Employee 'voice' and working environment in post-communist New Member States: An empirical analysis of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania Charles Woolfson,

Employee 'voice' and working environment in post-communist New

Member States: An empirical analysis of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania

Charles Woolfson, Dace Calite and Epp Kallaste

'Employee 'voice' and working environment in post-communist New Member States: An empirical analysis

of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania'

Charles Woolfson, Dace Calite and Epp Kallaste

International seminar on Worker Representation and Workplace Health & Safety

Cardiff Work Environment Research Centre10th October 2007

1.7 million

2.4 million

3,4 million

Main themes• Baltic Working Environment and Labour (BWEL)

survey of 800 employers and 1200 employees conducted in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, in the second half of 2006 and early 2007.

• A first estimate of the current state of the working environment, social dialogue and labour standards following accession to the EU, focussing on the issue of workforce representation and participation in health and safety.

• Implications for workforce ‘voice’ in health and safety are explored in terms of broader issues of convergence and divergence of post-communist states within a wider European framework.

Perception that health and safety is at risk because of work

(European Foundation 2005 survey)

European Foundation Fourth Working Conditions Survey, (2005)

• With regard to the Baltic States, European Foundation data reveal 49.1% Latvian, 43.4% Lithuanian and 39.4% Estonian respondents claiming their health and safety at risk because of their work.

Work intensification

18.2

19.2

23.2

36.9

34.7

29.8

30.4

36.6

36.3

4.51.3

1.7

9.9

3.7

5.83.4

3.7 0.9

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

LithuaniaWor

k in

tens

ity, w

orki

ng p

ace

%

Considerably increased Slightly increased Remained the same

Slightly decreased Considerably decreased Hard to say

"Compared with one year ago, how has working pace changed during last 12 months?"

Base: all respondents, Latvia: n=1236; Estonia: n=1201; Lithuania: n=1200

Work intensification

• A total of 55.1% of respondents in Latvia, 53.9% in Estonia and 52.7% in Lithuania reported that their work intensity/working pace had increased ‘considerably’ or ‘slightly’ in the previous twelve months

Working at high speed and to tight deadlines

12.5

21.6

22.5

37.8

49.2

28.7

53.5

55.5

48.7

43.2

32.9

33.6

21.9

15.0

15.3

10.9

10.2

19.3

12.1

7.9

13.6

7.7

18.5

8.1

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

%

All of the time About half the time Never Hard to say

"Does your job involve...?"


Working at

very high speed

Working to

tight deadlines

Working at very high speed and to tight deadlines

• working at very high speed ‘about half the time’ or ‘all of the time’. Two thirds (66.0%) of Latvian respondents, and around three-quarters of Lithuanian (71.2%) and Estonian (77.1%) respondents reported affirmatively.

• working to tight deadlines ‘half the time’ or ‘all of the time’, four out of five Latvian (81%) and Estonian (82.1%) and nearly two-thirds of Lithuanian respondents (62.3%) agreed.

Working physical effort

7.6

6.7

10.2

21.8

18.7

20.7

55.8

61.9

56.4

4.71.4

1.3

10.6

6.7

7.9

2.9

3.6

1.3

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Wor

king

phy

sica

l effo

rt

%

Considerably increased Slightly increased Remained the same Slightly decreased Considerably decreased Hard to say

"Compared with one year ago, how has working physical effort changed ... ?"


Working physical effort

• While physical intensity of work is still increasing especially in Lithuania, it is possibly doing so at a slower rate than in previous years, indicating that some kind of physical effort ‘ceiling’ has been reached.

• Respondents reported that physical effort had ‘considerably’ or ‘somewhat’ increased as follows: Latvia 29%; Estonia 21%; Lithuania 31%

Working mental effort

13.8

12.4

11.2

31.7

30.2

21.8

41.3

48.0

51.3

3.30.9

1.6

9.5

5.1

8.8

3.1

5.3

0.6

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Wor

king

men

tal e

ffort

%

Considerably increased Slightly increased

Remained the same Slightly decreased

Considerably decreased Hard to say

"Compared with one year ago, how has working mental effort changed ... ?"


Working mental effort• When asked to say if working mental effort had

‘considerably’ or ‘somewhat’ increased, a larger proportion of BWEL survey respondents reported intensification of effort in the previous year: Latvia 46%; Estonia 43%; Lithuania 33%.

