Reconciliation of work and family life in the EU
The reconciliation of work, private and family life is a key area for European employment policy,which aims to increase the participation of both men and women in the labour market and toencourage initiatives to support the health and well-being of employees. This survey data reportexamines employment rates for men and women, the impact of children on labour marketparticipation, the various forms of flexibility to support the reconciliation of work and family life(part-time work, flexibility of working time, work organisation and place of work) and the satisfaction of individuals with their work–life balance. Employment targets and employment ratesThe creation of new, good quality jobs and an increase in both the overall and femaleemployment rate form key elements of the EU’s employment strategy. Under the LisbonStrategy, which ran from 2000 to 2010, the target was to achieve an overall EU employment rate of 70% and a female employment rate of 60%. Under the Europe 2020 Strategy, one of theheadline indicators is a target rate of 75% for overall employment of workers aged 20–64%.
Data from the EU Labour Force Survey (LFS) published by the European Commission in a 2010 compendium show that the overall employment rate (for 15–64 year-olds) in EU27was 65.4% in 2007 and 65.9% in 2008. The rate fell back slightly to 64.6% in 2009, presumablyas a result of the economic crisis. The most recent figures for male employment show a rate of72.8% in EU27 in 2008 and 70.7% in 2009; for female employment, the rate was 59.1% in 2008,falling back slightly to 58.6% in 2009.There are significant differences in male and female employment rates between Member States(Figures 1 and 2). In the case of male workers, rates in vary from 82.4% in the Netherlands and77.6% in Cyprus, to 61% in Latvia and 59.5% in Lithuania. In the case of female workers, ratesvary from 73.1% in Denmark and 70.2% in Sweden, to 46.4% in Italy and 37.7% in Malta.© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20113Figure 1: Overall employment rates for age group 15–64 in the EU, 2009 (%)
Figure 1: Overall employment rates for age group 15–64 in the EU, 2009 (%)Source: EU Labour Force
Figure 2: Employment rates for men and women in the EU, 2009Figure 2: Employment rates for men and women in the EU, Flexibility in the organisation and length of working time, which enables greater reconciliation ofwork, private and family life, can play an important role in increasing employment rates,particularly among women, who retain the bulk of the responsibility for child and dependant care.This, however, is a complicated policy issue. According to the report on the reconciliationof work, private and family life in the EU from the European Commission, thepresence of children (especially younger ones) can have a strong influence on the type of jobsought, in particular among women. Flexible working time arrangements, part-time jobs ortemporary work are examples of employment that those with parental responsibilities may seek orbe ‘pushed into’, often as a result of insufficient, inappropriate or unaffordable childcareprovisions. Public policies regarding reconciliation between parenthood and labour marketparticipation have sometimes developed in contradictory ways, combining measures encouragingparents to stay at home with those encouraging them to take up paid employment.Although female employment rates have increased strongly over the past decade, women (andalso to some extent men) still encounter difficulties in reconciling work and private and familylife.
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20114The influence of childrenAlthough significant changes have been made to the labour market over the past 50 years and thelabour market participation of women has increased substantially, the Commission report pointsout that women’s participation in the workforce continues to be affected by their predominantrole in the care of children.The presence and number of children, as well as the age of the youngest child, can have a markedinfluence on female employment rates. The presence of children decreases labour marketparticipation in virtually all EU Member States, while the presence of children usually has theeffect of increasing male labour market participation (Table 1). The average negative effect onfemale participation is -11.3% in EU27 and -10.9% in EU15.
Women,particularly those in relatively low-paid jobs, prefer to undertake the childcare themselves andwithdraw from the labour market.Some of the main ways in which individuals try to reconcile work and family and private lifeinclude:• part-time working;• working flexibility;• flexibility in the organisation of work, including the length of the working day and taking timeoff as and when needed;• flexibility in the place of work, largely through teleworking from home.These issues are explored below.Part-time workPart-time work is widespread among the female workforce, although a proportion of men alsowork part-time. According to the most recent data from Eurostat, 18.8% of the EU27 workforceworked part-time in 2012.
For men the total was 8.3% and for women it was 31.5%. TheNetherlands stands out as having the largest proportion of part-time workers among the femaleworkforce (75.8%), due to a long-standing tradition of encouraging part-time working.In addition to differences between men and women in the incidence of part-time working, thereasons why men and women work part-time also differ considerably. In the case of women, themain reason is the care of children and incapacitated adults, accounting for 42% of female parttimework in 2010 (Figure 3); this reason accounted for only 8% of male part-time workers(Figure 4). For men, the main reason for working part-time was the lack of a full-time job. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20116Figure 3: Women’s reasons for part-time work in EU27, 2006Figure 3: Women’s reasons for part-time work in EU27, 2006Source: Eurostat, LFSFigure 4: Men’s reasons for part-time work in EU27, 2006Figure 4: Men’s reasons for part-time work in EU27, 2006Source: Eurostat, LFS© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20117The 2009 Commission report on the reconciliation of work, private and family life in the EU(13Mb PDF) notes that it is not clear whether part-timers would prefer to work full-time ifchildcare services were more extensive or if full-time working hours were organised to be morefamily-friendly. ‘Looking after children’ was a reason often cited by women in the Netherlandsand the UK, but this could either be due to insufficient childcare facilities or to a deliberate choiceof the mothers.Flexibility in the organisation of workThere are many different types of flexible working schemes and arrangements on offer to workersto help them to reconcile work and private and family life. These cover issues such as flexibilityin the organisation of working time (including working atypical hours) and flexibility in thelength of working time.
The main forms of flexible work organisation are:• part-time work;• reduced hours, which allow people to trade income for time off;• term-time contracts, which allow employees to remain on a permanent contract as either fullorpart-time employees, but gives them the right to unpaid leave during school holidays;• compressed working week, where weekly hours are compressed into fewer days than normal,for example a four-day week, giving employees longer weekends;• flexitime, which allows employees to vary their working hours within specified limits (corehours) from day to day;• shift swapping, which allows employees to rearrange shifts among themselves to suit theirneeds;• self-rostering, where employees schedule their own working day to meet the requirements ofservice delivery or production (often as a team with a mix of skills, accommodatingindividual preferences as much as possible);• staggered hours, where employees have different start, finish and break times (often in largeworkplaces to cover longer working days).This type of flexibility can have benefits for both the employer and the employee. For theemployer, they can help to reduce employee turnover, increase productivity and reduce operatingcosts; for the employee, they can help to reconcile work, private and family life.Using data from the Establishment Survey on Working Time and Work–Life Balance (ESWT(615Kb PDF) 2004–2005, Figure 5 gives an indication of the impact of flexible types of workingtime arrangements offered by employers. It shows that the main impact was higher jobsatisfaction (cited by 73% of employee representatives and 61% of managers). A betteradaptation of workload was also cited by a majority of both employee representatives andmanagers (67% and 54%, respectively), and lower absence rates were cited by 31% of employeerepresentatives and 27% of managers. Among the negative impacts, communication problemswere cited by 20% of employee representatives and 10% of managers, and increased costs by 6%of employee representatives and 5% of managers.© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20118Figure 5: Effects of introducing flexible working time (%)Figure 5: Effects of introducing flexible working time (%)Note: Surveyed companies with employee representation offering flexibleworking time arrangements (multiple answers possible).
