Joint Programming Initiative

More Years, Better Lives

The Potential and Challenges of Demographic Change

European Working Conditions Survey
European Working Conditions Survey

Topic
Public Attitudes towards Older Age
Health and Performance
Social Systems and Welfare
Work and Productivity
Education and Learning
Relevance for this Topic
Country Europe
URL
More Topics

Governance

Contact information

European Foundation for the Improvement of the Living & Working Conditions (Eurofound)
Wyattville Rd.
Dublin 18 Loughlingstown
Ireland
Phone: (+353 1) 204-31-00
Fax: (+353 1) 282-4209/282-6456
Email: information(at)eurofound.europa.eu
Url: www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/surveys/index.htm

Timeliness, transparency

Wave 1 (1991): Data collected between March and April 1991 and the report was released in February 1993. Wave 2 (1996): Data collected between November 1995 and January 1996 and the report was released September 2000. Wave 3 (2000/2001): Data collected from the European Union member states from March to April 2000 and the first report was released in October 2001. The data for the 2001 report of the candidate countries was collected from May to June 2001 and then data was collected in Turkey in 2002. This report was released in October 2003. Wave 4 (2005): Data collected between September and November 2005 and the report was released in February 2007. Wave 5 (2010): Data collected between January and June 2010 and the report was released in April 2012. Survey datasets are made available no later than two years after fieldwork completion.

Type of data


Survey

Type of Study

Longitude survey: long-term study of random or different samples

Data gathering method

Face-to-face interview (CAPI, PAPI)

Type of data


Survey

Type of Study

Longitude survey: long-term study of random or different samples

Data gathering method

Face-to-face interview (CAPI, PAPI)

Type of data


Survey

Type of Study

Longitude survey: long-term study of random or different samples

Data gathering method

Face-to-face interview (CAPI, PAPI)

Type of data


Survey

Type of Study

Longitude survey: long-term study of random or different samples

Data gathering method

Face-to-face interview (CAPI, PAPI)

Type of data


Survey

Type of Study

Longitude survey: long-term study of random or different samples

Data gathering method

Face-to-face interview (CAPI, PAPI)


Access to data


The data is for download on the UK Data Service website

Conditions of access


Those interested in viewing or downloading the data must register on the UK Data Service website. In addition, non-UK residents or students must request a username. The data is available free of charge to all those who intend to use it for non-commercial purposes.


It may take up to 3 days to receive a username


microdata


STATA and SPSS.


Data and reports are available in English, the questionnaires are all available in the various national languages.

Access to data


The data is for download on the UK Data Service website

Conditions of access


Those interested in viewing or downloading the data must register on the UK Data Service website. In addition, non-UK residents or students must request a username. The data is available free of charge to all those who intend to use it for non-commercial purposes.


It may take up to 3 days to receive a username


microdata


STATA and SPSS.


Data and reports are available in English, the questionnaires are all available in the various national languages.

Access to data


The data is for download on the UK Data Service website

Conditions of access


Those interested in viewing or downloading the data must register on the UK Data Service website. In addition, non-UK residents or students must request a username. The data is available free of charge to all those who intend to use it for non-commercial purposes.


It may take up to 3 days to receive a username


microdata


STATA and SPSS.


Data and reports are available in English, the questionnaires are all available in the various national languages.

Access to data


The data is for download on the UK Data Service website

Conditions of access


Those interested in viewing or downloading the data must register on the UK Data Service website. In addition, non-UK residents or students must request a username. The data is available free of charge to all those who intend to use it for non-commercial purposes.


It may take up to 3 days to receive a username


microdata


STATA and SPSS.


Data and reports are available in English, the questionnaires are all available in the various national languages.

Access to data


The data is for download on the UK Data Service website

Conditions of access


Those interested in viewing or downloading the data must register on the UK Data Service website. In addition, non-UK residents or students must request a username. The data is available free of charge to all those who intend to use it for non-commercial purposes.


It may take up to 3 days to receive a username


microdata


STATA and SPSS.


Data and reports are available in English, the questionnaires are all available in the various national languages.