• High levels of reported stress in the three Baltic States is comparable with data from the European Working Conditions Survey (stress factors particularly acutely present in the Baltics).

• Negative impacts on employees’ health resulting from stress are reported at more than 10 percentage points higher in the Baltic States (Latvia 36.9%; Lithuania 31% and Estonia 32.4%) as against the EU average (22.3%).

Legislative compliance with the acquis but uneven implementation• Health and safety committees mainly in

the larger enterprises (more than 50 employees).

• Employers resistance to any form of worker representation especially in new private sector

• Trade unions opposed to development of forms of non-union workforce representation but have few resources to develop in this area

Employer view of extent of OHS representation

56.8

53.8

31.1

13.3

25.3

17.8

28.6

20.9

50.9

1.3

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Lithuania

Estonia

%

Yes No I don't have such need/ small company Hard to say

"Does a workforce elected Safety Committee and/ or Safety Representatives exist in your enterprise?"


Employee view of extent of OHS representation

29.9

31.5

22.0

13.4

14.7

12.5

56.7

53.9

65.5

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

%

Yes Hard to say No


"Do you have a safety and health workforce representative and/ or a health and safety committee member elected from the workforce in your workplace?"

OHS representation in workplace

‘Practical’ irrelevance of ‘voice’ in OHS

26.7

29.1

22.3

9.5

8.7

22.8

4.2

1.7

1.6

7.4

7.2

4.2

41.8

41.9

43.2

51.4

53.6

49.4

10.5

6.7

5.1

15.2

15.7

22.0

13.9

24.1

30.5

20.1

18.3

35.4

40.0

48.8

31.7

31.7

41.6

2.9

7.1

3.5

8.1

2.8

43.5

38.1

35.3

38.6

31.1

32.3

6.6

8.0

6.9

6.5

9.6

6.8

6.4

13.4

9.3

7.1

14.3

11.010.9

2.1

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

...yo

ur s

uper

viso

ron

the

job

...fe

llow

wor

kers

…tr

ade

unio

ns

…sa

fety

com

mitt

eere

pres

enta

tives

%

Yes regularly Yes sometimes Never Do not exist in my w orkplace Hard to say

"Do you normally receive health and safety advice from ... "


Underlying ‘consensualism’ in OHS

44.2

43.9

52.7

28.2

29.6

31.2

24.6

16.3

21.2

20.1

19.7

24.7

28.8

37.4

27.2

44.3

47.9

43.1

39.9

51.9

41.2

45.1

51.0

41.0

27.0

18.7

20.2

27.5

22.6

25.8

35.5

31.8

37.7

34.7

29.4

34.3

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Mor

e co

-op

erat

ion

betw

een

man

ager

san

d w

orke

rson

hea

lthan

d sa

fety

Mor

e tr

aini

ngon

hea

lthan

d sa

fety

issu

es w

ithre

gard

to m

yjo

b

Str

onge

r tr

ade

unio

n in

fluen

ceon

hea

lth a

ndsa

fety

que

stio

ns

Mor

e po

wer

for

safe

tyre

pres

enta

tives

or s

afet

yco

mm

ittee

s to

rais

e is

sues

with

%

Yes No Hard to say


"What improvements in health and safety would you like to see in your workplace?"

Employer resistance to workforce participation on OHS

8.5

2.0

4.0

21.7

5.8

17.7

60.4

90.7

71.2

9.3

1.5

7.0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

%

Would you consider inviting your w orkforce to elect representatives?

Would you rather appoint someone w ho you knew w ould be reliable in this task?

Would you rather keep things the w ay they are now ?

Hard to say

"If there are no workforce health and safety representatives in your enterprise ... "

Base: respondents in whose enterprise there is neither Safety Committee nor Safety Representatives elected by workforce, Latvia: n=364; Estonia: n=551; Lithuania: n=372

Trade unionisation in the Baltic States

• Latvia –15% of workforce (EIRO report. 2005)

• Lithuania – 10% of the workforce (EIRO report, 2005)

• Estonia – 9% of the workforce (LFS, 2006)

Workforce attitudes to trade unions• ‘Trade unions are a necessary protection for

employees against employers’. Latvia 51.4%, Lithuania 42.1% and Estonia 42.9% respondents ‘completely’ or ‘rather’ agreed

• ‘Trade unions are a threat to successful business’. Estonia (10.1%), Latvia (9.1%), Lithuania (5.7%) supported this view

• ‘Trade unions are too weak to be of much help to workers’. Latvia 44.2%, Estonia 42.7% and Lithuania 44.6% respondents ‘completely’ or ‘rather’ agreed.

