Young people's experiences of precarious and flexible work – Main Report
The research report presents findings on young people's experiences of precarious and flexible work. These work conditions included where young people had for example zero hours contracts, low wages, lack of progression opportunities, dissatisfaction with current employment, or varying hours.
Appendix E – Profile of respondents
A1. Qualitative sample profile
Overall ten focus groups were conducted across Scotland with 16-24 year olds in employment. The locations and number of respondents included in the qualitative research is shown in Table A2.
| Location | No. of focus groups | No. of respondents across both groups | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dundee | 2 | 17 | Urban = 16 Rural = 1 | Top 20% SIMD area = 8 Not Top 20% SIMD = 9 |
| Glasgow | 2 | 15 | Urban = 12 Rural = 3 | Top 20% SIMD area = 3 Not Top 20% SIMD = 12 |
| Edinburgh | 2 | 12 | Urban = 12 Rural = 0 | Top 20% SIMD area = 2 Not Top 20% SIMD = 10 |
| Peterhead | 2 | 12 | Urban = 9 Rural = 3 | Top 20% SIMD area = 4 Not Top 20% SIMD = 8 |
| Galashiels | 2 | 10 | Urban = 0 Rural = 10 | Top 20% SIMD area = 0 Not Top 20% SIMD = 10 |
| Total: | 10 | 66 |
The sample profile of each focus group is shown in the following tables.
| Gender | Age | Industry Sector | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females = 8 Males = 9 | 16 yrs = 1 17 yrs = 4 18 yrs = 3 20 yrs = 1 22 yrs = 2 23 yrs = 2 24 yrs = 4 | Hotels and restaurants = 5 Retail = 4 Healthcare = 3 Business services = 2 Construction = 2 Manufacturing = 1 | Urban = 16 Rural = 1 | Top 20% SIMD area = 8 Not Top 20% SIMD = 9 |
| Total Respondents: 17 | ||||
| Gender | Age | Industry Sector | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females = 9 Males = 6 | 16 yrs = 3 17 yrs = 1 18 yrs = 1 19 yrs = 2 20 yrs = 1 22 yrs = 3 23 yrs = 3 24 yrs = 1 | Hotels and restaurants = 7 Retail = 1 Business services = 2 Financial services = 1 Arts and other services = 1 Other = 3 | Urban = 12 Rural = 3 | Top 20% SIMD area = 3 Not Top 20% SIMD = 12 |
| Total Respondents: 15 | ||||
| Gender | Age | Industry Sector | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females = 6 Males = 6 | 16 yrs = 2 18 yrs = 2 19 yrs = 3 20 yrs = 2 21 yrs = 1 22 yrs = 1 23 yrs = 1 | Hotels and restaurants = 4 Retail = 2 Healthcare = 3 Business services = 1 Construction = 1 Other = 1 | Urban = 12 Rural = 0 | Top 20% SIMD area = 2 Not Top 20% SIMD = 10 |
| Total Respondents: 12 | ||||
| Gender | Age | Industry Sector | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females = 5 Males = 7 | 16 yrs = 1 17 yrs = 4 18 yrs = 1 20 yrs = 4 21 yrs = 2 | Hotels and restaurants = 2 Retail = 5 Healthcare = 1 Agriculture, fisheries, mining and utilities = 2 Other = 2 | Urban = 9 Rural = 3 | Top 20% SIMD area = 4 Not Top 20% SIMD = 8 |
| Total Respondents: 12 | ||||
| Gender | Age | Industry Sector | Urban/Rural | SIMD Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females = 7 Males = 3 | 16 yrs = 1 17 yrs = 1 18 yrs = 2 19 yrs = 3 21 yrs = 1 22 yrs = 1 24 yrs = 1 | Hotels and restaurants = 4 Retail = 2 Agriculture, fisheries, mining and utilities = 2 Education = 1 Manufacturing = 1 | Urban = 0 Rural = 10 | Top 20% SIMD area = 0 Not Top 20% SIMD = 10 |
| Total Respondents: 10 | ||||
At each location one focus group was with 16-19 year olds and one focus group was with 20-24 year olds. A good mix of age, gender, urban/rural locations and types of employment was included in the sample. Job types included a wide range of occupations.
The 6-fold urban / rural classification was used to identify and monitor the type of area respondents lived in. This was then grouped into urban and rural (includes accessible/remote towns).
SIMD16 quintiles were used to identify and monitor the proportion of respondents that lived in the 20% most deprived areas and those that didn't.
A2. Quantitative Sample Profile
Tables A8 to A12 below show the survey respondents' demographic profile. Quota sampling was used to ensure that a representative sample of 16-24 year olds across Scotland was achieved. Quotas were set against age, gender and location. There was limited published data on 16-24 year olds in Scotland who are employed, therefore different sources were used to determine the proportion of interviews needed across each of the different variables.