Coverage


Wave 1: data collected in 1990/91, sample size of 12,500, which included Belgium, Denmark, Germany (East and West), Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The target sample size was 500 for each country with the exceptions for Germany (1,000, 500 for East Germany, 500 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (250). Wave 2: data collected in 1995/6, sample size of 15,800, which included all of the countries from the first wave, plus Austria, Finland and Sweden. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Germany (2,000, 1,000 for East Germany and 1,000 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (500). Wave 3: data collected in 2000, sample size of 21,500, which included all the countries from wave 2. The target sample size was 1,500 from each country, except for Luxembourg (500). Data collected in 2001 was from all candidate countries with a sample size of 11,500. This included Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (2002). The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Malta and Cyprus (500). Wave 4: data collected in 2005, sample size of 29,680, which included all of the countries from wave 3 and Croatia, Norway and Switzerland. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with exceptions for Cyprus, Estonia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia (600). Wave 5: data collected in 2010, sample size of 43,816, which included all of the countries from wave 4, as well as Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro. The target sample size was 1,000 with exceptions for Germany and Turkey (2,000), Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France (3,000), and Slovenia (1,400).


1990


Based on region and degree of urbanisation


Random probability methods. Depending on the country the base used was: • Enumeration (random route): Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro. • National population registry: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, Norway. • Address registry: Ireland, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. • Address Cadastre: Spain


For regional breakdown, NUTS II was used in all of the waves. Wave 5: The sample did not cover the French overseas departments (FR), the Canaries (ES) and the Arctic Spitsbergen (NO), but covered the islands of Madeira (PT), Azores (PT) and Baleares (ES).


Waves 1-4: 15 and older; Wave 5: 15 and older with the exception of Spain, the United Kingdom and Norway (16 and older, complying with Labour Force Survey universe definition) whose usual place of residence is in the territory of the countries included in the survey and who were in employment during the reference period.


Sample was representative to the whole population of persons in employment based on Eurostat’s definition of both employees and self-employed. Institutionalised populations were not included in EWCS. The sample did include eligible persons who were temporarily institutionalised in the household roster, but considered these cases as non-contacts, if institutionalisation lasted beyond the fieldwork period.


The aim of the survey is to provide a general idea about the working conditions in Europe. The information collected reflects workers’ perspectives, the characteristics of the companies they work in, and the households in which they live. It does provide a reliable comparison of European countries; however, it is not meant to be a detailed study on the specific working conditions in a particular country. Regarding public attitudes towards old age, the European Working Conditions Survey considered the possibility of remaining active at the age of 60. Based on the survey’s structure, it is possible to analyse this trend by individual (e.g. educational attainment, age-group) and economic characteristics of the surveyed.


• Anxo, D., Franz, C., & Kümmerling, A. “Working time and work-life balance in a life course perspective”. vols. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Burchell, B., & Fagan, C. “Gender and the intensification of work: Evidence from the European Working Conditions surveys”. Eastern Economic Journal (2004). • Cottini, E., & Lucifora, C. "Mental Health and Working Conditions in European Countries". IZA Discussion Paper No. 4717. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1545144
. • Daniels, K. “Perceived risk from occupational stress, a survey of 15 European countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 467-470. • Dragano, N., Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. "Welfare regimes, labour policies and unhealthy psychosocial working conditions: a comparative study with 9917 older employees from 12 European countries". Journal of epidemiology and community health 65(9) (2011): 793-799. • Eurofound. "Trends in job quality in Europe". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Eurofound. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Gimeno, D., Benavides, F. G., Benach,J., & Amick, B.C. “Distribution of sickness absence in the EU countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 867-869. • Smith, M., Burchell, B., Fagan, C., & O'Brien, C. "Job quality in Europe". Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2008): 586–603. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2338.2008.00507.x • Vendramin, P., Valenduc , G., Molinié ,A. F., et al. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Villosio, C., et al. "Working conditions of an ageing workforce". Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2008.

