Work is a sensitive issue on which, particularly in Italy, ideological clashes often take place rather than genuine exchanges of ideas. We saw clear evidence of this in the debates on the recent labour market reform, the Jobs Act. It is a sensitive issue because it is a central factor in shaping people’s individual and social identities. It is a fundamental component of dignity and social inclusion. It is no coincidence that it is enshrined in the first article of our Constitution, making work the backbone of our civil society and the cornerstone upon which our welfare system is built. Conversely, this importance is not always matched by adequate support from the public sector. One need only consider the malfunctioning of social safety nets, and the absence of a system for lifelong learning and educational and career guidance. Furthermore, the search for employment is left to the personal networks of individuals and families: estimates suggest that between 2 and 4 per cent of new entrants to the labour market are placed through Jobcentres. Consequently, the burden of finding work – which has become even heavier during these years of crisis – falls on families. This explains the high level of sensitivity surrounding issues relating to work and changes to the rules governing it.
Finegil newspapers, 2 August 2015
Corriere delle Alpi, 2 August 2015
Messaggero Veneto, 2 August 2015
However, public discourse is often held captive by ideological perspectives and considerations that fail to take account of the profound transformations currently taking place, not only in the production system but also in the ways work is perceived and the values attributed to it. To paraphrase the title of an (old but still relevant) book by Aris Accornero, one could argue that we are still living in the era of ‘Work as Ideology’ (Mulino, 1981). In other words, there is a lack of up-to-date analysis of how the values attributed to work are changing. On these issues, Community Media Research has launched a research project, consulting people in the north-east to understand how the concept and meaning of work are changing. In this first instalment, we will not only examine the current understanding of the issue, but also assess the extent to which the population’s views align with the measures included in the Jobs Act.
Firstly, it should be emphasised that labour market reform was followed, to a greater or lesser extent, by three out of four people in the North-East (74.1 per cent), with greater interest shown in Friuli Venezia Giulia (72.7 per cent) and Veneto (78.5 per cent) than in Trentino-Alto Adige (50.5 per cent). This reform has therefore had an impact on a large proportion of the population, particularly men and even younger people, who, of all groups, were the ones most likely to have followed the issue in depth. Among workers, the debate on the reform was of greater interest to business owners (80.2 per cent) and technical staff (78.9 per cent), and less so to manual workers (68.4 per cent). But it was above all amongst voters from the Centre (87.4 per cent), the Centre-Left (81.0 per cent) and the Left (78.4 per cent) that the Jobs Act attracted the most attention. In other words, within that cultural sphere where the issue of work constitutes a deeply rooted aspect of identity (and values).
Secondly, opinions amongst the population of the north-east are divided when it comes to who would benefit from the implementation of the Jobs Act. On the one hand, a third (35.3 per cent) believe it is beneficial for both businesses and workers, particularly amongst people from Friuli-Venezia Giulia (62.7 per cent) and Trentino and South Tyrol (52.9 per cent). This suggests that the reform strikes a good balance between differing interests. On the other hand, a slightly smaller proportion (30.5 per cent) believe it mainly benefits companies, particularly among Venetians (35.1 per cent). What is certain is that few perceive it as disadvantageous for everyone (8.6 per cent) and even fewer as beneficial exclusively to workers (5.1 per cent). Analysing occupational groups, among business owners, the majority see the benefits as equally distributed (46.9 per cent). Among managers and technical staff, however, the balance of benefits is roughly equal (38.4 per cent for everyone; 37.6 per cent for businesses); whilst among manual workers, the balance favours businesses (38.2 per cent) rather than everyone (32.0 per cent).
But it is political affiliations that create the greatest divide. A view that favours businesses alone is predominantly shared by voters on the two extremes of the political spectrum (Right: 29.5%; Left: 51.6%), as does a wholly negative view of the Jobs Act (Right: 21.1%; Left: 7.3%). Conversely, those in favour of a fair distribution of benefits are voters from the Centre (61.6 per cent) and the Centre-Left (52.6 per cent). Thus, voters on the Right/Centre-Right – who, however, are less familiar with the reform than others – anticipate negative consequences for everyone or, at best, benefits only for businesses. Conversely, on the Left/Centre-Left, the Jobs Act is divisive, polarising opinion between those who see benefits for everyone (Centre-Left) and those who see benefits only for businesses (Left).
Precisely to avoid the pitfalls of an ideological or prejudicial approach, respondents were presented with a number of statements which, in effect, reflect the provisions of the Jobs Act (the most controversial ones) without, however, mentioning them explicitly. The aim was to ascertain whether, and to what extent, there was consistency between public opinion and the reforms that had been approved. In general, on average, over 75 per cent approve of being able to change roles in order to keep their job (77.5%), that there should be increasing protections with permanent employment (76.3%), and that, in the event of dismissal, it is better to receive financial compensation rather than be reinstated (77.5%). A change of role, increasing job protection and the repeal of Article 18 are no longer taboo subjects. By adding up the scores obtained from the various responses, it is possible to create a composite measure of the (implicit) attitudes towards the Jobs Act. Overall, 75.1 per cent of people in the north-east hold views close to those introduced by the reform. The largest group is the ‘JAct-leaning’ (46.1 per cent), comprising those who approve of almost all the measures introduced, particularly in Veneto (49.4 per cent) and Friuli Venezia Giulia (49.0 per cent). They are followed by the ‘YES JAct’ group (29.0 per cent), who approve of the measures in their entirety, particularly in Trentino-Alto Adige (76.5 per cent). Conversely, 23.9 per cent view the reform predominantly negatively (‘Reluctant towards the JAct’), almost exclusively among Venetians (23.5 per cent), and only 1.0 per cent are totally opposed (‘NO JAct’). It should be noted that the latter group consists mainly of those on the Left (36.7%), but at the same time a full 63.3% agree with the approved reforms of the Jobs Act.
Labour issues are still weighed down by a cultural rigidity that prevents a pragmatic discussion – one that tackles real problems without, for that reason, denying the value and dignity of work. Because, in the meantime, the world of production has changed, and with it the attitudes of workers. Yet political cultures do not seem to have changed to the same extent. And the Jobs Act reflects the resistance to change felt by people in the north-east far more than public debates would suggest.
Daniele Marini
