Influence of Digitalization on the Tasks of Employees with Disabilities in Germany (1979–2006) †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Computer technology in the workplace substitutes for employees with disabilities in performing routine and manual tasks.
- Computer technology in the workplace complements employees with disabilities in performing non-routine tasks.
2. Data and Methods
2.1. Data
2.2. Methods
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Results
3.2. Multivariate Results
4. Discussion
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
1979 | 1986 | 1999 | 2006 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
DOD = 0 | 95.50% | 95.80% | 95.0% | 92.80% | |
DOD < 50 | 2.60% | 2.30% | 2.60% | 4.00% | |
DOD ≥ 50 | 1.90% | 1.80% | 2.40% | 3.20% | |
DOD = 0 | male | 75.60% | 72.20% | 72.50% | 68.50% |
DOD = 0 | female | 24.40% | 27.80% | 27.50% | 31.50% |
DOD < 50 | male | 82.60% | 75.50% | 68.00% | 59.00% |
DOD < 50 | female | 17.40% | 24.50% | 32.00% | 41.00% |
DOD ≥ 50 | male | 60.80% | 62.30% | 59.30% | 55.80% |
DOD ≥ 50 | female | 39.20% | 37.70% | 40.70% | 44.20% |
DOD = 0 | 15–25 years | 3.60% | 0.30% | - | 0.70% |
DOD = 0 | 25–45 years | 24.90% | 14.70% | 25.50% | 31.00% |
DOD = 0 | 45–65 years | 71.50% | 84.90% | 74.50% | 68.30% |
DOD < 50 | 15–25 years | 1.70% | 3.90% | - | 0.70%% |
DOD < 50 | 25–45 years | 25.10% | 25.80% | 25.80% | 27.70% |
DOD < 50 | 45–65 years | 73.20% | 70.30% | 74.20% | 71.60% |
DOD ≥ 50 | 15–25 years | 16.60% | 10.10% | - | 6.20% |
DOD ≥ 50 | 25–45 years | 52.30% | 47.30% | 46.70% | 54.20% |
DOD ≥ 50 | 45–65 years | 31.10% | 42.70% | 53.30% | 39.60% |
DOD = 0 | Low qualification | 34.10% | 19.50% | 17.10% | 11.70% |
DOD = 0 | Middle qualification | 47.40% | 55.10% | 54.10% | 67.00% |
DOD = 0 | Technical college | 12.40% | 16.40% | 14.70% | 7.90% |
DOD = 0 | High qualification | 6.00% | 8.90% | 14.10% | 13.40% |
DOD < 50 | Low qualification | 31.50% | 21.00% | 16.00% | 12.50% |
DOD < 50 | Middle qualification | 53.50% | 56.30% | 54.00% | 65.60% |
DOD < 50 | Technical college | 9.90% | 17.50% | 12.90% | 5.90% |
DOD < 50 | High qualification | 5.10% | 5.20% | 17.10% | 16.00% |
DOD ≥ 50 | Low qualification | 28.10% | 19.70% | 14.50% | 8.80% |
DOD ≥ 50 | Middle qualification | 52.70% | 54.10% | 55.60% | 61.60% |
DOD ≥ 50 | Technical college | 11.40% | 14.50% | 11.90% | 6.80% |
DOD ≥ 50 | High qualification | 7.80% | 11.70% | 18.00% | 22.80% |
Variable | Question in the Employment Surveys | Operationalization |
---|---|---|
Tasks |
|
|
Degree of disability9 | F1514: Do you have an officially recognized disability? (Yes/no) F1515: What is the recognized degree of disability? (Less than 50 percent/or 50 percent and more10) |
|
Main tool in the workplace | Mechb—degree of technology (main work tool) (Simple work device, tool/powered hand tools/simple machines/semi-automated machines, plants/computers, program-controlled tools) |
|
1979, 1986, 1999, 2006 |
| |
Highest qualification level11 | Nvausbr—highest vocational qualification (no full qualification/apprenticeship, full-time vocational school/trade and technical school (master craftsman, technician, certified senior clerk and similar)/university of applied sciences/university) |
|
Economic sector | Q087—economic sector (industry/craft trades/commerce/public sector/agriculture/other economic sector |
|
Working time | Q008—weekly working time in main employment |
|
Company size12 | Q089—company size (1 to 4 employees/5 to 9 employees/10 to 49 employees/50 to 99 employees/100 to 499 employees/500 to 999 employees/1000 employees and above) |
|
Age | Age |
|
Gender | Q002—gender of target person |
|
References
- Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (BMAS). Teilhabebericht der Bundesregierung über die Lebenslagen von Menschen mit Beeinträchtigungen. Teilhabe- Beeinträchtigung- Behinderung; Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs: Bonn, Germany, 2013; Available online: https://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Publikationen/a125-13-teilhabebericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Trost, R.; Schüler, S. Beschäftigung von Menschen mit geistiger Behinderung auf dem allgemeinen Arbeitsmarkt. Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Arbeit der Eingliederungsinitiative in Donau Eschingen und Pforzheim. Integra: Walldorf, Germany, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Bundesagentur für Arbeit (BA) Schwerbehinderte Menschen in Beschäftigung (Anzeigeverfahren SGB IX); Federal Employment Agency: Nuremberg, Germany, 2015.
- Bach, H.W. Beunruhigend starker Anstieg der Arbeitslosigkeit schwerbehinderter Akademiker: ZAV muss reformiert werden. Horus 2015, 1, 5–9. [Google Scholar]
- Niehaus, M.; Bauer, J. Chancen und Barrieren für Hochqualifizierte Menschen mit Behinderung. Übergang in ein Sozialversicherungspflichtiges Beschäftigungsverhältnis. Pilotstudie zur Beruflichen Teilhabe. Abschlussbericht; Aktion Mensch: Bonn, Germany, 2013; Available online: https://www.aktion-mensch.de/dam/jcr:f884eacc-8452-4656-a00a-0806649d2e37/AktionMensch_Studie-Arbeit_2013_09_30.pdf (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Krauss, H. Das Umkämpfte Subjekt-Widerspruchsverarbeitung im “Modernen” Kapitalismus; Trafo-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Möller, J. Verheißung oder Bedrohung? Die Arbeitsmarktwirkungen einer vierten industriellen Revolution; IAB Discussion Paper; IAB: Nürnberg, Germany, 2015; Volume 18. [Google Scholar]
- Vanderheiden, G. Over the Horizon: Potential Impact of Emerging Trends in Information and Communication Technology on Disability Policy and Practice; National Council on Disability: Washington, DC, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Engels, D. Chancen und Risiken der Digitalisierung der Arbeitswelt für die Beschäftigung von Menschen mit Behinderung. Institut für Sozialforschung und Gesellschaftspolitik Forschungsbericht, 2016; Volume 467. Available online: http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDFPublikationen/Forschungsberichte/fb-467-digitalisierung-behinderung.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Revermann, C.; Gerlinger, K. Chancen und Perspektiven behinderungskompensierender Technologien am Arbeitsplatz. In TAB-Arbeitsbericht; Büro für Technikfolgenabschätzung beim deutschen Bundestag: Berlin, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Revermann, C.; Gerlinger, K. Technologien im Kontext von Behinderung: Bausteine für Teilhabe in Alltag und Beruf; Studien des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung: Berlin, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Apt, M.P.; von Stokar, T.; Bovenschulte, M. Der Wandel der Arbeitswelt in der Schweiz. Gesellschaftliche, strukturelle und technologische Entwicklungen; Working Paper of the Institute for Innovation and Technology; Institut für Innovation und Technik (iit): Berlin, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- National Council on Disability Power of Digital Inclusion. Technology’s Impact on Employment and Opportunities for People with Disabilities; National Council on Disability Power of Digital Inclusion: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Hauser, M.; Tengeler, D. Menschen mit Behinderung in der Welt 2035. Wie Technologische und Gesellschaftliche Trends den Alltag Verändern; GDI: Zurich, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The ICT Opportunity for a Disability-Inclusive Development Framework; Synthesis Report of the ICT Consultation in Support of the Broadband Commission for Digital Development; Global Initiative for Inclusive ICT’s (G3ICT); International Disability Alliance (IDA); International Telecommunication Union (ITU); UNECSO; Microsoft, the Telecentre.org Foundation: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Tiemann, M. Routine bei der Arbeit. Eine Untersuchung zur Entwicklung von Routineinhalten auf Basis der Erwerbstätigenbefragungen seit 1979. BWP 2016, 2, 18–22. [Google Scholar]
- Fraser, B.J. Impact of Computers on Disabled Persons in the New Zealand Workplace (A Personal Perspective). In Computers for Handicapped Persons, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference, ICCHP ’94, Vienna, Austria, 14–16 September 1994; Zagler, W.L., Busby, G., Wagner, R., Eds.; Springer: Heidelberg/Berlin, Germany, 1992; pp. 165–171. [Google Scholar]
- Lauenstein, T.; Ritz, H.-G.; Sürth, B. Sicherung und Förderung der beruflichen Eingliederung Blinder und Sehbehinderter auf PC-gestützten Büroarbeitsplätzen. Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung 1997, 2, 514–521. [Google Scholar]
- Informationspool Computerhilfsmittel für Blinde und Sehbehinderte (Incobs). Available online: http://www.incobs.de/ (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Zlotolow, D.A.; Kozin, S.H. Advances in Upper Extremity Prosthetics. Hand Clin. 2012, 28, 587–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- von Kardorff, E.; Ohlbrecht, H.; Schmidt, S. Zugang zum allgemeinen Arbeitsmarkt für Menschen mit Behinderung: Expertise im Auftrag der Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes; Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes: Berlin, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Güttinger, F. Menschen mit Behinderung auf dem Arbeitsmarkt. Zugangschancen und Hindernisse. Sociology of Work and Organization, 1998. Available online: http://socio.ch/arbeit/t_fguetti1.htm (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Blanck, P.D.; Sandler, L.A. ADA Title III and the Internet: Technology and civil rights. Ment. Phys. Disabil. Law Rep. 2000, 5, 855–859. [Google Scholar]
- Autor, D.H.; Levy, F.; Murnane, R.J. The Skill Content of Recent Techological Change: An Empirical Exploration. Q. J. Econ. 2003, 118, 1279–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levy, F.; Murnane, R.J. The New Division of Labor: How Computers Are Creating the Next Job Market; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Goos, M.; Manning, A. Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2007, 89, 118–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frey, C.B.; Osborne, M.A. The future of employment. How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2013, 114, 254–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spitz-Oener, A. Technical Change, Job Tasks and Rising Educational Demands: Looking Outside the Wage Structure. J. Labor Econ. 2006, 24, 235–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rohrbach-Schmidt, D.; Tiemann, M. Mismatching and Job Tasks in Germany—Rising Over-Qualification Through Polarization? Empir. Res. Vocat. Educ. Train. 2011, 3, 39–55. [Google Scholar]
- Dengler, K.; Matthes, B. Folgen der Digitalisierung für die Arbeitswelt: In kaum einem Beruf ist der Mensch vollständig ersetzbar. IAB-Kurzbericht 2015, 24. Available online: http://doku.iab.de/kurzber/2015/kb2415.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2019).
- Dengler, K.; Matthes, B. Substituierbarkeitspotenziale von Berufen: Wenige Berufsbilder halten mit der Digitalisierung Schritt. IAB-Kurzbericht 2018, 4. Available online: http://doku.iab.de/kurzber/2018/kb0418.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2019).
- Pfeiffer, S.; Suphan, A. The Labouring Capacity Index: Living Labouring Capacity and Experience as Resources on the Road to Industry 4.0. Working Paper 2015#2. Available online: https://www.sabine-pfeiffer.de/files/downloads/2015-Pfeiffer-Suphan-EN.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2019).
- Mohr, S.; Troltsch, K.; Gerhards, C. Job tasks and the participation of low-skilled employees in employer-provided continuing training in Germany. J. Educ. Work 2016, 29, 562–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helmrich, R.; Tiemann, M.; Troltsch, K.; Lukowski, F.; Neuber-Pohl, C.; Lewalder, A.C.; Güntürk-Kuhl, B. Digitalisierung der Arbeitslandschaften—keine Polarisierung der Arbeit, aber beschleunigter Strukturwandel und Arbeitsplatzwechsel; Academic Research Discussion Papers; BIBB: Bonn, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Hartmann, J. Trenddatensatz der BIBB/IAB-Erhebungen 1979-1999—Technischer Bericht; Infratest Burke Sozialforschung: Munich, Germany, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Rohrbach-Schmidt, D.; Tiemann, M. Changes in workplace tasks in Germany—Evaluating skill and task measures. J. Labour Mark. Res. 2013, 3, 215–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, A. Die BIBB/BAuA-Erwerbstätigenbefragung 2006 Methodik und Frageprogramm im Vergleich zur BIBB/IAB-Erhebung 1998. Wissenschaftliche Diskussionspapiere, 107, Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung. 2009. Available online: https://www.bibb.de/dokumente/pdf/WDP_107_Screen.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2019).
- Rohrbach-Schmidt, D.; Hall, A. BIBB/BAuA-Erwerbstätigenbefragung 2012; BIBB-FDZ Daten- und Methodenberichte; BIBB: Bonn, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Tiemann, M.; Zopf, S. BIBB/BAuA Employment Survey 2005/2006. Schmollers Jahrb. 2010, 3, 409–420. [Google Scholar]
- Antonczyk, D.; Fitzenberger, B.; Leuschner, U. Can a Task-Based Approach Explain the Recent Changes in the German Wage Structure? Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 2009, 229, 214–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brüderl, J. Regressionsverfahren in den Bevölkerungswissenschaften. In Handbuch der Bevölkerungswissenschaft; Müller, U., Nauck, B., Dieckmann, A., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1997; pp. 589–642. [Google Scholar]
- Bundesagentur für Arbeit (BA). Der Arbeitsmarkt in Deutschland. Der Arbeitsmarkt für Schwerbehinderte Menschen; Bundesagentur für Arbeit: Nuremberg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Domzal, C.; Houtenville, A.J.; Sharma, R. Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities; US Department of Labor: McLean, VA, USA, 2008.
- Livermore, G.A.; Goodmann, N. A Review of Recent Evaluation Efforts Associated with Programs and Policies Designed to Promote the Employment of Adults with Disabilities; Cornell University: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2009; Available online: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1262;context=edicollect (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis). Mikrozensus 2014 Qualitätsbericht; Destatis: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2015; Available online: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Qualitaetsberichte/Bevoelkerung/Mikrozensus2014.pdf?__blob=publicationFile (accessed on 5 October 2016).
