NATIONAL WORKSHOPS
The WorkYP Project uses a participative approach, based on co-creation of knowledge, taking advantage of the various stakeholders’ expertise (e.g., policy makers, social partners, academics, students, citizens, and NGOs), to ensure an open dialogue on how in-work poverty impacts on EU Social Citizenship. Nation Workshops gather different experiences coming from civil society into the project to promote good employment and spread best practices throughout the labour market.
National Workshop Sweden
Country: Lund University (Sweden)
Dates: March 18th, March 22nd, March 25th
National Report: Executive Summary here
The workshop aims to present the national report to relevant stakeholders and gather from them inputs, perspectives and ideas on the problem of in-work poverty in Sweden. It also aims to gather views and information on stakeholder activities and strategies of relevance for the issue of in-work poverty and how it can be addressed.
The Swedish National Workshop of the WorkYP Project took place in several sessions during the month of March 2021. These events gathered national stakeholders in Sweden in order to get their valuable inputs and perspectives on the issue of in-work poverty. Some participants highlighted that the groups of persons most at risk of in-work poverty in Sweden are in very precarious situations (such as persons subject to human trafficking, labour exploitation, undocumented immigrants or workers part of the undeclared, informal market) and, therefore, outside of the scope of the Project. Work intensity, that can be a consequence of either short-term temporary employment contracts, part-time employments or a combination of both, is the main problem of those who are working. It was pointed out that the reasons why people are working part-time need further investigation. Another problem is connected to the shortcomings of a Social Security system based on the ideal of standard employment. Eradicating in-work poverty will therefore require changes on the labour market that provides protection from insecure and casual employments with low numbers of weekly working hours. Finally, in Sweden, collective agreements in the workplace are perceive as an efficient protection that should be further reinforced.
Stakeholders represented during the workshop are:
- Trade unions: LO, TCO, SACO, Handels, Fastighets, Kommunal, Unionen, Transport, SAC;
- Employers’ organisations: Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, Egenanställningsföretagens Branschorganisation, Almega;
- Public institutions: Arbetsförmedlingen, Socialdepartementet;
- Civil society organisations: EAPN Sverige.
National Workshop Luxembourg
The aim of the national workshop is to bring together the most relevant Luxembourgish stakeholders to discuss in-work poverty from legal, social and economic perspectives. With the aim to prepare a comprehensive and complete national report as one of the most important project’s results, we are keen to get the feedback from terrain, from people and institutions that are directly dealing with in-work poverty.
Departing from the question on the role of labour law in connection to in-work poverty, the participants highlighted a number of problematic issues that may influence in-work poverty levels and their evolution in Luxembourg. The lack of affordable accommodation and housing policies, the shortcomings of the existing statistics in relation with the characteristics of Luxembourg and its labour market, the taxation system, problems in the access to the health system and the familiar situation were discussed. When the debates became more focused on labour law policies, the role of minimum wages, work intensity and the need to study the prevalence of in-work poverty throughout the working-life cycle appeared as the main points to study in Luxembourg.
The workshop will be attended by some of the most relevant local stakeholders, among them Caritas Luxembourg, Chambre des salariés Luxembourg, LCGB, Chamber of Commerce, STATEC, LISER, LIS Data Center, Ministère de la Famille, de l’Intégration et à la Grande Région, ASTI a.s.b.l. and Caritas Accueil et Solidarité a.s.b.l. and Members of the European Parliament.
National Workshop Italy
The Italian workshop highlighted the crucial role of those measures indirectly affecting in-work poverty, i.e. those measures and policies supporting households’ family costs based on their incomes, regardless of the existence of any current or previous working relationship (namely,
for instance, social assistance, family benefits, childcare measures, healthcare policies, education and life-long learning, housing policies). At the same time, it was explained that the Italian social assistance policy has long been characterised by an intense weakness.
It is in this context that some proposals to tackle in-work poverty were discussed. These consist of policy proposals that should aim at strengthening childcare services, provide an adequate welfare system for some categories, namely secondary workers – such as dependent self-employed or precarious workers or reinforce lifelong learning and education that could help workers to acquire new skills.
Finally, several stakeholders highlighted that those most at risk of poverty fall outside the scope of the Project, for instance the workers part of the informal market.
Stakeholders represented during the workshop are:
- Confindustria Emilia – Area Centro;
- IRES CGIL – Emilia-Romagna;
- Insieme per il lavoro
National Workshop Netherlands
Stakeholders present at the workshop highlighted the following elements as being likely to impact in-work poverty. First, the system of reducing benefits when a person finds a job, even if it is low paid, is problematic. This is the so-called poverty trap because even though individuals start working, their income remains below the poverty threshold because of the reduction/repayment of benefits. Second, the presence of apparent self-employed workers who work through an intermediary on whom they depend on getting work assigned is also problematic. These apparent self-employed do not have a stable income and often work at quite a low rate while dependent on the intermediaries.
Moreover, very often, self-employed are not ‘true’ entrepreneurs, but simply individuals trying to survive because they cannot find another job. This leads to a high rate of failure when trying to set up successful enterprises. Finally, the participants in the workshop highlighted that individuals often describe a ‘fear of the government, tax authorities and other institutions as a result of their experiences.
