Aspects regarding quality of work and employment in Romania in the first decade of the 21st century.
Ionescu, Alina Mariuca ; Ionescu, Dan Dumitru
Introduction
The issue of quality of work and employment has been officially put
in the agenda of European policies since the European Council in March
2000 when the so-called Lisbon Strategy was launched. As the Social
Policy Agenda states, "quality of work includes better jobs and
more balanced ways of combining working life with personal life"
(1).
According to Pena (2), there are two conceptual frameworks
currently in use in EU concerning the issue of quality of work and
employment.
The first of them has been developed by the European Foundation for
the Improvement of Working and Living Conditions (Eurofound), which
identified four dimensions as essentials to promote job and employment
quality (3): ensuring career and employment security; maintaining and
promoting the health and well-being of workers; developing skills and
competences; and reconciling working and non-working life. Eurofound
continues to develop studies in these areas, as well as in other areas
such as occupational health, absenteeism, stress and violence and
harassment.
The second conceptual framework results from the institutional
approach in the context of European Employment Strategy. It was proposed
by the 2001 Commission Communication which identified two broad
categories of elements of quality of work (job characteristics and the
work and wider labour market context) and ten dimensions of quality of
work (intrinsic job quality; skills, life-long 1earning and career
development; gender equality; health and safety at work; flexibility and
security; inclusion and access to the labour market; work organisation
and work-life balance; social dialogue and worker involvement; diversity
and non-discrimination; overall work performance). A list of key
indicators linked to these 10 dimensions were approved by the Council
and communicated to the Laeken European Council in December 2001 (4).
More recently, the European discourse on quality of work and
employment has emphasized four broad dimensions of quality of work in EU
while stressing the importance of good work: workers' rights and
participation, equal opportunities, safety and health protection at work
and a family-friendly organisation of work (5).
In an effort to monitor the quality of work and employment in
Europe, Eurofound has been conducting the European Working Conditions
Surveys (EWCS) since 1991. Starting with 2000/2001 the Foundation
included the then acceding country Romania among the range of countries
covered in these surveys.
Based on the EWCS findings for Romania, along with a range of other
research and literature, this paper aims to analyze the changes that
have occurred in the quality of work and employment in Romania starting
with year 2000 and to provide a dynamic insight into the development of
and current situation regarding working conditions and employment in
Romania. The analysis is focused on Romania, but comparisons with other
EU member states are also made in order to identify certain disparities
between East and West.
Data and method
The assessment of quality of work considers both job
characteristics (number of working hours, work intensity, job
satisfaction) and aspects concerning the functioning of the labor market
as a whole (working conditions, training, career prospects, and access
to employment).
Data sources used to describe the various aspects of quality of
work and employment are the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS)
and the European Working Conditions Observatory (EWCO).
EWCS was launched in 1990, when workers in the EC12 were surveyed,
and took place every five years since then. Its geographical coverage
was extended over time. Within the third EWCS in 2000 the EU15 and
Norway were surveyed in a first phase, the survey then being expanded to
cover the 12 "new" Member States in 2001 (including Romania),
and Turkey in 2002 in a second phase. The fifth EWCS covered EU27 member
states, Norway, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Turkey, Albania, Montenegro and Kosovo (6).
The survey aims to provide an overview of working conditions in
Europe, assessing and quantifying working conditions of both employees
and the self employed across Europe on a harmonised basis. There are 13
topics covered today by the survey questionnaire, each topic being
assigned between 5 and 12 questions.
Within this paper data on answers to 13 questions covering 7
dimensions of quality of work were extracted from EWCS database
available on Eurofound website. Table 1 presents selected themes and
questions and their response categories.
Findings and discussions
This section presents descriptive findings concerning the
indicators of the general job context, working time, work intensity,
access to training and career prospects, pay, satisfaction with working
conditions, work-related health risks, work-life balance and financial
security, along with an elementary bivariate analysis of the
relationship between gender (male, female), age (under 30, 30 to 49,
50+), employment status (employee: permanent contract, employee: other
arrangement, self-employed), activity of organisation (industry and
services), and type of occupation (high-skilled clerical, low-skilled
clerical, high-skilled manual, low-skilled manual) [7] and these various
measures (see Tables 2-5 and Figures 1-15).
In terms of job security, over 20% of respondents expressed fear
that they might lose their jobs within 6 months after the investigation.