Coverage


Wave 1: data collected in 1990/91, sample size of 12,500, which included Belgium, Denmark, Germany (East and West), Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The target sample size was 500 for each country with the exceptions for Germany (1,000, 500 for East Germany, 500 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (250). Wave 2: data collected in 1995/6, sample size of 15,800, which included all of the countries from the first wave, plus Austria, Finland and Sweden. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Germany (2,000, 1,000 for East Germany and 1,000 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (500). Wave 3: data collected in 2000, sample size of 21,500, which included all the countries from wave 2. The target sample size was 1,500 from each country, except for Luxembourg (500). Data collected in 2001 was from all candidate countries with a sample size of 11,500. This included Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (2002). The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Malta and Cyprus (500). Wave 4: data collected in 2005, sample size of 29,680, which included all of the countries from wave 3 and Croatia, Norway and Switzerland. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with exceptions for Cyprus, Estonia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia (600). Wave 5: data collected in 2010, sample size of 43,816, which included all of the countries from wave 4, as well as Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro. The target sample size was 1,000 with exceptions for Germany and Turkey (2,000), Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France (3,000), and Slovenia (1,400).


1990


Based on region and degree of urbanisation


Random probability methods. Depending on the country the base used was: • Enumeration (random route): Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro. • National population registry: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, Norway. • Address registry: Ireland, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. • Address Cadastre: Spain


For regional breakdown, NUTS II was used in all of the waves. Wave 5: The sample did not cover the French overseas departments (FR), the Canaries (ES) and the Arctic Spitsbergen (NO), but covered the islands of Madeira (PT), Azores (PT) and Baleares (ES).


Waves 1-4: 15 and older; Wave 5: 15 and older with the exception of Spain, the United Kingdom and Norway (16 and older, complying with Labour Force Survey universe definition) whose usual place of residence is in the territory of the countries included in the survey and who were in employment during the reference period.


Sample was representative to the whole population of persons in employment based on Eurostat’s definition of both employees and self-employed. Institutionalized populations were not included in EWCS. The sample did include eligible persons who were temporarily institutionalised in the household roster, but considered these cases as non-contacts, if institutionalisation lasted beyond the fieldwork period.


The aim of the survey is to provide a general idea about the working conditions in Europe. The information collected reflects workers’ perspectives, the characteristics of the companies they work in, and the households in which they live. It does provide a reliable comparison of European countries; however, it is not meant to be a detailed study on the specific working conditions in a particular country. The Survey collects information on the workers’ health and work-related health risks. Particularly, it sheds light on the interaction of working conditions and perceived health in issues such as exposure to physical hazards, exposure to tobacco and work intensity.


• Anxo, D., Franz, C., & Kümmerling, A. "Working time and work-life balance in a life course perspective". vols. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Burchell, B., & Fagan, C. “Gender and the intensification of work: Evidence from the European Working Conditions surveys”. Eastern Economic Journal (2004). • Cottini, E., & Lucifora, C. "Mental Health and Working Conditions in European Countries". IZA Discussion Paper No. 4717. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1545144
. • Daniels, K. “Perceived risk from occupational stress, a survey of 15 European countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 467-470. • Dragano, N., Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. "Welfare regimes, labour policies and unhealthy psychosocial working conditions: a comparative study with 9917 older employees from 12 European countries". Journal of epidemiology and community health 65´(9) (2011): 793-799. • Eurofound. "Trends in job quality in Europe". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Eurofound. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Gimeno, D., Benavides, F. G., Benach,J., & Amick, B.C. “Distribution of sickness absence in the EU countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 867-869. • Smith, M., Burchell, B., Fagan, C., & O'Brien, C. "Job quality in Europe". Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2008): 586–603. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2338.2008.00507.x • Vendramin, P., Valenduc , G., Molinié ,A. F., et al. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Villosio, C., et al. "Working conditions of an ageing workforce". Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2008.

Coverage


Wave 1: data collected in 1990/91, sample size of 12,500, which included Belgium, Denmark, Germany (East and West), Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The target sample size was 500 for each country with the exceptions for Germany (1,000, 500 for East Germany, 500 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (250). Wave 2: data collected in 1995/6, sample size of 15,800, which included all of the countries from the first wave, plus Austria, Finland and Sweden. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Germany (2,000, 1,000 for East Germany and 1,000 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (500). Wave 3: data collected in 2000, sample size of 21,500, which included all the countries from wave 2. The target sample size was 1,500 from each country, except for Luxembourg (500). Data collected in 2001 was from all candidate countries with a sample size of 11,500. This included Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (2002). The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Malta and Cyprus (500). Wave 4: data collected in 2005, sample size of 29,680, which included all of the countries from wave 3 and Croatia, Norway and Switzerland. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with exceptions for Cyprus, Estonia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia (600). Wave 5: data collected in 2010, sample size of 43,816, which included all of the countries from wave 4, as well as Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro. The target sample size was 1,000 with exceptions for Germany and Turkey (2,000), Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France (3,000), and Slovenia (1,400).


