Introduction

Abstract

The central question of this book is how the automation, flexibilization and intensification of labour are affecting the quality of our working lives. Good work for everyone who can and wants to work, we argue, is of urgent concern for governments, public institutions, businesses and organizations representing workers and employers. Good work is important for both individuals and for overall prosperity – for the economy to take full advantage of the possibilities offered by new technologies, and for society so that everyone can participate.

Max is a truck driver. He climbs into the cab of his truck between 5 and 6 am each day. When he arrives at a glass factory in Limburg at around 11 am, he must first wait for another truck to unload. Pausing the meter above his head, Max uses this time to work off half an hour of his break. Drivers must take a 45-min break for each 4.5 h they spend behind the wheel; they otherwise risk being fined. But for Max there is no rest. He uses this time to clean the truck’s tires, to loosen the tarpaulin and to fill in forms. While the much-touted self-driving truck may be safer, Max does not fear for his job in the short term. The individual loads and routes, combined with loading, unloading and other essential tasks, will make automating everything difficult. “Even if it comes to that, you’ll still need someone to check the machine.”

Bouchra is a homecare worker. She begins her daily rounds at 7.30 am. She can see on her phone who her next clients are and how much time she has with each: 15 min, support stockings for Mrs. A; 35 min, showering Mr. C. But you must never let clients notice that you are watching the clock, she says. No one likes that. Bouchra must deal with people with all kinds of health issues, mental as well as physical. “You shouldn’t do it for the money”, she says. “It’s for the heart.” Bouchra is delighted that she recently received a permanent contract, which has finally given her a sense of “stability and security”. “Maybe I can buy a house now.”

Max and Bouchra’s working days provide us with windows on two common professions. They also highlight three major developments in the world of work with repercussions for workers, businesses and institutions in the Netherlands and beyond:

• Automation: new possibilities created by robots and artificial intelligence have far-reaching consequences for the nature and amount of work people do.

• Flexibilization: although the rise of flexible contracts in the labour market has created employment, it also means job and income insecurity for workers and their families.

• Intensification: having to work more intensively, faster or under greater emotional stress places heavier demands on workers, in the workplace as well as at home.

The central question of this book is how the automation, flexibilization and intensification of labour are affecting the quality of our working lives. Good work for everyone who can and wants to work, we argue, is of urgent concern for governments, public institutions, businesses and organizations representing workers and employers. Good work is important for both individuals and for overall prosperity – for the economy to take full advantage of the possibilities offered by new technologies, and for society so that everyone can participate.

1.1 Three Major Developments: Automation, Flexibilization and Intensification

While the future of work has received ample attention from academics, governments, citizens and civil society organizations,¹ most studies focus on two developments: the emergence and application of new technologies and the rise of the flexible labour market. This book covers these two developments as well, and adds a third: the intensification of work. We introduce them in turn below.

1.1.1 Automation: Robots, Cobots and Algorithms

The first development is the emergence of technologies that allow the digitization and robotization of labour, with far-reaching consequences for the scope and nature of work. Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee² argue that we have entered the “Second Machine Age” in which it is possible to automate not only physical but also intellectual tasks.³ This is due to growing computing power, improved sensors, big data, the use of algorithms (artificial intelligence), output technology such as 3D printers, robots and “cobots” – collaborative robots that work together with people. New technologies also enable platforms such as Uber and Airbnb to act as online intermediaries between the providers of work and individuals willing to carry it out. Although the gig economy⁴ remains in its infancy in the Netherlands – involving 34,000 people or just 0.4% of the working population⁵ – it is already posing fundamental questions about the position of workers and the quality of work. What does it mean to have an algorithm as your boss? Who is responsible for Uber drivers or Deliveroo riders who become incapacitated?

Discussion about these new technologies has evolved in recent years, with wild speculation about millions of evaporating jobs giving way to more nuanced and realistic appraisals. Fears of a robot apocalypse in the foreseeable future have proven unfounded, with some reports even predicting a shortage of human workers able to do all the new work created by new technology. For the most part, people look set to share their workspaces with robots and algorithms. Still, many jobs will change under their influence – as will the demands placed upon workers.

It may be a cliché, but new technological possibilities create both opportunities and threats (see Fig. 1.1). Will robots in the workplace leave humans side-lined and disempowered? Or will new technologies lead to more interesting tasks for humans? How we apply new technology is not a given. Technology does not just happen to us; there is room for human agency and decision-making.

