Attitudes of registered unemployed women over the age of 50 to different forms of employment The labour market was founded on the assumption that the vast majority of economically active people are able to obtain permanent and full-time employment, and that they are threatened only by short periods during which they may temporarily be without work. Today the situation is different. As noted by Keller (2006, s. 120), it is becoming clear that precarious employment and unemployment are inscribed directly in the dynamics of today’s modernization. They are unavoidable consequences of new patterns of employment restructuring; they form the other side of industrial innovations and the other side of efforts to increase competitiveness.
One of the basic human needs is the need for self-realization and self-actualization within broader social ties. This need tends to be fulfilled only through activities that benefit both the individual and the society in which the individual lives. We call such activities work. According to Czech sociologist Buchtová, “work is an important condition for a dignified human existence; it brings not only material gain, but also gives a person a sense of self-realization and social usefulness. It integrates a person into many social relations and satisfies the need for ambition, self-fulfillment, and self-esteem.”
Exclusion from employment means deprivation in the basic needs that work directly satisfies, including participation in a status that is created and confirmed through this activity, as Mareš (2002, s. 68.) notes. Unemployment is not considered a serious economic or social problem until it becomes massive. When unemployment becomes widespread and the duration of individual unemployment cases lengthens, unemployment comes to the centre of attention not only of those who lose work, but also of the entire society and its state and political institutions (Mareš, 2002, s. 11). Women, and especially women over 50, become a risk category: they are among those first dismissed from employment, along with young people without work experience, and they return to the labour market mainly with employment problems. Generally, women are directed to service-sector jobs and positions with reduced working hours and part-time jobs.
The high level of long-term unemployment among women over 50 motivated us to investigate these women’s attitudes toward different forms of employment. We conducted the study at the Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office in Prešov in 2010. The basic study population consisted of registered unemployed women over 50 in the records of the Prešov Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office. At the time of the study, there were 1,270 unemployed women over 50 on the register. Given the sufficient size of the sample, we chose a questionnaire method. We included 1,243 respondents, unemployed women over 50 in the register. Through increased effort we managed to collect 1,118 questionnaires—89.94%—of which 1,081 could be evaluated, that is, 86.96%.
The aim of the study was to find out the attitudes of registered unemployed women over 50 toward different forms of employment. We formulated the hypothesis that registered unemployed women over 50 would not sufficiently express their attitudes toward different forms of employment. The respondents answered the following questions, with a response option of (definitely yes, rather yes, rather no, definitely no): 1. Would you accept part-time work and why? 2. Would you work as a home-based worker or in telework and why? 3. Would you work for the minimum wage and why? 4. Would you work for less than the minimum wage and why? 5. Would you work as a freelancer if your employer required it and why? 6. Would you work overtime and why? 7. Would you work shifts and why? 8. Would you work at night and why? 9. Would you work in hazardous conditions and why? 10. Would you work in short-term or temporary employment and why? 11. Would you work using active labour market policy tools and why? 12. Would you work seasonal work and why? 13. Would you carry out more than one job at the same time and why? 14. Would you accept any work and why?
The respondents expressed their attitudes toward shorter working time, home-based work and telework, work for the minimum wage, work for less than the minimum wage, freelancing, overtime, shift work, night work, work in risky conditions, short-term and temporary employment, active labour market policy tools, seasonal work, doing multiple jobs simultaneously, and doing any type of work.
Research Results Work with shorter working time All 1,081 respondents answered this question, and none used the option to justify their attitude. We can assume that either they did not feel the need to express their thoughts, or they did not consider completing the questionnaire an important part of dealing with their life situation. “Definitely yes” was answered by 392 respondents, representing 36.26%. “Rather yes” was answered by 252 respondents, or 23.31%. Work with shorter hours would be accepted “rather not” by 263 respondents, 24.33%. “Definitely no” would answer 174 respondents, 16.09%. We can conclude that responses to this question confirm respondents’ interest in shorter working hours, which would allow them to spend time with their family or in other activities.
Work in the form of home-based work and telework Again, all 1,081 respondents answered this question, but none used the opportunity to justify their response. In this form, 207 respondents (19.15%) would “definitely” work from home/telework. “Rather yes” answered 174 respondents, 16.09%. “Rather no” was chosen by 246 respondents, 22.76%, and “definitely no” for this form of work was stated by 454 respondents, 42.00%. The responses show that interest in this new form of work is not strong. Based on these answers, we can infer that respondents either did not know this form of work, had not encountered this terminology, or if they knew the term and form, they likely do not have sufficient computer skills or prefer working in a team over working from home with computer equipment.