1990


Based on region and degree of urbanisation


Random probability methods. Depending on the country the base used was: • Enumeration (random route): Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro. • National population registry: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, Norway. • Address registry: Ireland, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. • Address Cadastre: Spain


For regional breakdown, NUTS II was used in all of the waves. Wave 5: The sample did not cover the French overseas departments (FR), the Canaries (ES) and the Arctic Spitsbergen (NO), but covered the islands of Madeira (PT), Azores (PT) and Baleares (ES).


Waves 1-4: 15 and older; Wave 5: 15 and older with the exception of Spain, the United Kingdom and Norway (16 and older, complying with Labour Force Survey universe definition) whose usual place of residence is in the territory of the countries included in the survey and who were in employment during the reference period.


Sample was representative to the whole population of persons in employment based on Eurostat’s definition of both employees and self-employed. Institutionalised populations were not included in EWCS. The sample did include eligible persons who were temporarily institutionalised in the household roster, but considered these cases as non-contacts, if institutionalisation lasted beyond the fieldwork period.


The aim of the survey is to provide a general idea about the working conditions in Europe. The information collected reflects workers’ perspectives, the characteristics of the companies they work in, and the households in which they live. It does provide a reliable comparison of European countries; however, it is not meant to be a detailed study on the specific working conditions in a particular country. Regarding social systems and welfare, the European Working Conditions Survey allows for the comparative study of the working conditions and the reconciliation of working and non-working time and gender-related differences.


• Anxo, D., Franz, C., & Kümmerling, A. “Working time and work-life balance in a life course perspective”. vols. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Burchell, B., & Fagan, C. “Gender and the intensification of work: Evidence from the European Working Conditions surveys”. Eastern Economic Journal (2004). • Cottini, E., & Lucifora, C. "Mental Health and Working Conditions in European Countries". IZA Discussion Paper No. 4717. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1545144
. • Daniels, K. “Perceived risk from occupational stress, a survey of 15 European countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 467-470. • Dragano, N., Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. "Welfare regimes, labour policies and unhealthy psychosocial working conditions: a comparative study with 9917 older employees from 12 European countries". Journal of epidemiology and community health 65(9) (2011): 793-799. • Eurofound. "Trends in job quality in Europe." Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Eurofound. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Gimeno, D., Benavides, F. G., Benach,J., & Amick, B.C. “Distribution of sickness absence in the EU countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 867-869. • Smith, M., Burchell, B., Fagan, C., & O'Brien, C. "Job quality in Europe". Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2008): 586–603. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2338.2008.00507.x • Vendramin, P., Valenduc , G., Molinié ,A. F., et al. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Villosio, C., et al. "Working conditions of an ageing workforce". Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2008.

Coverage


Wave 1: data collected in 1990/91, sample size of 12,500, which included Belgium, Denmark, Germany (East and West), Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The target sample size was 500 for each country with the exceptions for Germany (1,000, 500 for East Germany, 500 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (250). Wave 2: data collected in 1995/6, sample size of 15,800, which included all of the countries from the first wave, plus Austria, Finland and Sweden. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Germany (2,000, 1,000 for East Germany and 1,000 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (500). Wave 3: data collected in 2000, sample size of 21,500, which included all the countries from wave 2. The target sample size was 1,500 from each country, except for Luxembourg (500). Data collected in 2001 was from all candidate countries with a sample size of 11,500. This included Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (2002). The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Malta and Cyprus (500). Wave 4: data collected in 2005, sample size of 29,680, which included all of the countries from wave 3 and Croatia, Norway and Switzerland. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with exceptions for Cyprus, Estonia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia (600). Wave 5: data collected in 2010, sample size of 43,816, which included all of the countries from wave 4, as well as Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro. The target sample size was 1,000 with exceptions for Germany and Turkey (2,000), Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France (3,000), and Slovenia (1,400).