- Seven ‘experts by experience’ from the VUP-groups
- A group of external experts from the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment
- The Dutch Social and Economic Council (SER)
- The Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR – Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regering)
- DIVOSA Foundation of municipalities focusing on local social policies, the European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN), STERK centre of expertise Expertise on poverty and social exclusion, and ZiPconomy platform of expertise on the flexible economy.
National Workshop Poland
The most important topics that were discussed included the evaluation of specific social programs, strategies and accepted practices of assisting people in the job search process, the training system for low-skilled people, the membership of fixed-term workers to trade unions or, finally, the experiences of employers related to the crisis on the labour market caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The aid programs for entrepreneurs (protective shields) offered by the State in the framework of the pandemic were thoroughly assessed with particular emphasis on support for the so-called poor sectors.
First day – representatives of the following institutions were present:
- the Vice-Marshal of Pomeranian Voivodeship
- the Office of the Marshal of Pomeranian Voivodeship
- the Social Insurance Institution in Gdansk
- the Statistical Office in Gdańsk
- the Chairman of Gdansk Region of the Solidarity Trade Union NSZZ “Solidarity” – Mr Krzysztof Dośla
- the President of the Board of the Organisation of Employers: Employers of Pomerania
- Guests representing various fields of science
Second day – representatives of:
- Working Community of Associations of Social Organisations (WRZOS)
- workers employed in flexible forms of work
- the self-employed
- employed or fixed-term workers
National Workshop Germany
Statistical data on Germany show that although German levels of in-work poverty have generally been close to or slightly under the EU-average, the size of the low-wage sector an issue of concern. An interesting finding is that the expansion of the low-wage sector and income inequality in Germany was accompanied by a strong growth in labour market participation. In this point, there are concerns that reforms aimed at curbing low-wage and atypical employment would lead to more unemployment. However, international examples (notably the Scandinavian countries) are invoked by trade unions and researchers as proof that a large low-wage sector is not per se necessary for a high participation in employment.
Another interesting debate was centred around the impact of the Hartz reforms of the early 2000s, that have largely followed a “workfare” approach. As a direct result of these reforms, most people losing their jobs today immediately have to fall back on means-tested benefits. Those benefits are set at a level that is generally too low to lift a household out of relative income poverty, and accompanied by strict conditionality in terms of labour market reintegration efforts. The same benefits are also received by a significant share of the working poor, i.e. those whose household income from labour market activity lies below the level of benefit entitlement. A critic to the system is that it requires “labour market reintegration at all costs”, which drives beneficiaries into low-paid and/or atypical work rather than enabling them to find suitable and sustainable employment. All participants in the workshop agreed that a forward-looking approach should aim to enable and incentivise training and life-long learning among the working-age population, so that problems of low skills are not tackled only at a stage where a person has to claim means-tested benefits.
The experience with the recently introduced statutory minimum wage is unanimously assessed as a success in the sense that it did not lead to a surge in unemployment in any of the most concerned sectors. However, a key issue of dispute is its level, which was set at EUR 8.50 per hour in 2015. Though raised repeatedly in the meantime, its level has remained at less than 50% of the median wage, making minimum wage workers likely (depending on the household context) to remain below the relative income poverty line. Trade unions and parts of the research call for a reappraisal of the current level, whereby the concept of a poverty-avoiding minimum wage amounting to 60% of the median is discussed.
- Benjamin Baykal, senior spokesperson for economics and international affairs of the Bund deutscher Arbeitgeber (BDA) [top-level employers’ organisation]
- Claudia Czernohorsky-Grüneberg, coordinating chairperson of the four Jobcenters [employment office for recipients on means-tested benefits] of Frankfurt a.M.
- Ruxandra Empen, senior spokesperson for labour market policy of the Deutscher Gewerschaftsbund (DGB) [top-level trade union confederation]
- Katharina Erbeldinger, senior spokesperson for questions of poverty and wellbeing of the Federal Labour and Social Ministry (BMAS)
- Thorsten Schulten, professor and chair of the Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliches Institut (WSI) [institute for economics and sociology research]
- Ulrich Walwei, professor and vice director of the Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB) [institute for labour market and employment research]
- Bernd Waas and Christina Hießl, representing the German WorkYP-team.
National Workshop Belgium
The central problematic aspect of the Belgian system discussed at the national workshop is that specific categories of non-standard workers, such as self-employed persons, part-time employees and persons performing work under temporary or flexi-job contracts, are not included in social security protection. Moreover, in some instances, these workers are not entitled to a legal minimum wage. The combination of these factors may result in the persons under these non-standard contractual arrangements falling under the poverty line, particularly in one-person households.
Beyond this problem, some other factors were identified as having an impact on in-work poverty. First, the fact that the Belgian legal framework still treats differently intellectual and manual workers in some cases may provoke some problematic differences, such as for temporary unemployment benefit due to economic difficulties of the undertaking or incapacity benefits. Secondly, the social security schemes concerning most contingencies, including ceasing of activity, are often different for self-employed and employees, resulting in lower and shorter benefits for self-employed. As a result, the benefits may not suffice to protect self-employed persons against in-work poverty adequately. Thirdly, contributions to the social security system are regressive: the higher the occupational income, the lower the marginal rate, which is unfair for low occupational incomes. Fourthly, there are stringent requirements for access to income guarantees for part-time workers. Last but not least, regulation of platform work in Belgium usually frames it as a form of employment that should not be the person’s primary occupation, which not always corresponds to reality. On the other hand, persons performing platform work in Belgium are generally treated as self-employed persons by the online platforms.