EMCC European Monitoring Centre on Change

Finland: Young people and temporary employment in Europe

  • Observatory: EMCC
  • Topic:
  • Published on: 08 December 2013



About
Country:
Author:
Institution:

Disclaimer: This information is made available as a service to the public but has not been edited by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The content is the responsibility of the authors.

Temporary contract work among the young appears to be at about EU average. The financial crisis originally reduced the share of temporary employees. In addition to apprenticeship, practical training or summer jobs, replacing a person on leave is typical for a temporary contract, particularly among women. ‘Hidden’ temporary work does notappear to be common, although the use of ‘0-hour contracts’ (not guaranteeing actual working hours) has been reported. The length of the contract does not directly influence health care or other benefits, but unemployment periods can. Social partners have focused on the issue and recent actions have been taken.

Background note

Youth unemployment has been a persistent problem in many parts of Europe for many years. Over the past 3-4 years, however, since the onset of the financial crisis and the economic recession which followed, it has become an even greater and more widespread problem and one which, given the on-going depressed state of the European economies, is likely to remain for some time to come. The latest monthly figures (for September 2012) show the unemployment rate of those aged 15-24 averaging 22.8% in the EU – just over 1 percentage point higher than at the time a year earlier. In Spain, the figure was over 54% and in Greece, 57%, in both cases, much higher than a year earlier. In the worst affected countries, therefore, as in most Member States, there is very little sign of any easing of the youth unemployment problem. There are, however, a few exceptions. In Germany, in particular, youth unemployment has declined since the global recession hit in 2009 and now stands at only 8%, well below the level it was before the recession. In Norway too, the rate is only 8%, though this is slightly above the level in 2007 before the crisis. Germany, apart, there are two other countries in the EU with youth unemployment below 10% according to the latest monthly figures - the Netherlands (9.4%) and Austria (9.9%). As in Norway, in both cases, the rate is above the pre-crisis level.

Moreover, young people who do manage to find jobs often have to settle for a temporary one, defined as one with a fixed-term contract of employment. According to the European Labour Force Survey (LFS), in 2011, just under 43% of employees under 25 were in temporary jobs in the EU and well over half in Germany (56%), France (55%), Portugal, (57%), Sweden (57%), Spain (63%), Poland (66%) and Slovenia (75%). (In Norway, the figure was much lower than in most EU countries, at around 24%.) While around 40% of the young people concerned on average were in temporary jobs because they had a fixed-term training contract and another 9% were on probationary contracts, a substantial proportion (37% on average) were in temporary jobs because they were unable to find permanent ones. In the Czech Republic, Cyprus and Portugal, this figure was over 75% and in Spain and Slovakia, well over 80%.

Among young people making the transition from education or initial vocational training into employment, the proportion who take up temporary rather than permanent jobs is much higher than for the age group as a whole. In 2011, 57% of those aged 15-24 in employment who were in education the previous year were in temporary jobs in the EU and 86-87% in Spain, Portugal and Poland. For those moving from unemployment into employment, the proportion who take up temporary jobs is even higher on average in the EU (61%) as well as in Spain (90%).

The fact that a relatively large proportion of young people in employment are in temporary jobs may be a reason why they have been hit disproportionately hard by the crisis. In the economic downturn in 2009, many of the people who lost their jobs first were on fixed-term contracts since not renewing these contracts represented the easiest way for employers to reduce their work forces. In 2009, therefore, there was some decline across Europe in the proportion of young people in work employed in temporary jobs (see the Tables attached to the questionnaire). Since then, there has been some tendency for the proportion to increase again, in part perhaps because employers are reluctant to take on people on permanent - or standard – contracts given the uncertainty about future economic prospects.

Given the above, it is understandable that there is growing public interest, and some concern, over the nature of the jobs that young people are taking up. This concern is mirrored at EU-level where a ‘flexicurity’ approach to labour market policy has increasingly been advocated, which, in practice, means that while flexibility is an important objective, it needs to be accompanied by protection of workers’ interests if it is not to lead to a growth of precarious employment in low quality jobs. Accordingly, there is a need to obtain a better understanding of the terms and conditions applying to temporary jobs, the extent to which they are a stepping stone to permanent jobs and a working career in line with a person’s qualifications and capabilities, the access to social protection which comes with them and the measures in place to encourage employers to convert them into more stable jobs. These issues form the focus of the present study.

