• Aucun résultat trouvé

Importance and Meaning of Work in Europe: a French Singularity

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Importance and Meaning of Work in Europe: a French Singularity"

Copied!
107
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Importance and Meaning of Work in Europe:

a French Singularity

LUCIE DAVOINE

L u c i e . d a v o i n e @ m a l i x . u n i v - p a r i s 1 . f r Centre d’études de l’emploi et Ecole d’économie de Paris

DOMINIQUE MEDA

d o m i n i q u e . m e d a @ m a i l . e n p c . f r

Centre d’études de l’emploi, TEPP (FR n° 3126, CNRS)

DOCUMENT DE TRAVAIL

N°96-2

(2)
(3)

Lucie Davoine, Dominique Méda

Abstract

International and European data shows the singularity of the French people’s relation to work. More than other Europeans, the French people declare that work is very important in their life, and, in the mean time, that they wish to see the importance of work diminishing in the society. How can we explain this paradox? Understanding the diversity of work values in Europe and, in particular the peculiar situation of France is the main objective of this article. The originality of this work relies in particular in the comparison of the results from different international and national surveys that have been little disseminated or scattered separately.

In a first section, we disentangle the many meanings of work importance. Two hypotheses can explain the French situation: on the one hand, high unemployment rate and a strong feeling of job insecurity makes work an essential concern. On the other hand, French people distinguish themselves by higher expectations regarding the intrinsic interest of work and the possibility of self-fulfilling through work. The second section suggests hypotheses to explain why French wish to see the importance of work diminishing in the society. This whish is partly the results of the dysfunctions of French labour market and work organisations: bad social relations, dissatisfaction with working and employment conditions. This whish also reveals a more positive desire of spending more time with family and reconciling work and personal life. Besides, more than others, the French people declare that they suffer from tensions between the different spheres of life. Throughout the article, we emphasized not only differences between countries, but also the differences inside countries, according to the family status and the occupation.

Key words: importance of work in life and in identity, preferences and expectations towards work and employment, satisfaction with job, dynamics of values, reconciliation between work and other spheres of life, European comparisons.

(4)

RÉSUMÉ

L’examen des données françaises et européennes montre que les Français entretiennent un rapport singulier au travail. Plus encore que les autres européens, les Français déclarent en effet que le travail est très important dans leur vie, mais plus que les autres, ils souhaitent que le travail prenne moins de place dans leur vie. Comment expliquer ce paradoxe ? L’objectif premier de ce travail est de comprendre la diversité des perceptions en Europe et de proposer des interprétations qui permettraient d’avancer dans la résolution de ce paradoxe. L’originalité de ce travail provient en partie de la confrontation des résultats des diverses enquêtes françaises et internationales sur ces questions, qui restent aujourd’hui épars et peu diffusés.

Dans un premier temps, nous analysons les déterminants de l’importance accordée au travail et les sens que peut revêtir cette notion. Deux hypothèses sont mobilisées pour expliquer les réponses des Français : d’une part, le taux de chômage élevé, la prégnance de l’emploi précaire et un fort sentiment d’insécurité de l’emploi ; d’autre part, les attentes plus fortes à l’égard de l’intérêt du travail. Les Français, se distinguent en effet par des attentes de réalisation dans le travail plus intenses que celles de leurs voisins européens. Dans une seconde partie nous tentons de comprendre pourquoi les Français considèrent que ce serait une bonne chose que le travail occupe une place moins grande dans leur vie. Cette situation peut s’expliquer par la moindre qualité des relations sociales en France, ou par des conditions de travail et d’emploi dégradées, mais aussi par le souci des individus de consacrer plus de temps à leur vie personnelle et surtout de mieux concilier leur vie professionnelle et leur vie familiale. Les Français sont d’ailleurs ceux qui déclarent le plus souvent éprouver des difficultés de conciliation, et des tensions entre les deux sphères. Nous soulignons également, tout au long de l’article, que les réponses moyennes des pays ne doivent pas occulter la grande diversité des opinions, liées notamment à la catégorie socioprofessionnelle et à la situation familiale.

Mots-clefs : comparaisons européennes, place du travail dans la vie et dans l'identité, attentes à l'égard du travail et de l'emploi, satisfaction vis-à-vis du travail et de l'emploi, évolution des valeurs, conciliation entre le travail et les autres sphères.

(5)

INTRODUCTION

1

Ever since they began, European surveys on values have shown that the French attach great importance to work but also that more of them would also want to see work occupy a less important place in their life. How can this paradox be explained? First of all, we will try to understand the logic which may explain the diversity of perceptions in Europe and France’s specific position. In order to do so, we will try to make sense of the various meanings attributed to the importance of work by referring to various theories and analysing the various items developed in surveys. Secondly, we will try to understand why, despite these scores, the French consider that it would be a good thing for work to occupy a less important place in their life. We will be proposing four non-exclusive explanatory hypotheses. Although the primary aim of this work is to put forward interpretations to enable this paradox to be solved, the second is no less important: to list the principal results of French and international surveys which remain today not widely circulated and to make them available. The originality of this work is therefore to be found in the comparison of the results of various surveys. This article is mainly based on three international surveys: the European

Values Surveys (EVS), the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) and the European Social Survey (ESS). The specific features of these three surveys are shown in Box n°1. More

selectively, analyses will refer to the results of Eurobarometers, the European Community Household Panel and the European Survey on living and working conditions, as well as national surveys: “Travail et mode de vie”, done in 1997 (Baudelot and Gollac, 2002), the survey by the “Observatoire sociologique du changement” entitled “emploi salarié et conditions de vie”, which took place in 1995 (Paugam, 2000); the survey on “Histoire de vie – Construction des identités” that took place in 2003 (Garner, Méda and Senik, 2006). More commercial surveys are rarely accessible to researchers. We will however selectively refer in particular to two surveys done by Ipsos under the aegis of the Institut Chronopost in 2003 (Méda, 2004; Vendramin, 2004) and in 2004 (Delay, 2005) and a survey done in 2007 (Solom, 2007).

The validity of international survey is sometimes discussed. Some biases can interfere at different stages of the surveys’ construction (see Heath et al., 2005). The international surveys face some linguistic tricks, when the words connotations are different (cf. the examples of Braun and Scott [1998] and Crompton and Lyonette [2006], when acquirement bias are stronger in some countries (see, for example, Smith [2004] or Johnson et al. [2005]). More and more vigilant, the teams responsible for the survey use recognised procedures to limit the risk of bad translation or misunderstanding. The procedure of « back translation » is now used in many international surveys (Harkness, 1998; Smith, 2004). More fundamentally, the notion of linguistic bias should be discussed: the surveys just retranscribe differences in expression and communication way. They do not construct artificially these differences. When gathering the date, the different traditions of sampling and population covered can also introduce biases. However, the central teams responsible for the international surveys impose stricter and stricter requirements (Jowell, 1998).

