Galanaki

275
-1

Published on

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
275
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Galanaki

  1. 1. Flexible Working Patterns in Greece and Europe Eleanna Galanaki Athens University of Economics and Business, Dpt of Marketing and Communication
  2. 2. Use of Flexible working Patterns in Europe <ul><li>Data from the 2004 Cranet round </li></ul>
  3. 3. Weekend work Shift work Overtime Annual Hours Contract Part Time Work Job Sharing Flexi-Time Temporary/Casual Work Fixed-Term Contracts Teleworking Compressed Working Week United Kingdom 65% 71% 92% 26% 97% 55% 48% 86% 75% 20% 29% France 55% 78% 82% 70% 95% 7% 29% 90% 90% 5% 11% Germany 79% 74% 55% 30% 98% 40% 90% 64% 97% 44% 28% Sweden 65% 74% 99% 46% 99% 34% 94% 94% 98% 44% 20% Spain 56% 86% 80% 34% 75% 18% 46% 85% 72% 12% 8% Denmark 54% 58% 92% 33% 96% 15% 78% 85% 57% 39% 34% The Netherlands 40% 48% 62% 27% 99% 47% 50% 92% 71% 41% 39% Italy 19% 65% 71% 7% 86% 2% 11% 44% 92% 20% 7% Norway 84% 61% 98% 42% 95% 42% 92% 82% 89% 60% 26% Switzerland 60% 51% 72% 44% 95% 38% 69% 40% 77% 33% 21% Finland 66% 72% 95% 35% 96% 37% 83% 72% 95% 30% 15% Greece 68% 85% 89% 9% 48% 7% 43% 51% 79% 9% 2% Czech Republic 62% 85% 94% 37% 79% 13% 78% 73% 85% 23% 18% Austria 69% 69% 93% 29% 99% 27% 88% 43% 76% 30% 37% Belgium 60% 74% 84% 14% 98% 26% 60% 71% 85% 24% 15% Bulgaria 40% 81% 60% 40% 45% 32% 31% 54% 70% 4% 16% Hungary 59% 68% 86% 14% 71% 17% 51% 41% 76% 14% 5% Cyprus 74% 65% 88% 15% 55% 25% 49% 77% 57% 4% 5% Iceland 83% 80% 99% 48% 98% 53% 82% 64% 86% 48% 21% Estonia 67% 73% 80% 8% 69% 29% 50% 66% 87% 26% 9% Slovenia 80% 83% 91% 27% 65% 31% 59% 47% 98% 11% 13% Slovakia 60% 67% 87% 66% 12% 60% 60% 55% 7% 45% 0% TOTAL 62 % 71 % 8 4 % 32 % 81 % 3 0 % 6 1 % 67 % 7 8 % 27 % 17 %
  4. 4. Use of Flexible working Patterns in Europe <ul><li>Data from the 2003-4 Cranet round </li></ul><ul><li>Data from the 2008-9 Cranet round </li></ul>
  5. 5. Weekend work Shift work Overtime Annual Hours Contract Part Time Work Job Sharing Flexi-Time Temporary/ Casual Work Fixed-Term Contracts Home-based work Tele-working Compressed Working Week Austria 80% 66% 98% 27% 97% 36% 90% 49% 79% 14% 39% 40% Cyprus 67% 62% 88% 33% 44% 16% 49% 56% 64% 9% 4% 5% Czech Republic 57% 90% 98% 12% 82% 5% 77% 53% 80% 11% 17% 100% Denmark 49% 48% 92% 47% 98% 15% 81% 88% 57% 22% 70% 36% Finalnd 79% 80% 97% 40% 99% 38% 92% 70% 97% 36% 39% 20% Germany 83% 67% 59% 39% 98% 37% 94% 76% 93% 39% 52% 31% Greece 66% 75% 80% 10% 44% 10% 33% 38% 66% 5% 10% 5% Hungary 75% 55% 85% 21% 62% 27% 72% 33% 68% 17% 22% 6% Lithuania 68% 67% 64% 8% 85% 35% 48% 51% 81% 8% 14% 53% Slovajia 72% 65% 83% 45% 65% 22% 46% 51% 63% 18% 20% 8% Sweden 73% 72% 98% 47% 95% 27% 92% 93% 98% 31% 32% 18% United Kingdom 55% 58% 76% 32% 90% 49% 55% 72% 77% 38% 29% 30% Iceland 51% 62% 71% 58% 89% 30% 85% 63% 55% 9% 61% 23% Switzerland 77% 62% 96% 52% 98% 58% 78% 46% 92% 28% 25% 28% AVERAGE 68% 65% 83% 33% 76% 29% 66% 60% 73% 19% 29% 23%
  6. 6. Groups of Flexible Working Patterns Rotated Component Matrix a &quot;Traditional&quot; Flexible Working Patterns Working from distance or distributing the time worked Temporary or Fixed - term Less total time worked weekly S hift work 0,73 -,234 ,148 ,121 O vertime 0,69 ,336 -,110 -,140 W eekend work 0,66 -,200 ,192 ,265 T ele-working -,070 0,74 -,102 ,020 F lexi-time -,202 0,58 ,270 ,064 H omebased work -,019 0,53 ,040 ,128 Annual hours contract ,212 0,43 ,236 -,018 Fixed-term contracts ,019 ,013 0,74 ,025 T emporary/casual ,321 ,167 0,6 -,012 J ob sharing ,056 -,038 ,133 0,72 Compressed working week ,167 ,222 -,251 0,63 Part-time work -,083 ,211 ,465 0,49 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
  7. 7. Flexible Working Patterns in Europe Across time
  8. 8. Flexible working practices in Greece, 2009
