1. 29th June, 2006 Bled Conference on ESeC, 29th-30th June 2006 An insight into responses to the questions related to the supervisory functions in French data sources Loup Wolff, INSEE-CREST

2. Page 2 29th June, 2006 Plan 1. Determinants underlying the ESeC prototype 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ?

3. Page 3 29th June, 2006 1. Determinants underlying the ESeC prototype (1) Two types of “heritage” at least : 1. Scale of prestige – deriving from the ISCO classification 2. Theoretical framework proposed by John Goldthorpe – based on the concept of “Employment relationship”

4. Page 4 29th June, 2006 1. Determinants underlying the ESeC prototype (2) ESEC 1 Higher Salariat* ESEC 2 Lower Salariat* ESEC 3 Higher grade white collar workers* ESEC 6 Higher grade blue collar workers* ESEC 7 Lower grade white collar workers* ESEC 8 Skilled workers* ESEC 9 Semi- and non- skilled workers* Salariat White collar workers Blue collar workers Source of the names (*) : Eric Harrison and David Rose, The European Socio- economic Classification (ESeC), Draft User Guide (Université d’Essex, février 2006)

5. Page 5 29th June, 2006 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions (1) The Working Conditions Surveys 1984-1991-1998 - The questionnaire is submitted to all persons in the labour force holding a job and present among the outgoing rotation of the main sample, that is approximately 22 000 individuals per year - Labelled ‘CHEF’ in the questionnaire, a question is replicated at the three waves of the Working Conditions survey : “Do you have other employees under your supervision or your authority?”

6. Page 6 29th June, 2006 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions (2) Supervising and qualification Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998 – DARES/INSEE Field: Employees in public and private companies Comment: The height of a rectangle is proportional to the rate of supervisors recorded in each category, the width with the size of the category. The surface of a rectangle is thus proportionate with the number of supervisors in the category

7. Page 7 29th June, 2006 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions (3) Conclusions : - The level of diploma acts positively on the chances to access positions of supervisory responsibilities - Highly qualified supervisors nevertheless represent a small proportion of the total population of all supervisors

8. Page 8 29th June, 2006 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions (4) Supervising rates by certification : 1984 - 1998 Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998 – DARES/INSEE Field: Employees in public and private companies Reading: 32,6 % of a General Bac holders declared to be supervisors in 1984, as against only 23,6 % in 1998.

9. Page 9 29th June, 2006 2. The trend in a devaluation of supervisory positions (5) Conclusions : - Trend in the development of low-skilled supervisory functions - The same trend is observable in the status and wage hierarchies...  Less qualified, lower placed in the wage hierarchies, the employees that declare supervising other workers have lost part of their prestige.

10. Page 10 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (1) The COI (‘Changements Organisationnels and Informatique’) Survey - 1997 - It provides a particularly rich and detailed view of work characteristics in the industry for companies of twenty employees and over - It is also possible to describe a little further the characteristics of the supervisory tasks through ten specific questions

11. Page 11 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (2) What do supervisors do ? Source: Survey ‘Changements Organisationnels and Informatisation 1997 – DARES, INSEE, CEE Field: employees of industrial companies of 50 employees and over (including food industries)

12. Page 12 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (3) Structure of the supervisory tasks Source: Survey ‘Changements Organisationnels and Informatisation’ 1997 – DARES, INSEE, CEE Field: employees of industrial companies of 50 employees and over (including food industries) Methodology: Projection of the variables describing supervisory tasks in a Multiple Correspondences Analysis (MCA)

13. Page 13 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (4) Projection of the social properties of supervisors Source: Survey ‘Changements Organisationnels and Informatisation’ 1997 – DARES, INSEE, CEE Field: Employees of industrial companies of 50 employees and over (including food industries) Methodology: Projection of individual additional variables in the first factorial design of the ACM

14. Page 14 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (5) Four groups : Class 1: Tutors (13 % of supervisors) - South-east This group has only modest qualification, stands low in the hierarchy of skills whose principal tasks consist in "showing the know how " and to act "in the event of technical problem". Class 2: Foremen (42 %) - South-west Responsibilities and status traditionally attached in the industry to the agents charged with the control of workers Class 3: Administration (12 %) - North-East Employees charged with the administrative supervision of teams. The tasks which are entrusted to them are more often related to the management of problems between subordinates, services or with the customers Class 4: Commercial and administrative executives (33 %) - North-west Highly skilled and educated, cumulating all the hierarchical responsibilities and in particular those relating to the mediation with customers, they are "cadres", "directors" or "engineers".

15. Page 15 29th June, 2006 3. Different forms of supervision in the French industry (6) Conclusions : - Trend in the growth of heterogeneity of the “supervisors” as a category - What kind of supervisors do we want to re-allocate in the nomenclature ?  Need for some supplementary variables in order to characterise properly the “Employment relationships” ?

16. Page 16 29th June, 2006 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ? (1) An experiment using the Working Conditions Surveys (1984-1991-1998-2005) Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998,1991,1998,2005 – DARES/INSEE Field: All Allocation in the ESeC : 1984 - 2005

17. Page 17 29th June, 2006 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ? (2) Various ER situations characterised within a set of variables (inertia) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (B1) Autonomy vs subordination (B2) « Assets specificity » (skill, competencies) = ER (B3) Type of labour contract ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

18. Page 18 29th June, 2006 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ? (3) Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998,1991,1998,2005 – DARES/INSEE Field: All Decomposition of the inertia (all ER variables)

19. Page 19 29th June, 2006 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ? (4) Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998,1991,1998,2005 – DARES/INSEE Field: All Decomposition of the inertia (‘Type of labour contract’ only)

20. Page 20 29th June, 2006 4. Toward a trend in the growth of the blurring in the classification ? (5) Source: Working Conditions Survey 1998,1991,1998,2005 – DARES/INSEE Field: All Decomposition of the inertia (‘Autonomy vs subordination’ only)