Fig. 1.1

Robots and platforms: opportunities and threats

Source: Kool & Van, Est, 2015

1.1.2 Flexibilization of Work

The second development changing the world of work is the decline of permanent contracts and the rise of flexible work. While employment levels in the Netherlands were rising before the Covid-19 pandemic, the country is a European leader in the use of temporary contracts. The proportion of the self-employed – freelances and sole traders, officially classified as “self-employed persons without staff” – is high, twice that of Germany. Although the United Kingdom also has high rates of self-employment, fewer workers are on temporary contracts (see Figs. 1.2 and 1.3). The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in a 2019 report voiced its concerns about the extent of labour flexibilization in the Netherlands. On average, the oecd claims, “job quality tends to be lower among non-standard workers… and non-standard work results in significant inequalities between workers”.⁶

Fig. 1.2

Temporary employees as a percentage of all employees in the Netherlands and other European countries, 1998–2018

Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey)

Fig. 1.3

Self-employed individuals as a percentage of all employees in the Netherlands and other European countries, 1998–2018

Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey)

While there were “only” one million flexible workers in the Netherlands 15 years ago, their numbers surpassed two million in 2018 when Statistics Netherlands (cbs) recorded 985,000 temporary employment contracts, 556,000 on-call and casual workers, 308,000 agency workers and 149,000 “unspecified hours” contracts. An additional 1.1 million people were self-employed. Adding these categories together, 36% of the active workforce in 2018 no longer had a permanent contract (see Chap. 3, Fig. 3.1). Almost everyone in the Netherlands is now familiar with the uncertainty of flexible work, either personally or through a colleague, partner, neighbour or child.

This uncertainty often means that people cannot or dare not start a family or find a home of their own. Almost no one chooses a temporary job if a permanent position is available. On the other hand, many self-employed individuals – this is the positive side of labour flexibilization – are happy with their work and are less at risk of burnout.⁷ It has also become easier for people to switch between positions over the course of their careers, moving for instance from a temporary job into a full-time position and then reverting to part-time to take on freelance assignments. This “hybridization” of work means that people can simultaneously occupy several different positions in the labour market or change course over their careers to accommodate their family lives and care-giving responsibilities.

Attitudes towards flexible labour are changing in the Netherlands. When the self-employed are discussed in policy texts, ornithological metaphors abound.⁸ A few years ago, the freelance worker was a “free bird” or – due to their supposed prowess at innovation – “the goose that lays the golden eggs”. But more recently, they have become the “cuckoo in the nest”, exerting unfair competitive pressure. No bird represents them all; the self-employed flock is diverse in its plumage. But although most self-employed individuals claim to be satisfied with their work,⁹ only some can spread their wings financially. Many are scratching out a living near the poverty line.

Criticism of temporary work is mounting. The Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis points to unfair competition and increasing inequalities caused by labour market flexibilization¹⁰ while the oecd has called on the Netherlands to rein in tax incentives for flexible work.¹¹ Critics argue that flexible work should no longer be seen as inherent to business operations but as a means to cope with peaks and sickness – and only when it suits the nature of the work.¹²

The oecd concludes that the flexibilization of the labour market alongside declining trade union membership has undermined the bargaining power of workers.¹³ While employees on personalized contracts can still cause collective embarrassment – and new forms of solidarity and action are emerging in the platform economy and among freelance workers¹⁴ – individualized work is not conducive to collective bargaining. If all workers strive for individualized contracts, there will be little collective action. With platform companies, flexible jobs and self-employment, the traditional relationship of mutual responsibility binding employer and employee is no longer self-evident. It necessitates a thorough review of who is responsible for the risks and necessary investments in the new world of work.

1.1.3 Intensification of Work

The third trend is the intensification of work – the change in its pace and nature. Consider home care workers who have less time with each client although many have complex problems, IT system administrators who must complete all their reports as a matter of urgency, and primary school teachers who now have many additional non-teaching tasks such as administration and catering to children with specific needs, not to mention their increasingly vocal parents.¹⁵ In recent decades, both men and women in the Netherlands have been working longer and longer hours (Chap. 5). And their work has become more intensive.

