Numbers and characteristics of those considered as potential “key workers” in the response to coronavirus (COVID-19), UK. Labour Force Survey and Annual Population Survey.

New insights on the characteristics of non-British nationals and non-UK-born in the workforce between 2017 and 2019, including those who could be considered as key workers in the response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

The coronavirus pandemic has necessitated extraordinary human resilience in order to preserve and prolong life and social order. Risks to health and even life are being confronted by workers in health and social care, as well as those in roles previously never defined as “frontline,” such as individuals working in community supply chain sectors. The strategy adopted by the United Kingdom (UK) government in facing the challenges of the pandemic was markedly different from other countries. The present study set out to examine what variables were associated with resilience, burnout, and wellbeing in all sectors of frontline workers, and whether or not these differed between the UK and Republic of Ireland (RoI). Individuals were eligible if they were a frontline worker (in health and social care, community supply chain, or other emergency services) in the UK or RoI during the pandemic. Part of a larger, longitudinal study, the participants completed an online survey to assess various aspects of their daily and working lives, along with their attitudes toward their government’s handling of the crisis, and measurement of psychological variables associated with heroism (altruism, meaning in life, and resilient coping). A total of 1,305 participants (N = 869, 66.6% from the UK) provided sufficient data for analysis. UK-based workers reported lower wellbeing than the RoI-based participants. In multivariate models, both psychological and pandemic-related variables were associated with levels of resilience, burnout, and wellbeing in these workers, but which pandemic-related variables were associated with outcomes differed depending on the country. The judgment of lower timeliness in their government’s response to the pandemic appeared to be a key driver of each outcome for the UK-based frontline workers. These findings provide initial evidence that the different strategies adopted by each country may be associated with the overall wellbeing of frontline workers, with higher detriment observed in the UK. The judgment of the relatively slow response of the UK government to instigate their pandemic measures appears to be associated with lower resilience, higher burnout, and lower wellbeing in frontline workers in the UK.

The data collection consists of 40 qualitative interviews with Polish migrant essential workers living in the UK and 10 in-depth expert interviews with key stakeholders providing information and support to migrant workers in the UK. All migrant interviews are in Polish. Six of the expert interviews with key stakeholders are in English and four are in Polish. Fieldwork was conducted fully online during the Covid-19 pandemic between March and August 2021, following the third UK-wide Covid-19 lockdown. Restrictions were still in place in some localities. Interviews took place shortly after the end of the transition period concluding the UK’s European Union exit on 1 January 2021. All Polish migrant worker interviewees entered the UK before 1 January 2021 and had the option to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme.

The objectives of the qualitative fieldwork were to: 1. To synthesise empirical and theoretical knowledge on the short- and long-term impacts of COVID-19 on migrant essential workers. 2. To establish how the pandemic affected Polish migrant essential worker's lives; and expert interviews with stakeholders in the public and third/voluntary sector to investigate how to best support and retain migrant essential workers in COVID-19 recovery strategies. The project also involved: - co-producing policy outputs with partner organisations in England and Scotland; and - an online survey to measure how Polish migrant essential workers across different roles and sectors were impacted by COVID-19 in regard to health, social, economic and cultural aspects, and intentions to stay in the UK/return to Poland (deposited separately to University of Sheffield). Key findings included significant new knowledge about the health, social, economic and cultural impacts of Covid-19 on migrant essential workers. Polish essential workers were severely impacted by the pandemic with major mental health impacts. Mental health support was insufficient throughout the UK. Those seeking support typically turned to private (online) services from Poland as they felt they could not access them in the UK because of language or cultural barriers, lack of understanding of the healthcare system and pathways to mental health support, support being offered during working hours only, or fear of the negative impact of using mental health services on work opportunities. Some participants were in extreme financial hardship, especially those with pre-settled status or those who arrived in the UK during the pandemic. The reasons for financial strain varied but there were strong patterns linked to increased pressure at work, greater exposure to Covid-19 as well as redundancies, pay cuts and rejected benefit applications. There was a tendency to avoid applying for state financial support. These impacts were compounded by the sense of isolation, helplessness, or long-distance grief due to inability to visit loved ones in Poland. Covid-19 impacted most detrimentally on women with caring responsibilities, single parents and people in the health and teaching sectors. The most vulnerable Polish migrant essential workers - e.g. those on lower income, with pre-existing health conditions, restricted access to support and limited English proficiency - were at most risk. Discrimination was reported, including not feeling treated equally in the workplace. The sense of discrimination two-fold: as essential workers (low-paid, low-status, unsafe jobs) and as Eastern Europeans (frequent disciplining practices, treated as threat, assumed to be less qualified). In terms of future plans, some essential workers intended to leave the UK or were unsure about their future place of residence. Brexit was a major reason for uncertain settlement plans. Vaccine hesitancy was identified, based on doubts about vaccination, especially amongst younger respondents who perceived low risks of Covid-19 for their own health, including women of childbearing age, who may have worries over unknown vaccine side-effects for fertility. Interview participants largely turned to Polish language sources for vaccination information, especially social media, and family and friends in Poland. This promoted the spread of misinformation as Poland has a strong anti-vaccination movement.

