UN AGGIORNAMENTO SULLE POLITICHE DEI PAESI DELL’UNIONE EUROPEA PER LA CONIUGAZIONE TRA FLESSIBILITA’ DELLE STRUTTURE PRODUTTIVE E SICUREZZA DEI LAVORATORI NEL MERCATO
Link al sito Eurofound, da cui l’articolo (risalente all’ottobre 2008) è tratto
Flexicurity is not an easy subject. While the idea is straightforward enough – employers’ need for flexibility has to be balanced with the workers’ need for security – getting to grips with the different components of flexicurity and understanding the diverging approaches of Member States remains a very real challenge.
The European Commission identifies four basic components of flexicurity:
- Flexible and reliable contractual arrangements
- Comprehensive lifelong learning
- Effective active labour market policies (ALMP)
- Modern social security systems
Member States – finding the right approach nationally
Flexicurity? It has been proven that Danes do it best. Why then, are other countries not simply following the Danish model? The flexicurity patterns presented in the European Commission’s 2006 Employment in Europe Report reflect the very different starting points of Member States. In striving for a better balance of flexibility and security, the policy focus will be influenced by the state of play of a country. A new study on flexicurity and industrial relations by Eurofound’s European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO) confirms that there is little convergence among flexicurity pathways in the Member States.
Companies – putting flexicurity into practice
European companies have to face the challenges of globalisation, increased competition, and demand dynamics. In practice, they will use numerical flexibility (e.g. temporary contracts, overtime, part-time work,etc.), functional flexibility (e.g. job rotation), outsourcing, wage flexibility, flexible remuneration. However, flexible companies are not by definition good for the workers, or vice-versa. What makes a difference is the underlying motive: whether flexibility measures are adopted to make a company leaner and meaner, tailored to rapid changes on the external market, or whether the company is responding to the working time flexibility needs of its work force. Eurofound’s 2004–5 Company Survey provides unique data on working time arrangements and work–life balance issues in companies.
Individuals – the impact of flexicurity on workers’ lives
A smooth transition between work and non-working life is a crucial element in the quality of work and employment. It is a key factor in enabling more people, especially women, to participate and remain in the workforce, combining paid work with other responsibilities and activities, including family. Flexicurity has the potential to facilitate work organisation arrangements which could benefit both the company and workers with families. The results of the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS) show that women with children are slightly more satisfied with their work–life balance than men. The fact that women have chosen their working time pattern in advance to fit in with their needs can account for this.
Drawbacks – how flexicurity affects vulnerable groups
The twin objectives underlying the flexicurity approach are to create more flexibility in the labour market and at the same time give some employment security to workers. Implicit in this is the basic premise that flexicurity creates upward mobility for workers. However, data from the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS) indicate that some groups of workers might not benefit as much as other workers from this model. Based on the data, four indicators were developed to measure the impact of different aspects of flexicurity: objective and subjective insecurity, employability and vulnerability.From the analysis, it could be deduced that higher insecurity may be linked to lower employability. On the other hand, participation in lifelong learning is positively related to employability.
