579

Work 51 (2015) 579–590 DOI 10.3233/WOR-152011 IOS Press

Will I be able to do my work at 60? An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing Carla Barrosa,∗, Filomena Carnideb , Liliana Cunhac, Marta Santosc and Catarina Silvad a

Centro de Psicologia da Universidade do Porto, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Porto, Portugal Fac Motricidade Humana, Univ Tec Lisboa CIPER, Lisbon, Portugal c Centro de Psicologia da Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal d Centro de Psicologia da Universidade do Porto, Fac Motricidade Humana, Univ Tec Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal b

Received 18 May 2013 Accepted 30 October 2013

Abstract. BACKGROUND: Most developed countries have considered population ageing as one of the economic challenges that need to be overcome. Managing ageing has led to consideration of a number of policies where it is essential to increase the employment rate for older workers. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the working conditions which tend to be perceived as hindering continuity in the workplace at the age of 60. PARTICIPANTS: 1234 workers from different sectors and socio-professional categories (52% men and 48% women; 64.5% younger than 45 years old). METHODS: A quantitative overview was adopted with the use of logistic regression models. The INSAT was used (Work and Health Questionnaire). RESULTS: Apart from factors of great physical constraint, other less visible aspects play a role in the idea of workers not being able to continue to work by the age of 60, namely factors linked to work organizational options and relationships with others. CONCLUSIONS: Working conditions have a great influence in the idea of inability to perform the same type of work at 60. This notion does not only apply to older workers. In fact, even younger workers under certain working conditions hold the same view, thus raising social concerns that should be taken into account by public policies. Keywords: Ageing in and due to work, organization and working conditions, workers’ perspective, work constraints, earlyretirement

1. Introduction

∗ Corresponding author: Carla Barros, Centro de Psicologia da Universidade do Porto, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, P-4249-004 Porto, Portugal. Tel.: +351 225071300; Fax: +351 5508269; E-mail: [email protected].

The Global Risks Report 2013 [1] has stated five risks with a high probability of occurrence in the next ten years. Among them we stress the risk of “mismanagement of population ageing”. In fact, most developed countries have identified ageing population as one of the greatest economic and social challenges.

c 2015 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved 1051-9815/15/$35.00 

580

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

The E.U.’s choice of the year 2012 as the “European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations” is proof of that. The fact that ageing is usually associated with an increase in life expectancy and falling birth rates [2] has led to the consideration of a number of policies in order to increase the employment rate for older workers [3]. In fact, one of the three main goals defined by the E.U. in 2012 concerns “active ageing in employment”, and stresses the need to take into account current working conditions and the possibility of adapting those to the health of the elderly. In the document produced by the Eurostat [4] it is even stated that “Ensuring the health and safety of workers throughout their working career is a precondition for a sustainable working life and for active and healthy ageing after retirement. It forms an important part of the comprehensive measures to enable and encourage people to continue working longer and thus support the sustainability of pension systems” (p. 7). 1.1. Re-thinking ageing from a perspective of working conditions An increase in age means on the one hand a decline in certain abilities and on the other hand an enhanced knowledge through experience which may be seen to compensate dwindling functional abilities. The relative importance of these counteracting trends is influenced by the specific working conditions a person has experienced [5]. The debate on “the good age” to retire is now deeply conditioned by the current economic situation and by a certain definition of the “young” [6]. In an ever-changing scenario, competences gained through life experience are no longer enough. Constant updates and adaptation are crucial. Furthermore, it is also necessary to intervene in more “discrete” working conditions not always considered in more standardized evaluations, and which could equally contribute to workers leaving work. The focus on the age factor overlooks the debate on working conditions, as these are not usually a target for intervention and are one of the most obvious reasons for retiring [7]. In this context, what is most shocking is that exiting the labour market is seen as the only option left in order to ensure workers’ selfpreservation. In this case, the risk of early-retirement is seen as an alternative to a preventive policy and is perhaps the greatest threat to health preservation. This study presents a discussion of the different factors related to working conditions that lead to early work exclusion. The development beforehand of a human re-

source management policy within companies, taking into account active aging, requires knowledge of risk factors that may lead to early exclusion [8]. Besides the most common risk assessments, which emphasize usual occupational exposure levels, the specificity of our contribution is to consider the unobservable activity dimension, i.e. the workers point of view, giving them voice, and collecting their own perception of risk factors that influence their decisions to abandon work. 1.2. Re-thinking working conditions from the perspective of the workers Having in mind the notion of “boundary object” used by Molinié and Leroyer [9], the chosen methodology aims to bring the different interlocutors closer, in a debate between different actors, different worlds, different knowledges, and different interpretations, through a tool which is flexible enough and yet robust in its essence. Our analysis views workers as participating actors who are capable of expressing themselves directly, rather than through the interpretation of an intermediary. To re-think working conditions from the workers’ perspective means to understand how work characteristics and conditions are evaluated; the workers’ health; and the relationship between health, safety and work. The Health and Work Questionnaire (INSAT: Inquérito Saúde e Trabalho) [10] is a tool that has been used following this guideline. It originated from the contribution of European questionnaires [11], and it aims to understand the notion that workers have of their own working conditions and the impact these have on their health. The INSAT is a good evaluation tool as it focuses on the diverse and variable questions related to the different work situations. In fact, the inclusion of a diverse number of questions related to the work context, even those that focus on a more subjective dimension of work, is one of the main concerns of this questionnaire and a constant point of reference in the suggested methodology. More than identifying “exposure factors”, we have aimed, in our health and work research, to analyse how work demands different uses of health [12–14]. It is not only the use in a physical, psychological or even an affective sense, but a use in oneself [15] a total mobilization of itself as an answer to the constraints of the activity. This overview takes a more individual-centred perspective, referred by Dejours [16] as “the subjective

