Precarious Work in Europe Causes and consequences for the Agriculture, Food and Tourism sectors

Transcription

1 Precarious Work in Europe Causes and consequences for the Agriculture, Food and Tourism sectors European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Union

2 Study carried out by: Professor Sonia McKay Nick Clark Dr Anna Paraskevopoulou Working Lives Research Institute London Metropolitan University On behalf of: October 2011 The project is carried out with the financial support of the European Commission 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 5 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY Methodology used in the study PART A - BACKGROUND Precarious work in context What is precarious employment? A framework for the identification of precarious work What causes precarious work? What are the consequences of letting precarious work grow? Are some workers more at risk? What data is there on precarious work? Is precarious work likely to grow? How can Europe s precarious workers be protected? PART B SECTOR ANALYSIS AGRICULTURE Who are the precarious workers in agriculture? What risks do agriculture workers face and how can they be protected? How many people work in agriculture in Europe? What is the future for precarious work in agriculture? HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, CATERING, TOURISM (HORECA) Who are the precarious workers in the Horeca sector? What risks do Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism workers face and how can they be protected? How many people work in Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism in Europe? What is the future for precarious work in Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism? FOOD, DRINK AND TOBACCO Who are the precarious workers in the Food, Drink and Tobacco sector? What risks do Food, Drink and Tobacco workers face nd how can they be protected? How many people work in Food, Drink and Tobacco in Europe? What is the future for precarious work in Food, Drink and Tobacco?

4 PART C CASE STUDIES AGRICULTURE HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, CATERING, TOURISM FOOD, DRINK AND TOBACCO PART D CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusion Recommendations Key Principles on Precarious Work to be addressed by European Social Partners and Policy Makers Annex A: Breakdown of questionnaire responses Annex B: Definitions Annex C: Effat Questionnaire on Precarious Work

5 Introduction The EU is committed to policies intended to make Europe a highly competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economy within a framework of progressive social rights. However, this ambition does not match what trade unions are seeing on the ground. This study shows that instead they are encountering a growing number of workers whose lives are blighted by low pay, poor prospects and exclusion from credit markets; workers missing out on protections from the state (such as social security, welfare schemes and labour law enforcement) and afraid of talking to trade unions; workers faced with job insecurity that causes them stress and prevents them from planning their lives and futures. This is the world of precarious work and it not only generates misery for the workers doing it, it is also infectious: undermining the hard-won terms and conditions of employment of comparable workers in the same employment markets and destroying decent jobs provided by competitors in the same sectors. EFFAT commissioned this study because its member trade unions were reporting their concerns about increasing incidences of precarious work in the sectors for which they are European social partners (agriculture, hotels, restaurants, catering, tourism, food, drink and tobacco). Many of these EFFAT sectors are particularly affected by the problem of precarious work. Methodology EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study reviews the literature on the topic and the relevant legislative framework and then surveys the EFFAT trade unions dealing with precarious work in Europe in order to find out their experiences and what they can tell us about precarious work in their sectors. Unfortunately, the failure of statistical authorities to collect good comparable data from which to better quantify the problem restricts the possibility to further analyse the subject with a more quantitative approach. For this reason the study recommends that the EU should establish a system to statistically monitor and record precarious work. What is Precarious Work? The subject of precarious work is confused by numerous competing and incompatible definitions being used and promoted by academics, policy makers and other actors. So, to carry out this study it was important to decide what framework to adopt for the identification of precarious work. While some have linked precarious work directly to 'atypical' contractual relationships, we follow the position outlined by Rogers and Rogers in 1989, by accepting that that 'precariousness is best defined in relation to instability, lack of protection, insecurity and social or economic vulnerability, and that it is some combination of these factors which identifies precarious jobs. We also drew on the EFFAT Charter on Precarious Work ( in order to ensure that our framework was compatible with the concept of precarious work adopted by EFFAT member unions. 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

6 The resulting framework defines whether or not work is precarious based on the circumstances under which employment is undertaken and the outcomes it provides to workers. Five characteristics of precarious work are highlighted: 1. Absence of choice (over where they work or what they do) 2. Inadequate or low income 3. Inability to make future plans 4. Lack of employment protection 5. Absence of representation and access to justice Forms of work identified with precarious work by sector (in %) Part time Fixed Term Temporary Agency Sub-contracted Posted Seasonal Migrants Extras Bogus self-employed Temporary Employment, EU & EU15, (in %) Undeclared work Agriculture HORECA FBT 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

7 Temporary Employment (%) according to age and sex, EU, What causes Precarious Work? Precarious work is generated by employers seeking to minimize labour costs and shift the economic risks of their businesses onto their workforce. The specific elements contributing to precarious work are constantly in transformation, as they find new ways to do this. Privatization, sub-contracting, bogus self-employment and the introduction of 'atypical' work arrangements, such as contracts that are for very short hours or very short periods of time are all closely associated with precarious work. The promotion of flexicurity has encouraged the introduction of many flexible forms of work correlating to precariousness while the social protection supposed to accompany flexicurity is generally absent or inadequate to protect workers and households from precariousness. Indeed in many countries social and welfare protection seems to have weakened for workers, over a period when the risks of precarious work, and thus the need for such protections, have increased. The negative social consequences of Precarious Work Precarious work generates harmful impacts not only for workers themselves but for their families, for their communities, for those in the same labour markets and for the societies in which they live. In short, the existence of precarious work is an issue that affects all of us. The study reports that among the most worrying consequences of precarious work is its impact on health and well-being. 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

8 Let s take a look at all working time (Source Eurofound March 2012). Inequalities in health, derived from employment, are closely linked to other kinds of social inequalities. Employment circumstances affect opportunities for well-being, exposure to hazards leading to disease and access to health care. Poor health outcomes for workers in precarious employment are exacerbated by the fact that are less likely to be familiar with their rights, they are more likely to be fearful about reporting incidents and they may be reluctant to make any claims against private insurance, due to extreme economic pressures to keep working. Health risks also arise from the insecurity of employment itself, the uncertainty regarding the terms and conditions of employment and the need to expend additional effort searching for work and balancing multiple jobs at multiple worksites. Using the concept of employment strain evidence suggests that precarious workers report overall poorer health and higher levels of stress, compared to workers in standard relationships. Precarious employment has also fostered segmented labour markets, which obstruct the movement of workers to more stable employment, particularly for vulnerable groups including migrants, women, young workers and the disabled. Workers, in particular young workers who have been denied access to standard employment conditions, are being pushed in very large numbers into a mix of precarious work where there is no potential for career development and unemployment. The consequences of these policies can be seen in the streets of Europe where young people have been expressing their deeply felt anger about being excluded from the benefits that regular work provides. 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

9 EFFAT s Experience of Precarious Work EFFAT sectors have been particularly affected by the growth in precarious work. We present research findings in relation to three broad sectors: Agriculture Unions have seen a growth in precarious work in agriculture, with seasonal and migrant labour experiencing especially high levels of job insecurity, low pay and poor health and safety. Older workers are believed to be particularly at risk of precarious work. The hazardous nature of much work in the sector also means that agricultural workers can face serious health and safety risks when they have heightened reporting fears because of precariousness. Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism Many workers in hotels, restaurants, catering and tourism experience low pay, unsocial working hours and high incidences of seasonal and temporary work. The sector employs a large number of young people that are particularly identified with precarious jobs. Risks particularly identified for workers these sectors include those relating to job insecurity, long working hours and high incidences of undeclared work. Food, Drink and Tobacco Within the Food, Drink and Tobacco sector, meat slaughtering and processing operations have been are particularly identified with high levels of precarious work. The sector is at risk from social dumping, with labour providers competing to source workers on the lowest possible pay and cut costs wherever possible. The sector is vulnerable to swings in product consumption that affect market size and increase risks of job insecurity. Asymmetric power relations between producers and mass-retailers area has also been identified as a driver of precarious work in this sector. Protecting those in precarious work: Trade Unions Other studies have shown that extensive collective bargaining coverage is the most effective way to prevent people suffering in low wage work. Our research shows that EFFAT unions have gone beyond the traditional role of unions and have adopted a range of successful strategies aimed either at eliminating or regulating precarious work, and to ensure that vulnerable workers are adequately protected. The case studies, which form PART C of this report, provide examples of what is being done. Such as: Negotiating collective agreements providing seasonal workers with guarantees of future employment and other paths into more permanent work; Developing better protection for posted workers and migrant workers through the provision of information on working conditions in languages of origin, as well as the building of links between home and host country trade unions; 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTVE SUMMARY -

