TMFDI/1998 - Part 4

ILO Home

	INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION
	Sectoral Activities Programme

See text links
below

Technology and employment in the food and drink industries

Report for discussion at the, Technology and Employment in the Food and Drink Industries

Part 4

4. Impact of new technology
and structural change on
working conditions

Hours of work and earnings

This section examines the impact of technological and structural change on working conditions in FD industries in two ways. First, available global data series on hours of work and earnings are reviewed. These allow comparisons to be made between trends in individual countries, although they do not permit easy generalization. Second, information gathered from ILO constituents in a number of countries is presented. This country-level information is more specific and detailed and may give a better insight into the processes at work.

The data on average hours of work for the FD industries compared to total manufacturing contained in the ILO's Yearbook of Labour Statistics do not present any generalized pattern. In some countries the weekly hours of work are longer in the food industry and shorter in the drink industry than those in total manufacturing. In others, both food and drink workers put in longer hours than workers in total manufacturing, while the opposite situation is true for a few other countries.

Tables 4.1 and 4.2 present wages per worker in the food and drink industries, respectively, in proportion to the wages per worker in total manufacturing in selected countries and territories for the period 1985-95. They show that in many countries the workers in the food industry earn less than the average in total manufacturing, while those in the drink industry earn more. The tables also indicate that earnings in recent years in the food industry are on a downward trend compared to the average in total manufacturing, particularly in many high-income countries. Despite increased mechanization in recent years, the food industry still employs a large number of non-skilled, low-paid workers for labour-intensive jobs. The wages of such workers must be responsible for bringing down the average earnings in this industry compared to those in total manufacturing.

Table 4.1. Wages per worker in food products as a percentage of wages per worker in total manufacturing, 1986-95


Country/territory	1986	1987	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995

High-income non-OECD
Cyprus	98.05	96.91	96.55	97.93	99.07	98.74	101.32	103.58	100.21	101.21
Germany (former GDR)	96.06	95.77	95.79	96.20
Hong Kong	101.89	100.29	98.79	101.16	104.06	109.03	102.76	105.30
Israel	69.15	70.27	71.04	74.14	75.32	73.17	72.95	73.94	73.35
Kuwait	64.71	64.14	63.97	66.54	57.66	47.65	69.14	65.01	62.58	63.03
Qatar	57.49	65.95	61.56		63.56	69.80	73.87	68.40	73.33
Singapore	100.22	98.80	101.79	101.28	99.67	99.27	94.85	93.19	92.95	93.09
High-income OECD
Australia	95.15	94.71	95.72	93.00	91.20	87.93	85.19
Austria	92.79	91.62	92.24	90.70	89.10	89.85	88.51	87.22	87.45	84.12
Belgium	83.79	83.59	82.43	82.79	84.03	85.50	86.09
Canada	88.45	89.76	89.82	89.24	88.71	88.10	87.23	86.80	84.94	83.41
Denmark	94.51	95.60	95.74	96.46	91.51	92.13	91.85
Finland	93.21	93.36	93.77	93.35	91.59	92.95	94.40	92.88	91.98	89.30
France	94.98	92.33	93.12	93.30	91.49	88.77	91.39
Germany						77.27		77.31	75.83
Germany (former FRG)	80.76	80.12	79.61	77.99	77.16	76.95	76.77
Iceland	102.22	95.25	99.32	91.08	88.40	89.54	91.28	94.63
Ireland	96.79	96.41	94.62	96.85	95.60	94.61	100.11	103.10	106.52	110.89
Italy	111.63	112.52	100.45	105.63	103.40	109.21	113.61	114.70
Japan	74.61	74.97	74.37	72.58	71.26	70.66	70.95	70.82	69.48	67.36
Luxembourg	62.60	63.18	62.04	62.35	64.02	67.37	67.23	65.88	62.85
Netherlands	97.26	94.55	93.94	92.96	92.36	91.87	92.07	95.32	91.27	90.44
New Zealand	99.72	102.88	91.08	96.64	107.49	104.35	101.79
Norway	85.04	85.70	85.97	86.97	86.64	86.91	86.84	85.96	87.90	87.67
Spain	79.03	78.95	78.33	76.77	75.99	75.44	74.66	76.10	75.05	70.13
Sweden	89.14	90.38	90.75	89.51	90.57	86.95	88.60	87.89	90.22
United Kingdom	85.43	84.30	83.50	82.23	82.28	82.55	82.31	82.53	82.29	82.84
United States	82.65	82.63	81.83	81.43	81.48	80.40	80.91	80.39	80.11	79.70
Low-income
Bangladesh	79.06	89.99	92.78	87.07	95.62	97.66	107.05
Burundi	83.78	80.56	77.74	81.06	112.64	99.96
Central African Republic	125.35	138.57	134.30	148.01	147.67	155.52	152.60
Egypt	89.56	87.15	85.39	85.26	76.58	75.50	73.18	77.20	76.75
Ethiopia and Eritrea	92.10	92.88	95.09	95.59
Ghana	91.59	89.84						104.80	104.80
Haiti	122.00	92.80	90.75
Honduras	94.14	89.02	93.42	96.41	113.50	105.66	102.69	113.62	111.36
India	54.26	56.07	57.13	59.59	60.61	64.31	60.28	56.22
Indonesia	86.87	90.15	86.33	97.27	84.21	80.48	73.61	85.42	79.61	79.57
Kenya	88.23	71.04	71.90	69.65	69.42	70.64	74.94	78.07
Madagascar	89.70	79.24	79.23
Malawi	90.81	76.80
Mozambique					82.00	82.85	80.21	77.22	69.13
Nepal	105.13	96.71	112.07	104.21	98.51	110.27		101.06
Nigeria				68.84	54.48
Pakistan	110.62	102.46	102.00	97.21	92.79	99.01	99.01
Sri Lanka	86.93	83.97	81.21	77.40	89.70	85.60	83.81	85.91
Tanzania, United Republic of	51.35	53.17	53.49
Uganda	46.91	150.12	86.99	77.10
Zambia					84.53				105.71
Zimbabwe	97.78	98.78	96.76	97.17	95.72	102.60	137.24	95.03	92.61	98.35
Middle-income (lower)
Albania			86.00	94.95	96.64			109.05
Algeria	87.10	85.80	97.68	101.13	95.88	96.52	101.86	98.05	98.05
Armenia	85.25	87.29	91.05	90.23	85.43	86.36	105.12	121.03
Azerbaijan					80.93	80.22	72.26	80.97	69.18
Bolivia	106.22	106.23	99.01	102.68	112.72	118.54	105.04	104.83	102.97
Bulgaria	87.52	85.95	86.57	87.57	94.99	96.42	94.15	96.77	98.56
Cameroon				67.71	56.74	65.23	70.79	59.01	61.09
Chile	78.74	80.66	82.57	84.47	82.82	78.34	80.88	80.29	77.25	73.90
Colombia	98.64	95.23	98.56	98.19	96.82	96.75	95.63	92.87	88.11	87.39
Congo	49.05	48.42	48.66
Costa Rica	95.06	94.02	95.42	99.25	99.59	100.59	101.36	99.56
Cuba	101.60	101.20	101.48	100.43
Czechoslovakia (former)	94.79	95.02	95.38	95.94	95.77	96.73
Ecuador	99.54	96.73	97.69	94.00	115.33	100.33	92.01	87.32	91.60
Fiji	105.68	106.79	114.27	121.24	129.63	155.07	147.89	151.53	150.83
Guatemala	77.57	86.47	92.75					79.12
Iran, Islamic Republic of	88.72	88.97	99.31	90.92	93.16	84.06	87.15	85.02
Iraq	94.40	96.89				99.90	78.32
Jamaica	91.61	95.65	97.19	84.88	84.26	88.67	91.87
Jordan	78.55	72.38	70.24	69.02	72.77	76.28	81.78	82.15	80.41
Kyrgyzstan				74.55	23.83	76.06	82.29	76.30	68.77
Latvia	92.86	95.38	92.20	92.24
Lithuania							144.83	121.35
Malaysia	91.91	94.17	96.19	97.39	98.95	95.46	95.24	97.26	95.43	93.01
Mauritius	164.36	152.64	158.58	166.32	156.73	164.47	146.93	134.28
Moldova, Republic of	89.60	90.42	85.32	86.94	86.92	85.81		150.79	126.72
Mongolia					69.24	64.87	77.88	47.44	46.83
Morocco	106.07	135.75	110.04	123.45	152.51	116.85	120.53	114.96	123.53
Panama	90.87	90.40	92.48	94.35	98.20	93.18	93.55	93.52	93.08	97.50
Papua New Guinea	67.27	68.37	67.54	67.54
Peru	96.91	94.28	105.96	85.37	90.97	90.30	85.58
Philippines	100.53	102.62	98.83	99.84	81.87	85.20	98.04	95.97	101.56	98.34
Poland	92.00	91.20	95.77	102.66	100.58	104.14	102.82	96.76
Romania					94.60	104.45	105.86	104.29	103.98
Senegal		85.94	87.48	84.57	88.94	81.14	89.50	88.38	81.51
Slovenia		106.27	109.59	111.71	131.50	149.97	138.31	132.20	121.97
Swaziland	84.13	92.25	94.72	65.14	57.17
Syrian Arab Republic	100.42	94.02	95.74	92.93	92.23	92.59	89.97	90.73
Thailand	87.16		70.03	57.13	65.26	69.99
Tonga	91.88	74.67	93.28	103.47	108.83	100.68	109.46	99.43	86.79
Turkey	79.59	79.82	76.38	81.07	87.17	84.21	93.23	92.85	100.43
Middle-income (upper)
Argentina	79.75	77.99	75.81	68.72	75.94			83.53
Barbados	100.44	104.65	115.80	113.71	117.60	134.13	119.03	101.49	88.89	88.83
Botswana	115.04	123.29	123.68				124.63	119.67
Brazil					67.81		63.81
Greece	90.78	92.51	92.79	90.59	90.89	91.39	91.72	90.94	88.66	87.03
Hungary	101.18	100.46	105.43	104.31	104.41	101.99	98.98	100.53	113.03	126.50
Korea, Republic of	89.51	90.40	86.51	86.80	83.30	82.38	80.78	83.81	81.31	77.74
Malta	96.12	99.21	95.98	80.88	88.04	92.48	94.44	93.72
Mexico	81.41	78.96	79.72	79.48	80.88	83.20	82.54	84.55	83.22	83.19
Netherlands Antilles								70.20
Oman	92.33	103.36	90.82	124.83	112.78	174.31	150.70	94.35	103.16
Portugal	91.27	89.26	90.62	93.36	98.63	101.06	102.83	102.73	102.06	112.99
Puerto Rico	108.39	99.81	102.08	93.07	81.96	89.02	88.35	77.13	75.72
Russian Federation								138.18	134.34
Slovakia						98.60	99.70	97.09	97.36
South Africa	75.55	76.91	79.94	79.57	76.52	80.61	83.08	82.23	85.67	82.34
Suriname	86.92	87.15	87.37	95.22	95.17	86.80	104.23	81.06
Trinidad and Tobago	93.06	105.06		57.89	55.97	61.73	66.44	66.59
USSR (former)	91.14	93.86	91.21	91.14	94.32
Uruguay	86.18	85.89	87.06	90.04	86.61	87.37	89.23	87.67	90.42	94.73
Venezuela	86.75	84.81	84.49	86.01	82.81	80.53	84.44	74.05
Yugoslavia (former)	96.59	100.21	101.51	112.91
Others
Croatia	98.58	101.83	102.38	105.51	130.32	138.60	106.70	114.14	121.66
Czech Republic		93.96	93.57	94.55	94.64	97.36	99.22	96.70
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia		102.40	93.18	118.62	110.82	122.81	117.53	126.84	134.29
Taiwan, China	99.98	98.75	100.74	101.02	104.28	100.84	99.44	98.40	99.28	99.28
Ukraine			148.83	145.63	150.48	103.15	81.31	108.04	111.02
Source: UNIDO: Industrial Statistics, 1997.

Table 4.2. Wages per worker in beverages as a percentage of wages per worker in total manufacturing, 1985-95


Country/territory	1985	1986	1987	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995

High-income non OECD
Bahamas					112.83	117.45	116.05
Cyprus	151.33	151.82	150.41	151.46	150.29	145.77	144.86	146.72	143.75	139.64	138.64
Germany (former GDR)	96.48	96.06	95.77	95.79	96.20
Hong Kong	145.87	142.05	138.63	136.75	147.73	149.82	154.59	154.44	151.18
Israel	76.12	80.88	83.69	77.73	81.33	84.60	75.71	81.31	81.51	79.47
Kuwait	58.72	61.96	57.33	64.51	64.84	62.51	74.95	60.35	60.59	64.37	64.87
Qatar		68.79	64.72	62.84		64.54	73.68	73.39	76.75	79.05
Singapore	121.79	117.64	116.07	125.71	116.08	133.54	139.63	131.15	122.19	117.40	116.47
High-income OECD
Australia	114.60	113.94	113.61	112.75	107.93	110.40	109.98	105.16
Austria	117.49	115.87	114.90	115.26	115.91	112.24	108.08	106.18	110.68	113.38	108.88
Belgium	103.58	104.19	104.57	105.49	106.77	107.98	109.94	109.71
Canada	121.60	123.61	122.76	121.58	125.03	122.78	135.36	123.12	120.80	120.98	117.86
Denmark	110.59	115.19	112.10	112.28	113.42	126.79	123.98	123.93
Finland	104.52	103.90	103.18	100.51	99.59	109.58	110.18	113.52	115.56	110.87	103.12
France	127.95	130.61	130.30	129.60	129.27	129.76	133.81	131.95
Germany							100.67		100.80	100.95
Germany (former FRG)	102.20	102.55	102.21	102.23	101.90	101.11	100.38	100.66
Iceland	111.75	122.31	112.81	127.23	103.57	126.16	142.04	123.19	133.35
Ireland	151.59	162.12	163.60	155.78	154.34	158.75	151.65	140.55	137.85	147.89	145.50
Italy	119.68	126.16	117.07	172.55	119.52	122.69	125.01	123.76	122.32
Japan	97.09	98.46	100.99	99.36	98.27	95.22	96.06	97.07	95.66	97.95	94.99
Luxembourg	97.26	97.64	98.56	93.42	92.67	95.42	91.48	97.39	96.67	104.50
Netherlands	120.81	123.96	123.11	120.40	125.26	130.02	126.81	121.31	120.99	126.77	124.67
New Zealand	100.87	115.04	131.21	131.08	127.41
Norway	109.46	112.30	105.97	110.43	111.20	107.62	106.90	112.45	101.41	100.64	99.35
Spain	128.37	129.75	131.30	127.30	121.67	118.58	122.69	121.14	123.14	120.68	112.87
Sweden	108.24	113.27	111.22	111.08	114.55	110.29	105.83	109.29	106.81	104.30
United Kingdom	110.75	111.42	110.03	107.92	110.52	110.05	107.06	109.83	114.17	117.92	145.73
United States	111.13	111.43	115.75	113.82	113.26	115.01	113.34	113.56	112.29	114.58	115.45
Low-income
Bangladesh	111.27	108.18	102.97	105.77	154.53	98.59	91.71	142.77
Burundi		170.74	167.81	182.77	214.39	208.23	234.21
Central African Republic	121.88	125.37	138.09	133.96	147.68	147.91	155.95	152.60
China	86.63	86.13
Egypt	85.59	101.64	87.98	79.23	89.20	102.05	148.04	88.13	89.43	89.21
Ethiopia and Eritrea	118.58	112.57	107.60	114.67	116.70
Ghana	135.50	169.73	150.01						120.48	120.49
Haiti	107.07	106.11	97.30	93.87
Honduras	167.58	112.60	109.65	108.69	103.39	199.56	208.45	215.87	230.02	216.10
India	90.83	89.04	86.66	90.49	90.74	93.24	97.11	95.23	94.84
Indonesia	155.75	159.63	153.36	150.80	164.67	132.01	131.92	102.32	125.65	135.04	121.86
Kenya	180.94	183.85	204.01	188.15	194.71	189.66	193.85	171.47	167.64
Madagascar	112.80	106.57	108.43	108.45
Malawi	119.83	90.93	110.46
Mozambique						125.83	93.35	141.80	109.74	147.24
Nepal		172.21	173.11	142.90	144.27	151.01	155.94		124.47
Nigeria	125.41				124.80	138.11
Pakistan	99.47	96.69	98.34	91.61	92.13	92.81	94.10	94.08
Sri Lanka	152.08	111.67	125.97	152.46	163.39	184.47	170.82	156.37	197.38
Tanzania, United Republic of	103.65	107.09	99.21	92.87
Uganda	110.16	82.07	78.00	14.65	268.83
Zambia						120.95				150.65
Zimbabwe	111.07	114.29	112.69	126.71	105.50	119.26	128.87	170.40	136.56	130.18	123.81
Middle-income (lower)
Algeria	95.51	87.10	85.74	97.67	101.07	95.83	96.57	101.87	98.06	98.06
Armenia		83.49	88.03	88.05	82.00	77.62	85.92
Azerbaijan						79.99	79.44	76.79	69.30	69.26
Bolivia	91.60	143.61	144.09	133.37	139.34	121.34	135.84	130.34	134.83	138.39
Bulgaria	88.59	87.80	87.70	94.11	95.77	106.81	130.21	132.44	133.15	135.01
Cameroon					183.42	163.25	206.20	184.51	272.87	275.74
Chile	108.20	109.41	107.97	106.48	104.93	120.78	128.32	114.40	111.78	109.34	112.92
Colombia	133.61	136.82	134.66	116.81	127.78	128.07	125.05	134.00	139.12	138.70	144.90
Congo	193.12	173.61	171.29	172.09
Costa Rica	125.27	127.14	122.20	128.82	126.92	132.49	122.08	124.37	126.57
Cuba	84.76	86.18	86.50	91.05	90.52
Czechoslovakia (former)	97.53	97.21	94.72	95.97	99.94	102.32	107.05
Ecuador	84.85	79.03	83.47	76.18	70.61	65.96	68.85	78.34	90.82	72.59
Fiji	131.69	144.01	157.83	170.17	170.57	173.09	189.12	175.18	171.45	172.34
Guatemala	160.73	173.36	153.72	137.16					124.58
Iran, Islamic Republic of	102.64	107.97	103.24	105.48	87.62	105.86	103.24	110.00	102.28
Iraq	104.01	106.44	109.92				116.05	122.05
Jamaica		188.57	174.72	169.07	164.72	190.45	157.10	155.65
Jordan	115.64	118.62	136.19	138.04	128.82	105.26	126.52	126.76	124.83	87.27
Kyrgyzstan					85.92	85.14	68.67	89.74	87.08	74.85
Latvia		86.82	90.08	92.99	96.08
Lithuania								155.16	159.38
Malaysia	140.00	143.37	166.32	183.07	172.63	165.96	163.59	165.28	162.41	173.42	173.40
Mauritius	176.31	183.93	185.93	179.44	198.05	182.79	187.99	164.24	160.06
Moldova, Republic of		81.22	85.03	85.78	98.06	93.46	110.02		302.99	136.47
Mongolia						139.05	213.13	135.33	45.24	30.78
Morocco	139.98	110.73	158.50	157.88	190.70	271.90	222.51	236.71	326.62	190.65
Panama	113.46	107.96	103.30	104.38	127.59	137.60	134.81	133.07	138.46	139.44	142.47
Papua New Guinea	107.06	121.73	122.53	117.39	117.42
Peru	107.83	110.98	126.69	120.11	131.83	118.85	156.99	185.24
Philippines	126.81	134.51	151.15	151.75	162.63	168.19	171.56	164.40	151.59	154.92	160.86
Poland	92.68	92.05	92.82	96.00	104.74	111.49	134.43	145.67	140.30
Senegal					152.58	162.90	165.94	160.29	178.90	221.22
Slovenia			97.65	98.21
Swaziland	138.17	154.31	155.43	194.61	215.75	216.62
Thailand		96.93		112.66	138.75	91.19	152.02
Tonga	63.50	60.93	49.09	61.20	67.90	72.37	99.52
Turkey	106.93	110.04	108.45	97.60	101.29	113.37	111.79	117.68	123.29	128.43
Middle-income (upper)
Argentina	96.93	90.80	86.74	89.10	77.63	86.91			115.69
Barbados	129.31	147.20	164.06	154.47	137.76	159.42	165.00	156.84	133.82	124.92	124.06
Botswana	154.93	152.28	163.52	164.11				241.76	207.80
Brazil	95.75					80.39		92.92
Greece	116.25	118.20	120.61	118.10	115.88	121.58	119.51	136.37	140.13	146.88	147.60
Hungary	96.13	97.60	94.23	92.26	94.58	97.48	104.99	112.98	110.63	110.18	111.75
Korea, Republic of	133.27	124.82	124.74	116.23	119.36	116.45	117.93	111.84	110.49	111.34	108.07
Malta	120.28	126.94	128.82	130.97	130.03	121.32	117.78	120.90	127.20
Mexico	88.98	88.00	85.28	82.94	85.69	83.70	84.82	83.18	86.79	86.68	86.61
Portugal	107.47	114.82	114.82	115.70	116.99	118.23	121.99	126.45	126.72	125.01	126.18
Puerto Rico	105.62	103.41	137.89	146.27	78.58	147.08	146.22	149.61	143.44	148.44
Russian Federation									135.77	126.29
Slovakia							102.30	107.40	103.35	105.31
South Africa	94.81	101.26	107.20	108.97	107.90	106.93	111.56	109.57	108.17	110.31	109.98
Suriname	138.30	135.79	131.97	142.47	142.64	140.54	135.13	151.20	161.95
Trinidad and Tobago	87.28	94.73	85.18		140.08	103.66	115.03	99.48	142.75
USSR (former)	77.12	76.23	78.46	80.04	82.06	84.52
Uruguay	141.78	135.69	141.08	145.54	139.61	151.93	150.07	156.49	164.06	156.97	143.34
Venezuela	118.89	125.25	132.54	113.04	118.15	113.85	133.32	129.41	141.38
Yugoslavia (former)	101.60	104.75	107.84	101.68	106.14
Others
Croatia		112.92	108.35	101.68	100.21	136.57	145.38	113.03	124.95	141.22
Czech Republic			94.18	96.89	97.92	99.21	112.21	108.69	108.83
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia			92.11	106.64	93.62	98.16	145.88	125.81	152.06	177.99
Taiwan, China	143.90	138.25	132.33	125.45	128.15	136.16	144.93	145.26	141.11	143.36	143.37
Ukraine				139.16	141.39	143.36	107.75	87.28	106.79	120.94
Source: UNIDO: Industrial Statistics, 1997.

For workers in the drink industry, on the other hand, wage trends in recent years do not indicate any dominant pattern. They declined in some countries, increased in some others and stagnated in the rest. The fact that workers in the drink industry are better paid than those in total manufacturing is partly due to a higher degree of capital-intensiveness and the higher skills required in this industry compared to total manufacturing. The fact that many low-skilled and low-paid jobs have been eliminated in this industry in recent years appears to account for the higher average wages than in total manufacturing.

As noted earlier, new technology has affected low-skilled workers the most; many such workers happen to be women doing low-paid jobs. It is therefore of interest to compare women's working conditions, in terms of hours of work and wages, with those of their male colleagues. Tables 4.3 and 4.4 present women workers' average weekly hours of work and average hourly earnings, respectively, in proportion to men's hours of work and earnings, in total manufacturing (TM) and the food (ISIC 311-312) and drink (ISIC 313) industries. Data for some countries refer to total workers (T), while others relate to salaried employees (SE) or wage-earners (WE). The data for some countries also include the workers in the tobacco industries (ISIC 31).

As far as average weekly hours of work are concerned, women worked fewer hours than their male colleagues in all the countries and industries presented in the table, with the exception of Egypt. Their hours of work ranged from 75 to 97 per cent of men's hours of work in 1995, reflecting the fact that many women work part time. Although women's hours of work in some countries appear to have become longer in recent years, there is no clear trend in this regard as they fluctuated from one year to the next in many countries.

When women's earnings are compared to men's (table 4.4), however, it becomes apparent that their earnings were uniformly much lower. In fact, their average earnings in the FD industries (including ISIC 31) ranged from 50 to 92.5 per cent of men's earnings in 1993, with little change in 1995. Comparing wages and hours of work, it becomes clear that women are less well-paid than men. For example, while Australian women in ISIC 31 worked 95 per cent as much as men in 1993, they earned 86 per cent as much as men. German women in ISIC 31 earned 28 per cent less than their male colleagues in 1993, although they worked only 7 per cent fewer hours than men. In the Republic of Korea, women in the FD industries earned only half of what men did. Barring a few exceptions, women in the drink industry earned more than women in the food industry in the countries for which data were available, perhaps reflecting the overall difference in skill levels of women workers in these industries. Nevertheless, the gap between women's and men's earnings in both the food and drink industries in many countries does not appear to be narrowing, unlike the gap in hours of work.

Table 4.3. Women's average weekly hours of work as a percentage of men's in total manufacturing and in the food and drink industries, 1985-95


Country/territory	Category of worker¹	Industry (ISIC)²	1985	1987	1989	1991	1993	1995

Argentina	T	TM	-	-	-	87.0	87.0	85.3
Argentina	T	31	-	-	-	87.0	87.9	80.7
Australia	SE	TM	-	-	91.8	92.9	94.0	-
Australia	SE	31	-	-	92.9	97.3	95.3	-
Cyprus	WE	TM	-	95.2	95.2	93.0	92.9	95.1
		311/2	90.7	93.0	95.5	93.3	91.1	91.1
		313	87.2	88.9	87.0	95.3	93.0	95.1
Egypt	WE	TM	-	88.3	98.2	96.6	91.7	-
		311/2	-	88.7	95.1	103.4	103.3	-
		313	-	91.4	102.0	100.0	103.8	-
Germany³	WE	TM	96.1	96.3	96.3	96.5	96.8	96.4
Germany³	WE	31	92.7	92.6	93.1	92.5	93.0	-
Greece	WE	TM	-	96.5	97.6	97.4	97.6	97.4
		311/2	-	94.1	98.1	98.1	98.6	95.3
		313	-	94.1	97.8	96.7	97.4	95.8
Ireland	WE	TM	87.9	89.7	88.0	86.4	89.1	88.5
		311/2	83.3	84.5	85.5	82.8	87.4	85.8
		313	76.0	78.5	77.9	73.1	80.6	75.3
Korea, Republic of	SE	TM	101.3	100.2	98.8	99.2	98.6	98.2
		311/2	97.8	97.8	97.0	98.2	96.8⁴	97.1⁴
		313	97.9	98.5	101.6	94.6	-	-
Netherlands	WE	TM	-	98.5	98.3	98.5	98.2	-
Netherlands	WE	311/2	-	97.5	99.3	97.5	96.8	-
New Zealand	SE	TM	92.3	92.5	92.7	93.0	92.0	91.6
		311/2	91.1	98.7	96.5	94.7	91.0	93.6
		313	86.8	86.8	89.4	87.8	93.4	90.6
Norway	SE	TM	-	80.1	79.8	80.6	83.3	82.8
Norway	SE	31	-	82.0	77.1	79.7	79.2	81.4
Spain	T	TM	-	94.7	94.1	94.3	94.3	93.0
Spain	T	15	-	89.1	88.8	90.4	89.1	89.0
United Kingdom	SE	TM	-	90.9	89.9	92.4	92.4	91.4
United Kingdom	SE	15	-	89.8	90.1	90.7	91.8	90.1
¹ Category of worker: T = total employees; SE = salaried employees; WE = wage earners. ² Industry (ISIC): TM = total manufacturing; 31 (ISIC-Rev. 2) = manufacture of food products, beverages and tobacco products; 311/2 = manufacture of food products; 313 = manufacture of beverages; and 15 (ISIC Rev. 3) = manufacture of food products and beverages. ³ Figure up to 1990 refers to the former Federal Republic of Germany. ⁴ Figure refers to 15 (ISIC Rev. 3). Source: ILO: Yearbook of Labour Statistics, two volumes (Geneva, 1993 and 1996).