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

experience of the worker”. Therefore, it is possible to give greater visibility to new, more discrete, and less obvious relationships between health and work. Despite the fact that the INSAT is a quantitative methodological tool it is possible, as noted by Volkoff [17], to have enough scope for evaluation and intervention in a rather more “comprehensive” than “explanatory” overview. This means that the creation, analysis, and interpretation of the INSAT results require a continuous dialogue with the data which contextualises those results. As a result, we take into account the principle of previous work analysis [18], in order to understand its specificity, whilst knowing that workers always use strategies to manage their work activity, despite consequences to their health, i.e. promotion or deterioration [19]. In fact, despite the statistical possibilities of this tool described in an attempt to create global, general and quantitative analysis, DaubasLetourneux [19] and Volkoff [17,21,22] tend to emphasize how results interpretation ought to be followed by careful and cautious reflection, whilst having in mind readjustments to address the unforeseen [23] and taking into account the management of the complexity of work and its impact on health [24]. From this perspective, quantification can be seen as a way to show trends and to highlight the workers’ most subtle concerns, which would otherwise be kept hidden in their personal sphere. As noted by Molinié and Leroyer [9], numbers allow us to identify and reinforce a series of connections between work and health, and to help us overcome the growing individualization of work experiences. One of the INSAT key points, which will be the focus of this study, is the possibility to remain in the same work situation at the age of 60;1 however, it is not our intention to analyze individual answers as if this continuity in the workplace depended on a personal decision, but rather to understand that working conditions help to justify certain trends in the answers. According to this principle, this study aims to explore the trends in the workers’ answers in terms of the possibility to continue working at the age of 60, and to analyze the working conditions which seem to justify 1 The

reference to a precise age – 60 years old – is justified for two main reasons: (i) it is a milestone at the beginning of a decade when usually retirement is possible without penalty, ie, although it is previous to formal retirement age, the time gap is shorter compared to a lifetime of work, thus it is important to determine the workers’ point of view about remaining or not at work after the age of 60; (ii) the European working conditions surveys make use of the same reference group [25,26].

581

their idea of being unable to continue to perform their work in those conditions. 2. Methodology 2.1. Sample The sample comprised 1264 Portuguese workers from the north, center, and Lisbon and Tagus valley regions, with 90% response rate, and belonging to six economic sectors: (a) Health and Social Support (receptionists and nurses); (b) Education (high school teachers and professional trainers); (c) Wholesale and Retail (sales people, store managers and supermarket cashiers); (d) Manufacturing Industry (highly qualified and technical staff, middle managers, back office workers, logistics, and blue collar workers); (e) Water Collection, Treatment and Supply, Sanitation and Waste Collection and Treatment (directors, middle managers, highly qualified and technical staff, drivers, front and back office workers, logistics and blue collar workers); (f) Transport, Storage and Communications (public service drivers). The exclusion criterion of the sample was not having answered a third or more of the questions. 2.2. The tool and procedures The INSAT is organized in different sets of questions. First, a set of question focuses on the job description in terms of the nature of work, type of contract, working hours and shifts. After this introductory part, another group of questions concentrates on work constraints and their effects on workers, namely, (1) environmental and physical constraints, (2) organizational (pace and autonomy) constraints, (3) relationship (colleagues and customers) constraints, and (4) work characteristics. Another set of questions broaches the effects of work on health. In this study, we have used the common set to the 2007 and 2010 versions of the INSAT [10,11]. It includes twenty-four common health problems such as: back pain, headache, respiratory, heart and vision problems, and musculoskeletal disorders, among others. The survey is self-reported because, as mentioned above, the main goal is to ascertain what the workers’ perception is of the effects of their work conditions on their health and well-being. The survey follows the researchers’ guidance, and was conducted between 2008 and 2012. We ensured the confidentiality on the data collected by maintaining the anonymity of the participants. All the participants provided signed informed consent to participate.

582

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

2.3. Statistical analysis The main outcome of our study was the item. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the central tendency parameters for scale variables (mean, standard deviation and median) and relative frequency of the nominal variables, allowing the sample’s characterization. Firstly, the relational structure among the different work dimensions and the inability to continue working at the age of 60 was assessed by Principal Components Analysis for Categorical Data using the correlations matrix for factor extraction of principal components method. The common factors were those that had retained the value of eigenvalues higher than 1. Afterwards, all variables were recorded in nominal variables, according to the workers’ answers, that is, if the condition was reported for actual or both (actual and past) (value 1), or if it was never verified or only in the past (value 0). Following that, the nominal variables were integrated in a bivariate logistic analysis (Enter method), in order to examine the association between demographics, physical, organizational, social work conditions and the inability to work at 60. The variables that showed significant associations in this first approach were then integrated into a multi-factorial logistic analysis (backward conditional method), after confidence intervals has been calculated from the maximum likelihood estimation of coefficients and their standard errors. Statistical analysis was done in groups using PASW Statistics 20.0 with the level of significance set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

tific specialists; 12.3% technical and middle-range professions; 20.7% administrative personnel; 7.8% personal, protection, security and sales services; 5.8% building industry and craftsmen qualified staff; 32.5% machine, plant and assembly operators, and unqualified workers. Most workers (59.4%) had been working in the same company for more than ten years and were on contract (80.5%). The questionnaires were given to workers from both public (54.6%) and private (45.4%) companies. Most workers (81.9%) were from big companies (with more than 250 workers) and worked in the following areas: Health and Social Support (5.4%); Education (13.2%); Wholesale and Retail (7.8%); Manufacturing Industry (31.8%); Water Collection, Treatment and Supply, Sanitation and Waste Collection and Treatment (28.7%); Transport, Storage and Communications (13.1%). Out of the entire sample 39% of participants answered “yes” to the question: “It’s a type of work that I will not be able to perform when I am 60.” Out of these the majority were women (44.2%), workers with age < 45 (63.7%), workers that had been working for more than ten years in the same company (57.9%) and had a well-balanced educational level: 30.5% had basic education (up to nine years of schooling), 36.5% had completed secondary school and 27.1% held a degree or a post-graduate course. A positive answer was given to our initial question in all socio-professional categories, namely by machine, plant and assembly operators and unqualified workers (28.7%), as well as, managing boards and intellectual and scientific specialists (26.5%). A greater percentage of workers in the wholesale and retail sectors and education stated that they considered it difficult to perform their work aged 60 (namely, 79.8% out of the 94 participants, and 64.7% out of the 151 participants answered “yes”).