10 Using codes of conduct and corporate social responsibility policies as the basis for agreements on labelling and tracing supply chains to increase job protection for precarious workers. Protecting those in precarious work: Legislation & Enforcement Workers in precarious jobs need the protection of legislation that addresses the characteristics of precarious work. This report demonstrates that there is already a large body of law that can be used to combat precariousness, including legislation guaranteeing fundamental rights, health and safety, and non-discrimination. However, the complexity of this legislation makes it difficult to master and allows gaps to appear that can be exploited by employers seeking to legitimize precarious work. The legal frameworks for collective bargaining and minimum wages vary significantly from country to country along with the resulting protection for precarious workers. Finally, sanctions and enforcement mechanisms needed to ensure that precarious workers receive the full protection of existing laws are all too often missing or inadequate. The future of Precarious Work in Europe Precarious work in Europe is unlikely to disappear and is expected to get worse. Other studies from the United States suggest that coming out of recession may even accelerate this trend. Noncompliance with existing regulations and instruments undermines the Europe 2020 and Lisbon strategies and has the potential to violate the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, yet there is no coherent EU strategy to counteract precarious employment. Drawing on the lessons from this study EFFAT has proposed ten key principles for combating precarious work: 1. If it s the same work it s the same job, so it must come with the same rights and pay (equal pay for equal work). 2. It is where you work that counts, not where you are from (the host country principle). 3. All workers in Europe deserve decent minimum wage protection either through collective agreements or legislation. 4. Employment relationships must be simplified to create clarity and avoid abuse. 5. All workers should be covered by collective bargaining - it is the most effective way to prevent people suffering in low wage work. 6. Precarious workers need clear, simple routes into permanent jobs. 7. Europe needs strong and well-funded public employment services, focused on combating precarious work. 8. Effective regulation is needed for temp agencies and other labour providers - and it must be well enforced. 9. Employers must be held to account for their subcontracted workers. 10. Precarious workers need to be organised and given a voice. 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

11 It is surely fair to conclude that adopting these principals in European and national legislation, as well as collective agreements and the work of social partners, would dramatically improve the lives of millions of European citizens and do much to remove the blemish of precarious work from our society. Learning and developing on the job: Employer paid training by country, employees Types of initiatives to support those in precarious work (in %) 14% 15% 20% 4% 10% 13% Source: Eurofound, March % Specific training programmes Information/Publication s Specific web pages/tools Ad hoc legal representation Public campaigns Organising campaigns Other initiatives 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -

12 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY This report brings together the different elements of a study on Social Inclusion of Precarious Workers in Agriculture, Food and Tourism, which was initiated in November 2010 and completed in September The project was funded under the Grant Agreement for an Action between the European Commission DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities and EFFAT - European Federation of Food, Agriculture, Tourism, Trade Unions (Grant Agreement VS/2010/ Information and Training Measures for Workers Organisations ). EFFAT contracted the Working Lives Research Institute (WLRI) of London Metropolitan University to conduct the research and to prepare this final report. The report has four main parts. Part A provides the context in relation to precarious work and indicates why it is a key issue in employment today. Utilising specific examples, it sets out the risks that precarious work presents and documents how EFFAT and other trade unions have responded. It also explains the purpose and objectives of the research and sets out the methodology utilised. Part B contains an analysis by sector, primarily drawn from a review of recent literature together with a survey of EFFAT affiliated trade unions. Part C consists of 19 case studies undertaken as part of the research. These explore initiatives taken by the unions in response to the challenges of precarious work. Part D sets out the main policy recommendations that emerged from the survey findings, the case study material and in discussions with EFFAT. They address all of the relevant stakeholders, EU institutions, National governments and institutions, employers and companies, trade unions, and civil society. The purpose and objectives of the research The purpose of the research was to support EFFAT in the execution of its project Social Inclusion of Precarious Workers in Agriculture, Food & Tourism. EFFAT s overall objectives were firstly to get an overview of the scope and types of precarious and non-standard work in these three EFFAT sectors, based on available statistics, existing academic research and information from its national member organisations. Secondly, EFFAT wished to have a clearer picture of the existing legal provisions and standards which regulate employment at international, European and national level and of their implementation in its sectors. A third objective was to collect information on examples of successful measures, initiatives and practices used by its member organisations in response to precarious work. The final objectives were to draw political conclusions and to elaborate proposals for political initiatives and then to disseminate the findings and exchange information on the good practices. The report s authors acknowledge the input, guidance and comments of the EFFAT secretariat, including Harald Wiedenhofer, Kerstin Howald, Daria Cibrario and Codruta Liliana Filip. 12

13 Methodology used in the study Three main research methods were utilised in the study: a literature review, a questionnaire and case studies. The choice of methods was aimed at ensuring that the study would both capture existing knowledge on precarious work, while at the same time utilising the knowledge and experiences of EFFAT and its member organisations. It must of course be pointed out that an exercise of this kind cannot hope to examine all of the data and literature, particularly that available at national level. 1a Literature review For the review of the relevant literature and statistical data, as well as the review of key legislation, a wide range of data, including that collated by EFFAT or its member organisations, was referenced. The expertise of EFFAT officials was used to identify relevant literature and examples of innovative developments in any or all of the sectors. The literature review was circulated to EFFAT and commented upon. It is incorporated into Section 2 of this report. 1b Questionnaire and identification of the case studies To conduct a representative survey of EFFAT affiliated members, a questionnaire was designed by the WLRI research team, in collaboration with the EFFAT secretariat for each sector participating in this project. A final agreed version of the questionnaire was produced in January 2011 and was made available, through the translation facilities of EFFAT, in five main languages: English, German, French, Italian and Spanish. The questionnaires were distributed by EFFAT to affiliated organisations across Europe and followed up by regular reminders sent by EFFAT. A copy of the questionnaire can be found in Annex C. The questionnaire had a high response rate: Out of a total of 123 EFFAT member organisations, 63 provided an answer. These member organisations represent 72 % of EFFAT membership.. Inevitably the nature of such questionnaires means that it is not possible to claim that it provides a robust statistical resource. The fact that there is insufficient hard data is one of the reasons why the study recommends (see Section D) that the EU keeps records and establishes a system that will monitor and generate figures and estimates about precarious work. An additional source of data was case studies. To determine which case studies should be undertaken the research team first made a selection based on the data provided in the questionnaire responses. This gave an initial list of more than 20 potential case studies. The list was discussed with EFFAT and was also presented at a meeting with EFFAT member organisations represented. Additional suggestions for case study were made and a final selection of nineteen cases was agreed for more in-depth study. The aim of the selection was to include different types of initiatives, in order to give as wide a range as possible of examples of action to combat precarious work. Each case study was based on interviews with key trade union representatives or other stakeholders, generally lasting around 45 minutes each. There were six for each of the three sectors with one additional cross-european case study. The case studies covered collective agreements, legislative developments as well as campaigning and organising initiatives and initiatives involving NGOs. The case studies were co-ordinated by the WRLI research team, with the co-operation of researchers based in some of the countries selected, and were carried out mainly in June and July

14 1c Interview protocols and procedures The interview protocols and procedures concerning the case studies were developed by the WLRI research team in consultation with EFFAT. A semi-structured interview schedule was prepared for use by the interviewers conducting the case studies. A template was also produced, setting out the main areas to be covered in the completed case study report. These are included in this report as Annex A and B. The research protocols for the case study interviews consisted of the following steps: Potential interviewers were identified by the WRLI research team, chosen on the basis of their previous research activity and knowledge of industrial relations; Formal contracts were drawn up specifying their tasks in relation to the case studies; On their acceptance of the contract, the names and contact details of the potential interviewees were forwarded to the interviewers. The interview schedules and templates were forwarded at the same time. Interviewers were asked to make early contact with the proposed interviewees, to explain that a case study had been identified and to arrange a suitable time and date for the interview; Interviews were conducted either face-to-face or by telephone, dependent on the availability of the interviewee; Case studies were written up based on the template; and Drafts of the case study were provided to the interviewees for their comment and case studies were updated in the light of these. 14

15 PART A - BACKGROUND 1. Precarious work in context Workers in Europe are experiencing a challenge to their hard won terms and conditions of employment. Job security, which is key to the ability of working people to reasonably plan, is under attack and while the number of workers in precarious employment may still be relatively small in comparison to the overall labour force in Europe, their number is growing steadily. Unions have expressed concern at some employers using social dumping to further reduce labour costs and weaken collective bargaining and it is for this reason that EFFAT has stated that it supports calls for European-level action to guarantee equal rights for all workers doing the same work at the same location, regardless of whether they are nationals of the country where the work is undertaken or migrant workers. In 2000 under the Lisbon Treaty the Member States adopted policies with the stated aim of making the EU the most competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economic zone in the world. They promised more and better jobs, with a strong emphasis on decent work. Yet more than a decade later the reality is that ever growing numbers of workers in Europe have been pushed into precarious work while, as EFFAT has contended, despite references to the need to protect vulnerable groups, issues like combating social dumping, fighting precarious work and protecting vulnerable workers are currently absent from the Commission s plan for the period (the Stockholm Plan). While the Commission has sponsored a study aimed at translating and concretising flexicurity themes and goals into tools for social partners across Member States and at identifying good practices in collective bargaining and collective agreements, these can only provide a partial picture. Thus while policies aimed at flexibility in the labour market have been promoted, there is little analysis of the extent of their contribution to the growth in precarious employment. The European Commission is also committed to promoting worker mobility in order to create jobs yet, as a study on Mobility in the agricultural sector, commissioned by EFFAT, demonstrates there are a number of factors which impede mobility including unacceptable social standards, a lack of provision for pensions and poor hiring practices, sometimes through the use of uncertified agencies (EFFAT, 2011). EFFAT contends that the sectors of agriculture, food and tourism have witnessed a decline, rather than an improvement in the situation of many workers and has argued that in times of economic crisis and recession many atypical forms of work and many new forms of labour that are not covered by proper social security schemes have become more common in the labour market and, for some categories of worker (such as migrants, seasonal or temporary agency workers), they are accompanied by income levels that are insufficient and are ill-equipped to provide workers with a secure future career. EFFAT asserts that flexibility has to be jointly agreed with the social partners, otherwise workers will face less and less security and too much flexibility. Additionally, while it is accepted by the trade unions that the free movement of workers is a major achievement of the EU, unfortunately, particularly in the sectors covered in this study, it is being abused as a source of cheap labour. Consequently many of these workers, coming from the newer EU countries, are condemned to work and live as second-class workers in degrading conditions. 15