Table 4.4. Women's average hourly earnings as a percentage of men's in total manufacturing and in the food and drink industries, 1985-95


Country/territory	Category of workers¹	Industry (ISIC)²	1985	1987	1989	1991	1993	1995

Australia	SE	TM	79.4	79.8	80.4	84.7	84.8	-
Australia	SE	31	85.2	85.9	85.2	85.4	86.1	-
Belgium	WE	TM	-	74.7	74.0	74.6	74.5	74.3³
		311/2	-	85.9	86.2	86.6	86.2	86.7³
		313	-	88.1	88.6	88.5	88.2	90.5³
Cyprus⁴	WE	TM	55.8	57.8	58.3	59.6	56.5	60.1
		311/2	55.8	64.3	67.2	66.3	66.9	66.2
		313	55.7	65.1	61.4	64.8	67.6	72.5
Czech Republic⁵	WE	TM	-	-	-	67.9⁶	67.9	67.9
Czech Republic⁵	WE	15	-	-	-	68.7⁶	68.7	68.7
Denmark	WE	TM	-	84.2	84.6	84.8	85.0⁶	-
		311/2	-	89.9	89.8	90.1	88.7⁶	-
		313	-	95.2	99.5	95.2	92.5⁶	-
Egypt⁴	WE	TM	-	71.8	70.8	71.9	75.0	-
		311/2	-	63.6	69.0	67.3	71.7	-
		313	-	75.7	83.8	102.4	88.9	-
Finland	WE	TM	76.8	77.3	76.8	78.1	78.2	79.4
		311/3	81.4	81.5	82.2	85.9	84.9	85.0
		313	82.5	81.9	83.2	85.4	88.6	90.1
France	WE	TM	79.1	79.2	78.5	78.6	79.1	-
France	WE	313	-	82.1	85.6	86.7	86.0	-
Germany⁷	WE	TM	72.5	73.0	72.8	73.2	73.8	73.8
Germany⁷	WE	31	70.5	70.6	70.7	71.5	71.7	72.1
Greece	WE	TM	-	77.6	78.3	78.8	80.0	80.4
		311/2	-	84.2	84.0	85.6	84.4	83.4
		313	-	87.6	84.6	92.2	88.2	87.9
Hong Kong⁸	WE	TM	79.2	75.4	73.0	69.6	66.0	65.4
Hong Kong⁸	WE	311/2	70.3	71.9	61.5	57.4	-	-
Ireland	WE	TM	67.6	67.4	69.3	69.8	71.4	74.1
		311/2	76.2	77.2	79.1	77.4	76.3	80.0
		313	62.0	61.5	63.1	62.4	63.2	63.6
Kenya⁵	SE	TM	75.6	65.3	69.2	73.3	-	-
		311/2	37.8	55.6	84.3	79.8	-	-
		313	84.3	118.4	169.0	82.0	-	-
Korea, Republic of⁵	SE	TM	46.9	50.3	50.5	50.8	52.2	54.1
		311/2	47.6	46.7	51.5	52.7	49.9⁹	50.7⁹
		313	44.2	43.1	53.9	49.4	-	-
Malaysia⁵	SE	TM	-	47.9	48.6	52.0	56.6	-
		311/2	-	50.6	51.9	52.3	58.0	-
		313	-	59.1	59.1	60.2	67.0	-
Netherlands	WE	TM	-	77.6	77.5	77.3	78.8	-
Netherlands	WE	311/2	-	77.9	77.2	77.8	80.3	-
New Zealand	SE	TM	70.5	72.5	75.3	75.3	77.1	77.7
		311/2	61.2	64.6	73.2	79.7	75.5	75.9
		313	79.4	73.2	85.1	78.2	80.3	79.5
Norway	WE	TM	83.5	83.7	85.5	87.1	87.1	87.2
		311/2	87.3	87.5	89.3	90.7	90.3	-
		313	86.3	87.9	88.7	89.0	89.3	-
Sweden	WE	TM	89.8	90.1	89.5	89.2	89.5	90.0
		311/2	88.6	89.3	88.8	-	-	-
		313	91.9	93.2	90.9	-	-	-
Switzerland	WE	TM	67.1	67.3	67.8	68.0	68.7	-
		311/2	70.0	70.6	71.1	71.6	71.7	-
		313	72.7	72.1	72.9	74.4	75.1	-
Turkey⁸	SE	TM	-	-	74.0	91.2	88.5	-
		311/2	-	-	51.7	73.9	72.2	-
		313	-	-	70.3	91.3	92.2	-
United Kingdom	SE	TM	-	66.1	67.2	68.3	70.0	70.8
United Kingdom	SE	15	-	69.0	68.5	68.9	70.9	72.9
¹ Category of workers: SE = salaried employees; WE = wage earners; T = total employees. ² Industry (ISIC): TM = Total manufacturing; 31 (ISIC Rev. 2) = manufacture of food products, beverages and tobacco products; 311/2 = manufacture of food products; 313 = beverages; 15 (ISIC Rev. 3) = manufacture of food products and beverages. ³ 1994 data. ⁴ Weekly earnings. ⁵ Monthly earnings. ⁶ 1992 data. ⁷ Data up to 1990 refer to the former Federal Republic of Germany. ⁸ Daily wages. ⁹ Data refer to 15 (ISIC Rev. 3). Source: ILO: Yearbook of Labour Statistics, two volumes (Geneva, 1993 and 1996).

Turning to national sources, information provided by a number of ILO constituents tends to show that hours of work have become more flexible than before. No clear picture emerged regarding whether the total number of hours of work has increased or decreased. Some constituents reported a decrease in hours of work. As a result of the effective and flexible deployment of staff by management, workers in a number of countries reported a reduction in overtime work, which has negatively affected their total earnings. While many workers mentioned that their earnings had increased in line with the greater skills and responsibilities required, others expressed their dissatisfaction at not being compensated in accordance with the responsibilities they now assume. Table 4.5 compares the average annual earnings per head in the FD industries to those in total manufacturing in Australia. Earnings in the FD industries were lower than those in total manufacturing throughout the period presented. Earnings in the FD industries improved by 20 per cent during the period, as opposed to 17 per cent in total manufacturing, which resulted in a narrowing of the earnings differential in these industries. Despite this improvement, earnings in the FD industries compared to total manufacturing still seem low, particularly when per capita turnover is taken into account. As mentioned earlier (see "Changes in labour productivity", Chapter 3), per capita turnover in the FD industries was 19 per cent higher than that in total manufacturing in 1989-90 and 18 per cent higher in 1992-93.⁽¹⁾

Table 4.5. Australia: Average per capita annual earnings¹ in the food and drink industries and in total manufacturing, 1989-93 (Australian dollars)


Industry	1989-90	1990-91	1991-92	1992-93²

Food and drink	24 857	27 027	28 122	29 713
Total manufacturing	26 551	29 141	29 847	30 991
¹ Derived by dividing total wages and salaries paid by total employment given in the source. ² Preliminary and subject to change. Source: Government of Australia (Department of Industry, Science and Technology): Food Australia: Processed food and beverages industry (Canberra, 5th edition, Dec. 1995).

Table 4.6 presents the average hourly wages in the cooperative sector of the meat and poultry industries in France by category of worker for the period 1991-94. In both the meat and poultry industries, office workers earned higher wages than production workers. While the wages of office workers in the meat industry increased by 13 per cent during the period, those of production workers rose by only 5.5 per cent. Although production workers' wages amounted to 77 per cent of office workers' wages in 1991, the proportion declined to 72 per cent by 1994. In the poultry industry, on the other hand, the wages of both office and production workers improved by about 7.5 per cent during the period, and production workers' wages remained at around 71 per cent of office workers' wages. Although it has often been said that production workers' wages have generally improved as their responsibilities increased in the context of higher levels of mechanization and higher skills requirements, this is not reflected in the meat and poultry industries in France. It has been reported, however, that the increased deployment of new technology and flexible employment have resulted in fragmented family life, displaced daily rest, shortened or destroyed weekends with family and disarranged mealtimes. These new elements in workers' lives are said to be increasingly responsible for nutritional and digestive problems as well as insomnia.⁽²⁾

Table 4.6. France: Average hourly wages in the cooperative sector of the meat and poultry industries, by category of worker, 1991-94 (French francs)


Year	Meat		Poultry
Year	Office	Production	Office	Production

1991	68.30	52.56	67.19	47.64
1992	73.60	53.88	69.86	49.38
1993	74.59	55.27	71.43	51.49
1994	77.17	55.46	72.15	51.21
Source: Data provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, France, cited in S. Tomoda: Safety and health of meat, poultry and fish processing workers, Sectoral Activities Programme Working Paper No. 104 (Geneva, ILO, 1997), p. 25.

The trend seen in annual hours of work in the FD industries and total manufacturing in Germany for the period 1988-93 is shown in table 4.7. Total hours of work in the former FRG declined steadily in both industries, the decline in manufacturing being 6.3 per cent as opposed to 5 per cent in the FD industries for the period. Despite the declining hours of work in both industries, FD workers' hours always exceeded those in total manufacturing. In fact, FD workers' hours were about 11.5 per cent longer than those of manufacturing workers in 1988, and this ratio remained about the same until it increased to 13 per cent in 1993. The longer hours worked by FD workers were also seen in the former GDR, though the annual hours of work there increased from 1991 to 1993, mainly due to the revitalization of the economy following reunification. The longer hours for FD workers can partly be attributed to seasonal fluctuations. As the workforce is kept as small as possible to avoid underemployment in slack periods, many workers are required to do a great deal of overtime work in peak seasons.⁽³⁾ Table 4.8 shows the changes in gross value added per worker and gross hourly wages in the FD industries and total manufacturing in the former FRG from 1988 to 1993. The difference between gross value added per worker in the FD industries and in total manufacturing was reflected in their wage levels. Nevertheless, hourly wages in the FD industries increased by 43 per cent during the period as opposed to a 39 per cent increase in manufacturing. If hourly wages for the FD industries and manufacturing are multiplied by the annual hours of work given in table 4.7, annual per capita earnings in the FD industries come to DM46,353 as opposed to DM50,574 in total manufacturing. FD workers thus earned 9 per cent less than manufacturing workers in 1993 despite the fact that they worked 13 per cent longer hours.