Table A8 shows the proportion of interviews achieved across each location compared to the breakdown for the Scottish population. The proportion of interviews conducted in each area accurately reflects the Scottish population statistics for 16-24 year olds.
| Location | Total Sample | Target – Based on % of Scottish population of 16-24 year olds[4] |
|---|---|---|
| Central Scotland | 9% | 9% |
| Glasgow | 14% | 14% |
| Highlands & Islands | 8% | 8% |
| Lothians | 19% | 18% |
| Mid Scotland & Fife | 13% | 12% |
| North East Scotland | 14% | 14% |
| South Scotland | 12% | 13% |
| West Scotland | 12% | 12% |
| Base: All | 1,043 | 100% |
Labour Force Survey data (ONS, 2018) showed that there is a higher proportion of 20-24 year olds employed across Scotland than 16-19 year olds, therefore quotas were set to reflect this in the final sample. The final sample achieved had a slightly higher proportion of 16-19 year olds than the target; however a checking process was carried out on the data to ensure this difference did not impact on the overall findings. The checking process involved weighting the full data set by the target age split of 16-19 and 20-24 year olds, to show what the results would have been had the correct proportion of age groups been achieved. This weighted data was compared against the unweighted data and no difference in results was found, it was concluded that this slight difference in age split has had no impact on the overall findings, and the unweighted data has been used in the report. The proportion of males and females in the sample reflect the profile of employed 16-24 year olds across Scotland; 52% of males and 48% of females (see Table A9).
| Age | Total Sample | Target – Based on % of employed 16-24 year olds in Scotland[5] |
|---|---|---|
| 16 – 19 years old | 30% | 26% |
| 20 – 24 years old | 70% | 74% |
| Gender | ||
| Male (Incl. trans man) | 52% | 53% |
| Female (Incl. trans woman) | 48% | 47% |
| Base: all | 1,043 | 100% |
The respondent's ethnicity was also captured and the overall sample included 4% from an ethnic minority group (see Table A10).
| Ethnicity | Total Sample | Target – Based on % of Scottish population of 16-24 year olds[6] |
|---|---|---|
| White | 96% | 94% |
| Other Ethnic group – Mixed, Asian, Asian Scottish, Asian British, African | 4% | 6% |
| Base: all | 1,043 | 100% |
It was also important to ensure that the final sample was reflective of the study population in terms of the area in which they live, however, achieving set quotas on this can be challenging alongside other criteria (e.g. gender, age, etc. as per the above). Therefore, whether respondents were living in an urban or rural location, or were identified as living in the 20% most deprived areas were left to fall out of the sampling naturally. The results were monitored throughout the fieldwork period to ensure the final data set was reflective of the Scottish population. The final data set is reflective of the Scottish population of 16-24 year olds (see Table A11).
| Urban / Rural location | Total Sample (Excl. unclassified post codes) |
Target Based on % of Scottish population of 16-24 year olds[7] |
|---|---|---|
| Large / Other Urban areas | 73% | 75% |
| Accessible / Remote towns or rural areas | 27% | 25% |
| Base: all (excl. unclassified postcodes) | 830 | 100% |
| Top 20% SIMD area Not Top 20% SIMD area | Total Sample (Excl. unclassified postcodes) |
Target Based on % of Scottish population[8] |
| Most deprived quintile | 24% | 20% |
| Other four quintiles | 76% | 80% |
| Base: all (excl. unclassified postcodes) | 824 | 100% |
All respondents included in the research were either currently employed or had been employed in the last 24 months. The majority of the sample (84%) were currently employed, with 16% not working at the time of the fieldwork but had worked in the previous 24 months.
Just under half (46%) of the sample were in either full time or part time education. Just over half (54%) were not financially independent and relied on family members or someone else to cover their living expenses (Table A12). This was much higher for the younger age-group, with 83% of 16-19 year olds not financially independent. The qualitative findings suggested that those in education and/or not financially independent were less concerned about their contract or working conditions than those who were not in education and/or financially responsible for their own living expenses.
A minority (12%) had someone who was financially dependent on them and this was skewed towards the 20-24 year olds.
| Employment status | Total Sample |
|---|---|
| Currently working | 84% |
| Not currently working but worked in the last 24 months | 16% |
| Education status | |
| Full-time education | 37% |
| Part-time education | 9% |
| Not in education | 55% |
| Financial dependence | |
| Yes I am responsible for my own living expenses, bills, food etc. | 45% |
| No I am dependent on family members/someone else to cover my living expenses, bills, food etc. | 54% |
| Base: all | 1,043 |
As quota controls guided the sample selection, precise margins of error or significance testing are not appropriate, as the sampling type is non-probability. The margins of error outlined below for the sub-groups are therefore indicative, based on an equivalent probability sample.
| Sub-groups | Sample size | Margins of error 95% confidence level |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| 16-19 year olds | 313 | ±1.1% and ±5.5% |
| 20-24 year olds | 730 | ±0.7% and ±3.6% |
| Education | ||
| In education | 474 | ±0.9% and ±4.5% |
| Not in education | 569 | ±0.8% and ±4.1% |
| Financial dependence | ||
| Financially dependent | 466 | ±0.9% and ±4.5% |
| Financially independent | 566 | ±0.8% and ±4.1% |
Contact
Email: youngpersonguar@gov.scot
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback