such, “workers are only paid for those hours when the employer calls on their labour’’ (Crouch 2015, p.2).
From a business perspective, the benefits of the Zero Hour Contract are obvious; it enables them (business) to save in terms of wage output; only employing a worker as and when required, as opposed to being legally obliged to guarantee a set number of working
9 | P a g e
hours. The outcomes regarding the growth of this form of contemporary employment contract should not however be measured by business alone and must be viewed in conjunction with the effect on the overall sense of security experienced by workers employed under such a contract. This thesis will attempt to subjectively reveal the realities for individuals and families’ dependant on wages from a zero-hour contract, and will endeavour to clarify its affects in terms of the level of security; or lack of it, as experienced by them, acknowledging that the impact may differ depending on particular household circumstances.
The extent of worker’s security is also influenced by other relatable factors; the degree of protection provided by both the institutional and social environment available to them. This thesis will attempt to highlight any social and institutional differences between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom and will explore the significance of their respective safety nets as to the level of added security they provide; which in turn affects the overall impact of insecure zero-hour employment for workers. Social protection is linked to insecure employment in that it can provide a sense of security for the (at risk of becoming) unemployed, through providing benefits in order to manage the risk of unemployment.
To fully understand and analyse the impact of insecure employment at an individual level, the views of employees working on a zero-hour contract need to be sought and analysed. Zero-hour workers are a minority, representing a small percentage of the employed labour force in both the Netherlands and UK. The purpose of this thesis is to give voice to a minority group working within the labour market, in order to investigate the level of security workers have, in this particular precarious form of employment.
There has been an abundance of academic literature published regarding the economic uncertainty from which the expansion of the “zero-hour contract” can be contextualised, however, there is comparatively little published in relation to the experiences of employees working within this unstable form of employment as to how it directly impacts on a person’s sense of security – or insecurity. Questions that remain include: How do zero hour workers experience their employment position in terms of security? How do they perceive their personal situation in the labour market?And in what ways do the experiences of people working under zero hour contracts in the Netherlands and United Kingdom differ, relative to their institutional surroundings? The aim of my research project is to shed some light on this intellectual gap.
10 | P a g e
Outline of Thesis
Chapter 1 will discuss the theoretical framework. It will offer clarification as to the concept
of the Standard Employment Relationship [SER]; followed by a discussion on the deterioration of its application in the workplace; as evident through the rise in more flexible forms of employment contracts. It will thereafter give an overview as to the precariousness that can emerge from this movement; in particular it will outline a wide range of empirical studies that reveal the consequences of flexible labour on the wellbeing of employees. The demise of labour law and social protection will thereafter be discussed in relation to their effect on workers in insecure jobs.
Chapter 2 will outline the qualitative methodological approach that was undertaken and will
reveal how the various research themes which underpin the sociological enquiry into precarious work will be examined. A description of the research design, the data gathering strategy that was undertaken, and the profiles of the research participants interviewed will also be provided.
Chapter 3 will explore the various social and institutional differences between the
Netherlands and the UK, which can influence the levels of security felt by zero-hour contract workers. The first step of the empirical analysis is based upon secondary data comparing various parameters such as; dismissal protection, unemployment provision and replacement rates, child benefits, state pension schemes and net pension replacement rates. Furthermore, the generosity and conditionality which effects eligibility and access to social transfers for those in non-standard employment will be explored. The institutional description of the two country cases form part of the context of my own primary data gathering through semi structured interviews which will be analysed in Chapter 5.
Chapter 4 will define the Zero Hour contract and highlight how its expansion, following the
2008 financial crisis coincides with the rise in under-employment for a significant percentage of workers within the labour market. It will statistically draw comparison between the Netherlands and the UK as to the extent of the increase of the Zero Hour Contract, as well as
11 | P a g e
its effect on reducing unemployment figures in both countries, a reality often masked by under-unemployment.
Chapter 5 will provide a description and analysis of the semi structured interviews
undertaken with zero-hour contract workers in both the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. A number of elements are examined; number of hours offered; sickness absenteeism; dependency of the job to provide a household income; levels of protection provided by the institutional safety net, adaptations made in terms of housing tenure and how money is saved and spent, all of which directly impact on feelings of security, which, in turn, can have psychological and behavioural consequences for the worker. Within the analysis, the institutional differences highlighted in chapter 3 will be applied to my research groups.
Conclusion – The final section of the thesis will attempt to integrate the theoretical and
empirical contexts highlighted in chapters 1 and 3, and critically reflect upon the research findings analysed in chapter 5. It will also highlight the limitations of the research carried out (eg. the shortcomings of the research project).
12 | P a g e
1. Theoretical Framework
1.1 Standard Employment Relationship (SER)
In order to clarify the move to more insecure, non-standard forms of employment, it is useful to draw parallel with the more traditional, Standard Employment Relationship (SER). After World War II, the economy was flourishing. A buoyant labour market was regulated through an active Keynesian macro-economic paradigm; with state intervention through public policies, designed to achieve full employment and price stability (Keynes 1936; Clasen and Clegg 2011; Sarwat 2014). Governments advocated deficit spending on labour-intensive infrastructure projects to stimulate employment and stabilize wages (Sarwat 2014).
Manufacturing industries (textiles, clothing, ship building, mining, steel works) where thriving and plentiful employment opportunities were available, even for those with low skills (Clasen and Clegg 2011). As a result, employment rates rose and a steady trajectory of economic growth was established. As Kalleberg (2008) & Crouch (2015) elucidate, capitalism had its most successful period during industrial times, “the three decades following World War II were marked by sustained growth and prosperity’’ (Kalleberg 2008, p.4).
