PLAN DE CONTINGENCIA 103

In the early 1990s there was little pressure in the labour market. Registered un- employment ranged around 3 percent until 1996. This low level of unemploy- ment can be attributed to slow progress in economic restructuring, wage regula- tion and the generally declining economic activity of the Czech population (VECERNIK 1998). However, the labour market has gradually become a decisive

mechanism for allocating human resources as economic and monetary re

and privatisation have progressed (RATINGER and RABINOWICZ 1997). Since

1997, unemp oyment has increased (to 10.3% at the end of 2003, CZS

A declining overall demand for labour has affected the development of the agri-

17.7 20.3 5.3 9.1 43.1 35.2 12.6 10.0 20.0 0.0

Compulsory Secondary Vocational Secondary with GCSE University

Education

30.0

%

Workers in Agriculture Employed in National Economy

cultural labour market. The agricultural unemployment rate5 increased from

higher rate6. From the structural point of view,

ltural sector reduced the number of interests of ag- technologies), the exiting of economically weak individual and corporate farms, and, indirectly, changes in the business environment (e.g., the nature and extent

of demand for agricultural output). HORSKA et al., (2000) found that there was

no demand for additional labour in three quarters of the interviewed farms; two thirds of farms considered the current employment situation/structure as optimal and one third thought to cut further jobs; the importance of seasonal labour was relatively low – just about 10 percent of the total labour. Under these circum- stances, there is little chance for younger people, particularly graduates of agri- cultural schools, to obtain a job in agriculture (this problem was recognised in

three quarters of the job offices, HORSKA et al., 2000).

Obviously, the labour market is imbalanced when the supply of agricultural la- bour does not meet demand. There are structural reasons for this imbalance: an excess of unqualified labour seeking jobs in agriculture on the one hand, and the educated, skilled population's lack of interest in agriculture on the other. Less than 20 percent of the agricultural university graduates were determined to

work in agriculture in 1997 (HORSKA et al., 1998). The main reason mentioned

during the interviews was the low interest of working on farm – low reward 3.6% in 1997 to 8.5% in 1999, then it fell to 6.6% in 2003, which was still

than the overall unemployment

the share of job seekers released from agriculture has been twice as high in rural areas (5.3% in 2003, CZSO 2004) than elsewhere. The situation has worsened as there have been ever less job opportunities in the immediate local economy, par- ticularly in remote rural areas. Three quarters of the working population in vil- lages under 1,000 inhabitants commute. On average, the rate of commuting in communities with up to 10,000 inhabitants increased by 5 percentage points dur- ing the 1990s (CZSO 2002).

The results of empirical investigations of the agricultural labour market (HORSKA et al., 2000) show that the agricu

permanent, as well as seasonal jobs as an effect of: the economic

ricultural entrepreneurs (improving efficiency and profit by investing in new

(wages) and poor working conditions (time, working environment, seasonal character of the work), low social status and unclear prospects of the sector. The imbalance between agricultural labour supply and demand is revealed in the fact that agricultural job seekers have been considered by job offices as one of

the most problematic groups to place in the labour market (HORSKA 2000). This

judgement mirrors specific barriers such as low or no qualification, low profes-

5 _{The rate of unemployed who worked in agriculture during the last 8 years to those cur-}

rently employed in agriculture.

sional flexibility, difficult re-qualification, lacking entrepreneurship, and, often, ties to a concrete living place (where job seekers own their house and plot). There are structural differences among agricultural job seekers; the older, younger (who seek their first job) and women may find their situation most dif-

2003) show that non-agricultural diversification is common among Czech farms; slightly less

n average of about 18% of their labour into these activities. The use of surplus in- vestment capacities and improving a farm's gross income motivated farm man- agers to diversify rather than create or maintain existing jobs.

Changes in production structure, particularly the abandonment of dairy produc- tion on many farms, has caused gender inequality on the agricultural/rural labour market. The agricultural unemployment rate (see note 5) is more than twice as high for women (11.5%) than for men (5%). The share of unemployed agricul- tural females of the total unemployed female population is 3.7 % compared to the rate of employed agricultural females of the total employed female popula- tion (2.7%) (CZSO 2003). This indicates that the unemployment structure is gender specific. Female unemployed are likely to become long-term unem-

ployed, and job offices find it hard to re-qualify them (HORSKA et al., 2000).

HORSKA and SPESNA (2000) characterised the female (un)employed from agri-

culture as follows:

“The average representative of agricultural female labour is a middle aged woman (46) with a basic education or vocational training, an employee (and of- ten an agricultural production cooperative member) – low skilled worker, at-

unwilli o undertake on her own. In con-

e per-

work, improving their income. Rural women in general see inequalities in seven areas (i.e., in three additional areas: getting a job, utilising leisure time, being ficult.

On-farm diversification to non-agricultural activities is often considered an op-

tion for improving tension on the agricultural labour market (CHAPLIN 2003).

Empirical investigations (HORSKA et al., 2002 and HORSKA et al.,

than half of the farms interviewed actually diversified employment, placing a

tached to her own house and the local social environment (a village), inflexible- ng to move, lacking will and capacity t

trast to the other female groups she is willing to accept any job if it is in her lo- cality”.

There is not only gender inequality on the rural labour market – the perception of job opportunities for males and females is also gender specific. Men see the chances of women getting jobs more propitiously than women themselves. However, women in agriculture perceive their situation less dramatically than

the other rural women clusters. HORSKA and SPESNA (2000) specified th

ceptual differences:

“Men perceive worse chances for rural women in only four areas: getting a top manager position, getting a leading position, being paid equally for the same

promoted), while “agricultural” women perceive 9 areas (in addition to the above-mentioned categories – maintaining their jobs and receiving respect and authority in their work).”