The share of these people increased in 2010 compared to 2005 with 5.8
percentage points, from 18.5% to 24.3%, being 1.5 times higher than EU27
average and 2.5 times higher than the value of the indicator in
countries such as Luxembourg, Denmark and Norway.
Although the mistrust of job security is more prevalent among men,
its increasing occurred more obviously among female active population,
the share of women that agreed that they could lose their jobs in coming
months after the investigation being of 22.5%, which is almost 8
percentage points above the 2005 value.
Just over half (55.9%) of the active population of Romania
considers at the moment of investigation that they will not lose their
jobs in the next six months, which represents a share of about 1.5 times
lower than in Norway, Denmark or Luxembourg, countries with shares above
80%.
The evolution of the phenomenon of mistrust of job security in
Romania largely follows the average trend shown in the EU27 in the
analyzed period.
The proportion of the respondents that always or most of the time
have enough time to get the job done increased in Romania, from 71.8% in
2005, to 84.9% in 2010. Our country is surpassed only by four of the
other 33 countries considered in the analysis: Latvia, Bulgaria,
Macedonia and Hungary.
Romania has also one of the lowest percentages (4%) of the active
population who rarely or never have enough time to get the job done,
after Latvia (2.1%) and Portugal (3.1%), amounting to 2.3 times the
average share at EU27 level. This percentage decreased in 2010 to more
than half of the value recorded in 2005. The average value of the
indicator for EU27 also decreased between the two surveys, but more
moderately.
The most affected by the lack of necessary time required to perform
their tasks seem to be those who work in Turkey, 21.5% of them stating
that they rarely or never have enough time to get the job done. Just
over half (55.9%) of the active population in Turkey has always or most
of the time enough time to complete their tasks.
Austria, Sweden, Cyprus and Denmark are also among countries where
over 12% of the workers have rarely or never sufficient time to get
their job done.
The share of people facing tight deadlines within their job in at
least one quarter of the time decreased in Romania by 8 percent (from
59.7%) in the period between EWCS 2000 and EWCS 2010, the new value
being below the EU27 average (62%).
While Romania reports a decreasing tendency in the share of people
working to strict deadlines in at least one quarter of the time, the
value of the indicator increased at the level of EU27 from one survey to
another during the period 2000-2010.
The states where less than half of the working population is facing
tight deadlines within job in at least one quarter of the time in 2010
are Portugal (40.6%), Lithuania (47.3%) and Bulgaria (47, 5%). By
contrast, in Turkey, Cyprus, Germany, Finland and Malta, its share
exceeds 70%, reaching almost 80% in the first two countries.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
As regards Romania, the following categories of workers account for
the highest proportions of people facing tight deadlines within their
job in at least one quarter of the time in 2010: those being in the age
group 30 to 49 years (61.6%); employees having a permanent contract
(67.8%, comparing to other categories, with weights around 61%); workers
in industry (64.8% versus 53.2% of those working in services sector);
high-skilled individuals (with weights over 64%, compared to low-skilled
workers, which record weights under 58%).
Working time is a critical element in the working conditions of all
workers which has received considerable attention in EU policymaking
discussions over the last 20 years. The EU has intervened through
legislation such as the 1993 Working Time Directive, and its subsequent
revisions in order to make working time more flexible and facilitating
shorter working hours, both as a way of making jobs available to more
citizens and to assist in balancing work and private life (8).
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
Working time is an indicator of quality of work that creates
important differences between the countries located in South-eastern
Europe and those located in Western and Northern Europe.
In Romania, the proportion of people that usually work more than 40
hours per week in their main paid job is in 2010 significantly lower
than in the previous surveys EWCS 2000 and EWCS 2005.
However, our country together with Greece, Czech Republic and
Slovakia account for the largest shares (over 40%) of population with a
working time longer than 40 hours per week among European Union
countries. By contrast, in countries such as Finland, Norway, France,
Austria, Netherlands, more than 17% of the workers exceed 40 hours per
week in their main paid job.
The longest actual working week for full-time employees in their
main jobs in 2010 was in Romania (41.3 hours); the shortest was in
Finland (37.8 hours); while, in the EU27 as a whole, the actual working
week was 39.7 hours (9).
The following categories of workers present in 2010 the highest
percentages of people working more than 40 hours per week in Romania:
51% of those aged over 50 years; 48.5% of those working in industry
compared to 30.2% of those working in services; over 44% of those in
high-skilled categories compared to less than 37% of those in
low-skilled categories.
An important factor in the overall duration of working time is the
amount of paid annual leave to which workers are entitled. The combined
total of agreed annual leave and public holidays varied across the EU in
2010 from 40 days in Germany and Denmark to 27 days in Romania--a
difference that equates to around two-and-a-half working weeks (10).
Shorter working hours--30 hours or less--appear to be much more
common in Western Europe than in Eastern Europe. In the western
countries, part-time work is undertaken for a variety of reasons, an
important one being the way in which women combine employment and family
life (11). Part-time work is less common in Eastern Europe, where it is
not necessarily seen as a way of balancing work and family life; more
often, it is used as part of a pre-retirement or post-retirement
strategy or constitutes part of a company's policy for avoiding
mass redundancies (12).
In Romania, part-time work is not viewed favourably by trade unions
because it generates a lower income, therefore the trade unions'
opinion is that the law and the decision-makers should treat part-time
work as an exception, not as a rule (13).
Despite the many working hours performed, no more than 21.4% of the
workers in Romania would like this number to be smaller. Only Bulgaria
and Lithuania present smaller percentages (17% and 19%) than Romania
among the other surveyed states. In countries like Turkey, Sweden,
Greece, Montenegro, Denmark and Albania, the share of those who would
prefer to work less than current exceeds 40%.
Romania even shows a share (14.7%) above the EU27 average (13.9%)
of those who would like a greater number of working hours.
The phenomenon is the most obvious in Latvia, Ireland and
Lithuania, where the proportion of those who would prefer to work more
than current exceeds 20%.
Among those who would prefer to work more hours in Romania, we may
notice the following categories with higher weights in 2010: people over
30 years old (22.7% compared with around 13% of the other age groups),
workers in services sector (17.6% compared with 12.2% of those working
in industry) and low-skilled individuals (proportions of 17-22%, which
are twice higher than for high-skilled categories).
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
People that would like to work less than current in Romania show to
quite similar percentages across the various categories of
socio-demographic variables considered.
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
The share of workers who think that their health or safety is
endangered because of their work decreased by 14.5 percentage points
between EWCS 2000 and EWCS 2010 investigations. However, Romania finds
itself among the top seven Member States most affected by this
phenomenon.
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
With regard to the impact of work on health, Romania is among the
first ten EU countries with the highest percentages of workers whose
health is mainly negatively affected by their work (these weights are
exceeding 34%) and among the first nine states whose workers'
health is the least positively affected (with weights not exceeding
6,5%).
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
The share of respondents who agree that their job offers them good
prospects for career advancement has significantly increased in Romania
during the period 2005-2010 particularly among women.
Despite the improvement in this aspect between the two surveys,
Romania is the European country in the considered sample with the
highest percentage (62,5%) of the workers who disagree with the fact
that their job offers them good prospects for career advancement.
An important increase was recorded in the proportion of the people
who received training paid for or provided by their employer over the
past 12 months, from 11% in 2005 to 18.3% in 2010.
Romania stands, however, in the bottom of the ranking, while the
EU27 average is 33.7%, and in countries such as Sweden, Netherlands, and
Finland, the proportion of those who have been professionally trained by
the means of their employer is about 50%.
[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 11 OMITTED]
As regards the payment of the work, Romania lies in 2010 among the
countries in the sample with the lowest shares of workers who agree that
they are well paid for the work they do.
[FIGURE 12 OMITTED]
Surprisingly, while the proportion of those who believe they are
well paid fell at the EU27 level by over 2 percentage points from the
previous survey, in Romania it increased with almost two points.
Romania shows a significant increase in the share of people who
feel very satisfied or satisfied with working conditions in their main
paid job during the period 2005-2010, from 58.8% to 75.4%.
Despite this important lift, our country remains below the EU27
average.
Only 15.4% of workers in Romania would be financially secure in
case of a long term sickness, which means a percentage 2.5 times lower
than the EU27 average and 4.5 times lower than in Denmark.
Young workers seem to be the most exposed age category in Romania
in case of a long term sickness, as 0% of those under 30 years agreed
they would be financially secure.