The essay of British sociologist T.H. Marshall, written in 1949, proposed that only through continuous expansion of rights linked to citizenship could a stable capitalist society be established. Despite the relationship between the social state and the market remaining complex, there was some concept that social citizenship needed to be distanced from market competition and profit (Crouch 2004). This meant, among other things, that all citizens should have the right to a decent standard of living and secure employment (Bosch 2004; Crouch 2015; Streeck 2008).
The SER came into existence during the 1950s and 1960s; it was deliberately designed to protect workers and their families from market fluctuations, which, in turn, provided workers with stable incomes and careers; by safeguarding against economic and social risks, and increasing economic efficiency through stability and reduced inequality (Streeck 2009). Institutionalised rights of social and industrial citizenship, coupled with corresponding obligations from employers and governments were able to protect citizens from the pressures
13 | P a g e
of market change, thereby limiting the extent to which labour was turned into a marketable commodity (Streeck 2009).
Bosch (2004, pp.618-619) states that the SER can be defined as a, “stable, socially protected, dependent, full-time job; the basic conditions of which (working time, pay, social transfers) are regulated to a minimum level by collective agreement or by labour and/or social security law”. Hence, it is the unique combination of “full time and stable employment with attached collective bargaining features, social rights
and protections” (Van Aerden 2014, p.772). The SER can be associated with stability, as full-time employment guarantees workers with a living wage and an adequate level of social protection. Furthermore, a stable job places the relations between employer and employee on a long-term footing (Bosch 2004). “The Standard Employment Relationship enables employees to plan for the long term” (Bosch 2004, p.619). This provides workers with security, and employers with a stable workforce, which leads to increased production.
Essentially, the SER sets out a fixed number of hours an employee will routinely work and be paid for, which subsequently enables an element of security to a workers’ life. Employees are entitled to various forms of
social protection including sickness and holiday pay, and pension provisions that are embedded into the contract, therefore, workers are not only paid for the hours / days they work, but also for times when they are not working or they are further investing in their capacity to work i.e. via training programmes to enhance both party’s future productivity (Bosch 2004).
Through these SER arrangements employees have dual protection via full time, open ended, on-site waged employment, coupled with income maintenance in the form ofunemployment
Standard Employment Relationship
•
Full time contract (open ended)
• Stable long-term employment
relationship
• Standard working hours
(8hour day)
• Conferring to social benefits
and social protection
• Negotiated through collective
bargaining and statutory rules
of the welfare state
14 | P a g e
insurance and sickness pay, in case of a transition period between jobs or in periods of illness or accident. Hence, the SER can be viewed as a relationship that partially de-commodifies labour, protecting the employee on a macro-level from the insecurities of market volatilities, and on a microlevel from the vulnerabilities of life itself, sickness, disability, old age etcetera. The SER should be viewed as the pinnacle of secure employment, that was once a reality for a large share of (male) employees in Western Europe and the United States (Bosch 2004). From around 1975, the SER began to erode and the emergence of labour market flexibility became prominent.
15 | P a g e
1.2 The rise of flexibility in the labour market
The demise of the SER was a precursor of a significant growth in flexible employment in most developed countries (Olsthoorn 2015). The mid 1970’s has been identified as the juncture in which the post war settlement, the ‘Golden Age’ came to an end; as it marked “the start of macro-economic changes that helped lead to an increase in global price competition” (Kalleberg 2008, p.2). When competition increases, prices are driven down, and the worker becomes more easily replaceable and exposed to risk (Marx 1848; Esping Andersen 1990; Polanyi 2001). The globalization of economic activity has led to upheavals in the world of work, creating new demands for productivity and
adaptability in increasingly deregulated labour markets.
The most regularly cited reasons explaining why this transformation has taken place in advanced capitalist economies throughout the world include; industrialisation, globalisation, de-regulation, Trade Union decline, service sector expansion, and government policy changes in labour law, (introduced to adapt to post-industrial conditions), which have facilitated employers use of flexibility in the workplace (Kalleberg 2008; Streeck 2009; Clasen and Clegg 2011).
Due to diminishing employment protection law, firms often choose to go for a different type of employment relationship which is less restrictive than the rigid SER. Across the OECD area,
dismissal protection and standard working time has continuously decreased (OECD 2015).
The shift in power from unions to enterprises emphasises the chances for business to enforce atypical instead of standardized employment (Streeck 2005). The importance of Trade Unions began to decline in some countries after the 1970’s, partly because economic change
Non-Standard Work
• Limited duration and finite
period
• Part-time
• Less remunerated
• Ineligible for social protection
• Flexible working hours
• Individually negotiated
• A-typical contracts:
– Agency workers (third party)
– On-call workers
– Temporary contracts
– Zero Hour contracts
16 | P a g e
led to the reduction of industrial employment and also because governments in the United Kingdom, United States and elsewhere began expelling unions from the organizations that they would consult over policy in relevant areas (Crouch 2015).
With the process of deindustrialization, companies began to outsource production, tapping into previously untouched markets, which resulted in cheaper labour and manufacturing costs, and, as a consequence, many traditional manufacturing industries (textiles, clothing, ship building, and mining) were outsourced (Crouch 2004). “In the manufacturing industry, a high proportion of mass production was shifted to low-wage countries” (Bosch 2004, p.627). Since reaching peak levels in the mid 1960’s, manufacturing employment has been in steady decline in Europe, meaning the potential for growth in the European economy today, rests overwhelmingly in the service sector; which is purported to flourish where is flexibility rather than stability (Clasen and Clegg 2011). In order to compete, firms must be able to react quickly to fluctuations in demand and therefore, seek a flexible pool of labour that can be counted on when necessary and if demand slows, can easily be laid off (Crouch 2015).
