.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION has recently published the 'Joint Employment Report' on the year 2001. The rôle of this annual document is to examine how the European Employment Strategy (EES) is progressing. This was set up in 1997 after the 'jobs summit' in Luxembourg which adopted four 'pillars' of employment, designed to get Europe back to work. These were employability of workers, entrepreneurship, adaptability of employers and equal opportunities. The report gives a generally good impression of the progress made in 2001. Despite the economic slowdown unemployment fell by 0.6% to 7.4% whilst employment (the percentage of those of working age in a job) rose to 64%.
The report then deals with the more difficult targets of the Lisbon summit held in 2000 (see issue 10 page 2). Here the national leaders went for ambitious targets for employment in general (70%) and of older persons (50%) and women (60%) to be achieved by 2010.
|
On present figures another 15 million people will have to find jobs in the next eight years if the main target is to be met. The Lisbon meeting also sought to encourage quality in employment and productivity. Here the report says there is 'still a significant productivity gap between the US and the EU' while 'Some progress is being made towards meeting the objective of all workers achieving [computer] literacy by the end of 2003'. On equal opportunities: 'Efforts to reconcile work and family life have been intensified, but adequate, high quality and affordable childcare services are still not sufficiently accessible'. The means by which the national governments are supposed to reach these objectives are the National Action Plans (NAPs). These are agreed every year by the Commission and each EU Member State and their success or otherwise examined at the end of the year. |
|
The section of the report on the United Kingdom is complimentary about employment targets as the Lisbon objectives have already been met; for all workers, for those over 55 and for women the figures exceed those required in 2010. It praises the government for recognising the importance of the gender pay gap and for trying to increase skill among workers through the Learning and Skills Councils. Criticisms centre around the large number of those claiming sickness and disability benefit, differences in unemployment rates between different regions and higher rates among disadvantaged groups, and the preponderance of women in part time employment. 'Special attention could be given to encouraging employers to train women working in low paid part-time work to help address an unacceptably wide gender pay gap' advises the report. |
|
Employment Commissioner Diamantopoulou |
A nEW REPORT FROM THE EU COMMISSION, based on interviews with over 15,000 people concludes that there are wide differences in levels of poverty and social exclusion between EU Member States with, in general, the southern countries recording the highest figures of those who considered themselves poor. Greece and Portugal fared worse with over 50% of their populations reporting severe financial difficulty. The economic cycle also had a decisive effect on poverty. During the downturn of 1989&endash;1993 the proportion of people experiencing money problems increased as did those who thought that there were people living in poverty or extreme poverty in their neighbourhood. When economic recovery occurred in the mid-nineties both these measures recorded falls.
A table from the report showing both objective and subjective
measures of poverty
However the reasons that the respondents gave for poverty varied: individual reasons such as laziness or bad luck were favoured in the UK, Ireland and Denmark while social explanations like societal injustice held sway in France, Germany and Sweden. In southern Europe poverty was often regarded as an inherited condition.
At work, people in unskilled jobs were not only more likely to experience unemployment but had less access to training and more risk of work-associated illness, both of which made it more likely that they would experience poverty in the future. In all groups of employees, less than half had received training in the five years preceding 2001 but in 'elementary occupations', less than a quarter had experienced any 'upskilling' of their job. Partly as a result 10% of managers and professionals had had an experience of unemployment prior to 2000 compared to 24% of unskilled employees.
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