As to the type of occupation, 24.2% of the high-skilled clerical
workers, only 9.5% of those high-skilled manual and 0% of those
low-skilled would be financially protected in case of a bad health
condition.
[FIGURE 13 OMITTED]
Reconciliation of work and private life is a key element in quality
of work and employment. It continues to be an important concern of the
European debate, being mentioned in the Europe 2020 Strategy for Smart,
Inclusive and Sustainable Growth [14]. Almost one fifth of European
workers are having difficulties achieving a satisfactory work-life
balance, which means a slight decrease since 2000.
With regard to this aspect, Romania is among European countries
with the highest proportions (85.8%) of workers whose working hours fit
in very well or well with their family or social commitments outside
work.
The highest percentages are specific to: those in the 50+ age group
(92.3%, compared to only 79.9% of those under 30); the employees having
other arrangements than a permanent contract (89.6%); the high-skilled
clerical workers, which account for 93.2% while the other categories
record weights of about 85% or below this value.
[FIGURE 15 OMITTED]
Conclusions
To summarize, the results of the analysis lead to the following
conclusions on the quality of work and employment in Romania:
* High percentage of those who feel job instability;
* Significant share of those who work a high number of hours;
* High proportion of those who would like to work more than current
compared to the other European countries;
* High percentages, even if declining over the past 10 years, of
the workers who believe their health or safety is at risk because of the
work they do and of those whose health is negatively affected by their
work;
* A certain relaxation in terms of tight deadlines and time
pressure at work compared to most of the other European countries;
* The highest share of those who don't believe that their job
offers them good prospects for career advancement;
* Young workers, those working in services and high-skilled workers
are the categories most likely to have the opportunity for career
advancement within their jobs;
* Among the European countries with the lowest percentages, even if
increasing over the past 5 years, of the workers who received training
paid for or provided by their employer and of those who consider
themselves to be well paid for the work they do;
* A significant increase in the share of people who feel very
satisfied or satisfied with working conditions in their main paid job
over the past 5 years;
* None of the young workers or of the low-skilled workers are
financially secure in case of long term sickness;
* One of the most balanced work-life relationships in Europe.
Acknowledgements
This work was possible with the financial support of the Sectoral
Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007-2013, under
the project number POSDRU/89/1.5/S/49944 with the title Dezvoltarea
capacitatii de inovare si cresterea impactului cercetarii prin programe
post-doctorale.
References
[1.] Chivu Luminita, Romania: Quality of work and employment of
low-qualified workers, Publication date: 13-11-2009,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/studies/tn0810036s/ro0810039q.htm
[2.] Chivu Luminita, Working time in the European Union: Romania,
Publication date: 17-11-2009,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/studies/tn0803046s/ro0803049q.htm
[3.] Clark Andrew, Measures of job satisfaction, What makes a good
job--Evidence from OECD countries, OECD, Paris, 1998
[4.] Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Employment and social
policies: a framework for investing in quality, Brussels, 20 June 2001,
COM(2001) 313 final;
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2001:0313:FIN:EN:PDF
[5.] EMCO, Ad Hoc Group report on the 2010 thematic review, part 2:
Quality in work, 24 November 2010;
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=6441&langId=en
[6.] European Council, Presidency Conclusions of the European
Council Meeting in Laeken, 14-15 December 2001;
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/background/docs/laeken_concl_en.pdf
[7.] European Council, Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels
European Council, 8-9 March 2007, doc. 7224/07
[8.] European Commission, European Economy - 7/2009 - Economic
Crisis in Europe: Causes, Consequences and Responses, Office for
Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2009
[9.] European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), Expert group report for the Belgian presidency
conference For a better quality of work, 20-21 September 2001
[10.] European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), First European Quality of Life Survey: Quality
of work and life satisfaction, Luxembourg: Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities, 2007,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2006/95/en/1/ef0695en.pdf
[11.] European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), Quality of work and employment in Romania, 2007,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2007/37/en/1Zef0737en.pdf
[12.] European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), Foundation Findings: Working time in the EU,
2012, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/45/en/1/EF1145EN.pdf
[13.] International Labour Office (ILO), Global employment trends,
Geneva, January 2010;
http://www.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ilo/P/09332/09332(2010-January).pdf
[14.] Leontaridi Rannia and Sloane Peter, Measuring the quality of
jobs: Promotion aspects, career and job satisfaction, Centre for
European Labour Market Research, University of Aberdeen, 2000
[15.] Leontaridi Rannia and Sloane Peter, Measuring the quality of
jobs, LoWER network working paper, 2001
[16.] Pena-Casas Ramon, More and better jobs: conceptual framework
and monitoring indicators of quality of work and employment in the EU
policy arena, Working Papers on the Reconciliation of Work and Welfare
in Europe, RECWP 06/2009;
http://www.socialpolicy.ed.ac.uk/^data/assets/pdf_file/0013/30073/REC-WP_0609_Pena-Casas.pdf
(1) Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Employment and social
policies: a framework for investing in quality, Brussels, 20 June 2001,
COM(200l) 313 final;
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2001:0313:FIN:EN:PDF, pp. 3-4
(2) Ramon Pena-Casas, More and better jobs: conceptual framework
and monitoring indicators of quality of work and employment in the EU
policy arena, Working Papers on the Reconciliation of Work and Welfare
in Europe, REC-WP 06/2009;
http://www.socialpolicy.ed.ac.uk/^data/assets/pdf_file/0013/30073/REC-WP_0609_Pena-Casas.pdf
(3) European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound),
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/qualityofwork/index.htm
(4) For the detailed list of key indicators, see Ramon Pena-Casas,
op. cit.