3.1. Sample characterization 3.2. Factor analysis Out of 1264 questionnaires, 30 were excluded due to being a third or more incomplete. As a result, 1234 questionnaires were classified as valid with 52% male participants and 48% female participants (Table 1). The participants’ average age was 41 ± 10.5 (Me 41.0), with 64.5% of those aged < 45. The participants’ educational background was varied and ranged from 28.1% having up to nine years of schooling, to 33.1% at degree and post-graduate level. Most socioprofessional categories were included in the sample [20] (with the exception of the armed forces): 21% company managing boards and intellectual and scien-

The first factor (Table 2) presented a high factorial weight for variables 9 to 48 (that is, higher than 0.40) representing the physical, organizational and social conditions of work. The Cronbach’s Alpha was considered excellent (i.e., superior to 0.90). Time constraints were taken into account, namely the absence of recovery times and constraints linked to dealing with the public, which have led to a greater weighting between the items in this category. The second factor comprised items related to work schedule organization and presented a lower eigen-

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

583

Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristics of the total sample in terms of the answer to the question “It is a type of work that I will not be able to do when I am 60. (Relative frequencies) Socio-demographic characteristics

Total sample (%) (n = 1234)

Gender Men Women Education Unknown Primary School Preparatory School Lower Secondary School Upper Secondary School Bachelor’s Degree University Degree Post-graduate Degree Age < 45 years old  45 years old Seniority Up to 15 years 15 years or more 15 Socio-Professional Category* Managing boards and intellectual and scientific sector specialists Technical and middle-range professions Administrative personnel Personal, protection, security and sales workers Building industry and craftsmen qualified workers Machine, plant and assembly operators, and unqualified workers. Work sector∗ Health and Social Support Education Wholesale and Retail Sales Manufacturing Industry Water Collection, Treatment and Supply, Sanitation and Waste Collection and Treatment Transport, Storage and Communications ∗ According

52.0 48.0 0.3 4.1 3.0 21.0 38.4 2.5 27.5 3.1 64.6 35.4 51.6 48.4 21.0 12.3 20.7 7.8 5.8 32.5 5.4 13.2 7.8 31.8 28.7 13.1

“It is a type of work that I will not be able to do when I am 60”? Yes (%) No (%) (n = 455) (n = 711) (n = 450) (n = 704) 44.2 59.2 58.8 40.6 (n = 406) (n = 563) 0.5 0.2 4.9 3.7 4.2 2.3 21.4 19.7 36.5 40.3 2.0 2.8 21.7 27.1 3.4 3.4 (n = 432) (n = 681) 63.7 64.6 36.3 35.4 (n = 426) (n = 684) 53.7 52.2 46.3 47.8 (n = 446) (n = 692) 26.5 17.8 6.5 16.3 15.2 25.9 16.6 2.9 6.5 5.9 28.7 31.2 (n = 454) (n = 710) 5.1 5.5 21.4 7.6 16.5 2.7 27.1 31.5 22.9 34.5 7.0 18.2

to the Portuguese Professions Classification 2010 [27].

value than the first factor, but still higher than 1, with a Cronbach’s Alpha classified as very good (0.80–0.90). This factor only included the items related to the different types of work schedules in a correlation higher than 0.50. The results obtained in the Principal Components Analysis for Categorical Data made it possible to select which were the determinant factors behind the idea of inability to perform work at the age of 60, and therefore to continue the quantitative analysis of these associations. 3.3. Logistic regression analysis Having as a starting point the bivariate analysis (non adjusted) (Table 3) it was noted that extreme environmental working conditions, such as vibration, dust and gases, were given as reasons for the inability to per-

form work at the age of 60 by approximately 20% of the workers. Nevertheless, in the multifactorial analysis, dust and gases were a key factor in increasing three times more the idea of inability to perform work at the age of 60 (3.028; CI 95% 2.001–4.583). This may be justified by the number of participants exposed to these conditions (23.9%), mainly in the following sectors: – Manufacturing industry as it is an industrial area where exposure to vibration and continuous inhalation of dust and gas is constant, especially in the wiring assembly area, due to cutting and connecting wires by welding tasks [28]. – Water collection, treatment and supply, during the interventions in the field workers are often exposed to vibrations induced by machines, dust resulting from earthmoving and gases from the organic matter decomposition inside the sanitation ducts [14];

584

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

Table 2 Factorial weights of each item in the two factors retained, eigenvalues and explained variance after factor analysis with extraction of factors by the method of principal components