1

This article has been written within the framework of the European project SPREW (Social Patterns of Relation to Work) coordinated by the Fondation Travail-Université of Namur : http://www.ftu-namur.org/sprew/fr-index.html. The authors would like to thank Béatrice Delay, Anne N’Diaye, Danièle Trancart, Patricia Vendramin and Aurélie Bur for their constructive remarks.

(6)

To sum up, these international surveys may be fragile, but some real progresses have been made to improve the validity of comparisons: the European Social Survey, the youngest international survey, meets strict requirements (random sample, face-to-face interviews, rigorous procedure of translation). Furthermore, the increase in number of results and their comparisons allow proposing assured conclusions. Following Roger Jowell (1998) advice, we have to stay vigilant, but interpretation of data is now possible. Vigilance and comparison of results constitutes our research strategy to explore work preferences, values and expectations in Europe.

The results cover the 27 members of the European Union, but, when analysing the long-term trend, the analysis focuses on the 15 members.

Box n°1: available European and international surveys

Eurobarometer

Eurobarometer has been undertaken uninterruptedly every six months since 1974. It is administered by the European Commission and is intended firstly to answer questions from the Directorates General. It involved from its beginnings academics such as Ronald Inglehart whose theory is partly based on this survey. It contains numerous questions on European feelings and on how European construction is seen but also, more selectively, questions on poverty, unemployment or even, which is of more interest to us, precariousness, life-long training, satisfaction or professional mobility. In the following analyses, we have particularly used the results of the special Eurobarometer survey “European Social Reality” done as a backup to the Bureau of European Policy Advisers’ report (European Commission, 2007; Lerais and Liddle, 2007).

European Values Surveys (EVS)

The European Values Survey (then hereafter EVS) started in 1981 thanks to a group of researchers led by Jan Kerhofs of Louvain University and Ruud de Moor of Tilburg University (Bréchon, 2002). During the first wave, nine European countries were involved in the survey. Almost twenty years later there are thirty-four (annex 1.1). The survey now comprises three waves: 1981, 1990 and 1999. The EVS questionnaire, a large part of which does not vary from wave to wave, addresses, inter alia, the place of major values such as work, the family or religion but also religious practices, political opinions as well as the importance attributed to each facet of work (wages, security, personal fulfillment, etc.). The interview, which lasts almost an hour, therefore covers numerous subjects and only a few questions are of real relevance for our research.

Shortly after the launch of the EVS, Ronald Inglehart, a researcher at the University of Michigan, took the initiative of extending the survey to other continents which gave rise to the World Values Survey (WVS). The questionnaire of the WVS is similar to the EVS one, and there is a small time-lag between the waves of EVS and WVS.

(7)

The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP)

The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP), the first wave of which took place in 1985, arose out of cooperation between researchers from four countries, Germany, the UK, the USA and Australia, where there already was a tradition of surveys on attitudes, but the number of participants increased substantially in the 90s to reach 38 countries at the present moment (annex 1.2) Compared with the EVS that focus on values, the ISSP places greater importance on attitudes and behaviour. This survey takes place every year on a different theme every time. Each module is linked to a national survey and the interview lasts about a quarter of an hour if socio-demographic variables are not taken into account. A survey on the meaning of work was undertaken in 1989 (but France did not participate), in 1997 and in 2005. These three waves undoubtedly constitute one of the most complete bases on the relationship to work.

The European surveys on working conditions

The European survey on living and working conditions is undertaken every 5 years by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, based in Dublin. The number of countries involved has grown as the European Union has enlarged. The first edition contained some twenty questions and the last about a hundred. The questionnaire does not really cover preferences with regard to employment but conditions of work in its broadest sense: working times, working organisation, income, physical difficulty, stress, possibility of conciliation, the nature of jobs done, feelings of discrimination2. It nonetheless contains several questions on satisfaction with working conditions, income and promotion possibilities.

The European Community Household Panel (ECHP)

The European Community Household Panel (ECHP hereafter) is monitored and harmonized by Eurostat. As its name implies, it is a panel comprising eight waves from 1994 to 2001 except for a few countries which joined the European Union at a later date. The aim of the ECHP is to be able to obtain comparable statistics on living standards of households and individuals and on employment. The questionnaire contains one question on satisfaction vis-à-vis the job or the main activity and six questions on satisfaction with regard to one aspect of employment (wages, security, hours, shifts, type of work, conditions of work, distance between the place of work and home). The social, demographic and economic data available for each individual are very complete: there are almost 140 variables at household level and 320 variables at individual level. The sample is important, because almost 10,000 individuals are interviewed. The ECHP, stopped in 2001, is gradually being replaced by a new EU-SILC panel (European Statistics on Income and Living Conditions).

2 See the Dublin Foundation site for further information:

(8)

The European Social Survey (ESS)

In this scenario, the European Social Survey is the most recent survey. The first wave took place in the autumn of 2002, the second in 2004 and the third at the end of 2006. It covered 22 countries in the first wave (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK). Estonia, Slovakia, Iceland and the Ukraine took part in the following wave, and the last wave will also contain data on Bulgaria, Cyprus, Latvia, Romania and Russia. The interview lasts a whole hour. Half the questionnaire does not change, the other half, the rotating part, addresses two subjects which are chosen from amongst proposals put forward by scientific teams. For the 2002 wave, the modules selected covered citizenship on the one hand and immigration on the other. The 2004 wave contained a module on health and care on the one hand, and on the family, work and well-being on the other. We find questions relevant to our work in the latter module. The third wave covers well-being and the perception of the life cycle.

1. MEANING AND IMPORTANCE OF WORK: THE SINGULAR POSITION

OF THE FRENCH IN EUROPE

Regardless of the surveys considered or the years of the questionnaires, two notable facts can clearly be seen from the European surveys considered: work is seen as important or very important by a majority of Europeans. The French systematically form part of those who affirm most strongly that work is important. To understand why, we outline the various theoretical explanations likely to be referred to and we analyse the various dimensions of the importance attributed to work.

1.1 The importance of work: explanatory framework and dimensions of work

Work occupies a central position in the life of Europeans: only a minority of persons interviewed – less than 20% in almost all countries – said that work was “not very important” or “not important at all” in their life (cf. graph 1).

The similarities in Europe nonetheless become apparent as soon as a distinction is made in the degree of importance attributed to work. A majority of the population says that work is “very important” in the majority of countries, with the exception of Denmark, the UK and the Netherlands: only 40% of Danes and Britons say that work is “very important”. This proportion is close to 50% in Germany, Sweden or Finland, but also in the Czech Republic and Estonia. It is much higher in a few continental countries (Belgium, France, Austria), in two countries in the South (Spain and Italy) and in a few new member countries (Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia). France occupies a special position in this graph: it differs from the continental and Mediterranean countries by a much higher proportion of inhabitants for whom work is “very important”: this proportion is 77% in France whereas it does not exceed 65% in Belgium, Spain or Austria. France thus finds itself amongst the group of the poorest countries in Europe (Romania, Poland). More than 30 points separate it from the UK and Denmark. This very special position is even more visible if only the Europe of 15 is considered (graph 2).

