Decreasing job quality in Europe? The evolution of job strain between 1995 and 2010, by Christophe Vanroelen (Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium). Presented at the 15th European Society for Health and Medical Sociology (ESHMS) Conference 28 - 30th August, 2014, Helsinki, Finland.

1. Decreasing job quality in Europe?
The evolution of job strain between 1995
17-9-2014 pag. 1
and 2010
Christophe Vanroelen
cvroelen@vub.ac.be
Interface Demography
Department of Sociology
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
15th ESHMS Conference
28 - 30th August, 2014, Helsinki, Finland

2. 17-9-2014 pag. 2
Background
• Increases in disability in most OECD-countries
 Leading cause: mental health (30 – 45% in OECD)
Source: OECD, 2009

3. 17-9-2014 pag. 3
Background
• Rising disability – Causes:
• Ageing (working)population;
• Low return to work-rates;
• Spillover effects from unemployment, early
retirement and other income replacement schemes;
• Changing nature of work;
EU 2020 Employment strategy:
“more and better jobs”?

4. 17-9-2014 pag. 4
Background
• Changing nature of work:
• Industrial production Post-Industrial production;
• Working conditions  Job quality:
• … the extent to which a job has work-and employment related factors
that foster beneficial outcomes for the employee, particularly
psychological well-being, physical well-being and positive attitudes such
as job satisfaction (Warr, 1990).
• Components:
• Working conditions (physical exposures, (psychosocial)
demands);
• Intrinsic work task (autonomy, control, learning possibilities);
• Employment conditions (stability, rewards, flexibility);
• Relations at work (support, participation, representation)

5. 17-9-2014 pag. 5
Background
• Variation and evolution in job quality in Europe:
• Evidence from labour economics and sociology of work;
• General evolutions (1990’s – 2000’s):
• Clear trend of work intensification and increasing physical strain;
• Stability/decline in work complexity, learning opportunities, discretion;
• Increase in non-standard contracts;
• Job satisfaction +/- stable;
• Considerable variation among EU-countries:
• Levels of job quality not completely consistent with welfare state typologies;
• Contradictory country-level evolutions over time;
• Macro-factors affecting evolutions:
• Extent of technology involved in the labour process/ skill level workforce;
• Managerial approaches (low trust/high trust);
• Globalization and competitiveness;
• (Institutionalized) working class power;
• Labour market structure and regulation;
• The economic cycle;

6. 17-9-2014 pag. 6
Background
• Job strain as a sensitive indicator of job quality:
• Combination of “high demands” & “low control”;
• Work intensification without increase in control  Lean Model;
• Secondary labour market characteristic:
• Lower educated; Manual and lower skilled service jobs; Younger workers,
Immigrant workers, …;
• Temporary and shorter-tenured workers;
• Small enterprises;
• Other more adverse work- & employment conditions;
• Strongly health-related: CVD (Belkic et al, 2004); Mental health
(Häusser et. al, 2010); Musculoskeletal complaints (Kraatz et al,
2013); General health (Bambra et al., 2014); …;
 Important work-related determinant of health inequality

7. 17-9-2014 pag. 7
Objectives
• Few evidence of country-variation and
evolution in job strain
• To assess the evolution and variation in high
strain jobs in 15 European countries over the
period 1995-2010;
• To adjust the evolution of high strain jobs for
individual-level background variables;
• To adjust the evolution of high strain jobs for
relevant macro-level background variables;

8. 17-9-2014 pag. 8
Methods
• Data source:
– Representative sample working population (all ages; 56,4% male);
– Pooled European Working Condition Surveys, waves 1995 (N 15,986), 2000/01 (N
21,703), 2005 (N 14,952) and 2010 (N 22,424);
– 15 European countries: Belgium, France, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Finland,
Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, Luxembourg, Austria, Portugal and
United Kingdom
• Dependent variable: Job strain
– Cross-classification control (autonomy + skill discretion) and quantitative
demands  Prevalence = 9,6% total sample;
• Country level typology: Gallie’s (2007) typology of 4
production regimes:
– Nordic: Denmark, Finland, Sweden
– Liberal market: Ireland , UK
– Continental coordinated: Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, The Netherlands,
Austria
– State coordinated: France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal

9. 17-9-2014 pag. 9
Methods
• Micro-level independent variables:
– Employment status: indefinite; fixed term; agency; apprenticeship; self-employed;
– Part-time: cut-off 34 hours or less;
– Tenure: 12 years or more; 4-11 years; 3 years or less;
– Supervising tasks: yes/no;
– ISCO 1 digit;
– Age: under 35 years old; 36-49 years; 50+; Sex;
– Organizational level: NACE (10 cat.); Establishment size (alone; 2-9; 10-49; 50-499; 500+)
• Macro-level independent variables (10 point scales):
– Technology: R&D personnel/1000 workers;
– Globalization: Export as part of GDP;
– Productivity: GDP/per hours worked;
– Working class: union density;
– Labour market: social expenditure on unemployment and social protection; temporary
employment rate;
– The economic cycle: GDP growth; unemployment rate;

10. 17-9-2014 pag. 10
Methods
• Statistical techniques:
– Descriptive analyses:
• Evolution over time;
• Evolution over time according to countries and welfare states;
– Hierarchical Poisson regression (random intercepts);
• Level 1 = Individual respondents; Level 2 = Country-Years;
• Models fitted:
– Model 0: Null model;
– Model 1: Model 0 + Waves;
– Model 2: Model 1 + Individual level variables;
– Model 3: Model 0 + Macro level variables;
– Model 4: Model 2 + Model 3;
• Reported:
– Reduction in Level 2 variance;
– Parameter effects as prevalence rates;

11. Results: general evolution 1995-2010
17-9-2014 pag. 11

12. Results: between country-types variation
17-9-2014 pag. 12
P Value = 0,174 (Nordic); 0,000 (All others)

13. Results: intra-country type variation
17-9-2014 pag. 13

14. 17-9-2014 pag. 14
Results: level 2 variance

15. 17-9-2014 pag. 15
Results: effects of individual level
variables (model 4)
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
Employment status
Indefinite 1,00
Fixed term 1,23 1,38 1,32 ***
Agency 1,31 1,14 1,50 ***
Apprenticeship 0,99 0.80 1,23
Self employed 0,60 0,53 0,68 ***
Other 1,11 1,01 1,22 *
Supervision none 1,00
1 to 9 0,70 0,59 0,85 ***
10 or more 0,52 0,44 0,61 ***
ISCO isco1 - Legislators, senior officials and managers 1,00
isco2 - Professionals 0,71 0,59 0,85 ***
isco3 - Technicians and associate professionals 1,09 0,93 1,28
isco4 - Clerks 1,53 1,31 1,80 ***
isco5 - Service workers and shop and market sales workers 1,84 1,58 2,15 ***
isco6 - Skilled agricultural and fishery workers 1,87 1,43 2,46 ***
isco7 - Craft and related trades workers 2,32 1,99 2,71 ***
isco8 - Plant and machine operators and assemblers 3,16 2,69 3,70 ***
isco9 - Elementary occupations 2,69 2,30 3,14 ***
isco0 - Armed forces 1,84 1,24 2,71 **
Age under 35 1,00
36-49 0,94 0,89 0,99 *
50+ 0,88 0,82 0,94 ***
Sex Man 1,00
Woman 1,16 1,10 1,23 ***

16. 17-9-2014 pag. 16
Results: effects of individual level
variables (model 4)
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
Employment status
Indefinite 1,00
Fixed term 1,23 1,38 1,32 ***
Agency 1,31 1,14 1,50 ***
Apprenticeship 0,99 0.80 1,23
Self employed 0,60 0,53 0,68 ***
Other 1,11 1,01 1,22 *
Supervision none 1,00
1 to 9 0,70 0,59 0,85 ***
10 or more 0,52 0,44 0,61 ***
ISCO isco1 - Legislators, senior officials and managers 1,00
isco2 - Professionals 0,71 0,59 0,85 ***
isco3 - Technicians and associate professionals 1,09 0,93 1,28
isco4 - Clerks 1,53 1,31 1,80 ***
isco5 - Service workers and shop and market sales workers 1,84 1,58 2,15 ***
isco6 - Skilled agricultural and fishery workers 1,87 1,43 2,46 ***
isco7 - Craft and related trades workers 2,32 1,99 2,71 ***
isco8 - Plant and machine operators and assemblers 3,16 2,69 3,70 ***
isco9 - Elementary occupations 2,69 2,30 3,14 ***
isco0 - Armed forces 1,84 1,24 2,71 **
Age under 35 1,00
36-49 0,94 0,89 0,99 *
50+ 0,88 0,82 0,94 ***
Sex Man 1,00
Woman 1,16 1,10 1,23 ***

