Looking at the output of the survey, and in particular, the average wage and work hours, the results appear to be in line with the law. However, by carefully reading the statistics, a more alarming phenomenon can be recognized:
31% of interviewees belong to the group of graduated architects (holding a master or higher degree) working under an internship agreement or subjected to under-the-table agreements involving no contract.
By focusing on the particulars of this 31%, one discovers that the great majority (86%) of architects have completed at least one or more years of work experience in the field of architecture. This represents the most controversial finding of the survey, since it underlines a growing trend, which is the weakening of the power of labor.
Within the realm of architectural practices (from one-man companies up to multinationals) there exists a need to re-define contractual conditions and methods/modalities of practice in order to re-establish the dignity of the workers.
In a moment of economic, political and cultural crisis it is unlikely to secure workers by adopting traditional means.
Assuming it is impossible for the labor market to provide stability, being flexible remains the way to go for most of the companies.
However, what should a worker do? Is it possible for a worker to achieve a (/n economic) balance by means of flexibility?!
How can a person provide for his/her future when having to jump from one temporary contract to another , quite possibly incurring long periods of unemployment?