What does the intensification of work look like in practice? We distinguish between two forms. In its narrow, quantitative definition, the intensification of work means that people have to do more work in the same allotted time.¹⁶ The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research finds that it creeps in slowly and insidiously: in 2008, some 34% of the workforce said they “often” or “always” had to work fast to complete their allotted tasks in time; by 2018, it was 38% (see Fig. 1.4).¹⁷ While excessive workloads have recently become a focal point of dissatisfaction in the Dutch public sector, the problem does not end there. The latest collective agreement for the security industry also includes reduced working hours to ease the burden on security guards. Many employers now see combating excessive pressure from work as their number one priority.¹⁸ More and more people are taking work home or putting in overtime because they cannot finish their tasks during normal working hours.¹⁹

Fig. 1.4

Trends in the intensification of work, autonomy and burnout symptoms, 2007–2018 Source: nea 2007–2018 (tno/cbs), Houtman et al. (2020)

The intensification of work is a broader issue than time alone. The nature of work has changed as well, with more workers having to more often deal with clients, customers and colleagues. A growing number of people thus experience work as more emotionally demanding (10.7% in 2018 versus 9.4% in 2007; Fig. 1.4). While professionals in education and healthcare suffer the most, a broad spectrum of workers report greater emotional strain – from the ict systems administrator who has to juggle conflicting demands to the security guard facing an increasingly aggressive public.²⁰

Working intensively is not necessarily a problem; it can make jobs more varied and challenging.²¹ But if it goes too far or lasts for too long, it can threaten the well-being of workers and their families.²² Whether workers are able to cope largely depends on the support they receive from managers and colleagues, including the extent to which they are able to organize their own tasks. Although more and more people in the Netherlands are educated to higher levels, autonomy at work is declining (Fig. 1.4) – a contributing factor to the rising incidence of burnout. Although the intensity of work has long been a focus of Dutch labour policy, it now seems to be taking a higher toll than ever before.

While new technologies can intensify work – in for example just-in-time manufacturing²³ – it is also a product of the shift towards the service economy, which puts a premium on social skills and teamwork.²⁴ In the words of Amy Edmondson: “few individuals simply do their work and then hand the output over to other people who do their work, in a linear, sequential fashion. Instead most work requires people to talk to each other to sort out shifting interdependencies. Nearly everything we value in the modern economy is the result of decisions and actions that are interdependent and therefore benefit from effective teamwork.”²⁵ As individual employees have more and varied tasks, cooperation in the workplace becomes necessary. While this can make work more interesting,²⁶ it also demands much from the working person as a colleague.

Technological developments are also blurring the boundaries between work and private life. More and more people are reporting that they can be called in at any moment, including on weekends and holidays; others feel compelled to check e-mail outside of their formal working hours. We will examine the causes and consequences of this intensification of work and what can be done to counter it.

1.2 Better Work as a Societal Mission

The automation, flexibilization and intensification of work have consequences for the amount of work people do and who participates in the paid workforce. Paid work for all has been a central Dutch policy goal since the 1990s.²⁷ The European Commission has likewise sought to increase employment levels across the European Union, with the Lisbon Strategy in 2000 proclaiming a target employment rate of 75% by 2020. This target has long been achieved in the Netherlands, which now has one of the highest levels of employment in Europe. In the fourth quarter of 2019, some 316,000 people in the Netherlands were registered as unemployed, amounting to 3.4% of the workforce (seasonally adjusted).

Although the Netherlands has created many new jobs in recent decades, there is still not work for everyone. Many remain side-lined in the labour market, including 1.6 million people on benefits; while not all can work, one million would like to work or work more. This group includes people with occupational disabilities, whose participation in the workforce actually fell between 2003 and 2017, from 45.6% to 38.2% (Chap. 6). This is in part a side-effect of the Netherlands’ intensive, high-productivity economy, which excludes less productive workers. That many people are side-lined in this way has major repercussions. A job is not only a set of tasks; employment provides people with income, self-esteem and the feeling that they are part of society.

This involuntary side-lining has negative consequences for the economy and society. The economy grows when productivity increases, when we work more hours or add more value per hour of labour. If people who wish to work are prevented from doing so without good reason, we all lose out. This is why the wrr in its 2013 report Towards a Learning Economy²⁸ emphasized that everyone is needed to help build the economy – the more so because demographic changes will likely lead to structural labour shortages in the future.

