tempo de trabalho flexível. relatório ue

7/28/2019 TEMPO DE TRABALHO FLEXVEL. RELATRIO UE

1/128

Flexible working timearrangements and gender equality

European Commission

A comparative review of 30 European countries


2/128

This publication is commissioned under the European Union Programme or Employment and SocialSolidarity (2007-2013). This programme is managed by the Directorate-General or Employment, socialaairs and eual opportunities o the European Commission. It was established to inancially supportthe implementation o the objectives o the European Union in the employment and social aairs area,

as set out in the Social Agenda, and thereby contribute to the achievement o the EUROPE 2020 goalsin these ields.

The seven-year Programme targets all stakeholders who can help shape the development o appropriateand eective employment and social legislation and policies, across the EU-27, EFTA-EEA and EUcandidate and pre-candidate countries.

PROGRESS mission is to strengthen the EU contribution in support o Member States commitments andeorts to create more and better jobs and to build a more cohesive society. To that eect, PROGRESS isinstrumental in

providing analysis and policy advice on PROGRESS policy areas; monitoring and reporting on the implementation o EU legislation and policies in

PROGRESS policy areas;

promoting policy transer, learning and support among Member States on EU objectivesand priorities; and

relaying the views o the stakeholders and society at large

For more inormation see:http://ec.europa.eu/progress


3/128

Flexible working time arrangements

and gender equality

A comparative review

o 30 European countriesJanneke Plantenga and Chantal Remery

European Commission

Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairs and Eual OpportunitiesUnit G1

Manuscript completed in November 2009

EU Expert Group on Gender and Employment (EGGE)

The national experts(* indicates non-EU countries)

*See page 81 or the list o national reports

Ingrid Mairhuber, Austria Ruta Braziene, Lithuania

Danile Meulders, Belgium Robert Plasman, Luembourg

Iskra Beleva, Bulgaria Ilze Trapenciere, Latvia

Chrystalla Ellina, Cyprus Frances Camilleri-Cassar, Malta

Alena Kkov, Czech Republic Janneke Plantenga and Chantal Remery,

the Netherlands

Ruth Emerek, Denmark Ania Plomien, Poland

Friederike Maier and Andrea Hilla-Carl, Germany Virgnia Ferreira, Portugal

Reelika Leetmaa, Estonia Elena Zamr, Romania

Maria Karamessini, Greece Anita Nyberg, Sweden

Elvira Gonzlez Gago, Spain Aleksandra Kanjuo Mrela, Slovenia

Hanna Sutela, Finland Magdalena Piscov, Slovakia

Rachel Silvera, France Colette Fagan, United Kingdom

Mria Frey, Hungary Lilja Msesdttir, Iceland*

Ursula Barry, Ireland Ulrike Papouschek, Liechtenstein*

Annamaria Simonazzi, Italy Anne Lise Ellingster, Norway*


4/128

This report was nanced by and prepared or the use o the European Commission, Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairs and Eual

Opportunities in the ramework o a contract managed by the Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini. It does not necessarily reect the opinion or position

o the European Commission, Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairs and Eual Opportunities. Neither the European Commission

nor any person acting on behal o the Commission may be held responsible or the use that may be made o the inormation contained in this

publication.

Fondazione BrodoliniViale di Villa Massimo 2100161 Rome RMITALYTel. +39 [email protected]://www.ondazionebrodolini.it/

photo 1: Getty Imagesphoto 2: 123RFphoto 3: iStock

For any use or reproduction o photos which are not under European Union copyright, permission must be sought directly rom the copyright holder(s).

More inormation on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data as well as an abstract can be ound at the end o this publication.

Luembourg: Publications Ofce o the European Union, 2010

ISBN 978-92-79-15545-1

doi:10.2767/29844

European Union, 2010Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Belgium

Printedonwhitechlorine-freePaPer

Europe Direct is a service to help youind answers to your uestions about

the European Union

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow accessto 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

1

3

2
mailto:[email protected]://www.fondazionebrodolini.it/http://www.fondazionebrodolini.it/mailto:[email protected]


5/1283

Country abbreviations 5

Executive summary 7

Rsum 11

Kurzassung 15

1 Introduction 19

2 Working time fexibility in Europe: an overview 21

3 Regulatory ramework 29

4 Flexibility in the length o working time 39

5 Flexibility in the organisation o working time 53

6 Categorising working time fexibility and gender equality in employment 65

7 Policy developments 71

8 Summary and conclusions 79

Reerences 81

Appendices 87

Contents


6/128


7/1285

BE Belgium

BG Bulgaria

CZ Czech Republic

DK Denmark

DE Germany

EE Estonia

IE Ireland

EL Greece

ES Spain

FR France

IT Italy

CY Cyprus

LV Latvia

LT Lithuania

LU Luxembourg

HU Hungary

MT Malta

NL Netherlands

AT Austria

PL Poland

PT Portugal

RO Romania

SI Slovenia

SK Slovakia

FI Finland

SE Sweden

UK United Kingdom

IS Iceland

LI Liechtenstein

NO Norway

CoUntRY ABBReVIAtIons


8/128


9/1287

exeCUtIVe sUmmARY

Increasing the eibility o working time is an impor-tant element o the European employment strat-

egy (Employment Guideline 21). Enterprises shouldbecome more eible in order to respond to suddenchanges in demand, adapt to new technologies andbe in a position to innovate constantly in order toremain competitive. Fleibility, however, is not onlyidentied as an important ingredient in the uest orcompetitiveness by employers. Also on the supplyside, contemporary employees demand non-ull-timeworking hours and/or eible working time schedulesin order to suit their preerred liestyles and to recon-

cile work and amily lie. However, employer-riendlyand employee-riendly eibility do not necessarilyconverge, creating new tensions between employ-ers and employees and between men and women.This report provides an overview on eible workingtime arrangements and gender euality in the 27 EUMember States and the three EEAEFTA countries. Theocus is on internal uantitative eibility. On the onehand, this reers to eibility in the length o workingtime, such as part-time work, overtime work and longhours and, on the other hand, to eible organisationo working time, such as eible working time sched-

ules, homeworking and work at atypical hours.

The length o the working week is an importantelement o the employment contract. For a long time,the trend has been towards a progressive regulationand a shortening o the ull-time working week. Yet, atthe end o the 20th century, the emphasis has shitedin avour o more eible and individualised workinghours. In order to accommodate these developments,the regulatory ramework has become more ocusedon allowing tailor-made solutions within the bound-aries o a commonly agreed ramework. The resultmay depend on the system o industrial relations and

the strength o the dierent parties involved, withdierent roles or legislation measures, collectivebargaining and bilateral negotiations between theemployer and the employee. In this respect, it shouldbe noted that legislation does not necessarily resultin a better position or employees. In some countriesthe strengths and coverage o collective agreementsmay be comparable or even better than nationallegislation in other countries.

Dierences in the length o working time betweenthe European Member States are still very large.

For eample, individualised working hours appearto be relatively widespread in the northern and

western EU Member States, whereas, especially inthe new Member States, the traditional 40-hourworking week is still very much intact. In regard tothe lie course perspective, part-time work is leastcommon or male employees in the prime agegroup, suggesting that part-time work acilitates acombination o work with education or the youngage group and phased retirement in the old agegroup (although the levels remain low comparedto emale employees). Working overtime and longhours is more common in the prime age group andthe older age group. In some countries, however,

long hours are more common among youngemployees. The main orm o eibility in workingtime among emale employees is part-time work.Although having children is an important reasonto work part-time, part-time rates in the prime agegroup are not consistently the highest.

When looking at the overall pattern o eibility inthe length o working time, it appears that Austriaand the United Kingdom have a high ranking on allthree indicators. The Netherlands has a high scoreon part-time employment and working overtime,

whereas Iceland and the Czech Republic have highscores on working overtime and working long hours.At the other end, our countries are the least eibleand score low on all three indicators: Portugal,Lithuania, Cyprus and Hungary. This implies that themajority o countries have some level o eibility inthe length o working hours.

From a gender euality point o view, the increasedeibility in working hours should be rated positivelyinasmuch as more individualised working hours canhelp employees to reconcile their work obligationsand personal lie. It is thereore likely that more indi-

vidualised working hours have a positive eect onthe emale participation rate. Greater eibility inthe length o working time, however, also seems tohave some adverse eects on gender euality, takinginto account that the main orm o eibility amongemale employees is part-time work. In most coun-tries, part-time work is still concentrated in low-paidsectors with low career and training opportunities.It is thus difcult to claim that greater eibility interms o the length o the working time will havethe desired eect o greater gender euality.

Whereas increased eibility in the length o workingtime can be relatively easily documented rom labour


10/1288

LExIBLE WORKING TIME ARRANGEMENTS AND GENDER EqUALITY

orce survey data, the increased eibility in theorganisation o working time is much more difcult toascertain. This is partly attributable to the act that theeible organisation o working time is oten nego-tiated at the level o the rm, independently romstatutory regulation and/or the system o collectivebargaining. As a result, the statistical processing othese developments is ar rom complete. Never-theless, despite the statistical deciencies, it canbe concluded that also on this dimension Europedisplays large dierences, particularly with regard toeible working time schedules. Fleible working time

schedules reer to arrangements such as staggeredworking hours, eitime arrangement and workingtime banking. Fleible working time schedules arerather widespread in Denmark and Sweden with atleast 60 % o men and women having access to eibleworking time schedules. Also Germany, Finland andNorway score relatively high with a little more thanhal o all employees working with some kind o e-ibility in their working hours. Low scores are concen-trated in the southern EU Member States and in thenew Member States o eastern Europe.

Furthermore, the mi o eible working timeschedules is dierent across countries. In Denmarkeitime arrangements and (to a lesser etent)working time banking are common, whereas inSweden staggered hours are an important orm oeible working time schedules. In Germany workingtime banking is the main orm and it is also thecountry with the highest share o employees havingaccess to this schedule. In the southern and easternEuropean Member States, working time banking isstill an unamiliar phenomenon. The limited eibilitymainly reers to staggered hours and eibility instarting and ending the working day or determining

personal working schedules. The available inor-mation with regard to homeworking suggests thatthe incidence o, or eample, telework has increasedsignicantly over the past decade as a result o newtechnologies. At the same time, however, the numbero ull-time teleworkers remains relatively small as aproportion o the overall workorce. Finally, inor-mation on atypical hours indicates that the (male andemale) share o persons working on Saturday and/or at night has remained relatively stable. There is aslight increase in the share o employees working inthe evening, on Sunday and in shits, but the devel-

opments do not seem to indicate a trend towards a24-hour economy.

From a gender perspective, it is generally assumedthat a eible organisation o working time supportsthe reconciliation o work and private lie and as suchshould avour gender euality. Yet, eible workingtime schedules should be careully designed inorder to take the preerences o the employees intoaccount. In addition, the organisational culture hasa large impact on the actual use o these schedules.As long as eibility is still considered a emale wayo organising working time, eible working timeschedules are more likely to conrm gender dier-ences than to change them. A eible organisation o

working time may also contribute to the blurring oboundaries between work and leisure/private time.Fleibility in this respect demands a certain levelo sel discipline. I there are no strict boundariesbetween paid work and leisure, there is a dangerthat evening or weekend work becomes normalised,which may put a strain on private and/or amily lie.

It is possible to categorise the dierent realities othe EU Member States and classiy the dierentMember States in terms o gender euality workingtime regimes by combining the national scores on

working time eibility and on gender eualityin employment. Gender euality is measured bythe standardised gender gap in employment, thegender pay gap and the working time dissimilarityinde. Working time eibility is charted using theshape o the working time distribution (kurtosis) oall employees; the percentage o employees usuallyworking at home and the percentage o employeesmaking use o eible working time schedules. Onthe basis o this categorisation, Denmark, Finland,France, Slovenia and Sweden are placed in the upperright uadrant; they score above average in termso both gender euality and eibility. A number o

countries, most notably Spain and Greece, perormpoorly in both gender euality and eibility andare placed in the lower let uadrant. Both countriescombine a relatively large gender employment gapwith relatively little eible working time schedulesand homeworking. The Netherlands, Austria, theUnited Kingdom and to a lesser etent Germany andLuembourg combine eibility with relatively lowgender euality. Especially or the Netherlands andAustria, the poor rating in gender euality is to a largeetent due to the larger share o women workingpart-time compared to men. Finally, Lithuania,

Portugal, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Bulgaria andRomania combine low eibility with high levels o


11/1289

ExECUTIVE SUMMARY

gender euality and are thereore placed in the lowerright uadrant.

The relatively diverse positions o EU Member Stateswithin the eibility/euality spectrum indicate theimportance o policy measures. In act, workingtime eibility is on the policy agenda in severalcountries, although the specic topics vary, asdoes the ocus on gender euality. Some countriesocus on eibility as an instrument to increase theparticipation rate (both in persons and in hours). Aninnovative element in this respect is that part-time

working hours no longer reer almost eclusivelyto women, but also become a policy instrumentwithin the contet o active ageing. Especially in theNordic countries, involuntary part-time work is animportant issue, leading to policy measures, which

try to create a new balance between eibility andsecurity. Time banking and annualised hours arealso part o the current policy agenda in some coun-tries connected with the debate on lowering theprevalence o overtime. In addition, there is a cleareect rom the current nancial and economic crisis.Within this contet, eibility is seen as an importantpolicy instrument in order to allow employers toadjust to changing economic circumstances. In thecurrent debate, however, the gender dimensiondoes not gure prominently. As such it is importantthat, despite the recent economic developments,

the progress made in amily-riendly labour marketstructures will be maintained. This implies that botheibility in working time arrangements and gendereuality are identied as important preconditions oeconomic recovery.


12/128


13/12811

Laccroissement de la eibilit du temps de tra-vail est un lment important de la stratgie eu-

ropenne de lemploi (ligne directrice de lemploin 21). Les entreprises doivent pouvoir se montrerplus eibles an de rpondre au changementssoudains de la demande, sadapter au nouvellestechnologies et tre en position dinnover constam-ment pour rester comptitives. Cependant, la ei-bilit nest pas uniuement un ingrdient importantde la recherche de comptitivit des employeurs. Duct de lore galement, les salaris recherchentdornavant des horaires de travail autres u temps

plein et/ou des horaires de travail eibles adapts leurs styles de vie prrs et permettant de conciliertravail et amille. Touteois, la eibilit convenant lemployeur ne saccorde pas ncessairement aveccelle convenant lemploy, ce ui cre de nouvellestensions entre employeurs et employs et entre hom-mes et emmes. Ce rapport donne un aperu gnralsur les amnagements de temps de travail eibleset lgalit entre les hommes et les emmes dansles 27 tats membres de lUnion europenne (UE)et les trois pays de lEEE-AELE (Espace conomiueeuropen - Association europenne de libre-change).

Il est ocalis sur la eibilit uantitative interne.Il se rre, dune part, une eibilit dans la duredu temps de travail, comme le travail temps partiel,les heures supplmentaires et les longues journesde travail, et, dautre part, lorganisation eible dutemps de travail, comme les horaires eibles, le tra-vail domicile et le travail des heures atypiues.

La dure de la semaine de travail est un lmentimportant du contrat de travail. Pendant denombreuses annes, la tendance est alle la rgu-lation progressive et la rduction de la dure de lasemaine de travail temps plein. Cependant, la n

du xxe sicle, laccent a plus particulirement t missur une plus grande eibilit et individualisation dutemps de travail. An dintroduire ces changements,le cadre lgislati sest davantage concentr surlore de solutions sur mesure dans les limites duncadre communment accept. Le rsultat dpenddu systme des rapports sociau et de la orcedes direntes parties impliues, avec des rlesdirents pour les mesures lgislatives, les conven-tions collectives et les ngociations bilatrales entrelemployeur et le salari. cet gard, il aut noter uela lgislation ne met pas ncessairement les salaris

dans une position plus avorable: dans certains pays,la orce et la couverture des conventions collectives

peuvent tre comparables la lgislation nationaledautres pays, voire meilleures.

Les dirences en matire de dure du temps detravail entre les tats membres de lUE sont encoretrs importantes. Par eemple, lindividualisation desheures de travail semble relativement rpandue dansles tats membres du nord et de louest de lUE, alorsue, spcialement dans les nouveau tats membres,la semaine traditionnelle de 40 heures de travail estencore de mise. En ce ui concerne la perspectivedu cycle de vie, le travail temps partiel est le moins

ruent parmi les salaris masculins dans la orcede lge (25-49 ans), ce ui laisse penser ue letravail temps partiel acilite la combinaison travailet ormation chez les jeunes et ltape vers la retraitechez les seniors (bien ue les niveau restent aiblescompars au emmes). Les heures supplmentaireset les longues journes de travail sont plus rpandueschez les salaris dans la orce de lge et chez lesseniors. Dans certains pays, cependant, les longuesjournes de travail sont plus rpandues chez lesjeunes. Chez les emmes, le temps partiel constituela principale orme de eibilit du temps de travail.

Bien ue le ait davoir des enants soit une raisonimportante de travailler temps partiel, les tau detemps partiel des salaris dans la orce de lge nesont pas toujours les plus levs.

Lorsuon observe le modle gnral de eibilitdans la dure du temps de travail, on constate uelAutriche et le Royaume-Uni afchent un score levpour les trois indicateurs. Les Pays-Bas prsententun tau lev demploi temps partiel et dheuressupplmentaires, alors ue lIslande et la Rpubliuetchue atteignent des niveau levs dheuressupplmentaires et de longues journes de travail.

linverse, uatre pays sont moins eibles etobtiennent un aible rsultat pour les trois indica-teurs: le Portugal, la Lituanie, Chypre et la Hongrie.Au nal, la plupart des pays pratiuent un certainniveau de eibilit dans la dure du temps de travail.