Definition of temporary jobs

The interest in the study is in all young people employed in temporary jobs of whatever kind, in the sense of all jobs that they are not subject to a standard contract of employment which is normally one of indeterminate length, or at least one for which no specific length is specified. Such temporary jobs can be for a period of training (i.e. traineeships or apprenticeships) or probation, intended to enable employers to check the suitability or aptitude of people for the jobs concerned. They might also be to replace someone on maternity leave or on a training programme or they might relate to a specific project of fixed duration.

All such jobs and others which are of fixed duration should be covered, whether they are part-time or full-time and irrespective of whether they are specifically for young people (such as perhaps in the case of traineeships or apprenticeships) or for people of all ages which young people happen to be doing. In some cases, it should be noted, it is relevant to include, in addition, to temporary employees, the ‘bogus’ self-employed – i.e. those people who have self-employment status but who are contracted to work for a single employer and who are effectively similar to employees who have a fixed-term contract of employment. (The cases in question relate to instances where employers use self-employment contracts as a means of employing young people without bearing the costs, and obligations, of a standard contract of employment.)

Outline of study

The study is divided in three sections. The first is concerned with the main types of job in which young people who are employed under temporary contracts work and the reasons why employers choose to use temporary contracts of employment instead of standard ones when they take on young people, as well as with the link, if any, with labour market conditions (i.e. with the extent to which the crisis has led to an increase in temporary employment). The starting point is the data summarised above, derived from the LFS, which indicate the relative number of young people employed on temporary contracts in the different European countries and the way that this has changed over the recent past (these data, as noted, are set out in the tables attached to the questionnaire). Correspondents are asked to check these data against any national data on temporary employment and to indicate where these show a different picture from the LFS data, perhaps because a different definition is adopted of temporary jobs.

Any description or commentary on national statistics should, however, remain brief, since the main task of the first section, is to review and summarise relevant sources of information on the different kinds of temporary contract under which young people are employed in each of the countries, the circumstances and areas (the types of job and the sectors of activity) in which they tend to be used and the main reasons why employers adopt them.

The second section is concerned with the access to social benefits which temporary jobs provide, distinguishing between the various kinds of benefit, and with the extent to which entitlement to benefit differs for young people employed in temporary jobs from that for those employed under standard contracts of employment. It should be emphasised that the concern is not only with the formal regulations which apply, which in many if not most countries do not make a formal distinction between temporary jobs and others, but also with de facto entitlement which stems from the nature of temporary employment. In particular, young people in temporary jobs may have difficulty in complying with the need to have a continuous period in employment, or a continuous record of paying social contributions, in order to be eligible for unemployment benefit.

The third section is concerned with the measures in place to regulate the use of temporary contracts of employment (such as specifying the number of times they can be renewed), with the attitudes of government and the social partners towards their use and with the incentives which exist to encourage the wider use of standard contracts of employment and the conversion of temporary jobs into permanent ones. A particular point of interest is the extent to which regulations and attitudes as regards temporary jobs have changed over the crisis period as the number of jobs available for young people to take up has diminished and as expanding these has become a policy priority.

A final point to note is that while it is customary to define youth employment (and unemployment) in terms of those aged 15-24, it is also the case that many of those aged 25-29 are also employed in temporary jobs, as indicated in the attached tables. Correspondents are therefore asked to extend the coverage of the study to this age group where relevant. It is recognised that in some countries the statistics available may not relate precisely to the age groups specified here, in which case correspondents should report on the age groups nearest to these.

Questionnaire

1. Importance of temporary employment for young people

1.1. Do the figures shown in the attached tables (on the number of temporary employed as a % of total employees based on Eurostat LFS data) give a reliable indication of the scale of temporary employment among the young in your country and the way that it has changed over recent years? Are there young people employed in temporary jobs who do not show up in the Eurostat figures? Are there national statistics which show a different picture from the Eurostat data? If so, please indicate what they show and give the source of the data.

