Back to GESIS Homepage

Item List

Frage Thema Item Text Antwort Format Konstrukt Eingesetzte Kogn Techniken Ergebnis
English version:
D. You are involved in improving the work organisation or work processes of your department or organisation

German version:
D. Sie sind an der Verbesserung der Arbeitsorganisation oder der Arbeitsabläufe Ihrer Abteilung oder Firma/ Organisation beteiligt		 Nein

Online Probing:
As a first step of the analyses, we examined respondents’ understanding of the terms “being involved”, “improving” and “work processes” in this item.
“Being involved” is described as having the opportunity to voice opinions, be it in direct communication with a team leader or the management, in conferences or team meetings. “Improving” means optimizing procedures and work flow, making daily chores easier for operational staff, and innovation management. Most respondents give general and vague descriptions of “work processes”:

  • “Daily routine” (R63DE, employee, “always”)
  • “Division of work” (R104DE, employee, “always”)
  • “Situations are discussed and alternatives considered” (R195DE, self-employed, “always”)
  • “New ideas” (R20UK, employee, “most of the time”)
  • “My colleagues and I are often consulted and asked to give our views and ideas about how the office environment can by realistically improved” (R225UK, employee, “sometimes”)

Others name examples from their work life:

  • “The facilities and infrastructure of the lawyer’s office, technical equipment, work processes and all are discussed by my colleagues and myself” (R319DE, self-employed, “most of the time”)
  • “Optimizing IT-supported work processes “ (R52DE, employee, “sometimes”)
  • “Writing the menu” (R106DE, employee, “most of the time”)

Next, we examined why respondents chose their respective answers and we did so for employees and self-employed separately. Employees generally answer the question in the intended manner. Many respondents who answer that they are “always” involved or “most of the time” are in a managerial position or work closely with the management, but single respondents in an operative position also feel involved in improving work processes:

  • “I am in a managerial position and work closely with the company owner” (R905DE, employee, “always”)
  • “I am the manager, so am involved to various degrees in all department changes” (R45UK, em-ployee, “always”)
  • “If anyone finds a better way of doing something, it is shared and we all help in making things work better” (R66UK, employee, “most of the time”)
  • “Because we are directly involved in routines, we care that the patients receive two rolls with marmalade and cheese a day, and that they are cut correctly. We use the answer cards that come with the meals” (R258DE, employee, “always”)

Employees who answer that they are “sometimes” involved correctly indicate that the opportunity for involvement exists, but their influence is limited:

  • “We can make suggestions in conferences” (R34DE, employee, “sometimes”)
  • “We can gladly make suggestions. But implementing them doesn’t always work”(R55DE, employee, “sometimes”)
  • “If procedure is no longer fit or can be improved it's revised” (R98UK, employee, “sometimes”)
  • “I get to discuss with my boss new ways of improving and streamlining our work methods” (R382UK, employee, “sometimes”)

Explanations of employees who are “rarely” or “never” involved in improvement vary, but are all in line with the question intention. Either superiors decide and show little interest in employee opinions, or the employees themselves feel it is not part of their job to be involved in establishing and improving work processes, they see no room for improvement, or their employment situation (i.e. non-permanent contracts, shift work) make it difficult for them to contribute to structural change:

  • “It doesn’t matter what I think; I have to function like a machine “ (R75DE, employee, “never”)
  • “The work rules are made by management” (R70UK, employee, “rarely”)
  • “This is done by management” (R5UK, employee, “never”)
  • “There are hardly opportunities; the work just needs to be done, there isn’t much to change “ (R120DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • “No responsibility” (R79PL, employee, “rarely”)
  • “Team leaders decide these things, not me” (R107DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • v“That is my boss‘ job” (R108DE, employee, “not applicable”)
  • “I don’t work directly in the department, but I can voice my opinion” (R301PL, employee, “rarely”)
  • “I am a temporary worker” (R142DE, employee, “never”)
  • “My tasks are separate from the rest of my department” (R25UK, employee, “never”)