The outsourcing of a high volume of manufacturing jobs to lower-wage countries has produced a greater surplus of labour, and advancements in technology have impacted on work processes; resulting in the growth of precarious work which has contributed to greater economic inequality, insecurity and instability (Streeck 2008). The rise of economic liberalization policies, such as, private ownership, tax cuts for corporations, fiscal austerity, de-regulation and reductions in government spending, has resulted in governments taking more of a subordinate role in the economy than they had done previously during the Keynesian paradigm; which had advocated an active role for government intervention into the economy to stimulate citizens purchasing power; in order to boost consumption during periods of economic uncertainty (Keynes 1936). During the 30 years after World War II (1945-1975), Keynesianism constituted the dominant paradigm for understanding the determination of economic activity. However, in the mid-1970s the Keynesian impulse went into reverse, and was replaced by neoliberalism.
17 | P a g e
1.3 Employment under Neo-Liberalism
The deterioration of employment conditions, in particular, for low skilled workers, is not contingent but in fact, key for the functioning of this neo-liberal variant of capitalism (Howell 2015). Globalisation has not inevitably led to precarious employment, instead policies have been deliberately pursued in order to create an economic environment more conducive to capital and companies (Howell 2015). Where previously employers used to share some of the responsibility and reduce individual risk by providing job security despite market volatility, the current situation is such that the individual employee bears the majority of risk (International Labour Organization 2012). “Capital’s search for flexible labour is crucially linked to the choices made by governments that favour a deregulated monetary regime and foster wage competition” (Barbier 2013, p.17).
This has resulted in intensified economic integration whereby the rules of the market increasingly intervene into government institutions (Crouch 2004). This has paved the way for the private sector to become the dominant force of both the market and society (Block 1990).As Crouch (2015) points out, governments participate in this dominance by accepting that business will not be able to profitably employ workers or recover from economic crises if they are ‘restrained’ by regulation to protect workers’ interests. A large amount of state institutions and political parties no longer represent the majority of working peoples’ interests (Chomsky 1999). During the neo-liberal period, there has been a big redistribution away from ordinary working people towards capital and wealth.
Neoliberalism is capitalism “with the gloves off” and represents an era in which business forces are stronger and more aggressive, and face less organized competition than ever before, often leaving workers in an insecure position (Chomsky 1999). As the colossal force of neo-liberalism has escalated and spread globally, the increased emergence of the need to introduce flexibility in the workplace has become more commonplace, resulting in a general theme of workers’ rights being further eroded with various new types of ‘non-standard work’ being introduced.
Generally, a more flexible and less predictable economy has ensued across industrialized nations, resulting in firms becoming less able to survive with the old, rigid, previously
18 | P a g e
established employment forms and consequently, a proportion of the working age population has been pushed into accepting all manners of labour, just to get employment (Crouch 2015). Prior to mass production becoming largely outsourced there was high need for stable employment relations, whereas, in the post-industrial, predominately service based economies of the three most recent decades under the neo-liberal paradigm, flexible labour relations are deemed to be essential in enhancing economic growth; which has led to all jobs becoming more insecure and uncertain (Clasen and Clegg 2011). Job insecurity has helped the neo-liberal program to flourish, as workers have become too intimidated and are content with having the “privilege” of just having a job which has made it more difficult for workers to collectively mobilise and protest (Chomsky 1999).
A common quest of governments today, is to enact policies in order to help enforce flexible labour relations, which thereby encourages service sector expansion. Flexibility allows greater freedoms for companies, enabling them to hire and fire with low transaction costs in order to quickly adapt to changing market conditions. At the same time, technological transformation has made it easier for companies to compete in a more effective and transparent way against each other.
All of these macro level changes combined, have resulted in workers becoming increasingly exposed to the vagaries of the free market and the growth of uncertainty and risk (Streeck 2008). As an outcome of weakened restrictions from labour law, the power of employers to make decisions on more of a unilateral basis in order to meet fluctuating market demand creates insecurity insofar as they ultimately have the control to more easily fire employees or make changes to working conditions (Streeck 2009).
Although flexible employment was well established before the economic crisis of 2008, during and afterwards the pursuit of a flexible labour market was even more firmly pushed on the neoliberal political agenda (Berge 2014). Non-standard employment has accelerated at a faster pace with employers seeking the most flexible workforce possible. Today, the paramount concern in the fields of Industrial Relations and labour market policy is flexibility in the workplace (Streeck 2009). Flexible employment is a broad, heterogeneous entity, and thus entails many different forms. The most familiar ones are numerical (internal / external) flexibility, functional flexibility and flexible pay (Wilthagen 2004; Standing 2011).
19 | P a g e
Table 1: Different forms of flexibility
Numerical Flexibility
• Easy to fire employees
• Reduce income of employees
• Change working conditions (a.o. working time)
• Variety of contracts: temporary/fixed-term contracts (zero hour ‘contracts’), agency work and subcontracting.
External numerical flexibility
The extent to which a company has a flexible labour force in terms of employees who work under temporary or fixed-term contracts.
Internal numerical flexibility
The extent to which a company has a flexible labour force in terms of employees working variable hours, i.e. employees working under
Zero-hour contracts.
