EMCC European Monitoring Centre on Change

Netherlands: Young people and temporary employment in Europe

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



About
Country:
Netherlands
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.

According to the permanent Survey on Employees of the Central Bureau for Statistics in 2011, 35% of those in employment under 25 years of age works under a flexible, non-permanent, contract. This is 1.5 times as high as that in the labour force (15 to 65 years) in total, of which 25% has a flexible contract. The division into types of flexible contracts has been more or less unchanged over the last 15 years. The movement from flexible to permanent contracts has been slowing down since 2002. On the whole, flexible contracts have increased. The economic crisis has played a role in changes to government policy. The eligibility of young people (on flexible contracts) to social benefits has been restricted. The initiatives of the government and social partners have been almost completely directed towards the unemployed young.

Introduction

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?

The LFS data give a reliable indication, see 1.2 below.

Are there young people employed in temporary jobs who do not show up in the Eurostat figures?

Yes, young people who have a temporary job of less than 12 hours a week 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.

Yes, there are differences. In general there is a difference in definition of (flexible) work between Eurostat, the Dutch central Bureau for Statistics (CBS) on the one hand and the Public Employment Service (UWV) on the other hand.The latter, the UWV, includes employees who word less than 12 hours weekly, while the CBS followed the Statline definition. This generates differences in the number of flexible jobs and the part they have in the total number of jobs. While Eurostat includes self-employed, it excludes jobs for less than twelve hours weekly. Furthermore, differences depend on how one classifies fix term-contracts, which last longer than a year and may give access to a permanent contract. That being said, the trend in the figures in the two databases is similar. (Muffels, Wilthagen 2011) The authors conclude that since 2003 there has been a considerable growth in flexible labour relations for all workers in the different age groups, even without including free-lancers and self-employed. (As is also shown in the Eurostat data.) In my opinion we should not focus here on differences in measuring – I just record here that they exist. I do not think they make a significant difference in the trend, increase of flexible jobs for all workers (between 15 and 65 years) and an increase at a higher level for young workers (between 15 and 29 years), as described in the Eurostat figures.

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.

Although we do not have an official source for bogus self-employment, we are convinced that it exists among self-employed. We can find bogus self-employed, for example in the construction sector, but we have no knowledge about the scale. Workers have no choice other than to accept the bogus construction, while employers circumvent all social risks. Among young flexible workers (between 15-25 years), self-employed have increased from 6% in 2000 up to 9% in 2010.

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?

Among youngsters in the age of 15 to 25 years the flexible part is around 35%. That figures is roughly 1.5 as high as the average of 25% for the whole working population (these figures are excluding the self- employed). This distribution of types of flexible work has not dramatically changed over the years (since 1996), but all figures have risen, for the labour force in total (15 – 65), thus regardless age, and for young employees even stronger. If I go closer into the situation of young employees in 2011, I can give the following figures regarding internal and external flexibility. Stand-by employees or reserve employees represent the biggest group of flexible workers (28,5%). The second largest group are the temporary workers. (Dekker 2012; Statline) Thus flexibility in working hours and in type of labour contract are both addressed and included: these forms may overlap: working temporary as a stand-by employee. Thus, these figures can not be aggregated as such.

In the Netherlands one can distinguish between traineeships, apprenticeships, probationary periods, replacement of workers on leave or projects of a fixed duration. Government policy is directed at ensuring all youngsters (up to 25 years) are either working of have training, or have training on the job. There is no information on the distribution of these different forms of training/working among youngsters. These forms exist and can be distinguished in government policy combatting youth unemployment and in collective agreements which have been concluded on the subject (see NL1101019). In general, one can report an under participation in schooling among older employees, self-employed and flexible workers (SER 2012: 83).

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?

In general, one can point to the economic crisis as a main reason for the emergence and development of the different types of temporary contracts, but the crisis is nothing more than an immediate course. Long term developments have crystalized out in the flex and security legislation which has in ideological terms changed the significance of the standard labour contract.

That being said, one has to keep in mind that in 2010 83% of employees have a standard, permanent contract, in 2002 when the ruling on Flex and Security came in to force this figure was 87%. (Dekker et al 2012) In 2010 17% of the employees had a flexible contract. Taken over the whole labour force, the increase of flexible work in this period is mainly the result of the increase of fix-term contracts with the intention to become permanent. The influx of temporary workers into permanent jobs (in 2009 and 2010) has declined since 2002. In 2002 30% of temporary, fixed-term, workers received a permanent job, in 2009/2010 the figure had decreased to 20%. The same holds for stand- by employees.

This research covers the whole labour force and does not differentiate between young and older employees. In this research on moving from flex to standard labour contracts a broad spectrum of flexible contracts is included. (Dekker et al 2012).