(9)

Graph 1: The place of work in the life of Europeans

How important is work in your life?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Denma rk Grea t Br itain The Ne ther lands Irela nd Germ any Finl and Eston ia Czech Rep. Lux embo urg Swed en Hung ary Port ugal GreeceLituani a Slov enia Ital y Slov akia Bulg aria Spain Aust ria Belg ium Fra nce Latv ia Rom ania Ma lta Pola nd Very important Quite important Not important Not at all important

Source: EVS 1999.

Graph 2: The importance of work in 1990 and 1999 Percentage of people declaring that work is "very important" in 1990 and 1990 in the EU 15

39,5 40,1 47,4 49,8 50,3 50,7 54,5 58,0 59,2 61,7 63,0 63,9 64,8 69,7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Den mar k Grea t B ritai n The Net herla nds Irel and Ge rman y Finl and Swe den Por tug al Gree ce Italy Spai n Aus tria Bel giu m Fran ce 1990 1999

(10)

1.1.1 The explanatory frameworks: composition, culture, context

How can such differences within the European Union be explained? How, in particular, can France’s special position be understood? We have several hypotheses to choose from. These differences could be due to a simple effect of composition. The population structure per age group, the proportion of the working population, or even the level of qualification and the profession are effectively sources of similarity. For example, women at home and people who have undertaken higher studies state less often that their work is very important. Conversely, employers, the unemployed and the self-employed attribute more importance to work (see annex 2). Yet, these categories are to be found very unequally in the European countries: education levels are for example higher in the Nordic countries, and women participate less frequently in employment in the Southern countries (Davoine and Erhel, 2007). However, even taking the different effects of the composition of the population into account, differences from country to country remain significant. France, in particular, continues to differ substantially, attributing greater importance to work (see annex 2).

Consequently, how can differences between countries be interpreted? Are they cultural differences which could be linked, for example, to the predominance of Catholicism or Protestantism? Literature even refers to other cultural traits to explain the relationship to work. In psychology and management in particular, the cultural dimensions highlighted by Geert Hofstede are systematically used to try to explain the relationship to work (see for example Parboteeah & Cullen, 2003). In his later works, Geert Hofstede proposes summarizing cultural differences in five dimensions: the degree of acceptance of an inegalitarian distribution of power, the degree of stress vis-à-vis uncertainty and ambiguity, the degree of individualism, the development of insurance and competition or, on the contrary, of modesty and self-help, the orientation towards the long or short-term (Hofstede, 2001). For each of these dimensions, differences are clearly perceptible within Europe. For example, French and Belgian people are more likely to accept a power distance, whereas the closeness with the hierarchy is appreciated in Denmark, Sweden, Austria, and Finland. Concerning the second axis, the workers in France and on the Southern countries are more likely to suffer from uncertainty which do not frighten Nordic people. The dimension called “individualism” distinguishes Europe from the rest of the world, which is less individualistic. On the fourth dimension, Europe is more diverse: for example, the propensity for modesty and help is higher in Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Finland and Portugal.On the last dimension, the Asiatic countries show a high score for long-term orientation, compared to the rest of the World, including Europe. According to Geert Hofstede, the constructing cultures are still accurate, and can explain some actual differences in attitudes and behaviours. However, he recognizes that cultures can evolve and that some differences in attitudes can be explained by institutional and economic context, rather the cultural roots.

Is this culture-based hypothesis backed up by the surveys considered? The stability of differences between countries over time can be a sign of the cultural nature of the present work orientations. Regardless of the year, work is considered to be less important in the UK, Denmark and the Netherlands than in France for example3 (cf. graph 2). The special

3

It should be noted that the French interviewed in 1990 seem to attribute less importance to work than in 1999, which could be explained by a slight modification in the French language questionnaire. In 1990, the questionnaire explained the meaning of each phrase:

- Very important (the core of your life)

(11)

European Policy Advisers analysis on European social reality (European Commission 2007) confirms that the French attribute more importance to work than the majority of their neighbours: 92% of them said that work is important, for an average of 84% in the EU25. A split between protestant and catholic countries seems to be taking shape: contrary to what Max Weber teaches us, work seems less important in many protestant countries (Denmark, UK, Netherlands, Germany, Finland) and more important in catholic countries (France, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Austria), with the exception however of Ireland. But the effect of the individual practice of a religion must be clearly distinguished in the work relationship from the effect of belonging to a country or a group to a given religion. At individual level, religion clearly has an impact on the relationship to work (cf. annex 2): compared with atheists, interviewees who said they were christian or muslim attribute more importance to work and within this category protestants are amongst those who attribute the greatest importance to work. We find here certain elements of Max Weber’s analyses. He showed in

The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism how the fact of considering that duty is

accomplished in temporal affairs and constitutes the highest moral activity of Man in this world, is a product of the Reform and how protestant asceticism created “the only norm which was decisive for its efficacy: the psychological motivation by which work as a vocation constitutes the best, if not the only, means of ensuring a state of grace”4.

At the general level however, countries with a protestant tradition are not those where work is considered to be the most important confirming once more Weber’s analyses: “All-conquering capitalism does not need this support since it is built on a mechanical basis (…) In the United States, at its very birthplace, the pursuit of riches, stripped of its ethical and religious meaning, tends today to be associated with purely agonistic passions which frequently confers on it the character of a sport”5. Other phenomena seem to enter into account, as we will see below: wealth and secularization. Countries with a protestant tradition are effectively the wealthiest and are those in which religious beliefs are less significant.

The sign that other explanations are required in order to understand European heterogeneity, in particular the level of development of countries measured by their GDP or its variation, is the fact that there are significant variations in opinions relating to work between several waves of survey in one and the same country: hence work was considered to be less important in 1999 in Scandinavian countries, the UK and in Ireland than in 1990. Between the two dates, economic conditions improved substantially in these countries. The importance of work would not therefore appear to be unrelated to the economic context or its variations.

This is the hypothesis put forward by Ronald Inglehart (1990), whose name is associated with the theory of post-materialism developed just after May 68 based on perceptible generational differences in European countries (Inglehart, 1971). Although Inglehart recognises Max Weber’s contribution and the persistence of old cultural divisions in modern societies partly

- not very important (your main preoccupations are elsewhere)

- not important at all

The meaning of the first phrase (“very important”) may seem stronger when it is stated that it would be the core of one’s life. In the English-language questionnaire (in 1990 and 1999) and in the French-language questionnaire in 1999, the wording in brackets was missing and the meaning of the phrases therefore weaker.

