Standards Working Group meetingupdated).pdf · SWG/2016/7.4 “Standards ... means that somebody who stops working and seeks work would have a different socio-economic classification

EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROSTAT Directorate B: Methodology; corporate statistical and IT services Unit B-5: Data and metadata services and standards

SWG/2016/7.4

“Standards

Working Group meeting”

Luxembourg, 6-7 June 2016

BECH Building, Room Ampère

ITEM 7.4 OF THE AGENDA

EUROPEAN SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUPS (ESEG)

2

1. Background

The ESeG classification was firstly developed by an ESSnet composed by the National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) of France (coordinator country), Czech Republic, Italy and Hungary (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/content/eseg_en).

The work of this ESSnet was slightly revised by Eurostat to include the amendments requested by the Classification Working Group and the classification was presented to the Directors of Social Statistics (DSS) in September 2014.

The classification is fully derived from the “Core social variables”, as agreed up by the DSS in September 2009, to ensure that it can be used in all social surveys using the existing variables.

The ESeG classification is a tool to measure the social status of an individual (or of a household) in the stratification system of societies.

This classification aims to facilitate the comparative analysis of many aspects of the quality of life and of social cohesion, for example health, living conditions and economic situation of European Union’s population, seeking to understand variations across Member States. It should also provide a comparative research tool to facilitate analyses of intergenerational social mobility and intergenerational inheritance of inequalities.

As some practical issues concerning the implementation of this classification still needed to be

addressed, the Directors of Social Statistics decided to create a specific task force to provide

recommendations.

2. The Task force: composition and mandate

The French, Italian and Swedish NSIs as well as Eurostat and the International Labour Office (ILO)

volunteered to participate in this Task Force.

The Task Force was created to address outstanding issues which hamper full implementation of the

ESeG classification.

The specific objectives were:

- to address practical issues which prevent the implementation of this classification, - to contribute to solutions for the amendment of the ESeG classification - to provide technical advice on proposals made by Eurostat.

The Task Force reviewed the technical proposals presented by Eurostat and provided Eurostat with

appropriate advice.

3. Implementation of the ESeG classification: methodological issues

considered by the Task Force

Several methodological issues arose when Eurostat tried to apply the ESeG classification for the

dissemination of some relevant social statistics. Additional issues had already been identified by

Eurostat and presented on the occasion of the September 2014 DSS.

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/content/eseg_en

3

The methodological issues are the following:

1) Better delineation between active (groups 1-7) and inactive population (groups 8-9), and problems of exhaustive classification for non-employed persons

2) Treatment of non-response 3) Relevance of the "Employment Status" variable 4) Socio-economic status at household level

The Task force tackled only issues 1) and 2) which were preventing the application of the

classification in social statistics. Issues 3) and 4) were not considered urgent and will be dealt by the

Task force in a later stage. They are briefly described in § 4.

While groups 1-7 look quite consistent, groups 8 and 9 presented some inconsistencies that could be

smoothed by small changes in the classification.

The main inconsistencies are listed below:

3.1 Labels of the 2 major groups

Issue: Groups 1-7 were labelled "Active population" and Groups 8 and 9 were labelled "Inactive

population". Nevertheless, some unemployed were included in Group 9, meaning that groups 1-7

did not encompass all active persons.

Conclusion of the Task force: The TF agreed to rename the 2 main groups as follows:

- "Persons in the Labour Force" - "Persons outside the Labour Force"

Such descriptions are consistent with the terminology used in the ILO Resolution concerning

statistics of work, employment and labour underutilization adopted at the 19th International

Conference of Labour Statisticians (ICLS).

Code 9.3 "Unemployment not elsewhere classified" was deleted to allow for ESeG groups 8 and 9 to

cover exclusively population outside the labour force.

It was also agreed to introduce the following codes:

0.0 " Persons in the labour force, whose occupation is not known"; this position is further subdivided

into:

- 0.1 Employed persons whose occupation is not known - 0.2 Unemployed persons whose previous occupation is not known or who never had a job

(corresponds to previous group 9.3).

3.2 Groups 8 and 9 cover mainly inactive population but not only

Issues:

Group 8 is named “Retired persons (and people 65 years and over, not employed)" but it is

not clear whether this category covers unemployed people aged over 65.

Should unemployed aged over 65 whose previous occupation is known be classified in

groups 1-7? Or should they be classified in subgroups 8.1 – 8.7? If the latter option is chosen,

these subgroups should be renamed (the adjective "retired" should then be removed).

Where should unemployed aged over 65 be classified when their previous occupation is

unknown? Should they be classified in subgroup 9.3 even if group 9 contains mostly people

aged less than 65?

4

It is not clear whether the age is the discriminator between groups 8 and 9. If this is the case,

all people over 65 who have never worked or for which information on their previous job is

not available or who are unemployed should be classified in subgroup 8.9. Subgroup 8.9

should then be renamed accordingly (e.g. “Other persons outside the labour force, retired or

aged 65 or more”).

Conclusion of the Task force:

It was agreed to remove the reference to age as 65 does not necessarily correspond with the

retirement age in all countries and sectors of activity.

Group 8 was renamed "Retired persons".

Sub-group 8.9 "Other persons outside the labour force aged 65 or more" was deleted and replaced

by a code 8.0 "Retired persons with unknown previous occupation".

Group 9 was renamed "Other persons outside the Labour Force".

Sub-group 9.1 was renamed "Students".

Sub-group 9.2 was renamed "Permanently disabled persons, not retired".

Sub-group 9.9 was renamed "Other persons outside the labour force not elsewhere classified".

As a consequence, unemployed persons aged over 65 whose previous occupation is known should

be classified in groups 1-7 and unemployed aged over 65 whose previous occupation is not known

should be classified in 0.2.

3.3 Label of Group 9

Issues:

It is not clear whether a permanently disabled person aged over 65 should be included in

group 9.2 or in subgroup 8.9.

Apart from sub-group 9.3, all sub-groups under group 9 contain only inactive persons.

However, the current labels suggest that, for example, 9.1 contains all types of students,

which is not the case. A possible solution to this problem could be to rename group 9 into

“Other non-employed persons not elsewhere classified”, 9.1 into “Students outside the

labour force”, 9.2 into “Permanently disabled outside the labour force”, and 9.9 into “Other

persons outside the labour force aged less than 65 not elsewhere classified”.


All these issues where solved with the changes proposed under point 3.2.

Permanently disabled persons not in the labour force should be included in group 8 if they are

retired and in group 9 if they are not retired.

3.4. Inactive person aged less than 65

Issues:

It is unclear where to classify an inactive person aged less than 65 and for whom we do not

know if he/she is retired or not, because in this case one cannot decide whether he/she

should be classified to group 8 or 9.

The last job is not known for the majority of retired people.

5

The criterion of 65 years doesn’t match the rules of classification for the employment status

defined in the Labour force survey and more generally, why have an age distinction among

the other inactive persons and have it coded under 8.9 and 9.9?

While unemployed for which the past occupation is known are allocated to groups 1-7,

inactive persons for which the past occupation is known are treated in a different way. That

means that somebody who stops working and seeks work would have a different socio-

economic classification than somebody who stops working without seeking work. For

example, a person fired by his/her employer would not have the same socio-economic

status depending on whether he/she seeks a job not. In addition, this change of socio-

economic status would be immediate: a mother who stops working to take care of her child

would immediately change socio-economic status. These 2 examples show an inconsistency

in the application of the classification.


Without reference to age, group 8.9 would cover only the retired population for which the previous

occupation is not known, therefore code 8.0 would be more appropriate. For this reason it was

agreed to suppress code 8.9 and rename new code 8.0 (replacing 8.9) into "Retired persons with

unknown previous occupation"

Sub Group 9.9 will be kept.

Concerning the issue of the change of ESeG status for people who cease employment and do not

search for a job (as described in the examples above) the TF recognised that this is a limitation for

the use of the classification. The introductory notes shall explicitly mention this and other possible

limitations of this classification.

Another limitation of the classification that should be noted is that in crisis periods or periods of high

unemployment, some persons who lose their jobs as employees will try to earn a living in self-

employment, frequently of a marginal nature, rather than becoming unemployed. This could result

in an improvement in the ESeG status in statistical aggregates that do not reflect a real improvement

in socio-economic conditions.

3.5 Coding issues for partial information

Issues:

In cases where only partial information is available, ISCO includes specific codes for not

further specified professions (e.g. ISCO code 1000 "Manager not further defined"). If the

second level of the classification cannot be coded the first level should be tried. However,

while such sub-major groups are available in the ISCO classification (ISCO codes 10, 20, 30),

it is not the case of the current ESEG classification (ESEG codes 10, 20, 30 do not exist).

Should new sub-groups 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, etc. be included in the ESEG classification to be used

when at least information on one of the components of ESeG is not available?


The TF agreed on introducing new sub-groups codes 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 in the ESEG

classification when the information to classify the person at a more detailed level is not available.

6

3.6 Other issues

Issues:

The variable MAINSTAT is a voluntary annual variable, therefore distinguishing between

Groups 8 and 9 is not always possible.


This was identified as another limitation of the ESeG classification. There is not much that can be

done about this and it can happen that information on groups 8 and 9 will not be always available.

It was also mentioned that the variable "MAINSTAT" has several response categories (employed,

retired, disabled, student…) and in fact a person can have more than one of these status (e.g. retired

and disabled). The explanatory notes to the variable just say that it is up to the person to choose

his/her main status. This would hamper the quality of the information provided by groups 8 and 9

and should also be mentioned in the notes about the classification.

4. Other issues to be dealt by the Task force at a later stage

4.1 Relevance of the variable "Employment status"

In a document on the revision of the International Classification of Status in Employment (ICSE-93)

prepared for the 19th International Conference of Labour Statisticians , ILO stated that the

categories defined in ICSE-93 and used for variable "Status in Employment" “no longer provide

sufficient information or detail to adequately monitor the changes in contractual arrangements that

are taking place in many countries. There is a need in particular to provide more clarity about the

treatment of specific groups, to provide more detailed categories for the purposes of international

comparison, and to deal more appropriately with the emergence over that last several decades of a

variety of new forms of employment and contract types that are blurring the boundary between

paid employment and self-employment.”

As ESeG classification relies fundamentally on a clear distinction between employees and self-

employed, it can happen that these concepts will have to be reviewed in the light of the revision of

ICSE classification.

When the revision of the classification ICSE is finalized ESeG should be reviewed.

4.2 Socio-economic status at household level

The ESeG classification aims to classify individuals. However, many phenomena concerning

economic, social and cultural characteristics are linked to households. Furthermore, the socio-

economic position of individuals can be influenced by the composition of their household.

Therefore it would be important to define the socio-economic status of the household and to

establish rules describing more precisely how the ESeG-code of a household can be derived from the

ESeG-codes of its individual members. Such rules would provide a further use case for the

classification and harmonise its implementation.

One possible rule could be to allocate to the household the ESeG code of its member whose main or

previous job has the highest socio-economic status. Nevertheless the impact of this choice needs still

to be analysed.

7

Another issue which deserves some discussion is whether the ESeG of individuals should be based

on their own main job or should all persons within a household have the same status.

Although this aspect is not considered the priority for the moment, it should be kept in the agenda.

The Members of Standards Working Group are invited to:

comment the conclusions of the Task force and

endorse the present version of ESeG and its introductory guidelines and explanatory notes

(Annex 1)

8

Annex 1 - European Socio – economic groups

1. Brief history of the classification

1.1 Prototype defined under the 6th Research Framework Programme (FP6)

The 6th Framework Programme project on ESeC followed a task force on harmonisation of social

statistics in 1997-2000 which also covered this topic. The project aimed at producing a European

Socio-economic Classification for use in the field of EU comparative research in human sciences

which allow EU wide analyses of health, living conditions, labour market situation of men and

women, economic situation of citizens among Member States, along with intergenerational social

mobility and intergenerational inheritance of inequalities.

The consortium running the project was composed of universities and research centres from the UK,

Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. The Consortium organised several

workshops to build the classification. One conference took place on 19/20 January 2006 in Lisbon

and aimed at proposing a first version of the classification and validation studies. An additional

conference targeted to National Statistical Institutes was organized in June 2006 in Slovenia to

present a more complete version along with a user guide for implementation in EU surveys.

In some countries, national socio-economic classifications already exist. They are either developed

as a normative/deductive matrix (mostly Anglo-Saxon countries: the Erikson-Goldthorpe-

Portocarero - EGP schema) or as a theoretical/inductive classification (French 'nomenclature des

Professions et Catégories Socioprofessionnelles' PCS). A report (Gray, 1999) provided a first overview

of the socio-economic classifications in use in the different National Statistical Institutes in EU and

EFTA countries.

1.2 The ESeC task force

In 2007, in the framework of the discussion on core variables for social surveys, the Directors of

Social Statistics decided to create a task force on the European Socio-Economic Classification (ESeC).

The aim of the ESeC task force was to organise tests of the classification prototype by National

Statistical Institutes in the context of co-financing proposed in the Commission budget for 2007.

The mandate of this task force was therefore to:

- review the objectives of the classification in the framework of an EU classification to be

implemented in all ESS surveys,

- study the dimensions needed to derive the matrix on the basis of the main issues related to

the current prototype and similar national classifications,

- summarise and use the NSI contributions presented in the Bled (Slovenia) conference in

June 2006 which concluded the work of the ESeC consortium for the FP6,

- propose guidelines for specific improvement and validation procedures focussing on

comparability across countries,

- address the main quality issues, including sources, reduced versions, labels, classification of

occupations (ISCO 2008, FP6 project on euro-occupations) and EU comparability.

The task force to discuss the ESeC prototype met in April 2007 and proposed a set of tests for the

improvement and the validation of the proposed classification at EU level. A call for grant proposals

9

was sent to the European Statistical System members a few months after. The results of the tests

provide an assessment of the existent prototype and suggestions for an improved version valid at EU

level and most social surveys.

The task force concluded that three main aspects needed to be covered:

1. Quality and comparability of occupations (ISCO-88 and ISCO-08) and other dimensions of the

prototype,

2. Improvements needed to obtain a classification applicable to all social surveys (links between

simplified/reduced and full versions, identification of additional dimensions required),

3. Other quality issues (including presentation and labels).

Examples of validation procedures from an ESeC conference organised in Slovenia in 2006 were also

selected by the task force.

1.3 Grants

The call for proposal for grants launched in 2007 was divided in 3 sets of items, each of them

containing a standard list of questions to be studied.

Four countries applied for these grants: Bulgaria, France, Italy and Hungary. The tests started in

January 2008. Bulgaria, Italy and Hungary transmitted their final reports to Eurostat in the summer

2009. France did so mid October 2009.

Based on the input from these countries and the proposal from France, Eurostat proposed the

following developments in the November 2009 ISCO workshop:

- Adapt ESeC to ISCO-08 and build a new version of the classification

- Focus on improvement of the implementation of ISCO-08 since it is the main input in ESeC.

- Continue to work on a derivation of ESeC exclusively based on core variables to allow for an

implementation in all social surveys (e.g. ISCO 2 digits, status in employment, sector)

- Study the possibility of providing more precise results from the LFS with additional variables

already available in this survey (if necessary, e.g. size of the enterprise, ISCO at 3 digits, Supervision

variable).

- Test the quality of this variable, taking into account that such derived ESeC could be slightly

different from the initial ESeC used by researchers.

An ESSnet of several Member States was considered the most appropriate way of tackling these

questions.

1.4 Outcomes of the Directors of Social Statistics meeting of September 2009

Two options were proposed to the September 2009 DSS regarding the future of ESeC:

- To restrict ESeC to researchers

- To improve ESeC in order to be able to use it in the main social surveys

The latter would mean using only core variables, mainly ISCO-08 (2 digits) but also professional

status and possibly sector of activity. Further details would be restricted to the LFS (ISCO-08 3 digits,

10

supervisory responsibilities, enterprise size). An ESSNet on this classification was proposed to be

created.

France volunteered to lead this ESSNet.

1.5 The ESSnet

Following a call for grants by Eurostat, an ESSnet project was launched to define a European socio-

economic classification. The grant agreement was signed between Eurostat and the NSIs from

France, Italy, the Czech Republic and Hungary. The ESSnet was coordinated by INSEE. The contract

was signed on October 2011 for two years and extended until April 2014.

The aim of the project was to develop a new classification, taking into account previous experience

of EseC, but using ISCO-08 and adding some dimensions which are relevant for defining social

groups.

Research laboratories were associated to the project in the country members of the ESSnet ;

European researchers and statisticians were consulted in international workshops. This large

participation allowed reaching a consensus on the structure of the classification.

ESeG comprises 2 levels: the aggregated level (groups) is completed by a second more detailed level

(sub-groups) offering greater flexibility for rearrangements, to reconcile different researcher needs

and to take account of particular contexts required by national studies or for specific social fields.

EseG was endorsed by the Directors of Social Statistics in September 2014.

2. Basic principles of the classification

ESeG is a derived classification which allows the grouping of individuals with similar economic, social

and cultural characteristics throughout the European Union, based only on core social variables to

ensure comfortable use in all social surveys providing comparable results The main core social

variables used are "ILO Working Status ", “Status in employment”, “Occupation in employment”

and “Self-declared labour status” but "Occupation on the previous employment" and "Status in

employment for the previous job" are also used to differentiate Sub-groups from Group 8.

The classification is composed of 9 groups (1-9) and 40 sub-groups.

Groups 1 to 7 refer to the population in the Labour Force (Labour Status = employed or

unemployed).

The employed population is classified according to ESeG using Occupation (ISCO 08 sub-major

groups) and Status in employment (Self-employed/employees). Family workers should be

considered in this context as self-employed.

The unemployed population should be classified in a similar way but using occupation and status in

employment of the previous job.

Groups 8 and 9 refer to the inactive population. Group 8 concerns the retired inactive population

and Group 9 refers to the other inactive population. The subgroups proposed can be used with the

help of the variable Self-declared labour status.

It should be noted that students or disabled persons who are in employment should be classified in

groups 1-7 according to their job.

3. Treatment of non-response for some of the components of ESeG

11

For the sake of exhaustiveness 2 extra codes are available to code individuals for which detailed

information is not available:

- 0.1 Employed persons whose occupation is not known

- 0.2 Unemployed persons whose previous occupation is not known or who never had a job

Furthermore, sub-groups codes 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 should be used when the

information to classify the person at sub-group level is not available but enough information is

available to classify them at Group level.

For retired persons for who we don't know the previous occupation and/or their status in

employment they should be coded 8.0.

4. Limitations of the ESeG classification

ESeG is a derived classification based on core social variables. Due to this constraint the classification

presents a certain number of limitations:

- In the Labour Force Survey, although data is available quarterly, the variable Self-declared

labour status is a voluntary annual variable therefore the distinction between Group 8 and 9 is not

always possible.

- Furthermore the variable Self-declared labour status has several response categories

(employed, retired, disabled, student…) and in fact a person can have more than one of these status

(e.g. being retired and disabled).The explanatory notes of the variable only mention that it is up to

the person to choose their own main status. This can hamper the quality of the information provided

by groups 8 and 9.

- While unemployed persons for whom the past occupation is known are allocated to groups

1-7, this is not the case of inactive persons for which the past occupation is known. That means that

somebody who stops working and seeks work would have a different socio-economic classification

than somebody who stops working without seeking work.

- ESeG can present changes in the socio-economic situation which are not real and just

mirror a change in the employment status. For instance, a mother who stops working to take care of

her child would immediately change socio-economic status from a group 1-7 to group 9.

- In crisis periods or periods of high unemployment, some persons who lose their jobs as

employees will try to earn a living in self-employment, frequently of a marginal nature, rather than

becoming unemployed. This could result in an improvement in the ESeG status in statistical

aggregates that does not reflect a real improvement in socio-economic conditions.

12

5. ESEG classification

Persons in the Labour Force

1 Managers

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 1 and Status in employment = employees or self-employed;

- Persons employed coded ISCO 01 and Status in employment = employees

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 1 in previous job and Status in employment in previous job =

employees or self-employed;


employees

1.1 Higher managerial self-employed

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 11, 12 or 13 and Status in employment = self-employed;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 11, 12 or 13 in previous job and Status in employment in previous

job = self-employed;

1.2 Lower managerial self-employed

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 14 and Status in employment = self-employed;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 14 in previous job and Status in employment in previous job = self-

employed;

1.3 Higher managerial employees

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 01, 11, 12 or 13 and Status in employment = employees;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 01, 11, 12 or 13 in previous job and Status in employment in

previous job = employees;

1.4 Lower managerial employees

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 14 and Status in employment = employees;


employees;

2 Professionals

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 2 and Status in employment = employees or self-employed;


employees or self-employed;

2.1 Science, engineering and information and communications technology (ICT) professionals

13

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 21 or 25;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 21 or 25 in previous job;

2.2 Health professionals

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 22;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 22 in previous job;

2.3 Business and administration professionals

Includes:



2.4 Legal, social and cultural professionals

Includes:



2.5 Teaching professionals

Includes:



3 Technicians and associate professional employees

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 02 or 3 and Status in employment = employees;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 02 or 3 in previous job and Status in employment in previous job =

employees;

3.1 Science and engineering associate professionals and ICT technicians

Includes:


- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 31 or 35 in previous job and Status in employment in previous

job = employees;

3.2 Health associate professionals

Includes:



employees;

3.3 Business and administration associate professionals

14

Includes:



employees;

3.4 Legal, social and cultural associate professionals

Includes:



employees;

3.5 Non-commissioned armed forces officers

Includes:



employees;

4 Small entrepreneurs

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 and Status in employment = self-

employment;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 in previous job and Status in employment

in previous job = self-employment;

4.1 Self-employed agricultural and related workers

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 6 or 92 and Status in employment = self-employment;


self-employment;

4.2 Self-employed technicians, clerical support, services and sales workers

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 3, 4 or 5 and Status in employment = self-employment;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 3, 4 or 5 in previous job and Status in employment in previous job =

self-employment;

4.3 Self-employed drivers, craft, trades and elementary workers

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 7, 8, 91, 93, 94, 95 or 96 and Status in employment = self-employment;

- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 7, 8, 91, 93, 94, 95 or 96 in previous job and Status in employment

in previous job = self-employment;

5 Clerks and skilled service employees

15

Includes:


- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 03, 4, 53 or 54 in previous job and Status in employment in previous

job = employees;

5.1 General and numerical clerks and other clerical support employees

Includes:

- Persons employed coded ISCO 41, 43 or 44 and Status in employment = employees;


job = employees;

5.2 Customer services clerks

Includes:



employees;

5.3 Personal care employees

Includes:



employees;

5.4 Protective service employees and armed forces, other ranks

Includes:



employees;

6 Skilled industrial employees

Includes:



employees;

6.1 Building and related trade employees

Includes:



employees;

6.2 Food processing, wood working, garment employees

Includes:

16



employees;

6.3 Metal, machinery, handicraft, printing, electrical and electronic trade employees

Includes:



job = employees;

6.4 Stationary plant and machinery operation and assembly employees

Includes:



employees;

6.5 Employee drivers and mobile plant operators

Includes:



employees;

7 Lower status employees

Includes:


- Persons unemployed coded ISCO 51, 52, 6 or 9 in previous job and Status in employment in previous

job = employees;

7.1 Personal services and sales employees

Includes:



employees;

7.2 Industrial labourers and food preparation assistants

Includes:



job = employees;

7.3 Cleaners and helpers and services employees in elementary occupations

Includes:


17


employees;

7.4 Agricultural employees

Includes:



employees;

Persons outside the Labour Force:

8 Retired persons

8.1 Retired managers

Includes:

- Persons coded in Self-declared labour status "In retirement or early retirement or has given up

business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 1 and Status in employment of last job = employees or self-employed


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 01 and Status in employment of last job = employees

8.2 Retired professionals

Includes:


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 2 and Status in employment of last job = employees or self-employed

8.3 Retired technicians and associated professionals employees

Includes:


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 02 or 3 and Status in employment of last job = employee;

8.4 Retired small entrepreneurs

Includes:


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 and Status in employment of last job = self-employed

8.5 Retired clerks and skilled service employees

Includes:


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 03, 4, 53 or 54 and Status in employment of last job = employees;

8.6 Retired skilled Industrial employees

Includes:


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 7 or 8 and Status in employment of last job = employees;

8.7 Retired lower status employees

Includes:

18


business" and Coded in ISCO (last job) 51, 52, 6 or 9 and Status in employment of last job = employees;

9 Other persons outside the Labour Force

9.1 Students

Includes:

- Persons coded in Self-declared labour status "Pupil, student, further training, unpaid work

experience";

9.2 Permanently disabled persons not retired

Includes:

- Persons coded in Self-declared labour status "Permanently disabled";

9.9 Other persons outside the labour force not elsewhere classified

Includes:

- Persons coded in Self-declared labour status "In compulsory military or community service",

"Fulfilling domestic tasks" or "Other inactive person";

Standards Working Group meetingupdated).pdf · SWG/2016/7.4 “Standards ... means that somebody who stops working and seeks work would have a different socio-economic classification

Documents