(5) European Council, Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels
European Council, 8-9 March 2007, doc. 7224/07, p. 3
(6) European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound),
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/ewcs/index.htm
(7) For more about the breakdown for these variables, see EWCS 2010
methodology on http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/ewcs/2010/methodology.htm
(8) European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), Foundation Findings: Working time in the EU,
2012, p. 3, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/45/en/1/EF1145EN.pdf
(9) Ibidem, p. 19
(10) Ibidem
(11) European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), First European Quality of Life Survey: Quality
of work and life satisfaction, Luxembourg: Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities, 2007, p. 18,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2006/95/en/1/ef0695en.pdf
(12) Ibidem
(13) Luminita Chivu, Working time in the European Union: Romania,
Publication date: 17-11-2009,
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/studies/tn0803046s/ro0803049q.htm
(14) European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions (Eurofound), Foundation Findings: Working time in the EU,
2012, www.eurofound.europa.eu, p. 4
Alina Mariuca IONESCU, Alexandru loan Cuza University of lasi,
Faculty of Economy and Business Administration
E-mail: alina.ionescu@yahoo.com
Dan Dumitru IONESCU, Alexandru loan Cuza University of lasi,
Faculty of Economy and Business Administration
E-mail: dd.ionescu@yahoo.com
Table 1 Elements for the assessment of quality of work and employment
Dimension of Question Response categories
quality of work
and employment
Job context Q77A How much do you agree Agree; Neither
or disagree with the agree nor disagree;
following statements Disagree
describing some aspects of
your job? I might lose my
job in the next 6 months.
Work intensity Q51G For each of the Always or most of
following statements, the time;
please select the response Sometimes; Rarely
which best describes your or never
work situation. You have
enough time to get the job
done.
Q45B And, does your job Less than a quarter
involve...? working to of the time; At
tight deadlines. least a quarter of
the time
Working time Q18 How many hours do you Less than 30; 30 to
usually work per week in 40; More than 40
your main paid job?
Q19 Provided that you Less than current;
could make a free choice Same as current;
regarding your working More than current
hours and taking into
account the need to earn a
living: how many hours per
week would you prefer to
work at present?
Health and Q66 Do you think your No; Yes
wellbeing health or safety is at risk
because of your work?
Q67 Does your work affect Yes, mainly
your health, or not? positively; Yes,
mainly negatively;
No
Skills, Q77C How much do you agree Agree; Neither
training or disagree with the agree nor disagree;
and career following statements Disagree
prospects describing some aspects of
your job? My job offers
good prospects for career
advancement.
Q61A Over the past 12 No; Yes
months, have you
undergone any of the
following types of training
to improve your skills or
not? Training paid for or
provided by your employer
or by yourself if
self-employed.
Job fulfilment Q77B How much do you agree Agree; Neither
or disagree with the agree nor disagree;
following statements Disagree
describing some aspects of
your job? I am well paid
for the work I do.
Q76 On the whole, are you Very satisfied;
very satisfied, satisfied, Satisfied; Not very
not very satisfied or not satisfied; Not at
at all satisfied with all satisfied
working conditions in your
main paid job?