4

P. 220.

5

(12)

based on religious differences, he adopts an implicitly evolutionist and, to a large degree, materialist perspective. In the tradition of Marx, he considers that economic development has “systematic and to a large degree foreseeable” consequences (p. 20) on a country’s culture and its values (Inglehart and Baker, 2000). Borrowing certain concepts from Daniel Bell, he detects three stages of evolution for society: in the agrarian society men have to struggle against nature, in the industrial society the competition against nature involves techniques and the organisation of work and lastly in the post-industrial society survival is no longer a concern.

More precisely, in more recent works, Ronald Inglehart and Wayne Baker proposed to classify countries by using two axes or two dimensions: a first dimension, which marks the passage of a pre-industrial society to an industrial society, contrasts traditional and religious values with lay and rational values. The second dimension contrasts preoccupations of survival with those of individual expression and the quality of life. It corresponds to a transition towards a post-industrial society. The use of the World Value Survey, via an ACP, allows them to find both of these axes, which sum up 70% of the difference between the average replies of each country, and to draw up a cultural map showing 65 countries. The vertical axis

(traditional/secular-rational values) contrasts countries depending on the importance attributed to respect for

authority, religious faith and national pride. It distinguishes, on the one hand, Africa and Latin America from the western world, the former countries of the soviet block and that part of Asia which is most developed on the other. The horizontal axis (survival/self-expression

values) contrasts on the one side countries of the former soviet block and southern Asia and

on the other protestant Europe (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland) and the Anglo-Saxon countries (New Zealand, the UK, Canada, Australia, USA and Ireland). The inhabitants of countries in transition and the countries of southern Asia give priority to economic and physical security compared with personal fulfillment and the quality of life favoured by the inhabitants of Anglo-Saxon or protestant countries. On both axes, catholic Europe (Belgium, France, Austria, Italy, Spain and Portugal) occupies a median position. France, Belgium, Italy and Austria are however closer to protestant Europe. Conversely, the USA is relatively distant from it; it shares with protestant Europe post-materialistic (or self-expression) values but differentiates itself from them by more traditionalist, less lay values. A regression on aggregate data confirms that economic (GDP, share of agriculture, industry and services) and historical (language, religion) factors both explain the value differences observed between countries. These analyses have been widely published and often serve as an analytical framework for the study of values in more specific areas (work, family, political opinions), at least in political sciences.

For our purposes, if we follow Ronald Inglehart, economic evolution would tend to modify the meaning given to work and three stages could then be distinguished. Firstly, that of the tradition, work comes within the scope of a system of belief and respect for authority. Work then corresponds to an “ethic of duty”, an obligation vis-à-vis society. The second stage corresponds to the development of individualistic and rational values: work then has an instrumental value and it is sought for the security and the income it provides. This is also the working hypothesis of John Galbraith which he tested via a survey done between 1962 and 1964. Serge Paugam recalls the results of this survey which highlighted the fact that “the affluent worker” was characterised by a very instrumental relationship to work: “What counts above all for him is recompense for his work and not its intrinsic value (…). Work then corresponds to an ordinary task to be accomplished, not for self-fulfillment in doing it but in order to attain aims concerning consumption and well-being”.

(13)

security no longer being a priority with the quality of life and subjective well-being becoming major values. In this perspective, work should above all enable individuals to fulfill themselves. The end of the XXth century could thus be marked by the rise of

post-materialistic hopes: the individual no longer hid behind the group, his fulfillment became a central value (Inglehart, 1990; Beck, 1984; Giddens). This tendency, which affects the most diverse fields of society, could also be found in the work sphere, as argued by Hélène Riffault, who saw the rise of a more personal concept of work: “Although the exercise of work has for long been a sign of social adherence as well as a moral duty, it seems that today Europeans tend to consider it above all as a means of expressing their potentiality and as a way of personal fulfillment. Although this vision of work is not new it tends to override all other aspects of work and in particular the more social aspects, like the norms relating to the obligation to work (…). The establishment of this view of work goes hand in hand with economic development. This leads the individual to relativize material satisfactions, insofar as they are largely acquired, and to look at all areas of his/her life, including work, for possibilities of self-expression such as the liberation of creative capacities, the assumption of responsibility or the exercise of the right to free speech. Work today tends to be filled more with expectations relating to personal fulfillment and less felt as a social norm than was the case 20 years ago.”

This interpretation, which highlights the role of the economic context, remains of course simplistic and mono-causal. It will form a framework for analysis which will need to be tested and qualified. In other words, and to use an image that Inglehart proposes in conclusion, economic development pushes societies in the same direction but they follow parallel trajectories, marked by history, in the framework of a phenomenon of pathway dependence. Ronald Inglehart underlines in this way the persistence of religious and historical divisions. Furthermore, the path to modernisation is not linear since U-turns are possible, as proven by the trajectory of countries in the former soviet block which went back to traditional values. Other factors enter into account in order to structure values.

In particular, the most stimulating critique of Ronald Inglehart’s scheme covers, we think, the need to place values in their institutional context (Haller, 2002). This context can also shape expectations and preferences: for example, will social protection not lessen the importance of work? In this perspective, preferences and values are endogenous, they are shaped by the institutional context. To understand the diversity of work preferences in Europe, we shall look at the typologies of institutional model, in particular the work on the different Worlds of Welfare State (Esping-Andersen, 1990) and the work on the diversity of capitalism (Amable, 2003) is again6.

Furthermore, the effect of the level of national wealth remains uncertain, in particular on materialistic expectations. Some writers have underlined the fact that the capitalist system created and maintained a constantly renewed need for consumer goods (Haller, 2002). One may want high wages and a safe job because one is concerned by questions of security, survival or in order to finance conspicuous consumption. It is not certain that contemporary European societies will in future be less materialistic. Conversely, does the intrinsic interest in work not constitute a need, even in societies where questions of survival have not been completely resolved? Maslow’s typology remains a subject of discussion in organisational psychology.

6 For a detailed presentation of the universalist, culturalist and institutionalist school, as weel as the convergence between

(14)

Finally, the development of post-materialistic values can have contrary effects on the importance attributed to work in life. Once the needs for security have been satisfied, work can of course assume less importance and leave individuals the choice of fulfilling themselves in other spheres (leisure, politics or family). However, in searching for fulfillment in the work sphere, individuals who place greater importance on post-materialistic values may attribute a higher value to work since the latter is not only and simply a source of income. In other words, in already industrialised societies, economic growth may have a dual impact: work is less important, or it remains important but for different reasons. By looking at these controversial issues and questions, we may perhaps be able to understand the French peculiarity.

1.1.2 The various dimensions of work

This historical sequence whose virtues are also heuristic (because they provide an analytical schedule making it possible to analyse the position of different countries on an evolutionary scale of meanings) is not fundamentally far removed from other theoretical developments, of a philosophical or sociological nature, which have been put forward these last few years in order to understand changes and differences of meaning attached to the term “work”. We outline three in particular which have the advantage of highlighting the various constituent dimensions of the concept of work the effect of which could possibly be isolated in surveys.