16 The questionnaire survey of EFFAT member organisations, conducted as part of this study, helps understand how precarious work has expanded. In the view of the respondents there had been a significant rise in precarious work in their sectors over the last decade, with 61 per cent saying that it had increased at least a little or a lot in their sector, in contrast to just 13 per cent who had noted a decrease of either a little or a lot. Of most concern is the fact that a third of the respondents noted that precarious work had increased a lot. Figure 1: Precarious work trends (in %) in the last decade 4% 3% 10% 33% 22% 28% Decreased a lot Stayed the same Increased a lot Decreased a little Increased a little Don t know Source: Questionnaire data Broughton et al. (2010), in their study on Flexible forms of work - very atypical contractual arrangements, also reported an increase in temporary employment between 1991 and Furthermore, a significant proportion of employees (7 per cent) reported having no employment contract and thus limited ability to enforce rights at work. The evidence thus points to an increase in precarious work with a number of factors having contributed to this including: Changes within the structure and organisation of work (Kalleberg, 2009); Member State policies favouring privatisation and the contracting out of services (Thornley et al., 2010); Rising unemployment and changes in the mechanisms of job access (Rodgers and Rodgers, 1989); The growth in project oriented work (McDowell and Chirstopherson, 2009); Economic inequalities (Kretsos, 2010); The impact of the rising numbers of economic migrants (Porthé et al., 2010); The spread of unpaid traineeships & voluntary work as a means of accessing workplace experience Labour market flexibility (ETUC, 2006). The global economic and financial crisis has impacted on these factors, bringing precarious work into the mainstream, with the sectors of agriculture, food and Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism all having been affected (Longley, 2010; Rossman, 2010; EASHW, 2007). At the same time it is important to emphasise that precarious work is trans-sectoral and increasingly it is moving into areas of the labour market that had earlier been considered protected and unaffected by these wider changes. 16

17 1.1 How have the trade unions responded to the growth of precarious work? Trade unions have demonstrated a preparedness to respond to perceptions of the increase in precarious work, by attempts to regulate and diminish its negative aspects through collective bargaining, information and campaigning. But of course, the extent to which they are able to do this successfully has been impeded by assaults on collective bargaining by employers and by legal rulings which have questioned the legitimacy of trade unions to organise. The work of trade unions has assisted in raising the issue of precarious work at national and at EU level, by pointing to changes in the economic system and its effects on employment. This is demonstrated in the EFFAT Charter on precarious work which targets its demands on three fronts, as part of the effort to tackle precariousness and protect precarious workers: Employers: to respect existing regulations and bargaining agreements, to involve the unions, to provide better conditions and fair wages for the workforce, to provide training; Political actors at European and national levels: to develop appropriate policies, to introduce social clauses into the allocation of contracts, to introduce minimum standards for employers, to prevent further deregulation of the labour market; and Trade union organisations: to strengthen collective bargaining and to campaign on European social wage standards, to ensure cross border cooperation. In its 12-point programme for precarious workers EFFAT commits itself and its member organisations to a detailed schedule of work towards implementing its Charter. Its strategy has focused on collective bargaining, new innovative methods such as community organising and building trade union capacity in countries that need it; on calling for change to the law to end the fragmentation of the different categories of employment contracts; on revising the law on posted workers and strengthening the rights of seasonal workers. It has emphasised that the EU economy cannot develop and function effectively while precarious and insecure work is growing, involving discussions with employers and with other trade unions at EU level. Indeed EFFAT took a lead on the issue when in October 2009 it introduced the issue of precarious work into the Tripartite Social Summit. This focused effort has ensured that the issue of precarious work is at the fore of its activities. EFFAT has also worked with the ETUC and with the other European trade union federations in the development of concrete principles such as on the need to fight against precarious jobs and to promote equality, to safeguard protection for workers or to pressurise for better jobs. At global level other trade unions have also been active in producing a wealth of information on the precarious workforce. Examples of this include the work of the International Metalworkers' Federation (IMF), the International Union of Food workers (IUF), which in 2006 produced an Organising tool for trade unionists in the fight against precarious work and UNI, the Global Union for skills and services. This work has involved trade union trans-national co-operation, and Case Study 6, from Spain, shows how this can be successful, in building links between the home and destination countries of migrant workers. Trade unions play a key role in defending workers against the rise of precarious employment. As one survey respondent noted: The future depends on how we succeed in fighting (employer demands) and in organising workers (Slovakia, agriculture sector). Unions have also been concluding collective agreements to protect against precarious work. The questionnaire survey identified a large number of collective agreements that covered workers in 17