Work for the minimum wage All 1,081 respondents answered this question, again without any justification. For work at the minimum wage, 297 respondents (27.47%) answered “definitely would,” and 252 (23.32%) answered “rather yes.” “Rather no” was selected by 297 respondents, 27.47%, and “definitely no” by 235 respondents, 21.74%. The responses indicate that half of the respondents are not willing to work for the minimum wage. In the current labour-market situation, it must be recognized, especially for people who lack the required knowledge and skills and who have been out of the work process for a long time with their work habits beginning to fade, that work at the minimum wage can still be a path to better valuation and stable employment.
Work for lower wage than minimum To this question, 1,081 respondents answered, again without expressing their reasoning. “Definitely yes” to a wage lower than minimum wage was answered by 95 respondents (8.80%), and “rather yes” by 140 respondents (12.95%). For a wage lower than the minimum, 303 respondents (28.03%) answered “rather not,” and 543 respondents (50.22%) answered “definitely not.” These responses allow us to conclude that more than half of the respondents would not accept work for a wage below the minimum. In the current period, it was probably not an adequate economic gain for the respondents and their families.
Work as a freelancer if your employer required it All 1,081 respondents answered this question. None provided reasons or justification. If the employer required it, only 62 respondents (5.73%) answered “definitely yes,” and 145 (13.41%) answered “rather yes.” As freelancers, if required by an employer, 308 respondents (28.50%) would “rather not,” and a negative attitude was expressed by 566 respondents, that is, 52.36%. From these responses it follows that more than half of the women know what it means to work as a freelancer, including the obligations that come with it, and they are more willing to reject this form. Among the women who said they would be willing to work that way, either there is a lack of knowledge about entrepreneurs’ rights and duties and the differences from an employment relationship, or they simply want to work and be employed at any cost. A deeper examination of this phenomenon would certainly be very interesting, but given the scope of our study we did not have the room or time to address these questions.
Overtime work All 1,081 respondents answered this question, without any justification. Overtime work would be “definitely” performed by 398 respondents, or 36.82%. “Rather yes” was selected by 218 respondents (20.17%). “Rather no” would be 280 respondents (25.90%), and 185 respondents (17.11%) answered that they would “definitely not” work overtime. From these responses we may conclude that more than half of the respondents would perform overtime in order to obtain employment and work. For those who did not show interest, because they did not use the justification option, we can only assume that it is probably not possible due to health status, or that overtime would disrupt their established routine.
Shift work All 1,081 respondents answered this question without justification. “Definitely would” work on shifts: 314 respondents, 29.05%. “Rather yes”: 229 respondents, 21.18%. “Rather no”: 353 respondents, 32.66%. “Definitely not” would work shifts: 185 respondents, 17.11%. The responses indicate that half of those surveyed would welcome shift work, while the other half does not agree with shift work. From these responses we can infer that these women, in order to obtain work, are willing to change even their traditional workday pattern (i.e. from 07:00 to 15:30) and adapt to new trends in work. For the other half, family environment may matter: family members may not accept shift work, or there may be school-age children or people requiring special care at home.
Night work All 1,081 respondents answered this question but did not use the justification option. “Definitely would” work at night was 229 respondents, 21.18%, and 62 respondents (5.74%) answered “rather yes.” “Rather no” was selected by 280 respondents, 25.90%, and 510 respondents (47.18%) answered “definitely no.” The responses show that respondents would not welcome night work. We can likely attribute the rejection to the number of years worked, less than ideal health, and problems with night connections in city public transport, Slovak bus transport, and Slovak Railways. The smaller half that would accept shift work probably did so for survival reasons and the need to secure income through employment.
Work in risky conditions All 1,081 respondents answered this question. None used the option to justify their stance. “Definitely would” work in risky conditions: 78 respondents (7.22%), and “rather yes” was chosen by 145 (13.41%). “Rather not” would work in risky conditions: 347 respondents (32.10%), and “definitely not” was answered by 511 unemployed women (47.27%). We can conclude that work in risky conditions is not attractive for this group of registered unemployed people. These respondents are likely weighing suitable working conditions in relation to their health and age.