Work as a duty

Max Weber’s work, as we have said, has particularly highlighted the dimension of “task” or duty acquired by work over the last few centuries. Weber showed how the Reform radically changed the western way of viewing work and how Luther’s translations firstly (and then the theoretical elaborations of the Calvinists) made it possible to interpret work as man’s most important task on earth by following several stages. At the start of his reformist activities, writes Weber, Luther thought that secular work - although required by God - was part of mankind’s nature. “But work would take on more and more importance for Luther (…). Not only did monastic life lack value in his eyes as a means of justifying oneself before God but it shielded man from the duties of this world and thus appeared to Luther to be the product of the egoism and hardness of the heart. On the other hand, the exercise of professional work was for him the external expression of love for one’s neighbour”7. But this justification would itself soon disappear: it would leave in its place the affirmation, repeated with growing fervour, that in all circumstances doing one’s temporal duties was the only way of living which pleased God. “Accomplishing these duties, and it alone, is God’s will and consequently all lawful work has absolutely the same value in God’s eyes”. The more Luther was to become involved in worldly affairs, continues Weber, the more he would emphasize the significance of professional work: “which led him to consider more and more professional work as a special order from God to the individual to fulfill the concrete task assigned by Providence”. But for Luther, the concept of Beruf remained traditionalistic: “Man must accept his task as being given to him by divine decree and he must live with it. Orthodox Lutheranism went much further and defended the idea that professional activity was a task, even more, the task assigned by God. Ascetic Protestantism would take this idea even further: what had remained a purely intellectual hypothetical suggestion became for the

7

(15)

expressed firstly in the accomplishment of professional tasks given by lex naturae. Work, in the service of impersonal social utility, was thus recognised as exalting the glory of God. Lalive d’Epinay (1994), commenting in particular on the way in which translators have radically changed the initial meaning of texts8, defends the idea that at the start of the 20th

century work continued to be perceived essentially as a duty and an effort. “At the start of the 20th century, the revolution produced its effects, leading to the generalization of the labour market, the expansion of the wage-earning class and the development of the working class. The industrial society established itself and was organised around economic activity which made the people, for better or for worse, industrious. This was when Weber wrote the lines in his celebrated essay “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”: “the puritan wanted to be industrious and we are forced to be so (…). The idea of accomplishing one’s duty via work now haunts our lives, like the specter of religious beliefs long since gone”. From Northern Italy to Scandinavia, from Czechoslovakia to the USA, a work and duty ethic now reigns which is a veritable vision of man and the world. Let us propose a summary:

- the human being is defined ontologically speaking as a being governed by duty; work – i.e. mercantile work – is the first of the duties, a means par excellence for the proper accomplishment of other duties;

- the concept of duty is closely associated with the principle of individual responsibility (or freedom), vis-à-vis oneself and one’s family in the present and in future;

- individual responsibility leads to the adoption of rational behaviour, i.e. effort, work, anticipation, savings;

- hence the individual’s fulfillment consists of finding his/her proper place in society, it involves assuming a precise function and social roles.

According to this vision of the world, the community is a superior principle to the individual of which it is the finality. The individual is above all defined by duties, the only fundamental right being the right to work. Society on the other hand has rights vis-à-vis individuals. The subordination of the individual to society, the sacrifice of oneself to the community is justified by the fact that society ensures the individual’s security and above all by the idea that, transformed into one gigantic factory, society is in the process of producing tomorrow’s prosperity”9.

Jean Paule Willaime (2003), commenting on Weber’s idea that work value would be secularized (since “all-conquering capitalism no longer needs this support as it is built on a mechanical basis”) and in wondering how religious motivations had been replaced, gave this reply: “work is always considered as an important duty, even as a vocation. There has indeed

8

Psalm 90 tells of the vanity of life for whosoever exile separates from God: “the days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet it is their strength labour and sorrow”. What was rendered by the translator Osterwald correctly as “sorrow” was translated by Luther as “work” (and yet that which was precious was but pain and work). Although the Reformer’s translation is, at a pinch, acceptable, it translates a word with a strong negative connotation by a neutral, weak term. The Reformer’s translation became the accepted one but, over the course of time, this verse has become removed from its scriptural context and transformed into a sentence worded as follows: what is most precious. In a long life, it is effort and work. The alchemy has succeeded; the mistranslation is sealed”. This formalization was made possible by the theoretical re-working which began with Saint Augustine (it became possible to compare the divine opus with the work of monks) and ended in a veritable about turn with the Reform, and more particularly with Calvinism whose effects have been clearly shown by Weber. As Lalive d’Epinay, echoing Weber, recalls by showing the re-interpretations of Psalm 90, the translations of Luther’s Bible would result for the concept of work in a complete change of meaning.

9 Lalive d’Epinay, “Significations et valeurs du travail, de la société industrielle à nos jours” in Traité de sociologie du

(16)

been secularization but it remained internal to the work value. It is the latter which moved us on from the concept of work as a religious duty to a vision of work as secular duty”.

Although work was considered at one time and certainly is still considered so by some individuals, more or less intensely in certain countries, as a duty, other dimensions may also be more or less present. Investigations of a philosophical or sociological nature make it possible to distinguish different meanings in the concept of work which co-exist today and which help individuals to envisage their relationship with work.

From work as a “production factor” to work as the “essence of man” and to work as a “system for distributing income, rights and protection”

In “Le Travail. Une valeur en voie de disparition”, Méda (1995) proposed distinguishing three stages or three periods in the construction of the concept of work, each having witnessed the introduction of a new layer of interpretation or meaning which had in a way become sedimented over the previous centuries. The XVIIIth century saw the success and the

formalization of the first dimension, particularly in the works of Smith, after several centuries of theoretical preparation in which work, until then scorned, was recognised as having a value. Work was then defined as “that which creates wealth”. This is our actual “production factor”. It nonetheless continues to be considered as a punishment, a sacrifice, economists would say a “disutility”.

With the XIXth century a second period began during which a second layer of meaning,

radically different from the first, was added on to the first (but did not replace it): work was considered as the creative freeing of man, the transformational and negative power of man enabling him both to obliterate nature and make the world in his image and thus express and transform himself. First expressed in Hegel’s philosophy, this concept finally found form in Marx’s The Manuscripts of 1844, where work appears as the human activity par excellence, that which allows man to express himself best both in his genre and in his singularity: “let us suppose”, writes Marx, “that we are productive as human beings: each one of us could assert himself doubly in his production, himself and the other. 1. In my production, I would realise my individuality, my particularity; I would experience, in working, the pleasure of an individual manifestation of my life and in contemplating the object, I would have the individual joy of recognising my personality as a real power, concretely perceptible and exempt from any doubt (…) 3. I would be conscious of serving as a mediator between you and humankind, of being recognised and felt by you as complementary to your own being and as a necessary part of yourself, of being accepted in your spirit as in your love”(10). Work is not a disutility: “to consider work simply as a sacrifice, therefore a source of value, as a price paid by things and attributing a price to things depending on whether they involve more or less work, is to adhere to a purely negative definition (…). Work is a positive, creative activity (11). Once it is no longer alienated, work will become the primary vital need.