Du point de vue de lgalit entre hommes etemmes, la eibilit accrue en matire de temps detravail devrait tre value de manire positive, dansle sens o des heures de travail plus individualisespeuvent aider les employs concilier leurs obliga-tions proessionnelles et leur vie personnelle. Il est

donc vraisemblable uune plus grande individuali-sation du temps de travail aura un eet positi sur le

RsUm


14/12812


tau dactivit minin. Nanmoins, une plus grandeeibilit dans la dure du temps de travail sembleavoir galement uelues eets ngatis sur lgalitentre hommes et emmes, si lon tient compte du aitue le travail temps partiel constitue la principaleorme de eibilit parmi les emmes salaries. Dansla plupart des pays, le travail temps partiel resteconcentr dans les secteurs aiblement rmunrs,


15/12813

RSUM

membres en onction des rgimes de temps detravail en matire dgalit des sees en combinantles scores nationau sur la eibilit et sur lgalitentre hommes et emmes. Lgalit entre hommeset emmes se mesure sur la base des carts entrehommes et emmes en termes demploi, dermunration et de temps de travail (indice dedissimilarit). La eibilit, uant elle, est mesurepar la orme (coefcient daplatissement ou kurtosis)de la distribution du temps de travail de lensembledes employs, le pourcentage demploys travaillanthabituellement domicile et le pourcentage ayant

recours la gestion eible du temps de travail.Daprs cette catgorisation, le Danemark, la France,la Slovnie, la Finlande et la Sude sont placs dansle uadrant en haut droite. Ils obtiennent desscores au-dessus de la moyenne en termes dgalitentre les hommes et les emmes et de eibilit. Uncertain nombre de pays, principalement lEspagneet la Grce, atteignent un aible score dans ces deudomaines et sont placs dans le uadrant en bas gauche. Les deu pays allient une disparit rela-tivement leve entre les hommes et les emmesen matire demploi une proportion relativement

aible de gestion eible du temps de travail etde travail domicile. Les Pays-Bas, lAutriche,le Royaume-Uni et, dans une moindre mesure,lAllemagne et le Luembourg allient la eibilit un niveau dgalit entre les hommes et les emmesrelativement aible. Spcialement pour les Pays-Baset lAutriche, le aible score en matire dgalit entreles hommes et les emmes est d, dans une largemesure, la plus grande proportion de emmestravaillant temps partiel par rapport au hommes.Enn, la Lituanie, le Portugal, la Hongrie, la Lettonie,la Pologne, la Bulgarie et la Roumanie associent uneaible eibilit des niveau levs dgalit entre

les hommes et les emmes et sont donc classs dansle uadrant en bas droite.

Les positions relativement direntes des tatsmembres dans le graphiue de leibilit/dgalitrvlent limportance des mesures politiues. Eneet, la leibilit du temps de travail est lordredu jour politiue dans plusieurs pays, bien ueles sujets spciiues varient, comme cest le caspour lattention porte lgalit entre hommes etemmes. Certains pays se ocalisent sur la leibiliten guise dinstrument permettant daugmenter letau de participation lemploi ( la ois du nombrede personnes et dheures). cet gard, la nouveautest ue les heures de travail temps partiel ne visent

plus eclusivement les emmes, mais deviennentgalement un instrument politiue dans lecontete du vieillissement acti. Spcialementdans les pays du Nord, le travail temps partielinvolontaire reprsente une uestion importante,menant des mesures politiues ui tentent detrouver un nouvel uilibre entre la leibilit etla scurit. La capitalisation du temps de travail etlannualisation des heures ont galement partiede lagenda politiue actuel dans plusieurs pays etsont lies au dbat sur la diminution de la ruencedes heures supplmentaires. En outre, la crise

conomiue et inancire actuelle a un eet sur lasituation de la leibilit du temps de travail. Dansle contete de crise, la leibilit est perue commeune mesure politiue importante ain de permettreau employeurs de sadapter au changement desituation conomiue. Cependant, dans le dbatactuel, la dimension du genre ne semble pas jouerun rle prpondrant. Il est important, en dpit delvolution conomiue rcente, de conorter lesprogrs accomplis dans des structures du marchdu travail avorables la amille. Cela impliueue la leibilit des accords sur le temps de travailainsi ue lgalit entre hommes et emmes soient

identiies comme des prconditions importantes une reprise conomiue.


16/128


17/12815

KURZFAssUnG

Die eiblere Einteilung der Arbeitszeit ist einwichtiger Bestandteil der Europischen Be-

schtigungsstrategie (BeschtigungspolitischeLeitlinie 21). Unternehmen sollten eibler werden,um kurzristigen Nachragenderungen begegnenzu knnen, sich neuen Technologien anzupassenund in der Lage zu sein, mit kontinuierlicher Innova-tion die eigene Wettbewerbshigkeit zu erhalten.Doch Fleibilitt ist nicht nur ein wichtiges Elementim Streben der Arbeitgeber nach einer gnstigenWettbewerbsposition: Auch Arbeitnehmer/-innenerwarten heute das Angebot einer mglichen

Teilzeitbeschtigung und/oder eibler Arbeits-zeiten, die sich ihrem individuellen Lebensstil an-passen lassen und helen, Arbeit und Familie zuvereinen. Arbeitgeber- und arbeitnehmerreund-liche Fleibilitt sind jedoch nicht zwangslugdeckungsgleich, so dass es zwischen Arbeitgebernund Arbeitnehmern/-innen und auch zwischenFrauen und Mnnern zu immer neuen Spannungenkommt. Dieser Bericht bietet einen berblick bereible Arbeitszeitmodelle und die Gleichstellungder Geschlechter in den 27 Mitgliedstaaten der EUund den drei EWR-EFTA-Staaten. Der Schwerpunkt

liegt au dem Umang der internen Fleibilitt. Zumeinen bezieht sich dies au eine eible Gestaltungder Arbeitsdauer, dazu gehren Teilzeitarbeit oder(teilweise vertraglich geregelte) berstunden, zumanderen au die eible Einteilung der Arbeitszeit,so z. B. eible Arbeitsstunden, Heimarbeit und an-dernalls atypische Arbeitszeiten.

Die Dauer der Arbeitswoche ist ein wichtigerBestandteil des Arbeitsvertrages. Lange ging derTrend hin zu einer zunehmenden Regulierungund Verkrzung der Vollzeitwoche. Zum Endedes 20. Jahrhunderts hat sich der Schwerpunkt

jedoch zugunsten einer eibleren und indivi-duelleren Einteilung der Arbeitszeit verschoben.Um diese Entwicklung zu ermglichen, wurdendie Rahmenbestimmungen zunehmend audas Angebot individuell angepasster Lsungeninnerhalb eines gemeinsam estgelegten Rahmensausgerichtet. Das Ergebnis hngt vielleicht auchvom System der wirtschatlichen Beziehungenund der Durchsetzungshigkeit der beteiligtenInteressengruppen mit unterschiedlichen Legisla-tivbeugnissen ab, von gewerkschatlichen Tariver-handlungen und bilateralen Gesprchen zwischen

Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern/-innen. In diesemZusammenhang sollte auch angemerkt werden,

dass legislative Manahmen nicht zwingend dieRolle der Arbeitnehmer/-innen verbessern. Ineinigen Lndern kann die Situation vorliegen, dassStrken und Tragweite von Tariabschlssen mitder nationalen Gesetzgebung in anderen Lndernvergleichbar oder gar besser als diese sind.

Die Arbeitsdauer ist in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaatender Europischen Union nach wie vor sehr unter-schiedlich. So ist eine individualisierte Arbeitszeit inden Lndern Nord- und Westeuropas verhltnismigweit verbreitet. Vor allem in den neuen Mitglied-

staaten ist hingegen die traditionelle 40-Stunden-Woche nach wie vor bestimmend. Bei Betrachtungder gesamten beruichen Laubahn zeigt sich, dasseine Teilzeitbeschtigung unter der mnnlichenBevlkerung im Alter zwischen 25 und 49 Jahren amwenigsten verbreitet ist, was die Vermutung nahelegt,dass die Teilzeitarbeit die Kombination von Arbeitund Ausbildung in jngeren Altersgruppen undden bergang in den Ruhestand unter der lterenBevlkerung erleichtert (obgleich die entsprechendenZahlen, verglichen mit denen der weiblichen Besch-tigten, durchaus niedrig ausallen). berstunden

und Nachtarbeit sind in der mittleren Altersgruppe(25 bis 49 Jahre) sowie unter lteren Arbeitnehmer/-innen weiter verbreitet. In einigen Lndern verteilensich lange Arbeitszeiten jedoch vorrangig au diejungen Arbeitnehmer/-innen. Die hugste Formder eiblen Gestaltung der Arbeitszeit unter derweiblichen Bevlkerung ist die Teilzeitbeschtigung.Und obwohl die Kindererziehung ein unabweisbarerGrund zur Ausbung einer Teilzeitarbeit ist, ist derAnteil an Teilzeitbeschtigten in der mittleren Alters-gruppe nicht grundstzlich auch am hchsten.

Ein berblick ber die Situation der eiblen

Arbeitszeitgestaltung zeigt, dass sterreich undGrobritannien mit allen drei Indikatoren in denoberen Bereichen liegen. Die Niederlande schneidenbei der Teilzeitarbeit wie auch bei der Absolvierungvon berstunden weit oben ab, Island und dieTschechische Republik verzeichnen hingegen beiberstunden und langen Arbeitszeiten hohe Werte.Am unteren Ende der Skala nden sich vier Lnder,deren niedrige Ergebnisse r alle drei Indikatorenvon einer beraus geringen Fleibilitt zeugen:Portugal, Litauen, Zypern und Ungarn. Letztlicholgt daraus die Feststellung, dass die Mehrzahl der

Lnder einen bestimmten Grad an Fleibilitt derArbeitszeitgestaltung vorweisen kann.


