OECD Employment Outlook 2019 · 2020. 3. 22. · Directorfor Employment, Labour and Social Affairs....
13
Presentazione rapporto CNEL 2019 Andrea Salvatori Labour Economist Director for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs OECD
OECD Employment Outlook 2019 · 2020. 3. 22. · Directorfor Employment, Labour and Social Affairs. OECD. Un futurosenza lavoroa causa dei robot? Disoccupazione tecnologica su larga
Andrea SalvatoriLabour EconomistDirector for Employment, Labour and Social AffairsOECD
Un futuro senza lavoro a causa deirobot?Disoccupazione tecnologica su larga scala e’ improbabile…
2
Employment rates overall have risen in most OECD countries (1990-2017)
%
1990 2017
Molti lavori cambieranno a causa della technologia…
14% dei lavori sono a rischio di automatizzazione…
14%
32%
3
… ma molti ancora cambierannosignificativamente
Percentage of jobs at risk of automation (as a % of all jobs)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
High risk of automation (>70%) Significant risk of change (50-70%)
Il cambiamento sta gia’ avvenendo rapidamente
05
101520253035404550
Percentage of workers in workplaces that have introduced new technologies and/or undergone significant restructuring in the way
jobs and tasks are carried out in the previous 3 years, 2015
Note: Share of working answering affirmatively to the following question: During the last three years, has there been a restructuring or reorganisation at the workplace that has substantially affected your work?
Source: European Working Condition Survey, 2015
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Technological change is also leading to substantial adjustments in how work is organised and the adoption of new business models. Across the OECD and EU countries, a significant proportion of workers are in workplaces that have introduced new technologies and/or undergone significant restructuring in the way jobs and tasks are carried out (Figure). Ongoing changes in work organisation include the adoption of high performance work practices and engagement of workers through mechanisms such as teamwork, employee’s voice, workers’ autonomy, multitasking and problem-solving. These management and organisational changes can foster skills use in the workplace but require more emphasis on workplace learning and workers with strong cognitive skills and motivation to learn.
Il part time involontario è in crescita per ragioni strutturaliVariazione del tasso di PT innvolontario dal 2001 per
%Unadjusted Adjusted for cyclical factors Adjusted for cyclical factors and industry mix
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Workers in part-time jobs (<30 hours) who report that they cannot find a full-time job or that they would like to work more hours. Note this figure reports the change in underemployment since 2001. Main structural trend driving increase in underemployment is the growth of the service sector: some parts of the service sector have a much higher incidence of underemployment than manufacturing. For example, in 2017 “Accommodation and food services” had a share of underemployed workers of around 12.2%, against only 1.8% in manufacturing (Figure 3.8). One explanation for such large difference is that firms in these sectors often favour part-time employment as a way of dealing with demand variation over the day (Euwals and Hogerbrugge, 2006[12]).
I cambiamenti toccano gruppi diversi in modi diversiL’aumento del PT involontario e’ piu’ forte tra i giovani
-5
0
5
10
15
20
% Young Prime Older
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Workers in part-time jobs (<30 hours) who report that they cannot find a full-time job or that they would like to work more hours. Note this figure reports the change in underemployment since 2001. Main structural trend driving increase in underemployment is the growth of the service sector: some parts of the service sector have a much higher incidence of underemployment than manufacturing. For example, in 2017 “Accommodation and food services” had a share of underemployed workers of around 12.2%, against only 1.8% in manufacturing (Figure 3.8). One explanation for such large difference is that firms in these sectors often favour part-time employment as a way of dealing with demand variation over the day (Euwals and Hogerbrugge, 2006[12]).
La sfida per il futuro: un mercato del lavoro inclusivo
- Per affrontare i cambimenti servono politiche su molti fronti– come descritto nel rapport CNEL.
- Cenni su due temi:- Formazione degli adulti- Protezione sociale
7
8
Share of adults (16-65) in each group that participate in training, 2012/2015
Source: Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) (2012, 2015).
Low skilledOlder (55-64)
High automation Own-accountSelf-employed
Temporary
Part-time
Displaced
High skilled
Young (25-34)
Low automationStandard Standard Standard
Unemployed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
average
Note: Share of adults who participated in formal or non-formal job-related training over the previous 12 months. Data refer to 2012 for most countries, except for Chile, Greece, Israel, Lithuania, New Zealand, Slovenia and Turkey where they refer to 2015. Low (high) skilled refers to adults who score at level 1 or below (levels 4 or 5) on the PIAAC literacy scale. High (low) automation refers to adults at high (low) risk of automation. Own-account workers are the self-employed without employees. Temporary refers to workers on fixed term or temporary work agency contracts. Part-time refers to adults who work less (more) than 30 hours per week. Standard are adults in full-time jobs with an indefinite work contract. Unemployed refers to all unemployed who have not been dismissed for economic reasons in their last job; displaced refers to unemployed adults who have been dismissed for economic reasons in the last job. The OECD average (41%) refers to the unweighted average participation in job-related training among all adults among OECD countries participating in the Survey for Adult Skills (PIAAC).
Coloro che hanno maggiore bisogno di formazione, ne ricevono di meno
Relatore
Note di presentazione
However – it’s exactly these disadvantaged groups, who need training the most, who train the least. High-skilled 62%; Low-skilled: 22% Low-automation 64%; High-automation: 36% Solo self-emp. 35%; FT perm. 57% Temp 50%; FT perm 57%; but less FTC if continuous education for a degree excluded. Low-skilled, older people, workers with jobs at high risk of automation, displaced workers – are all, for different reasons, risking to be left behind in a changing world of work ; but they are also, for different reasons, less likely to train. Also non-standard workers (like own-account, temporary and part-time workers) – train much less than standard employees.