The XXth century is the one which saw the development of a third layer of meaning with the

establishment of the wage-earning society: the various rights set up to protect workers would be centered on the link with wages (the very one which would have to be abolished if work was to be liberated): right to work, right to social protection. Of course, as Habermas wrote,

10

.. Marx (1844), Economy and Philosophy, Lecture Notes, § 22, in Œuvres, Économie, tome II, p. 33, La Pléiade, Gallimard, 1979.

11

. Marx, “Work as Sacrifice and as Free Labour” in Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, outline 1857-1858, Œuvres, Économie, tome II, pp. 290-292, La Pléiade, Gallimard, 1979.

(17)

bureaucracies established by the Welfare State and by purchasing power in his role as a consumer of goods. The lever for pacifying class antagonism is therefore the neutralisation of the conflictual material still to be found in the status of salaried employment”12, but work is therefore transformed into employment and it is therefore appreciated not only for the income or the expression of self it provides but also for the rights to which it gives access. This genealogy, which sees in our current concept of work the result of many theoretical re-workings and the co-existence of a plurality of meanings, provides a pattern for attempting to untangle the various dimensions covered by the notion of importance attributed to work. When people say that work is important, are they referring to the instrumental dimension of work (work as the activity providing an income and increasing national production, the “work as a production factor”), to the expressive dimension of work (I express myself and I change the world in which I am, this is the “work as the essence of man” dimension) or work as a job (work is important because it gives me access to social rights, this is work as the “system of distribution of income, rights and protection”)?

Homo oeconomicus, homo faber, homo sociologicus

Sociology has produced three very similar typologies whose heuristic vocation is identical, for example that which Paugam (2000) proposes in “Le salarié de la précarité”13

by

distinguishing three paradigms: homo faber, homo oeconomicus and homo sociologicus.

“Homo faber refers of course to the act of work itself and the fulfillment it provides for the

person doing it, in that it enables him/her to assert him/herself in a precise task (…). Homo

oeconomicus implies a more instrumental attitude to work. Satisfaction depends then on

his/her remuneration according to a market (…). Homo sociologicus postulates that all work is done in a social framework: the quality of the relationships between men and the recognition they obtain from it constitute an essential factor of satisfaction”.

These theoretical remarks make it possible to understand why, as Paugam writes, “wage-earners are so attached to their employment, sometimes to the point of accepting inferior working conditions and wages. Employment provides them in reality with more than a wage. It gives them social rights and a position in the hierarchy of status derived from the Welfare State and therefore a social identity”14.

This theoretical framework gives us an initial analytical scale which enables us to understand better the concept of the importance of work. To say that work is important without going into more detail means nothing: when people say that work is very important, do they mean that it is essential in order to live as a provider of income, as a supplier of income (economic dimension of work as a production factor where it is reduced to this best effort dimension with a view to something else), do they on the contrary wish to signify that work is a duty that must be accomplished or that via work I express and fulfill myself and that it constitutes a fundamental dimension of my humanity (work as the essence of man and the mark of my singularity which must therefore be exercised not with a view to something else – obtaining

12

J. Habermas, La technique et la science comme idéologie, in La technique et la science comme idéologie, Denoël, 1973, p. 65.

13

S. Paugam, op.cit.

14

(18)

an income – but by virtue of the satisfaction which the activity itself gives). Consequently, all the dimensions of expression and relationship permitted by work become essential. Lastly, to declare that work is important may be interpreted as agreeing with the current norm which is that without work participation in social life is diminished and that having a job is having a place in society as well a series of rights.

As explained by Lallement: “The most worrying fact is perhaps that, as we look at the the surveys in more detail, certitudes weaken to the point that it scarcely seems relevant to try to decide one way or another in favour of a conclusion which is as simple as it is unilateral. The main reason is due to an ongoing misunderstanding arising out of the extensive use of the word "work". In the Value surveys referred to previously, the variety of terms proposed to assess work is remarkable to such an extent that it is difficult to reach a simple interpretation of results which are too global" (Lallement, 2001).

In the following sections, we try on the one hand to see whether the results of the surveys confirm the explanatory hypotheses referred to above and on the other to highlight the most important dimensions of work in the French case. Can the fact that work is considered to be more important in France than in other countries be explained by the fact that the ethic of duty is more developed there or should we see the effect of a particularly poor employment situation compared with other European countries, in particular with regard to the rate of unemployment and worries linked to job insecurity? Or, a third hypothesis, must one interpret these results as the sign that expectations centered on work are particularly strong in France, marked especially by the hope that work becomes a place where one can express oneself, enabling social links to be created and therefore by post-materialistic dimensions? We will be looking successively at these three hypotheses.

1.2. What is the significance of the importance attributed by the French to work?

According to the surveys, it seems that France occupies a median position with regard to the work ethic. Part of its singularity can be explained by its high rates of unemployment and the related concerns for the future. France is about average with regard to having an instrumental relationship to work. Most of the French singularity seems to be related to the strength of the post-materialistic expectations centered on work.

1.2.1 “The ethic of duty”: France about average

We saw previously that although the ethic of duty has profoundly marked western societies over the course of the last few centuries certain authors say that the XXth century would rather

seem to be the epoch of its decline. Work was considered less a duty to be accomplished than a means of obtaining a wage enabling the individual to fulfill him/herself and being a condition for full integration into society. What trends can we see when we read the surveys available? What is happening in Europe? Does France occupy a special position in this scenario?

Graphs 3 to 5 show the results of a series of questions in EVS 1999 on the work ethic as a duty15: countries are shown in the light of the proportion of people who were “in full agreement” with the phrase proposed in the questionnaire.

15

(19)

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? "Work is a duty towards society".

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Grea t Bri tain The N eth erla nds Litu ani a Swed en Irel and Spain Finl and Germ any Gree ce Est oni a Lat via Czech Re p. Den mar k Italy Fran ce Belg ium Malt a Slov akia Slove nia Hungar y Pol and Bulg aria Rom ani a Lux em bou rg Portu gal Disagree strongly Disagree

Neither agree, nor disagree Agree

Agree strongly

Source: EVS 1999.

The feeling that work is a duty to be accomplished is still largely held and shared by more than half of all Europeans (cf. graph 3). In Portugal and Denmark, more people agree that work is a duty vis-à-vis society. This seems to echo the idea that Danes are particularly “civic” (Algan and Cahuc, 2006). They become involved in their work (Svallfors et al., 2001; Hult and Svallfors, 2002). Taken overall, the French population seems no more sensitive to the work ethic than its Anglo-Saxon neighbours for example. If one takes account of the percentage of people simply agreeing with this idea, France is close to the UK. Furthermore, a quit high proportion of French also accept that “people should not be obliged to work if they do not want to” (graph 5) and that it is not humiliating to receive money without having worked for it (graph 4). The feeling of helping others or of being useful to society also does not seem to be particularly important for the French: less than 20% consider that the possibility of helping others by working is important in a job whereas this proportion is almost 40% in Portugal, Ireland and Spain. In other words, the work ethic as a duty vis-à-vis society is not particularly prevalent in France.