1990


Based on region and degree of urbanisation


Random probability methods. Depending on the country the base used was: • Enumeration (random route): Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro. • National population registry: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, Norway. • Address registry: Ireland, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. • Address Cadastre: Spain


For regional breakdown, NUTS II was used in all of the waves. Wave 5: The sample did not cover the French overseas departments (FR), the Canaries (ES) and the Arctic Spitsbergen (NO), but covered the islands of Madeira (PT), Azores (PT) and Baleares (ES).


Waves 1-4: 15 and older; Wave 5: 15 and older with the exception of Spain, the United Kingdom and Norway (16 and older, complying with Labour Force Survey universe definition) whose usual place of residence is in the territory of the countries included in the survey and who were in employment during the reference period.


Sample was representative to the whole population of persons in employment based on Eurostat’s definition of both employees and self-employed. Institutionalised populations were not included in EWCS. The sample did include eligible persons who were temporarily institutionalised in the household roster, but considered these cases as non-contacts, if institutionalisation lasted beyond the fieldwork period.


The aim of the survey is to provide a general idea about the working conditions in Europe. The information collected reflects workers’ perspectives, the characteristics of the companies they work in, and the households in which they live. It does provide a reliable comparison of European countries; however, it is not meant to be a detailed study on the specific working conditions in a particular country. The EWCS provides insights of the characteristics of the workers and their households, working conditions and preferences, risks at the workplace, as well as income and financial security. Moreover, the survey offers insights on the precarious employment, leadership styles and worker participation, work-related health risks, cognitive and psychosocial factors, work-life balance and access to training. The last Wave 5 questionnaire included a number of questions to capture the impact of the economic downturn on working conditions


• Anxo, D., Franz, C., & Kümmerling, A. “Working time and work-life balance in a life course perspective”. vols. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Burchell, B., & Fagan, C. “Gender and the intensification of work: Evidence from the European Working Conditions surveys”. Eastern Economic Journal (2004). • Cottini, E., & Lucifora, C. "Mental Health and Working Conditions in European Countries". IZA Discussion Paper No. 4717. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1545144
. • Daniels, K. “Perceived risk from occupational stress, a survey of 15 European countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 467-470. • Dragano, N., Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. "Welfare regimes, labour policies and unhealthy psychosocial working conditions: a comparative study with 9917 older employees from 12 European countries". Journal of epidemiology and community health 65(9) (2011): 793-799. • Eurofound. "Trends in job quality in Europe". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Eurofound. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Gimeno, D., Benavides, F. G., Benach,J., & Amick, B.C. “Distribution of sickness absence in the EU countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 867-869. • Smith, M., Burchell, B., Fagan, C., & O'Brien, C. "Job quality in Europe". Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2008): 586–603. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2338.2008.00507.x • Vendramin, P., Valenduc , G., Molinié ,A. F., et al. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Villosio, C., et al. "Working conditions of an ageing workforce". Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2008.

Coverage


Wave 1: data collected in 1990/91, sample size of 12,500, which included Belgium, Denmark, Germany (East and West), Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. The target sample size was 500 for each country with the exceptions for Germany (1,000, 500 for East Germany, 500 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (250). Wave 2: data collected in 1995/6, sample size of 15,800, which included all of the countries from the first wave, plus Austria, Finland and Sweden. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Germany (2,000, 1,000 for East Germany and 1,000 for West Germany) and Luxembourg (500). Wave 3: data collected in 2000, sample size of 21,500, which included all the countries from wave 2. The target sample size was 1,500 from each country, except for Luxembourg (500). Data collected in 2001 was from all candidate countries with a sample size of 11,500. This included Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (2002). The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with the exceptions of Malta and Cyprus (500). Wave 4: data collected in 2005, sample size of 29,680, which included all of the countries from wave 3 and Croatia, Norway and Switzerland. The target sample size was 1,000 for each country with exceptions for Cyprus, Estonia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia (600). Wave 5: data collected in 2010, sample size of 43,816, which included all of the countries from wave 4, as well as Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro. The target sample size was 1,000 with exceptions for Germany and Turkey (2,000), Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France (3,000), and Slovenia (1,400).