18 forms of employment identified as precarious. In some cases there were specific agreements, particularly those covering seasonal, temporary agency, posted and sub-contracted workers. Figure 2: Collective agreements in the three sectors (in %) Source: Questionnaire data Agreements on part-time work were reported in Belgium, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden and UK; on temporary agency work from Austria, France, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the UK; on subcontracting from Finland, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey; on seasonal workers from Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Italy, Macedonia (FYROM), Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia; on migrant workers, from Sweden and the UK. Based on the questionnaire responses, countries that were mainly recipients of migrant workers, many of whom are employed as temporary agency workers, are more likely to have negotiated specific agreements. In relation to seasonal workers, in particular, there was evidence of a targeted effort by trade unions in some countries to protect seasonal workers. Comments from respondents in relation to the collective agreements particularly highlight the work of unions in developing appropriate collective agreements concerning precarious work. Below are some examples for each sector, which illustrate a range of issues that the agreements have covered. PART C of this report provides details of 19 other initiatives taken by EFFAT member organisations and EFFAT itself, illustrating good practices. Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism, Finland The collective agreement for the hotel and restaurant sector includes a provision whereby an employer cannot hire new workers unless additional hours have been offered to parttime employees. The same provision is also found in Finnish legislation where, in cases of dispute, the collective agreement provides for the issue to be taken to the Labour Court. As the agreement was negotiated with the employers organisation, the duty to ensure compliance with the collective agreement falls upon the employer. (See also Case study 10 on giving access to permanent work for seasonal workers in Spain and Case study 12 on pension rights for seasonal workers in Croatia). 18

19 Agriculture, Portugal The collective agreement gives seasonal workers the same benefits as workers with regular contracts, so it includes Christmas allowances and holiday pay. (See also Case study 1 on the Irish mushroom industry agreement). Agriculture, France From the beginning of 2010 agricultural workers are covered by an agreement that covers death, temporary and permanent incapacity and provides access to complementary healthcare. In certain regions, seasonal workers have equal rights with regard to these. Individual training contracts (CIF), offering training for up to a year, are open to all with at least two years service in the workplace. In agriculture, rights to participate have been made more elastic for seasonal workers where otherwise they would not have been able to claim. They have to show just 12 months of work within four years, even if their work was discontinuous and with more than one employer. (For further information, see also Case studies 2 and 3) Food, Drink and Tobacco, Sweden The latest collective agreement provides that companies, in principle, cannot replace permanent workers with workers from labour agencies. If a company is using workers from agencies they have to follow the collective agreement for the specific branch or trade. They are not allowed to pay less or give poorer benefits to these workers. (See also Case study 14 on the registration of gang masters in the meat processing in the UK). Food, Drink and Tobacco, Denmark An agreement concerns the resolution of disputes regarding the wages and working conditions of foreign employees in Denmark. For those enterprises not covered by a collective agreement, it provides better scope for avoiding workplace stoppages in connection with the demand to be covered by an agreement. For enterprises that are covered by an agreement it guards against social dumping. (See also Case study 15 on regulating agency work through the collective agreement in the Netherlands). Survey respondents reported that the absence of collective agreements was as a result of three factors and provided examples of them: 1. Employer attitude: Posted workers should also be covered by collective agreements, but in many cases, employers try to ignore or refuse to accept taking part in a collective agreement (Denmark, multi). 2. Weakness of the law or of its enforcement: Subcontracted workers do have the right to join a trade union, but in practice the right is limited due to the pressure of the employers and the weaknesses of job security clauses of the Labour Act (Turkey, agriculture). Due to outsourcing in the hotel sector, there is the risk of there no longer being any directly employed workers, linked to other sectors. What is needed is continuous and more effective inspections (Italy, Hotels, Restaurants, Catering, Tourism). 3. Unsuccessful negotiations: For temporary workers, we tried, but we failed to include them into the collective agreement (Netherlands, FBT). 19