Table 4.7. Germany: Annual hours of work per worker in the food and drink industries and in total manufacturing, 1988-93


Area	Industry	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993

Former FRG	Food and drink	1 817	1 792	1 779	1 752	1 740	1 727
Former FRG	Manufacturing	1 629	1 616	1 597	1 573	1 569	1 527
Former GDR	Food and drink	-	-	-	1 505	1 753	1 817
Former GDR	Manufacturing	-	-	-	1 187	1 525	1 607
All Germany	Food and drink	-	-	-	1 698	1 742	1 739
All Germany	Manufacturing	-	-	-	1 504	1 564	1 535
Source: Michael Breitenacher and Uwe Christian Täger: Branchemuntersuchung Ernährungsindustrie, ifo Struktur und Wachstum, Industrial Series, Issue No. 48 (Germany).

Table 4.8. Germany (former FRG): Gross value added per worker and gross hourly wages in the food and drink industries and in total manufacturing, 1988-93 (DM)


Industry	Year	Gross value added per worker	Gross hourly wages

Food and drink	1988	77 808	18.73
Food and drink	1993	91 032	26.84
Manufacturing	1988	82 455	23.78
Manufacturing	1993	98 041	33.12
Source: Breitenacher and Täger, op. cit.

Table 4.9 presents monthly average net earnings per head in the FDT industries in Hungary by branch for 1992-95. The average for the FD industries (Ft.26,400) in 1995 was reported to be comparable to that for total manufacturing (Ft.26,450). Earnings were relatively high in the firms manufacturing tobacco, non-alcoholic beverages, beer and confectionery that had been privatized by foreign capital.⁽⁴⁾ The per capita net earnings in most of the branches rose by almost 100 per cent during the period presented.

Table 4.9. Monthly average per capita net earnings in the Hungarian food, drink and tobacco industries, by branch, 1992-95 (Ft.)


Branch	1992	1993	1994	1995

Meat and meat processing	14 450	17 683	21 400	24 741
Poultry	13 000	15 745	19 735	22 433
Fruit and vegetable products	13 501	16 734	21 248	24 897
Dairy	15 054	17 869	22 925	26 087
Milling	15 996	19 021	24 390	28 167
Fodder	16 019	20 215	24 762	29 397
Bakery	15 146	17 714	21 377	22 977
Sugar	17 198	20 995	26 759	31 923
Chocolate and confectionery	14 010	17 547	22 565	28 953
Pastry	14 732	16 558	22 335	28 176
Alcohol and alcoholic beverages	18 342	22 267	28 068	31 932
Wine	13 891	16 284	21 148	24 790
Beer	16 310	19 508	25 982	32 046
Non-alcoholic beverages	14 327	19 780	29 096	35 415
Food products and beverages	14 973	18 225	22 929	26 400
Tobacco	21 443	26 434	34 171	43 776
Source: Judit Kiss: Technology and employment in the Hungarian food and drink industry (Budapest, Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Mar. 1997), unpublished paper, p. 44.

The comparison of net earnings for manual and non-manual workers in the Hungarian FD industries for 1995 is given in table 4.10. The table shows that manual workers' earnings in the FD industries fell within a narrow range, while those of non-manual workers were somewhat more spread out. For example, the lowest level of earnings (Ft.20,118 in wine) among manual workers was equivalent to 74 per cent of the highest level (Ft.27,142 in beer). On the other hand, the lowest level of earnings (Ft.33,849 in bakery) among non-manual workers was 66 per cent of the highest level (Ft.51,671 in chocolate and confectionery).

Table 4.10. Monthly average earnings of manual and non-manual workers in the Hungarian food, drink and tobacco industries, by branch, 1995 (Ft.)


Branch	Manual	Non-manual

Meat and meat processing	22 517	34 673
Poultry	20 362	35 233
Fruit and vegetable products	21 282	39 795
Dairy	22 909	35 622
Bakery	20 958	33 849
Sugar	26 998	48 115
Chocolate and confectionery	22 360	51 671
Alcoholic and alcoholic beverages	24 849	46 728
Wine	20 118	34 751
Beer	27 142	43 112
Food products and beverages	22 836	39 273
Tobacco	32 589	66 968
Food, beverages and tobacco	22 997	40 062
Source: Kiss, op. cit., p. 45.

Table 4.11 presents the increase in monthly earnings per worker in the food-processing industry in India during the period 1974-93. Average earnings grew by 27 per cent between 1984 and 1993. During this period earnings grew faster than the average in the dairy (46 per cent), grain milling (34 per cent), oils and fats [other than hydrogenated] (54 per cent), coffee (55 per cent) and other products (49 per cent) branches, while they increased more slowly in the fruit and vegetable (7 per cent), fish (9 per cent) and bakery products (5 per cent) branches. Despite the rapid growth seen in the industry in recent years, as discussed earlier, earnings do not seem to have kept pace. At a large public sector undertaking active in diverse branches, for example, the average monthly salary per employee increased from Rs.4,304 in 1994 to Rs.5,442 in 1997, a 26 per cent increase for the period. On the other hand, the value added per person climbed from Rs.19,246 to Rs.64,860 for the same period, a 237 per cent jump. While the total wages paid at this company had accounted for 14 per cent of the total turnover in 1991, this figure declined to 11 per cent of turnover in 1996.⁽⁵⁾ The company, which has made heavy investments in modern technology, may be eager to recover its investments as soon as possible, but the above figures suggest that many workers do not necessarily benefit from their contribution to rapid industrial growth.

Table 4.11. Monthly earnings per worker in the Indian food-processing industry (Rs. at 1980-81 prices)


Branch	1974-75	1979-80	1984-85	1988-89	1992-93

Meat products	4 214	7 548	10 008	17 535	11 569
Dairy products	5 990	8 570	8 788	10 879	12 834
Fruit and vegetable products	3 133	3 294	5 099	5 774	5 445
Fish products	4 241	4 488	4 746	5 173	5 167
Grain milling	1 702	2 602	2 593	2 953	3 462
Bakery products	6 455	8 224	8 621	8 426	9 088
Cocoa products and confectionery	3 814	5 699	6 584	7 492	7 325
Oils and fats (hydrogenated)	6 332	8 069	9 121	9 858	10 732
Oils and fats (others)	1 963	2 623	3 525	3 860	5 411
Coffee	1 081	1 079	1 243	1 538	1 931
Ice-cream	5 603	7 016	6 977	8 084	8 216
Animal feed	5 259	4 313	5 684	6 014	6 383
Other food products	2 770	4 059	5 032	5 732	7 476
Soft drinks and syrups	6 908	6 404	7 057	7 590	7 914
Average	2 458	3 406	4 085	4 867	5 197
Source: Veena Nabar: Technology and employment in Indian food and drinks industry: Some case-studies (New Delhi, July 1997), unpublished paper, p. 46.

Table 4.12 presents average monthly hours of work and earnings in Japan's FDT industries and in selected branches, by sex and size of establishment, for the period 1992-96. Male workers in the entire sector and all branches worked much longer hours than their female colleagues, and their average hourly earnings were around twice those of women. This is mainly because a large proportion of women (those in part-time employment) receive low wages and limited fringe benefits. Both men and women in larger establishments tended to earn more than their counterparts in smaller establishments, this being particularly notable among male workers. Seafood-processing workers, both male and female, earned less than other workers, though men's hourly earnings in that branch topped those of their counterparts in bakery/confectionery in 1996. Total hours of work were on a slow downward trend, though they rallied slightly in 1996 in most sectors except seafood processing, in line with the national drive concerning hours of work.

Table 4.12. Japan: Average monthly hours of work and earnings in the food-processing industries, by sex and size of establishment, 1992-96 (yen thousands)

Year

Size of establishment

Sex

Food, drink, feed
and tobacco

Livestock products

Seafood processing

Bakery/
confectionery

Hours of work

Earnings

Hours of work

Earnings

Hours of work

Earnings

Hours of work

Earnings

1992

Men

Women

179.9

148.4

391.4

154.0

177.1

145.0

380.7

146.7

188.2

153.3

329.1

129.0

184.1

145.0

367.7

149.4

>30

Men

Women

178.7

148.5

419.4

169.1

175.4

144.0

393.9

153.1

190.1

156.4

347.0

133.8

183.1

145.8

383.4

160.0

1994

Men

Women

176.0

141.0

396.6

149.5

174.4

145.6

410.8

151.0

184.5

144.5

327.6

128.3

183.6

138.8

367.7

150.4

>30

Men

Women

174.6

140.7

423.0

158.8

173.3

148.8

425.3

162.1

187.1

143.0

358.4

133.4

182.7

140.3

381.8

158.7

1996

Men

Women

177.1

143.6

399.7

157.7

176.7

148.0

397.4

164.9

180.5

146.2

368.7

143.6

184.6

141.6

370.7

151.8

>30

Men

Women

176.8

145.7

427.4

170.6

175.8

149.9

406.5

169.1

183.1

148.9

403.9

155.8

185.1

143.3

384.2

160.8

Source: Ministry of Labour of Japan: Monthly Labour Survey, National Survey, Dec. 1992, 1994 and 1996.

The information provided by some workers' organizations in Japan indicated that there had been changes in earnings and hours of work as well as in other working conditions as a result of increased mechanization and flexibility in the workplace. To take an example, salaries which in the past were primarily based on age and seniority are increasingly being based on qualifications and productivity. In addition to their monthly salary, employees have generally been paid bonuses twice a year, the amount of which has depended on both the firm's turnover and on the workers' age and seniority. Bonuses are now being reconsidered, and are being incorporated into the base salary, which is set on the basis of productivity. This is why the rate of increment for the total earnings of older workers has declined in some firms. In addition to regularly paid salaries or bonuses, workers used to be entitled to premium payments for work done outside regular working hours. Overtime work is now being considerably reduced, partly because of the national drive to align the total number of hours of work with international standards, but mainly because of better shift work arrangements facilitated by high technology. Many firms now operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 365 days a year non-stop, except when machines have to stop for maintenance and repair. Under these circumstances, the concept of work during special hours or on special days is no longer regarded by management in the same way, now that every worker, in principle, has to belong to the rotating shift teams. For this reason, at one large bakery firm, for example, the premium for night work -- formerly 45 per cent above the normal rate -- has been reduced to 35 per cent, while the 30 per cent premium which had been paid for work on a public holiday has been abolished. At another bakery firm, the night work premium has been reduced from 60 to 50 per cent above the normal rate, while the holiday premium has been abolished. At one company, the shifts are rotated every three months.