1 – Company Activity Sector (CAS) 2 – Fixed Schedule 3 – Variable Schedule 4 – Weekend Schedule 5 – Normal Schedule 6 – Alternating Shifts Schedule 7 – Night Shift 8 – Mixed Shifts 9 – I am (or I was) exposed to vibrations 10 – I am (or I was) exposed to intense heat or cold 11 – I am (or I was) exposed to dust of gases 12 – I am (or I was) forced to use repetitive gestures 13 – I am (or I was) forced to stay in difficult postures 14 – I am (or I was) forced to sit down for a long period of time 15 – I am (or I was) in situations where I am (was) dependent on other colleagues’ work 16 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to follow production norms or meet strict deadlines 17 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to adapt to method changes and work tools 18 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to do several things at the same time (multitasking) 19 – I am (or I was) in situations where I am (was) frequently interrupted 20 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to hurry up 21 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to solve sudden problems without help 22 – I am (or I was) in situations where I cannot (could not) look away from my work 23 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to “skip” or shorten a meal or not have a break 24 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to sleep at unusual times 25 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) to continue working beyond my assigned timetable 26 – I am (or I was) in situations where I cannot (could not) change the order of tasks to do 27 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) no freedom to decide how to do work 28 – I am (or I was) in situations where I have (had) no possibility to choose breaks 29 – In my work I frequently need (or needed) help but not always get(got) it 30 – In my work my opinion is (or was) not always taken into consideration to the running of the department 31 – In my work it is (was) impossible to express myself 32 – I am (was) exposed to the risk of verbal aggression 33 – I am (was) exposed to the risk of physical aggression 34 – I am (was) exposed to the risk of sexual harassment 35 – I am (was) exposed to the risk of intimidation 36 – I am (was) exposed to the risk of age discrimination 37 – I am (was) in direct contact with the public 38 – I have (had) to endure the demands of the public 39 – I have (had) to deal with situations of tension in the relationship with the public 40 – I have (had) to be exposed to the risk of verbal aggression from the public 41 – I have (had) to be exposed to the risk of physical aggression from the public 42 – It is (was) a type of work where I am (was) in the presence of others 43 – It is (was) a type of work where I am (was) always learning new things 44 – It is (was) a varied type of work 45 – It is (was) a type of work where I am (was) at times greatly in demand 46 – It is (was) a type of work which is not (was not) taken seriously by my colleagues 47 – It is (was) a type of work whose working conditions diminish(ed) my dignity... 48 – It is (was) a type of work where I generally feel (felt) exploited Cronbach’s Alpha Total (Eigenvalue)

– Transport, storage and communication, during their work bus drivers are constantly submitted to vibration and exposed to dust and gases originating from external public space [24].

Dimensions Work Work conditions schedules 0,680 0,618 0,393 0,658 0,482 0,662 0,430 0,510 0,414 0,505 0,482 0,525 0,481 0,586 0,434 0,580 0,560 0,415 0,509 0,245 0,587 0,174 0,542 0,155 0,593 0,055 0,458 0,060 0,475 0,226 0,591 0,281 0,489 0,426 0,643 −0,401 0,586 −0,372 0,662 −0,340 0,659 −0,393 0,554 0,009 0,640 −0,284 0,509 0,302 0,673 −0,340 0,579 −0,018 0,555 0,081 0,674 0,022 0,633 −0,388 0,552 0,150 0,522 0,112 0,669 0,020 0,608 0,263 0,499 0,364 0,628 0,203 0,480 0,453 0,767 0,176 0,666 0,239 0,737 0,144 0,755 0,035 0,632 0,215 0,534 0,497 0,628 0,385 0,566 0,191 0,601 0,309 0,548 0,200 0,508 0,316 0,453 0,228 0.962 0.890 20.503 8.327

The stratified analysis has also shown that exposure to dust and gases is one of the key reasons for the idea of inability to perform work at the age of 60 for men (2.852; CI 95% 1.714–4.745), and for the

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

585

Table 3 Association between working conditions and the idea of inability to perform work at the age of 60 (bivariate and multifactorial analysis) Working conditions Environmental (I am exposed to...) Vibrations Intense heat or cold Dust or gases Physical (I am forced to. . . ) Repetitive gestures Painful postures Sitting down for a long period of time Work Rhythm (I am exposed to . . . ) Production norms or strict deadlines Having constantly to adapt to method changes or work tools Having to do several things at the same time Frequent interruptions Having to hurry up Having to solve sudden situations or problems without help Not having to look away from work Having to “skip” or shorten meals or not even having a break Having to sleep at unusual times because of work Having to continue working beyond my assigned timetable Autonomy and Initiative (I am exposed to... ) Not being able to change the order of the tasks to do Not having the freedom to decide how to do work Not being able to chose breaks Work relationships (It is. . . or I am exposed to the risk of... ) Frequently needing help but not always getting it Not having my opinion is (or was) not always taken into consideration to the running of the department Impossible to express myself Verbal aggression Physical aggression Sexual harassment Intimidation Age discrimination Dealing with the public (There is. . . or I have to. . . ) Direct contact with the public Endure the demands of the public Deal with situations of tensionin the relationship with the public Be exposed to verbal aggression from the public Be exposed to physical aggression from the public Work Characteristics (My work is a type of work. . . ) I am always in the presence of others I am always learning new things Varied At times greatly in demand Which is not usually recognised by my colleagues Where I generally feel exploited Whose working conditions diminish my dignity Activity Sector (CAE) Education Wholesale and retail Manufacturing industry Water collection, treatment and supply, sanitation and waste collection and treatment Transport, storage and communications Health and social support Schedules Fixed schedules Weekend schedule Night shift Mixed shifts

%

OR crude (95% C.I.)

OR adjusted (95% C.I.)