Work-life EF12A Do you agree with the No; Yes
balance and following statements? If I
financial had a long term sickness, I
security would be financially secure.
Q41 In general, do your Very well; Well;
working hours fit in with Not very well; Not
your family or social at all well
commitments outside work
very well, well, not very
well or not at all well?
Source: Based on information extracted from Eurofound website
Table 2 Changes in respondents' perceptions of job
security in relation to statement "I might lose my
job in the next 6 months", during 2005-2010, in
Romania and EU27 (%)
2005
Agree Neither Disagree
agree nor
disagree
RO Male 21,6% 13,6% 64,8%
Female 14,8% 14,7% 70,5%
Total 18,5% 14,1% 67,4%
EU27 Male 13,8% 11,8% 74,4%
Female 13,5% 13,1% 73,4%
Total 13,7% 12,4% 73,9%
2010
Agree Neither Disagree
agree nor
disagree
RO Male 25,6% 20,5% 53,9%
Female 22,5% 19,0% 58,6%
Total 24,3% 19,9% 55,9%
EU27 Male 16,5% 15,8% 67,7%
Female 16,3% 16,0% 67,8%
Total 16,4% 15,9% 67,7%
Source: Data extracted from EWCS 2010 database
available on Eurofound website
Table 3 Changes in respondents' perceptions of time
pressure in relation to statement "You have enough
time to get the job done", during 2005-2010, in
Romania and EU27 (%)
2005
Always or Sometimes Rarely
most of the or
time never
RO Male 68,7% 21,5% 9,8%
Female 75,6% 15,8% 8,6%
Total 71,8% 18,9% 9,2%
EU27 Male 68,8% 19,4% 11,8%
Female 70,6% 17,3% 12,1%
Total 69,6% 18,4% 11,9%
2010
Always or Sometimes Rarely
most of the or
time never
RO Male 85,5% 10,8% 3,7%
Female 84,1% 11,5% 4,4%
Total 84,9% 11,1% 4,0%
EU27 Male 75,8% 15,3% 8,9%
Female 76,0% 14,8% 9,3%
Total 75,8% 15,1% 9,1%
Source: Data extracted from EWCS 2010 database
available on Eurofound website
Table 4 Evolution of the distribution
of workers who usually work more than
40 hours per week in their main paid
job by gender, during 2000-2010, in
Romania and EU27 (%)
2000 2005 2010
RO Male 57,6% 55,8% 41,1%
Female 41,7% 46,5% 39,5%
Total 50,1% 51,4% 40,4%
EU27 Male 35,6% 33,8% 30,7%
Female 19,9% 17,0% 16,1%
Total 28,7% 26,2% 24,0%
Source: Based on data extracted from
EWCS 2010 database
Table 5 Changes in respondents' perceptions in relation
to statement "My job offers good prospects for career
advancement", by gender, during 2005-2010, in Romania
and EU27 (%)
2005 2010
Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
RO Male 19,6% 65,5% 19,5% 62,5%
Female 16,9% 63,9% 21,2% 62,3%
Total 18,4% 64,8% 20,3% 62,5%
EU27 Male 33,1% 43,8% 34,1% 42,8%
Female 28,3% 50,1% 28,5% 48,8%
Total 31,0% 46,6% 31,6% 45,5%
Source: Data extracted from EWCS 2010 database available
on Eurofound website
Figure 1 Changes in proportion of workers whose job involve working
to tight deadlines at least a quarter of the time, during 2000-2010,
in Romania and EU27
2000 2005 2010
RO 67,7 62,0 59,7
EU27 59,0 61,8 62,0
Source: Based on data extracted from EWCS 2010 database
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Figure 6 Changes in proportion of workers who think that their health
or safety is at risk because of their work, 2005-2010, in Romania and
EU27 (%)
2000 2005 2010
RO 50,5 49,1 36,0
EU27 31,1 28,6 24,2
Source: Based on data extracted from EWCS 2010 database
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Figure 14 Changes in proportion of workers whose working hours fit
in very well or well with their family or social commitments outside
work, during 2000-2010, in Romania and EU27(%)
2000 2005 2010
RO 78,6% 73,8% 85,8%
EU27 80,4% 79,4% 81,5%
Source: Based on data extracted from EWCS 2010 database
Note: Table made from bar graph.
