Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Quality of working life, productivity and employment in the context of globalisation and demographic challenges
Date: 2006-09-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: employment policy, globalisation, humanisation of work, organisation of work, productivity

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/157

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Quality of working life, productivity
and employment in the context of globalisation and demographic challenges

(2006/C 318/27)

On 17 November 2005 the Finnish Presidency decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on Quality of working life,
productivity and employment in the context of globalisation and demographic challenges

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 13 July 2006. The rapporteur was Ms Engelen-
Kefer.

At its 429th plenary session, held on 13 and 14 September 2006 (meeting of 13 September 2006), the
European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 116 votes to three with eight
abstentions:

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The Lisbon Agenda is the European response to the chal-
lenges of globalisation. Synergies between economic, employ-
ment, social and environmental policies are intended to improve
Europe's competitive position in the world. It is therefore impor-
tant that the European economy makes use of the opportunities
of globalisation by creating new areas of employment in sectors
the economy with good future prospects and boosting
of
growth through innovation. Europe should therefore focus on
its strengths, which are to be found in the high quality of its
products and services, its well-trained workforce and its social
model, and should compete with its global competitors on
quality and not enter a race for the lowest wages and social
standards in which Europe is bound to be the loser. Such quali-
tative competition requires a comprehensive approach to inno-
vation policy, which includes the microeconomic level, i.e. busi-
ness structures and the quality of working life.

1.2 Whilst it is a stated aim of the Lisbon Agenda to create
not only more but better jobs, this qualitative aspect has so far
been neglected in the debate on the implementation of the
Lisbon goals. As well as increases in R&D investment and
investment generally, and investment in education and training
in view of the requirements of the knowledge and information
society,
improving the quality of working life is a key to
increasing the growth in productivity and innovativeness of
businesses. This is proven by studies into the relationship
between quality of work and productivity and into the signifi-
the
cance that ‘good work’ has from the point of view of
employees concerned for their job motivation and readiness to
enhance output.

1.3
Quality of working life includes a number of aspects,
such as the avoidance and reduction of health risks, the way
work is organised at the workplace, social benefits including a
fair income, opportunities to gain skills and qualifications, and
the ability to reconcile work and family life. Improvements in all
these areas have a positive impact on productivity, according to
the results of studies into improving working and living condi-
tions carried out by the Dublin Foundation and presented to the
for voluntary corporate health promotion
EESC. Support
schemes is especially important in this area. Secure jobs, salu-

brious working conditions and working arrangements that give
workers more autonomy in their work are an important factor
for increasing productivity and hence innovativeness, which is
also influenced by the social environment. The EESC therefore
believes that business structures and cultures should take this
into account. The Lisbon strategy therefore also needs to be
implemented at company level, where economic and social
goals meet. Social dialogue has an important role to play here.

In order to bring about an improvement in the quality of
1.4
working life,
it is necessary to adopt a comprehensive plan
which takes account of the changes in the world of work and
addresses the particular needs of older people. In line with the
concept of ‘well-being at work’, pursued by the Commission in
its Community strategy on health and safety at the workplace,
the primary objective must be to prevent health risks and to
bring about an ongoing reduction in the number of industrial
accidents and the incidence of occupational
illnesses. In this
context, there is a need to pay special attention to the issue of
precarious employment offering little social protection and not
likewise
subject to any regulation or contract. It is, however,
necessary to introduce new forms of work organisation in order
to promote job satisfaction and a readiness to boost output.
Cooperative methods of working, involving low-profile hierar-
chies and greater autonomy, such as group- and team-work,
make it possible to exploit people's knowledge and abilities to
the full, whilst, at the same time, taking account of the greater
demands for flexibility in the economy. Good working condi-
tions and forms of work organisation that are conducive to
empowerment and participation are also a key prerequisite for
improving labour productivity and strengthening businesses'
innovativeness. For this reason, the EESC supports the concept
of flexicurity — i.e. a healthy balance between flexibility and
social security — as endorsed by the Employment and Social
Policy Council on 1 and 2 June 2006.