COVID-19 has exposed the UK's socio-economic dependence on a chronically insecure migrant essential workforce. While risking their lives to offset the devastating effects of the pandemic, migrant workers reportedly find themselves in precarious professional and personal circumstances (temporary zero-hours contracts, work exploitation, overcrowded accommodation, limited access to adequate health/social services including Universal Credit). This project will investigate the health, social, economic and cultural impacts of COVID-19 on the migrant essential workforce and how these might impact on their continued stay in the UK. It will focus on the largest non-British nationality in the UK, the Polish community, who - while employed across a range of roles and sectors - are overrepresented in lower-paid essential work. We will use this group as an illustrative case study to make wider claims and policy recommendations about migrant work during the pandemic. Using a mixed-methods approach, we will conduct: an online survey to map COVID-19 impacts; in-depth qualitative interviews to establish how the pandemic has affected worker's lives; and expert interviews with stakeholders to investigate how to best support and retain migrant essential workers in COVID-19 recovery strategies. The results will generate the first comprehensive UK-wide dataset on the experiences of migrant essential workers against the backdrop of COVID-19. The research, co-produced with partner organisations (Polish Expats Associations, Fife Migrants Forum, PKAVS Minority Communities Hub and Polish Social and Cultural Association), will generate a policy briefing, a toolkit for employers in the essential work sectors, information resources for migrant workers, alongside media and academic outputs.

Given the outbreak of the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), pandemic during March 2020, lockdown measures taken by governments have forced many families, especially those who have children, to re-arrange domestic and market work division. In this study, I investigate the factors associated with partnered and employed individuals’ involvement with housework during the COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom. Drawing evidence from the first wave of the Covid-19 Survey from the Five National Longitudinal Studies dataset with using OLS regressions, this study found that daily working hours, socioeconomic status, and partner’s key worker status are important indicators of daily time spent on housework. Furthermore, interaction analysis showed that women living with a key worker partner not only did more housework than women whose partner was working in a regular job, but they also did more housework than men living with a key worker partner during the lockdown. Policy implications of regulating maximum daily working hours and key worker status are discussed in the context of re-arranging paid and unpaid work between couples during the first lockdown in the United Kingdom.

Citation: Sönmez, I ̇brahim. 2021. A Missed Opportunity for Men? Partnered and Employed Individuals’ Involvement with Housework during the COVID-19 Lockdown in the UK. SocialSciences10: 135. https:// doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040135

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global public health crisis that continues to exert immense pressure on healthcare and related professional staff and services. The impact on staff wellbeing is likely to be influenced by a combination of modifiable and non-modifiable factors.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the self-reported wellbeing, resilience, and job satisfaction of National Health Service (NHS) and university staff working in the field of healthcare and medical research.MethodsWe conducted a cross sectional survey of NHS and UK university staff throughout the COVID-19 pandemic between May-November 2020. The anonymous and voluntary survey was disseminated through social media platforms, and via e-mail to members of professional and medical bodies. The data was analyzed using descriptive and regression (R) statistics.ResultsThe enjoyment of work and satisfaction outside of work was significantly negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic for all of staff groups independent of other variables. Furthermore, married women reporting significantly lower wellbeing than married men (P = 0.028). Additionally, the wellbeing of single females was significantly lower than both married women and men (P = 0.017 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Gender differences were also found in satisfaction outside of work, with women reporting higher satisfaction than men before the COVID-19 pandemic (P = 0.0002).ConclusionOur study confirms that the enjoyment of work and general satisfaction of staff members has been significantly affected by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interestingly, being married appears to be a protective factor for wellbeing and resilience but the effect may be reversed for life satisfaction outside work. Our survey highlights the critical need for further research to examine gender differences using a wider range of methods.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global public health crisis that continues to exert immense pressure on healthcare and related professional staff and services. The impact on staff wellbeing is likely to be influenced by a combination of modifiable and non-modifiable factors.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the self-reported wellbeing, resilience, and job satisfaction of National Health Service (NHS) and university staff working in the field of healthcare and medical research.MethodsWe conducted a cross sectional survey of NHS and UK university staff throughout the COVID-19 pandemic between May-November 2020. The anonymous and voluntary survey was disseminated through social media platforms, and via e-mail to members of professional and medical bodies. The data was analyzed using descriptive and regression (R) statistics.ResultsThe enjoyment of work and satisfaction outside of work was significantly negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic for all of staff groups independent of other variables. Furthermore, married women reporting significantly lower wellbeing than married men (P = 0.028). Additionally, the wellbeing of single females was significantly lower than both married women and men (P = 0.017 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Gender differences were also found in satisfaction outside of work, with women reporting higher satisfaction than men before the COVID-19 pandemic (P = 0.0002).ConclusionOur study confirms that the enjoyment of work and general satisfaction of staff members has been significantly affected by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interestingly, being married appears to be a protective factor for wellbeing and resilience but the effect may be reversed for life satisfaction outside work. Our survey highlights the critical need for further research to examine gender differences using a wider range of methods.

Estimates of the risk of hospital admission for coronavirus (COVID-19) and death involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, overall and by age group, using anonymised linked data from Census 2021. Experimental Statistics.

Outcome definitions

For this analysis, we define a death as involving COVID-19 if either of the ICD-10 codes U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) or U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified) is mentioned on the death certificate. Information on cause of death coding is available in the User Guide to Mortality Statistics. We use date of occurrance rather than date of registration to give the date of the death.

We define COVID-109 hospitalisation as an inpatient episode in Hospital Episode Statistics where the primary diagnosis was COVID-19, identified by the ICD-19 codes (COVID-19, virus identified) or U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified). Where an individual had experienced more than one COVID-19 hospitalisation, the earliest that occurred within the study period was used. We define the date of COVID-19 hospitalisation as the start of the hospital episode.

ICD-10 code

U07.1 :

COVID-19, virus identified

U07.2:

COVID-19, virus not identified

Vaccination status is defined by the dose and the time since the last dose received

Unvaccinated:

no vaccination to less than 21 days post first dose

First dose 21 days to 3 months:

more than or equal to 21 days post second dose to earliest of less than 91 days post first dose or less than 21 days post second dose

First dose 3+ months:

more than or equal to 91 days post first dose to less than 21 days post second dose

Second dose 21 days to 3 months:

more than or equal to 21 days post second dose to earliest of less than 91 days post second dose or less than 21 days post third dose