Functional Flexibility
• Workers capable and willing to switch jobs inside their existing workplace (guaranteed continued employment and additional training provided by employer).
• Variable working time and possibly pay – •Broad specific skills.
Flexible pay
• The extent to which a company can pay their employees relative to the demand and supply of the market.
20 | P a g e
1.3.1 Functional flexibility
For a while, different versions of flexibility coexisted and competed with one another (Streeck 2009). When employers and governments first began to ask workers to become more flexible, the original form was functional flexibility. Functional flexibility refers to the ability to transfer employees quickly and smoothly to different activities or tasks (Atkinson 1984; Streeck 2009). It advocates for a broad and specific skilled set of employees that are able to switch function whenever demand requires them to. Under this form of flexibility, the employee is not fired when their role is out of demand, but is transferred to another duty which can be unpredictable and stressful for the worker.
However, there is a definite form of job security present as during potential periods of low demand an employee will not lose their job, but they have to be flexible in order to switch to a different task whilst keeping their wage and maintaining an income. Despite its popularity in the 1980’sand early 90’s, functional flexibility delayed, but could not prevent the arrival of numerical flexibility. According to Streeck (2009, p.6), “this was either because its potential was exhausted too soon, or because employers resented the additional efforts it required them to undertake”.
1.3.2 Numerical flexibility (external/internal)
In order to compete in this increasingly competitive market and reduce risk, employers tend to use numerical flexibility, which enables them to shrink their workforce if necessary without heavy firing costs or rigid regulations (Kalleberg 2003; Streeck 2009). As displayed in the table above numerical flexibility is a dichotomous entity, made up of both external numerical flexibility, which consists of temporary or fixed-term employment, and internal numerical flexibility which refers to flexible contracts in the form of variable working hours, such as the Zero-hour contract (Standing 2011; Olsthoorn 2015).
Under this form of flexibility, the workers’ future is precarious and highly uncertain, as it is not clear what level of income will be available in the future and in the case of zero hour contracts, it is even uncertain when the next pay check will come from in the short term. This
21 | P a g e
creates psychological and social disruptions which increases the demand for social protection as workers need a basic income and guarantee of economic security. “Increases in job insecurity are commonly said to fuel demand for social protection” (Anderson and Pontusson 2007).
All employees that work under a flexible contract are finding themselves in varied, but insecure situations. In the case of external numerical flexibility, the fixed term / temporary contract is used. This contract is entered with a specified duration whereby one can only be sure of work, an income, and in some cases a form of social protection, while they are under contract. However, the time limit on the contract makes it difficult for a worker to make long-term plans and foresee a stable financial situation in the future.
In the case of internal numerical flexibility, the contract of choice for employers is the Zero-Hour Contract. The same long-term insecurity applies, however, in addition, an employee cannot be sure of an income for a set period of time, as the employer is not legally obliged to provide work for the on-call employee. Coupled with this, in some instances it might be difficult to resort to different jobs, because the zero-hour employee needs to be available for work anytime the employer calls.
When combined, the effects of numerical flexibility and the contracts used under its wing, are not all directly visible. There is no employment security, and therefore little income security. The insecurities that derive from working under such employment contra cts, may be more consequential than initially observed. Thus, it can be argued that flexible employment has a number of consequences that need to be taken seriously.
22 | P a g e
1.4 Consequences of flexible labour on the Well-Being of workers
Being employed in an acceptable job, is more than simply a “labour for wages “transaction, and offers the individual access to wider social participation and recognition. Not only is work vital in terms of personal income, adequate quality work also fulfils human needs by shaping personal identity, securing social status and giving structure and purpose to daily life. A sense of security is considered to be a basic human need, and positive feelings of security are associated with various positive outcomes (Maslow 1945). The increase of more flexible and less secure forms of employment, including, agency work (third party), casual work, and on call (zero hour) work, has resulted in a growing body of scientific research devoted to investigating the possible psychological (un)well-being of workers; thus, there is now a wide range of peer reviewed empirical studies which highlight the consequences of flexible labour on the general wellbeing of employees (e.g. De Witte 1999; Nolan 2000; Sverke & Hellgren 2002; Lewchuk & Clarke 2008).
The extensive research highlighted above has findings which are consistent with workers from various countries. A negative link between insecure work and perceived (mental) health has been found in; the United Kingdom (Burchell 1994; University College London 2017); The Netherlands (Van Vuuren; Klandermans 1991; Dekker & Schaufeli 1995); South-Korea (Jung 2013; Park & Kawachi 2008); Finland (Nurminen, 2008); the United States (Dehany & Ciampi 2010), and Spain (Vives 2012). American research found that, exposure to insecure work in excess of two years, increases the risk of developing some form of mental health issue by as much as 50% (Dehany & Ciampi 2010). In Spain, 23% of all mental health problems are believed to be linked with precarious labour; in 50% of these cases, there is evidence that a total of 11,5% result for a causal relationship between precarious labour and mental health issues (Vives 2012).
Furthermore, a study involving 600 UK employees found a lower level of psychological well-being amongst workers who felt insecure about their jobs (Burchell (1994, p. 198). An international comparative study of The Netherlands and Israel, concluded that employees working on insecure contracts felt more depressed, and reported more negative emotional feelings (Van Vuuren and Klandermans 1991, pp. 80–81). Other studies add to this list including, (Landsbergis 1988; Dekker & Schaufeli 1995) who suggested that the prolonged exposure to job insecurity can lead an increased level of mental, emotional, and physical
23 | P a g e
exhaustion (“burnout”), which ultimately leads to a depletion of the individual worker as a resource.
