Changes

[[File:Spain_Workers-affiliated-to-the-Social-Security-system-during-the-first-wave-of-the-pandemic_2019-2020_map_17824_eng.jpg|left|thumb|300px|Map: Workers affiliated to the Social Security system during the first wave of the pandemic. 2019-2020. Spain. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Workers-affiliated-to-the-Social-Security-system-during-the-first-wave-of-the-pandemic_2019-2020_map_17824_eng.pdf PDF]. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Workers-affiliated-to-the-Social-Security-system-during-the-first-wave-of-the-pandemic_2019-2020_map_17824_eng.zip Data]. [//interactivo-atlasnacional.ign.es/index.php#c=indicator&i=s17824.s17824&i2=c12235.c12235&t=A02&t2=A03&view=map9 Interactive version].]]

</li>

The measures introduced by the national government to lessen the impact of lockdown went some way to lightening the drop in affiliation, yet succeeded unevenly from one province to another. The maps on affiliated workers for the period from March to June 2019 and 2020 show that the coastal provinces that rely heavily on tourism, such as Cádiz, Málaga, Alicante, Tarragona and Girona, lost between 6% and 8% of the affiliated workers, being the drop in the Balearic Islands (Illes Balears) even worse, at 11%. On the other hand, Biscay (Bizkaia), Gipuzkoa, Navarre (Navarra), Cuenca and Albacete were the least affected provinces, with falls that ranged from 0.1% to 2%. The rest of provinces saw reductions close to the national average, these being slightly higher in the south and scarcely lower in the north.

The impact also differed between sectors, with the most significant falls recorded in the construction sector (-17.08%), food and beverage services (-14.27%), administrative activities and auxiliary services (-8.91%), education (-5.24%) and transport and storage (-4.76%). The healthcare sector grew, in contrast, by 7,085 affiliated workers.

The drop in the amount of workers affiliated to the Social Security system who had temporary contracts (-17.30%) was much sharper than amongst those with permanent contracts (-1.92%). However, new contracts were signed in all regions, most of them temporary, as shown on the map on [[:File:Spain_Employment-contracts-during-the-pandemic_2019-2020_map_18159_eng.jpg| ''Employment Contracts during the pandemic'']]. This map depicts the amount of employment contracts -both temporary and permanent- registered in the National Public Employment Service throughout the first wave of the pandemic. The variation in the amount of new contracts signed in 2020 in relation to those signed in the same period in 2019 is shown on the choropleth. The downturn in the labour market explains why this variation was negative in all regions, although not to the same degree. New contracts fell the most in the Balearic Islands (Illes Balears) (-72.3%), followed by the Canary Islands (Canarias) and some regions in northern Spain, with a negative variation ranging from -50% to -60%. Andalusia (Andalucía), the Region of Valencia (Comunitat Valenciana), Aragón, Navarre (Navarra) and La Rioja registered slightly lower decreases, of -40% to -50%. Falls registered in Extremadura and Castile-La Mancha (Castilla-La Mancha) were around -30% to -40%. Only in the Region of Murcia (Región de Murcia) was the fall somewhat lower (-28.5%).}}

Many companies and public administrations could only continue their activity during lockdown in spring 2020 by allowing their employees to work from home. A previously scarcely used labour format became almost overnight a large-scale experiment to test the possibilities offered by this way of managing the production process. According to the Labour Force Survey, at least 20% of employees in Spain were in home office during this period.

Figures highlight significant differences by region and sex. From a spatial point of view, the Region of Madrid (Comunidad de Madrid) stands out, as over 30% of employees were in home office. This contrasts with the Canary Islands (Canarias), La Rioja, Navarre (Navarra) and the Region of Murcia (Región de Murcia) where only under 15% of employees worked from home. In terms of gender, more women than men were in home office in most of the regions, especially in Aragón, Extremadura and the town of Melilla.

<br>

{{ANESubirArriba}}

{{ANETextoEpigrafe|epigrafe=Registered unemployment}}

[[File:Spain_Evolution-in-registered-unemployment_2015-2020_statisticalgraph_17839_eng.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Statistical graph: Evolution in registered unemployment. 2015-2020. Spain.]]

One of the immediate effects of the health crisis on the labour market was that many people were unable to carry out the tasks they usually performed. Countless people saw their economic activity suspended by the economic shutdown following the state of alarm on 14 March, with exceptions only being made for activities that were considered ‘essential’. As restrictions were gradually loosened in May and June, some workers were able to return to work, yet many others were not. This second group included those whose companies made use of the exceptional measures put in place by the national government through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (agreed upon by employers and unions and approved in Parliament), which allowed employers to reduce working hours and even suspend contracts. Also in this group were those unable to return to work, either because the company could not withstand the temporary shutdown and folded or because the company adjusted its workforce once economy opened again, what made some employees redundant.

Other areas of economic activity within the service sector were also particularly hit, registering sharp rises in unemployment that will likely prove difficult to reverse after the return to ‘new normal life’. The

non-food retail sector, which was forced to close during the state of alarm, is one such example. The shutdown and decrease in families’ disposable income caused by the rise in unemployment utterly reduced revenues, leading to the closure of businesses and further job losses.

The labour market began to feel rapidly the impact of the pandemic short after 14 March 2020. The public administrations quickly took hefty measures to lessen the effects of lockdown for both companies and workers. One of the main priorities of Royal Decree Law 8/2020 of 17 March, on extraordinary urgent measures to reduce the economic and social impact of COVID-19, was to protect the productive and social fabric so that it could resume normal activity as soon as possible. One of the most important and effective mechanisms was Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, officially called ‘Temporary Employment Regulation Scheme’, which is a furlough-type instrument which already existed in Spanish regulation but was adapted to fit the new scenario. This instrument allowed companies to temporarily suspend an employment contract or reduce its working hours whilst keeping the employment relationship. Whilst this Scheme was in force, workers received a payment from the government to compensate for the total or partial loss of their salary. Two new furlough schemes were set, i.e. one due to force majeure and the other due to objective reasons. Both were intended to prevent lay-offs linked to uncertainty and the drop in activity caused by lockdown. The intensity and duration of the health crisis forced the public administrations to lengthen this mechanism on several occasions, to the extent that it was still in force in June 2021.

<li style="display: inline-block; vertical-align:top">

[[File:Spain_Companies-using-furlough-schemes-according-to-economic-sector_2020_statisticalgraph_17876_eng.jpg|left|thumb|300px|Statistical graph: Companies using furlough schemes according to economic sector. 2020. Spain.]]

[[File:Spain_Companies-using-furlough-schemes_2020_map_17874_eng.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Map: Companies using furlough schemes. 2020. Spain. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Companies-using-furlough-schemes_2020_map_17874_eng.pdf PDF]. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Companies-using-furlough-schemes_2020_map_17874_eng.zip Data]. [//interactivo-atlasnacional.ign.es/index.php#c=indicator&i=s17874.s17874&t=A02&view=map9 Interactive version].]]

</li>

Data on companies using Furlough Schemes, as well as on employees who received unemployment benefits as a result of being affected by this mechanism, show that the vast majority were due to force majeure and job suspension in the second quarter of 2020, with far fewer being used for objective reasons or to allow partial unemployment. The maps show that Furlough Schemes were more commonly used in areas of Spain where the local economy is largely based on the service sector, in general, and the food and beverage services, in particular.

{{ANESubirArriba}}

{{ANETextoEpigrafe|epigrafe=Unemployment, poverty and social protection}}

[[File:Spain_Households-with-no-income_2019-2020_map_17855_eng.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Map: Households with no income. 2019-2020. Spain. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Households-with-no-income_2019-2020_map_17855_eng.pdf PDF]. [//centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/aneTematico/Spain_Households-with-no-income_2019-2020_map_17855_eng.zip Data]. Interactive versions [//interactivo-atlasnacional.ign.es/index.php#c=indicator&i=c12273.c12273&t=A02&view=map10 1] [//interactivo-atlasnacional.ign.es/index.php#c=indicator&i=c12274.c12274&t=A02&view=map10 2].]]

[[File:Spain_Evolution-in-the-amount-of-households-where-all-active-members-are-unemployed_2005-2020_statisticalgraph_18364_eng.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Statistical graph: Evolution in the amount of households where all active members are unemployed. 2005-2020. Spain.]]

The first estimates of the impact of the pandemic on economy in Europe confirm that poverty rate is increasing in many states. In spite of the emergency measures put in force by the governments, the current situation is breeding a rise in income disparities between states and reducing the social and territorial cohesion of the continent. States in the south, and Spain in particular, have fewer jobs that may be carried out using home office, yet those who may work from home tend to be more qualified and have higher salaries than in other central European states. In addition, fewer medium and low-skilled jobs were deemed as being ‘essential’ in southern European states, suggesting that the impact of the pandemic on lower-income households was more significant than in other states.

Comparing the months of May 2019 and May 2020 reveals a remarkable rise in the amount of people claiming unemployment benefits throughout Spain, especially by those affected by furloughs (see the map on [[:File:Spain_Beneficiaries-of-unemployment-benefits_2019-2020_map_17873_eng.jpg|''Beneficiaries of unemployment benefits'']]). However, significant differences may be observed in the regional coverage rates (see the map on [[:File:Spain_Coverage-of-unemployment-benefits_2019-2020_map_17871_eng.jpg|''Coverage of unemployment benefits'']]), which measure the ratio of beneficiaries of unemployment benefits to unemployed. The coverage of unemployment benefits increased in the northern and eastern regions, whilst it reduced in some southern regions, especially Extremadura and Andalusia (Andalucía).

The effects of the pandemic revealed more quickly and were more harmful for more vulnerable households, according to the quarterly data from the Labour Force Survey. Both the graph on the [[:File:Evolution in the amount of households.jpg|''Evolution in the amount of households'']] where all active members are unemployed and the graph on the [[:File:Spain_Evolution-in-the-amount-of-households-with-no-income_2005-2020_statisticalgraph_17864_eng.jpg|''Evolution in the amount of households with no income'']] show that the second quarter of 2020 marked a clear change in trend with respect to the one observed since 2014.

This change in direction entails an increased risk of unemployment, which is much greater for those who live in vulnerable households. The poorest households saw their income drop by a third in the initial months of the pandemic, especially if their members came from ‘informal employment’. This caused a rapid rise in the amount of households living in severe poverty, especially amongst those with dependent minors. The percentage of households with no income, whether due to lack of work or to not having received benefits, increased by almost 20% from the last quarter of 2019 to the second quarter of 2020. However, it shall be pointed out that this rise was nearly double as much for households with dependent minors (37%). Therefore, the economic impact of lockdown seems to have been significantly more severe in households with dependent minors, the long-term consequences of which are an issue of major concern.

The ‘Regional Minimum Incomes’ granted by the regional public administrations were until June 2020 the only public policies designed to cover the risk of extreme poverty. For several decades, the geographical coverage of this benefit has been very heterogeneous. In average, these benefits reached 17% of households at risk of poverty throughout Spain in 2019. However, whilst in some regions, such as the Basque Country (Euskadi/País Vasco) and Navarre (Navarra), all households with income below the poverty line were covered, in others, such as Castile–La Mancha (Castilla–La Mancha) and Andalusia (Andalucía), this benefit reached under 10% of them. In addition to this regional inequality, the Spanish minimum income model suffered from a low protective capacity and minimal coverage. With the onset of the COVID-19 health crisis, new measures were put in place to protect households living in extreme poverty. Indirect support mechanisms were developed and the regulations were revised to prevent the withdrawal of basic utilities due to non-payment (electricity, gas, water and telecommunications). Electricity rate subsidies were extended to a wider range of social groups, and automatic moratoria on mortgage payments and various aids to vulnerable tenants were introduced. The main problem was the delay in granting them, which probably made them less effective. It is important to point out that these were emergency and needed transitory measures not intended to solve long-term structural problems.

However, granting this benefit to the population for which it is intended is proving to be a slow and challenging process, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of this policy. The initial results indicate that several Andalusian provinces concentrate the highest amount of national Minimum Subsistence Income beneficiaries, i.e. Cádiz, Seville (Sevilla), Granada, Almería and Jaén. However, analysing the percentage of households receiving benefits with an income below 40% of the median (i.e. those at risk of severe poverty), draws a very different picture. For example, in Castile and León (Castilla y León) and Navarre (Navarra), over 20% of potential beneficiaries received the benefit, whilst this figure was only 7% for Catalonia (Catalunya/Cataluña).

<div><ul style="text-align: center">

</li>

</ul></div>