To our knowledge, there are no conflicting sources to the Eurostat data as they are based on the most common source, Labour Force Survey collected by Statistics Finland. Cross-sectional surveys, such as the Quality of Work Life Survey or Work and Health Survey, may give somewhat different figures, but those can largely be explained by the design or timing of the survey. ‘Hidden’ forms of temporary work (see 1.2 below) do not appear to be of such magnitude that they would challenge the figures from the LFS.

There has been some debate regarding measurement issues and the trends of temporary employment (see Uusitalo 2008 and Pärnänen & Sutela 2011). The disagreement has largely focused on the trend since the 1990s and Statistics Finland has been refining its measure in order to better capture new developments in the job market.

1.2. Is there any evidence that other forms of employment are used as a substitute for temporary contracts, such as bogus self-employment where young people are contracted to provide services to a single work provider in a continuous manner so acting de facto as employees? If so, please give the source of the evidence and indicate the scale of the phenomenon in terms of the number of people concerned.

The use of ‘0-hour contracts’ has been discussed as a way of substituting temporary contracts. Such a contract defines that within a week, for example, working time may be between 0 and 40 hours. The number of such contracts is not known, but it has been reported that they have become more common during the financial crisis. The social partners have agreed that an investigation will be carried out into the use these contracts and the problems they may create as well as ways of solving those problems.

Another issue, ‘reluctant self-employment,’ has been addressed in some investigations, although the situation is quite unclear. A 2007 report, based on a broad survey of SMEs, found this phenomenon to be quite small, even though it may be more serious in certain subsectors. One important aspect of this phenomenon is that an involuntarily self-employed persons may have only one ‘buyer’ for their services. In outsourcing cases this only ‘buyer’ can be their previous employer. A 2012 report by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy doesn’t specify a number or an age distribution, but points to a possible increase of the phenomenon.

1.3. Please list (and give summary details, i.e. purpose and duration of the contract) the most common contract types or contractual arrangements under which young people are employed on a temporary basis (such as for traineeships, apprenticeships, probationary periods, replacement of workers on leave or projects of a fixed duration). What is the relative importance of each type of contract or arrangement in terms of the number of young people employed under them?

The most common contract types or contractual arrangements under which young people in Finland are employed are often related to vocational apprenticeship training or a summer job. In addition, fixed-term contracts are often related to seasonal work, replacement of workers on leave, a fixed term project or temporary agency work.

Among all age groups the most common reason for a temporary contract is, according to 2008 data, replacing a person on a leave (30%, figures are not available by age). These are typically family leaves and since they are more common in female-majority sectors (eg. municipal social and health care), the replacements are also often women. Accordingly, this reason for a temporary contract is more common among women (38%). According to same 2008 source, in another 23% of the cases the position or task is a project or otherwise fixed (eg, many university positions are fixed-term). (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 16/2012)

Vocational apprenticeship training in Finland is available to both adults and young people. Apprenticeships are one way of achieving vocational qualification. The apprenticeship training contract is, at the same time, a work contract of a limited period. The practical training takes place at the workplace in connection with work assignments. This is complemented by theoretical studies in a vocational institute. An individual study programme for the apprentice must be attached to the contract. The employer pays the student a salary in accordance with the valid labour agreement.

In vocational apprenticeship training (vocational qualification) the employer receives state funds education allowance (20 to 300 euro / month). The money is spent on training procurement from an institution or on training reimbursement for the employer. If the apprenticeship is for an unemployed person, the employer can also get wage subsidy. Vocational training apprenticeship training takes generally 1.5 to 3 years. In year 2009, 7 075 people performed vocational qualification apprenticeship. Of them 9.5 % were under 20 years old (n=675) and 44 % (n=3095) were under 25 years of age (3 095 people). (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 8/2012)