Turning to self-employed respondents, in all three countries, these are highly likely to either fully agree with this statement (“always”: UK 37% self-employed vs 20% employed; DE 47% vs 24%; PL 31% vs 17%) or insist that it does not apply to them (UK: 35% vs 3%; DE: 32% vs 11%, PL: 27% vs 12%). This indicates that self-employed are split into two groups, of which one group applies the question terms “your department or organisation” to their working situation as self-employed, while the other does not.
The results of the probing question support this assumption, as all self-employed give the same reasoning to their answer - regardless of whether they answer “always” or “not applicable” (n=57) – stating that their employment status as self-employed is the reason for their answer:

  • “I decide how I organize myself and what my processes are” (R98DE, self-employed, “not applicable”)
  • “I decide on all processes” (R211UK, self-employed, “not applicable”)
  • “As a freelancer, I’m the boss, and I decide on all processes and organization”( R349DE, self-employed, “always”)
  • “As the head of the organisation, it falls on my shoulders to make sure my business is successful” (R283UK, self-employed, “always”)

This clearly demonstrates that the question cannot be answered by respondents and interpreted by researchers in an unambiguous way.
Also interesting are the 28 respondents who are self-employed, but indicate that they are “never”, “rarely” or “sometimes” integrated. Of those, some again give their self-employment and decision-making as the reason:

  • "I am self-employed" (R355DE, self-employed, "never")
  • "It's only me involved" (R216UK, self-employed, "never")
  • “I work on my own, I don’t need improvement” (R147DE, self-employed, “never”)

Others give a more logical answer, stating that despite being self-employed they are dependent on other circumstances:

  • "I never know what's coming" (R13UK, self-employed, "never")

Two respondents are self-employed, but working for a company which they cannot influence:

  • "I work as self-employed for a company. So I have nothing to do with their decisions” (R322DE, self-employed, “never”)
  • “It's not my place to change the organisations and processes in place” (R130UK, self-employed, “rarely”)
English version:
E. You have a say in the choice of your work colleagues

German version:
E. Sie haben ein Mitspracherecht bei der Auswahl der Arbeitskollegen, mit denen Sie zusammenarbeiten		 Nein

Online Probing:
There is a systematic difference in the responses of employed and self-employed. Employed respondents are less likely to answer that they always have a say in their choice of work colleagues. Self-employed are more likely to answer that this is always the case (UK: 28%, DE: 50%, PL: 48%) or that this does not apply to them (UK: 48%, DE: 33%, PL: 19%), with self-employed in the UK most likely to claim it does not apply and self-employed in Germany most likely to claim it always applies. This either speaks for a different understanding of the item’s meaning between self-employed in the different countries, or for truly different working situations of the self-employed.
We therefore took a closer look at the reasons that self-employed respondents provided for why they selected their answers. In Poland and Germany, most self-employed (PL: 68%, DE: 58%) argue that they are either the boss of their enterprise or that they work as free-lancers who can decide on a case by case basis who to work with. Hence, it makes sense that they predominantly answer “always” in response to Item E. In the UK, only about 35% of the self-employed argue along these lines.

  • “It's my business so I have the choice of choosing who I work with.” (R500UK)

“As a free-lancer, I can decide who to work with.”(R370DE)

A second line of reasoning, which is provided most often by the UK respondents (UK: 52%, DE: 33%, PL: 25%), is that respondents have no work colleagues, but work alone:

  • “I have no work colleagues.” (R218UK)
  • “I work alone.” (R768PL)

This explanation is almost exclusively provided by respondents who selected the “not applicable” answer category. Again, this indicates that self-employed respondents understand the item unambiguously and that differences in the answer distributions across countries are most likely due to differences in the sample composition (i.e., the UK respondents work more often on their own than the German and Polish respondents).
This explanation is almost exclusively provided by respondents who selected the “not applicable” answer category. Again, this indicates that self-employed respondents understand the item unambiguously and that differences in the answer distributions across countries are most likely due to differences in the sample composition (i.e., the UK respondents work more often on their own than the German and Polish respondents).