- Frick, B. Interne Arbeitsmärkte und Betriebliche Schwerbehindertenbeschäftigung: Theoretische Analysen und Empirische Befunde; Campus: Frankfurt am Main, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Mühling, T. Minderheiten auf dem Arbeitsmarkt. In Arbeitsmarktsoziologie. Probleme, Theorien, Empirische Befunde; Abraham, M., Hinz, T., Eds.; Springer: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2008; pp. 214–262. [Google Scholar]
- Gehrmann, M. Zur Beschäftigungs(in)stabilität schwerbehinderter Menschen auf dem allgemeinen Arbeitsmarkt. Eine Wirkungsanalyse der Förderung zur Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen durch das Berliner Integrationsamt mit Investitionshilfen nach § 15 der Schwerbehinderten-Ausgleichsabgabeverordnung (SchwbAV); Landesamt für Arbeit und Soziales Berlin: Berlin, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
1 | In Industry 4.0, production is interlinked with modern information and communication technology. The driving force behind this development is the rapidly increasing digitalisation of the economy and of society as a whole. This fourth industrial revolution will be determined by the deployment of so-called “smart factories”. |
2 | For the statistical analysis the programme Stata was used. The computer code used is available and can be requested by the author. |
3 | The data used is publicly available via the Research Data Centre of the Federal institute of vocational education and training Germany (BIBB): 1979: doi:10.7803/501.79.1.8.10, 1986: doi:10.7803/501.85.1.8.10, 1999: doi:10.7803/501.98.1.8.10, 2006: doi:10.7803/501.06.1.8.11. [38]. |
4 | BIBB: Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung/federal institute for vocational education and training; IAB: Institut für Arbeit und Beschäftigung/Institute of Employment Research; BauA: Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin/German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health |
5 | In longitudinal studies several cross sections (waves) are analyzed. |
6 | For further details about the participants please see Table A1 (Appendix A). |
7 | Further influencing extrinsic factors (which cannot be analysed with the given data) may be that the computer technology at non-routine task work may not be effective; however, to make it to work every day from home and stay independent, perhaps individuals use a lot of computer technology. These factors will also play into depression, mood, and work culture. |
8 | The next wave of the BIBB-BAuA employment survey with information on disability was conducted 2018 and will be available via the BIBB-Research Data Centre (https://www.bibb.de/en/53.php). |
9 | Although the systematic exclusion of some disability groups in the employment surveys (presumably employees with a mental, psychological, and hearing disability) means that it is possible to assume that most of the employees recorded have a chronic or physical disability, it is not possible to arrive at the direct conclusion that a majority of such persons uses a technical tool in the workplace. Because the composition of respondents with a disability cannot be precisely determined, assumptions regarding the effect of computer influence on the task structure remain speculative at this point. |
10 | The items are listed here in the same way as they are contained in the questionnaire. The author is aware that it is incorrect to state degrees of disability in percent. |
11 | This qualification level is not taken into account because of low sample sizes for employees with a disability that are in possession of a master craftsman, technician, certified senior clerk qualification, etc. |
12 | As is the case with other regulations under employment law, the rate of employment of disabled persons varies in accordance with the size of the company. The degree of fulfilment of the mandatory requirement to employ disabled persons rises in line with company size. Whereas companies with up to 40 staff achieved an employment rate of 2.9 percent in 2013, the corresponding figure for companies offering between 250 and 500 jobs was 4.3 percent. Companies with 500 to 1,000 employees reached a rate of 4.7 percent, and the rate for major corporations with a total of 1 million jobs was 6.3 percent (BA 2015). |
Description | ES 1979 | ES 1986 | ES 1999 | ES 2006 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Routine task (Manual and cognitive routine) | Monitoring | ||||
Producing | |||||
Storing | N/A | ||||
Measuring | N/A | ||||
Written work | N/A | ||||
Calculating | N/A | N/A | |||
Non-routine task (Analytical and interactive non-routine) | Investigating | N/A | |||
Organizing | |||||
Researching | N/A | N/A | N/A | ||
Computer | N/A | ||||
Applying laws | N/A | N/A | |||
Training | |||||
Advising | |||||
Procuring | |||||
Managing | N/A | N/A | |||
Negotiating | N/A | N/A | |||
Manual non-routine task | Repairing | ||||
Catering | N/A | ||||
Caring | |||||
Securing | N/A | ||||
Cleaning | N/A |
Qualification | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | N | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | N | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | N | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | N |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1979 | 1986 | 1999 | 2006 | |||||||||||||
Low | 5.13 | 8.03 | 7.99 | 373 | 5.09 | 7.57 | 98 | 26.55 | 20.71 | 30.08 | 595 | 32.38 | 23.39 | 27.55 | 342 | |
Medium | 5.94 | 8.03 | 7.38 | 818 | 7.27 | 5.59 | 6.16 | 409 | 38.47 | 35.29 | 33.22 | 3539 | 43.34 | 40.55 | 44.48 | 3436 |
High | 7.71 | 10.45 | 156 | 9.72 | 6.26 | 113 | 55.25 | 59.05 | 58.64 | 1697 | 73.31 | 61.51 | 78.75 | 2063 | ||
N | 1274 | 43 | 30 | 1347 | 606 | 6 | 6 | 620 | 5572 | 127 | 133 | 5831 | 5499 | 168 | 176 | 5841 |
DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | DOD = 0 | 20 ≥ DOD > 50 | DOD ≥ 50 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1979 | 1986 | 1999 | 2006 | |||||||||
Low level qualification | ||||||||||||
Routine task | 68.15 | 71.52 | 72.71 | 57.27 | 60.49 | 50.37 | 41.50 | 59.21 | 55.11 | 36.04 | 47.83 | 44.48 |
Non-routine task | 13.26 | 12.56 | 5.77 | 17.85 | 18.12 | 20.31 | 47.43 | 32.32 | 34.22 | 37.08 | 24.52 | 28.54 |
Manual non-routine | 18.58 | 15.90 | 21.51 | 24.87 | 21.37 | 29.31 | 11.06 | 8.45 | 10.66 | 26.87 | 27.64 | 26.97 |
Medium Qualification | ||||||||||||
Routine task | 65.74 | 69.24 | 71.15 | 49.53 | 52.90 | 54.86 | 31.01 | 37.66 | 32.25 | 34.22 | 37.84 | 31.26 |
Non-routine task | 20.24 | 17.30 | 12.39 | 28.13 | 31.42 | 24.22 | 52.93 | 47.39 | 51.78 | 45.36 | 40.15 | 48.06 |
Manual non-routine task | 14.01 | 13.45 | 16.45 | 22.33 | 15.66 | 20.91 | 16.06 | 14.94 | 15.95 | 20.41 | 21.99 | 20.66 |
High qualification | ||||||||||||
Routine task | 33.86 | 41.54 | 36.80 | 24.06 | 22.12 | 16.82 | 16.54 | 24.35 | 18.57 | 18.63 | 25.09 | 20.55 |
Non-routine task | 58.10 | 50.47 | 58.70 | 69.01 | 25.14 | 78.77 | 76.98 | 68.96 | 76.39 | 73.91 | 64.61 | 71.46 |
Manual non-routine task | 8.04 | 7.98 | 4.49 | 6.46 | 6.68 | 5.03 | 6.46 | 6.68 | 5.03 | 7.45 | 10.29 | 7.98 |