14.5 53.6 23.9

1.479 (1.062–2.059) 1.137 (0.895–1.445) 1.568 (1.190–2.067)

3.028 (2.001–4.583)

48.8 38.4 34.1

1.239 (0.974–1.575) 1.253 (0.973–1.614) 2.731 (2.117–3.523)

2.635 (1.843–3.766)

43.2 55.6 63.5 54.7 66.8 65.7 30.2 45.9 26.3 56.6

1.466 (1.148–1.872) 1.283 (9.75–1.688) 1.315 (1.020–1.695) 1.357 (1.063–1.732) 0.900 (0.695–1.166) 1.008 (0.782–1.299) 1.190 (0.908–1.559) 1.210 (0.950–1.541) 1.140 (0.856–1.517) 1.379 (1.077–1.766)

37.9 34.5 40.9

1.140 (0.880–1.476) 1.003 (0.762–1.319) 0.836 (0.652–1.072)

67.4 26.7

1.341 (1.044–1.723) 1.036 (0.786–1.367)

20.1 43.1 24.8 10.8 32.1 8.3

1.022 (0.755–1.383) 1.205 (0.946–1.536) 1.289 (0.884–1.880) 1.289 (0.884–1.880) 1.040 (0.804–1.345) 1.686 (0.817–1.345)

64.5 72.6 74.5 75.3 56.1

1.686 (1.120–2.538) 1.277 (0.932–1.751) 1.236 (0.895–1.706) 1.610 (1.167–2.219) 1.486 (1.113–1.984)

87.2 82.9 60.4 67.3 45.1 37.1 24.5

1.286 (0.848–1.949) 1.197 (0.876–1.634) 1.329 (1.038–1.700) 1.088 (0.841–1.407) 1.741 (1.355–2.236) 2.398 (1.836–3.131) 1.780 (1.313–2.413)

21.4 16.5 27.1 22.9

3.306 (2.314–4.723) 7.207 (4.290–12.108) 1.238 (0.954–1.606) 1.769 (1.353–1.606)

7.0 5.1

2.923 (1.946–4.391) 1.088 (0.641–1.846)

79.2 78.4 51.1 68.4

1.609 (0.940–1.752) 1.065 (0.631–1.798) 1.043 (0.533–2.042) 1.043 (0.533–1.042)

1.674 (0.946–2.960)

0.667 (0.464–0.960) 1.498 (1.009–2.223) 2.580 (1.699–3.919) 1.634 (1.005–2.657)

586

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

two age groups analysed, < 45 years old (4.322; CI 95% 2.345–7.966) and  45 years old (2.259; CI 95% 1.299–3.929). From all the physical factors evaluated, sitting down for a long period of time is the only key factor, with almost three times as much probability, for leaving work before the retirement age, both in the bivariate analysis; (2.731; CI 95% 2.117–3.523), and the multifactorial analysis (2.635; CI 95% 1.843–3.766). Sitting down for a long period of time was referred by 34.1% of participants as being a constraint for most of the administrative personnel (32.4%); machine, plant and assembly operators (including transport and assembly line workers) (27.3%); and also company managing boards and intellectual and scientific sector specialists, as well as, technical and middlerange professions (13.7%). Results were very consistent in the stratified logistic regression analysis having into account the following variables: gender (men 2.577; CI 95% 1.561–4.254; women 2.656; CI 95% 1.736–4.065) and age (< 45 years old 3.242; CI 95% 2.048–5.132;  45 years old 2.413; CI 95% 1.443– 4.033); thus allowing us to recognize the widest effects of sitting down for a long period of time, in terms of the idea of continuing to work in the future. Regarding time constraints, norm enforcement (1.466; CI 95% 1.48–1.872), frequent interruption (1.357; CI 95% 1.063–1.732) and multi-tasking (1.315; CI 95% 1.020–1.695) were respectively for 43.2%, 54.7% and 63.5% of the workers, reasons for the idea of inability to perform work at an older age. Nonetheless, when adjusted with the other factors, time constraints do not appear to be decisive for leaving work at the age of 60. The stratified multifactorial regression analysis results showed mainly that frequent interruptions during work are the reasons why women (1.566; CI 95% 1.026–2.390) have the idea of less ability to continue to work at the age of 60. Descriptive statistics results showed us that exposure to frequent interruptions may be related to the characteristics of professional activity typically performed by women involving contact with the public (students, customers, internal or external) and the demands of that public, as it is the case of teachers and professional trainers (26.4%), assembly line workers (28.1%), office workers (18.2%) and sellers and hypermarket cashiers (15.7%). It is interesting to note that the most important relational dimension for workers was the need for help from other colleagues, even when this need is not met (1.341; CI 95% 1.044–1.723). This was observed

only in the bivariate analysis. Nevertheless, the stratified analysis has shown that, for workers aged  45 years old, the lack of colleagues’ help whenever necessary almost trebled the idea of inability to work at 60 (2.945; CI 95% 1.741–4.983). The same, but to a lesser degree, was verified in relation to gender (men 1.882; CI 95% 1.126–3.146; women 1.699; CI 95% 1.054– 2.739). Still, in terms of the relationship with others in a work-related situation, that is, direct contact with the public (64.5%), and the thought of exposure to physical (56.1%) and verbal (75.3%) aggression was associated to the idea of inability to perform work at the age of 60. But, similarly to time constraints, these factors did not reach statistical significance in the multifactorial analysis. In what concerns work characteristics, varied work (1.329; CI 95% 1.038–1.700), the lack of recognition from colleagues (1.741; CI 95% 1.355–2.236), the feeling of being exploited (2.398; CI 95% 1.836– 3.131), and diminishing working conditions (1.780; CI 95% 1.313–2.413) were the most relevant characteristics and, each one of them, contributed twice as much for possible inability to secure the same type of work at the age of 60. This trend continued in the multifactorial analysis inasmuch as the varied work characteristic gained a protective role (0.667; CI 95% 0.464–0.960) at the expense of the idea of being exploited (2.580; CI 95% 1.699–3.919), the lack of recognition from colleagues (1.498; CI 95% 1.009–2.223), and diminishing working conditions (1.634; CI 95% 1.005–2.657), which showed identical values to the ones in the bivariate analysis. The stratified analysis showed that varied work had a protective role for women (0.585; CI 95% 0.383– 0.894). The feeling of being exploited was decisive after having been gender adjusted (men 2.475 CI 95% 1.438–4.258; women 3.358; CI 95% 1.689–6.676), and age group (< 45 years old 3.195; CI 95% 1.792– 5.697). The work sectors analysis where workers felt exploited were men who worked mainly in water collection, treatment and supply, sanitation and waste collection and treatment (32.1%) (the feeling of exploitation may be associated with the combination of several factors namely, performing demanding physical work, to having an unusual schedule and earning low salaries) [14]; and women who worked mainly in wholesale and retail (42.2%) (including sales people and supermarket cashiers, whose particular response is associated with precarious employment contracts and