The structure of establishments with employee representation differs significantly from thestructure of all the establishments surveyed. In addition, there are a range of family-friendly arrangements that employers can provide whichgo beyond working time arrangements (Table 2). These include types of leave over and abovestatutory provision, including enhanced maternity and paternity leave, and parental leave. Othertypes of leave that employers can offer include leave for family reasons such as to look after anelderly relative, leave upon the adoption of a child, and a range of career break schemes.Employers can also provide help with childcare, in the form of financial assistance such asvouchers or provision of workplace nurseries. Other types of support that can be offered byemployers include help with managing work-life balance and counselling (where needed). .Table 2: Examples of work–family arrangements provided by enterprisesType ExamplesFlexible working arrangements Part-time workFlexible arrangementsJob-sharingTeleworking/working at homeTerm-time workSaving hoursChildcare arrangements Workplace nurseryContracted childcare placesChildmindingChildcare resource and referralFinancial assistanceHoliday play schemes/summer campsLeave (Extra statutory) maternity leave© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 20119Type ExamplesParental leavePaternity leaveLeave for family reasons (including elderly)Adoption leaveCareer break schemeSupportive arrangements Work–family management training
Employees counselling/assistanceWork–family coordinatorResearch on employees needsFinancial contributionsSource: Den Dulk (2001)Varying the working dayThe Labour Force Survey ad hoc module 2005 on reconciliation between work and family life(3.6Mb PDF) collected data from EU27 Member States plus three European Free TradeAssociation (EFTA) countries.A relatively high degree of flexibility was found in the proportion of men and women able to varythe start and finish of their working day by at least one hour for family reasons; 69% of men andwomen in EU27 could vary their working day in this way. In country terms, the proportionranged from 93% in the Netherlands to 45% in Romania. The report notes that this is notsurprising given that this type of working time flexibility is very common in the Netherlands.Relatively little difference in access to this type of flexibility was found between men andwomen. Only in Germany, Hungary, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia were the differencesnoticeable (between 3 and 4 percentage points). However, in the Nordic countries (Denmark,Finland, Norway and Sweden) and Malta, men seem to have a greater degree of this type ofworking time flexibility than women (with a difference of between 7 and 8 percentage points).Taking days off for family reasonsThe second aspect of flexibility examined in the Labour Force Survey 2005 ad hoc module(3.6Mb PDF) was the opportunity to organise working time for family reasons (including care forchildren, disabled or other dependants) by taking days off without using holidays or special leave.This includes working time banking as well as individuals with free working time who can beabsent for a day without any special arrangement.In EU27, 62% of employees aged 25–49 had the possibility of taking entire days off for familyreasons, with only a marginal difference between men and women. At the level of individualcountries, the most flexibility was found in Austria, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Norway andSlovenia (all above 75%). The lowest scoring country was Cyprus (30%), where employedpeople do not generally have the possibility of taking entire days off.From a gender perspective, more women have this opportunity in the Benelux countries andGermany, whereas in the Nordic countries, significantly more men than women are able to alterworking time or take days off for family reasons.© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 201110However, the report also notes that it is often left to the employer’s discretion whether workingtimes can be altered or days off granted for family reasons.
Nevertheless, some countries have astatutory obligation to grant employees time off from work and the report provides informationon statutory provisions in Member States.Flexibility in the place of workOne important element of flexibility in the organisation of work is flexibility regarding whereemployees carry out their work. If individuals can work remotely, usually from home on atelework basis, this can improve their work–life balance in terms of reducing commuting timesand enabling them to combine working with being on hand to deal with family-related issues. Foremployers, the advantages of this type of arrangement include cost reductions (less office space isneeded) and a reduction in employee absence and turnover. However, the 2009 EuropeanCommission report on the reconciliation of work, private and family life in the EU (13Mb PDF)also notes that the introduction of teleworking, or remote working, requires a relatively highdegree of trust and communication between employee and employer.The incidence of teleworking has increased relatively slowly in the EU in recent years. In EU27in 2006, 3.8% of men said that they ‘usually’ worked from home and 8.4% said that they‘sometimes’ worked from home. For women, 4.9% said that they ‘usually’ worked from homeand 7.1% said that they ‘sometimes’ worked from home.There are significant differences between Member States. In the UK, for example, a relativelyhigh proportion of both men and women (26.8%) and women (22.5%) said that they ‘sometimes’worked from home (Table 3). This was also the case in Denmark, where 28.6% of men and21.8% of women said that they ‘sometimes’ worked from home.The incidence of men who ‘usually’ worked at home was highest in Finland (9.9%) and Austria(8.8%) and lowest in Romania (0.5%). For women, incidence was highest in France (11.6%) andAustria (11.2%) and lowest in Romania (0.8%).
