JOB MOBILITY AND FAMILY LIVES Anna GIZA-POLESZCZUK Institute of Sociology Warsaw University, Poland Abstract One of the key phenomenon we face in the contemporary world is increasing demand on mobility and flexibility of persons and institutions. The demographic, economic and political changes create new constraints and opportunities, resulting in a growing flow of people who are constantly on the move. Moreover, the demand to become and stay mobile increasingly concerns women. In the less developed countries, women are pulled abroad by the deficit of care in the ageing wealthy societies (e.g. it is estimated close to 1 Mio women of the caring professions have left Poland over the last few years). In the developed economies, women are faced with the spatial mobility requirements as the condition of a gainful career. As a consequence, new patterns of contingency and constancy, movement and integration, work and family are emerging. The research conducted in the 6 th Framework Programme (Priority 7), Job Mobilities and Family Lives in Europe. Modern Mobile Living and its Relation to Quality of Life was targeted at (1) mapping the demands and potentials of job mobility across selected regions, and identifying the barriers and triggers influencing the readiness to become mobile; (2) identifying the consequences of job mobility for family formation (marriage, fertility, divorce), family relations (child care, coping, conflict management, division of labour), social integration and individual well-being; (3) assessing the gender-specific issues in the field of mobility with a special focus on women, as previous research suggests the costs of job mobility are higher for women and (4) developing suggestions for adequate political measures to advance quality of life of mobile employees and their families in Europe, and balancing demands against readiness to move. The research has been carried out by an interdisciplinary research team (sociologists, psychologists, economists) in six European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Poland, Spain and Switzerland. The key question discussed in this paper is the relation between mobile living in its different manifestations (such as cyclic and recurrent mobilities, e.g. regional, national or international daily or weekly commuting or nonrecurrent mobilities, e.g. relocation or migration) and family arrangements in Poland. In conclusion,
the suggestion of the additional data that seem vital for family statistics will be formulated. * * * * * Full paper 1) Introduction One of the key phenomenon we face in the contemporary world is increasing demand on mobility and flexibility of persons and institutions. The demographic, economic and political changes create new constraints and opportunities, resulting in a growing flow of people who are constantly on the move. Moreover, the demand to become and stay mobile increasingly concerns women. In the less developed countries, women are pulled abroad by the deficit of care in the ageing wealthy societies (e.g. it is estimated close to 1 Mio women of the caring professions have left Poland over the last few years). In the developed economies, women are faced with the spatial mobility requirements as the condition of the gainful career. As a consequence, new patterns of work and family are emerging. Obviously, mobile living has a significant impact on the family life, both in terms of family formation and the demand to handle home related duties. The phenomenon of mobile living is very complex. Traditionally, the distinction was made between migratory behaviors, and job related mobility inside a specific labour market. However, the border between the two is getting very vague - together with the physical borders disappearing in European Union. For example, a person who - due to the distance between homeplace and workplace - only comes home for the weekends is not much different from a circulatory migrant. More and more people change jobs and move along on the labour market, relocating their homes. Family, instead of being rooted in one place, in stable social networks and in dense internal interactions, changes into a small group of nomads with no roots, and often - into a virtual group, linked more via modern communication technologies than by face to face interactions. The point is not about the misery of the contemporary family - but about understanding the problems people face and identifying the strategies people develop to still keep their families in good shape while accepting challenges of the modern labour market. 2