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

irregular unpredictable schedules) [29]. Also, in the educational sector (24.1%) (in the case professional trainers this feeling may be related to a status of precarious employment reflected in multiple employment and termly contracts, with a great variability of working hours per week, and with the need to deal with many different public trainees with extremely different requests and demands [30]; in the case of teachers this feeling is mainly associated to the lack of adequate facilities and equipment to perform their work and due to the little recognition of students and head teachers, and sometimes even their own colleagues) [31]. Finally, even though a few sectors of economic activity have been proven determinant in the bivariate analysis (Table 3), this stratified approach showed an extreme relevance in the difference among the occupational exposure patterns identified in this study. The qualitative knowledge of the work activity of the jobs included in each sector allowed us to clarify with great security the role of some demographic conditions responsible for leaving work before the age of 60.

4. Discussion To understand the different factors that influence the decision to leave or remain at work at the age of 60 can help to explain work sustainability. To consider that working conditions are decisive factors in the quality of ageing [32,33], is the first step towards taking action in a real context in order to safeguard workers’ health and promote active ageing in employment. Identifying the factors that contribute towards work constraints is usually done by [34]: i) reflecting on the ideal retirement age in relation to working conditions; ii) analysing workers who have debilitating health problems related or not to past working conditions; or iii) identifying hardship factors that, according to workers, force them to leave work before retirement age. The methodology used in this study reflects this last point. It promotes a more thoughtful approach to workers’ statements, privileging their point of view in order to understand their professional constraints and difficulties in the workplace. About a third of the sample answered “yes” to the question: “I will not be able to perform my type of work when I am 60”. Most of them were women and younger participants who had stronger idea of early exit from their job, in those conditions (63.7% of the workers aged < 45 years old and 36.3% aged 

587

45 years old). These results are consistent with the results found in the last two European surveys [25,26], which showed that workers believed more strongly in their ability to continue working as they approached 60. Nevertheless, these studies warn us that there is a need to contextualize and understand these differences in terms of the type of work performed and the working conditions. Although, doing the same type of work until the age of 60 was considered by workers as particularly difficult when exposed to a type of work performed in a difficult environment and in hard physical conditions (for example, being exposed to vibrations, dust and gases or sitting down for a long time), organizational and relational work characteristics also played a key role in the intention of leaving work. The perception of the inability to work and the consequent shortening of careers are justified by a wide range of reasons and not just medical [35] or physical working conditions. For example, work that is exposed to time constraints (such as norm enforcement, frequent interruptions and multi-tasking), reduces the possibility of performance with a level of quality, and contributes to the idea of inability to perform work until retirement age. In fact, unpredictability and the number of demands workers face at work “weakens strategies, namely anticipation strategies that would be particularly valuable with age” (p. 327) [36]. Other variables that may reflect the intention of not continuing to work belong to the type of risks stated by Davezies [36,37], as risks against human dignity. Indeed, not feeling recognition in the workplace, feeling exploited and having working conditions that affect human dignity can be seen as different forms of psychological violence [38], and are some of the reasons given to justify early exit from the labour market [39]. Moreover, the lack of recognition by co-workers compromises both the psychological role of work and the idea that workers have of their work as essential for their well-being [40]. Nevertheless, having into account the interaction between different factors, the reasons that explain early exit from the labour market re-group and lead to new relationships. Despite factors associated to physical constraints, social relationships and human dignity contributing greatly towards the feeling of inability to perform a type of work at the age of 60; having varied work seems to be a reason for active ageing at work. In order to deal with work constraints, workers develop strategies that allow them to overcome hardship, and, in that sense, varied work may diminish the sever-

588

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

ity of those factors. On the other hand, performing a number of diversified tasks may also reduce the impact associated to monotonous work, or the type of work that does not promote learning, as previously shown in the DARES [25]. Indeed, the reasons for early exit from the labour market, frequently associated to ageing, cannot be generalized or standardized as this can be prompted or delayed due to working conditions experienced previously [41]. Furthermore, early exit from the labour market is extremely variable depending on the workers and the type of work. Working conditions and work organization may hinder or facilitate the development of compensating strategies, thus leading to a greater or lesser ageing process. In truth, for both younger workers (age < 45 years old), and older workers (age  45 years old), exposure to physical hardship and painful postures lead to the idea of inability to remain at the same workplace. However, this is more noted in younger workers than in older workers. The consequences of the above mentioned factors, which appear to be experienced by workers from very early in their active working life, is worsened whenever there is a feeling of exploitation. Gender difference variations suggest a wish for early exit from the labour market by men whenever they are subjected to the following factors: exposure to dust and gases in their work, sitting down for long periods of time, needing help but not always getting it, or feeling exploited. In the case of women, apart from the need of being sitting down or the fact of feeling exploited, equally mentioned by men; it was also found that frequent interruptions and lack of recognition by colleagues were relevant factors. On the other hand, performing varied work is a decisive factor to guarantee the possibility of remaining at work. The answers given by women add more weight to work organization options rather that physical hardship factors as decisive factors to early exit from the labour market. Frequent interruptions at work make it difficult to do a job well done [7] and may lead to a lack of recognition from colleagues. Finally, it is worth noting that, when discussing results, having as a reference point workers’ intrinsic characteristics, such as gender or age, should not lead to “individualizing or [naturalized] readings” [22] due to the fact of being men or women, or younger or older workers. On the contrary, it so happens because work selection mechanisms that precede individuals but determine their career paths and the quality of ageing prevail [24]. Our aim goes beyond reporting the existence