Routine Tasks M1 | Routine Tasks M2 | Non-Routine Tasks M1 | Non-Routine Tasks M2 | Manual Non-Routine Tasks M1 | Manual Non-Routine Tasks M2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DOD (reference DOD = 0) | ||||||
20 ≥ DOD < 50 (1 = yes) | 4.29 | 3.85 | −3.32 | −3.29 | −0.97 | −0.56 |
(1.04) *** | (1.10) ** | (1.01) ** | (1.07) ** | (0.81) | (0.87) | |
DOD ≥ 50 (1 = yes) | 2.07 | 1.31 | −3.40 | −2.97 | 1.33 | 1.66 |
(1.14) * | (1.19) | (1.11) ** | (1.15) * | (0.89) | (0.93) | |
Computer (1 = yes) | −9.90 | −10.51 | 22.66 | 22.14 | −12.76 | −11.63 |
(0.38) *** | (0.41) ** | (0.37) ** | (0.39) ** | (0.29) ** | (0.32) ** | |
Interaction computer 20 ≥ DOD < 50 | −2.51 | −1.99 | 1.72 | 1.91 | 0.79 | 0.09 |
(2.02) | (2.13) | (1.95) | (2.06) | (1.56) | (1.67) | |
Interaction computer DOD ≥ 50 | −0.44 | 0.93 | 1.78 | 1.24 | −1.35 | −2.17 |
(2.07) | (2.24) | (2.00) | (2.17) | (1.60) | (1.76) | |
Qualification level (reference—low qualification) | ||||||
Medium qualification | −6.85 | −8.50 | 7.38 | 8.63 | −0.52 | −0.13 |
(0.39) *** | (0.42) ** | (0.38) ** | (0.40) ** | (0.30) | (0.33) | |
High qualification | −25.06 | −26.54 | 33.53 | 35.44 | −8.47 | −8.90 |
(0.49) *** | (0.54) ** | (0.47) ** | (0.53) ** | (0.38) ** | (0.43) ** | |
Year dummy (reference—1976) | ||||||
1986 | −14.95 | −13.59 | 8.10 | 6.97 | 6.85 | 6.62 |
(0.41) *** | (0.42) ** | (0.40) ** | (0.41) ** | (0.32) ** | (0.33) ** | |
1999 | −30.02 | −25.92 | 24.78 | 21.16 | 5.24 | 4.75 |
(0.39) *** | (0.42) ** | (0.38) ** | (0.41) ** | (0.30) ** | (0.33) ** | |
2006 | −27.09 | −22.52 | 18.24 | 14.05 | 8.85 | 8.47 |
(0.42) *** | (0.48) ** | (0.41) ** | (0.46) ** | (0.33) ** | (0.37) ** | |
Employment in the public sector (reference—employment in the private sector) | ||||||
Public sector | −7.86 | 5.48 | 2.37 | |||
(0.38) ** | (0.37) ** | (0.30) ** | ||||
Company size (reference—<20 employees) | ||||||
20-< 250 employees | 11.10 | −8.15 | −2.95 | |||
(0.38) ** | (0.37) ** | (0.30) ** | ||||
>250 employees | 14.27 | −11.12 | −3.16 | |||
(0.46) ** | (0.45) ** | (0.36) ** | ||||
Working time (reference—<17 h) | ||||||
Working time ≥18 h | 6.10 | −2.72 | −3.38 | |||
(0.83) ** | (0.80) ** | (0.65) ** | ||||
Gender (1 = female) | −6.44 | 9.12 | −2.68 | |||
(0.32) ** | (0.31) ** | (0.25) ** | ||||
Age (reference—40–55 years) | ||||||
Age < 25 years | 5.13 | −5.45 | 0.32 | |||
(0.54) ** | (0.53) ** | (0.43) | ||||
Age 25–40 years | 1.08 | −1.16 | 0.08 | |||
(0.33) ** | (0.32) ** | (0.26) | ||||
Age > 56 years | −1.43 | 2.50 | −1.07 | |||
(0.53) ** | (0.51) ** | (0.42) ** | ||||
Constant | 72.34 | 60.43 | 12.06 | 18.32 | 15.60 | 21.25 |
(0.38) *** | (0.98) ** | (0.36) ** | (0.95) ** | (0.29) ** | (0.77) ** | |
R2 | 0.26 | 0.28 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
N | 55,529 | 48,827 | 55,529 | 48,827 | 55,529 | 48,827 |
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Weller, S.I. Influence of Digitalization on the Tasks of Employees with Disabilities in Germany (1979–2006). Societies 2019, 9, 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc9010018
Weller SI. Influence of Digitalization on the Tasks of Employees with Disabilities in Germany (1979–2006). Societies. 2019; 9(1):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc9010018
Chicago/Turabian StyleWeller, Sabrina Inez. 2019. "Influence of Digitalization on the Tasks of Employees with Disabilities in Germany (1979–2006)" Societies 9, no. 1: 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc9010018
APA StyleWeller, S. I. (2019). Influence of Digitalization on the Tasks of Employees with Disabilities in Germany (1979–2006). Societies, 9(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc9010018