This chapter discusses ways to enhance labour market mobility and incentivise the participation of older workers in the mid-to-late career in Czechia. The chapter first looks at a range of structural barriers to mobility, including work incentives posed by the unemployment insurance and tax system, and labour market regulation, such as employment protection legislation. It then considers enabling factors such as the role of flexible working arrangements and flexible pathways to retirement to enhance career progression and good mobility among both men and women later in working life. Finally, the chapter highlights supporting factors to improve participation of older women in particular, such as care services.
Promoting Better Career Mobility for Longer Working Lives in Czechia
Abstract
Key messages
Structural barriers to labour market mobility in the Czech labour market limit career progression opportunities for older workers. These include financial incentives for moving jobs, such as the design of unemployment insurance, as well as the lack of labour market flexibility. Czechia is currently implementing a number of labour market reforms designed to increase mobility for all age groups.
For older workers, adequate financial support during job search periods is key to incentivise mobility. More generous unemployment benefits can enable workers to find better-quality jobs while maintaining an adequate income, though excessively high levels of support can disincentivise job search. In Czechia, almost one in five households (18%) would fall below the poverty line if its highest-earning member left employment to search for a job and received unemployment benefits, with this share doubling (36%) among households with children.
Czechia is undertaking a promising reform to unemployment insurance to increase labour market mobility. Short-term support during unemployment will be substantially increased, with replacement rates of 80% for the first two months of unemployment. Support will be more generous for workers older than 52, with benefits at 80% for three months. The duration of unemployment benefit support will remain unchanged and is very low in OECD comparison, at five months for workers under 52, eight months for those aged between 52 and 57, and 11 months for those older than 57.
The tax and benefit system also has a significant impact on labour market participation. Moves into employment are disincentivised by high tax wedges on incomes for low and secondary earners, driven by high social security contributions and tax and cash benefits for families.
Excessively high levels of employment protection are a barrier to mobility for older workers. Czechia has the highest level of employment protection in the OECD. Age‑specific employment regulation does not exist, and provisions become stricter with tenure only to a limited extent. Recent reforms have increased flexibility to a degree, but changes are rather minor.
Self-employment can enable labour market participation for older workers, but there are concerns about its quality in Czechia. Self-employment is financially advantageous due to tax incentives and widespread, with 17.5% of workers aged 50‑64 self-employed and close to 15% working as own-account workers. A significant share of self-employment does not appear to be genuine, though precise data does not exist.
Access to flexible work is crucial to enable labour market participation of workers as they age, but is very limited in Czechia. The rate of part-time work is one of the lowest in the OECD, and access to flexible working arrangements more generally is rare. Work agreements, which enable short-term or part-time work outside of the standard employment relationship, are common. However, they continue to be associated with limited social protection and employment rights, despite recent reforms. There have been other initiatives to increase access to flexible work, including financial incentives for employers to offer part-time work and the introduction of job sharing, but progress is slow.
Flexibility is also limited for workers as they near the retirement age. Work can be combined flexibly with pensions post-retirement, and a high share of pensioners continue working at the start of pension receipt (27.7%). However, access to flexible arrangements is lacking before the retirement age.
Gender inequalities in the labour market are pronounced throughout the life course. Long periods of inactivity related to childbirth and caregiving limit job quality and career progression opportunities throughout the rest of the career. Parental leave in Czechia remains one of the most generous in the OECD, despite recent reforms, while access to childcare and adult care services is very limited.
Against this background, Czechia should consider taking action to:
1. Carefully monitor the effects of the recent unemployment insurance reform. While the reform is promising, its effect on labour market mobility needs to be carefully evaluated, including the differential provisions for older jobseekers. This should also include consideration of whether the maximum duration of unemployment benefit support is sufficient to enable high-quality job matches.
2. Reform the tax and benefit system to incentivise the participation of low and secondary earners. The tax wedge for low and secondary incomes should be decreased, for instance by lowering social security contributions.
3. Incentivise good labour market mobility by reforming employment protection while decreasing structural incentives for self-employment. Further reforms to decrease employment protection for regular contracts should be considered. Tax regimes for the self-employed and employees should be aligned to limit incentives for dependent self-employment.
4. Increase access to flexible work arrangements in high-quality jobs. Recent initiatives to increase access to flexible work should be continued and carefully evaluated. The introduction of a right to request flexible work for all workers should be considered. On the basis of new monitoring, the regulation of work agreements should be carefully reviewed and further alignment with regular contracts should be considered. Access to phased retirement should be promoted for older workers.
5. Remove barriers to women’s labour market participation and career progression. Parental leave should be reformed to shorten its overall duration and increase incentives for fathers to take up leave. Care services need to be strengthened significantly, including both early childhood education and care and adult care services.
Czechia has very low levels of labour market mobility, which decrease further with age (see Chapter 1). Low levels of mobility in the labour market limit opportunities for older workers to transition into new and better-quality employment opportunities. In Czechia, structural labour market barriers play an important role in creating disincentives for workers, particularly with advancing age, to change jobs. This includes the level of unemployment benefits, the design of the tax system and the strictness of employment protection legislation (Causa et al., 2022[1]). In response to this, the Czech Government is currently pursuing a strategy for adjusting incentives and enhancing mobility through structural reforms, chiefly relying on increased generosity of unemployment insurance combined with greater flexibilisation of the labour market.
2.1.1. Increased levels of unemployment benefits could enable more workers, particularly at older ages, to move jobs
Financial support, particularly through unemployment insurance, can play a key role in enabling workers to search for and move to new and good quality jobs as they age. Against the background of substantial financial vulnerability of many Czech workers, the government is currently undertaking a significant reform of unemployment insurance to increase labour market mobility.
Unemployment benefits in Czechia are too low to allow workers to switch to good quality jobs
Evidence suggests that more generous unemployment benefits are associated with higher levels of job-to-job transitions and improved wages upon re‑employment, as they enable workers to look for better-quality jobs while maintaining an adequate income (Causa et al., 2022[1]; Nekoei and Weber, 2017[2]). This reduction in the financial risk associated with job transitions can incentivise labour market mobility (Sjöberg, 2007[3]). For older workers with established labour market careers, who may consider mobility more of a risk than younger workers, sufficient financial support during a job search period could be a significant incentive to move jobs.
However, if unemployment insurance is excessively generous for a prolonged amount of time, job search efforts and a return to employment can be disincentivised, paving the way into retirement for older workers (Causa et al., 2022[1]; OECD, 2024[4]). Higher generosity of unemployment benefits at one year of unemployment is associated with a lower likelihood of voluntary job mobility at older ages (OECD, 2024[4]). Unemployment benefit schemes therefore need to be carefully balanced to ensure that they provide sufficient support to incentivise mobility while maintaining job search effort.
In Czechia, limited financial resources are a significant barrier to job mobility in Czechia. According to survey data, 75% of employees could afford to look for a job for a maximum of three months, with 25% being able to afford only one month of job search, and a further 24% being able to afford two (MOLSA, 2024[5]). Thirty-six percent have financial reserves that would last one month or less in case of job loss (Ibid.).
Unemployment benefit levels in Czechia are too low to protect workers from financial vulnerability. Estimates suggest that almost one in five households (18%) would fall below the poverty line if its highest-earning member left employment to search for a job and received unemployment benefits, with this share significantly higher (36%) among households with children (MOLSA, 2024[6]). In addition, the duration of unemployment benefits is very low in international comparison. Across a sample of 33 OECD countries, the average duration of unemployment benefits at age 40 was 17 months in 2020, compared to only five months in Czechia (OECD, 2023[7]). The financial vulnerability associated with unemployment can be a significant deterrent to labour market mobility, by disincentivizing workers from entering unemployment temporarily while searching for a new job. In addition, unemployed workers may be more inclined to accept a job faster, regardless of job quality or the job-worker match.
Planned reforms to unemployment insurance are a promising avenue to increase mobility at older ages, but need to be monitored carefully
With the aim of increasing mobility in the labour market, Czechia is currently undertaking a major reform of its unemployment benefit system, to come into effect on 1 January 2026. While the total duration of unemployment benefit receipt will not change, support will be more generous than previously in the first months of unemployment, and somewhat less generous than before in later months. Under the old system, jobseekers under 50 received unemployment benefits for five months, with replacement rates of 65% of average previous monthly net earnings for two months, then 50% for a further two months, and 45% for one month. The replacement rate during the first two months will now be increased to 80%. This would place unemployment benefits during the first two months of unemployment among the most generous in the OECD, in terms of replacement rates (Figure 2.1). The maximum amount of unemployment benefit will also be significantly increased, from 58% of the average wage to 80%. Support will decrease to 50% for the next two months, as previously, then further decrease to 40% (rather than 45%) for another month. Significantly, the amount of unemployment benefit will be independent of whether individuals voluntarily resign or are let go, in contrast to the previous scheme. In addition, support for retraining of jobseekers will be more generous, increasing to 80% from 60%.
Net unemployment benefit replacement rates at two months of unemployment, 2024
Note: Net replacement rates give the share of previous net income replaced by unemployment benefits for a single person with previous earnings at the average full-time wage in the 2nd month of registered unemployment. Calculations are for a 55‑year‑old single person without children who has been continuously employed since the age of 18 in full-time employment. Rates for a 40‑year‑old are identical except for Latvia, Switzerland and Finland with rates lower by 6.9, 1.8 and 0.7 percentage points respectively. OECD is an unweighted average of the 34 countries shown.
Source: OECD tax-benefit model.Model version 2.7.1 (accessed 10 April 2025).