Job related mobility creates multiple strains on family life. Travelling increases the cost (mainly time, but also financial costs) of work, thus leaving less time and resources (also energy) for family related activities. With two hours spent daily for commuting, work time increases to 10-10,5 hours, leaving hardly any time to be invested in one's partner, children or household chores. With both partners commuting, the logistic problems of organising family life increase dramatically, especially if they have school children. Relocations due to changing jobs weaken social networks, diminish support and self-help they usually provide families with. Spending part of the week out of home, in a distant location, potentially may weaken family ties, not to mention costs incurred (renting flat or room in another location, cost of communication, cost of travelling etc). One may hypothesise that mobility requirements may significantly contribute to the problems families face - both in the aspect of formation (low marriage rates, low fertility rates) and stability (divorce rates, remarriages, patchwork families). Job related mobility may slow down the development of families, particularly in the case of women. In addition, it may affect social relationships and, in the case of cyclic mobility, may lead to considerable physical and psychic strains. And vice versa: having family and a partner may strongly influence the individual willingness to become mobile. 2) Background: mobility and family in Poland Poland is an interesting case to study mobility in the context of family lives. On the one hand, Poland has a long and continuing tradition of international migration, with very strong migration networks, some of them coming from the XIX century. There are regions in Poland where the majority of inhabitants have more family members abroad than in other regions of Poland; in Silesia more than 0.5 million people have both Polish and German citizenship. Currently the migration flow is showing a dynamic increase, with European labour markets opening for Poles and, on the average, at least 5,2 times higher wages (salaries). On the other hand, Poland has undergone deep economic reforms, with a modern labour market - including mobility requirements - emerging. Thus, we face in Poland double mobility trends: economic migration abroad and internal movements. It should be also stressed that Poland, compared to the developed European countries, is still a family-centred society: the marriage rate is high, the divorce rate, though on the increase, is still relatively low, the singles and modern family life patterns (e.g. Living Apart Together) are marginal, and even cohabitation is estimated at the low level of 3% of couples. The strength of the Polish family is partly due to its culture and tradition, including the role of the Catholic Church, 3
and partly - due to the inefficiencies of the service sector, very poor social policies and overall low (compared to the EU average) level of income. A Polish family has to cope on its own, relying rather on the informal (family) networks than on institutions. This makes the Polish family quite strong: it still has to serve as a social unit supporting individuals, rather than the emotional space for individuals to grow. Family - marrying, having a long term close relationship, having children, living a quiet life among the closest family composes the most valued set of values for Polish society, including young people (Giza-Poleszczuk, Poleszczuk: 2005). The vital role that the family network plays in people s lives makes mobility even more problematic. While migration has been part of Polish culture for a long time, with coping strategies developed and working quite efficiently, internal job mobility is a new phenomenon. The survey conducted is focused on internal job mobility only. 3) About the research The research conducted under the 6 th Framework Programme (Priority 7), Job Mobilities and Family Lives in Europe. Modern Mobile Living and its Relation to Quality of Life was targeted at (1) mapping the demands and potentials of job mobility across selected regions, and identifying the barriers and triggers influencing the readiness to become mobile; (2) identifying the consequences of job mobility for family formation (marriage, fertility, divorce), family relations (child care, coping, conflict management, division of labour), social integration and individual well-being; (3) assessing the gender-specific issues in the field of mobility with a special focus on women, as our previous research suggests the costs of job mobility are higher for women and (4) developing suggestions for adequate political measures to advance quality of life of mobile employees and their families in Europe, and balancing demands against readiness to move. The research has been carried out by an interdisciplinary research team (sociologists, psychologists, economists) in six European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Poland, Spain and Switzerland. For the sake of the study, various forms of occupational mobility have been identified to cover all different forms of (a) being mobile because of the job; (b) having a mobile job - i.e. a job that requires spending considerable time out of the home. In the first case, we have tried to cover both commuters - especially long distance commuters (spending more than 2 hours daily on travel to and from a job) - and overnighters : people spending part of the week out of home, sometimes even having a second household, because of the distance between their place of living and place of work. In the second case, we tried to cover the entire spectrum, from jobs requiring frequent 4
travelling to the jobs demanding constantly moving from one place to another (e.g. expatriation). In the study, representative data 1 have been collected that provide information about the spread of job-related mobility requirements and about the frequencies of the different kinds of mobile living. Persons interviewed were asked if they had encountered mobility requirements within the last three years, and whether they had performed a job (or jobs) requiring mobility in their occupational biography since the first job till now. It enables us to analyse who (in terms of personal features, family situation, sector of economy) is confronted with mobility requirements, and who is significantly more often mobile due to job reasons. The questionnaire includes also the set of questions concerning family arrangements, satisfaction with various aspects of the family life, and the overall quality of life. The study has been currently completed, and only very preliminary results are available at the moment. To gather a big enough number of mobile people, additional booster has been added to the representative sample: after completing 790 interviews on the regular sample, respondents were screened to check their current status (job mobile in any form or not), and only those mobile were interviewed. 4) Job related mobility in Poland in the context of the family lives In Poland, 1,102 people were interviewed (791 in the main sample and 311 in the boost sample). The survey was conducted with CAPI (computer assisted face-to-face interviews). In the first stage of the study a representative sample for the Polish population aged 25-54 was drawn from the PESEL-operate (ID numbers), and a quota sampling strategy was used in the boost stage of the study. Fieldwork lasted 21 days. Weighting strategy was based on the Central Statistical Office data concerning gender, age (10-year cohorts) and educational status of respondents. In general, 700 non-mobiles and 402 mobiles were interviewed during the whole study. 4.1. Mobility experience and mobility potential For the sake of clarity, we have focused on the most common forms of job related mobility: (1) long distance commuters (daily travel to and from the job takes at least 2 hours), (2) overnighters (spend on the average at least 2 nights out of home weekly); (3) recent relocator (has moved to another destination at least 100 km away from the previous home, due to the job); (4) multi-mobile: experiences more than one form of mobility in her/his job. We have also introduced 3 types of not 1 In all countries, representative samples have been used, including both economically active and economically passive. 5
mobile respondents: (1) experienced: were job-mobile in the past, but are not at the moment; (2) rejecter: has been required to become mobile, and refused; (3) unchallenged: has never been offered a job requiring mobility in any form. Table 1. Mobility experiences of Individuals % whole sample % employed % employed full-time Non-mobiles (total) 88.7 84.4 84.0 Experienced 23.4 21.3 21.1 Rejecter 6.4 7.1 6.5 Unchallenged 58.7 56.1 56.3 Mobiles (total) 11. 3 15.6 16.0 Long distance commuter 4.2 6.0 6.1 Overnighter 3.5 4.7 4.7 Recent relocator 1.4 1.8 1.8 Multi-mobile 2.4 3.1 3.4 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 B including self-employed persons C working for pay 35 hours and more per week; fulltime in Poland is 40 hours. In the table this country-specific value is not included because there are only a few cases that differ in both categorizations (35+ and 40+). Even if 11.3% of respondents are mobile because of their job, we can clearly see that only 59% were never challenged with mobility. Among currently not-mobile, 23,4% were mobile in the past, and only 6.4% of Poles refused a job demanding mobility. If we add respondents who have a jobmobile partner (6.8% of population), nearly one person in five (18.2% altogether) is currently 6
affected by mobility - either own mobility or partner mobility. There are significant differences between respondents who are employed (either in any form or full time) and the total sample, although they are not very big. The most common form of mobility is long distance commuting - spending two hours or more daily on travelling. A smaller proportion of the employed are overnighters. Quite uncommon is relocation - which may be due to the real estate market in Poland, and the problems people have with property rights to their flats. The least common type of job mobility is living in a long-distance relationship. Only 0.4% of the whole surveyed population lives in such a relationship for job related reasons. None of the non-working respondents lived in such a relationship. Table 2. Mobility Experiences of Couples % Not in stable relationship (32.2% of the total sample) No partner, non - mobile 87.5 No partner, mobile 12.5 Total (all singles) 100.0 In stable relationship (67.8% of the total sample) Both partners are not working for pay One-earner Couples (total) 7.6 36.5 Working for pay partner non-mobile 29.4 Working for pay partner mobile 7.1 Dual-earner Couples (total) 55.9 Both partners non-mobile 42.3 One partner mobile 11.8 Both partners mobile 1.8 Total (all couples) 100.0 7
The rate of mobility (12.5%) is only marginally higher among singles (people who do not have a partner) compared to people who are in a stable relationship (11.8%). The difference is more visible in the rate of rejection: among people living with a partner 24.4% rejected mobility, while among singles there are 19.9% rejectors. Among all couples, 20.8% are affected by mobility (at least one partner is mobile), which is much higher than we expected. Are those who are mobile willing to continue their way of living, and are those who are not mobile willing to move? What is the potential of mobility, and is mobility a negative experience people rather would stop? Table 3. Willingness to Become Job Mobile (Again) Not Full-time employed A C Part-time employed BC employed searching a job Total Non-mobiles (total) 60.5 6.0 33.5 100 Willing to commute (incl. staying away overnight) 70.3 7.4 22.2 100 Willing to relocate 69.1 7.3 23.7 100 Willing to commute or relocate 69.9 7.1 23.1 100 Mobiles (total) 90.0 5.6 4.4 100 Willing to commute (incl. staying away overnight) 91.5 4.9 3.7 100 Willing to relocate 92.2 4.7 3.1 100 Willing to commute or relocate 91.8 4.7 3.5 100 A working for pay 35 hours and more per week B working for pay less than 35 hours per week C including self-employed persons It seems mobility is widely considered and accepted: close to 70% of currently non - mobile respondents declare willingness to commute or to relocate, and this readiness is higher among 8
respondents working full time. What seems interesting, these are unemployed (currently seeking a job) who are less willing to become mobile - which may be one of the reasons they stay unemployed. Respondents who are currently mobile are even more eager to continue mobile living: more than 90% declare a willingness to commute or to relocate. In the whole surveyed population only 16.2% are not willing to become mobile at all. Thus the potential of mobility, at least according to declarations, is very high in Poland: the majority of respondents would be even ready to relocate - though in reality only 1.4% of respondents had actually moved due to their job responsibilities. 4.2. Who becomes mobile? It is crucial to understand the personal features and family status of people who more willingly decide on a mobile job. On the one hand, being mobile may influence the decisions concerning founding a family or make it difficult to build a stable relationship; on the other hand, the mobility of people having a partner and children may influence the quality of family life. Table 4. Mobility Experiences of Individuals by sex and age group Male Female Total 25-34 35-44 45-54 Total Non-mobiles (total) 48.5 51.5 100 32.7 29.4 38.0 100 A Experienced 60.1 39.9 100 30.0 23.9 46.1 100 Rejecter 67.3 32.7 100 40.4 30.8 28.8 100 Unchallenged 41.8 58.2 100 33.0 31.3 35.8 100 Mobiles (total) 61.8 38.2 100 55.1 24.7 20.2 100 Long distance commuter 15 18-16 8 9 - Overnighter 21 7-13 8 7 - Recent relocator 7 4-9 1 1 - Multi-mobile 12 6-11 5 2 - A including people who have also rejected demands to become mobile 9
Not surprisingly, there are less women (38.2%) than men (61.8%) among the mobile. Women are also less often challenged with mobility - which may simply mean they are not offered jobs requesting mobility, and less experienced with mobility in their occupational career. Only one in five (20%) non-mobile women has experienced mobility in the past while almost one in three nonmobile men has been mobile before. There are substantial differences between men and women concerning types of mobility. First of all, if a woman is job-mobile, she is most probably a long distance commuter (51.4% of all mobile women). Among mobile men there are more overnighters (38.2% of mobile men) than long distance commuters (27.3% of mobile men). Thus, gender is strongly correlated both with the probability of being offered or performing a mobile job, and with the type of mobility. Women, if they decide for mobility at all, prefer long distance commuting over spending nights away from home. Mobility experiences are also related to age. The majority of the mobiles (55.1%) are people aged 25-34, and they prevail in each of the types of mobility. Bearing in mind the Polish pattern of family formation - the average age of the first marriage and the first child - they are precisely in the most crucial phase of setting up the family. Apart from being the most mobile age group, these are also the most open to (further) mobility respondents. More than two thirds (70.6%) of people aged 25-34 are willing to relocate, while among the age groups 35-44 and 45-54 corresponding percentages are 57.4% and 41.8%. Similarly, the vast majority (80.1%) of the youngest age group is willing to commute over long distances, compared with 62.0% of the group aged 45-54. Table 5. Mobility Experiences of Individuals by educational and income levels in PLN Primary 1 Secondary University Total Less than 4600 PLN 4601-7300 PLN 7301-9900 PLN Total Non-mobiles (total) 13.3 70.7 16.0 100 94.4 5.4 0.2 100 Experienced 11.5 72.7 15.8 100 94.4 5.6 0 100 Rejecter 13.5 51.9 34.6 100 91.6 8.4 0 100 Unchallenged 13.9 72.1 13.9 100 94.8 4.9 0.3 100 10
Mobiles (total) 4.5 61.4 34.1 100 84.7 12.4 2.9 100 Long distance commuter 2 21 10-17 2 0 - Overnighter 1 17 8-14 2 0 - Recent relocator 0 5 6-6 1 0 - Multi-mobile 0 11 7-7 1 0 - B Because in Poland there were 41.3% missing values concerning revenue and out of 58.7% who responded more than two thirds (69.2%) are respondents whose household income falls into the first category (less than 2700 PLN), the procedure of implementation of revenue according to a regression procedure would be unreliable. 1 PL Secondary school - basic vocational, secondary vocational schools and secondary schools; university - lower and higher university degree and PhD. Clearly, the higher the level of education, the more mobility. People with a university education compose only 16% of the population of non-mobiles and 34% of the population of those performing a job demanding mobility. The lowest level of mobility is linked to the lowest primary education - we should remember, however, that they are often choosing migration (circular, seasonal work) against internal mobility. As, due to the educational boom in Poland, there are significantly more people with a university education among young people (25-34), the two factors interact. After completing a university degree, young people try to invest in their occupational career, deciding on the best opportunities even if these involve relocating or other forms of mobility. Not surprisingly, family decisions have to wait. People with a university education are not only relatively most mobile, but also most ready to stay or become mobile. Among people with a university degree one out of twelve (8.6%) is unwilling to become mobile in any form. The corresponding percentage is higher among people with secondary education (14.5%). As much as 23.0% of the respondents who finished only basic vocational school are unwilling to be mobile. The data also prove that it is beneficial to be mobile. The group of people with relatively high household incomes is bigger among the mobiles than among the non-mobiles. For 71.5% of nonmobiles the net household monthly income is less than 2700 PLN. In the mobiles group there are only 50.2% of the households with such a low income. On the high end, only 15.8% of the nonmobiles households income is in the range of 2700 to 3800 PLN, while there are 21.3% of mobiles 11
households in this income brackets. The highest level of 3800-4600 PLN per month has been identified in 6.2% of non-mobiles households, and in 12.3%.of mobiles. Obviously, the relation between income and mobility is more complicated: a mobility career is more typical for younger people, with higher education levels, and may be also more dynamic or open for challenge (psychological factors). Nevertheless, moving into the broader labour market brings more options and opens up better job opportunities. Is it related to the family situation? Table 6. Mobility and family situation Rate of mobility in groups A No partner No kids With partner No kids No partner With kids With partner & kids Overall rate in whole group Male 14.71 24.39 10.34 11.21 13.47 Female 19.05 19.35 5.41 6.12 8.42 A percentage of mobiles in groups. The highest ratio of people performing mobile jobs is in the group of people who have a partner, but no kids. Having kids definitely decreases mobility levels, especially dramatically for women. In the group of women with a partner, but without kids, more than 19% are mobile; in the group of women with a partner and kids - only 5.4%. In the case of men, the rate of mobility also decreases more than twice, thus it is clear children stop their parents at home. Finally, mobility is linked to the sector of economy and hierarchical position in the workplace. Among people working in private enterprises almost one person in five (18.9%) is mobile. The rate of mobility in the public and semi-public sector is lower - 14.8% of people working in such companies and organizations are mobile. Mobility is also rather uncommon among the selfemployed (8.8%). 12
Table 7. Mobility Experiences of Individuals and hierarchical position Supervisor In-between Supervised Independent Total Non-mobiles (total) 3.0 14.8 61.3 20.8 100 Experienced.9 16.8 63.9 18.4 100 Rejecter 9.9 27.3 50.7 12.2 100 Unchallenged 3.0 12.5 61.7 22.9 100 Mobiles (total) 1.3 27.4 62.3 9.0 100 Long distance commuter 24.9 65.9 9.2 100 Overnighter 2.6 25.9 61.7 9.8 100 Recent relocator 24.3 66.8 8.9 100 Multi-mobile 2.6 36.1 54.1 7.2 100 It is highly uncommon to be mobile at the supervisor position. Only one out of fourteen supervisors in the study was mobile. On the other hand, positions in the middle management (or being both supervised and supervisor) are frequently connected with mobility demands. The proportion of mobiles to non-mobiles among the in-between group is one to three. It is also rather common (happens more often than in the other groups) for a person in the middle management to be multimobile. Being mobile is rather rare among the supervised compared to the middle management, but the supervised are still the majority of the mobile group. The position at work seems to be quite an important factor influencing mobility. As the supervised are seldom mobile, it is important to stress that women are usually supervised. 70.2% of women have such a position at work while only a bit more than a half (53.7%) of men belong to the supervised category. There are only a few women who are in the middle management and even less who are supervisors themselves. This difference seems to be related to higher rates of mobility among men than among women. It is also worth noticing that women are rarely independent workers. Only 13.7% of women could name their job position as independent while the corresponding percentage of men is 23.7%. 13
5) Conclusions Women are less challenged by mobility than men, first of all, because they are less involved in working for pay (36% of women in the age span we have considered are not working for pay against 7% men). Further, if unemployed, their readiness to accept a job which requires mobility is also lower than those of men. Women are also less confronted with mobility demands by the employer than men. Though, among working women, the readiness to become mobile is not very different to men s, they tend to reject more often mobility opportunities than men. This gender gap is strongly related to the family situation, gender role definitions inside and outside the family and gender discrimination. Mobility tends to be also more common among young people and to decrease with age. In our survey more than half of job mobiles are between 25 and 34 years old. Considered from the point of view of the age groups and those who are working for pay, while there is 55% of those aged 25 to 34 working for pay in the mobile group, the percentage decreases to 25% among the next age group and to 20% among those aged 45 to 54 working for pay. The fact that past mobility is roughly distributed in the same proportion as the different age groups are distributed in the whole sample shows that some form of mobility is mainly an experience in the earlier stages of the working biographies, being abandoned in many cases with the consolidation of the work career. Mobility forms vary also according to gender, though not age. Women are significantly more often long distance commuters, while men spent more nights out of the home working in distant locations. Obviously, women are more involved in everyday household duties, and can seldom afford to become an overnighter. As to age, all kinds of mobility are more frequent in the youngest age group. According to educational level, 2/3 of mobile persons have a secondary degree, but in relative terms, the highest proportion is to be found among persons with a university degree. Mobility is more common for people in the in-between (middle management) position than for supervisors, or - even more - for supervised. Mobile persons are especially frequent in the group of DINKY s (Double Income No Kids Yet), and then in the group of single people. In the group of people with kids (with or without partner) the proportion of mobiles decreases quite dramatically, especially in the case of women. Thus, overall 14
women are less challenged with mobility - but women with kids are virtually excluded from mobility. According to income level, the households of mobile persons more often reach (relatively) high income levels, and are less often present in the lowest income brackets. This is obvious bearing in mind these are younger people, with a university education, in the in-between (thus having some prospects) professional position, with a partner but without kids - who are overrepresented in the group of mobiles. While migration remains in Poland mainly the strategy of people of a lower social position, it seems internal occupational mobility is rather the strategy to build a real, long term career. However, it seems from the data mobility does not go well with family life. It may be in either direction: if persons most prone to becoming mobile are couples without kids - either they delay kids due to mobile living, or they decide on mobile living to build a material base to have children in the future; or, using another example, if having kids strongly discourages people, especially women, to be mobile - it also deprives them from the benefits of mobile jobs (like better income). The data concerning quality of life, satisfaction from family life and overall well being of mobile persons will show whether mobility is also linked to psychological stress or to the level of satisfaction from family life. In Poland, it seems the size of mobility is not that big as, for example, in Germany or Belgium. It seems reasonable, however, to include in family statistics some measurements concerning job requirements, and especially mobility. 15