  • 1. Most respondents (DE: 52%, UK: 54%, PL: 69%) explain that – to a certain degree – they can influence the choice of their colleagues. How often this is the case mainly depends on one’s position in the job: Respondents in leading positions tend to say that they “always” have a say in the choice of their work colleagues (e.g., “As a senior employee this is part of my job.” – R38DE, always) while those further down on the corporate ladder tend to select the “sometimes” or “rarely” answer category (e.g., “If a new person has his or her trial day, then the manager asks us about our opinion.” – R37PL, sometimes).
  • 2. Some respondents (DE: 43%, UK: 43%, PL: 21%) argue that they simply “have no decision making powers” (e.g., R47DE, never) or “don’t hire the staff” (e.g., R85UK, never). Interestingly, a few German (n=3) and Polish (n=5) respondents who argue along these lines selected the “not applicable” instead of the “never” response option. Given that the “not applicable” option should be reserved for respondents who do not have any work colleagues, these few cases hint at a potential problem of the presentation or wording of the answer options.
  • 3. A few respondents (DE: 3, UK: 2, PL: 1) argue that they “don’t have colleagues” (e.g., R21UK) or “work alone” (e.g., R91PL). Some of these respondents selected the “never” answer category (n=2) instead of “not applicable” (n=4). Again, these first two cases hint at a potential problem in the presentation or wording of the answer categories.

Next, we examined how respondents understand the term “having a say”. Depending on one’s position in the job, “having a say” is interpreted as ranging from (informally) being asked about one’s opinion on a potential new colleague (e.g., unskilled worker) to making the final decision about hiring a colleague (e.g., CEO). There are no systematic differences in the interpretation of this term between the three countries:

  • “As the CEO I have a say in everything.” (R325DE)
  • “We are asked what we think of people who want to join the team.”(R196UK)
  • “I am in a leading position and can influence the choice of work colleagues.” (R81PL)

Finally, we investigated what sorts of colleagues respondents think about when answering this item. Across all three countries, most respondents (DE: 71%, UK: 77%, PL: 67%) think about colleagues in general when answering this item with no specific focus on either direct colleagues on the same hierarchical level, superiors, or subordinates:

  • “Colleagues from the same company.” (R126DE)
  • “Other employees below, above and level with my position.” (R52UK)
  • “The whole department.” (R337PL)

Some (mostly self-employed) respondents specifically refer to their subordinates/employees when answering this question (DE: 20%, UK: 14%, PL: 22%) while a few other respondents solely refer to co-workers on the same hierarchical level (DE: 8%, UK: 8%, PL: 11%):

  • “I thought about my employees.” (R349DE, self-employed)
  • “People that I employ.” (R181UK, employee)
  • “Drivers who subordinate me.” (R927PL, self-employed)
  • “Colleagues on the same level.”(R336DE, self-employed)
  • “My management team.” (R 268UK, self-employed)
  • “Colleagues working in a similar position as me.” (R89PL, employee
English version:
F. You can take a break when you wish

German version:
F. Sie können eine Pause machen, wenn Sie möchten		 Nein
English version:
G. You have enough time to get the job done

German version:
Sie haben genug Zeit, um die Arbeit zu erledigen		 Nein

Online Probing:
This question shows no large or systematic differences in answer behaviour; neither between self-employed and employed, nor between countries. Self-employed are more likely to answer with “always” or “most of the time”, indicating that self-employment serves the goal of better determining work pace than employment. However, the majority of all respondents answer with “always” or “most of the time” that they have enough time to get the job done. Only very few respondents respond that this statement does not apply to them.
The three respondents who answer that this question does not apply to them also gave inconclusive answers to probing.
Of the twelve respondents who answer that they “never” have enough time to get the job done, all of them describe a situation of work overload in answer to the probing question. Employees are more likely to answer in this way than self-employed, though both groups deliver answers:

  • “In 5 ½ hours, I have to fill shelves, clean, control prices, bring products, help at the cash registers, carry out orders, help out in sanitary area and the garden. The customer comes first” (R75DE, employee, “never”)
  • “We have too much to do in very short time” (R31UK, employee, “never”)
  • “Breaks are predetermined and must be kept exactly. Every additional break, also an individual one, influences the process; that is why there are penalties and additional breaks are not possible” (R156PL, employee, “never”)
  • “A self-employed person is like a hamster in a wheel – he is never free of time pressure” (R760PL, self-employed, “never”)

A total of 24 respondents say that they “rarely” have enough time to get the job done, almost exactly half (n=11) of these are self-employed. These respondents give more detailed and varied answers as to the cause of the lack of time. These include work overload, lack of employees / colleagues, bureaucracy, and sinking quality as a result of time restrictions:

  • Extreme workload compression and more bureaucracy” (R53DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • “Too much bureaucracy, too little time for personal consultation” (R338DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • “Because everything has to go quickly” R56DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • “Lack of personnel; and it’s not possible to achieve the same quality with fewer employees, without harming yourself or others” (R258DE, employee, “rarely”)
  • “Of course, I want to sign as many projects as possible. But it’s not possible to do this in part-time” (R322DE, self-employee, “rarely”)

“I get too much work to do in my contract hours, and if we do everything, the managers always give us more work to do” (R163UK, employee, “rarely”)“I’m always behind” (R247UK, employee, “rarely”)

Two respondents describe a general work overload, not only related to their job, but to their schedule as such. Both of these are self-employed:

  • “I just think there's never enough hours in a day to do everything including my job” (R248 UK, self-employed, “rarely”)
  • “I am also responsible for the household and helping my parents‘ daily routine” (R768 PL, self-employed, “rarely”)

However, the majority of respondents explain that they “always” or “most of the time” have enough time to get their job done. A clear coding is best possible when coding the answers of the respondents who answered with “always”; this applied to 104 respondents.
The most common explanation given is that they are able to choose their working hours, schedule or order of tasks (n=38). This explanation is mostly given by self-employed (n=32, 84% of the respondents who gave this explanation). Four respondents, all of whom are self-employed, argue the other way around – so not that they have enough time to finish their work, but that they can choose the amount of work to fit the time they have. The next most common explanation is that the work load is manageable in the amount of time (n=26). This reasoning is provided more often by employed respondents (n=16) than self-employed (n=10). Another ten respondents explain that timelines and deadlines are not relevant to their job (n=10, 6 of these are employees). For instance, this applies to one respondent who works as a receptionist (R129UK), or another one who works as a security guard (R51UK).
English version:
A. Considering all my efforts and achievements in my job, I feel I get paid appropriately

German version:
A. In Anbetracht meines Engagements und meiner Leistungen habe ich das Gefühl, dass ich angemessen entlohnt werde		 Nein
English version:
B. My job offers good prospects for career advancement

German version.
B. Meine Arbeit bietet gute Karrierechancen		 Nein

Online Probing:
In the UK, almost half of the employees (45%) and a quarter (23%) of the self-employed (strong-ly/tend to) agree with this statement. In Germany, one third of the employees and of the self-employed respondents state that they agree with this statement, respectively. In contrast, the proportion of self-employed people in Poland who (strongly/tend to) agree with this statement is significantly higher with 57%. The proportion of employees that agree (43%) is comparable with the other two countries.
A look at the frequency distribution of the answer option “not applicable” shows a similar pattern: In Germany and the UK, self-employed are more likely than employed to answer that the statement “My job offers good prospects for career advancement” does not apply to them (UK: 30% self-employed vs. 5% employed; DE: 22% self-employed vs. 13% employed). In Germany, self-employed are also more likely to choose the middle category (30% vs. 19%). In contrast, in Poland, self-employed neither answer that this statement does not apply to them more often than employees, nor are they more likely to choose the middle category.
A look at the frequency distribution of the answer option “not applicable” shows a similar pattern: In Germany and the UK, self-employed are more likely than employed to answer that the statement “My job offers good prospects for career advancement” does not apply to them (UK: 30% self-employed vs. 5% employed; DE: 22% self-employed vs. 13% employed). In Germany, self-employed are also more likely to choose the middle category (30% vs. 19%). In contrast, in Poland, self-employed neither answer that this statement does not apply to them more often than employees, nor are they more likely to choose the middle category.
As a follow-up question, we examined respondents’ understanding of the term “good prospects” across countries and employment status. Divergent themes would indicate interpretation differences between the respondents across groups of employment status or countries. As respondents could mention several themes, multiple coding applied. The results are shown in Table 3.
Good prospects are described in terms of general advancement, promotion or moving up to a higher position with more responsibility by the vast majority of respondents. The second large thematic complex is the financial aspect, so having a high or higher salary. The third thematic complex is learning or doing new things as part of the job:

  • “Chance to get a better position.” (R236DE)
  • “Salary increase.” (R358UK)
  • “To train in specialist areas. (R218UK)

Self-employed are likely to name advancing their business as having good prospects, which is sometimes associated with delivering good work and building a larger customer base, but at other times with the economy. Also, a large number of self-employed say that the question does not apply to them.

  • “To increase production and attract more sales.”v (R181UK)

“Given that I am self-employed, this question is invalid.” (R42DE)

Respondents understanding of the term “good prospects”
Topics such as job security and appreciation are also mentioned occasionally. Surprisingly, respondents from Poland mention most frequently that they do not have any prospects and less frequently that “career prospects” do not apply to them because of their self-employment. Besides that, there are no large differences in the understanding of “career prospects” between countries. A total of 5% of respondents does not respond to the probe question or provide non-evaluable information:

  • “Long-term job, personal development.” (R27PL)
  • There aren’t any prospects on my farm, because it is too small.” (R50PL)

In addition, respondents were asked what the term “career advancement” means to them. 28 respondents did not provide a response to the probe question (8%). All other 337 respondents gave a substantive probe answer. Respondents' answers were assigned to multiple thematic codes. The answers are very similar to the answers in the previous probe asking for “good prospects”. Respondents are mostly thinking of promotion or advancement, earning more money, growing companies or expanding their (own) business, more responsibility in their job and more interesting fields of work and to educate themselves professionally and personally. The main difference between the group of employees and the group of self-employed was that employees think more of promotion and advancement on the career ladder, while self-employed people also think of the expansion of the company and its further development:

  • “Senior position, higher salary.” (R61DE, employee)
  • “Taking my business to the next level and earning more money from it.” (R253UK, self-employed)

A closer look at the self-employed shows that only respondents in the UK and in Germany state that they do not have career prospects because they own their own business. Self-employed in these two countries also think more often of promotion and professional advancement than respondents in Poland (DE: 35%, UK: 41% and PL: 24%). Polish participants more often mention aspects such as further training (development; DE: 0%, UK: 5% and PL: 18%) and expanding business (DE: 15%, UK: 15%, PL: 25%). However, one has to keep in mind that the proportion of respondents being the sole director of their own business was significantly higher in the UK (43%) and in Germany (35%) than in Poland (11%).
English version:
C. I receive the recognition I deserve for my work

German version:
C. Ich erhalte die Anerkennung, die ich für meine Arbeit verdiene		 Nein
English version:
D. I generally get on well with my work colleagues

German version:
Ich verstehe mich im Allgemeinen gut mit meinen Arbeitskollegen		 Nein
English version:
E. The organisation I work for motivates me to give my best job performance

German version:
E. Die Organisation, für die ich arbeite, motiviert mich, meine beste Arbeitsleistung zu erbringen		 Nein
English version:
G. I might lose my job in the next 6 months

German version:
G. Ich könnte meinen Job in den nächsten 6 Monaten verlieren		 Nein