20 EFFAT affiliates were also asked what types of initiatives they had supported. The respondents identified the provision of information or special publications as the most frequently used type of initiative. This was followed by the offer of ad hoc legal representation to workers in precarious jobs, and organising or publicity campaigns. Figure 3: Types of initiatives to support those in precarious work (in %) 15% 4% 10% Specific training programmes Information/Publication s 14% 24% Specific web pages/tools Ad hoc legal representation Public campaigns 20% 13% Organising campaigns Other initiatives Source: Questionnaire data Specific examples of the initiatives taken by unions include: The provision of information to workers in various languages: Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Italy, Finland, Sweden and the UK. Providing information on rights to seasonal workers: Case study 3 (see Section C) represents a particularly innovative example from France involving the organisation of a big information campaign some stages of which are specifically aimed at seasonal workers, where union organisers take a bus around France and make contact with seasonal workers as they travel around. Making welfare provision available to precarious workers: Italy, Norway. Media campaigns: a Polish initiative on radio and TV entitled Decent Work, Decent Wages. Facilitating training provision: most respondents mentioned the availability of training and this was particularly the case in Norway, Serbia, Finland, UK, and France. Targeted campaigns: the chocolate sector in Germany is one example where a trade union and employee representatives network, has been established. Some unions referred to their websites where they provided information to those in precarious work, often available in more than one language. Survey respondents also produced information on collaboration between their union and other organisations. The following types of collaboration were most frequently mentioned: 20

21 Cooperation with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs): This included general cooperation with a range of relevant organisations including migrant associations or NGOs working with seasonal workers or NGOs in developing countries. Some unions had played an active role in setting up NGOs. One example from Spain involved cooperation between the union and an NGO with the aim of demonstrating solidarity and cooperation with organizations of workers and workers in developing countries. Labour inspectorates: The majority of unions reported close collaboration with labour inspectorates. For example, a Hungarian union reported that it had initiated an amendment to the law for temporary agency workers and seasonal workers and that it was in continuous contact with the Hungarian Labour Inspectorate, so as to observe the Sector Collective Agreement and to combat informal work. Employer associations, trade associations and relevant government bodies: A number of respondents referred to co-operation with employer organisations. They also referred to co-operation with bodies like the tax authorities, environmental bodies, the fire service, the immigration authorities and the police. Trade unions: many of the EFFAT member organisations reported wide-scale cooperation between trade unions at national, European and international level. Some cooperation was cross border, with examples provided in relation to the Nordic countries, the Baltic States and Russia. Specific collaborations: some respondents mentioned collaboration on issues such as minimum wages or social dumping. A Norwegian union respondent noted: We cooperate with all institutions who wish to fight social dumping. Over the last years we have especially had good cooperation with Norwegian authorities and the labour inspectorate. We do also have some cooperation with some employers and naturally we cooperate with Nordic and international trade union networks' (Norway, Food, Drink and Tobacco). 21

22 2. What is precarious employment? To comprehend precarious employment and its impact on workers and on society more generally, it is necessary to understand what the term covers. In the available literature there are no consistent conceptualisations or commonly promoted definitions and the issue is further complicated by the use of a variety of different terms that refer to precarious work, for example, contingent work (Evans and Gibb, 2009), atypical work or vulnerable work. These terms are sometimes used interchangeably although contingent is more commonly used in the USA, while precarious, atypical or vulnerable are more recognisable in the EU (Evans and Gibb, 2009). Parameters of precarious employment can be based on employment status, forms of employment, labour market insecurity and social location (Vosco, 2010). Other terms are useful in conceptualising precariousness such as under-employment when a worker is employed for fewer hours than would be necessary to earn a living wage; veryatypical employment which includes contracts of less that six months, less than ten hours per week or when there is the absence of a written contract (Broughton et al., 2010). EFFAT has defined precarious work as work where the level of income, protection and social integration of workers sinks far below the level defined and recognised as standard in contemporary society'. This definition concludes by stating that work is also precarious if it is subjectively associated with a loss of meaning, a deficit of recognition or uncertainties regarding planning, and if social standards are significantly changed to the disadvantage of the workers (EFFAT Roadmap, 2010). The EFFAT Charter on precarious work places the focus on the recompense that workers obtain from their employment, stating that precarious work is Non-standard employment which is poorly paid, insecure and unprotected and cannot support a household. The International Labour Organisation defines precarious employment as work where employment security, which is considered one of the principal elements of the labour contract, is lacking and states that the term encompasses temporary and fixed-term labour contracts, work at home and sub-contracting. A Report to the European parliament, by the Committee on Women s Rights and Gender Equality (2010), states that precarious work is non standard forms of work with any of the following characteristics: little or no job security; without any written contract; unclear working hours and duties that change according to the employer s will; a low level of remuneration, which may be unofficial or unclear; no social protection rights or employment related benefits; no protection against discrimination; limited or no prospects for advancement in the labour market; no collective representation of workers; a working environment that fails to meet minimum health and safety standards; and where employment security is lacking. This term encompasses temporary and fixed term labour contracts, work at home, and subcontracting. The questionnaire survey asked respondents to select from a list of different forms of employment those that, in the sectors which they represented, they identified as precarious. Overall, seasonal work was the most frequently identified, followed by fixed-term and undeclared work, although as is shown in Part B, there were significant variations in the responses by sector. 22