A more recent study from the Centre for Longitudinal Studies at the UCL Institute of Education, analysed data relating to in excess of 7,700 people living in England born in 1989-1990, of which five per cent were employed on Zero Hour Contracts. Researchers found that those employed under this form of contract were 50 per cent more likely to report poor mental health than those in more secure employment. The study also found more specifically that; 25-year-olds employed on such contracts, with no guaranteed hours of work were 41% less likely to report having good physical health compared to those who were not on such a contract. Furthermore, young people were also 1.5 times more likely to report having a mental health problem compared with young people on more stable employment contracts. The study concluded, financial stress or anxiety associated with having a low-status job to be the main cause of the negative impact of zero-hours contracts on mental health. Insecure employment is also consistently associated with a reduced level of job satisfaction. Research by Ashford (1989), involving a heterogeneous sample of employees, found a significantly lower level of job satisfaction amongst those who felt insecure about their jobs. Furthermore, Nelson (1995) studied a sample group of public sector workers who were facing privatization and (possible) subsequent job changes or job loss. As a result, work experience in terms of job satisfaction was affected; the mental and physical health of the respondents being significantly decreased after the post-privatization period, with their perceptions of uncertainty being cited as partially to blame for this decline.
It can be argued that, overall, temporary workers tend to be less satisfied with their job than permanent workers, and this dissatisfaction is attached to insecurity (OECD 2002; Myoung-Hee 2008). Temporary workers are thought to be vulnerable to job strain owing to poor job characteristics, most notably reduced control and limited support. The Second European Survey on Working Conditions (Benach 2002; Letourneux 1998), stated that temporary workers experience less autonomy than permanent workers. Furthermore, their type of work is often highly monotonous, thus implying few possibilities for skill utilization (Hall 2006). O’Brien (1986, pp. 53–59), documents the importance of skill utilisation, highlighting that under-employment leads to lower job satisfaction and to poorer mental health, as measured by anxiety levels, self-esteem, and life satisfaction.
24 | P a g e
Further to issues of unpredictability, uncontrollability also plays a crucial role. The lack of control, or the feeling of powerlessness towards the threat, is considered by some authors to be core experience of job insecurity (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt 1984: Dekker & Schaufeli 1995). At the end of ‘1990s, two empirical studies concluded that French and Dutch workers with a temporary contract reported lower psychological well-being than those with a permanent contract (Lasfargues 1999; Klein-Hesselink & Van Vuuren 1999). Non-permanent employees in general have less control over decisions relating to working hours and are more often affected by “unsocial” working hours or irregular and unplanned working time (Nolan. 2000; Burchell 2002).
In addition to economic losses, the uncertainty and insecurity that comes with temporary and precarious employment can dismantle the meaning of work, even the meaning of life or identity itself. The experience of precarity corrodes one’s identity and promotes anomie. Sennett (1998) argues “uncertainty about the future may affect couples’ decision making on key things such as the timing of marriage and children, as well as the number of children to have. The correlative of precarious employment, experienced frequently by workers in de-regulated labour markets, is unemployment. It is here that the effects of precarity become “particularly visible” and we see “the destructuring of existence, which is deprived among other things of its temporal structures, and the ensuing deterioration of the whole relationship to the world, time and space” (Bourdieu 1998, pp. 82). Losing one's job means losing one's income, one's long-term perspective and plans and possibly one's living standard (Green 2015). According to expected-utility theory, this uncertainty leads to risk-aversion as workers try to find a strategy in which to adapt their lives to their employment status.
It is clear from the above, that there is a wide range of empirical research which directly correlates insecure employment to a number of working conditions that can have a direct effect on the wellbeing of workers. A high degree of variability in working hours has been found to correspond with increased risks for health and psychological well-being, especially if the variability is company controlled rather than being of the employee’s choosing. Workers are required to be flexible, responsive to market changes; and, in doing so are affected by the relative costs of making such adaptations. By accepting more downward social mobility, they often rely on government welfare policies to ensure their flexible lives are not (or will not) become precarious (Streeck 2008).
25 | P a g e
1.5 Labour law and Social Protection
As an epiphenomenon of the deterioration of the SER, a certain (and varying) corrosion of social protection can be observed as well. Previously, there had been a stable and mutually connected social security standard embedded in the standard employment relationship (Vobruba 1990). Whenever the SER was entered, the rights to social security were provided as a part of the employment relationship. However nowadays, labour law has broadened widely and the employment relationship has become increasingly less linked to social security. Thus, with labour law expanding its boundaries in order to facilitate space for more a-typical and flexible forms of employment relationships, the right to social security has reduced.
The expansion of labour law and reforms in social protection are likely to have contributed to the increase in precarious employment. This can be explicated and visualised in an insightful manner by German Sociologist Georg Vobruba’s (1990) framework. When entering an employment relationship, the contract has to meet certain requirements set by labour law; in the case of the SER the norm was fulltime and stable employment.
At the same time, the employment relationship provides the employee with entitlements to social protection, in the case of the SER relatively “generous, non-means tested unemployment insurance to ensure income maintenance, pension provisions and sickness benefits” (Vobruba 1990, p.33). The situation of the SER is captured in the figure below, in which the squares, represent the range of possibilities permitted by labour law and the social protection provided with employment relationships:
26 | P a g e
Figure 1: The SER-situation according to Vobruba (1990).