  9. 9. Profile of Companies using Flexible Working Patterns <ul><li>“ Traditional” Flexible Working Patterns: </li></ul><ul><li>Lower percentage of managers (R= -0.15), professional/ technical (R= -0.24) and clerical employees (R= -0.24) or employees with higher education/university qualification (R= -0.36) and higher percentage of manual staff in total personnel (R= 0.41) </li></ul><ul><li>Also higher % of personnel younger than 25 years (R= 0.15) </li></ul><ul><li>Lower labour costs as % of total operating costs (R= -0.16) </li></ul><ul><li>More probable to be serving the local market , rather than the global one (R= 0.08) </li></ul><ul><li>Larger companies, in terms of employment (R= 0.08) </li></ul>
  10. 10. Profile of Companies using Flexible Working Patterns <ul><li>Working from distance or distributing the time worked: </li></ul><ul><li>Higher percentage of professional/ technical (R= 0.20) and clerical employees (R= 0.08), as well as managers(R=0.07) and employees with higher education/university qualification ((R= 0.18) and lower percentage of manual staff in total personnel (R= -0.22) </li></ul><ul><li>Also lower % of personnel younger than 25 years (R= -0.08) </li></ul><ul><li>Higher labour costs as % of total operating costs (R= 0.14) </li></ul><ul><li>More probable to be serving the local market , rather than the global one (R= 0.07). </li></ul><ul><li>Larger companies, in terms of number of employees (R= 0.06) </li></ul><ul><li>Less probable to be a family-owned company (Spearman’s Rho= -0.07) </li></ul>
  11. 11. Profile of Companies using Flexible Working Patterns <ul><li>Temporary or Fixed-term agreements: </li></ul><ul><li>Lower percentage of managers (R= -0.13), professional/ technical (R= -0.07) and clerical employees (R= -0.09) or employees with higher education/university qualification (R= -0.36) and higher percentage of manual staff in total personnel (R= 0.05) </li></ul><ul><li>Also higher % of personnel younger than 25 years (R= 0.10) or older than 45 (R= 0.12) and lower % of personnel between 25 and 45 years old (R= - 0.14) </li></ul><ul><li>Lower annual staff turnover (R= -0.07) </li></ul><ul><li>Higher labour costs as % of total operating costs (R= 0.08) </li></ul><ul><li>More probable to be serving the global market (R= - 0.06) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Profile of Companies using Flexible Working Patterns <ul><li>Less total time worked weekly: </li></ul><ul><li>Lower percentage of professional/ technical staff (R= -0.0 9 ) and lower percentage of workforce with a higher education/ university qualification (R=-0.07) </li></ul><ul><li>Also higher % of personnel younger than 25 years (R= 0.17) </li></ul><ul><li>Higher annual staff turnover (R= 0.11) </li></ul><ul><li>Higher labour costs as % of total operating costs (R= 0.09) </li></ul><ul><li>More probable to be serving the global market (R= - 0.06) </li></ul><ul><li>Larger companies , in terms of number of employees (R= 0.08) </li></ul>
  13. 13. Economic Sector (Difference across sectors at the 0.00 level)
  14. 14. Country (Difference across countries at the 0.00 level)
  15. 15. Conclusions <ul><li>Flexibility in working arrangements is a very “varying” concept: it can take different forms in order to meet the needs of both the employer and the employee </li></ul><ul><li>We identified four broad categories of flexible working patterns: “traditional”, “working from distance or distributing the time worked”, “temporary or fixed-term” and “less time worked weekly” </li></ul><ul><li>Each appears to fit better companies and personnel, according to sector of activity, type of organisation and profile of personnel </li></ul><ul><li>At the same time, the economic and legal background of the country also appear to be relevant </li></ul>

×