18/12816


Aus Sicht der Gleichstellung der Geschlechter solltedie Fleibilisierung positiv bewertet werden, daindividualisierte Arbeitszeiten im Sinne des Arbeit-nehmers die Vereinbarung von beruichen Pichtenund Privatleben erleichtern. Es ist daher wahr-scheinlich, dass sich individualisierte Arbeitszeitenpositiv au die Entwicklung des Frauenanteils imArbeitsleben auswirken. In Anbetracht der Tatsache,dass die wichtigste Art der Fleibilitt unter denArbeitnehmerinnen die Teilzeitarbeit ist, scheintsich jedoch eine grere Fleibilitt in der Dauer derArbeitszeit in einigen Situationen trotz allem negativ

au die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter auszuwirken.In der Mehrzahl der Lnder konzentriert sich die Teil-zeitarbeit nach wie vor in schlechtbezahlten Berus-segmenten mit geringen Karriere- und Fortbildungs-aussichten. Daher lsst sich die Behauptung, grereFleibilitt bei der Dauer der Arbeitszeit wrde zumgewnschten Eekt einer umassenderen Gleich-stellung der Geschlechter hren, nur schwer halten.

Whrend eine Fleibilisierung in der Dauer derArbeitszeit anhand von EU-Arbeitskrteerhebungenleicht dokumentiert werden kann, lsst sich eine

Fleibilisierung bei der Organisation der Arbeitszeitschwerer bestimmen. Teilweise beruht dies auder Tatsache, dass die eible Organisation derArbeitszeit hug au Unternehmensebene und somitunabhngig von gesetzlichen Regelungen und/oderdem Tarisystem ausgehandelt wird. StatistischeErhebungen zu diesen Vorgngen sind letztlichuerst unvollstndig. Fleible Regelungen derArbeitszeit beruhen hug au gestaelten Arbeits-zeiten, Gleitzeitmodellen und Arbeitszeitkonten. InDnemark und Schweden sind eible Arbeitszeitenmit einem Anteil von nahezu 60 % unter Mnnernund Frauen verhltnismig weit verbreitet. Auch

Deutschland, Finnland und Norwegen schneidenmit knapp ber 50 % der Arbeitnehmer/-innen ineiblen Arbeitsstellungen vergleichsweise gutab. Geringe Werte werden hingegen r die LnderSdeuropas und die neuen Mitgliedstaaten inOsteuropa ausgewiesen.

Die Kombination der eiblen Arbeitszeitmodelle istzudem in den einzelnen Lndern nicht einheitlich.Fleitime-Modelle und in geringerem Umang auchArbeitszeitkonten sind in Dnemark durchaus blich,wohingegen in Schweden die gestaelte Arbeitszeit

eine bedeutende Form der eiblen Arbeitszeitge-staltung ist. In Deutschland ist das Arbeitszeit-Banking

die meistgenutzte Form, und hier ndet sich auch derhchste Anteil an Arbeitnehmern/-innen, denen diesesModell zur Vergung steht. In den sdlichen undstlichen Mitgliedstaaten konnten sich Arbeitszeit-konten bisher nicht etablieren. Die gering entwickelteFleibilitt beschrnkt sich hauptschlich au gesta-elte Arbeitszeiten sowie Beginn und Ende des Arbeits-tages bzw. eine individuelle Ablauplanung. Die Daten,die zur Heimarbeit vorliegen, zeigen, dass im Laue derletzten zehn Jahre augrund der Entwicklung neuerTechnologien beispielsweise die Telearbeit deutlichzugenommen hat. Der Anteil an Heimarbeitern in

Vollzeit an der gesamten arbeitsttigen Bevlkerungbleibt jedoch dessen ungeachtet vergleichsweisegering. Angaben zu atypischen Arbeitszeiten deutendarau hin, dass der Anteil (mnnlicher wie weiblicher)Berusttiger, die samstags oder nachts arbeiten,vergleichsweise stabil geblieben ist. Ein leichterZuwachs zeigt sich bei den Arbeitnehmern/-innen, diein den Abendstunden, sonntags und nachts arbeiten.Die Entwicklungen lassen jedoch nicht au einen Trendhin zu einer 24-Stunden-Wirtschat schlieen.

Unter dem Aspekt der Gleichstellung geht man

grundstzlich davon aus, dass eine eible Organi-sation der Arbeitszeit die Vereinbarkeit von Beruund Privatleben begnstigt und dementsprechendder Gleichstellung der Geschlechter Vorschub leistenmsse. Fleible Ablauplanungen der Arbeitszeitsollten jedoch mit Bedacht zusammengestelltwerden, um die Vorlieben der Arbeitnehmer/-innen zu bercksichtigen. Die Art der Einteilung hatdarber hinaus groen Einuss au die tatschlicheUmsetzung und Einhaltung dieser Plne. SolangeFleibilitt als eine typisch weibliche Art der Arbeits-organisation gilt, ist es umso wahrscheinlicher, dassentsprechende Arbeitszeitmodelle die unterschied-

liche Position der Geschlechter besttigen, anstatt siezu ndern. Eine eible Organisation der Arbeitszeitkann gleichalls zum Verschwimmen der Grenzenzwischen Arbeit und Freizeit/Privatleben beitragen.In diesem Zusammenhang verlangt die Fleibilittnach einem gewissen Ma an Selbstdisziplin. Sindkeine klaren Grenzen zwischen bezahlter Arbeit undFreizeit gesetzt, besteht die Geahr, dass das Arbeitenin den spten Abend hinein oder am Wochenendezum Normalall wird und letztlich das Privat- undFamilienleben belastet.

Durch das Zusammenhren der nationalenIndizes zur Fleibilitt und zur Gleichstellung der


19/128

KURZFASSUNG

17

Geschlechter knnen die unterschiedliche Situ-ation in den Mitgliedstaaten der EuropischenUnion kategorisiert und die Mitgliedstaaten selbstentsprechend dem Umang, in dem sich die Gleich-stellungsrage in den Arbeitszeitmodellen wider-spiegelt, klassiiziert werden. Die Gleichstellung derGeschlechter wird anhand des geschlechtsspezii-schen Beschtigungs- und Lohngelles sowie desUnhnlichkeitsindees bestimmt. Die Fleibilitt lsstsich graphisch als Form (Kurtosis) der statistischenVerteilung der Arbeitszeit smtlicher Arbeitnehmer/-innen darstellen; dem Anteil der Arbeitnehmer/

-innen, die gewhnlich zu Hause arbeiten und demAnteil derjenigen, die leible Arbeitsablauplnehaben. Ausgehend von dieser Einteilung indensich Dnemark, Frankreich, Slowenien, Finnlandund Schweden im oberen rechten quadranten:Sie schneiden sowohl bei der Gleichstellungsrageals auch im Hinblick au die Fleibilitt berdurch-schnittlich gut ab. Eine Reihe von Lndern, ameindeutigsten Spanien und Griechenland, knnen inbeiden Bereichen nur schwache Ergebnisse erzielenund inden sich im unteren linken quadranten. Inbeiden Lndern trit ein verhltnismig stark

ausgeprgtes geschlechtsspeziisches Beschti-gungsgelle au vergleichsweise unleible Arbeits-zeitmodelle und Heimarbeit. In den Niederlanden,sterreich, Grobritannien und in geringeremAusma in Deutschland und Luemburg indet sichFleibilitt in Kombination mit einer relativ geringenGleichstellung der Geschlechter. Vor allem in denNiederlanden und sterreich beruht das schlechteAbschneiden beim Gleichstellungsinde in hohemMae au dem, verglichen mit der mnnlichenBevlkerung, hohen Anteil an Frauen in Teilzeit-arbeit. In Litauen, Portugal, Ungarn, Lettland, Polen,Bulgarien und Rumnien ist die Situation hingegen

von einer geringen Fleibilitt bei weitgehenderGleichstellung der Geschlechter gekennzeichnet,so dass sie im unteren rechten quadranten darge-stellt sind.

Die relativ unterschiedliche Positionierung derMitgliedstaaten innerhalb des Fleibilitts-/Gleich-stellungs-Spektrums verweist au die Bedeutungpolitischer Manahmen. Die leible Gestaltung derArbeitszeit steht in vielen Lndern au der politi-schen Agenda, wird jedoch im Einzelnen in unter-schiedlichen Fragestellungen behandelt. Auchdie Betonung der Gleichstellungsrage ist in deneinzelnen Lndern wenig einheitlich. Einige Lnderlegen ihr Hauptaugenmerk au die Fleibilitt alsein Instrument zur Steigerung der Integrationsrate(sowohl von Arbeitskrten als auch von Arbeitszeit)

in den Arbeitsmarkt. Eine Neuerung ist in diesemZusammenhang, dass die Teilzeitarbeit nicht mehrnahezu ausschlielich den Frauen zullt, sondernein politisches Mittel im Kontet des aktiven Alternswird. Vor allem in den Lndern Nordeuropas stelltdie unreiwillige Teilzeitarbeit ein bedeutendesProblem dar, das politische Manahmen nach sichzieht, die au die Schaung eines neuen Ausgleichszwischen Fleibilitt und Sicherheit ausge-richtet sind. Arbeitszeitkonten und au Jahres-basis verrechnete Arbeitsstunden sind im Zusam-menhang mit der Debatte um eine Senkung der

berstundenzahl in einigen Lndern ebenalls Teilder aktuellen Politagenda. Zudem zeigen sich dieAuswirkungen der gegenwrtigen Wirtschatskrisesehr deutlich. In diesem Zusammenhang gilt Flei-bilitt als ein wichtiges politisches Instrument, umArbeitgebern die Anpassung an sich ndernde Wirt-schatsverhltnisse zu ermglichen. In der derzei-tigen Diskussion werden die Aspekte der Gleich-stellungsrage jedoch nicht vorrangig behandelt.Daher ist es wichtig, dass trotz der jngsten wirt-schatlichen Entwicklungen die Fortschritte in derGestaltung amilienreundlicher Arbeitsmarktstruk-turen aurechterhalten und weitergehrt werden.

Dies setzt die Erkenntnis voraus, dass sowohl leibleArbeitszeitmodelle als auch die Gleichstellung derGeschlechter r die Erholung der wirtschatlichenLage unabdingbar sind.


20/128


21/12819

1 IntRodUCtIon

Increasing the eibility o working time is an impor-tant element o the European employment strategy

(Employment Guideline Promote eibility with em-ployment security and reduce labour market segmen-tation). Enterprises should become more eible inorder to respond to sudden changes in demand, adaptto new technologies and be in a position to innovateconstantly in order to remain competitive. Fleibility,however, is not only an important ingredient in theuest or competitiveness by employers. Employeesalso epress a growing need or more eibility in thetime allocation over the lie course in order to respond

to changing needs and/or responsibilities in regard tocare, learning and leisure (Messenger 2004). At a moreempirical level, these trends are visible in the growtho part-time working hours, career break systems, theannualisation o working hours and, in general, morediverse working time arrangements. However, em-ployer-riendly and employee-riendly eibility donot always converge, which can create new tensionsbetween employers and employees and betweenmen and women. As stated in the Commissions cur-rent policy ramework or gender euality, A road-map or equality between women and men20062010:

Fleible working arrangements boost productivity,enhance employee satisaction and employers repu-tations. However, the act that ar more women thanmen make use o such arrangements creates a genderimbalance which has a negative impact on womensposition in the workplace and their economic inde-pendence (CEC 2006: 5).

It is important to balance the various interests.Working time policy, which places emphasis on theimportance o labour market eibility, may be avital element in businesses competitive strategies.Working time eibility may also complement the

growing diversity in liestyles and the rise o dual-earner amilies. Increasingly more employeesseem interested in tailor-made hours matchingtheir personal needs or eibility. The importanceto create a win-win situation and nd mutuallybenecial solutions is underlined by the Commis-sions 2007 communication Towards commonprinciples o eicurity. This policy communicationemphasises that modern work organisation shouldpromote work satisaction and, at the same time,make enterprises more competitive (CEC 2007). Simi-larly, the European social partners progress report

on reconciliation o proessional, private and amilylie underlines that social partners have a common

interest to eplore and promote orms o workingtime arrangements that benet both employers andworkers (ETUC/CES et al. 2008).

The aim o this study is to provide an analysis oeible working time arrangements in the 27 EUMember States and in the three EEAEFTA coun-tries. As such the report contributes to a betterunderstanding o how working time eibilitymay contribute to solving important economicand social challenges both rom an employer andemployee perspective. A lie course perspective

adds an etra dimension to the analysis. Thereoredevelopments rom the perspective o youngpeople, prime age workers/working parents andolder workers are discussed. An important issuein this respect is the etent o gender dierences.Are they most pronounced in the parental phaseor already emerging in the working time patternso young people? And do older workers continuealong the patterns developed during the period inwhich care responsibilities were most intense, ordoes this phase indicate new patterns and perhapsnew ineualities between men and women?

The term eibility may reer to dierent concepts,such as contracts and working hours, but also toemployability issues. From an analytical point o view,it is useul to make a distinction between eternaland internal eibility on the one hand, and uanti-tative (or numerical) and ualitative (or unctional)eibility on the other (Atkinson and Meager 1986).Eternal eibility is eibility between rms, whereasinternal eibility reers to eibility within the rm.Eternal uantitative eibility includes using non-open-ended employment contracts such as ed-term contracts, temporary work agencies, on-call work

etc. Eternal unctional eibility implies the use oeternal knowledge and includes, or eample, postingo employees and reelance work. Internal uantitativeeibility reers to eibility in working time arrange-ments, such as overtime, part-time work and workingirregular hours. Finally, internal ualitative eibilityreers to the adoption o work organisation methodsthat enhance the adaptability to change, such as jobrotation and multitasking (see also EC 2007: 125126).This report ocuses on internal uantitative eibility.The reason is twoold. Firstly, gender dierences seemmost pronounced in this area. Secondly, eibility in

working time arrangements aects the total workorceand is thereore an important issue.


22/12820


Although the trend towards diversication and individ-ualisation o working time is visible in most EuropeanMember States, there are still large dierences inthe etent and actual shape o working time e-ibility. This is illustrated in Chapter 2, which providesa preliminary overview o working time eibility inthe 30 European countries. The dierences betweenEuropean Member States and the actual optionsand trends within European Member States can betraced back by the dierent legislative and regu-latory measures, which make specic options more orless attractive and/or provide restrictions on others.

Chapter 3 summarises these regulatory rameworks.Chapter 4 documents the prevalence o less standardand eible working time patterns by ocusing onpart-time work, overtime and long hours o work.Chapter 5 concentrates on the eible organisationo work and provides details on eible working timeschedules, homeworking and working atypical hours.Chapter 6 tries to categorise the European MemberStates in terms o working time eibility and gendereuality in employment. In Chapter 7 the ocus ison recent policy developments. Finally, Chapter 8provides a summary o the main ndings.


23/12821

The growth in the interest and use o eibilitycan be tied to several developments both on

the demand and on the supply side o the labourmarket. On the demand side, the need or eibil-ity has increased because o more volatile marketconditions, increased competition and the need tohave a labour orce that can adapt easily to tech-nological developments. On the supply side thereis a large demand or a better balance o work andamily lie, which may also translate into a higherdemand or working time eibility. As a result othese developments, there is a growing eibility

in the length o working hours; jobs are no longerorganised on a strict 40-hour week or 48 weeks peryear, but have become more diverse. This is mosteasily illustrated by the rise o part-time work espe-cially among women: the average share o emaleemployees working part-time (aged 15+) amongthe EU-27 is more than 30 %. In addition to thegrowth in part-time work there is also a trend to-wards greater eibility in the allocation o work-ing time over the working week and working year;the ull-time worker is thereore not ecluded in thetrend towards a growing eibility in the allocation

o working times. The boundaries o the normalworking day have epanded and work on Saturdayand Sunday is becoming more reuent. Annualisedhours schemes and staggered working hours areperhaps the most illustrative eamples o a trendtowards a more eible scheduling o standard ull-time hours (Bettio et al. 1998).

Beore providing a more in-depth analysis o thedierent dimensions, the prevalence o new workingtime arrangements within the EU Member Statesand the three EEAEFTA countries are discussedwith particular emphasis on dierences between

countries and between genders. Within the conteto internal uantitative eibility, the data will beorganised along two dimensions. First, inormationwill be provided on the eibility in the length oworking time; that is the spread in actual workinghours. Secondly, data on eibility in the organ-isation o working time, reerring to eible workingtime schedules, such as staggered hours and timebanks, will be presented. The ocus is on employeesonly. Sel-employed persons are not included in thisanalysis as their working time patterns are likely todiverge considerably rom the patterns o employees

(e.g. Parent-Thirion 2007). For the empirical part theEuropean labour orce surveys are used. The gures

reer to 2007 as ar as possible. With respect to ei-bility in the organisation o working time, however,part o the data reer to 2004, as more recent dataare not available.

Flexibility in the length o working time

Working hours in the Western world as they aretoday have been shaped to a large etent by the40-hour weeks that gained prominence over the20th century (Bosch et al. 1994). The 40-hour weekhas remained prevalent in many countries within

Europe today. At the same time, however, countriesshow large dierences in the actual distribution oworking hours. Graph 1 illustrates the actual varietyin working time proles throughout Europe, comparingthe working time proles or 2004 or male and emaleemployees or si EU Member States. Within this sub-sample, Hungary clearly demonstrates the highprevalence o the 40-hour norm; more than 80 %o all employees in Hungary usually work 40-hourweeks. As the additional graphs in the appendicesindicate, also in Lithuania, the Czech Republic,Estonia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Romania and Slovenia

the 40-hour norm is still airly dominant with over60 % o employees working 40 hours per week.

On the other side o the spectrum is the UnitedKingdom, in which any collective norm seems tohave disappeared; the concept o standard workingtime does not appear to eist in this countryanymore. The rest o the EU countries all somewherein between these two etremes; in most instances itis still possible to identiy a peak or two in terms ohours worked. These peaks usually coincide with thestandard working hours o their respective countriesand/or with the prevalence o part-time working

hours. In France, or eample, many employeeswork 31 to 35 hours as the standard working weekis 35 hours, although uite a number o employeesseem to work longer hours; see the second peakat 38/39 hours and the relatively high percentageo especially men indicating a usual working weeko 4650 hours. Denmark also deviates rom the40-hour week as many employees end up workingthe current standard o 37 hours. The Netherlandsdemonstrates two peaks given the large numbero employees working 20 hours a week (espe-cially women). Other countries, such as Germany,

Portugal and Sweden, also have what may be calledsecondary peaks around the 20-hour level.

2 WoRKInG tIme FlexIBIlItY In eURope: An oVeRVIeW


24/12822


Graph 1 Working time distribution o employees by gender in Hungary,United Kingdom, France, Denmark, Netherlands and Germany

Hungary

1 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 35 36 to 37 38 to 39 40 41 to 42 43 to 45 46 to 50 51 to 60 61+

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perce

ntageofemployees

Hours usually worked

Female

Male

United Kingdom


0

20

40

60

80

100

Percentageofemployees


Female

Male

France


0

20

40

60

80

100

P

ercentageofemployees


Female

Male


25/128


26/12824


Graph 1 also illustrates that both male and emaleworking hour proiles show large similarities;thereore a typical national pattern can be estab-lished or both men and women. In Hungary, oreample, the distribution o both the male andemale working hours is heavily concentratedat 40 hours, while also in France the dierencesseem relatively small with both men and womenollowing the typical three-peak pattern. Even inthe United Kingdom, de-standardisation seems tohave aected both the male and emale patterns oworking hours. Yet, the United Kingdom also illus-

trates a common dierence within Europe as theworking time distribution o women is more concen-trated in the shorter working hours, while men workthe longer hours. The largest gender dierences aredisplayed by the Netherlands, where women peakat the 1120 hours category and men still largelywork on a ull-time basis. Other countries showinggender dierences are Finland and Norway. Whileboth genders tend to work ull-time in these coun-tries, ull-time work or women is a ew hours lessthan the 40-hour week that men work. This type odierence in ull-time work between genders can

also be seen in Cyprus and Germany, where womentend to work at a low 30-hour level and men tend towork a 40-hour working week.

A simple inde o working hours segregationconirms the gender dierences in working hours.The s-inde, also called the inde o dissimilarity,is oten applied in research on occupational segre-gation (Rubery and Fagan 1993), but can also beused to illustrate the etent o working hourssegregation. The inde can be interpreted as thepercentage o the male and/or emale labour orcethat would have to change their job (or in this

case working hours) in order to eliminate allsegregation. It appears that there are large dier-ences in this respect (see Chapter 6 or ull details).Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakiaperorm best with scores below 10 %, whereasLuembourg and the Netherlands perorm the worstwith scores higher than 40 %. In act, the Nether-lands scores highest with 57 %; this means that57 % o the male and/or emale population wouldneed to change their working hours to reach aneual distribution. Overall the dierences betweenmens and womens working hours seem universal.

Men simply work more hours than women. Evenin countries such as Sweden, where ull-time work

is common among women, more women thanmen opt or part-time work. These dierences inworking hours illustrate that there is not an easyrelationship between gender euality and leibleworking hours. Short working hours may be seenas a actor which contributes to a dierentiatedeconomy thereby stimulating women to engagein paid work. Yet i women engage disproportion-ately in part-time work (or other non-standardworking time arrangements), the result might beenduring gender ineuality in terms o incomeand responsibility.

Flexibility in the organisation o working time

A leible organisation o working time reers toa leible matching o labour inputs over the day,week and year. A well-known eample is the annu-alisation o working time, in which actual workingtimes are averaged over a speciied sub-period othe year such as 6 or 12 months. Annualised hourschemes can be combined with other non-standardworking time schedules and are oten introducedin tandem with working time accounts or time

banks (EIRO 2003a). Other eamples include thecompressed, our-day working week, and swingtime arrangements in which employees are able towork a ew hours a day less, as long as they catchup on these hours within the same week. Workingtime practices which provide employees with realautonomy over their working times (variable startand inishing hours) are still inreuent (see Burchellet al. 2007) but may increase due to the intro-duction o new inormation technology and theconcomitant move towards more output-orientedmanagement styles.

Whereas the increased leibility in the length oworking time can be easily documented on thebasis o labour orce survey data, the rise in leibleorganisation o working time is much more diicultto ascertain. This is partly due to the tendency o theirm negotiating the leible organisation o workingtime independently rom statutory regulation and/or the system o collective bargaining (see alsoChapter 3). As a result, the statistical processing othese developments is ar rom complete. Eurostat,or eample, gives inormation about the share oemployees having annualised working hours, but

the uality o the data is uestioned or severalcountries. Furthermore, some respondents had


27/12825

2 WORKING TIME FLExIBILITY IN EUROPE: AN OVERVIEW

diiculties with the uestion (EC 2006). Other indi-cators such as the share o people usually (or some -times) working in the evening, night, Saturday,Sunday or at home may be less useul because highpercentages o persons working at the weekend, orinstance, might just as easily indicate the rise o the24-hour economy as a rather traditional economyin which agriculture and retail are still importantsources o employment. Given these diiculties,Table 1 only gives inormation about the percentageo employees having access to leible working timeschedules and the percentage o employees usually

working at home.

Fleible working time schedules reer to a variety oworking time arrangements that enable employeesto vary their working hours, in order to adapt theseto their personal needs and preerences (see alsoRiedman et al. 2006: 3). Table 1 summarises data onleible working time schedules which have beencollected in the LFS ad hoc module 2004 (underthe heading variable working hours). This moduleprovides inormation on the ollowing categories:(1) staggered working hours (employees start and

inish work at slightly dierent times, ied bythe worker or the employer; this implies that theemployee has some opportunity to i the hours,but they remain unchanged); (2) leitime (whichallows workers to vary their starting and endingtimes and the number o hours that they workin a particular week, in general with core hoursestablished; and (3) working time banking (whichinvolves keeping track o hours in order to buildup credits or accumulate deicits in hours workedover longer periods than in the case o leitime,with the rules how the ecess hours accumulated inthe time banking account can be spent) (EC 2006:

37). In addition, there is a category other whichincludes the reuent case o a ied start o the dayuntil the work is inished (EC 2006: 23). It appearsthat leible working time schedules are ratherwidespread in Denmark and Sweden with at least60 % o men and women having access to leibleworking time schedules. Also Germany, Finland andNorway score relatively highly with a little morethan hal o all employees working with some kindo leibility in their working hours. Low scores areconcentrated in the southern EU Member Statesand in the new Member States o eastern Europe.

Table 1 also indicates that in most countries maleemployees are more likely to have leible working

time schedules than emale employees, althoughthe dierences are small. The only countries wherethe share o emale employees is higher are Swedenand Malta.

Homeworking applies to many sel-employedpersons pursuing, or eample, an artistic or liberalproession, although this has also become animportant working condition or employees (Euro-ound 2007). Measuring the etent o homeworkis, however, rather complicated. In this report,data rom the EU-LFS are used on the number o

employees usually working rom home. Eurostatuses a rather strict deinition o working romhome as employees must have reached a ormalagreement with the employer, in which bothparties employees and employers agree thatpart o the work is to be done at home. In addition,a person is considered usually working rom homei, or a reerence period o our weeks beore theinterview, the hours worked at home amount toat least hal o the total hours worked during theperiod (Eurostat 2007: 48). This implies that home-working is a rather imperect indicator o leibility

in the organisation o working time as it may coverrather dierent categories o employees rangingrom the proessional multilocational employeeto teleworkers and (poorly paid) manual home-workers (viz. Stile 2004; Euroound 2007). Moreover,in the Eurostat deinition o work at home anyonewhose place o work comprises a separate unit suchas a doctors surgery or ta accountants oice withseparate entrance is not included (Stile 2004: 2). Yet,given that the data in Table 1 reer to employees,it is assumed that these igures indicate the preva-lence o a modern working time arrangement inwhich employees, with or without the help o new

inormation technologies, work rom home. Table 1shows that France shows the highest percentagewith 4.8 % o all male employees and 10.5 % oall emale employees usually working rom home.Working rom home seems to be rather inreuentin Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal and Spain. Yet thenorth-west/south-east divide seems less clear thanin the case o leible working time schedules. Withregard to gender, it appears that the percentageo emale employees working rom home in mostcountries is higher than the percentage o maleemployees; the only eceptions are Norway and

Ireland. The gender dierences are relatively largein Austria, France, Luembourg and Slovenia.


28/12826


Table 1 Share o employees aged 15+ having access to eible working time schedulesand usually working rom home by gender, 2004

Flexible working time schedules Usually working from home

Country Male Female Male Female

Denmark 62.7 61.3 2.5 2.9

Sweden 60.0 62.6 1.6 2.4

Germany 54.7 49.6 2.1 2.9

Finland 53.7 47.0 5.3 6.9

Norway 53.5 47.2 4.9 3.6

Luxembourg 38.8 34.5 3.8 7.6

Austria 37.6 36.3 2.7 5.7

United Kingdom 36.1 30.5 0.7 1.7

Netherlands 35.2 26.9 1.1 1.1

Italy 34.2 29.7 0.8 1.3

Belgium 30.5 28.2 4.5 5.7

France 29.8 28.5 4.8 10.5

Slovenia 29.0 28.4 4.3 7.7

Iceland 26.9 21.3 4.4 4.8

Czech Republic 23.4 18.4 0.5 1.6

Portugal 22.5 17.2 n.r. 0.5

Estonia 21.1 12.4 n.r. 3.0

Slovakia 20.8 18.2 1.1 2.2

Ireland 20.6 16.4 2.1 1.7

Poland 20.6 14.0 1.1 2.0

Latvia 20.1 17.2 n.r. 1.1

Hungary 17.8 13.5 0.9 1.6

Malta 16.9 17.0

Lithuania 16.8 12.0 n.r. 1.2

Spain 15.5 15.0 0.2 0.5

Greece 14.9 15.3 1.1 1.4

Cyprus 11.6 8.9

Romania 10.9 7.9 1.0 2.4

Bulgaria 10.0 7.5

n.r.: not reliableSource: Eurostat, EU labour orce survey 2004 and LFS ad hoc module 2004 (no data available or Liechtenstein on eibleworking time schedules; no data available or Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Liechtenstein on working rom home)


29/12827

2 WORKING TIME FLExIBILITY IN EUROPE: AN OVERVIEW

Summary

It can be concluded that the individualisationin working hours is relatively widespread in thenorthern and western EU Member States. Incontrast, the traditional 40-hour week has remainedprevalent, particularly in the new Member States.Gender dierences appear to be large in the UnitedKingdom and especially so in the Netherlands. Thereis only limited statistical evidence about the etentto which a eible organisation o working time hasbeen developing over recent years. Yet the available

data seems to suggest the same north-west/south-east divide. Fleible working time schedules

are, or eample, rather widespread in Denmark,Sweden, Germany, Finland and Norway, whereasGreece, Cyprus, Romania and Bulgaria score lowly.The data also indicate that in most countries maleemployees more oten have access to eibleworking time schedules than emale employees, yetthe dierences are relatively small. Working romhome does not seem to be evenly spread amongthe EU Member States, although the north-west/south-east divide seems less clear than in the case oeible working time schedules. In most countriesthe share o emale employees usually working rom

home is higher than the share o male employeesworking rom home.