Young people's fixed-term contracts are sometimes related to wage-subsidized work. Finland has a ‘Sanssi card’ system that supports the employment of young people. ‘Sanssi card’ promotes wage subsidy that The Employment Offices can grant to employers who recruit a young person less than 30 years of age. The maximum amount of salary support in ‘Sanssi card’ is up to 700€ a month in a full-time job and the employer can get the support up to 10 months. Amount per month depends on the number of days worked. The idea is to lower the threshold for employing young people. The subsidy covers both normal jobs and apprenticeships. In case of apprenticeship supsidies are available throughout the training. ‘Sanssi card’ subsidies aim to help young people to obtain employment and acquire valuable skills and experience. An employer that uses the ‘Sanssi card’ can be a private company, organization, foundation, association or local authority but not a state institution. The employment must be under normal employee and employer arrangements. Employers are required to pay all wages and meet all other obligations for their employee as required law. In 2010-11, 24 700 (18 800+5 900) young people received ‘Sanssi card.’During the same period, 5 500 (3 200+2 300) were employed in a subsidized job. (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 25/2012)

Temporary agency work is still quite a marginal form of working on the Finnish labour market. Among all employees, the share of temporary agency workers was only one per cent in 2011. Temporary agency work is mainly done by young people; five per cent of employees aged 15 to 24 were doing it. In Finland temporary agency work has been used in clerical work, retail trade, service sector and construction sector. (Labour Force Survey 2011, Statistics Finland)

1.4. Please indicate the main reasons for the emergence and development of the different types of temporary contract which you have listed in response to question 1.3. To what extent are they linked to particular conditions in the labour market or employment protection legislation/regulation in your country? What is the main attraction of such contracts to employers? What effect has the crisis had on the use of such contracts?

Temporary agency work began to increase in the turn of the millennium, and the growth continued until the 2008-2009 financial crisis. The number of young temporary agency workers decreased in 2009 (from 13 000 to 9 000), recovered somewhat in 2010 and has since remained stable (11 000-12 000 aged 15-24). (Labour Force Survey, Statistics Finland) Temporary agency work has become a permanent phenomenon, although the number of temporary workers is still quite small. Temporary agency work plays an important role in many employer’s short-term adjustment strategies. Reasons for using temporary agency workers include seasonal workload, cover for holiday, sickness, maternal leave of permanent workers and fixed term projects. (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 16/2012)

1.5. To what extent are temporary contracts a ‘stepping stone’ to ‘permanent’ jobs (or those with standard contracts of employment of undefined duration)? Are apprentices and trainees typically taken on by the companies or other organisations concerned on standard permanent contracts once they complete their training? Has the situation changed over the crisis period? Please summarise any relevant studies which have been carried out in your country or other evidence at the national level which exists and give the reference to them.

It has been suggested that for 30 % of all employees temporary work provides a ‘stepping stone’ to permanent work within 15 months. However, there is no age group specific data of this effect. (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 16/2012).

A study on the use of the ‘Sanssi-card’ and its effects on youth employment was carried out in year 2012. According to the survey results, employers’ (n=614) attitudes towards young applicants have changed into a more positive one and the interest in employing youth in permament contracts has increased. ‘Sanssi card’ is considered to be a good method for integrating young people into working life. On the basis of this survey it can be concluded that ‘Sanssi card’ has increased the utilization of the salary subsidy, however there is no accurate proof that it has had any effect on youth employment. (Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö 25/2012)

2. Access to social benefits

2.1. Does entitlement of young people to (contributory) unemployment insurance benefits and (non-contributory) unemployment assistance (i.e. benefits, usually means-tested, which provide a minimum level of income) differ if they are employed on temporary contracts as opposed to permanent ones? If so, please indicate briefly the differences in eligibility conditions and any differences between types of temporary contract (including those working as self-employed for a single employer). Have there been any changes over the period of the crisis?

Unemployment benefits in Finland are not directly influenced by the type of contract on which a person has worked. There are two forms of contributory unemployment benefits: basic (‘peruspäiväraha’) and higher earnings-related (‘ansiosidonnainen päiväraha’). Both are funded through the mandatory unemployment insurance, but the latter also through fund membership fees. Most, but not all, unemployment funds are union-related. Both forms of benefit require a sufficient recent work history (34 weeks during the previous 28 months, at least 18 hours per week), but the earnings-related benefit also requires a sufficient history as a fund member. Non-contributory unemployment assistance (‘työmarkkinatuki’) is available to those who do not fulfil the work history requirement. (Kela – The Social Insurance Institution of Finland)

2.2. Does entitlement of young people to sickness benefits and maternity benefits differ if they are employed on temporary contracts as opposed to permanent ones? If so, please indicate briefly the differences in eligibility conditions and any differences between types of temporary contract (including those working as self-employed for a single employer). Have there been any changes over the period of the crisis?