1990


Based on region and degree of urbanisation


Random probability methods. Depending on the country the base used was: • Enumeration (random route): Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro. • National population registry: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, Norway. • Address registry: Ireland, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. • Address Cadastre: Spain


i. For regional breakdown, NUTS II was used in all of the waves. ii. Wave 5: The sample did not cover the French overseas departments (FR), the Canaries (ES) and the Arctic Spitsbergen (NO), but covered the islands of Madeira (PT), Azores (PT) and Baleares (ES).


Waves 1-4: 15 and older; Wave 5: 15 and older with the exception of Spain, the United Kingdom and Norway (16 and older, complying with Labour Force Survey universe definition) whose usual place of residence is in the territory of the countries included in the survey and who were in employment during the reference period.


Sample was representative to the whole population of persons in employment based on Eurostat’s definition of both employees and self-employed. Institutionalised populations were not included in EWCS. The sample did include eligible persons who were temporarily institutionalised in the household roster, but considered these cases as non-contacts, if institutionalisation lasted beyond the fieldwork period.


The aim of the survey is to provide a general idea about the working conditions in Europe. The information collected reflects workers’ perspectives, the characteristics of the companies they work in, and the households in which they live. It does provide a reliable comparison of European countries; however, it is not meant to be a detailed study on the specific working conditions in a particular country. One of the topics included is participation in training paid by employers. Therefore, it allows for the analysis of life long learning trends by sector, age group and occupational groups.


• Anxo, D., Franz, C., & Kümmerling, A. “Working time and work-life balance in a life course perspective”. vols. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Burchell, B., & Fagan, C. “Gender and the intensification of work: Evidence from the European Working Conditions surveys”. Eastern Economic Journal (2004). • Cottini, E., & Lucifora, C. "Mental Health and Working Conditions in European Countries". IZA Discussion Paper No. 4717. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1545144
. • Daniels, K. “Perceived risk from occupational stress, a survey of 15 European countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 467-470. • Dragano, N., Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. "Welfare regimes, labour policies and unhealthy psychosocial working conditions: a comparative study with 9917 older employees from 12 European countries". Journal of epidemiology and community health 65(9) (2011): 793-799. • Eurofound. "Trends in job quality in Europe". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Eurofound. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. • Gimeno, D., Benavides, F. G., Benach,J., & Amick, B.C. “Distribution of sickness absence in the EU countries”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61 (2004): 867-869. • Smith, M., Burchell, B., Fagan, C., & O'Brien, C. "Job quality in Europe". Industrial Relations Journal, 39 (2008): 586–603. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2338.2008.00507.x • Vendramin, P., Valenduc , G., Molinié ,A. F., et al. "Sustainable work and the ageing workforce". European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2012. • Villosio, C., et al. "Working conditions of an ageing workforce". Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2008.


Linkage


In all waves, ISCO88, ISCO08 and NACE codes were used to code occupations and sector activity, respectively. ISCED was used to classify educational attainment during waves 4 and 5.

Linkage


In all waves, ISCO88, ISCO08 and NACE codes were used to code occupations and sector activity, respectively. ISCED was used to classify educational attainment during waves 4 and 5.

Linkage


In all waves, ISCO88, ISCO08 and NACE codes were used to code occupations and sector activity, respectively. ISCED was used to classify educational attainment during waves 4 and 5.

Linkage


In all waves, ISCO88, ISCO08 and NACE codes were used to code occupations and sector activity, respectively. ISCED was used to classify educational attainment during waves 4 and 5.

Linkage


In all waves, ISCO88, ISCO08 and NACE codes were used to code occupations and sector activity, respectively. ISCED was used to classify educational attainment during waves 4 and 5.


Data quality


For waves 1-3, the INRA (International Research Associates) of Brussels was commissioned to carry out all of the fieldwork. For waves 4 and 5, Gallup Europe was commissioned to do the fieldwork.


In all waves, ISCO and NACE coding were used to code occupation and sector activity. During the 4th and 5th wave, the ISCED coding for education was taken up.

Data quality


For waves 1-3, the INRA (International Research Associates) of Brussels was commissioned to carry out all of the fieldwork. For waves 4 and 5, Gallup Europe was commissioned to do the fieldwork.


In all waves, ISCO and NACE coding were used to code occupation and sector activity. During the 4th and 5th wave, the ISCED coding for education was taken up.