However, a minority of the population states very firmly its sensitiveness to the work ethic. With regard to the concept of work as a “duty vis-à-vis society”, the French effectively differ with a relatively high percentage of people “totally in agreement” with this idea (graph 3). This French specificity disappears when taking into account the percentage of people “in agreement”. Likewise, a relatively substantial proportion (more than 20%) of the French are “totally in agreement” with the idea that it would be humiliating to receive money without working (cf. graph 4). This proportion is lower in the other countries of the EU15 (with the exception of Italy) and in particular in the Netherlands, the UK, Denmark and Sweden but the French specificity is attenuated if the proportion of people “in agreement” with this idea is included. In other words, the work ethic is still well and truly present and substantially confirmed by a relatively large minority of the French population although this result can in no way suffice to explain the importance which work has for a large majority of French people.

(20)

Graph 4: Receiving money without working Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? "It is humiliating to receive money without having to work for it".

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% The Neth erlan ds Gr eat B ritain Islan de Spai n Swed en Finl and Port uga l Denm ark Ger man y Irel and Czech Rep . Esto nia Lat via Mal ta Gree ce Belg ium Slove nia Fra nce Hu ngar y Slovak ia Litu ania Luxe mbou rg Pola nd Ital y Rom ania Bulgari a Disagree strongly Disagree

Neither agree, nor disagree Agree

Agree strongly

Source: EVS 1999.

Graph 5 : Not having to work if you do not want to Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

"People should not have to work if they don't want to".

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Th e N ethe rlan ds Swed en Denmar k Port ugal Latv ia Gre at B ritai n Irel and Spain Italy Cze ch R ep. Slo veni a Ma lta Fin lan d Esto nia Ger man y Greec e Slovak ia Hu ngar y Bulg aria Litu ania Luxe mb ourg Belg ium Fran ce Roman ia Pol and Disagree strongly Disagree

Neither agree, nor disagree Agree

Agree strongly

(21)

Graph 6: The importance of the social link with work

% of people déclaring that the possibility of helping other people is "very important" in a job

16,0 18,7 20,7 21,1 22,0 26,2 23,7 29,4 37,5 38,6 40,2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Finla nd Fran ce Flan ders Germa ny ( We st) Gre at Br itain Den mar k Italy Swe den The Ne ther land s Ger man y (E ast) Aus tria Spa in Irela nd Por tuga l 1989 1997 2005 Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005.

Graph 7: The importance of being useful to society

% of people declaring that being useful to society is "very important" in a job

12,4 15,1 18,4 19,5 21,2 21,4 21,5 28,1 40,0 40,5 45,2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Finla nd Swe den The Ne ther lands Flan ders Germ any ( We st) Fran ce Denm ark Grea t Brit ain Italy Ger man y (E ast) Aus tria Spa in Irela nd Por tuga l 1989 1997 2005 Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005.

(22)

1.2.2 French society worried by unemployment: a hypothesis which does not fully explain the French singularity

Is the special position of France a manifestation of the stronger weight of unemployment? In this perspective, the economic context measured by indicators such as GDP per inhabitant or the level of unemployment would partly explain the French position.

If we refer to the replies given in the two waves of EVS, there is a correlation between the level of GDP and the importance attributed to work. Graph 8 shows that the poorest countries (like Ireland in 1990, Italy in 1990 and Spain in 1999) attribute more importance to work than the wealthiest countries (Germany in 1999 or Denmark in 1999). One can thus trace a straight line showing this correlation. This relationship cannot however explain the French situation. Without being in the group of the most prosperous countries, France in 1999 was relatively wealthy. It can therefore be found in the right-hand part of graph 3, but it is very far from the straight line which symbolises the correlation between the degree of importance attributed to work and GDP. The importance which the French attribute to work does not therefore seem to be explained by its level of wealth in 1999.

What about the link with unemployment? The correlation between importance attributed to work and the unemployment rate is clear at European level: in those countries affected by mass unemployment, the inhabitants more often than not consider work to be “very important” (cf. graph 9). In countries with a high rate of unemployment, the prospect of losing their job or of not finding another one seems to worry the inhabitants more and for them work then becomes a priority. In 1999, the date for which the ECHP and the EVS are available, a correlation can furthermore be established between dissatisfaction vis-à-vis job security and the importance attributed to work in a country (cf. graph 10).

Graph 8: Importance of work and level of national wealth

(23)

Graph 9: Importance of work and unemployment

Source: EVS 1990, 1999 and Eurostat for the unemployment rate.

Graph 10: Importance of work and job insecurity

Source: EVS 1999 for the importance of work and ECHP, wave 6 for satisfaction vis-à-vis job security.

The correlations highlighted in graphs 8 and 9 are still valid when the structure of the population is taken into account (levels of qualification, professions, status of activity). The effects of the unemployment rate and GDP are both significant (cf. annex 3). Work will be considered all the

(24)

more important when it is lacking and greater importance attributed to the balance between various activities when one has a stable job and an assured income.

The French survey on “Travail et Modes de vie”16 (Baudelot and Gollac, 2002) gives such a result. In response to the question: “What is more important for you in order to be happy?”, 46% of respondents said health, 31% the family, 27% work, 25% friends and 20% money. Slightly more than one quarter of respondents therefore referred to work (or the job: having work, a job, being in employment…), but the categories facing the most difficult working conditions, the lowest wages and the highest risk of unemployment made work one of the essential conditions of happiness. The word “work” or one of its synonyms was quoted by 43% of blue-collar workers compared with 20% of heads of enterprises, executives and those in the liberal professions. For men, the social situation as measured by the socio-professional category (blue or white-collar worker) is decisive. The status of the job is just as decisive: the unemployed (43%) and temporary workers (45%) put forward work much more often as a condition for happiness than the holders of a stable job (31%). “For those who have nothing, work is the minimum, the first step which they aspire to take: in order to be happy, you have firstly “to have”: to have work, employment, a job. On the contrary, the more benefits of all sorts one has (income, family, children, “gratifying” work) the greater the sources of happiness on earth. This is why blue-collar workers, white-collar workers and the unemployed associate happiness and work more, and more directly, than executives” (Baudelot and Gollac, 2002). These results partially clarify France’s special position on graph 1. The French rate of unemployment and the insecurity felt by the French could explain the importance which work has in their eyes. On graphs 4 and 5, France however remains relatively distant from the regression straight lines. In other words, the replies of the French cannot fully be explained by the rate of unemployment and job market insecurity. The “Travail et mode de vie” survey confirms furthermore that this explanation only holds true for part of the French population.