30/128


31/12829

3 ReGUlAtoRY FRAmeWoRK

The rise o eible and individualised workingtimes is a matter o supply and demand. Employers

attempt to cut back on labour costs to cope with sea-sonal and other uctuations in demand, or to etendoperating hours. Employees want choices other thanthe all-or-nothing option on the labour market and areeperimenting with more tailored working-time pat-terns. The adjustment process o supply and demand,however, does not occur in a vacuum. The matchingo preerences takes place against a backdrop o legis-lative and regulatory measures, which make specicoptions more or less attractive and/or provide restric-

tions on others. This chapter provides an overview othe regulatory ramework. As an in-depth analysis isbeyond the scope o this report, the EU working timedirective will be taken as a point o reerence. Whererelevant, however, reerence will be made towards thenational situation, particularly when aspects o gen-der seem important. In addition, some evidence willbe provided on the importance o more decentralisedregulatory systems, like collective and company agree-ments. The ocus on regulation implies that this over-view will be biased towards (eibility in) the lengtho working time. New innovative ways in the organ-

isation o working time may be supported by nationallegislation; however, the prevalence o annualisedhour schemes and/or eible starting times may bemore inuenced by company practices than by na-tional regulations (see also Riedman et al. (2006) or anoverview o European company practices).

3.1 Regulations on thelength o working time

Length of working week and working day

The EU provides a basic legal ramework concerningthe length o working time in Directive 2003/88/EC.This directive lays down minimum saety and healthreuirements or the organisation o working time,in respect o periods o daily rest, maimum weeklyworking time, annual leave and aspects o nightwork, shit work and patterns o work (OJEC 2003).According to this directive, the average workingtime or each seven-day period, including overtime,should not eceed 48 hours. All Member States have

to transpose this ramework into national legislation,leaving some degree o autonomy. In practice, the

maimum weekly working time is set at 48 hours in16 EU Member States: Cyprus, the Czech Republic,Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luembourg, Malta, theNetherlands, Romania, Slovenia and the UnitedKingdom. Most other countries have set the upperlimit or weekly working time at 40 hours: Austria,Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Poland, Portugal,Slovakia, Spain and Sweden. The only eception isBelgium which has set the upper limit or weeklyworking time at 38 hours (Euroound 2008: 25).

With regard to daily working time, the EU directiveincludes a daily rest period o at least 11 consecutivehours over a 24-hour period (Article 3) and a rest breaki the working day is longer than si hours (Article 4).In addition, or each seven-day period every workeris entitled to a minimum uninterrupted rest periodo 24 hours plus the 11 hours daily rest reerredto in Article 3 (Article 5). Most EU Member Stateshave set a statutory maimum or a working day,which varies rom eight hours (in Belgium, Bulgaria,Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland,Portugal, Romania and Sweden) to 12.5 hours in

Malta. Only ve countries Cyprus, Denmark,Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom do nothave a statutory limit. In these cases the maimumdaily working hours can be derived rom the legalregulations on minimum rest periods (Euroound2008: 25).

Part-time work

At the EU level, Directive 97/81/EC deals with theprevention o less avourable treatment in part-time work. The directive was based on a ramework

agreement negotiated by the European level socialpartners under the terms o the Maastricht Treatyssocial protocol and agreement. The directive callsupon the Member States to ensure eual treatment oull-timers and part-timers unless there are objectivereasons to treat them dierently. This was in place toincrease the uality o part-time jobs and to acilitateaccess to part-time work or men and women in orderto prepare or retirement, reconcile proessional andamily lie and take up education and training oppor-tunities to improve skills and career opportunities(OJEC 1998). The implementation o this directive

implied an improvement o the position o part-timeworkers in several EU Member States.


32/12830


To give a ew eamples: in Germany the transpos-ition o the EU directive on part-time work in 2001resulted in the introduction o a right or workersin companies with more than 15 employees toreduce their working time. In Cyprus the 2002 Lawon Part-time Work (.76 ()/2002) entitles part-timeemployees to eual employment terms and condi-tions as ull-time employees, specically eualtreatment regarding salaries and benets, socialinsurance, maternity protection, annual paid leaveand paid public holidays, parental leave, sick leave,termination o employment, the right to unionisation

and to collective bargaining, occupational health andsaety, and protection rom unavourable discrimin-ation in employment and occupation. In addition,employees may reuest a part-time job. In Liechten-stein the revision o the General Civil Code (LabourContract Act) to implement the directive entered intoorce on 14 December 2005. The most important newprovisions include eliminating discrimination againstpart-time workers, the promotion o part-time work,the guarantee o protection rom termination oemployment upon switching rom ull to part-timework or vice-versa, allowing part-time workers access

to promotion measures relating to occupationaltraining and to management positions, and providinginormation to workers on part-time and ull-timepositions in their place o work.

Legal right to part-time working hours

In addition to eual treatment legislation, severalcountries have introduced by law the right to workon a part-time basis. Generally, there are two orms:legislation that applies to all employees and legis-lation that ocuses on employees with care respon-sibilities. Countries in the rst group are Denmark,

Germany, Spain, France, Cyprus, Lithuania, the Neth-erlands, Poland and Portugal. Denmark has hadlegislation on reducing the number o working hourssince 2001/02. According to this law, the employerand employee must decide the working time o theemployee, and an individual employee can changerom ull-time to part-time. This law intended toremove the barriers laid down in collective agree-ments or part-time work in areas where only ull-time employment was agreed. Furthermore, it isintended to give better possibilities or promoting amore amily-riendly and inclusive labour market and

to promote eual opportunities. As stated above,in Germany since 2001 employees working in a

company with more than 15 employees can ask theiremployer or part-time work. In Lithuania part-timework may be established by agreement betweenthe employee and the employer by decreasing thenumber o working days per week or by shorteninga working day or by doing both. Dutch employeeshave been able to ask or an adjustment o theirworking hours since 2001. This adjustment can berom ull-time to part-time or rom part-time to ull-time. The Working Hours Adjustment Act only appliesto rms with at least 10 employees and employersmay only reuse or reasons o severe business

interest. The act should (among other things) oeremployees more opportunities to combine workand care tasks. In Spain, France, Cyprus and Portugalemployees are entitled to submit a reuest to reducethe number o working hours, but employers mayreuse such reuests. In Poland the regulation isalso rather limited, but employers have to inormemployees about the possibility o part-time work.Moreover, employees may ask to work part-time asan alternative to taking parental leave.

Eleven countries have legal regulations on part-

time work in order to support employees with careresponsibilities: Estonia, Spain, Latvia, Lithuania,Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, theUnited Kingdom and Norway. The target groupand the relevant period vary per country. In Estoniaemployers are reuired to grant part-time work topregnant women or women raising a disabled childor a child under 14. A similar regulation applies inLatvia and Lithuania. Austrian parents can switchrom ull-time to part-time work until the childsseventh birthday i they work or a company with atleast 20 employees and i they have been employedwith the rm or at least three years. In Portugal the

regulation applies to parents o children who areunder 12, disabled or chronically ill. The part-timeperiod is, however, limited to two years. In Sloveniathe options or the employee depend on the numbero children. Parents with one child can work part-timeuntil the child is three or, in case o more children,until the youngest child is si. In Finland parents canwork part-time until the child has nished the secondyear o school. This is in act a partially paid care leaveas the parent receives a at-rate compensation. Inaddition, employees may ask to work part-time or alimited period o time (maimum o 26 weeks) based

on social or health reasons. In Sweden parents havea right to shorten the normal working time by up to


33/12831

3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

a ourth until the child is eight years old or has notnished the rst year in school. In Spain employeeswith children below the age o si or with relativeswho need care have the right to reduce the workingday as long as it is taken with a proportionally lowerwage. The reduction has to be at least a third, witha maimum o hal the working time. Though this isconsidered an individual right o men and women,i two or more employees in the same company areentitled to this right, the employer can limit this rightbased on the correct unctioning o the enterprise.

In the United Kingdom the right to reuest reducedor eible working hours was initially limited toparents o children under the age o si but has beenetended to employees caring or an adult in needo care. Moreover, as o April 2009 the legislation hasbeen etended to parents o all children up to the ageo 16. Employers may reuse on grounds o speciedbusiness reasons. Finally, Norwegian employeeswith special needs, such as care responsibilities, areentitled to reduced working hours, unless it causesmajor inconvenience to the company.