23 Figure 4: Forms of work identified with precarious work (in %) Source: Questionnaire data Precarious work can also be work that places people at risk of continuing poverty and injustice resulting from an imbalance of power in the employer-work relationship (Rodgers et al., 2009). Some definitions place major emphasis on particular forms of work as being of necessity precarious, for example, temporary or agency work or seasonal work. Taking all of this into account, the next section moves on to develop a framework for the definition of precarious work A framework for the identification of precarious work The starting point for the development of such a framework demands a movement away from defining precarious work as being associated solely with particular contractual work relationships, for example, temporary work, seasonal work or part-time. The notion that these forms of what are usually referred to as atypical work (although in fact they are typical to some sectors and occupations) are per se precarious is challenged in this study, as it fails to take account of the agency of workers and their decisions about how they wish to work. For example, part-time work could be considered as precarious where workers are seeking, but cannot find, full-time work. But it is not precarious if the workers concerned have sought part-time work and there are no other conditions that would make it precarious. Similarly, seasonal work that relates to the nature of the industry may be viewed as acceptable employment, particularly in those cases where workers have alternative work possibilities outside of the season or where the state (or the employer) provides adequate social protection during out of work periods. Precariousness is therefore better defined in relation to instability, lack of protection, insecurity and social or economic vulnerability, and it is some combination of these factors which identifies precarious jobs (Rogers and Rogers, 1989: 3). It can also be work that promotes risks whether they are economic, social or health risks (Kalleberg, 2009: 2). Job insecurity is known to affect mental well-being (Siefert et al., 2007) as does the inability to find permanent work when it is what is wanted (Clarke et al., 2007). This leads to a conclusion that it is the circumstances under which employment is undertaken and the outcomes it provides to workers that defines whether or not work is precarious. This puts the focus on how work is chosen and undertaken and what it gives to workers. Five characteristics of precarious work (which are set out in more detail in the Table below) are highlighted: 23

24 1. An absence of choice; 2. Income levels that are too low; 3. Inability to make future plans; 4. Poor health and safety and employment protection; and 5. An absence of representation. Table 1: Characteristics and indicators of precarious work Characteristic precarious work of Indicators scenarios Absence of choice Inadequate or low income Inability to make future plans Lack of employment protection Choice is likely to be absent: Where the conditions of work are changed unilaterally by the employer; Where workers are contracted-out or out-sourced; or Where the availability of work is limited so that individuals have to take whatever is offered. A wage that cannot provide for the individual or the individual s family, for example: Unstable earnings Irregular payments Wages below the minimum wage Wages close or below the poverty line When jobs do not offer a sufficient degree of certainty to enable workers to plan for their futures, for example where: Jobs are of limited duration; There is a high risk of redundancy; There is limited or no training and career development; There is limited opportunity to use, retain and improve skills; There is no pension scheme or other benefits such as holiday and sickness allowances, parental or bereavement leave. The absence of a written employment contract; No or limited mechanisms in place, either in terms of the law or industrial practice to provide protection to workers against discrimination, unfair dismissal, abuse or poor working conditions; Where the working environment is hazardous or polluted or dangerous, so that health and safety is put at risk; Constructed illegality: undocumented migrant workers, undeclared work, envelope wages (part of wage paid in cash). Absence representation access to justice of or Where workers have little or no say over working conditions and wages; Where workers representation is discouraged; When collective bargaining is absent or weak. 24