1.5
The EESC calls for more studies into the relationship
between quality of work and productivity to be commissioned.
The Dublin Foundation would be well suited to doing this. In
addition, the EESC suggests that a European index for quality of
work be developed. This would be composed from various
criteria for ‘good work’ on the basis of relevant studies, and

C 318/158

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

would regularly be collated and published. Such an index could
help raise the profile of changes and progress, and at the same
time form the basis for new initiatives to improve the quality of
working life. The social partners should be involved in the
evaluation and be regularly asked for their opinion.

2. Arguments and comments

2.1 Background to the opinion

In anticipation of the Finnish Presidency of the Council
2.1.1
in the second half of 2006, the Finnish Government has asked
the EESC to draw up an exploratory opinion on the connection
between quality of working life, productivity and employment,
as this subject will occupy a central role in the political debate.

2.1.2
This exploratory opinion therefore looks at the extent
to which quality of work is a factor for increasing productivity
and economic growth, and what contribution improving the
quality of work can make to building the information and
knowledge society and thus achieving the Lisbon goals. Globali-
sation and demographic change are mentioned as background
conditions.

2.2 Introduction

Globalisation brings with it risks but also opens up
2.2.1
new opportunities. The risks consist in the fact that the Euro-
pean economy, owing to increased international competition
and the restructuring of the international division of
labour,
could lose jobs through restructuring and relocations unless
new areas of employment are developed. At the same time,
labour standards in Europe and the European social model as a
whole are coming under increasing pressure, because in a single
monetary area wage and welfare costs are a decisive factor in
competition. However, a Eurostat study (March 2006) shows
that labour costs rose more slowly in the EU-25 in 2005 than
in the USA. The Lisbon Strategy is the European response to the
challenges of
globalisation. Synergies between economic,
employment, social and environmental policies are intended to
improve Europe's competitive position in the world.

However, an adjustment

2.2.2
strategy that one-sidedly
focuses on making the labour market more flexible, reducing
labour standards and lowering social benefits is not a suitable
way of achieving this objective. Rather, it is necessary to use the
opportunities provided by globalisation for the benefit of the
European economy, given that Europe is an attractive place to
do business and can boast the following advantages:

— the attractiveness of the Euro area;

— stable democracies and social harmony;

— trustworthiness;

— efficient public services;

— developed infrastructure.

in greater detail

The EESC believes that a balance should be struck between flex-
ibility and social security in the spirit of a flexicurity approach.
Four important elements have been identified for achieving a
healthy balance of this kind between flexibility and security in
the labour market:
‘suitable contractual arrangements, active
labour market policies, credible lifelong learning systems and
modern social security systems’ (1). The concept of flexicurity is
set out
in the resolution adopted by the
Employment and Social Policy Council of 1 and 2 June 2006.
This states that contractual arrangements should provide ‘a
balanced combination (of) security and activation offers’. The
importance
for
employees in all kinds of contracts’. Modernisation of social
security systems should be geared to ‘taking better account of
new forms of work’ and ‘ensuring that women can build up
their own pension rights’. While unemployment
insurance
should be ‘adequate for all to have a sufficient income (…), it is
important to ensure incentives and assistance to find work’. It
also states: ‘Active labour market policies, lifelong learning and
in-company training are important to support the change from
job security to employment security (2).’ In this regard, the EESC
welcomes the fact that the social partners and other stake-
holders are to be involved in the further development of flexi-
curity policy.

ensuring ‘adequate

stressed of

rights

is

The opportunities of globalisation include focussing on
2.2.3
areas of
the economy and innovations with good future
prospects, competing with global competitors on the basis of
quality rather than social dumping, and creating new high-
quality jobs. Whilst
factor in international
they are a cost
competition, high labour standards also offer a locational advan-
tage, since they are an essential prerequisite for the cohesion of
societies and boost the productivity of employees and their
ability to innovate. This constructive role of social policy is char-
acteristic of
the European social model, which is based on
common values ‘such as solidarity and cohesion, equal opportu-
nities and the fight against all forms of discrimination, adequate
health and safety in the workplace, universal access to education
and healthcare, quality of life and quality in work, sustainable
development and the involvement of civil society. The role of
public services in social cohesion and social dialogue also
deserve a mention in this context. These values represent a
European choice in favour of a social market economy’ (3). If it
is to hold its own in a competitive world, Europe must therefore
build on these strengths of its social model (4).

(1) Council Conclusions, 1-2 June 2006, p. 17 English version. URL:
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_applications/Applications/
newsRoom/LoadDocument.asp?directory=en/lsa/&filename=89830.
pdf.

(2) Flexicurity: Joint Contribution of the Employment Committee and the
Social Protection Committee for the Employment and Social Policy
Council on 1-2 June 2006. URL: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/
pdf/en/06/st09/st09633.en06.pdf.

(3) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions ‘European values in the globalised world —
contribution of the Commission to the October Meeting of Heads of
State and Government’ COM(2005) 525 final/2 of 3.11.2005), p. 5.
(4) See EESC opinion adopted on 6 July 2006 on Social cohesion: fleshing out
a European social model, rapporteur: Mr Ehnmark. URL: http://eescopi-
nions.eesc.europa.eu/viewdoc.aspx?doc=//esppub1/esp_public/ces/
soc/soc237/en/ces973-2006_ac_en.doc.

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/159

The objectives which the Union set itself under the
2.2.4
Lisbon Strategy will not be achieved without strengthening
social cohesion through active social policies, increasing produc-
tivity growth through greater use of information and communi-
cations technologies (IC technologies), and, at the same time,
improving the quality of working life, motivation and job satis-
faction of the workforce as an essential prerequisite for innova-
tion. Innovation is not just a technical phenomenon that finds
expression in new products and production processes. Rather,
innovation is a social process that depends upon people, their
knowledge, their qualifications and skills. The achievement of
these objectives therefore requires new forms of work organisa-
tion — for instance group work and team work and better
collaboration between management and staff — in which
people can apply their knowledge and skills and take part in
decision-making. Demographic change poses a particular chal-
lenge here and will lead to changes in the age structure of the
workforce. This means (i) offering older people appropriate
training which will enable them to adapt to the new work
requirements arising from technical and organisational change;
and (ii) taking into account changes in the work profile of older
people by organising work in ways that meet age-related needs.
Both presuppose a rethink in the HR policies of companies so
as to offer more employment opportunities to older workers (5).

conditions

Regulating working

through collective
2.2.6
agreements is a key part of the social partners' role. When it
comes to improving the quality of working life, social dialogue
at all levels is thus of the utmost importance. The creation of
salubrious working conditions and of an innovation-friendly
working environment that empowers individuals to decide and
to act requires partnership with employees and those who repre-
sent them within the organisation. Only if the interested parties
and their representatives are involved will the Lisbon objective
of creating better jobs be achievable. This kind of partnership
for change and better quality of working life needs to start at
company level and continue at sectoral and cross-sectoral level.
The EESC welcomes the fact that an initial exchange of views
took place between the social partners on the eve of
the
informal meeting of the Employment and Social Policy Council
on 6 July 2006 in which a representative of civil society was
also able to take part. The EESC hopes that the social partners
can agree on a joint contribution to the debate — in conjunc-
tion with the flexicurity concept — on the quality of working
life, productivity and employment.

2.3 Growth, productivity and employment

element

an essential

Boosting innovation as

in
2.2.5
achieving the Lisbon objectives requires, alongside increasing
investment in research and development, further measures by
both government and business. This includes improving skills in
the use of new technologies, but also changes to working struc-
tures in businesses through new forms of work organisation
that empower the individual and improve collaboration with
management.
Increasing the number of women in senior
management posts and better ways of reconciling work and
family life also have a role to play. Finally, it is important to
improve working conditions as a whole to prevent stress and
work-related illness, so that older people in particular are able to
carry on working, and to provide working conditions that meet
age-related needs. In this context, the Committee draws atten-
tion to the importance of corporate health promotion schemes
that businesses provide for their employees on a voluntary basis.
Further support from public incentive schemes could help to
increase the use of this tool, in particular in SMEs. Similarly, the
integration of young people is important, as mixed-age teams
bring the skills of younger people together with the experience
of older people, allowing the best, most innovative ideas to
emerge.