of these selection mechanisms to show how personal attempts try to oppose certain work organizational options, and how these are also marked by failure in such a way that some workers claim that they feel unable to remain at work until the age of 60. 5. Conclusion Early exit from the labour market is not entirely due to the inability of older workers to adapt to the sudden changes of the job market, as conveyed in some statements. On the contrary, this study suggests that working conditions influence the idea of inability to secure the same job throughout active professional life. The importance of analysing present and past working conditions in order to predict the age that determines the end of working life should not be seen as a new prerogative of the scientific tradition we support – work activity ergonomics. Nevertheless, the fact that working conditions are not always mentioned in the collective debate on active ageing reinforces how relevant studies like this are. Even more so at present as this difficulty grows with the fact that ageing processes are frequently perceived in an individualised way, removed from history and context. Using the INSAT in this study follows the assumptions identified, in other words, the questions placed relate to the workers’ perspective and the statistical analysis aims to deepen the knowledge about risk factors. The idea of being unable to remain in the same job, under the same working conditions, became clear in this analysis as being associated to the interaction between different risk factors, and not only linked to factors traditionally considered as hard. Feeling exploited at work or feeling that working conditions are a blow to human dignity are perhaps less visible work dimensions, but reveal the need to intervene also at a level of organizational work options and job conditions. In conclusion, the INSAT results present another possibility – to promote a debate between the different social actors and politicians, in order to take into account in their policies not just requirements to be followed by the workers, but, above all, a perception of work as an object of analysis and intervention. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank FCT-Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia under the project PEst-C/PSI/ UI0050/2011 and FEDER funds through the COMPETE program under the project FCOMP-01-0124FEDER-022714.

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing

References [1]

World Economic Forum. Global Risks 2013. Eight Edition. Geneve, 2013. Available from: http://www.weforum.org/ reports/global-risks-2013-eighth-edition. [2] Fraser L, McKenna K, Turpin M, Allen S, Liddle J. Older workers: an exploratory of the benefits, barriers and adaptations for older people in the workforce. Work. 2009; 33: 261272. [3] Kristjuhan Ü. Ergonomic as a tool in prolonging youth and postponing ageing. Work. 2012; 41: 380-382. [4] Eurostat. The EU contribution to the active ageing and solidarity between generations. A statistical portrait of the European Union 2012 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012. [5] Laville, A, Volkoff, S, Âge, conditions de travail et emploi. In: Martin C, Baradat D, coord. Des pratiques en reflexion: 10 ans de débats sur l’intervention ergonomique. 2003: 125-131. [6] Hubault F, Entre travail et emploi: l’ergonomie défiée? In: Martin C, Baradat D, coord. Des pratiques en reflexion: 10 ans de débats sur l’intervention ergonomique, 2003, p. 117-125. [7] Jolivet A, Mardon C, Volkoff S, Les fins de vies professionnelles: quel rôle des conditions de travail? In: Molinié AF, Gaudart C, Pueyo V, La vie professionnelle: âge, expérience et santé à l’épreuve des conditions de travail, Toulouse: Octares Éditions, 2012, p. 307-314. [8] Schalk, R. & Van Veldhoven, M., et al. Moving European research on work and ageing forward: Overview and agenda. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2010, 19 (1), 76-101. [9] Molinié A-F, Leroyer A. Suivre les évolutions du travail et de la santé: EVREST, un dispositif commun pour des usages diversifiés. PISTES 2011; 13(2). Available from: http://www. pistes.uqam.ca/v13n2/articles/v13n2a2.htm. [10] Barros-Duarte, C.; Cunha, L. INSAT2010 – Inquérito Saúde e Trabalho: outras questões, novas relações. LABOREAL [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jun 11]; 6(2). 19-26. Available from: http://laboreal.up.pt/revista/artigo.php?id=48u56oTV658223 4;5252:5:5292. [11] Barros-Duarte C.; Cunha L. Lacomblez M. INSAT: uma proposta metodológica para análise dos efeitos das condições de trabalho sobre a saúde. LABOREAL [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2009 Apr 09]; 3(2). 54-62. Available from: http://laboreal.up. pt/revista/artigo.php?id=37t45nSU547112311:499682571. [12] Barros-Duarte C., Lacomblez M. Santé au travail et discrétion des rapports sociaux, PISTES [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2011 Mar 03]; 8(2): 1-17. Available from: http://www.pistes. uqam.ca/v8n2/articles/v8n2a2.htm. [13] Thébaud-Mony A, Riscos. LABOREAL, [Internet]. 2010. [cited 2011 Jan 11]. 6(1), 72-73. Available from: http://labo real.up.pt/revista/artigo.php?id=37t45nSU54711238:762698 4121. [14] Silva C, Costa C, Saraiva. D. Analysis of emerging psychosocial risk factors in a municipal service – working conditions beyond the obvious. Int. J. Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2012; 1(4): 333-350. [15] Schwartz Y, Trabalho e uso de si. Pró-posições, 2000; 1, 5 (32): 34-50. [16] Dejours C, Insatisfaction au travail et souffrance mentale. In: Thébaud-Mony A, Robatel N, orgs. Problèmes politiques et sociaux. 2009; 965: 35-49. [17] Volkoff S, Statistiques “ouvertes” et ergonomie “myope”: combiner les niveaux d’analyse en santé au travail. Sciences Sociales et Santé. 2010; 28(2): 11-30.