17. Results:effects of organisational level
variables (model 4)
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
17-9-2014 pag. 17
NACE Sectors
L Public administration and defence; compulsory social security 1,00
A-B Agriculture, hunting 1,65 1,32 2,07 ***
C-D Mining, quarrying, Manufacturing 1,82 1,60 2,06 ***
E Electricity, gas, and water supply 1,03 0,78 1,38
F Construction 1,86 1,61 2,14 ***
G Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 1,47 1,29 1,67 ***
H Hotels and restaurants 2,65 2,30 3,05 ***
I Transport, storage and communication 2,15 1,89 2,47 ***
J Financial intermediation 1,45 1,21 1,74 ***
K Real estate activities 1,39 1,20 1,62 ***
M-N-O-P-Q Other services 1,20 1,06 1,36 *
Establishment Size Interviewed works alone 1,00
2 to 9 1,83 1,60 2,10 ***
10 to 49 2,37 2,06 2,73 ***
50 to 499 2,71 2,35 3,13 ***
500 and over 2,71 2,33 3,16 ***

18. Results:effects of organisational level
variables (model 4)
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
17-9-2014 pag. 18
NACE Sectors
L Public administration and defence; compulsory social security 1,00
A-B Agriculture, hunting 1,65 1,32 2,07 ***
C-D Mining, quarrying, Manufacturing 1,82 1,60 2,06 ***
E Electricity, gas, and water supply 1,03 0,78 1,38
F Construction 1,86 1,61 2,14 ***
G Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 1,47 1,29 1,67 ***
H Hotels and restaurants 2,65 2,30 3,05 ***
I Transport, storage and communication 2,15 1,89 2,47 ***
J Financial intermediation 1,45 1,21 1,74 ***
K Real estate activities 1,39 1,20 1,62 ***
M-N-O-P-Q Other services 1,20 1,06 1,36 *
Establishment Size Interviewed works alone 1,00
2 to 9 1,83 1,60 2,10 ***
10 to 49 2,37 2,06 2,73 ***
50 to 499 2,71 2,35 3,13 ***
500 and over 2,71 2,33 3,16 ***

19. Results: effects of macro-level variables
(model 4)
17-9-2014 pag. 19
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
Macro-Level indicators Export as percentage of GDP 0,96 0,93 0,99 **
GDP Growth 0,99 0,96 1,02
GDP Hour worked 0.96 0,93 0,99 *
R&D personnel per 1,000 workers 0,98 0,95 1.01
Social expenditure on unemployment and social exclusion 0,97 0,94 1,00
Unemployment rate 1,03 1,01 1,07 *
Union density 0,95 0,92 0,98 **
Temporary employment rate 1,00 0,98 1,04

20. Results: effects of macro-level variables
(model 4)
17-9-2014 pag. 20
HIGH JOB STRAIN PR 95% C.I.
Macro-Level indicators Export as percentage of GDP 0,96 0,93 0,99 **
GDP Growth 0,99 0,96 1,02
GDP Hour worked 0.96 0,93 0,99 *
R&D personnel per 1,000 workers 0,98 0,95 1.01
Social expenditure on unemployment and social exclusion 0,97 0,94 1,00
Unemployment rate 1,03 1,01 1,07 *
Union density 0,95 0,92 0,98 **
Temporary employment rate 1,00 0,98 1,04

21. 17-9-2014 pag. 22
Results: evolution estimated wave-differences
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
(n.s.)

22. 17-9-2014 pag. 23
Discussion
• Main findings:
– General increase in Job Strain in EU15, leveling off in 2010;
– Heterogeneous country pattern – Outliers in each country
type;
– Sustainably lower levels in Nordic Countries and The
Netherlands (BENELUX);
– Highest levels in Spain, Greece and Germany;
– Explanatory factors:
• Individual level: occupation, employment status, supervisory
authority, age;
• Organization level: establishment size and sector;
• Macro level: union density;

23. 17-9-2014 pag. 24
Discussion
• Limitations:
– EWCS long trend variables are limited;
– Need for Meso-level indicators (organization);
– Limitations of available macro indicators:
• competitiveness; diffusion of managerial styles and
organizational concepts; quality of work policies
and interventions;
• Recommendations:
– Flexibility contradicts sustainability;
–Worker representation and participation (see
Westgaard & Winkel, 2011);