Box 1 Legal entitlements to part-time work

Legal entitlements to part-time work for all employees

DK A new Part-Time Law was passed by the government in 2001/02. According to this law it is up to the

employer and the employee to decide the working time, and an individual employee can change rom

ull-time to part-time. I an employee is dismissed due to the rejection o a reuest to go on part-time or

due to his or her own reuest to change to part-time, the employer has to pay compensation. In addition,

the law includes the principle o eual treatment o ull-timers and part-timers.

DE In November 2000, a new Act on Part-Time Work (and ed-term employment relationships) was passed

which came into orce in 2001. Among other provisions, the law introduced a right or workers in

companies with more than 15 employees to reduce their working time, as long as no internal company

reasons prevent such a reduction. The act transposes the EU directives on part-time (97/81/EC).

ES Employees are entitled to submit a reuest to switch rom ull-time to part-time work, but the employer

may deny such reuests.

FR Employees are entitled to submit a reuest to switch rom ull-time to part-time work, but the employer

may deny such reuests on economic or technical grounds.

CY According to the 2002 Law on Part-time Work (o 76 ()/2002) employers must consider employees

reuests to transer rom ull to part-time status (and vice-versa), to increase their working time, to inorm

on part-time or ull-time vacancies, to acilitate access to part-time employment at all levels, to take

measures to enable access to vocational training o part-time employees and to provide inormation to

employee unions about part-time employees.

LT Part-time work may be agreed between the employee and the employer by decreasing the number

o working days per week or shortening a working day or doing both. Part-time work does not lead to

restricted social benets, reduced job security or ewer career opportunities than ull-time work, and the

hourly rate is not lower or part-time employees than or ull-time employees.

NL On 1 July 2001, the Working Hours Adjustment Act (WAA) came into orce. This act gives every employee who

has worked at the same company or at least a year the statutory right to adjust working hours; a part-timer

may increase working hours and a ull-timer may reduce them. Non-compliance by the employer is only

allowed or reasons o severe business interest. Small businesses (less than 10 employees) are eempted rom

the WAA but are reuired to make their own arrangements regarding the adjustment o working hours.


34/12832


Legal entitlements to part-time work for all employees

PL According to the Labour Code a part-time worker may reuest to change the contractual number o

hours worked, and an employer should consider this reuest. Also, an employer is obliged to inorm

workers o the possibility o changing between part-time and ull-time status. Employees entitled to

parental leave may reuest shortening their working time to no less than hal time as an alternative to

parental leave and the employer is obliged to consider this reuest.

PT Employees are entitled to submit a reuest to switch rom ull-time to part-time work and vice-versa.

Employers have to consider reuests rom employees but may deny them. A 30-day notice is obligatory

or reuests to change working time patterns.

Legal entitlements to part-time work for employees with care responsibilities

EE Employers are reuired to grant part-time work when reuested by a pregnant woman or a woman

raising a disabled child or child under 14 years o age.

ES According to Article 37.5 o the Workers Statute, employees with children below the age o si or with

relatives who need care (up to second sanguinity degree) have the right to reduce the working day

as long as it is taken with a proportionally lower wage. The reduction has to be at least a third and a

maimum o hal the working time. Though this is considered an individual right o men and women, i

two or more employees in the same company are entitled to this right, the employer can limit this r ight

based on the correct unctioning o the enterprise.

LV Pregnant women and employees with a child under 14 years o age or a disabled child under 16 years o

age are entitled to part-time work.

LT Pregnant employees, employees who have recently given birth, employees who breasteed, employees

with children under the age o three, as well as lone parent employees with children below the age o 14

or disabled children below the age o 16 are entitled to part-time work (either daily or weekly).

AT In 2004 the right to part-time work or parents (Elternteilzeit) was introduced. Parents can switch rom

ull-time to part-time work until the childs seventh birthday i they work or a company with at least 20

employees and i they have been employed with the rm or at least three years. During the period they

work part-time, these employees are entitled to the usual protection against dismissal and the right to

return to ull-time work.

PT Parents o children who are under 12 or disabled or chronically ill are entitled to work part-time (usually 50 %

o normal hours unless otherwise agreed), working either in the morning, the aternoon or on three days

per week or to work eible hours, or up to two years (three years i more than two children). This appliesto only one parent the mother or the ather. The employer may reuse on business grounds or hard-to-ll

vacancy but this reuires support rom the tripartite Commission or Euality at Work and Employment.

SI The Parenthood and Family Income Act (PFIA, 2001) stipulates (besides our types o paid parental leave)

the possibility or parents to work part-time until a child is aged three and part-time until the youngest

child is si years old or parents o two or more children.

FI The Employment Contracts Act contains provisions related to the right o the parents o young children

to reduce their working hours to take partial care leave. Parents taking a part-time childcare leave can

reduce their working hours until the child has nished his/her second year o school. There is a nancial

compensation o EUR 70 when the child is under three years old or in the rst or second year o school. The

sum will be increased to EUR 90 in 2010. According to the Working Hours Act, i an employee wishes, or

social or health reasons, to work less than the regular working hours, the employer should try to arrange or

the employee to work part-time. This can be implemented as shortened daily or weekly working time. The

procedure reuires an agreement and it can be established or a maimum o 26 weeks.


35/12833

3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Legal entitlements to part-time work for employees with care responsibilities

SE Parents have a right to shorten the normal working time by up to a ourth until the child is eight years old

or has not nished the rst year in school. This means, or eample, that a parent can work si hours a day

instead o eight hours a day.

UK The Employment Act (2003) introduced the right or employees to reuest reduced or eible working

hours i they were parents o a child under the age o si years, or a disabled child under 18 years. From

April 2007 this right was etended under the Work and Families Act (2006) to employees caring or an

adult in need o care which encompasses most relatives or someone else living at the same address as

the employee. As o April 2009 the legislation has been etended to parents o all children up to the age

o 16. Employers must consider the reuest seriously, and without regard to the employees personal

circumstances, but can reuse on the grounds o one or more specied business reasons.NO According to the Work Environment Act, workers with special needs (health, care responsibilities) have

the right to reduced working hours i it can be arranged without major inconvenience to the rm.

Source: national reports

Part-time retirement

In addition to granting rights to young parents, itmight be useul to allow older workers part-timeretirement. This, however, does not seem to be acommon practice yet. Only a ew countries (i.e.

Germany, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden) provideeamples o regulation reerring to part-timeretirement. In July 1996, the German governmentreplaced the eisting early retirement practice withthe adoption o the Partial Retirement Law. ThePartial Retirement Law was created amongst othersin order to promote the gradual transition o olderemployees into retirement. Under this legislation,the Federal Employment Service (Bundesagentur rArbeit) nancially supports the gradual transitiono employees aged 55 and over to retirement, i theemployee voluntarily reduces his or her workingtime by 50 % and the resulting vacancy is lled by

an unemployed person or a trainee. The distributiono working time over the years until retirement is upto the parties o the employment contract. Possibleworking time schemes are part-time work, ull-timework and leave o absence alternating daily, weeklyor monthly, and the so-called Blockmodell (a phaseo ull-time working is ollowed by a total leave oabsence), which is the most preerred working timescheme. In November 2006, the German governmentdecided to increase the retirement age stepwise rom65 to 67 years, which also inuences the provisionso partial retirement. The nancial support o partial

retirement by the Federal Employment Serviceepired at the end o 2009.

In Slovenia workers older than 55 years have thestatutory right to part-time work. According to theWorking Hours Act in Finland, part-time retirementcombined with part-time work can be granted to anemployee aged 58 or over who makes a transitionrom ull-time to part-time employment by reducing

his/her working hours to 1628 per week (maimum70 % o ull-time working hours). The part-timepension is 50 % o the income loss. The employer shallseek to organise the work so that the employee maydo part-time work i he/she wishes to retire on a part-time pension. The Swedish pension system does notcontain a ed retirement age, but pensions cannotbe drawn beore the age o 61 and there is no legalright or employees to work ater the age o 67. Butthe system is eible in that pensions can be claimedpartially or ully at age 61 with or without leaving thelabour orce. I the individual decides to continueto work while claiming a partial or ull pension, the

benets will be recalculated given the additionalcontribution rom work.

Overtime

Overtime is oten seen as an important element oeibility by employers as well as an important sourceo income by employees. As a general working de-nition, overtime hours are those worked above a certainthreshold o working time, which attract enhancedcompensation or the worker, either in the orm o an

increased rate o pay or time o in lieu (EIRO 2003b:1).In most cases, the legislator sets two thresholds.


36/12834


The rst threshold marks the point at which overtimebegins, with the legislator setting the minimum pay rateto compensate the hours worked beyond this threshold.The second threshold sets a maimum o allowableovertime or a maimum daily or weekly limit or workinghours that cannot be eceeded. Within this regulatoryramework, negotiators decide on the actual workingtime scheme and payment system. In some cases, nego-tiators also have the authority to move the thresholds. Itshould be noted, however, that regulation within Europeis rather diverse and diers according to the type othreshold used (daily or weekly) and whether regulation

is shaped in legislative or collectively agreed terms. Inaddition, in the United Kingd

tempo de trabalho flexível. relatório ue

Documents