Skip to main content

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.