Adult Learning Policy Directions
• Attaccare barriere training (motivazione, tempo)• Portabilita’ del diritto alla formazione• Ruolo importante della contrattazione collettiva
9
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Examples: 1. Strengthening career guidance for all adults; putting in place public information campaigns to raise awareness of the benefits of learning 2. a) Tackling time constraints through modular training options, training delivered outside of working hours or online courses, as well as by providing workers with education and training leave b) Lowering the cost of training by providing financial incentives for the most vulnerable groups in the labour market. c) Reducing entry barriers to training courses for workers with low qualifications by strengthening the recognition of skills acquired through experience. 3. Lowering the cost to employers of training at-risk workers, for example by means of targeted financial incentives. 4. Targeting financial subsidies, and career guidance services on the groups that need them most, including non-standard workers. 5. Individual learning accounts complemented by more personal, face-to-face support delivered by specialised career guidance officers and informed by quality information on labour market needs 6. Significant financial resources will be required to scale up existing adult learning systems. This calls for co-financing by government, employers and individuals, that takes account of ability to pay and the benefits obtained
10Note: In some countries, unemployment benefits can be received by people who have some work attachment (part-time unemployed) or who are not available for work (labour market inactive). The number of unemployment-benefit recipients can then be much higher than suggested by these coverage rates. See (OECD, 2018[29]) for detailed results by employment status. The OECD SOCR database provides benefit recipients totals by country (www.oecd.org/social/recipients.htm). “Discouraged” refers to people without employment who are available for work but are not actively looking for a job. OECD-24 corresponds to the unweighted average of the countries shown. 2015 figures for Australia. LFS data for Sweden do not include a series of benefits that are accessible to jobless individuals who: i) are not in receipt of core unemployment benefits, and who ii) satisfy other conditions such as active participation in employment-support measures. ILO: International LabourOrganization.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70%
Discouraged ILO unemployed
Solo una minoranza delle persone in cerca di occupazione riceve sussidi
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Temporary and part‑time workers are in principle covered in the same way as permanent full‑time employees in most countries and for most risks, as long as they satisfy minimum employment periods, earnings thresholds and other eligibility requirements, such as low family income. Some countries operate exemptions for specific non‑standard contractual arrangements, such as casual employment, seasonal work or hybrid categories
11
Notes: Overall benefit support package 2014-15. Out-of-work individual in a low-income household with:• past “standard” work (uninterrupted dependent employment), and• past “non-standard” work or interrupted dependent employment (e.g. self-employed).Statistical significance is for a 90% confidence interval. Source: OECD calculations using EU-SILC panel data.
Out-of-work support for non-standard workers is limited in some countries
Baseline: past standard work Past non-standard (significant gap) Past non-standard (non-significant gap)
020406080
100
GRC ITA POL EST GBR AUT LVA PRT CZE SVK FRA HUN LUX ISL ESP SVN BEL
A. Probability of receiving any benefits
0
20
40
60
GRC ITA POL EST GBR AUT LVA PRT CZE SVK FRA HUN LUX ISL ESP SVN BEL
B. Benefit generosity for recipients (% of median income)
Il sostegno per disoccupati con carriere non-standard e’ debole in molti paesi
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Shorthand summary of benefit accessibility and generosity in a comparative perspective Out-of-work, not just unemployed – e.g. includes those on maternity or parental leave, disabled, discouraged jobseekers In just under a third of countries, both accessibility and benefit levels are similar for SW and NSW: (1) largely flat-rate and means-tested system in UK (2) But also in countries using earnings-related support (BEL, FRA, HUN, LUX). Suggests that limiting gaps is possible in very different types of social protection systems. In all others, benefit accessibility or levels are significantly lower – often, there sizeable gaps in both (EST, ESP, ITA, LVA, PRT, SLO, SVK). Coverage or generosity is very low for both SW and non-SW in comparative perspective: GRC, ITA, CZE, SVK. Small gaps between SW and NSW doesn’t mean all is good Gaps can be sizeable for SW too Bar for good coverage not particularly high: out-of-work for entire year, with previous work and low current income… Looks at recent past, can’t capture emerging alternative work arrangements, such as gig work, for which accessibility may be lower / different need regular monitoring…
Social Protection Policy Directions
• Rivedere i criteri di eligibilita’ per i sussidi di disoccupazione per assicurare protezione ai lavoratori con carriere non-standard.
12
Relatore
Note di presentazione
Governments should conduct a thorough review of their social protection systems to examine whether they provide reliable coverage against evolving labour-market and social risks. Most countries mix different social protection design principles, such as means-testing or social insurance, and these provisions shape the ways in which rising non-standard work translates into specific social protection access barriers. Where needed, social protection provisions should be reinforced to ensure effective income and employment support for workers who are ill-equipped to benefit from the opportunities of technological advances and dynamic labour markets. Examples: Employment requirements, waiting periods and rules for combining or alternating benefit receipt with intermittent and other non-standard forms of work extending the reach of existing social protection systems to new forms of work; including by: ensuring a more neutral treatment of different forms of work to prevent arbitrage between them (Social protection provisions themselves can drive trends towards non-standard employment); boosting the portability of entitlements between social insurance programmes that are intended for different labour market groups; and making means-tests more responsive to people’s needs by changing the reference periods for the needs assessment and putting appropriate weight on recent or current incomes of all family members Extend support for “part-time unemployed” and other jobseekers with intermittent or low-paid employment (to avoid gaps in income support, which typically serves as the main gateway to labour market reintegration measures); reconsider if and when employment services should actively connect people to potentially precarious forms of work; shift resources from work experience programmes towards tailored training and career counselling Governments should also assess whether existing social protection financing mechanisms achieve a fair balance of burdens between different employers, e.g. between those making little use of automation and those substituting large shares of their workforce for robots or artificial intelligence.