In Finland, sickness or maternity benefits are not directly influenced by the type of contract on which a person works or has worked. By law, the employer pays regular wages for the first 10 days of sickness. Collective agreements of ten extend that period (employer receives reimbursement), but the length of the covered period may vary by the length of employment. After the period covered by the employer, the employee can receive a sickness allowance (‘sairauspäiväraha’) from Kela – The Social Insurance Institution of Finland. The amount of that benefit depends on the past wages: at least one month’s employment is required. Therefore, a person working only short periods would receive only a minimum allowance. The same calculation principles also apply to maternity benefits.

2.3. Are there any differences in the entitlement of young people to old-age pensions between those employed in temporary jobs as opposed to permanent ones? If so, please indicate what these are. Have conditions of eligibility to pensions changed over the period of the crisis (including through pension reforms introduced as part of a long-term strategy to improve the financial sustainability of the system)?

The Finnish earnings-related pension system was overhauled in 2005. The system offer flexible retirement between 63 and 68 years and the pension accumulates over the work career (Finnish centre for Pensions). The type of contract does not influence coverage of wage and salary earners, but there are different procedures the self-employed and grant recipients. During the financial crisis the debate concerning the pension system has focused on the retirement ages, but no changes have been made so far.

2.4. Are there any differences in entitlement of young people to health care between those employed in temporary jobs as opposed to permanent ones? If so, please indicate what these are. Have conditions of eligibility to health care changed over the period of the crisis?

In Finland, there are different ‘channels’ to receive health care. (1) Public health care is available to all residents. This system is organised on a municipal basis, either by a single municipality or an alliance of several municipalities. (2) Occupational health services must be organised by the employer to all employees. The law requires only that preventive health services are organised. The employer can, however, also choose to offer regular medical services at general practitioner level. Employer is partially reimbursed for costs of both types of services. (3) Individuals can be reimbursed partly for health services purchased from private providers. (Kela – The Social Insurance Institution of Finland)

Access to public health care is in no way associated with employment, much less contract type. As preventive occupational health services are mandatory for all employees, there should not be any difference by contract type, either. In practise, however, gaps in coverage have been observed and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health did issue a letter in 2011 reminding employers of the obligation. Contract type should not influence the availability of regular medical services, either, if the employer chooses to offer them.

3. Regulation of temporary contracts and policies to support transitions into permanent contracts

3.1. Please describe briefly the regulations applying to the main types of temporary contract in your country. Do restrictions exist on the maximum duration of the different types of temporary contract for young workers or the number of times they can be renewed? Do these regulations differ by age (i.e. between young people and older workers) and/or by type of temporary contract (as mentioned in question 1.3), by occupation, or by sector of activity? Do special regulations exist for those completing apprenticeships or traineeships? Have the regulations changed over the period of the crisis – i.e. has there been a tendency for them to have been tightened or relaxed?

The Employment Contracts Act (‘Työsopimuslaki’) states that a work contract is permanent (‘indefinite’) unless there is a justified reason to make it temporary. The law also prohibits the use of fixed-term contracts if the employer’s need for an employee can be regarded as permanent. A specific number of temporary contracts or their length is not given, though. A specific list of justified reasons is not given, either, although the legislative proposal included examples from the preceding law: nature of work, replacing a person on a leave, practical training. The previous law also included some more general statements about justified reasons.

The regulations themselves do not differ by age of the employee or by the justification given for the contract. Nevertheless, repeated temporary contracts do give a stronger impression of a permanent need, which invalidates the use of temporary contracts. These issues have been addressed in court cases.

During the financial crisis, the regulations concerning temporary contracts have changed twice. In 2010, an amendment specifically outlawed the use temporary contracts when the need is permanent. Another amendment in 2012 clarified that a date or an estimated date of the contract’s expiration must be given to a temporary employee.