Labour law: Whenever an employment relationship is
entered into
Social protection:
Source: Vobruba, 1990, p.33
The labour law square is somewhat larger than the social protection square, this reflects the fact that in 1990 there was already more forms of employment permitted in labour law, such as temporary work and other a-typical forms of employment. However, the conclusion to be derived from figure 1 is that labour law and social protection interconnect in a manner such that the norms of labour law and the norms of social protection correspond. However, through the changes described above, labour law has expanded outside of the once-established norm as a response to market dynamics, by legalising a broader spectrum of employment relationships, these include temporary agency work (third party) and zero-hour contracts.
Then labour law requirements are met.
The norm is fulltime, stable employment The employment relationship then provides certain rights to social protection
27 | P a g e
Figure 2 Recent developments according to Vobruba
Labour Law
Social protection
At present, a declining number of jobs provide de-commodifying social protection benefits (like unemployment insurance) and an increasing number of jobs provide low social protection arrangements (such as basic unemployment assistance). There is an important difference between the two. Unemployment assistance is not only associated with lower levels of transfers but also strict activation policies or pu nitive workfare requirements. Such policies tend to give people less time to find a suitable job, one that provides long-term stable employment, that matches skill levels (Soskice 2002; Clasen and Clegg 2011).
Despite these fundamental changes in labour law and social protection it can be argued that social policies remain organized around full time standard employment, which has
28 | P a g e
“created a mismatch for people increasingly employed under non-standard contracts” (Vobruba 2000, p.608). As a result, more and more people are not only facing worsened employment conditions, but also a shrinking entitlement to social protection leaving many workers with the quandary that is a lack of both employment and unemployment rights. It is important to highlight that the extent to which Vobruba’s first square (labour law) broadens, which allows for a wider variety of employment relationships, differs per country. The same goes for the social protection square, reforms differ per country, as nations have chosen different forms and extents of providing social protection for the increasing insecurity citizens are facing (Crouch 2014). Some offer relatively generous social protection and in others social protection has shrunk extensively.
1.6 Job insecurity
Job insecurity is an everyday reality involving prolonged uncertainty about the future; hence, it is a subjective experience likely to a have strong psychological impact (Sverke 2002). As highlighted across a wide range of empirical studies in section 1.4; job insecurity reduces the well-being of the individual. McDonough (2000) finds that insecurity leads to negative self-evaluation with far stretching consequences on a behavioural and health level. De Witte (1999) finds significant effects of job insecurity on psychological well-being arguing that insecurity is the most distressful aspect of a job. Meltzer (2010) finds a correlation between job insecurity and depression.
The growth in zero-hour contracts has led to a growth in job insecurity. Self-perceived job insecurity is the result of an evaluation process in which both the objective situation at the macro level (employment contract, dismissal protection, welfare state assistance) and subjective comprehensions at the micro level (need for security, family responsibilities) have to be taken into account (Anderson 2007; Sverke 2006). According to Anderson and Pontusson (2007), macro-level determinants, such as labour market characteristics and social transfers systems powerfully shape employment-related worries of individuals. Workers look to the labour market for cues in seeking to assess how secure they are in their current employment (Anderson 2007; Green 2000).
29 | P a g e
An important component of job security/insecurity therefore is the feelings an individual has with regards to their employment contract and their own position in the labour market. Klandermans and van Vuuren (1999) suggest these feelings or perceptions of what is experienced define the impact of flexible employment contracts, not only the insecurity that is embedded in the contract itself.
In order to inter-connect job insecurity into a theoretical framework, a Job Security Model can be applied to my research focus. The frameworks conceptualisation of “Qualitative job insecurity” (Hellgren 1999; Sverke 2006); does not only concern the continued existence of the job itself; it pertains to perceptions of equally important features like potential loss of quality in the employment relationship, such as deterioration of working conditions, lack of career opportunities and concerns about the future. In contrast to ‘job loss’, which is an objective state of affairs, ‘job insecurity’ is a product of people's perceptions of signals in the environment (Sverke 2002; Anderson 2007).
The model below describes job insecurity as a subjectively experienced, multidimensional phenomenon, which may arise as a function of the interaction between the objective situation and subjective characteristics (see figure 3).
Figure 3: Job Insecurity Model
Subjective characteristics Family responsibilities Perceived control Need for security
Consequences Well being Worry about the
future
Feelings of insecurity Objective situation
Labour market characteristics Zero Hour Contract Dismissal protection Welfare State (Social
Transfers)
Job insecurity
Threats of job loss Threats to working
30 | P a g e The model is based on two fundamental assumptions:
(1) the experience of job insecurity is individual and subjective.
(2) it is derived from the objective situation by means of the individual’s perceptual and cognitive processes.
This research defines job insecurity as a subjective phenomenon based on the individual’s appraisal of uncertainties in the immediate work environment, which therefore implies that the feeling of job insecurity may differ between individuals even if they are exposed to the same objective situation. Although there are many consequences that can be examined when it comes to the effects of insecurity, the focus of this research is on the perceptions of people and how in turn, these perceptions create reality.
This a key theme I explored via in depth interviews with my research participants in the Netherlands and United Kingdom, as being employed under a Zero Hour Contract may affect workers’ perceptions of insecurity differently based upon their own personal situation / responsibilities; and may also be influenced by the institutional surrounding they operate within. Institutional surroundings matter, i.e. the extent to which unemployment benefit, child benefits, and pension provisions are provided by the welfare state (Olsthoorn 2015, pp. 54-55).