The legislation on temporary contracts, in particular with regard to youngsters up to 27 years, was changed in 2009 as a crisis measure. In the new settlement a fourth consecutive fixed-term contract for young employees, for a maximum of 48 months in total, was included. After a negative evaluation the measure was abolished in December 2011. In the evaluation it appeared that of the 19.000 young employees assessed, some more than 50% were kept in the job during the measure, less than 50% (9000) would have received an open-ended contract, while they were now were receiving a fourth temporary contract (Leenheer et al 2011; Bestuurs Rendement 2012). The measure did not help moving on to a permanent contract; the crisis measure was seen as no longer necessary.

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.

The LISS-panel of (Longidinal internet Studies for the Social Sciences) of Centerdata, a household panel of 8000 respondents, shows that the part of employees which is working on a standard contract is slowly decreasing. Some figures: in between 2008 and 2009 of the male workers, age group 16 – 64, 27% works on a standard contract. In the previous period (between 2004 – 2007) this was 24%. In 2009 this figure had decreased to 16%. Among women the figures are 16, 20 en 18 %.(Muffels & Wilthagen 2011) Moving on to a permanent contract from a temporary job and a zero-sum contract is stagnating; in these jobs mainly youngsters work. The zero-sum and the min-max contracts imply that you have a contract to work for a company; with the min-max contracts the minimal and maximum hours are circumscribed, while in zero-sum contracts there is solely the agreement that you will work for the company when it needs you. Furthermore, temporary work has not decreased.Thus the tendency during the crisis in the total labour force is downwards with respect to ‘moving on’ to a permanent job. (We lack this information on youngsters, in particular regards apprentices and trainees and their stepping stone function to permanent jobs. It is obvious that government policy and the policy of the social partners is directed at this form of moving on. In particular in technics and the metal industry there is a shortage of potential employees. (See NL1101019)

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?

In general there is no difference between the entitlement of young people as opposed to older people to unemployment benefits and assistance. Furthermore, there is in general no difference between employees on a temporary or permanent contract. (Self-employed, who work for a single employer are not accepted as self-employed and are treated as an employee.) Entitlement to benefits is dependent on work history: the longer one has been employed the longer one receives benefits. In recent years the limit of benefits has been drastically reduced for all employees. For youngsters more stringent settlements were introduced.

The Act ‘Investment in Youth’ (Investeren in Jongeren) was introduced to activate young workers. This Act changed the eligibility to social assistance. In force between 2009 and 2011, the Act stopped providing young people aged 18-27, whether they have worked before or not, with an automatic entitlement to social assistance. Instead, young people were to be offered work, education or a combination of the two. Young people refusing to accept such an offer were denied benefits. If they accept a job, they receive a salary from their employer. If they accept education, they were given, if deemed necessary, an income equivalent to social assistance benefits. (Chung et al 2012: 313)

As of 1 January 2012, the Act ‘Investment in Youth’ will be integrated into a new Act ‘the Work Capability Act’ (Wet Werken naar Vermogen), which has come into force in January 2013. The new Act contains specific settlements for under-27s and is expected to further reduce their access to social assistance (Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, 2011). In the first month after a first-time application for benefits, a young person is not given any financial assistance, but is instead sent home to engage in job-searching activities or apply for education. After this month, the young person may return and apply for social assistance. Moreover, the new Act stipulates that when a young person has the possibility of returning to state-supported education, he or she should do so. In such cases, he or she is denied social security benefits (Chung et al 2012).

There have been questions raised whether these settlements imply age discrimination.

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?

No, there is no difference in entitlement of young people employed on temporary contracts (as opposed to permanent contracts) to sickness benefits and maternity benefits.

Regards self-employed and single employers there stand other settlements, and these settlements do not distinct between young and old workers, but they do make a distinction on which issues and how you may have to insure yourself.

Since 2008, the start of the crisis, there have been no changes in settlements. With regard to self-employed there have been some improvements in entitlement to social security.

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)?

With regard to old-age pension the entitlement in general does differentiate between several categories of workers. Regards young people on a permanent or on a temporary contract – part-time of full-time employed - there exist no difference. Entitlement to a fund is dependent of the fact that they are directly employed at an employer. Off these employees 92% in eligible to a pension fund.

There exist not one pension settlement for all flexible contracts; settlements can differ. In general the pension is not settled. An exception are the temp workers, who are employed at a temp agency on a permanent contract. Falling under the collective agreement for temp workers they are eligible to the pension fund, agreed on in the temporary agency collective agreement.

The conditions of eligibility have not changed since the crisis of 2008. What has changed for all employees is the level of the premiums. For some employees the benefits out of the pension (sector) funds have declined in 2012/2013. The sectoral pension funds in the Metal electro or the fund for Care and Welfare are examples here.

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?

No, there are no differences in entitlement of young people on permanent or temporary jobs to health care. The conditions of eligibility have not changed since 2008.

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 regulation applying to temporary contracts concentrates on the number and duration of temporary contracts. The settlement was directed at activating youngsters and employers, but the practise turned out differently. The crisis ruling, especially for youngsters, in which not 36 months, three fix term contracts, but 48 months, 4 contracts, were legally acceptable, has been scrapped. From 1-1-2012 the government has abolished the possibility of offering young employees (15 – 26 years) a fourth fix term contract. The settlements reversed to the general settlements with a maximum of 3 temporary contract. The crisis ruling, in 2010 introduced, is been seen as no longer necessary. (Bestuurs Rendement 2012; Chung et al 2012).