3.2. Do incentives exists in your country to encourage employers to opt for standard rather than temporary contracts of employment, to convert temporary contracts into permanent ones or to make it easier for employees to move from temporary to permanent contracts? If so, please briefly describe the form that these incentives take. Do they apply equally to young people as well as to older workers? Are any incentives in place to encourage employers to take on young people who have completed an apprenticeship or traineeship on permanent contracts? Have there been any changes to incentives over the period of the crisis? Are any such changes being proposed or being actively discussed at present in your country?

No such incentive programs to be reported.

3.3. Is the employment of young people on temporary contracts an important issue of concern for the social partners? Are there strong differences in attitudes and policies between employers and trade unions towards the use of temporary contracts? Have any initiatives been taken by the social partners, either jointly or separately, to encourage the use of permanent rather than temporary contracts? Have any specific initiatives been taken in respect of young people completing apprenticeships or traineeships over the types of job they are offered when their temporary position comes to an end?

The situation of young people in temporary jobs is an important concern for the social partners in Finland for its own sake (as a matter of fairness) and because of the need to extend to work careers. Both separate and joint action has been taken to address problems with temporary contracts.

After several years of decentralised collective bargaining Finnish social partners signed a centralised ‘framework agreement’ in November 2011 in order to tackle the financial crisis. In addition to pay issues, the agreement set up several working groups to examine, among other things, problems associated with temporary contracts. The working group reached an agreement that the same principles must apply to temporary contracts in employment agency as well as other forms of work. As a result of the working group’s work, an amendment to the Employment Contracts Act was proposed and passed in late 2012, becoming effective on January 1, 2013. It clarified that a date or an estimated date of the contract’s expiration must be given to a temporary employee. This is important in situations when expiration is associated with a specific objective event (e.g., completion of an order) rather than a particular date.

Similarly, the framework agreement included a joint investigation on the use of ‘0-hour contracts’ in which the contract may be permanent, but no work is guaranteed in a given period. The investigation is on-going and a tripartite group may propose solutions during the first half of 2013.

In 2009, the social partners in the private social services sector agreed on instructions regarding the use of temporary contracts. This was based on a survey, carried out by the employer organisation, on the prevalence such contracts and justifications used in them. Among other things, the instructions clarified certain situations typical for the sector, eg. projects that based on grants.

The Union of Health and Social Care Professionals (Tehy) launched a campaign in 2007 to address problems of temporary contracts, which are particularly common in (municipal) health and social care sector. The campaign, ‘Health Check of Job Contracts,’ included instructing union representatives to examine and challenge, where appropriate, temporary contracts for their validity. Union announcement in early 2009 reported success in converting temporary contracts into permanent ones: in a survey 59% of union representatives (approx. 100 respondents) reported reductions in temporary positions and 35 disputed cases had been taken into court.

Temporary employees as a share of total employees aged 15-24, 2004-2011

 

% total employees

% point change

 

2004

2007

2009

2011

2004-2007

2007-2009

2009-2011

2007-2011

EU27

37.6

41.3

40.4

42.5

3.7

-0.9

2.1

1.2

BE

28.6

31.6

33.2

34.3

3.0

1.6

1.1

2.7

BG

15.3

10.3

9.3

8.3

-5.0

-1.0

-1.0

-2.0

CZ

18.0

17.4

18.7

22.3

-0.6

1.3

3.6

4.9

DK

26.9

22.5

22.8

22.1

-4.4

0.3

-0.7

-0.4

DE

55.5

57.4

57.3

56.0

1.9

-0.1

-1.3

-1.4

EE

:

:

:

13.8

 

   

 

IE

11.2

20.5

25.0

34.2

9.3

4.5

9.2

13.7

EL

26.3

27.0

28.4

30.1

0.7

1.4

1.7

3.1

ES

64.8

62.8

55.9

61.4

-2.0

-6.9

5.5

-1.4

FR

46.7

53.5

52.4

55.1

6.8

-1.1

2.7

1.6

IT

34.4

42.3

44.4

49.9

7.9

2.1

5.5

7.6

CY

16.1

23.3

18.4

17.2

7.2

-4.9

-1.2

-6.1

LV

17.3

9.3

9.3

10.7

-8.0

0.0

1.4

1.4

LT

13.8

9.8

5.0

9.1

-4.0

-4.8

4.1

-0.7

LU

24.1

34.1

39.3

34.5

10.0

5.2

-4.8

0.4

HU

15.1

19.1

21.4

22.9

4.0

2.3

1.5

3.8

MT

9.2

11.0

11.3

17.7

1.8

0.3

6.4

6.7

NL

37.9

45.1

46.5

47.7

7.2

1.4

1.2

2.6

AT

32.4

34.9

35.6

37.2

2.5

0.7

1.6

2.3

PL

60.6

65.7

62.0

65.6

5.1

-3.7

3.6

-0.1

PT

47.4

52.6

53.5

57.2

5.2

0.9

3.7

4.6

RO

6.6

4.6

3.7

5.8

-2.0

-0.9

2.1

1.2

SI

63.1

68.3

66.6

74.5

5.2

-1.7

7.9

6.2

SK

9.9

13.7

12.5

18.6

3.8

-1.2

6.1

4.9

FI

49.8

42.4

39.0

43.4

-7.4

-3.4

4.4

1.0

SE

53.1

57.1

53.4

57.3

4.0

-3.7

3.9

0.2

UK

11.0

13.3

11.9

13.5

2.3

-1.4

1.6

0.2

NO

31.2

28.0

25.7

24.3

-3.2

-2.3

-1.4

-3.7

Source: Eurostat, Labour Force Survey

         
Temporary employees as a share of total employees aged 25-29, 2004-2011

 

% total employees

% point change

 

2004

2007

2009

2011

2004-2007

2007-2009

2009-2011

2007-2011

EU27

19.5

21.1

20.2

21.4

1.6

-1.0

1.2

0.2

BE

12.4

13.1

12.5

14.6

0.7

-0.5

2.0

1.5

BG

9.0

5.3

4.4

4.2

-3.8

-0.8

-0.2

-1.0

CZ

9.8

8.1

8.4

10.8

-1.7

0.2

2.5

2.7

DK

16.5

13.9

13.8

16.4

-2.6

-0.1

2.7

2.5

DE

17.2

21.2

21.2

22.0

4.0

0.0

0.8

0.8

EE

3.0

1.8

4.2

4.2

-1.2

2.4

0.0

2.3

IE

3.4

10.1

9.5

12.7

6.7

-0.6

3.2

2.6

EL

18.4

16.1

19.9

19.0

-2.3

3.8

-1.0

2.9

ES

44.0

41.2

37.5

39.8

-2.7

-3.7

2.3

-1.5

FR

18.3

20.8

20.2

22.0

2.5

-0.6

1.8

1.2

IT

17.2

22.7

23.5

26.7

5.5

0.8

3.2

4.0

CY

19.2

17.7

16.2

18.1

-1.5

-1.5

1.9

0.4

LV

11.8

3.2

4.2

5.5

-8.6

1.0

1.4

2.3

LT

5.3

4.2

2.5

3.6

-1.1

-1.7

1.1

-0.6

LU

7.6

12.5

11.2

12.7

4.9

-1.2

1.5

0.3

HU

8.1

8.9

11.3

11.0

0.8

2.5

-0.3

2.2

MT

1.1

5.6

5.0

6.3

4.6

-0.6

1.3

0.6

NL

16.8

22.9

24.2

25.8

6.1

1.2

1.7

2.9

AT

10.0

8.8

9.6

9.8

-1.1

0.8

0.2

1.0

PL

33.8

38.7

35.6

38.9

4.9

-3.1

3.3

0.2

PT

30.3

36.6

38.6

39.2

6.3

2.0

0.6

2.6

RO

3.4

2.1

1.2

2.1

-1.3

-0.9

0.9

0.0

SI

30.7

33.7

34.1

33.9

2.9

0.4

-0.2

0.3

SK

6.8

5.7

4.1

7.7

-1.2

-1.6

3.7

2.1

FI

28.7

24.5

25.5

26.0

-4.2

1.1

0.5

1.5

SE

24.0

27.4

24.0

25.0

3.4

-3.3

1.0

-2.4

UK

6.2

7.1

6.3

5.0

0.9

-0.8

-1.3

-2.1

Source: Eurostat, European Labour Force Survey

       

Simo Virtanen, Mikko Nykänen, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health

Useful? Interesting? Tell us what you think. Hide comments

Add new comment