31 | P a g e
2. Method and research design
As the main goals underpinning the social nature of scientific research are to explore diversity and give voice to specific groups (Ragin 1994), it is imperative that, to fully understand and analyse the impact of insecure employment on an individual level, the views of employees working on a zero-hour contract need to be sought and analysed. In order to explore the various ways in which Zero Hour employment impacts upon an employees’ sense of security, multiple components must be analysed. The main themes that shape this sociological enquiry will revolve around the following research themes:
- How do Zero-Hour Contract workers experience their employment
position in terms of security and its effects on psychological
well-being?
- To what extent does the formal safety net provided by the welfare
32 | P a g e
- In what ways do people adapt their lifestyle to the Zero Hour
Contract?
- Do Zero Hour workers feel under-employed - in terms of not
having
enough paid hours or not doing work that utilizes their skills and
abilities?
- How do Zero-Hour Contract workers view their own position in the
labour market?
2.1 Research Design
A research design is a systematic plan to study a scientific problem and so refers to the overall strategy that a researcher will adopt when attempting to investigate a particular area of social life (Crotty 2008). Bryman (2008, p.31) defines the research design as “a framework for the collection and analysis of data’’, thus allowing the researcher to determine and submit the choices made about what is to be investigated, and how this will be achieved (Blakie 2009).
My own research design works inductively, by undertaking a qualitative phenomenological piece of research with the goal being to achieve an accurate description of the lived experience of a particular social reality (Crotty 1998). Phenomenology is a study of people’s conscious experience of their life-world, that is, “their everyday life and social action” (Merriam 2009, p.25).
Hence, to relate phenomenology to my thesis project, I am analysing and interpreting the subjective experience that is associated with the constant uncertainty associated with zero-hour contract employment; in order to empirically examine the way this insecurity is experienced. By adopting a phenomenological approach, I aim to gather informative data as a means of gaining useful insight into the effects of insecure, risky employment, as discussed by people based on their own experiences.
33 | P a g e
2.2 Data gathering strategy
The main qualitative data-gathering method was the use of semi-structured interviews with workers in both the Netherlands and the UK. Semi-structured interviews are a tried and tested means of accessing and collecting rich qualitative evidence, being naturalistic in its approach and inter-personal or dialogic in nature, it avoids much of the contrived and somewhat “artificialness”, that is associated with other data gathering methods such as impersonal questionnaires. The benefit of deploying semi-structured interviews to harness data lies in its ability to be flexible, enabling my research participants to have autonomy to communicate their experiences. This technique of data-generating permits the interviewer and interviewee to develop a good rapport with one another.
The organization I concentrated my interviews on is a global market research agency with subsidiaries in both the Netherlands and UK. In the Netherlands branch of the organization I conducted semi structured interviews, telephone interviewers are initially offered a 7-month contract, subject to a 1-month trial period. If certain targets are met, another 8-month contract is granted, then followed by another 8 months; amounting to a total of 23 months, thereafter, the employee must either be kept on permanently or let go.
The 1st contract (7 months) is a zero-hour contract with no guaranteed number of hours. In this contract, the employee won’t receive any payment if a shift is cancelled by the company on time. The 2nd and 3rd contract (8 months each) the employer guarantees an agreed minimum number of hours per week. These agreed hours vary per employee, but it is usually set at 11.75 hours. In the 2nd and 3rd contract, the employee will receive a payment if work is cancelled, but only if the total number of hours worked in the week in question is below the agreed minimum contract (11.75) hours per week. In that case, there will be a supplement to the salary up to the minimum hours agreed in the contract per week.
For every hour worked, he/she receives an extra 8.3% of paid holiday hours. During sickness, the first 2 days are unpaid. After these 2 days, the employee will receive 70% of his/her daily pay. The basic gross hourly rate for interviewers on level A (1st contract) is €10,42 (this is including holiday pay of 8,3%) and for level B (2nd – 3rd contract) it’s €11,19.
34 | P a g e
In the UK, call centre workers are employed on zero-hour contracts on an indefinite basis, with no guaranteed hours and are granted with the title of “worker”, rather than employee status. This means zero-hour workers are not eligible for statutory sickness pay which entitles employees to £89.35 per week for up to 28 weeks. As shifts are only made available just 1 one week in advance, workers can only ever plan there working hours from the previous week. When shifts are made available, telephone interviewers must be very quick to accept work or risk losing shifts are together. Workers receive an extra 12.07%, holiday pay for every hour worked. The basic gross hourly rate for interviewers on level A-grade is €10,30 (this is including holiday pay of 12,07%) and for level B grade it’s €9.20.
The first step of the analysis is a description of the institutional context largely based on secondary data. The institutional description of my two country cases in chapter 3 forms part of the context of data gathering through the interviews that will be analyzed in the final chapter. Analysis of the social and institutional safety net that effects zero-hour contract workers in both the Netherlands and United Kingdom will include:
a)
Dismissal protection
b)Unemployment benefits
c)Child benefits
d)Pension build up
e)Minimum wage
In the interviews, the focus was on individual experience and looked into different aspects regarding:
35 | P a g e
a) The level of dependency on the job
b) How much job security workers feel they have
c) The adaptations workers make with regards to employment status.
d) Social and dismissal protection from the state
2.3 Research participants and sample groups
The sample groups of 6 research participants in each country were varied and comparable, comprising of 1 persons of state pension age (both male and aged 66) in each country; 2 persons in each country who combined studying with the job, and 3 persons of working age (18-64) in each country that used the job as their main source of income, and also had the added responsibility of children. In total, the sample of 12 comprised of 8 males and 4 females. In the Netherlands, the sample of 6 participants was made up of 2 Dutch nationals, 2 French nationals, 1 Russian national and 1 British national. In the UK, all of the 6 research participants were British, apart from 1 that was of Irish origin.