Data quality


For waves 1-3, the INRA (International Research Associates) of Brussels was commissioned to carry out all of the fieldwork. For waves 4 and 5, Gallup Europe was commissioned to do the fieldwork.


In all waves, ISCO and NACE coding were used to code occupation and sector activity. During the 4th and 5th wave, the ISCED coding for education was taken up.

Data quality


For waves 1-3, the INRA (International Research Associates) of Brussels was commissioned to carry out all of the fieldwork. For waves 4 and 5, Gallup Europe was commissioned to do the fieldwork.


In all waves, ISCO and NACE coding were used to code occupation and sector activity. During the 4th and 5th wave, the ISCED coding for education was taken up.

Data quality


For waves 1-3, the INRA (International Research Associates) of Brussels was commissioned to carry out all of the fieldwork. For waves 4 and 5, Gallup Europe was commissioned to do the fieldwork.


In all waves, ISCO and NACE coding were used to code occupation and sector activity. During the 4th and 5th wave, the ISCED coding for education was taken up.


Applicability


The main objective of the European Working Conditions Survey is to provide comparable information on the conditions of work and employment of employed persons in different EU countries. It is not aimed at studying the situation in each country in depth. The small sample size for some countries might represent a limitation while conducting detailed analysis. The number of questions and issues covered in the EWCS has expanded over time, but a core of questions have remained unchanged across the different waves, allowing for a comparative study of the changes in working conditions and their effects. Therefore, this represents a useful complement for the European Quality of Life Survey by providing insights on the observed, but also on the perceived working conditions (such as perceived job insecurity or level of satisfaction of work-life balance) of the employed population at different ages.

Applicability


The main objective of the European Working Conditions Survey is to provide comparable information on the conditions of work and employment of employed persons in different EU countries. It is not aimed at studying the situation in each country in depth. The small sample size for some countries might represent a limitation while conducting detailed analysis. The number of questions and issues covered in the EWCS has expanded over time, but a core of questions have remained unchanged across the different waves, allowing for a comparative study of the changes in working conditions and their effects. Therefore, this represents a useful complement for the European Quality of Life Survey by providing insights on the observed, but also on the perceived working conditions (such as perceived job insecurity or level of satisfaction of work-life balance) of the employed population at different ages.

Applicability


The main objective of the European Working Conditions Survey is to provide comparable information on the conditions of work and employment of employed persons in different EU countries. It is not aimed at studying the situation in each country in depth. The small sample size for some countries might represent a limitation while conducting detailed analysis. The number of questions and issues covered in the EWCS has expanded over time, but a core of questions have remained unchanged across the different waves, allowing for a comparative study of the changes in working conditions and their effects. Therefore, this represents a useful complement for the European Quality of Life Survey by providing insights on the observed, but also on the perceived working conditions (such as perceived job insecurity or level of satisfaction of work-life balance) of the employed population at different ages.

Applicability


The main objective of the European Working Conditions Survey is to provide comparable information on the conditions of work and employment of employed persons in different EU countries. It is not aimed at studying the situation in each country in depth. The small sample size for some countries might represent a limitation while conducting detailed analysis. The number of questions and issues covered in the EWCS has expanded over time, but a core of questions have remained unchanged across the different waves, allowing for a comparative study of the changes in working conditions and their effects. Therefore, this represents a useful complement for the European Quality of Life Survey by providing insights on the observed, but also on the perceived working conditions (such as perceived job insecurity or level of satisfaction of work-life balance) of the employed population at different ages.

Applicability


The main objective of the European Working Conditions Survey is to provide comparable information on the conditions of work and employment of employed persons in different EU countries. It is not aimed at studying the situation in each country in depth. The small sample size for some countries might represent a limitation while conducting detailed analysis. The number of questions and issues covered in the EWCS has expanded over time, but a core of questions have remained unchanged across the different waves, allowing for a comparative study of the changes in working conditions and their effects. Therefore, this represents a useful complement for the European Quality of Life Survey by providing insights on the observed, but also on the perceived working conditions (such as perceived job insecurity or level of satisfaction of work-life balance) of the employed population at different ages.


  • The information about this dataset was compiled by the author:
  • Diana Lopez-Falcon
  • (see Partners)