Search

The project brought together researchers from 9 EU-Countries and resulted in a number of actions, in particular the following: (a) There is an urgent need of defining the concept of flexible working hours, since it has been used in many different and even counterintuitive ways; the most obvious distinction is where the influence over the working hours lies, that is between the“company-based flexibility” and the“individual-oriented flexibility”; (b) The review of the Legislation in force in the 15 European countries shows that the regulation of working times is quite extensive and covers (Council Directive 93/104/EC) almost all the various arrangements of working hours (i.e., part-time, overtime, shift, and night work), but fails to provide for flexibility; (c) According to the data of the Third EU Survey on Working Conditions, longer and“irregular” working hours are in general linked to lower levels of health and well-being; moreover, low (individual) flexibility and high variability of working hours (i.e., company-based flexibility) were consistently associated with poor health and well-being, while low variability combined with high autonomy showed positive effects; (d) Six substudies from different countries demonstrated that flexible working hours vary according to country, economic sector, social status, and gender; overtime is the most frequent form of company-based flexibility but has negative effects on stress, sleep, and social and mental health; individual flexibility alleviates the negative effects of the company-based flexibility on subjective health, safety, and social well-being; (e) The literature review was able to list more than 1,000 references, but it was striking that most of these documents were mainly argumentative with very little empirical data. Thus, one may conclude that there is a large-scale intervention ongoing in our society with almost completely unknown and uncontrolled effects. Consequently, there is a strong need for systematic research and well-controlled actions in order to examine in detail what flexible working hours are considered, what and where are their positive effects, in particular, as concerns autonomy, and what regulation seem most reasonable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Organisation of working hour schedules in the Northern European countries are rather similar. EU countries are obliged to adopt national legislation regarding duration of weekly working hours and rest periods. Yet, working hour characteristics and schedules are likely to differ with respect to starting times and duration depending e.g. on culture and tradition. Yet, very little is known about potential differences between shifts and schedules across countries among nursing personel. This knowledge is relevant, since the potential differences in working hour characteristics may influence and possibly explain some of the differences observed in studies of health and safety. The aim of the study was to compare characteristics of working hours and work schedules among nursing personel in three Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland and Norway. Methods: The study populations included nursing personnel holding a ≥ 50% position at public hospitals in Denmark (n = 63,678), Finland (n = 18,257) or Norway (n = 1538) in 2013. Objective payroll based registry data with information on daily starting and ending times were used to compare working hour characteristics e.g. starting time, duration of shift, and quick returns (< 11 h between two shifts), as well as work schedules e.g. permanent or 3-shift work between the three countries. Results: Night shifts generally started earlier and lasted longer in Finland (10–11 h starting at 20:00–22:59) than in Norway (10 h starting at 21:00–21:59) and in Denmark (8 h starting at 23:00–23:59). Very long shifts (≥12 h) were more common in Denmark (12%) compared to Finland (8%) and Norway (3%). More employees had many (> 13/year) quick returns in Norway (64%) and Finland (47%) compared to Denmark (16%). The frequency of 3-shift rotation workers was highest in Norway (41%) and lower in Denmark (22%) and Finland (22%). There were few differences across the countries in terms of early morning shifts and (very) long weekly working hours. Conclusion: Despite similar distribution of operational hours among nurses in the three countries, there were differences in working hour characteristics and the use of different types of work schedules. The observed differences may affect health and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to establish a causal relation between shift work and cardiovascular disease (CVD), we need to verify the pathways from the former to the latter. This paper aims to review the current knowledge of the mechanisms between shift work and CVD. Shift work can increase the risk of CVD by several interrelated psychosocial, behavioral, and physiological mechanisms. The psychosocial mechanisms relate to difficulties in controlling working hours, decreased work-life balance, and poor recovery following work. The most probable behavioral changes are weight gain and smoking. The plausible physiological and biological mechanisms are related to the activation of the autonomic nervous system, inflammation, changed lipid and glucose metabolism, and related changes in the risk for atherosclerosis, metabolic syndrome, and type II diabetes. The data provide evidence for possible disease mechanisms between shift work and CVD, but compelling evidence on any specific mechanism is missing.