Many FD workers in Japan are reported to be enjoying not only reduced total annual hours but also more rest days. In some cases, however, the increased number of rest days is due to the longer duration of each shift. This may be favourable for some who would like to devote an increased number of full days of rest to other activities. But under this system non-regular workers absent from work for one day (regardless of the reason) would be disadvantaged as their earnings would be reduced by ten hours worth of wages rather than eight hours. Finally, many workers are now allowed to take leave more flexibly than before. For example, in the past they had to take a minimum of one day at a time, but now they can take a half day at a time as needed.

According to a case-study⁽⁶⁾ on the FD industries in Mexico, the wage structure there is also being re-examined on the basis of new job specifications aimed at increased flexibility and teamwork. At a bean-canning plant, for example, the gap between the highest and lowest wages has been narrowed to promote greater staff mobility within the plant. Though this move has risked creating a climate of discontent among those who had higher earnings, the company has placed most workers in lower or mid-range job classifications to indicate to them that they are still expected to improve their skills and wages through promotion. This company is also considering incorporating performance evaluation in wage calculations on the basis of participation and performance in the "system of continuous improvement", which in management's opinion would push training levels ever higher and provide new incentives. Elements to be assessed include the neatness of workstations, care and maintenance of tools and equipment, the results of basic maintenance work, the productivity of tools and equipment, the quality of their products, the ability to handle a statistical monitoring system, active participation in suggesting improvements for production processes and ability to correct defects. While seniority used to be the most important factor for promotion at this plant, workers are now being promoted on the basis of knowledge, attitudes, skill levels, the ability to minimize wastage, discipline and absenteeism. The changes in the wage system at a Mexican confectionery company took the form of the introduction of a company-wide incentive tied to three indicators: the volume of production per person; the number of cases of customer complaints; and the level of leakage. The wage system at a brewery has also eliminated many grades to reduce excessive disparities in earnings so as to encourage group cohesion. This plant has formed high performance groups (HPGs) which operate on a 12-hour working day, with alternate three-day and two-day shifts separated by rest days and shift changes, amounting to a 45-hour working week. Those who take part in the HPGs receive a 25 per cent increase in their basic wages, in addition to a productivity bonus that could amount to as much as 10 per cent of the basic wage, depending on whether or not they achieve the quarterly productivity target set by the firm.

Continuous rotating shifts (CRS) have become commonplace, particularly in large, modern plants. They have often resulted in conflict between management and workers. At a Nestlé plant in Malaysia, for example, the contract negotiation dating back to 1993 was only completed in 1996 because of disputes over pay issues related to CRS. Workers' opposition to a proposed six days on, two days off schedule (the 6-2 system) eventually resulted in agreement on a CRS schedule of twice four days on, one day off, followed by four days on and two days off (4-1, 4-1, 4-2 system).⁽⁷⁾

In New Zealand, it was reported that technological change has not brought about any deterioration in the level of earnings or working conditions such as paid leave, as the minimum amount of leave is guaranteed by statute. In fact, technological change is said to be responsible for improved working conditions.⁽⁸⁾ Another source points out a trend towards the elimination or reduction of certain allowances, such as overtime rates and penal rates for weekend work,⁽⁹⁾ as has been reported elsewhere.

In the drink industry in Togo, workers' salaries increased by 50 per cent immediately after the strike of 1991, but have remained at the same level ever since. On the other hand, the volume of overtime work has fallen each year, thus reducing total earnings, while premiums for such work have hardly changed. Other conditions of work, such as hours of work, rest periods and paid leave, have remained the same as before.⁽¹⁰⁾

A case-study⁽¹¹⁾ on the FD industries in the United Kingdom, while noting the difficulty of identifying or quantifying the immediate and direct effects of new technology, reports that the adoption of more advanced technology has been accompanied by a significant reduction in the number of grades in wage systems, increased productivity and changes in working practices, including shift patterns and annualized working hours. Both management and workers generally recognize the necessity of these changes to improve productivity and competitiveness, and agree that pay increases have been ahead of inflation. However, many union officials think the productivity gains have been outstripping pay rises in real terms. The information provided by the Transport and General Workers' Union on four separate firms appears to support this claim.

Table 4.13 presents average weekly hours of work in the FDT industries and in total manufacturing in Great Britain, by sex and category of worker, for the period 1988-95. Both male and female manual workers in the FDT industries, as well as in total manufacturing, worked much longer hours than non-manual workers throughout the period presented. Moreover, manual workers in the FDT industries, both male and female, put in longer hours than their counterparts in total manufacturing. As far as non-manual workers are concerned, men in total manufacturing worked slightly longer hours than those in the FDT industries up to 1990, but in the 1990s their hours were about the same. These figures do not suggest that working hours have been reduced or increased due to technological change, but do show that manual workers still put in longer hours than non-manual colleagues.

Table 4.13. Great Britain: Average weekly hours of work in the food, drink and tobacco industries and in total manufacturing, 1988-95


Industry	Sex	Category	1988	1990	1992	1994	1995

FDT	Male	Manual	46.1	46.6	46.0	45.6	46.5
	Male	Non-manual	38.5	38.6	39.6	40.1	39.9
	Female	Manual	41.1	41.6	41.7	41.9	41.8
	Female	Non-manual	37.3	37.3	37.7	37.7	37.6
Manufacturing	Male	Manual	45.2	45.2	44.0	44.1	44.9
	Male	Non-manual	39.4	39.6	39.5	39.7	39.9
	Female	Manual	40.5	40.5	40.2	40.6	40.9
	Female	Non-manual	37.6	37.6	37.7	37.7	37.8
Note: Including overtime. Figures refer to April of each year. Source: Office for National Statistics, United Kingdom: Food, Drink and Tobacco Sector Review (Quarter 2, 1996), p. 32.

Table 4.14 gives average hourly earnings in the FDT industries and total manufacturing, also in Great Britain, by sex and category of worker for the same period. It shows that wages increased steadily for both men and women and for manual and non-manual workers in both industries. Despite reports of a reduction in the number of wage grades due to the increased responsibility of line workers, the gap between manual and non-manual workers did not seem to narrow. On the contrary, the table shows a widening gap. For example, the average hourly wage of a male manual worker in the FDT industries, which had been 59 per cent of that of a male non-manual worker in the same industries in 1988, had declined to 56 per cent by 1995. The average earnings of female manual workers in the FDT industries declined from 72 to 70 per cent of those of female non-manual workers. The trend was similar in total manufacturing. When the earnings of men and women in the same category are compared, the difference narrows. For example, female manual workers in the FDT industries earned 72 per cent of their male counterparts in 1988, and this gap narrowed to 78 per cent by 1995. Female non-manual workers' earnings increased from 59 to 62 per cent of those of male colleagues. In total manufacturing, women's earnings improved from 67 to 70 per cent of men's among manual workers and from 58 to 64 per cent among non-manual workers. Although the gap between men and women among manual workers narrowed, particularly in the FDT industries, female non-manual workers in the FDT industries were still paid much less than their male colleagues.

Table 4.14. Great Britain: Average hourly earnings in the food, drink and tobacco industries and in total manufacturing, 1988-95 (£)


Industry	Sex	Category	1988	1990	1992	1994	1995

FDT	Male	Manual	4.51	5.31	6.09	6.40	6.56
	Male	Non-manual	7.68	9.41	10.52	11.20	11.65
	Female	Manual	3.26	3.96	4.59	4.83	5.09
	Female	Non-manual	4.52	5.28	6.12	6.88	7.23
Manufacturing	Male	Manual	4.69	5.51	6.35	6.72	6.98
	Male	Non-manual	7.45	9.03	9.99	10.79	11.24
	Female	Manual	3.16	3.77	4.34	4.59	4.86
	Female	No manual	4.30	5.31	6.26	6.94	7.26
Note: Including overtime. Figures refer to April of each year. Source: Office for National Statistics, United Kingdom: Food, Drink and Tobacco Sector Review (Quarter 2, 1996), p. 32.

Table 4.15 gives average annual earnings per head in the FD and tobacco industries in the United Kingdom for the period 1988-93. The fact that the workers in the tobacco industry were much better paid than those in the FD industries is understandable when the turnover and productivity of these industries are compared. What is interesting is that the average earnings of administrative, technical and clerical workers in the FD industries improved by 48 per cent as opposed to a 35 per cent increase for operatives during the entire period. Again the data in the table do not seem to reflect a trend towards an increase in line workers' earnings in recent years in keeping with their increased qualifications and responsibilities resulting from new technology.

Table 4.15. Great Britain: Average annual earnings per head in the food, drink and tobacco industries, 1988-93 (thousands; £)


Industry	Category of workers	1988	1990	1992	1993

Food and drink	Average	9.0	10.6	12.2	12.3
	Operatives	8.1	9.5	10.8	10.9
	Administrative, technical and clerical	12.6	15.2	18.1	18.6
Tobacco	Average	15.1	17.9	22.7	24.6
	Operatives	12.9	14.8	19.3	19.6
	Administrative, technical and clerical	19.0	24.2	29.4	34.2
Source: Office for National Statistics, United Kingdom: Food, Drink and Tobacco Sector Review (Quarter 2, 1996), p. 27.