(5) See the following EESC opinions:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:

on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions on increasing the employment of older workers
and delaying the exit from the labour market (OJ C 157, 28.6.2005, pp
120-129; rapporteur: Mr Dantin).
URL:
C:2005:157:0120:0129:EN:PDF
on the Communication from the European Commission on Productivity: the
Key to Competitiveness of European Economies and Enterprises, rappor-
teurs: Mr Morgan/Ms Sirkeinen; co-rapporteur: Mr Ehnmark (OJ C
85, 8.4.2003, pp. 95-100)
http://europa.eu/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/c_085/
c_08520030408en00950100.pdf.

2.3.1
It is no secret that the ambitious growth and employ-
ment targets which were set under comparatively favourable
economic conditions in March 2000 by the European Council
in Lisbon are still far from being achieved. According to the
12 July 2005 broad economic policy guidelines ‘The EU is in
several respects further away from its goal of becoming the
world's most competitive economy than was the case in March
2000’. (6) Alongside the continuing high level of unemployment,
mirrored by only a marginal increase in the employment rate to
63 % in 2003 — far below the target of 70 % by 2010 — low
productivity growth is seen as a cause of this failure. The report
of the expert group on the Lisbon Strategy chaired by Wim Kok
had already drawn attention to this in November 2004. The
decline in productivity growth (per hour worked)
in the EU
since the mid-1990s can ‘be attributed more or less equally to a
lower investment per employee and to a slowdown in the rate
of technological progress’ (7). This slowdown, according to the
report of the expert group, ‘has been associated with the same
reasons Europe is not meeting the Lisbon targets: insufficient
investment in R&D and education, an indifferent capacity to
products
into
transform

marketable

research

(6) Council Recommendation of 12 July 2005 on the broad guidelines
for the economic policies of the Member States and the Community
(2005 to 2008) (OJ L 205 of 6.8.2005 — pp. 28-37).
URL:
l_20520050806en00280037.pdf.

http://europa.eu/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2005/l_205/

(7) ‘Facing the challenge — The Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Employ-
ment’. Report from the High-Level Group chaired by Wim Kok,
November 2004 (Kok report), p. 16.
URL: http://europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/kok_report_en.pdf.

C 318/160

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

processes, and the lower productivity performance in European
ICT-producing industries … and in European ICT-using services
… due to a slower rate of ICT diffusion’ (8). So the European
economy clearly lacks investment in future-orientated products
and technologies and the ability to innovate, something which
requires investment in people's potential to acquire skills. The
low levels of spending on R&D measured against the target of
3 % of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2010 are just one indi-
cation of this. What is more, only 55 % of research spending in
the Union is financed by the private sector — something that is
viewed as a significant cause of the innovation gap between the
USA and the EU (9).

2.3.2
In its report for the Spring European Council in March
2006, the Commission comes to the conclusion that the EU,
despite all its efforts, ‘is unlikely to meet its target of boosting
research spending to 3 % of GDP by 2010’ (10). It stresses in
this regard the need to increase private investment, for which
internal market policy should create better conditions. Alongside
a macroeconomic policy geared towards growth and jobs, only
a strategy focussed on boosting innovation will lead to more
and better jobs. This is also highlighted in the conclusions of
the European Council Spring Summit, which calls for a ‘compre-
hensive approach to innovation policy’ that inter alia includes
investment in education and training (11). At its meeting of 15
and 16 June 2006, the European Council again highlighted the
in knowledge and innovation and for
need for investment
national and EU measures to this end (12).