The author refrained from interviewing people he knows directly. The 12 interviews (1hr each) were conducted with the two groups; all of respondents shared the variable of zero-hour contract worker. The interviews contained questions about people’s sense of employment security and also needs or things they might want such as buying a house, going on holiday, etc., but also about their position in the household they live in (to what extent they depend on others or to what extent others depend on them). This enabled the researcher to ascertain whether a sense of security can be correlated with the amount of responsibility one has. The focus was fully on the sense of security, thus the level of awareness, the feelings one has with regards to their own situation, the ways people avoid risks and adapt life to their employment status.
36 | P a g e
A purposive sampling technique was deployed as the individuals that were to be interviewed needed to be relevant to the topic in hand, and therefore the author only wanted to recruit those that shared the variable of “zero-hour contract worker”. The main goal of this non-probability sampling technique is to focus on particular characteristics of a population that are of interest, and which will best enable the various research questions to be answered. Once the data had been gathered I applied Thematic Analysis to interpret the data collected. Thematic analysis is the most common form of analysis used in qualitative research; researchers consider it to be a very useful method in capturing the intricacies of meaning within a data set (Crotty 1998). Thematic analysis identifies data by the themes which emerge from the data and are not thrust upon by the researcher (Dawson 2013); which made this form of data analysis desirable as I didn’t want to impose myself on proceedings. The aim was to pinpoint, examine, and record patterns of regularly occurring trends found within the data collection.
3. Social and Institutional differences
–
Netherlands
and
United Kingdom
Feelings of security are also shaped by the protection that is provided by the institutional as well as the work environment. Hence, it is vital to also consider any social and institutional differences between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, that may affect zero-hour contract workers. Despite most institutional categories being irrelevant for this element of the employed labour force, there are however some aspects of labour market regulation and the benefit system that could have ramifications for the position of people in non-standard work. These include access to unemployment and child benefits, and also the generosity and low conditionality threshold of the basic pension in each country.
A main component of job insecurity is the access one has to other sources of income or livelihood independent from the labour market (Anderson and Pontusson 2007). Are there unemployment benefits available that provide a replacement income? Does the welfare state provide a generous basic pension so I can retire? Is child benefit from the government available to help with the costs of bringing up and caring for a child?
37 | P a g e
In order to answer these questions, comparisons can be made across various parameters such as; dismissal protection, the generosity of unemployment and net pension replacement rates, child benefits, and minimum wage. Anderson and Pontusson (2007), find that the existence of generous unemployment benefits provided by the welfare state, and an element of safety provided by employment protection legislation, moderates the severity of job insecurity. Hence, legislative security and social transfers provided by the government can reduce the experience of job insecurity. Blank defines (in Debus 2012, p.692) the formal social safety net as a “socio-economic characteristic referring to the extent of government regulation of the labour market and governmental social protection programs designed to protect workers from job loss and significant income decline”.
3.1. Labour Law and Dismissal Protection
Dismissal protection can provide workers with a great deal of security, as it places legal restrictions on the firing of employees. Without employment protection, workers have minimal rights and are gloomily fearful of being dismissed, which enables employers to force stricter labour conditions to best suit the company (Gray 2004). Dismissal protection has declined in most countries, meaning people are more likely to face periods of unemployment.
United Kingdom
The UK has one of the most lightly regulated labour markets in the European Union, in that employers can hire and fire with relative ease (Hall and Soskice 2001; Simms 2009). In general, a temporary job is likely to provide less security than a permanent job, although the extent of security permanent employment offers can also be low. The incidence of permanent employment is ver y high in the UK, mu ch higher in comparison to the Netherlands.
In 2015, 93.8% of employees were represented in permanent employment, leaving just 6.2% employed on a temporary basis ( OECD 2017) . However, these figures are misleading, as
38 | P a g e
Employment Protection Law for permanent jobs is markedly low in the UK, therefore, employers have little need for making contracts explicitly short term, as there are few restrictions on dismissing anyone who has been in a job for less than a year. As a result of this, the number of workers whose formal status is temporary, “ underestimates the extent of job insecurity in the UK” (Gray 2004, p.138).
In the UK, employer s ar e not restricted by la w to employ Zero Hour C ontra ct work er s on a permanent basis and have no legal obliga tions to guara ntee any hour s. Work er s ca n also ha ve their contra ct termina ted without a ny compensation as they are classified with “worker ”, not “employee” status (Pyper 2015). Accor ding to the UK G overnment website, "worker status”, entitles certain employment rights such as rest breaks, holiday pay, and importantly – the National Minimum Wage. However, it does not grant "employee status”, which carries further rights such as entitlement to claim for unfair dismissal, redundancy compensation, maternity pay and emergency leave.
Netherlands
Table 2: Share of permanent and temporary employment (%)
Netherlands
2000 2003 2005 2010 2015 Permanent 86.3 85.5 84.5 81.5 79.9 Temporary 13.7 14.5 15.5 18.5 20.1United Kingdom
2000 2003 2005 2010 2015 Permanent 93.0 93.9 94.3 93.9 93.8 Temporary 7.0 6.1 5.7 6.1 6.2Source: OECD stat – 2017