Population in employment working from home, as a percentage of totalemployment, for the age group 25–49, by gender.u = unreliable or uncertain data; p = provisional; – = data not available; IS = IcelandSource: Eurostat, LFSThere is no doubt that the incidence of teleworking has increased over the past decade. Datapresented in the 2010 Eurofound report, Telework in the European Union (TN0910050S), showthat there was a steady increase in teleworking (as measured by those who teleworked at least aquarter of the time) in the EU between 2000 and 2005. In 2000, the average proportion ofemployees involved in telework was 5.3% in EU15 and 4.2% in the then candidate countries. By2005, this figure had increased to 7% in EU27 (Figure 6).There are significant differences between Member States, with those experiencing relatively highlevels of teleworking also experiencing strong growth. Teleworking grew particularly strongly inthe Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Latvia and the Netherlands between 2000 and 2005,although it actually decreased in Cyprus, Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania and the UK (veryslightly).© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 201112Figure 6: Levels of teleworking in the EU, 2005Figure 6: Levels of teleworking in the EU, 2005Source: TN0910050SIn terms of the future of teleworking, the Eurofound report notes that there are many factors thatfavour its expansion such as the growing use of the internet and cost considerations. However,there are also a number of factors hampering the growth of teleworking such as problems relatedto the security of internet connections (particularly in the case of sensitive data). There is also aconcern that teleworkers may be disadvantaged compared with more traditional types ofemployees in terms of skills updating and access to career progression.Satisfaction with work–life balanceThe Labour Force Survey also asked questions relating to how satisfied employees were withtheir work–life balance including whether they wanted to work or work more and reduce theircaring activities, or whether they wanted to work less and increase their caring activities.General overall satisfaction with current types of working arrangements was found among bothmen and women with caring responsibilities. Overall, only 2.3% of individuals in 2005 said thatthey wanted to work mo
Evaluation of the project
We were evaluating our project during working on it and at the end of the project. Our students filled in Survey Monkey questionnaire to evaluate the project. Here it is and the results of the evaluation made by students and teachers.
I
Results of the survey
The project „F@MILY @ND WORK DIMENSIONS“ is almost at its end and students of participating schools did the survey about the project with the aim to evaluate the project.We used zoomerang survey and a Padlet/Walwisher to get the information about the evaluation Here are the results of the survey. The total number of students who took part in this survey was 21. There were 10 questions given in the questionnaire and all of them were answered by participants of the survey. Here are the results.
On question No. 1 How motivating was project „F@MILY @ND WORK DIMENSIONS“ ? 14 participants answered - extremely motivating, 4 participants said it is very motivating and 5 participants said the project is moderately motivating.
Question No. 2 . How many of the course objectives did project meet? answered 21 students. 10 students think all of them, 5 students think most of them and 6 students think that hlf of them.
Question No.3 How clearly did project explain the objectives of the course? answered 21 students. 10 of them think extremely clearly, 10 – very clearly and 1 student think moderately clearly.
Question No. 4 What were your most favorite experiences at project? students offered mostly these answers: logo competition, descriptions of thein own families, videoconferences with partners, the surveys, the most favourite experience in this project is that I learn a lot from my partners and I developed my skills in communication, the most important experience that I had in this project was the videokonference with the Romanian team and the Slovak team, and opportunity to learn something new.
The question No. 5 Overall, were you satisfied with your experience at project, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with it, or dissatisfied with it? was answered like this:10 students were extremely satisfied and 11 students moderately satisfied.
Question No. 6 What are the strengths of project? students answered these responses: joy and new knowledge, the dedication that we students showed, the strengths of the project are communication and cooperation between different people with different opinion and cultures, learning English and ICT application, discussing with other students from other countries, learning more about creating the webside of the project, I think that the strenghts of the project were the communication between pupils from different countries, meeting with people who shared with us their opinion on family and work balance, the study of IT applications., a good organisation of activities and cooperation with our partners.
Question No. 7 Are your interactions with other members of your team positive, neither positive nor negative, or negative? students answered like this: 15 students say very positive, 5 students say moderately positive and 1 student slightly positive.
The students answered the question No. 8 How well does project consider the individual needs of students? this way: 10 of the answered extremely well, 7 very well and 4 said moderately well.
Question No 9 How large a role does the project play in the community? was answered like this: 2 students said extremely large, 11 students said the role of the project is very large and 7 students said the role of the project was moderately large.
Question No.10 if the cooperation on the project had been fruitful all respondents answeret positively.
According to these results it is possible to say, that students were really satisfied with the project and it was a great oportunity for students to understand the issues of the family and work balance as well. And students learnt a lot of great new things and knowledge and the project has had a lot of assets.
THE PROJECT HAS BEEN AWARDED BY AN ETWINNING QUALITY LABEL IN SLOVAKIA. ROMANIA HAS A APPLIED FOR THE QUALITY LABEL TOO.