The slogan of Dutch labour market policies since the 1990s – “work, work, work” – needs updating, to focus on the quality of work. But what constitutes good work? Although perceptions here have changed as educational levels have risen and women have entered the paid workforce, we can distil from the sociological, economic and psychological literature and from international comparative studies²⁹ three basic conditions for good work: (1) control over income, an appropriate wage and income security; (2) control over work, sufficient autonomy and social support in the workplace³⁰; and (3) control in life, good work-life balance. If work is accompanied by constant insecurity, we cannot describe it as good. The same applies when people have no control over their working lives, or if they have lost their work-life balance.

The automation, flexibilization and intensification of labour potentially have major consequences for the quality of work. Although technology can turn workers into mechanical appendages, there is no need for it to do so. Flexible working arrangements, when one can be called in to work at any time, can be hard to combine with caring for young children. But again, it does not have to. The question is how we can – now and in the future – create good work for as many people as possible. As David Coates writes, “Work is good for us, but work is only really good for us if it is ‘good work’.”³¹

1.3 Concerns About the Quality of Work

Dutch workers are generally satisfied with their jobs; three-quarters even say they “greatly enjoy” their work.³² Asked the lottery player’s question – “What would you do if you won a large sum of money?” – most answer that they would keep working.³³ The “bullshit jobs” made famous by American anthropologist David Graeber³⁴ is not yet an issue in the Netherlands, where only 5% of workers doubt the importance of their work.³⁵

But dissatisfaction is rising.³⁶ Statistics Netherlands reports that strikes have reached their highest level in two decades,³⁷ with bus drivers, airline pilots, teachers, home care workers and university lecturers among those who have resorted to industrial action. While some protests are classic wage disputes, others focus on workloads, especially the burden of overtime and administrative duties. In recent walkouts, primary-school teachers have been demanding “a fair salary, less work pressure”. Theirs are not “bullshit jobs”, they say. But they do have too many “bullshit tasks” within their jobs. What they want is the freedom to do their jobs well.

Disturbing exposés of contemporary working life are all-too-common. In Hired,³⁸ British investigative journalist James Bloodworth reveals what it is like to be an order picker at Amazon, where he worked undercover. The company monitors employee activities, including toilet visits, with digital wristbands. Breaks are limited and there are penalties for reporting sick. Zero-hour contracts are the norm and almost no one has a permanent job. Similar reports have been published in the Netherlands about what it is like to work for the taxi service Uber and online retailer Bol.com, in the meat-processing industry and in logistics.³⁹

More work does not necessarily lead to less poverty. The proportion of the Dutch population classified as “working poor” has been rising since 1990.⁴⁰ In 2014, this applied to about 320,000 people (4.6% of all workers), of whom 175,000 were wage-earners and 145,000 were self-employed.

1.3.1 The Quality of Work as a Distribution Issue

Higher-skilled persons do not always have good jobs; lower-skilled persons do not always have bad jobs. There are, however, structural differences between these groups. Paul de Beer finds that lower-skilled people in the Netherlands, in both absolute and relative terms, were more likely to be employed “in 2016 than a person with similar characteristics (age, gender, domestic situation, origin) in 1990”. But there was also a downside: “the chances of this person being in flexible employment and on low wages were higher in 2016”.⁴¹ The oecd notes in its report on the Netherlands that “non-standard work results in significant inequalities between workers. Workers on non-standard contracts earn less, suffer from higher insecurity and are less likely to participate in collective bargaining and training”.⁴²

There are further concerns about the declining quality of work. Workers today have less say over how they perform their duties; in other words, their autonomy at work is declining (Fig. 1.4). Although occupational health is generally good, the proportion of employees reporting symptoms of burnout shot up from 11.3% in 2017 to 17.5% in 2018.⁴³ Although widespread across the working population, burnout is more common among the better educated. While work is a fine remedy for poverty, depression and poor health, it can also make you ill.

Public-sector professionals have been sounding the alarm about their working conditions – their wages being too low and their workloads being excessive – for some time. Especially teachers and healthcare staff want more autonomy to do their jobs well. The Professional Ethics Foundation has highlighted the mistrust police officers, teachers and nurses face from their superiors, which manifests in excessive control and enforced record-keeping.⁴⁴ What is at stake is “the recognition of one’s own professionalism”.⁴⁵

Although job satisfaction in the Netherlands generally remains high, many people when asked the “lottery question” say they would continue working, but with the caveat “under different conditions”. What workers want most is the space to do their jobs well. Compared to two decades ago, workers today have higher expectations. As well as good colleagues, they want jobs that are interesting, which allow them to make the most of their abilities and which give them a sense of achievement (Table 2.3).

Although not everyone needs to be ecstatic at work,⁴⁶ there are sound reasons to pay more attention to well-being in the workplace. Good work is about mutual engagement between employers and employees and about bringing out the best in people, with long-term benefits for workers, businesses,⁴⁷ the national economy and society. Better work improves occupational health, reduces absenteeism and encourages innovative workplace behaviour. Contented workers come up with creative ideas to improve products and services – all essential for a flourishing economy.

1.3.2 The Netherlands in Europe

Although the Netherlands is not performing badly on indicators that measure the quality of work, it could be doing much better. The country is a European leader in some areas, but by no means in all. Recent rankings by both the oecd⁴⁸ and the eu research agency Eurofound⁴⁹ place the Netherlands mid-table, with the oecd describing the country as an “average performer” alongside Mexico, South Korea, Japan, France, Belgium and Sweden; nations that score better include Denmark, Finland, Australia and Austria. According to Eurofound, some 40% of Dutch workers have “poor quality” jobs and are “under pressure” – more than in the uk or Belgium. What explains the Netherlands’ middling position? Part I of this book seeks to provide some answers.

1.4 Better Work and Well-Being

Our focus on good work dovetails with national and international initiatives to look beyond gross domestic product and employment rates. While the United Nations Millennium Development Goals said nothing about work,⁵⁰ “decent work” is part of the Sustainable Development Goals (sdgs) agreed in 2015. SDG 8 reads: “Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.” While the long explanatory text mentions “decent work for all” several times,⁵¹ what it means in concrete terms is up to individual nations to work out; implementation can and will differ across countries. The Dutch government has endorsed the Sustainable Development Goals, while ministries⁵² and companies⁵³ have begun working to achieve them.⁵⁴

1.4.1 Focus on Well-Being

While policymakers have long privileged economic growth and gdp, these indicators alone cannot gauge a nation’s overall prosperity and the well-being of its inhabitants. Gdp as a measure of economic performance was never meant to do this.⁵⁵ Since the French government’s Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress published its report⁵⁶ in 2008, international organizations have been at the forefront in advocating for a broader view of prosperity and well-being. Numerous reports and books have addressed the limitations of gdp and proposed alternative ways to quantify happiness, well-being and prosperity.⁵⁷ To track more than just the evolution of gdp, national and international organizations have developed new indicators and composite indices.⁵⁸

Interest in well-being has grown in the Netherlands as well. The debate in the House of Representatives following the wrr’s report Towards a Learning Economy⁵⁹ led to a parliamentary committee on “Defining General Well-Being”. The committee’s report in 2016 led to further debate⁶⁰ and the House of Representatives voting to request Statistics Netherlands to develop a Monitor of Well-Being.⁶¹ Since 2018, this report has been published annually on Accountability Day when the national government and its ministries present their annual reports to the House of Representatives.⁶² The concept of well-being⁶³ has been gaining traction in local politics as well, with the City of Amsterdam’s Research, Information and Statistics Department issuing its first Monitor of Well-Being for the Amsterdam Metropolitan Region in June 2018.⁶⁴

1.4.2 Work Is Important for Our Well-Being

As Statistics Netherlands declared in its first Monitor of Well-Being, work is central to human welfare and a key factor in shaping well-being in its broadest sense.⁶⁵ The section on the distribution of well-being breaks down unemployment data by social groups; the chapter on policy themes and Sustainable Development Goals provides indicators related to labour, workforce participation and leisure time. Having a job is a determining factor of well-being; so too is the kind of work one does. As the Taylor Review of modern working practices for the British government put it: “While having employment is itself vital to people’s health and well-being, the quality of people’s work is also a major factor in helping people to stay healthy and happy, something which benefits them and serves the wider public interest.”⁶⁶ These findings all argue in favour of paying greater attention to the quality of work.⁶⁷

1.5 In this Book

We argue that improving the quality of work for all people willing and able to work is a key societal and organizational challenge for governments, public institutions, businesses and organizations representing workers and employers. This dovetails with the oecd’s new jobs strategy which “goes beyond job quantity and considers job quality and inclusiveness as central policy priorities”⁶⁸ – a strategy based on evidence that countries which focus on improving inclusion and the quality of work outperform countries that solely privilege labour market flexibility.⁶⁹ Focusing on good work for all is also in line with the International Labour Organization’s “human-centred agenda for a decent future of work”,⁷⁰ which advocates long-term investments in human development and well-being.