Short-term or temporary employment All 1,081 respondents answered this question without expressing reasons. In short-term or temporary employment, “definitely would” work: 252 respondents (23.31%), and “rather yes” 347 respondents (32.10%). “Rather not” would work in short-term or temporary employment: 303 respondents (28.03%). A “negative attitude” to short-term or temporary employment was expressed by 179 respondents (16.56%). Based on respondents’ answers, we can conclude that these women would welcome short-term or temporary forms of employment, likely because of long-term unemployment and the possibility of earning at least partial income and the need to be productive and part of an employee collective.
Work using active labour market policy tools All 1,081 respondents answered this question, but none used the option to justify their stance. “Definitely yes,” using active labour market policy tools, was answered by 241 respondents (22.30%), and “rather yes” by 263 respondents (24.33%). “Rather no” was chosen by 285 unemployed women (26.36%), and “definitely no” by 292 respondents (27.01%). The responses indicate that nearly half of the respondents are interested in employment through active labour market policy tools. We can assume that these respondents likely know the Employment Services Act, have encountered this term, have had the opportunity to work with some active labour market tools, and have had good experiences with employers. The second group that responded negatively either does not know these tools or has not had very good experiences with this form of employment.
Seasonal work All 1,081 respondents answered the question on seasonal work, but again they did not justify their positions. “Definitely yes” to seasonal work was answered by 246 respondents (22.76%), and “rather yes” by 302 respondents (27.94%). “Rather no” was expressed by 309 respondents (28.58%), and 224 respondents (20.72%) said they would “definitely not” do this form of work. The responses indicate interest in seasonal work, where they could at least partially use their knowledge and skills and gain new experience that might later be used in full-time employment.
Multiple jobs simultaneously One thousand and eighty-one respondents answered this question, and no one answered the “why” question. “Definitely yes” to carrying out multiple jobs simultaneously was answered by 218 respondents (20.17%). “Rather yes” was chosen by 224 respondents (20.72%). “Rather no”: 314 respondents (29.05%). As many as 325 respondents (30.06%) answered “definitely not.” The responses indicate that interest in performing multiple jobs simultaneously is lower, probably because their health does not allow it, or because such workload would interfere with family care responsibilities.
Any job This question was answered by 1,081 respondents without justification. “Definitely would” accept any job: 232 respondents (21.46%), and “rather yes” by 244 respondents (22.57%). “Rather no” answered by 367 respondents (33.95%), and “definitely would not accept any job” by 238 respondents (22.02%). The responses indicate that half of this category is not interested in any work at all, meaning they prefer qualified and full-time work with appropriate remuneration where they can use their knowledge and experience; the other half is interested in any job, possibly due to financial reasons, limited education, or long-term registration at the labour office.
Established hypothesis: The hypothesis that registered unemployed women over 50 do not sufficiently express their attitudes toward different forms of employment was fully confirmed. As our study shows, registered unemployed women over 50 expressed interest in only three forms of work. Shorter working time received positive responses: “definitely yes” from 392 respondents (36.26%) and “rather yes” from 252 respondents (23.31%). There was also interest in short-term or temporary employment, with “definitely yes” from 252 respondents (23.31%) and “rather yes” from 347 respondents (32.10%). This category also showed a positive attitude toward seasonal work, where 246 respondents (22.76%) said they would “definitely perform” this work and 302 respondents (27.94%) would “rather yes” perform seasonal work.
For the remaining forms of employment in the remaining eleven questions, respondents expressed a negative attitude. They were not attracted to home-based work and telework, with 454 respondents (42.00%) saying they would “definitely not perform” this work and 246 respondents (22.76%) saying “rather not.” Work for the minimum wage would be “definitely not” performed by 225 respondents (21.74%), and “rather not” by 297 (27.47%). Likewise, 543 respondents (50.22%) would definitely not work for less than the minimum wage, and 303 respondents (28.03%) said rather not. Work as a freelancer would be “definitely not” done by 566 respondents (52.36%), with 308 (28.50%) saying rather not. For shift work, “definitely not” was answered by 185 respondents (17.11%), and “rather not” by 353 respondents (32.66%). To the question of working at night, 510 respondents answered “definitely not” (47.18%) and 280 (25.90%) answered “rather not.” For work in risky conditions, 511 respondents answered “definitely not” (47.27%) and 347 (32.10%) answered “rather not.” Regarding work through active labour market policy tools, 292 respondents (27.01%) answered “definitely not” and 285 (26.36%) answered “rather not.” Respondents who would “definitely not perform” multiple jobs at once numbered 325 (30.06%), and 314 (29.05%) answered “rather not.” For any work, 238 respondents (22.02%) answered “definitely no,” and 367 (33.95%) answered “rather no.” For overtime work, half of the respondents showed a positive attitude and half did not express interest in this form of employment. Our hypothesis was confirmed, and we can state that registered unemployed women over 50 did not sufficiently express their attitudes toward different forms of employment.
Discussion In this paper, we analyzed the attitudes of registered unemployed women over 50 toward different forms of employment. The aim was to determine this age group’s attitudes and to identify where they might find opportunities for employment.
These findings signal the challenges faced by this category of unemployed women, which should be particularly useful for employees of labour offices, social affairs and family offices, who should respect these issues to a substantial extent and incorporate them into their work. Since this category of unemployed women prefers work with shorter hours, short-term employment, or temporary employment and also showed interest in seasonal work, this reality must be acknowledged and used in their labour-market activation.
It would also help at the level of the Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office in Prešov to hold workplace meetings with employers from the Prešov district who could employ this workforce—registered unemployed women over 50—in part-time positions, or on a temporary basis, for example during holiday periods, during long-term sickness-related absences of their employees, or during parental leave.
Because registered unemployed women over 50 do not sufficiently know how to use active labour market policy tools, the Prešov Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office should provide more information and training about current labour-market policy tools, communicate with these women about suitable employment instruments, conduct recruitment procedures focused on this age group, and invite suitable employers who show interest in some active labour market policy tools and who also accept women over 50. Registered unemployed women over 50 showed less interest in addressing their adverse life situation by starting self-employment. Labour office counsellors, in cooperation with staff responsible for unemployed registrants, should identify women in this category who are inclined toward self-employment, invite them to professional interviews, include them in courses focused on self-employment, and provide them with a grant for self-employment.
Registered unemployed women over 50 were less flexible in accepting working conditions. They did not show interest, for example, in home-based work and telework, which is used to a large extent in the European Union and is still rarely preferred in our country, except in the Bratislava region. This form of employment should be explained to women over 50, with benefits of this employment relationship explained by the Prešov Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office. It would also be useful to organize workplace meetings with this category of unemployed women in the Employment Clubs and hold an expert lecture by the office’s legal officer to inform and motivate them toward this form of employment.
Conclusion Based on the research carried out at the Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office in Prešov with registered unemployed women over 50, there were also shortcomings identified in the work of staff at that office. It is necessary to cooperate more closely with this category, communicate with them, and provide individual counselling. They should be informed about all available forms of employment, the possibilities offered by active labour market policy tools, and provided with basic legal counselling. They should be encouraged to complete basic education and be offered retraining courses. At the same time, it is necessary that professional advisers, especially psychologists, work with these women to encourage them to address their life situation, strengthen their own capacities, and aim for employment.
For this age category of unemployed women over 50, public awareness about the value of older people’s skills—such as accuracy, reliability, and communicability—also needs to be improved.
Likewise, this category of unemployed women must realize that if they want to become employed, they need to be more interested in work and, in particular, in its new forms. They must gather new information and monitor changes in our legislation, especially the Employment Services Act No. 5/2004 Z. z. in its current wording and the Labour Code. Here, there is room for action not only by labour offices and social affairs and family offices, but also by other actors on the labour market, especially organizations in the third sector and volunteer organizations. Of course, the Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office will continue to have a major role in employment for not only this category of unemployed, as will an individualized approach to each unemployed person.
Author: PhDr. Anna ZákutnáBiographical profile: She completed higher education in Adult Education at Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Prešov. She worked at the social department of the District Office in Prešov and the Labour Office, Social Affairs and Family Office in Prešov in executive and managerial roles. She currently works as a project manager responsible for projects in the social field and education at the City Office in Prešov. She is studying doctoral studies in an external form at the University of Health and Social Work of St. Elisabeth in Bratislava. **List of literature:
BUCHTOVÁ, B. Nezaměstnanost – psychologický, ekonomický a sociální problém, Praha: Grada 2001, s. 75. ISBN 80-247-9006-8. Keller, J. 2006. Soumrak sociálního státu. Sociologické nakladatelství (Slon), Praha, s. 120. ISBN 80-86429-41-5. Mareš, P. 2002. Nezaměstnanost jako sociální problém. Sociologické nakladatelství, Praha, s. 11. ISBN 80-86429-08-3. Mareš, P. 2002. Nezaměstnanost jako sociální problém. Sociologické nakladatelství, Praha, s. 68. ISBN 80-86429-08-3. Zákon č. 311/2001 v platnom znení (Zákonník práce ). Zákon č. 5/2004 Z. z. o službách zamestnanosti v znení neskorších predpisov.