• ‘Trade unions should have the right to participate more in decision making in the plant’. Latvia 56.5%, Estonian 49.3%, Lithuania 46.3% respondents ‘completely’ or ‘rather’ agreed.

Source: Baltic Working Environment and Labour (BWEL) Survey, 2007.

14.3

16.2

16.2

1.8

2.0

1.3

12.8

9.1

18.0

19.0

17.2

18.5

37.1

36.7

25.9

7.3

8.1

4.4

33.6

26.6

37.5

32.1

27.8

32.8

20.5

15.9

17.5

10.7

5.0

8.4

7.3

17.1

24.3

4.9

3.2

6.1

1.6

3.4

3.4

33.9

32.9

43.0

39.0

40.0

49.5

35.1

36.6

38.7

36.9

38.9

43.0

31.4

32.6

9.0

10.7

10.9 3.8

19.3

3.5

5.9

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

Tra

de u

nio

ns a

re a

necessary

pro

tectio

n for

work

ers

again

st

em

plo

yers

Tra

de u

nio

ns a

re a

thre

at

to s

uccessfu

l busin

ess

Tra

de u

nio

ns a

re too

weak to b

e o

f m

uch h

elp

to w

ork

ers

Tra

de u

nio

ns s

hould

have

the r

ight to

part

icip

ate

more

in d

ecis

ion-m

akin

g

in r

ela

tion m

atters

in the

pla

nt

%

Completely agree Rather agree Rather disagreeCompletely disagree Hard to say

"Next statements relate to trade unions. Please say to what degree you agree or disagree with every statement?"


Workforce ambivalence

• This ‘realistic’ perception of current low level of trade union capacities hence workforce’s ambivalent evaluation of trade unions

• As significant as ongoing ‘contamination’ effect arising from union role in the previous social system

• This ‘realistic’ perception predisposes workers to seek an individualistic rather than collectivist response to wage and conditions bargaining issues at workplace level.

Individualism in wage bargaining

73.4

86.8

79.9

10.9

5.9

7.6

8.6

2.4

2.6

7.1

4.9

9.9

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

%

Individually betw een you and your employer

Betw een w orkforce representatives in the w orkplace and employer

Collectively at national level betw een trade unions and employers

Hard to say


"Do you feel that the SALARY issues are best of all discussed ... "

Less ‘individualism’ on OHS

47.3

62.3

57.2

33.6

23.1

23.7

11.2

8.2

5.3

7.9

6.4

13.8

0 20 40 60 80 100

Latvia

Estonia

Lithuania

%

Individually betw een you and your employer

Betw een w orkforce representatives in the w orkplace and employer

Collectively at national level betw een trade unions and employers

Hard to say


"Do you feel that the EMPLOYEES' SAFETY AND HEALTH AT WORK issues are best of all discussed ... "

EU policy on workforce involvement in health and safety

• Cornerstone of the European Union’s previous occupational health and safety strategy (2002-2006) has been the attempt to promote a ‘culture of risk prevention’ in the workplace.

• ‘strengthening social dialogue at all levels, particularly in firms’

• Successful OHS integration - one of the ‘key challenges of enlargement’

New Community Strategy 2007-2012

• Claims success for previous strategy in significant reduction in workplace fatalities 2002-2006 but no objective assessment offered

• New Strategy seeks 25% reduction in injuries and illness across member States by 2012

• No mention of New Member States and their (qualitatively?) poorer working environment

• No mention of social dialogue as pathway to improvement

• Dominated by neo-liberal Lisbon agenda concerns of competitiveness and growth (legislative simplification, easing of ‘burdens’ etc)

Main findingsOur study suggests:- • a comparatively poor working environment exists

in Baltic NMS• Ineffective implementation of EU health and

safety consultation requirements• Underlying but unrealised ‘consensualism’ on

OHS• Lack of employee ‘voice’ in the workplace health

and safety management, due to the absence of social dialogue in the workplace in Baltic NMS

• new EU strategy for occupational health and safety for 2007-2012 takes no account either of the deteriorated working environment in the NMS or the need to strengthen social dialogue

Documents

Employee 'voice' and working environment in post-communist New Member States: An empirical analysis of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania Charles Woolfson,