New wage systems, including schemes relating to skills and knowledge, defined contribution pension plans and voluntary tax-deferred retirement savings plans, have been introduced gradually and to a limited extent in major firms in the United States in recent years as employment flexibility increases. The structure in unionized companies remains essentially the same, with wages increasing in line with inflation. However, according to trade union sources, employers in the FD industries have attempted in recent years to reduce rest periods, paid leave and social benefits, such as social security, while seeking to extend the work day and week. Despite union resistance to these changes, ten-hour four-day weeks are said to have become increasingly common as employers seek to fully utilize equipment through 24-hour, seven-day a-week operation. Many employers are said to have sought greater employment flexibility by eliminating guarantees of minimum hours (e.g. paying for eight hours after four have been worked) and minimum rest periods between shifts -- in effect transforming full-time workers into contingent workers. Distribution workers had already allegedly been transformed into independent contractors, thus reducing or eliminating employers' obligations to cover social security and medical insurance payments.⁽¹²⁾ The case-study⁽¹³⁾ undertaken on the Nabisco plant in Richmond, Virginia found that both the union leadership and management had recognized the value of redesigning work processes to increase the responsibility of front-line workers. In order to better remunerate changed responsibilities, the company has introduced a few additional reward systems, such as its "pay for skill" system, a "facility productivity sharing bonus" and a new job classification. The "pay for skill" system, which pays a maximum rate of $1.25 per hour over an established rate, applies to workers who assume new roles and responsibility as a result of the redesign process. The "facility bonus", of up to a $500 lump sum per employee per year, is paid to those who support and contribute to the achievement of established plant objectives. Finally, an example of a new job classification, is the creation of a "packing technician", able to do all the jobs on the line. The total possible compensation increase based on these new reward systems amounted to approximately $3,000 per year. However, many front-line workers apparently feel that their earnings have not increased in proportion to their added responsibilities. Table 4.16 presents the average weekly hours of work and earnings of production or non-supervisory workers in given sectors and subsectors in the United States for the period 1991-95. It shows that the average weekly hours of work remained more or less the same in most of these sectors and subsectors, except in the tobacco sector where they increased by two hours during the period. The hours of work in the dairy products and beverages branches also increased by about one hour. On the other hand, average weekly earnings increased by 10 per cent in the FD sector, compared to an 11 per cent increase in non-durable manufacturing and a 24 per cent increase in the tobacco sector between 1991 and 1995. When different branches in the food and kindred products sector are compared, those which tend to be more capital-intensive saw a greater increase in weekly earnings. These included the dairy products (increased by 16.5 per cent), grain mill products (15 per cent) and beverages (13.3 per cent) branches. The branches that are inclined to be more labour-intensive, such as meat products (increased by 10 per cent), preserved fruits and vegetables (9.2 per cent), confectionery products (8.6 per cent) and bakery products (6.8 per cent), increased less than average.

One aspect of working conditions that has been frequently mentioned by workers' organizations was a trend towards reductions in social and medical coverage. In New Zealand, for example, since 1991 workers have been asked to pay more towards their medical costs and children's education. The accident compensation scheme has also been changed to reduce the general level of entitlements.⁽¹⁴⁾ Workers' contributions to medical insurance have also increased in Japan.⁽¹⁵⁾ The options presented in the health care coverage contained in the three-year contract signed in 1993 between grain millers and Pillsbury included, among other things, an increase in the employee deductible amount from $100 to $200 for single coverage and from $300 to $600 for family coverage, and an offer of a $75 cash payment per month to employees who were exclusively covered under their spouse's medical plans.⁽¹⁶⁾

Table 4.16. United States: Average weekly hours of work and earnings of
production or non-supervisory workers in the food, beverages
and tobacco industries by subsector, 1991-95 ($)


Subsector	1991¹		1993¹		1995¹
Subsector	Hours of work	Earnings	Hours of work	Earnings	Hours of work	Earnings

Non-durable goods	40.8	430.0	41.1	455.0	40.8	478.6
Food and kindred products	41.3	414.7	41.4	436.8	41.4	457.9
Meat products	40.9	337.4	41.1	353.9	41.0	371.5
Dairy products	41.2	455.3	41.6	492.1	42.3	530.4
Preserved fruits/vegetables	40.8	390.9	40.6	411.3	40.5	426.9
Grain mill products	46.2	555.8	46.1	588.2	46.1	639.4
Bakery products	39.6	447.1	40.5	473.5	40.4	477.5
Sugar/confectionery products	42.8	449.0	42.0	463.3	42.1	487.5
Fats and oils	46.0	466.4	45.3	498.3	46.6	550.8
Beverages	41.3	589.4	41.1	620.2	42.3	667.5
Tobacco products	38.5	642.6	37.7	610.7	40.7	798.5
¹ November data for respective year. Source: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics: Employment and earnings (Washington, DC, Jan. 1993, Jan. 1995 and Dec. 1996).

Occupational safety and health

The introduction of new technology has generally tended to make FD workplaces both safer and cleaner. Increased mechanization or innovative mechanical handling systems have freed many workers from dangerous and arduous manual jobs, reducing handling injuries. New machinery is likely to be equipped with safeguards to guard against injuries that were previously difficult to prevent. Mechanization has eliminated many repetitive manual tasks, reducing upper limb disorders. State-of-the-art production systems have reduced the need for worker access to areas which may present safety risks from noise, dust and fumes. The introduction of CIP systems has eliminated the need for cleaning chemicals to be mixed and handled by operatives. In many plants the awareness of both employers and workers of safety and health issues has been raised, leading to the establishment of better functioning safety committees at plant level. In best practice situations the plant floor and workers' shoe sole materials have been designed and improved so as to prevent slipping accidents, and more workers than formerly are provided with improved personal protective equipment, and they are more likely to utilize it according to safety regulations. All these elements have made for a safer and healthier work environment in the FD industries.

However, new technology can also be the source of various safety and health problems, unless proper safety measures are taken. Workers are more exposed today to higher levels of industrial noise due to increased levels of mechanization, and this can gradually lead to hearing impairment. Increased use of visual display units (VDUs) is alleged to be affecting workers' eye sight. Machines may also inadvertently start up due to inadequate isolation procedures, causing injuries. In plants carrying out meat and poultry processing where some but not all tasks have been mechanized, musculoskeletal disorders are increasingly being reported as workers are pressured to keep pace with machines.

Moreover, along with the increased production of frozen and chilled foods and of ready-to-eat meals, more workers are exposed to either extremely low or high temperatures that may cause respiratory, circulatory and dermatological disorders. An increased use of various solvents due to the production of diversified goods can also pose serious safety risks. Some workers may not be provided with adequate protective equipment, and even if this is made available to them, it may not be properly utilized because of inadequate safety training. In addition to physical injuries or sickness, an increasing number of workers are said to be suffering from mental stress due to rising pressure to perform better and faster and to changing roles and responsibilities.⁽¹⁷⁾

Despite the fact that many workers recognize improvements in their working environment as the result of new technology, many in the FD industries are still faced with various safety and health problems as the following data from selected countries show. Table 4.17 gives the total number of cases of occupational accidents and diseases reported and the cost of compensation for these cases in the FD industries in Belgium for the period 1990-93. It shows that many more accidents or diseases occurred in the food industry than in the drink industry, resulting in the total compensation in the former being far greater than in the latter. However, in view of the fact that the workforce in the drink industry was about one-sixth of the size of that in the food industry during the period presented,⁽¹⁸⁾ the frequency of accidents or diseases and the amount of compensation per head were higher in the drink industry. The number of cases of permanent incapacity for work, of right to indemnity and of health care required all increased steadily in both industries. The only consolation was that the total cost in the drink industry declined slightly from 1992 to 1993.

In addition to table 4.17, another set of data on occupational diseases⁽¹⁹⁾ reported in the FD industries in Belgium for the period 1990-93 also showed a relatively higher incident rate in the drink industry. Of the 1,223 cases of occupational diseases reported and compensated in total manufacturing in 1990, 97 (7.9 per cent of the total) and 34 (2.8 per cent) cases were found in the food and drink industries respectively. Since employment in the food and drink industries accounted for 10.6 and 1.7 per cent respectively of total employment in manufacturing, the frequency rate in the drink industry was above average. By 1993 the total number of cases dropped to 686 in total manufacturing, and to 56 (8.2 per cent of the total) and 19 (2.8 per cent) in the food and drink industries respectively. However, employment in the food industry had increased to 11.2 per cent of total manufacturing by then, while it had remained at 1.7 per cent in the drink industry. Despite the drop in the actual number of occupational diseases, the frequency rate in the drink industry was still above average.

Table 4.17. Belgium: Number of cases of occupational accidents and diseases reported and cost of compensation in the food and drink industries, 1990-93 (thousands; Belgian francs)


Sector	Year	Temporary incapacity		Permanent incapacity		Right to indemnity		Health care		Total cost*
Sector	Year	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	Total cost*

Food	90	15	2 131	1 368	197 144	90	12 144	585	4 818	226 081
	91	15	3 926	1 469	210 838	96	11 678	614	4 865	244 167
	92	25	4 985	1 564	222 933	102	13 351	621	5 013	258 588
	93	22	3 467	1 655	229 968	109	15 032	650	4 979	261 893
Drink	90	3	1 006	436	74 725	2	451	154	885	77 066
	91	5	591	490	87 537	1	354	173	980	89 713
	92	3	1 526	591	105 362	4	836	208	1 200	108 971
	93	2	723	649	103 170	6	1 114	236	1 410	106 789
* Also includes rehabilitation and other costs not mentioned above. Source: Fonds des maladies professionnelles: Rapport Annuel, 1990-93 (Brussels).

Table 4.18 compares the degrees of frequency and severity of occupational accidents in various sectors in France in 1993 and 1994. The table shows that the FDT industries is the fourth most hazardous group of industries of the nine presented in terms of both frequency and severity of occupational accidents. Both frequency and severity rates in the FDT industries declined slightly from 1993 to 1994, as in the other industries presented, with the exception of the severity rate in trade.

Table 4.18. France: Occupational accidents in selected sectors, 1993-94

Sector

Degree of frequency

Degree of severity

1993

1994

1993

1994

Construction

67.1

64.5

3.20

3.03

Forestry

45.2

43.7

1.43

1.38

Transport

42.1

41.6

1.97

1.93

FDT

36.1

34.9

1.13

1.12

Metal

28.7

27.7

0.91

0.89

Textiles

24.3

24.1

0.81

0.78

Trade

15.7

15.2

0.59

0.60

Clothing

15.3

14.3

0.53

0.51

Chemical

13.8

12.8

0.51

0.48

Source: L'Institut national de recherche et de sécurité: Travail et Securité (Paris, Nov. 1996), No. 554, p. 18.

Note:

Degree of frequency =

No. of accidents
No. of employees

1,000,000
No. of hours of exposure per
year and per employee

Degree of severity =

( No. of calendar days lost x 1,000 )
No. of hours of exposure per year

Table 4.19 gives the number of occupational diseases reported in the food, drink and catering (FDC) sectors in Germany for the period 1990-96. The number of diseases was particularly high in the bakery branch, accounting for about half of the total shown on the table. Many bakery workers suffer from asthma, and the total amount of treatment and compensation for asthma climbed from DM3 million in 1970 to DM70 million by 1994.⁽²⁰⁾ Nevertheless, the number of cases dropped considerably in the mid-1990s, which may indicate that factories in Germany have become safer and healthier places to work. The data on occupational accidents in Germany for 1995 indicated that the frequency rate in meat processing was considerably higher than in many other industries or branches. For example, the accident rate per million hours worked was 29.73 for all industry, as opposed to 32.02 in the FDC industries and 69.31 in meat processing. The rate per 1,000 workers was 46.68 in total industry, compared to 50.28 in the FDC industries and 108.82 in meat processing.⁽²¹⁾ Another source indicated that the number of occupational accidents in the FD industries in 1995 declined by 2 per cent from 1994.⁽²²⁾

Table 4.19. Germany: Number of cases of occupational diseases reported in the food, drink and catering sectors, 1990-96


Year	Bakery	Confectionery	Catering	Others	Total

1990	3 016	409	1 307	1 045	5 777
1991	3 000	449	1 387	2 000	6 836
1992	3 031	385	1 373	2 038	6 827
1993	3 018	364	1 501	2 121	7 004
1994	2 691	352	1 406	1 653	6 102
1995	2 495	331	1 255	1 476	5 557
1996	2 255	328	1 121	1 369	5 073
Source: Berufsgenossenschaft Nahrungsmittel und Gaststätten: 1995 Symposium, Arbeitsschutz, Unfallberichte, Unfall-Statistik (Mannheim, Germany).

A case-study⁽²³⁾ on the United Kingdom found that the FD industries did not pose as high a safety and health risk as the construction and transport industries in terms of major and fatal injuries. The findings also indicated a generally improving situation in the FD industries as automated work processes have eliminated many health and safety risks while making the workplace cleaner and reducing spillage. However, it has also pointed out some risks due to faster machine speed or fatigue from rotating shift work. Although many arduous jobs have been eliminated by new technology, distribution work -- particularly in soft drinks and mineral water -- is reported to have become even more arduous as a result of cost-cutting which has reduced delivery trucks to single manning. Table 4.20 shows the number of occupational accidents in the FDT industries as well as in all manufacturing in the United Kingdom. The number of major injuries in the FDT industries decreased from 1,095 (20 per cent of all manufacturing) in 1992-93 to 1,012 (18.6 per cent) in 1994-95. The number of injuries resulting in the loss of three or more workdays also dropped from 12,455 (26 per cent of the total) to 11,320 (25 per cent) during the same period. Despite these declines, the frequency rate in the FDT industries remained high in view of the employment in these industries, which accounted for 13 per cent of total manufacturing employment in 1994-95.⁽²⁴⁾

Table 4.20. United Kingdom: Number of cases of injury to FDT and manufacturing workers, 1992-95


	Fatal		Major		Loss of over three workdays
	FDT	All manufacturing	FDT	All manufacturing	FDT	All manufacturing

1992-93	8	56	1 095	5 413	12 455	47 522
1993-94	5	62	1 070	5 370	11 245	44 327
1994-95	7	54	1 012	5 441	11 320	45 812
Source: Burns with Garcia, op. cit., p. 46.

Finally, table 4.21 compares the incidence rates of occupational injury and illness in the FD (food and kindred products) industries to those in other selected industries in the United States for the period 1985-94. Although the total number of cases per 100 full-time workers in the FD industries declined gradually after 1991, the rate remained the highest of all the sectors presented, being approximately twice as high as in transportation and public utilities, which had the second highest rate. The FD industries also lost many more workdays per 100 full-time workers than other sectors. It is interesting to note that the falling rate of total cases did not necessarily result in a declining rate of lost workdays in the FD and other industries. This suggests that despite a decline in the total number of cases, the severity of some cases increased.

Table 4.21. United States: Incidence rates of occupational injury and illness, by industry, 1985-94 (incidence rates per 100 full-time workers)


Industry	Type of case	1985	1987	1989	1991	1992	1994

Food and kindred products	Total cases	16.7	17.7	18.5	19.5	18.8	17.1
Food and kindred products	Lost workdays	138.0	153.7	174.7	207.2	211.9	-
Textile	Total cases	7.5	9.0	10.3	10.0	9.9	8.7
Textile	Lost workdays	57.4	65.9	81.4	88.3	87.1	-
Chemical	Total cases	5.1	7.0	7.0	6.4	6.0	5.7
Chemical	Lost workdays	38.8	58.8	63.4	62.4	64.0	-
Petroleum	Total cases	5.1	7.3	6.6	6.2	5.9	4.7
Petroleum	Lost workdays	49.9	65.9	68.1	68.2	71.2	-
Transportation and public utilities	Total cases	8.6	8.4	9.2	9.3	9.1	9.3
Transportation and public utilities	Lost workdays	107.1	108.1	121.5	140.0	144.0	-
Source: US Department of Labor: Monthly Labor Review (Washington, DC, Sep. 1996), Vol. 119, No. 9, p. 98.

The above table again confirms the findings in other countries that FD workers are still exposed to more safety and health risks than many other workers. While all the accidents and diseases reported may not be directly associated with new technology, available data show that safety and health issues in the FD industries remain a matter of concern and require determined action in cooperation with all parties concerned.

1. Government of Australia (Department of Industry, Science and Technology): Food Australia: Processed food and beverages industry (Canberra, 5th edition, Dec. 1995), pp. 28-32.

2. Information provided by the Fédération CGT de l'Agroalimentaire, France.

3. Michael Breitenacher and Uwe Christian Täger: Branchenuntersuchung Ernährungsindustrie, ifo Struktur und Wachstum, Industrial Series, Issue No. 48 (Germany).

4. Judit Kiss: Technology and employment in the Hungarian food and drink industry (Budapest, Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Mar. 1997), unpublished paper, p. 41.

5. Veena Nabar: Technology and employment in Indian food and drinks industry: Some case-studies (New Delhi, July 1997), unpublished paper, pp. 53-54.

6. Anselmo García, Andrés Hernandez and Leonard Mertens: Technology and employment in the Mexican food and drink industry, Sectoral Activities Programme (ILO, Mar. 1997), unpublished paper, pp. 31-37.

7. IUF: Nestlé Bulletin (Geneva, 1996), No. 43, p. 2.

8. Information provided by the New Zealand Employers' Federation.

9. Information provided by the New Zealand Dairy Workers' Union.

10. Information provided by Syndicat des Travailleurs des Entreprises de Boissons, Togo.

11. J.A. Burns with Marian Garcia: The impact of technical change on employment in the UK food and drink industries, project for the ILO (University of Reading, July 1997), pp. 44-46.

12. Information provided by the Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers' International Union, AFL-CIO, US, Summer 1997, p. 12.

13. Todd Cherkasky: Changing technology: A case-study of Nabisco Inc. and Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers' International Union -- Work organization and plant operation (Washington, DC, Work and Technology Institute, revised July 1997), unpublished report.

14. Information provided by the New Zealand Dairy Workers' Union.

15. Information provided by IUF's Japan Coordinating Council (IUF-JCC).

16. "Developments in industrial relations", in Monthly Labor Review (Washington, DC, Bureau of Labor Statistics), July 1993, Vol. 116, No. 7, p. 56.

17. Information provided by the ILO's tripartite constituents from a number of countries.

18. Fonds des maladies professionnelles: Rapport Annuel, 1990-93 (Brussels).

19. ibid.

20. L'Institut national de recherche et de sécurité: Travail et Sécurité (Paris, June 1996), No. 549, p. 12.

21. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Sozialordnung: Arbeitssicherheit '96: Unfallverhütungsbericht Arbeit, (Bonn, Dec. 1996), p. 51.

22. Berufsgenossenschaft Nahrungsmittel und Gaststätten: 1995 Symposium (Arbeitsschutz, Unfallberichte, Unfall-Statistik, Mannheim, Germany).

23. Burns with Garcia, op. cit., pp. 46-47.

24. Burns with Garcia, op. cit., p. 46.

SECTORS | ACTIVITIES | MEETINGS | PUBLICATIONS

For further information, please contact the Sectoral Activities Department (SECTOR) at Tel: +41.22.799.7513, Fax: +41.22.799.7296 or email: sector@ilo.org

Disclaimer | webinfo@ilo.org

This page was created by CP. It was approved by BKN. It was last updated , 28 juin 1999.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION

Sectoral Activities Programme