INFORMACIÓN ADICIONAL

A disadvantage of INPS data is that, because they are based on administrative forms filled in by employers when contributions are paid, detailed workers’ characteristics are not recorded (e.g. education, marital status, number of children, parents’ background; INPS data, instead, record sex, age and area of work). In particular, information about the education of those working as a para-subordinate is crucial to better assess the characteristics of these workers.

To this end, in the rest of the chapter we will mainly rely on the micro-data collected in the AD-SILC dataset, a longitudinal dataset built by adding INPS data to the IT-SILC waves 2004-2012. Thus, the individual information recorded in IT-SILC has been enriched by the longitudinal information about the working history of each individual in the sample (e.g. recording for each working relationship, the type of arrangement, identified by the specific INPS fund where the workers pay contributions – which allows us to distinguish between para-subordinate collaborators and professionals – weeks worked and gross earnings).

Because individuals may have various contractual arrangements during a year, we recognise the working status at a point in time (31 December), thus identifying those

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Panel A. Number of sold vouchers, 2008-2016, in 1 000s

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Panel B. Number of vouchers sold, by annual income through vouchers in Euro, in 1 000s

exclusively working as a para-subordinate at that moment (if at 31 December an individual also has an employment or a self-employment arrangement or is retired he/she is therefore not classified as a para-subordinate worker).

Interestingly, data at our disposal show that the use of para-subordinate arrangements is much wider among those with a tertiary education qualification than among those with a lower level of education. Indeed, on the one hand, the distribution by education of private employees, para-subordinate collaborators and professionals in 2013 (Figure 6.5) shows that the share of those with a tertiary education is much higher in the two para- subordinate categories (34.0% and 46.8% of collaborators and professionals, respectively) than among private employees (11.2%), and conversely the share of low- skilled individuals (those with at most a lower secondary educational qualification) in para-subordinate arrangements is small. Similarly, 7% of tertiary graduates were para- subordinates at the end of 2013 (compared with a peak of over 10% in 2003), while the corresponding shares of those with at most upper secondary or lower secondary educational qualifications, respectively, 3.4% and 1.7% (not shown).

Figure 6.5. Para-subordinate workers are well educated on average Share of workers by contractual arrangement and education, percentages, in 2013

Source: Own calculations based on AD-SILC data.

The use of para-subordinate arrangements among the well-educated may be due to compositional effects (e.g. para-subordinate arrangements are often used in the case of younger workers who are, on average, more educated) and to the fact that some specific activities performed only or mostly by tertiary education graduates (e.g. postgraduate fellows, administrators or accountants) are classified as para-subordinate jobs. However, multivariate econometric estimates confirm that, even after controlling for the type of job and characteristics of workers, the probability of working in a para-subordinate arrangement is much higher for tertiary graduates than for less educated individuals (Raitano, 2007). This might be driven by the specific characteristics of some highly skilled jobs, which mean that these jobs are more frequently carried out via para- subordinate work arrangements. Since survey data do not contain detailed job descriptions, this cannot be confirmed in this analysis.

36 17 8 53 49 46 11 34 47 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Private employees Para-subordinate collaborators Para-subordinate professionals At most lower secondary Upper secondary Tertiary

As argued above, para-subordinate arrangements might mask – among both collaborators and professionals – actual employment relationships in which the employer uses a para- subordinate arrangement to save labour costs. The 2012 and 2015 reforms tried to avoid the misuse of these arrangements by adding requirements confirming that the para- subordinate worker is really independent.

To assess how many para-subordinate arrangements concealed what are effectively subordinate relationships between the employer and the worker before the recent reforms, a specific survey carried out by the ISFOL (Istituto per lo sviluppo della formazione

professionale dei lavoratori – Institute for developing workers’ lifelong learning) on a

sample of workers in 2010 is very useful. Indeed, this survey recorded how many para- subordinate workers reported in interviews that their job had some features that should not be typical of para-subordinate jobs, which suggests that there was actually a subordinate relationship between the employer and worker.

The figures in the ISFOL survey are worrying since they show that the large majority of para-subordinate workers performed activities similar to those of employees, which suggests that many para-subordinate arrangements masked subordinate relationships (Figure 6.6): indeed, the large majority of those interviewed reported having accepted a para-subordinate arrangement at the client’s request (70.5%), to work in the client’s office (71.7%), to follow prearranged working hours (67.0%) and because of a desire to convert their flexible para-subordinate arrangement into an open-ended employment contract (75%). Thus, rather than choosing this type of arrangement voluntarily, many workers seem to have been forced by employers to accept a very flexible arrangement, offering lower welfare guarantees and, very often, lower wages than employees.

Figure 6.6. Para-subordinates report working under conditions similar to those of employees Share of para-subordinate workers who report that their working arrangement fulfils characteristics of

dependent employment relationships, in percent, 2010

Source: Own calculations based on ISFOL-PLUS 2010 data.

71 81 72 ₆₇ 71 75 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Client requested

contractual arrangement Works for a single client Worksin the client's office Fixed working hours Uses client's facilities current arrangement to anWants to convert the open-ended employment