The oecd emphasizes that there are no standard policy recipes to achieve good and inclusive work. Each nation must pursue its own analysis of the opportunities and weaknesses in its labour market and formulate appropriate measures. In its submission to the Netherlands Independent Commission on the Regulation of Work, the oecd states that “the future of work will largely depend on the policy decisions countries make”. The Netherlands, it adds, is “at an important juncture and urgent decisions need to be taken about the kind of labour market that is desired in the future”.⁷¹

This book should be read in this context. It analyses key developments in the Dutch labour market, examines their potential consequences and formulates policy recommendations. Our analysis is based on international and interdisciplinary scientific research; on the working papers we commissioned from the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, the Netherlands Institute for Social Research, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the University of Amsterdam and Tilburg University⁷²; on policy reports, studies and evaluations from the Netherlands; and on conversations with policymakers and stakeholders, including discussions of our previous studies Mastering the Robot⁷³ and For the Sake of Security.⁷⁴

We hope that the analysis of the Netherlands presented in this book will provide researchers and policymakers in other countries with actionable insights on the importance of good work and how new technologies, flexible labour markets and the intensification of work are affecting its quality – and what governments, employers, trade unions and others can do create better work. If the Netherlands, known for its knowledge-based economy and employee satisfaction, is wrestling with these issues, this will be the case in other countries as well. As the developments we analyse are occurring everywhere, we hope that the proposals and recommendations we present will provide some food for thought.

1.5.1 Covid-19 Pandemic

This book was written shortly before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. The crisis has not rendered our analysis out of date but has highlighted the urgency of our study. First, the Dutch labour market has become one of the most flexible in Western Europe; there is a chasm between people with and without permanent contracts and income security. Much of the economic shock is being absorbed by temporary and self-employed workers, disproportionately affecting young people, women, and ethnic minorities. The pandemic’s economic impact, and the immediate financial support given by the Dutch government to the self-employed, reveals vulnerabilities in the labour market and the necessity of rethinking current social-security systems and reforming labour regulations to create stable work.

Second, the pandemic is revealing the need for renewed and expanded active labour-market policies as workers look for jobs in different sectors and governments face enormous challenges in helping job seekers find new employment. This requires adequate resources as well as administrative creativity when assistance must be provided digitally; in the absence of sufficient resources, those who are easily placeable are helped quickly while the most vulnerable are not.

Third, while professionals in healthcare, social care and education are now deemed “heroes”, they still suffer from highly demanding jobs, comparative low pay, high work pressure and relatively little control over their work. The current crisis once again underlines the importance of fair pay and sufficient autonomy for public professionals.

Fourth, the pandemic is revealing the importance of good work-life balance. Due to the measures taken to prevent the spread of the virus, many workers are now working from home, with many parents doubling as teachers. While working from home may become the new normal for many, it once again raises questions about healthy working conditions and investments in childcare.

Finally, from developing contact tracing apps to video-conferencing with co-workers, the Covid-19 crisis has been a catalyst for technological change. While the latest technological developments may ultimately have both positive and negative consequences for workers, it underlines our analysis of the importance of developing and implementing technologies in such a way that it leads to better work.

1.5.2 In the Following Chapters…

Drawing on the scientific literature, we first outline why work is important and what constitutes “good work” (Chap. 2). Then, in Part I, we examine how the quality of work in the Netherlands has been affected by the three trends at the heart of our study – the automation, flexibilization and intensification of labour (treated respectively in Chaps. 3, 4 and 5). In Part II, we discuss the consequences of these trends for the ability of different parts of the population to find and retain work (Chap. 6). In Part III, we discuss how globalization and new technologies inform the space available to national governments and labour organizations to invest in good work for everyone willing, able and needing to work (Chap. 7). Finally, Chap. 8 advances suggestions about how governments and other stakeholders can actively contribute towards “better work” for all.

Between the chapters are portraits of some common professions. By following the working day of truck drivers, home care workers and many others, these portraits reveal how the three trends at the heart of this book are experienced in daily life as well as just how important good work is.