2.4 Investment in people as a prerequisite for a knowledge-based inno-

vative economy

In a knowledge-based economy and society, production
2.4.1
and services structures are continually updated through the use
of ICT technologies and innovative products and production
processes. This is accompanied by changes in the organisation
of work at both production and managerial levels. This technical
and organisational structural change in production and manage-
ment leads to changes in work requirements, which must be
taken into account in both school and basic and further voca-
tional training. IT knowledge and ICT skills (media literacy) but
also social skills such as communication and team skills and

(8) Idem.
(9) See EESC opinion of 15.9.2004 entitled Towards the seventh Framework
Programme for Research: Research needs in the area of demographic change
— quality of life of elderly persons and technological requirements, rappor-
teur: Ms Heinisch (OJ C 74, 2.3.2005, pp. 44-54).
URL:
c_07420050323en00440054.pdf.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2005/c_074/

(10) Communication from the Commission for the Spring European
Council ‘Time To Move Up A Gear — The new partnership for growth
and jobs’ (COM(2006) 30 final — PART 1 of 25.1.2006), p. 19.

(11) European Council

(Brussels), 23-24 March 2006 — Presidency

Conclusions, points 18 et seq.
URL:
en/ec/89013.pdf.

http://consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/

(12) Presidency conclusions, points 20 and 21.

URL: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/press-
Data/en/ec/90111.pdf.

foreign languages, are becoming key factors in being able to
meet the new work requirements. The development of such key
skills must be given consideration in all branches of the educa-
tion system as another way of strengthening the ability of busi-
nesses to innovate by improving the skills of employees.

2.4.2
The Employment Taskforce report of November 2003
has already pointed out that raising levels of education and
constantly adapting qualifications to meet the needs of a knowl-
edge-based economy are of central importance in creating more
jobs. This involves both raising the general level of education
and providing easier access to lifelong learning opportunities for
people with different career profiles, both in the public and in
the private sector. Priority should be given here to the most
needy, namely the low-skilled, older workers and the employees
of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Employment
Taskforce stresses in particular the responsibility of trade and
industry and calls upon employers to take on more ‘responsi-
bility to build employees' skills throughout their career’ (13). A
legal provisions and voluntary arrangements
combination of
investment by
sufficient
should guarantee
employers in further training and that there is a fair division of
costs (for example, through sectoral or regional further training
funds, tax credits or by splitting the costs of further training as
is the case in France) (14). The EESC believes that every employee
should have the opportunity for further training.

there

that

is

The expert group on the future of EU social policy also
2.4.3
recommends
the European
that within the framework of
employment strategy the Union should concentrate on creating
the conditions for a knowledge-based economy throughout the
education system, and on improving the education system (15).
The expert group makes a number of proposals here concerning
all levels of education and vocational training. Particular impor-
tance is attached to further training. The expert group recom-
mends that the general right to further training should be stipu-
lated in wage and employment agreements. Furthermore, busi-
nesses should draw up personal development plans for each
individual and introduce an internal management scheme for
further training and skills. So there is no shortage of good
proposals, but they are not being implemented.

(13) ‘Jobs, Jobs, Jobs — Creating more employment in Europe’ — report
the Employment Taskforce chaired by Wim Kok, November

http://europa.eu/comm/employment_social/employment_-

of
2003, p. 49.
URL:
strategy/pdf/etf_en.pdf.

(14) Idem, page 51.
(15) Report of the High-Level Group on the future of social policy in the

enlarged European Union, May 2004.
URL: http://europa.eu/comm/employment_social/publications/2005/
ke6104202_en.pdf.

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/161

2.5 Improving the quality of working life in order to strengthen inno-

vation skills and better integration of older workers

— forms of work organisation that give employees more
autonomy and responsibility in their work have a positive
effect;

2.5.1 Quality of working life and productivity

2.5.1.1
The transition to a knowledge-based economy that is
capable of innovation requires new initiatives to improve the
quality of working life. Working conditions that meet health
needs and working arrangements geared towards greater coop-
eration between executives, managers and employees at other
levels, cooperation on equal terms and shared decision-making
boost work satisfaction and wellbeing at work and therefore
contribute to the economic success of a business. On the other
hand, stressful working conditions that cause people to become
ill have detrimental effects on quality of life and knock-on social
costs and lead to productivity losses, which have a negative
impact on the ability of the economy to be innovative. Relevant
scientific studies back this up, though there are too few such
studies.

A study carried out by the European Agency for
2.5.1.2
Safety and Health at Work (2004) looks more closely into the
relationship between quality of work and productivity (16). One
of the key findings was that the success of a business in today's
highly competitive environment can no longer be measured
purely in terms of figures. Instead, such factors as customer
satisfaction, optimising working relationships within the organi-
sation, innovativeness and flexible organisational structures are
playing an increasingly important role. The results of the study
based on an analysis of the literature shows that there is a close
and the
relationship between good working
economic success of a business. The quality of work has a signif-
icant effect on productivity and profitability. In particular, the
study identifies the following factors for business success:

conditions

— combining business targets with human resource activities

so as to achieve better results;

— a holistic approach to health promotion that not only looks
immediate working conditions, but also includes job

at
motivation and corporate culture;

— health promotion programmes that are aimed at avoiding

health risks;

— improving working practices and the organisation of work

in connection with technical innovations.

2.5.1.3
On the basis of case studies in various Member States
and different sectors, the same study found the following factors
for improving productivity:

— high quality of work, including good conditions for recon-

ciling work and family life, is very important;

— cooperative behaviour by management contributes to higher

productivity;

(16) European Agency for Safety and Health at Work: Quality of the
Working Environment and Productivity — Working Paper (2004).
URL: http://osha.eu.int/publications/reports/211/quality_productivity_en.
pdf (English only).

— improving working methods and workplace equipment
helps to reduce the burden of physically demanding work
and facilitates higher productivity. Such investment is there-
fore worthwhile;

— certain types of heavy duties need creative solutions for the
avoidance of occupational accidents. Cutting absence due to
sickness has a direct, positive effect on productivity.

2.5.1.4
The stresses to which employees are subject have
changed, not least through the introduction of ICT technologies.
Indeed there are still areas, particularly in industrial production,
where physical stresses predominate. On the whole, however,
there has been an increase in psychosocial stresses as a result of
the increasing intensity of work and time pressure and working
with ICT technologies. Work-related stress is the predominant
complaint in all areas of activity and the economy and the
central challenge for prevention. The European Agency's study
comes to the conclusion that preventing stress not only reduces
costs, but also improves productivity by increasing motivation
and enhancing the working atmosphere.

2.5.1.5
The proportion of skilled work involving increased
autonomy and less hierarchy has risen, particularly in the New
Economy. At the same time, however, the pressure of work has
intensified. The start and finish of
the working day are
becoming more and more fluid, a factor which goes hand-in-
hand with new forms of deterioration in the health of workers,
such as ‘burn out syndrome’, and reduces quality of life overall.
At the same time, however, a contrary tendency is becoming
apparent in a number of fields. Because of increased costs and
the pressure of competition, humane forms of work organisa-
tion, such as team working in the motor-vehicle industry, are
being dropped again and working patterns based on a strict
division of labour are being re-introduced,
leading to uneven
strains and corresponding health risks.

The proportion of precarious employment,
involuntary part-time working,

in the
2.5.1.6
form of
limited duration
employment and temporary employment, is increasing and the
groups of workers concerned do, for the most part, have to
contend with particularly stressful working conditions in the
form of simple, monotonous tasks, heavy physical
labour or
environmental health hazards. Precarious jobs are often those
with poor quality of working life, which makes measures to
protect employment and health and work organisation measures
all the more necessary.

C 318/162

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

important

The expectations of employees themselves as to what
2.5.1.7
constitutes ‘good work’ is shown by a representative survey by
the International
Institute for Empirical Social Economy in
Germany (INIFES) (17). The analysis for employees showed that
the most
factors are related to income and job
security, followed by qualitative aspects such as meaningful and
varied work. Social aspects such as cooperative management
behaviour and mutual support come in third place. Specifically,
those involved stated that the following aspects of work, listed
in order of importance,
impact on their job satisfaction and
their readiness to enhance output:

1. a stable, reliable income;

2.

job security;

3. work should be fun;

4. being treated as a person by one's superiors;

5. permanent contract of employment;

6. promotion of loyalty among colleagues;

7. a healthy workplace;

8. work should be meaningful;

9. many-faceted, varied work;

10. having influence on working methods.

All these criteria had the support of between 70 and 90 per
cent of respondents. Other criteria that also attracted wide
consensus (over 60 %) as to what constitutes good work related
to the opportunity to further develop one's own skills and the
expectation that superiors should promote training and career
development. The investigation also showed that high quality
work that is broadly in line with the subjective criteria for good
work leads to greater job satisfaction, willingness to work and
readiness to enhance output. It is therefore possible to conclude
that this also has a positive effect on labour productivity, even
though this relationship was not specifically investigated.

2.5.2 Organising work in ways that meet age-related

needs

2.5.2.1
The employment rate in respect of older workers
(aged 55-65) in the EU continues to be inadequate, and the
objective set out at Lisbon of increasing the rate to 50 % by
2010 will not be achieved. A key reason why older workers
take early retirement from gainful employment is the deteriora-

Brussels, 13 September2006.

tion in their health brought about by stressful working condi-
tions and highly intensive work. Another is high unemploy-
ment. In the past, personnel policies were geared to inducing
older workers to take early retirement. This led to a process of
displacement, which also put social security schemes under
considerable pressure.

2.5.2.2
In the EESC's view, it is not enough simply to spell
out ambitious objectives without, at the same time, creating the
necessary prerequisites for achieving such objectives. In view of
the considerable shortage of jobs, priority must be given to
reducing the performance pressures facing workers in enter-
prises and administrations and organising working conditions
and performance requirements in such a way as to place reason-
(rather long)
able demands on workers over the course of
working careers. In many enterprises such a measure will make
it necessary to increase the workforce in order to reduce perfor-
mance pressures and prevent premature deterioration in the
health of workers.
Improving the quality of working life by
taking appropriate measures in respect of working conditions
and the organisation of work and the allocation of staff are key
instruments for achieving the abovementioned objective. The
focus should therefore not be on increasing the legal retirement
age, but rather on bringing the actual retirement age more into
line with the legal retirement age. With this aim in view, there is
a need, above all, to take measures with regard to working
conditions and to change the personnel policy pursued by busi-
nesses in respect of older workers.

2.5.2.3
The High Level Group on the Future of EU social
policy recommends, in this context, that measures be taken on
three levels. In addition to the reform of social security schemes,
aimed at reducing incentives for workers to take early retire-
ment, the High Level Group believes that the measures to be
taken should focus on measures at enterprise level. There is a
need to boost the involvement of older workers in further
training measures,
to improve working conditions and to
modernise the way in which work is organised. New forms of
work organisation should be brought more into line with the
abilities and skills of older workers,
in particular by tailoring
jobs to meet the needs of older workers and by facilitating
job changes (18). There is also a need for society to
internal
adopt a change of outlook by revising the value it places on
knowledge gained through experience and skills acquired during
a person's working life.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(17) ‘Was ist gute Arbeit? Anforderungen aus Sicht von Erwerbstätigen’
(What is good work? Employees' expectations)– Summary. INIFES,
November 2005.
URL:
Arbeit/gute-arbeit-endfassung,property=pdf,bereich=inqa,
de,rwb=truepdf (German only).

http://www.inqa.de/Inqa/Redaktion/Projekte/Was-ist-gute-
sprache=

(18) Report of the High-Level Group on the future of social policy in the

enlarged European Union, May 2004, page 35.
URL: http://europa.eu/comm/employment_social/publications/2005/
ke6104202_en.pdf.