[18]

589

Wisner, A. Understanding problem building: ergonomic work analysis. Ergonomics. 1995, 38(3): 595-605. DOI:10.1080/ 00140139508925133. [19] Gaudart, C. Conditions for maintaining ageing operators at work – A case study conducted at an automobile manufacturing plant. Applied Ergonomics, 2000, 31(5): 453-462. [20] Daubas-Letourneux, V. Accidents du travail: des accidents de parcours? Regards croisés sur le (re)construction de la santé et sur le parcours professionnel de victimes d’accidents du travail. Actes du Séminaire Vieillissement et Travail CRÉAPTEPHE, 2004, Paris: Centre d’études de l’emploi, pp. 37-45. [21] Volkoff, S. Des comptes à rendre: usages des analyses quantitatives en santé au travail pour l’ergonomie. [Internet]. Centre d’Etudes de l’Emploi; 2002 [cited 2008 Jul 02]. Available from: www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/surveys/EwCS2005/ index.htm. [22] Volkoff, S. L’ergonomie et les chiffres de la santé au travail: ressources, tensions et pièges. Toulouse: Éditions Octarès, 2005. [23] Santos, M., Vicente, T. & Monteiro, A. Temporalities in evaluation of training courses: Standards and restrictions practiced by Human Resource professionals. Work, 2012, 41, 2, 217226. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-1290. [24] Cunha L, Nogueira S., Lacomblez, M. Beyond a man’s world: Contributions from considering gender in the study of bus drivers’ work activity. Work (pre-press). [25] DARES. Se sentir capable de faire le même travail jusqu’à 60 ans: le poids des facteurs psyco-sociaux, Premières Synthèses, 2008. 29. 2. [26] Eurofound. Sustainable work and the ageing workforce. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012. [27] INE, Classificação Portuguesa das Profissões 2010, Lisboa, Instituto Nacional de Estatística, 2011. [28] Almeida, C. & Barros_Duarte, C. Evaluation of Occupational Risks – Psychosocial Risks. Proceedings bo k of the International Symposium on Occupational Safety and Hygiene, SHO2013. In P. Arezes, J.S.Baptista, M.P.Barroso, P. Carneiro, P. Cordeiro, N. Costa, R. Melo, A.S. Miguel, G.P. Perestrelo. Portuguese Society of Occupational Safety and Hygiene – SPOSHO, 2013. ISBN 2182-8482. [29] Barros-Duarte, C.; Moreira, D., Leones, A.; Ferreira, A.; & Moreira, A. In the backstage of consumption: The risks that remain invisible in the evaluation of working conditions (pp. 59-64). In P. Arezes, J.S. Baptista, M.P. Barroso, P. Carneiro, P. Cordeiro, N. Costa, R. Melo, A.S. Miguel, G.P. Perestrelo. Occupational Safety and Hygiene. Portuguese Society of Occupational Safety and Hygiene, SPOSHO, 2012. ISBN: 978-972-99504-9-0. [30] Santos, M. & Ferreira, A. Conditions, demands and constraints on trainers’ activity: A case study in the Portuguese context. Work, 41, Supplement 1/2012, 5210-5217. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0811-5210. [31] Morais, V., Azevedo, R. Carvalho H., Monteiro, A., & BarrosDuarte. A percepção dos professores sobre o seu bem-estar no seu contexto de trabalho. In P. Cunha, A.Toscano, C. BarrosDuarte, C. Toriz Ramos, G. Jolluskin, I. Costa Leite, I. Silva, J. Soares Martins, M. Coutinho, N. Azevedo Barros, P. Cardoso, T. Toldy. Construir a Paz. Visões interdisciplinares e internacionais sobre conhecimentos e práticas. Volume 02. Trabalho, Saúde e Mediação Ambiental. Edições Universidade Fernando Pessoa 2013. ISBN 978-989-643-106-8. [32] Teiger C. Le vieillissement différentiel par et dans le travail: un vieux problème dans un contexte récent. Le Travail Humain, 1989; 52(1): 21-56.

590 [33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

C. Barros et al. / An analysis of working conditions that hinder active ageing Volkoff S, Laville A, Maillard M.C. Âge et travail: contraintes, sélection et difficultés chez les 40–45 ans. In Derriennic F, Touranchet A. Volkoff S, editors. Âge, travail, santé. Études sur les salariés âgés de 37 à 52 ans. Enquête ESTEV 1990. Paris: INSERM; 1996. Molinié AF. Facettes de la pénibilité, prisme du genre. Une analyse de l’enquête Santé et vie professionnelle après 50 ans. In : Molinié AF, Gaudart C, Pueyo V, La vie professionnelle : âge, expérience et santé à l’épreuve des conditions de travail, Toulouse: Octares Éditions, 2012, p. 315-341. Ilmarien, J. Work ability – a comprehensive concept for occupational health research and prevention. Scand J Work Environ Health, 2009, 35(1), 1-5. doi:10.5271/sjweh.1304. Davezies, P. Evolutions des organisations du travail et atteintes à la santé. Travailler. 1999; 3: 87-114.

[37]

[38] [39]

[40] [41]

Davezies P. Dérèglements organisationnels, santé, pouvoir d’agir. [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2012 Jul 22]; 6(2). 19-26. Available from: http://philippe.davezies.free.fr/download/down/ Souffrance%20au%20travail%20pour%20Pratiques.pdf. Vogel L. La dimension de genre en santé au travail, BTS, 2002; 18: 14-19. Cau-Bareille D, Les fins de carrière chez les einseignanntes de maternelle In: Molinié AF, Gaudart C, Pueyo V, La vie professionnelle: âge, expérience et santé à l’épreuve des conditions de travail, Toulouse: Octares Éditions, 2012, p. 343-361. Clot Y. La Fonction Psychologique du Travail. Paris: PUF, 1999. Derriennic F, Touranchet A. Volkoff S, editors. Âge, travail, santé. Études sur les salariés âgés de 37 à 52 ans. Enquête ESTEV 1990. Paris: INSERM, 1996.