Romanian Labour Migration

8/12/2019 Romanian Labour Migration

1/10

Romanian Labour Migration:Employees Perspective

Authors: Cristina Boboc*, Valentina Vasile,

Simona Ghi, Mihaela Covrig

* Corresponding author: [email protected]


2/10

Main goals

representing the profile of the employeeswho have a favorable opinion aboutexternal emigration for work

identifying the most reliable ways ofmigration for the employees

identifying the characteristics of employeeswho are in favor of emigration for work for

better earnings


3/10

Methodology

Survey on SME employees from urbanareas of the country

The survey was conducted with the support

of the Romanian Institute of Public OpinionSurvey (IRSOP Market Research &Consulting)

The survey had three main directionsaccording to the major weaknesses of theRomanian labor market: the respondentsopinion on discrimination, migration andundeclared work.


4/10

Data set description

Interviews were conducted bytelephone in early June of 2012 byIRSOP operators

The duration for completing thequestionnaire was about 15-20minutes

The questionnaire had 33 questions

The sample size was set to 500employees


5/10


The first part of the questionnaire included questions forrespondents selection the employees of private companies, non-agricultural,

having between 1 and 249 employees

The sample structure: by SME size:

21.6% employed in micro-enterprises 24.7% employed in small enterprises 53.7% employed in medium enterprises

by the activity domain of the SME: 27.06% - in industry, 8.63% - in constructions 22.35% - in trade 5.49 % - in transport 36.47% - in other services.


6/10


The next part of the questionnaire includes generalquestions about the employee's activity and their work. These questions are useful to identify the profile of various

categories of employees, based on their perception regardingthe vulnerabilities on the labor market.

The next section of the questionnaire includes specificquestions to the study, namely the respondents opinion ondiscrimination, migration and illegal employment. Since all these issues are sensitive, by making the respondent

to hesitate in giving the true answer, we opted for generalformulations, often without direct reference to the interviewee.

The last section of the questionnaire includes socio-demographic questions. These will be used for studying the profile of the employees

with an attitude about discrimination, informal work oremigration.


7/10

Empirical results

Ways to migrate for work

How much trust do you have in these ways of searching for a job (none / low / high)?

31 27

62

14

52

3

55

42

38

24

29

28

23

40

9

71

28

78

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%70%

80%

90%

100%

International DB National Agency for

Employment

Private agents Relatives/f riends Job search in

destination country

Posted w orkers

None Low High


8/10

Empirical results

72% of employees do not seen migration as a positive solution

11% of those interested to go to work abroad consider that it isnot a good solution, because it may cause family problems.

Profile of those interested to work abroad: from the westernpart of the country, males, young people, without high educationallevels, with low experience at work, not members of trade unions

Ways to migrate for work:

Confidence in the international databases: employees working inservices or industry

Trust in private agents: employees with higher education

Confidence especially in relatives/friends or acquaintances: veryyoung workers (under 30 years)

Confidence in emigration by relocation: female employees inmedium companies in Bucharest, activating in industry or transport


9/10

Empirical results

Potential migrant for work Statements regarding justifying the

emigration for work

Coef. Exp (coef.) Coef. Exp (coef.)

There have been layoffs, wage or non-wage

benefit cuts

-0.499** 0.607 4

Female gender -0.950*** 0.387 -0.881*** 0.415Male gender Ref Ref

1 year work experience 1.306*** 3.690

2 years work experience 1.069*** 2.914

3-5 years work experience 0.883*** 2.419

6-10 years work experience 0.560* 1.751

over 11 years work experience Ref Ref

Trade union member -0.769*** 0.464

Constant -1.338*** 0.262 -0.478*** 0.620

Hosmer-Lomeshow Test (2) 2=6.398, Sig=0.603 2=0.035, Sig=0.983

R2Cox&Snell 0.068 0.047

R2Nagelkerke 0.105 0.067

Percentage correct 78.6% 71.8%

Results obtained by applying binary logistic regression


10/10

Policies to reduce migration

stimulating entrepreneurship could be a solution for keepingyoung people in the local economy

encouraging investments in the local economy: businessdevelopment would produce local development in a sustainablemanner, which would lead to maintaining the employees in thelocal economy.

organizing workers in unions

attract specialists in Romania through: stimulating business byfinancial aid for starting a new project, stimulating youngpeople in starting a business, stimulating innovation, research

development

Romanian Labour Migration

Documents