1.2.3 An instrumental relationship with work comparable to that in other countries

The French do not seem to attribute particular importance to wages or job security. They follow the European average whether the question is asked in the framework of the ISSP (graphs 11 and 13) or the ESS (graphs 12, 14 and 15). According to these two surveys, wages and job security (which illustrate the instrumental dimension of work) are much more important in the Mediterranean countries than in the Nordic countries.

Two ISSP questions make it possible to measure the instrumental value of work. For almost 30% of the French, work is just a means of earning a living, which puts them above the Danes and the Swedes but below all the others. 60% of the French would continue to work even if they did not need the money. The French once again are in line with the European average (graphs 16 and 17). The instrumental value of work is neither more nor less developed than in comparable countries like Germany.

16 The survey “Travail et mode de vie” is complementary to the survey “Permanente Conditions de Vie des ménages”. It

was undertaken by Insee in January 1997 using a representative sample of about 6,000 of the French population in partnership with Dares and the ENS (Ecole normale supérieure). The survey was undertaken at the respondent’s domicile.

(25)

Graph 11: The importance of income according to the ISSP

% of people declaring that income is "very important" in a job

9,6 15,4 15,9 16,7 17,7 19,6 22,4 24,9 41,9 61,1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The Neth erla nds Denm ark Germ any Gre at B ritai n Flan der s Swe den Finl and Fra nce Irela nd Italy Austr ia Por tuga l Spa in 1989 1997 2005

Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005 (cf. annex 4 for the detailed results in 1997 and 2005).

Graph 12: The importance of income according to the ESS

For you personally, how important do you think a high income would be if you were choosing a job? 44,3 41,4 56,0 61,7 61,5 52,9 62,1 60,1 54,1 56,0 52,6 42,5 36,1 25,9 5,1 7,3 7,5 9,0 13,5 15,3 16,2 16,8 21,4 24,4 31,2 51,0 54,8 69,5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Den ma rk The N ether land s Finl and Sw eden Ge rma ny Gre at B rita in Fran ce Belgium Au stria Lux em bour g Irela nd Portu gal Spain Gre ece Very important Important

Neither important, nor unimportant Not important

Not important at all

(26)

Graph 13: The importance of job security according to the ISSP

% of people declaring that job security is "very important" in a job

31,9 50,9 53,6 53,9 55,2 57,9 61,1 62,9 64,8 69,4 74,1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Denm ark The N ethe rland s Gre at B ritai n Flan ders Finl and Ireland Swede n Fra nce Portu gal Ger man y (We st) Spain Ital y Aust ria Ger ma ny (E ast) 1989 1997 2005

Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005 (cf. annex 4 for the detailed results in 1997 and 2005).

Graph 14: The importance of job security according to the ESS

For you personally, how important do you think a secure job would be if you were choosing a job?

54,5 58,8 55,5 56,1 47,5 45,0 47,6 43,0 37,9 37,2 36,8 35,0 28,6 18,3 16,0 21,4 31,1 34,8 40,2 43,2 44,8 46,3 50,8 56,9 58,5 58,7 64,0 76,0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Denm ark The Neth erlan ds Sw eden Finl and Gre at Br itain Fran ce Bel giu m Irela nd Aust ria Germa ny Portu gal Luxem bou rg Spai n Gre ece Very important Important

Neither important, nor unimportant Not important

Not important at all

(27)

Graph 15 : The importance of promotion according to the ESS

For you personally, how important do you think a job with good promotions opportunities would be if you were choosing a job?

28,3 42,4 35,2 42,7 44,1 46,2 50,5 63,6 40,7 55,6 56,8 44,6 38,3 39,7 26,0 4,5 6,2 6,9 7,8 12,3 15,6 16,6 19,3 22,5 23,9 25,1 30,5 45,7 45,9 64,1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Den ma rk The Net herla nds Sw eden Finlan d Ge rma ny Gre at Br itain Belg ium Fran ce Aust ria Lux emb our g Slove nia Irela nd Spai n Por tug al Gre ece Very important Important

Neither important, nor unimportant Not important

Not important at all

Source: ESS 2002.

Graph 16: An instrumental relationship?

% of people agreeing the following phrase: "job is just a way of earning money - no more"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1989 1997 2005 Germany (West) Germany (East) Great Britain Italy Ireland The Netherlands Sweden Spain France Portugal Denmark Flanders Finland Austria Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005.

(28)

Graph 17: Work and wages % of people agreeing the following statement.

"I would enjoy having a paid job even if I did not need the money"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1989 1997 2005 Germany (West) Germany (East) Great Britain Italy Ireland The Netherlands Sweden Spain France Portugal Denmark Flanders Finland Austria Source: ISSP 1989, 1997, 2005.

The replies of the French to this series of questions on the importance of the extrinsic aspects of work (wages, job security, promotion) correspond broadly to those that one might expect given the economic and institutional situation of France or the composition of its population. This is what tends to be shown by the logistical regression shown in annex and the following graphs.

All things being equal, less qualified people attribute more importance to wages and job security. According to this modeling, country effects remain significant and are, to some degree, a residue not explained by our model which was intended to take the effects of composition into account. We therefore compare the country effects and macro-economic indicators via graphs to estimate the effects of the economic and institutional context. The level of income per inhabitant thus seems to affect preferences vis-à-vis wages: wages are less important in the wealthier societies once the level of education or the structure per profession is taken into account in our previous model (cf. graph 18)17. This result confirms Maslow and Inglehart’s theses and relativizes the thesis whereby money is still very important for conspicuous consumption in contemporary societies which remain materialistic. Furthermore, job security is more important in countries where the rate of unemployment is high which seem to be relatively intuitive (graph 19). The institutional context also plays a role, as suggested by Max Haller when he criticized Ronald Inglehart (2002). High unemployment benefits reassure workers who are less worried about job security since the institutional context enables them to be sure of a certain continuity of income (cf. graph 20).

17 It should be recalled that we have not introduced the effect of individual income because it is expressed in national

Figure

Table continues next page
Table continues on next page
Table continues on next page

Références

Documents relatifs

Contrary to the French institutional investor, the percentage of the foreign institutional investor institutional investor in the case of the enterprises audited by

The existence of a normative element in mental content does not need, therefore, to be only a feature of our self-ascriptions of thought: this element can be, so to

As part of the Europe 2020 Economic Growth Strategy, the European Commission highlights the role of regional policy in ensuring the complementarity of EU member states at a

In order to do that, I compare Mongin’s (2006) framework, which is useful to analyze the role of value judgments of economists in their professional work, and

The analysis concentrates on four main relations: fixed capital accumulation, financial accumulation and firms’ demand of financial assets, credit demand and firms’ indebtedness

The uses of places varied according to occupational and age subgroups: The young scientists expressed a higher need for privacy and a strong investment in their working areas,

Finally, civic worth arises when the processors mention their “values” (P8, P9, P11, P14) or say that they consider above all the welfare of the consumers and the producers (P9)

Designed to route information between computers, the Internet is rapidly evolving into an Internet of things where services, media, and Real World Objects (RWOs)