Online Probing:
This statement also shows a different pattern of understanding between both employees and self-employed and between countries. In the UK, self-employed are much more likely than employees to indicate that this statement does not apply to them (43% self-employed vs. 8% employed). In Germany, employees and self-employed are equally likely to indicate that this statement does not apply to them, and both groups are quite likely to feel this way (43% for both employees and self-employed). In Poland, as in Germany, self-employed and employed demonstrate approximately the same answer behaviour. However, in Poland only one in five respondents indicates that the statement does not apply (16% employed, 23% self-employed). In addition, self-employed in Poland more frequently state that they might lose their job in the next six month (16%) than self-employed in the UK (7%) and Germany (5%).
Next, we examined why respondents chose their respective answers and we did so for employees and self-employed separately. We first look at those who selected “does not apply”. Here, it is particularly noticeable that employees in Germany very often select this answer option (27 respondents). The reasons given are that they are civil servants or perceive their own job as safe (33%). Civil servants may not terminate or be dismissed because there is no contractual employment relationship.
Equally often the answer is explained by the fact that there is a shortage of skilled workers and that they are therefore irreplaceable in their current job. The last reason that is frequently mentioned is that they do not have reason to assume that they might lose their jobs (15%).

  • “There are too few cooks out there.” (R103DE)
  • “It is very unlikely, because my work is indispensable.” (R108DE)

One respondent explains that she will not lose her job because it is a family business in which she will not be dismissed. In the UK, 5 respondents chose “does not apply” to answer Item G. The reasons given are the same as with German respondents: they cannot lose their jobs or have a secure employment.
These results show that respondents who have a secure job, for instance as civil servants, do not use the answer categories “tend to/strongly disagree” to say that this statement is not true for them, but instead use the answer category “does not apply”. This response pattern is not observable among the Polish participants.
Among the self-employed, 26 respondents in the UK and Germany, respectively, and three respondents in Poland select “does not apply” when answering Item G. The most common reason given is that they cannot be dismissed as self-employed (67%). Another 18 percent say that this cannot happen to them as freelancers. Four percent answer that they have enough orders/work and that they have no reason to assume that they might lose their jobs.

  • “Because I am a freelancer.” (R46DE)
  • “As I work for myself this does not apply.” (R225UK)

Next, we analysed those self-employed who gave a substantive response option instead of selecting “does not apply”. It is striking that the response distributions in Germany and the UK are relatively similar, while the Polish respondents more often “agree” with the statement in Item G.
Table 4 contains the codes that summarize the reasons respondents provided to the general probe. Only self-employed are taken into account in the table. The data are reported in absolute frequencies.
Self-employed respondents that “disagree” with the statement explain their response selection most frequently with their status which makes it is impossible to lose the job. In the UK and Germany, respondents also state that there is a shortage of specialists in their field and that they generally have enough work or orders for the next months.

  • “As a self-employed person I do not intend to go bankrupt or close the business.” (R257UK)
  • “Been there a long time and we have lots of work.” (R47DE)

Interestingly, the status of a freelancer is interpreted very differently, which is also reflected in the answers referring to Item G. While respondents in all three countries state that they can lose their job because this can always happen as a freelancer, respondents in Poland and Germany also mention this as a reason for disagreeing with the statement. This argumentation can be traced back to the fact that they consider it unlikely, but that freelancers always face a certain risk because their work is bound to particular projects.
Generally, the reasons given by Polish respondents who (strongly/tend to) agree with the statement do often not correspond to the answers given. Those respondents who say that they might lose their jobs explain, for instance, that it is a secure job (“I am certain of my position”, R68PL), that they are not employed and cannot lose their job (“I will not lose this job because it is my business and a future-oriented industry.”, R330PL; “I have my own business”, R293PL), that it is unlikely because they are a freelancer or that they do not have a reason to assume that they might lose their job (“I don't think I'll lose my job.”, R663PL). It remains unclear why those respondents give conflicting answers. It seems likely that some respondents have interpreted the answer scale the other way around.

Cognitive Interviews:
In Germany, with the exception of two respondents (DE11, DE15), all respondents disagreed that they might lose their job in the next six months. In contrast, in Poland, six respondents agreed (PL01, PL06, PL08, PL10, PL12, PL14).
Employees and self-employed show comparable comprehension of the terms “job” and “security”, interpreting them in the adequate sense to match their working situations. For employees, their job obviously refers to their employment. Security is based on how likely they consider being fired. This is dependent on the general economy, their job market, their personal achievements and their employer’s typical behavior:

  • “I think my employer has more reason to worry that I’ll quit than I have reason to worry I’ll get fired” (DE04, “strongly disagree”)
  • “I just signed a permanent contract, so I don’t think this is likely” (DE12, “strongly disagree”)
  • “Fact is, you never know what’s going to happen, so you can’t exclude it. That’s why I didn’t take ‘absolutely disagree’. But that you can’t plan everything shouldn’t be the basis for the answer. I’m just being careful, so I took ‘tend to disagree’” (DE14, “tend to disagree”)
  • “The company is well managed, it develops quickly and I am a committed employee” (PL03, “tend to disagree”)
  • “The unit where I work is growing. […] I have a fairly well established professional position […] I do not feel threatened in any way” (PL05, “strongly disagree”)
  • “I have a new boss, and she has a different idea of how things should be done than I do; so this means, I could lose my job. Especially, as I’m sick at the moment. We’ll see” (DE11, “tend to agree”)
  • “I have a contract for a trial period which is for three months, so I cannot say if I continue working here afterwards“(PL06, “tend to agree”)
  • “Sports instructor is a seasonal job in Poland so the season will end in 2 weeks and I will not have a chance to do this job afterwards” (PL08, “strongly agree”)

One respondent chooses the middle category, because she while she doesn’t assume she will lose the job, may for other reasons no longer be able to carry it out:

  • “I don’t think I can lose my job, I may not have it but not lose it. These are two different things. My health condition may not let me do my job” (PL02, “neither agree nor disagree”)

Only one respondent gives an answer which is inconsistent to his actual opinion, stating that he might lose his job although circumstances give him no reason to believe this:

  • “Well, yes, I have a permanent contract, but there are always things you can do that lead to immediate job loss. I could attack my superior or the priest, I could steal money or something the-like.” [Interviewer: “And how likely is it that you will do this?”] “Well, of course that won’t happen. But the question is whether there is the possibility. And yes, there absolutely is, so I totally agree” (DE15, “strongly agree”)

Self-employed respondents emphasize that there isn’t a job to lose as such. Nevertheless, they easily find an answer and consistently apply the question to mean that their business goes bankrupt, they give up their business, or giving up working in general.

  • “Well, I decide for myself whether I stop working in this job, so it’s in my own hands, and I think it’s unlikely that something will happen. Still, I thought it would be arrogant to say ‘absolutely disagree’, because something can always happen that causes me to stop” (DE02)

“As I said, I’m self-employed. It is my choice whether or not I stop working. I can’t lose my job in the meaning that someone fires me” (DE08)“For that, I would have to lose my clients. And for that again to happen, something would have to happen on the market for my clients to not wish to work with me anymore. That hasn’t happened in 25 years, so I’m not worried about it” (DE09)“I have my own practice. It’s really unlikely that we’ll go out of business” (DE10)“A carpenter’s job involves use of machines and this means high risk of injuries. If I have an accident at work, I may lose it, it means more the possibility of doing it than the job itself. […] Poor market situations, or an unreliable client who does not pay on time”v (PL01, “agree”)“I have a lot of work at present, many people call, so I don‘t think it will be gone in half a year“ (PL07, “tend to disagree”)

A German respondent in multi-activity said that she has two terminated contracts and referred this question to the one that runs shorter (DE16), again demonstrating that respondents don’t consistently apply the main paid job to all questions, but use the job that best fits the question in their view. A Polish respondent in multi-activity (PL03) refers this question to his main paid job only, which has a permanent contract. We therefore recommend reminding respondents which job to refer the questions to.