Table 1 Overview of work profiles in LCA studies assessing the broad range of work exposures
From: Work profiles of older employees in Germany-results from the lidA-cohort study
Profile (% in sample) | Profile description |
|---|---|
Lowe [15], 6 profile solution, 2002 workers in Canada | |
1. “total rewards” (6%) | non-manual work, most positive scorings for all work indicators assessed, except pay and benefits (ranking 2nd) |
2. “decide and say” (9%) | manual work, good scorings for skills and discretion, but poor on pay and work life balance |
3. “relationships and balance” (20%) | mixed physical/non-physical work group, good scorings for social work environment indicators, but poor on discretion |
4. “economics and support” (12%) | non manual work, positive scorings for all work indicators except discretion, best scorings for pay and benefits |
5. “security” (16%) | mostly manual work, good benefits, rather healthy, safe and secure work place, otherwise low scorings, including poor social work environment |
6. “few rewards” (37%) | all manual work, most negative scorings for all work indicators assessed |
Vanroelen [13], 5 profile solution, 10,074 workers in the Flemish part of Belgium | |
1. “low stress” (26%) | predominantly non-manual work, low demands, high control, good social relations, high job security |
2. “passive manual” (24%) | manual work, average demands, low control, average level social relations |
3. “human contacts” (21%) | moderate physical demands and comparably adverse exposure for social work environment indicators |
4. “high demand” (18%) | non-manual work, high work demands, high control and an advantageous social work environment, high job security |
5. “high stress” (11%) | very high quantitative and physical work demands, adverse social environment, atypical work schedules, high job insecurity |
Eurofound [14], 5 profile solution, 26,648 workers from 28 European countries | |
1. “high flying” (21%) | non-manual profile, high on skills and discretion, good social environment, good earnings and prospect, higher than average work intensity |
2. “smooth running” (25%) | non-manual profile, very good social environment and working time quality, very low work intensity. However, low on skills and discretion and especially earnings |
3. “active manual” (21%) | distinctly manual profile with good social environment and prospects, otherwise poor working time quality and work intensity |
4. “under pressure” (13%) | a mixed, manual non-manual profile characterised by least favourable scores for the social work environment and work intensity. Else higher skills and discretion scores and better earnings, but poor working time quality |
5. “poor quality” (20%) | mostly manual profile with less favourable scorings for all indices. Distinctly low skills and discretion, prospects and earnings. |