The ruling discriminated by age, not by occupation or sector.

Special regulations for those completing apprenticeships or traineeships: young unemployed were offered the right for a learn-work trajectory in the Act Investment in Young people (2009); it constructed the obligation for the local authorities to offer this trajectory. Only if a young unemployed has applied for such a trajectory, he is entitles to a welfare benefit. (NL1101019)

The government policy is directed at decreasing unemployment among young people.

In 2009 the Act ‘Investment in Youth’ (Investeren in Jongeren) was introduced to activate young workers. As of 1 January 2012, the Act ‘Investment in Youth’ will be integrated into a new Act ‘the Work Capability Act’ (Wet Werken naar Vermogen), which has come into force in January 2013. The new Act contains specific settlements for under-27s and is expected to further reduce their access to social benefits.

In this policy the role of temporary work in relation to permanent employment is (of course) an issue. Flexicurity policies also are relevant, as new policies try to coach people from one work project to the next. Not the permanent job is central here, but the permanency of being in employment. For the different types of temporary contracts there exist no further differentiations by occupation and so on.

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?

Governments policy is not directed at stimulating standard contracts. The policy is mainly aimed at unemployed youngsters and their transition to work or training. Incentives have been offered and agreements have been concluded with the local authorities. (See Schaapman 2011, NL1101019)

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?

As stated, governments policy and policies advocated by the social partners, are in particular since 2008 primarily directed at (youth) unemployment. The social partners believe young people run a higher risk of unemployment since they represent to a large extend the flexibility in the Dutch economy. Furthermore, employment of young people on temporary contracts is an important issue of concern for the social partners and the unions in particular. There are differences in attitudes and policies between employers and trade unions in the use of temporary contracts.

The union federation FNV is deeply concerned about the development in which more types of flexible contracts such as stand-by and on-call contracts min-max and zero-sum contractsare being used more widely. These contracts imply that you have a contract to work for a company; with the min-max contracts the hours are circumscribed, while in zero-sum contracts there is solely the agreement that you will work for the company when it needs you. These types of contracts are not only used in special, unusual situations, but for normal situations. In recent years the increase of flexible contracts and the accompanying decrease of rights is a major concern for the FNV, according to FNV Jong. An initiative of the FNV union in recent years is that in collective bargaining extra attention is being paid to the position of flexible workers. Another point for agreement could be to give internal trainees a priority position in cases of vacancies.

The Confederation of Netherlands Industries and Employers (VNO-NCW) as well as the Dutch federation of small and medium-sized enterprises (MKB-Nederland) also see the labour market situation of young people as a matter of concern for employers. They approach the problem slightly from a different angle. They expect labour shortages after the crisis as a consequence of the aging labour force. These shortages have to be met by the influx of young workers. A permanent contract will be a medium to keep employees at work in companies.

In recent years the social partners could not reach agreement and have not taken initiatives jointly (for example in the Social-Economic Council) to face the problem of young people who do not move on from a flexible job to a permanent one. The social partners jointly have agreed and supported the initiative to create as many as possible combined jobs/traineeships for young people who are longer than three months unemployed. The public Employment Centre and the United Knowledge Centres for Vocational Training and Business, Colo, support this project.

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

       

References

Bestuurs Rendement (2012) 12-12-2011 ‘Vierde tijdelijk contract jongere afgeschaft’, p 1

Chung, H., S. Bekker, H. Houwing (2012) ‘Young people and the post-recession labour market in the context of Europe 2020’ Transfer 18 (3), pp 301-317

Dekker, R., H. Houwing, L. Kösters (2012) ‘Doorstroom van flexwerkers’, Economisch Statistische Berichten, 3-2-2012, pp 70-73

Leenheer, J., H. Adriaens, J. Mulder (2011) Evaluatie Wet investeren in jongeren. Tilburg: Centerdata

Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (2011) Memorie van toelichting bij het wetsvoorstel tot wijziging WWB en WIJ, 17 June 2011

Muffels, R., T. Wilthagen (2011) ‘Flexwerk en werkzekerheid in tijden van crisis’, Economisch Statistische Berichten 96, 21 januari 2011, pp 54-57

Schaapman, M. (2011) The Netherlands: EIRO CAR on Helping young workers during the crisis: contributions by social partners and public authorities, Amsterdam/Dublin (NL1101019)

Sociaal-Economische Raad (SER) (2011) Werk maken van scholing. Advies over de postinitiële scholingsmarkt (Working on training; advisory report on the post-initial training market), Den Haag

Sociaal-Economische Raad (SER) (2012 ) Werk maken van baan-baanmobiliteit (Working on job to job mobility), Den Haag.

Marianne Grunell, University of Amsterdam. AIAS/HSI

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

Add new comment