A Day at Work: The Truck Driver

Max climbs into the cab of his truck between 5 and 6 am each morning. He works for a small family business, hauling loads ranging from sugar beet and lime to glass for recycling. Today’s route takes him to several destinations in the Netherlands and then to Belgium. It is exactly 7 am when Max arrives at his first stop: a glass processing plant where he delivers coarse coloured glass and picks up a load of white rinsed fine glass.

Max joined the company two years ago as it allowed him to work more “normal” hours. But he still finds it difficult to lead a normal life. He spends between 50 and 60 h each week on the road, which makes it a tough job. “With breaks included, you’re away from home for the best part of 65 hours. The planner back at the office designs the routes and schedules, so it’s better to stay in his good books”, Max says with a smile. The planner can follow drivers using their GPS trackers. “If he spots you cutting corners, he’ll take it out on you.” Tonight, Max wants to be home no later than 7 pm as it is his brother’s birthday. To compensate, he has accepted a night shift for this Saturday, which pays a premium for unsocial hours. But this will force him to cancel his Sunday football match, ruining his weekend.

When Max arrives at the glass factory at around 11 am, he must first wait for another truck to unload. Pausing the meter above his head, he uses this time to work off half an hour of his break. Drivers must take a 45-min break for each 4.5 h they spend behind the wheel; they otherwise risk being fined. But for Max there is no chance to rest. He uses this time to clean the truck’s tires, to loosen the tarpaulin to ready for unloading and to fill in forms. An hour after arriving, he can set off again, on his way to Belgium.

Max keeps his cabin spotlessly clean: “I spend whole days in here – this is my home.” Behind the seats is a made-up bed; Max sleeps on the road an average of twice a week. Curtains hang from the windows and under the bed is a fridge containing his lunch. There will soon be a TV as well.

To his relief, Max arrives at the Belgian company just before the shift change, when the whole place shuts down. “It’s always a hassle here. You wait for ages and then they complain that your freight compartment isn’t clean.” The piles of glass reach impressive heights. The glass itself is so fine that it looks like sand and the wind blows it around. It tickles and stings everywhere. “You should see my socks at home”, says Max. “They’re all shredded.”

Once he has loaded and weighed the truck and filled in all the forms, Max is on his way again. He chats on his CB radio with other Dutch truckers who are approaching the same factory, annoyed as they will arrive during the shift change. Although Max is alone in his cab all day, “I never feel lonely with this thing.” He spends the whole day chatting with colleagues driving nearby.

It is 2:30 pm and Max has been behind the wheel for 9 h now. He still has some time left, he says with a big smile. Suddenly, he must slam on the brakes. A car has just cut in front of him to exit from the motorway. Forty tonnes of fine glass protest, its weight pushing the huge vehicle forward as Max barely manages to keep control. Long days or not, Max must stay alert. A recent accident in which a fellow driver died has left a deep impression on him. He talked about it with his colleagues. “It makes you think. If it ever comes to it, I just hope I’m not trapped for ages. That would be horrible. I’d rather die instantly.”

From a safety point of view, it might be preferable to completely automate freight transport with self-driving trucks. While Max often hears about this future scenario, he does not fear for his job in the short term. The individual loads and routes, combined with loading, unloading and other essential tasks, will make full automation difficult. “Even if it comes to that, you’ll still need someone to check the machine.”

At about 4:30 pm he delivers the fine glass and collects his final consignment of the day, a load of “coarse brown” which must go to Drenthe. But Max is finished for the day; this will be his first delivery tomorrow. He drives his truck back to the company depot, fills the tank – 540 litres, which takes a while – and completes more forms. Finally, at 6:15 pm, about 13 h after he began his working day, Max gets into his own car and drives home, just in time to celebrate his brother’s birthday.

At the beginning of 2019, some 109,000 people worked as truck drivers in the Netherlands. Almost all were men, roughly half with only basic education and half with upper secondary schooling. The vast majority (nine out of ten) were employed, increasingly on flexible contracts which now account for almost a quarter of trucking jobs. While the number of jobs in the sector were falling for over a decade due to competition from Eastern Europe, economic growth and an ageing workforce have led to a shortage of drivers in the past two years. Truck drivers typically earn €1800–2400 gross per month, excluding overtime premiums. The average (modal) income in the Netherlands in 2020 will be just over €2800 euros per month, excluding holiday pay. Truck drivers work long and irregular hours. Although they experience little work-related pressure compared to other professions, it is increasing due in part to the wider use of digital tracking systems.