WP 31 - How Many Hours Do You Usually Work: an analysis of the working hours questions in 26 large-scale surveys in 6 countries and the European Union

This paper reviews how working hours are asked in 26 large-scale surveys in 6 countries plus the European Union. Four dimensions of working time were investigated, notably number of working hours, timing of work, predictability and control over hours, and commuting time. Although almost all questionnaires ask for hours worked, the terminology varies largely. In only half of the cases a reference period is taken into account and in half the reasons for working more/less in the survey week than usual are asked. Contractual hours are hardly asked and so are paid and unpaid overtime hours. The timing of work is asked in a minority of the questionnaires, and predictability and control over working hours is also not a major issue. The incidence of an on-call contract is the most likely proxy for predictability.

‘How Many Hours Do You Usually Work?’

This article reviews how working hours are asked for in 26 large-scale surveys in six countries plus the European Union. Four dimensions of working time were investigated, notably number of working hours, timing of work, predictability and control over hours, and commuting time. Although almost all questionnaires ask for hours worked, the terminology varies greatly. In only half of the cases a reference period is taken into account and in half the reasons for working more/less in the survey week than usual are asked for. Contractual hours are hardly asked for and so are paid and unpaid overtime hours. The timing of work is asked for in a minority of the questionnaires, and predictability and control over working hours is also not a major issue. The incidence of an on-call contract is the most likely proxy for predictability

Lees and Moonshine: Remembering Richard III, 1485-1635

Published version of article deposited in accordance with Sherpa Romeo guidelines. © University of Chicago Press, 2010publication-status: AcceptedNot long after Shakespeare’s birth (1564) the last witnesses to the reign of Richard III (1483-85) would have reached the end of their lives. Richard III (c. 1592) occupies a distinctive historical moment in relation to its subject – a period after the extinction of living memory, but still within the horizon of communicative memory, the period in which stories and recollections may be transmitted across multiple generations. This essay explores how memories and “postmemories” of Richard’s reign were preserved, transmitted and transformed over the course of the sixteenth century and into the seventeenth. Whilst reflecting the powerful influence of emerging contexts including the Reformation and, ultimately, Shakespeare’s play, these memories remained distinct from and sometimes at odds with textual history. They survived because they offered their bearers a resource for interpreting and resisting the predicaments of the present, from the problem of tyranny to the legacies of the Reformation

Improved health-related quality of life, participation, and autonomy in patients with treatment-resistant chronic pain after an intensive social cognitive intervention with the participation of support partners

Contains fulltext : 180440.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Heraldry and Collective Memory:A Lawsuit of Emperor Charles V against Reinoud III of Brederode

This essay traces the genesis and progress of the widely believed myth that the Dutch nobleman Reinoud III of Brederode, foolishly claiming the county of Holland for himself, was condemned to death and later pardoned by the emperor Charles V. It also demonstrates that extant legal records tell a different story: Reinoud claimed the coat of arms of Holland on his familial arms as an advised and successful attempt to enhance his lineage, in order to improve his reputation and status among the nobility of the Netherlands. Charles allowed him to do so without ever officially making the Brederode family Counts of Holland. In the process, both Reinoud and the emperor displayed shrewd negotiation and awareness of their mutual dependence as patron and client, a relationship that had been developing over several generations of Burgundians and Brederodes.</p