Second dose 3-6 months:

more than or equal to 91 days post second dose to earliest of less than 182 days post second dose or less than 21 days post third dose

Second dose 6+ months:

more than or equal to 182 days post second dose to less than 21 days post third dose

Third dose 21 days to 3 months:

more than or equal to 21 days post third dose to less than 91 days post third dose

Third dose 3+ months:

more than or equal to 91 days post third dose

Model adjustments

Three sets of model adjustments were used

Age adjusted:

age (as a natural spline)

Age, socio-demographics adjusted:

age (as a natural spline), plus socio-demographic characteristics (sex, region, ethnicity, religion, IMD decile, NSSEC category, highest qualification, English language proficiency, key worker status)

Fully adjusted:

age (as a natural spline), plus socio-demographic characteristics (sex, region, ethnicity, religion, IMD decile, NSSEC category, highest qualification, English language proficiency, key worker status), plus health-related characteristics (disability, self-reported health, care home residency, number of QCovid comorbidities (grouped), BMI category, frailty flag and hospitalisation within the last 21 days.

Age

Age in years is defined on the Census day 2021 (21 March 2021). Age is included in the model as a natural spline with boundary knots at the 10th and 90th centiles and internal knots at the 25th, 50th and 75th centiles. The positions of the knots are calculated separately for the overall model and for each age group for the stratified model.

Objective: To investigate rates of adherence to the UK’s test, trace, and isolate system over the initial 11 months of the covid-19 pandemic.Design: Series of cross sectional online surveys.Setting: 37 nationally representative surveys in the UK, 2 March 2020 to 27 January 2021.Participants: 74 699 responses from 45 957 people living in the UK, aged 16 years or older (37 survey waves, about 2000 participants in each wave).Main outcome measures: Identification of the main symptoms of covid-19 (cough, high temperature or fever, and loss of sense of smell or taste), self-reported adherence to self-isolation if symptoms were present and intention to self-isolate if symptoms were to develop, requesting a test for covid-19 if symptoms were present and intention to request a test if symptoms were to develop, and intention to share details of close contacts.Results: Only 51.5% of participants (95% confidence interval 51.0% to 51.9%, n=26 030/50  570) identified the main symptoms of covid-19; the corresponding values in the most recent wave of data collection (25-27 January 2021) were 50.8% (48.6% to 53.0%, n=1019/2007). Across all waves, duration adjusted adherence to full self-isolation was 42.5% (95% confidence interval 39.7% to 45.2%, n=515/1213); in the most recent wave of data collection (25-27 January 2021), it was 51.8% (40.8% to 62.8%, n=43/83). Across all waves, requesting a test for covid-19 was 18.0% (95% confidence interval 16.6% to 19.3%, n=552/3068), increasing to 22.2% (14.6% to 29.9%, n=26/117) from 25 to 27 January. Across all waves, intention to share details of close contacts was 79.1% (95% confidence interval 78.8% to 79.5%, n=36 145/45 680), increasing to 81.9% (80.1% to 83.6%, n=1547/1890) from 25 to 27 January. Non-adherence was associated with being male, younger age, having a dependent child in the household, lower socioeconomic status, greater financial hardship during the pandemic, and working in a key sector.Conclusions: Levels of adherence to test, trace, and isolate are low, although some improvement has occurred over time. Practical support and financial reimbursement are likely to improve adherence. Targeting messaging and policies to men, younger age groups, and key workers might also be necessary.

COVID-19 UK Non-hospital Antigen Testing Results (Pillar 2) data is required by NHS Digital to support COVID-19 requests for linkage, analysis and dissemination to other organisations. These requests are often urgent and in support of direct care and service monitoring, planning and research. These are all functions that NHS Digital have been asked to deliver as a national resource in response to COVID-19, through the recent direction from the SoS.

Antigen test results relate to subjects who have had swab testing in the community at drive through test centres, walk in centres, home kits returned by posts, care homes, prisons etc.

The dataset is composed of:

• Patient identity and contact details

• Testing centre and laboratory details

• Test results • Test kit types (manufacturer)

The data cover the UK and is collected under SoS Covid Direction under s254 of the HSCA 2012 and s255 requests from devolved administrations for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. This is an expansion of the original scope which only included data for welsh patients tested in other parts of the UK.

Data is currently available for dissemination through the NHS Digital DARS service for England. If your extract is to include data from the devolved administrations their approval will also be required.

Timescales for dissemination can be found under 'Our Service Levels' at the following link: https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/data-access-request-service-dars-process

According to a 2025 survey, the main barriers for UK accommodation businesses when it came to finding and hiring new staff were ************************, as well as *************************************. In total, ** percent of businesses cited both as hurdles. Meanwhile, ** percent of businesses listed unsuitable working hours or work-life balance concerns as factors.

This dataset pertains to a research project investigating the social, cultural, and economic consequences of COVID19 on independent arts workers, specifically in the theatre sector, across England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The project recognised the unique vulnerability of this workforce in dealing with the impact of COVID19. Their workplaces closed overnight and their sector transformed as theatres moved to digital delivery, and their employment status (freelance) made them ineligible for the UK government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. The motivation of the project was to understand: the employment experiences of this workforce during the first 18 months of the pandemic; how the pandemic affected their planning for the future; how the pandemic changed their creative practices and skills; what impact government and sectoral policy had on the workforce; and to find strategies for government and industry to support this precarious workforce.

This data collection includes survey responses (n=397) to an online survey which ran from 23/11/2020 to 19/03/2021, and a database of policy events covering the period from the onset of the pandemic until 27/5/2022 (n=1353). This collection contains the survey data. The survey was run through the JISC surveys platform. It had 34 questions collecting a mixture of qualitative and quantitative data. Freeform text responses were alternated with multiple choice, multi-option and Likert scale. The survey captured data on theatre freelancers employment, emotional, and cultural experiences, the region(s) and setting(s) where they worked, and their age, gender identity, race, occupation(s).COVID-19 threatens the performing arts; closures of theatres and outlawing of public gatherings have proven financially devastating to the industry across the United Kingdom and, indeed, the world. The pandemic has sparked a wide range of industry-led strategies designed to alleviate financial consequences and improve audience capture amidst social distancing. COVID-19 has affected all levels of the sector but poses an existential threat to freelancers--Independent Arts Workers (IAWs)--who make up 60% of industry workforce in the UK (EU Labour Force Survey 2017). The crisis has put a spotlight on the vulnerable working conditions, economic sustainability, mental wellbeing, and community support networks of IAWs. IAWs are often overlooked by the industry and researchers, however it is their very precarity that makes them pioneers of adaptability responsible for key innovation within the sector. IAWs may prove essential for the industry's regrowth post-COVID-19. An investigation is necessary into the impact of COVID-19 on IAWs and the wide-ranging creative solutions developing within the industry to overcome them.

There has been increasing pressure to gather 'robust, real-time data' to investigate the financial, cultural, and social potential long-term consequences of COVID-19 on the UK theatre industry. The impact of the pandemic on IAWs is particularly complex and wide-ranging. A TRG Arts survey stated that 60% of IAWs predict their income will 'more than halve in 2020' while 50% have had 100% of their work cancelled. Industry researchers from TRG Arts and Theatres Trust have launched investigations examining the financial impact of COVID-19 on commercial venues and National Portfolio Organisations, but there has been insufficient research into the consequences for IAWs (eg. actors, directors, producers, writers, theatre makers, technicians) and the smaller SMEs beyond income loss and project cancellation data. In May 2020, Vicky Featherstone of the Royal Court Theatre, stated the importance of support for the 'massive freelance and self-employed workforce' she believed has been 'taken for granted' by the industry. Our study fills this gap by capturing and analysing not only the economic impact, but the social and cultural transformations caused by COVID-19 by and for IAWs. We will compare regional responses across England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland as well as variations across racial and socio-economic groups. Our aims are to document and investigate the impact of COVID-19 on IAWs, identify inequalities in the sector, investigate changes in the type of work produced post-COVID-19, and help develop strategies for how the sector can move forward from this crisis. We will investigate connections between the financial consequences of COVID-19 and creative strategies for industry survival including social support networks, communication initiatives between arts venues and IAWs, and the development of mixed-media work in the wake of the pandemic.

This project adopts two main research instruments - two online questionnaires (2 surveys of circa 1400 UK ‘new’ homeworkers each, June-July 2020 & Dec-February 2021). The second instrument is a series of semi-structed interviews (4 x Interviews with 80 ‘new’ homeworkers across UK, May 2020 – July 2021).

The COVID-19 outbreak has forced companies to embrace home-based working (HBW) at such speed that they have had little opportunity to consider the impact on their workers. It can be argued that the crisis has led to the most significant, intensive social experiment of digital, HBW that has ever occurred. The current situation, which involves the whole household being based at home, is an unprecedented challenge which may be at least an intermittent fixture, for the next eighteen months (BBC Futures, 25/03/20).

The press have suggested that this revolution might also offer an opportunity for many companies to finally build a culture that allows long-overdue work flexibility ... many employees for companies who have sent all staff home are already starting to question why they had to go into the office in the first place (The Guardian, 13/02/20). These optimistic takes on the current patterns of work focus on HBW's emancipatory potential, offering flexibility, the lubrication of work and family responsibilities and the promise of increased productivity. Yet, this new world order, where the home becomes a multi-occupational, multi-person workplace and school, not only challenges boundaries but also conceptions of the domestic space.

The impact of homeworking is likely to present significant variation depending on organisational support, the worker's role, socio-economic status, employment status, as well as household composition and size of living space. There are significant concerns regarding intensified HBW, including poor work-life balance, enhanced domestic tensions and disproportionately negative impacts on those in lower socio-economic groupings. Moreover, HBW increases the proportion of time women (most often) spend on housework and childcare, reproducing and reinforcing gender roles within the new 'work-space'

We will examine in-depth this radical shift in working arrangements and how it impacts on the wellbeing and productivity of workers and their households. Using a combination of in-depth interviews with sixty participants, representing the spectrum of this novel group of homeworkers, as well as a large-scale survey, this project (Working@Home) will provide unrivalled insights into the experience of home-working for the UK population and will serve as a permanent record of the lives of citizens in this unprecedented time.

The research will be key in understanding the expectations that organisations have placed on workers, as well as the robustness of support systems that have been put in place, taking into account the rapid advancement of home working systems with almost no preparation and only limited existing support structures or expertise. The findings will provide a benchmark for the resilience of both individuals and businesses and demonstrate the potential for the robustness of the infrastructure in the return to a 'new normal' after the crisis.

In order to ensure that the findings from the project are accessible to all, we are developing a website (workingathome.org.uk) that will host up to date information on the progress of the project, details of the project team, guidance for participants as well as information regarding our webinar series. The project aims to produce guidance to individuals, organisations and policy makers on how to best manage the ongoing medical emergency from a home-working perspective as well as providing guidance for any future pandemic scenario.

Pay level risk faced by different occupations, based on ability to work from home and whether or not they are a key worker, UK, 2020. Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings.

BackgroundThe emergence of SARS-CoV-2 triggered a chain of public health responses that radically changed our way of living and working. Non-healthcare sectors, such as the logistics sector, play a key role in such responses. This research aims to qualitatively evaluate the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented in the UK logistics sector during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted nine semi-structured interviews in July-August 2020 and May-June 2021. In total 11 interviewees represented six companies occupying a range of positions in the UK's logistics sector, including takeaway food delivery, large and small goods delivery and home appliance installation, and logistics technology providers. Thematic analysis was completed using NVivo12. Codes relevant to NPIs were grouped into themes and mapped deductively onto an adapted Hierarchy of Control (HoC) framework, focusing on delivery workers. Codes relevant to the implementation process of NPIs were grouped into themes/subthemes to identify key characteristics of rapid responses, and barriers and facilitators.ResultsHoC analysis suggests the sector has implemented a wide range of risk mitigation measures, with each company developing their own portfolio of measures. Contact-free delivery was the most commonly implemented measure and perceived effective. The other implemented measures included social distancing, internal contact tracing, communication and collaboration with other key stakeholders of the sector. Process evaluation identified facilitators of rapid responses including capacity to develop interventions internally, localized government support, strong external mandates, effective communication, leadership support and financial support for self-isolation, while barriers included unclear government guidance, shortage of testing capacity and supply, high costs and diversified language and cultural backgrounds. Main sustainability issues included compliance fatigue, and the possible mental health impacts of a prolonged rapid response.ConclusionsThis research identified drivers and obstacles of rapid implementation of NPIs in response to a respiratory infection pandemic. Existing implementation process models do not consider speed to respond and the absence or lack of guidance in emergency situations such as the COVID-19. We recommend the development of a rapid response model to inform the design of effective and sustainable infection prevention and control policies and to focus future research priorities.

Revenue in the Temporary Employment Agency industry is anticipated to drop at a compound annual rate of 4% in the five years through 2024 to €236.5 billion. The COVID-19 outbreak meant key employers of temporary workers in the hospitality and tourist sector shut their doors, and companies froze hiring due to economic uncertainty - a sizeable blow to revenue in the three years through 2022. Workers on temporary contracts represented a significant chuck of employment losses in all quarters of 2020. According to Eurostat data, temporary employment declined across Europe in the four years from 2017 to 2020, dipping from 13.8% to 11.9%. Since COVID-19 has slowed, companies have resumed hiring as confidence levels have been restored and vacancy levels have soared. An increasingly tight labour market encourages employers to rely on temporary employment placement agencies to fight in an increasingly competitive market. Several countries rank highly in terms of temporary workers with a large short-term job market. In 2022, the Netherlands and Spain have more than 15% of employed people under temporary contracts, according to Eurostat. Industry revenue is expected to shrink by 1.6% in 2024. Revenue is expected to grow at an annual rate of 4.5% in the five years through 2029 to €295.4 billion. With the labour market is likely to remain tight in many countries due to skill mismatches, employers will keep turning to placement agencies for their databases to track and identify the right candidates. Companies will lean on temporary hires as the economic outlook remains unclear and inflation keeps squeezing budgets. The automation of more routine jobs will be a threat to some long-standing temporary jobs. Across Europe, countries that traditionally rely on a strong network of short-term workers are implanting policies that may disrupt or expand services. Spain has already introduced reforms that are taking effect to increase permanent positions and remove temporary contracts, while Italy is expanding its voucher scheme to encourage temporary hires.

Summary for Local Authorities: Green Belt Policy in ScotlandPolicy Framework:Green belts are designated in National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) to manage urban expansion, support regeneration, and protect settlement identity.Local Development Plans (LDPs) determine where green belts are necessary and define their boundaries.Key Purposes of Green Belts:Direct Development – Encourage sustainable growth in suitable areas.Protect Settlement Character – Maintain the landscape and identity of towns and cities.Enhance Access to Open Space – Support public amenity and environmental benefits.Development Restrictions & Exceptions:Generally, development is not permitted in green belts.Exceptions include: Agriculture, forestry, and horticulture. Essential housing for key rural workers. Outdoor recreation, tourism, and leisure activities. Infrastructure (where essential) and cemeteries. Developments must demonstrate necessity, minimise impact, and align with green belt purposes.