In line with the old system, unemployment benefit support will be more generous for older individuals. Previously, the older unemployed were entitled to unemployment benefits for a longer time period, of eight months total between ages 50 and 55, and 11 months for those older than 55. This will continue to be the case, though the age boundaries have been raised to 52 and 57. In addition, the older unemployed will receive more generous support for longer, with three months of unemployment benefits at 80% and 50% replacement rates each, rather than two.
Given the high level of financial vulnerability of workers in Czechia, the unemployment benefit reform has potential for increasing job mobility and enabling older workers to move into higher-quality employment, by significantly increasing short-term financial support for job search. At the same time, the duration of unemployment benefit support remains very low compared to other OECD countries, particularly for younger and mid-career workers. This limits potential work disincentives associated with taking up employment, but also means that unemployment remains quite risky for jobseekers. The effects of the unemployment benefit reform will have to be monitored and evaluated carefully, including the effects of relatively more generous provisions for older unemployed, to ensure they do not serve as a disincentive for re‑employment and lead to labour market withdrawal for older workers (Flek, Hála and Mysíková, 2020[8]). In addition, changes to unemployment benefits cannot happen in isolation. The success of the policy strategy will rely on other measures, including adjustments to employment protection (Section 2.2) and high-quality active labour market policies to provide jobseekers with job search and upskilling support, including investing in the capacity of the public employment service (PES), which is currently lacking (see Chapter 3).
2.1.2. High tax wedges on low and secondary incomes discourage mobility
The tax and benefit system also plays a significant role in creating financial incentives to take up employment or move jobs. OECD research has shown that higher levels of labour tax wedges – the ratio between the amount of taxes paid by workers and total labour cost for employers – can depress both inactive‑to-job mobility and job-to-job mobility (Causa et al., 2022[1]). In particular, employment tends to be sensitive to tax wedges at the bottom of the income distribution, affecting both labour demand by firms and labour supply by workers (Ibid.).
In Czechia, the effective taxation of low incomes is rather high, which creates disincentives to move into employment. Tax wedges on low incomes are high in Czechia, even more so for workers who are the second earner (
Figure 2.2, Panel B). In 2023, the tax wedge for a single person earning 67% of the average wage was 38%, significantly higher than the OECD rate (31%). Tax wedges are also very high for secondary earners, both when they are on low and average incomes. For a second earner with two children earning 67% of the average wage, tax wedges are even higher, at 51%, one of the highest rates in the OECD.
The high level of labour tax wedges on low and secondary incomes is a significant deterrent to labour market mobility in Czechia. High tax wedges are driven by high social security contributions, as well as the loss of cash and tax benefits for second earners who take up employment (OECD, 2025[9]). Taking action to decrease the tax wedge at the bottom of the wage distribution and for second earners by reducing social security contributions and revising family benefits could increase work incentives and mobility.
Note: The principal earner in the two‑earner married couple works at 100% of the average wage (AW).
Source: OECD (2025[9]), OECD Economic Surveys: Czechia 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/7a70af5c-en, Figure 1.10.
Reforms to increase financial incentives for labour market mobility rely on the labour market being sufficiently flexible to enable such mobility. In Czechia, the labour market exhibits significant structural inflexibility for regular contracts. High levels of employment protection can inhibit mobility, including for mid-career and older workers. Though the government is aiming to increase flexibility in the labour market as part of its mobility strategy, significant structural barriers remain. At the same time, there is a high prevalence of self-employment among older workers, partially substituting for regular employment contracts. While self-employment could be beneficial for older workers in theory, there are concerns about its quality.
2.2.1. High employment protection limits mobility for older workers
Employment protection legislation plays an essential role in safeguarding job security and incentivizing workplace skills investment, but needs to be carefully designed to limit negative effects on labour market flexibility and dynamism (OECD, 2020[10]). Excessively high employment protection can negatively affect labour market mobility by both decreasing worker incentives for changing jobs and reducing firm incentives to hire (OECD, 2025[9]). More stringent protection on regular contracts is associated with both lower levels of job-to-job mobility and lower levels of mobility from unemployment into jobs, particularly among lower-educated workers (Causa et al., 2022[1]).
Excessively rigid employment protection which disincentivises hiring can be harmful for under-represented labour market groups, including older workers (OECD, 2019[11]). Higher levels of employment protection have strong negative effects on voluntary job mobility at older ages (OECD, 2024[4]). Employment protection legislation may be particularly harmful when special provisions apply for older workers, such as increased severance pay or longer notice period (OECD, 2019[11]). While these provisions can protect older employed workers from layoffs, they disincentivise hiring and may cause employers to substitute for workers from other age groups (Vodopivec et al., 2019[12]; Behaghel, Crépon and Sédillot, 2008[13]) Most OECD countries have moved away from stricter employment protection provisions for older workers, but many have provisions on severance pay and notice periods that increase with tenure (OECD, 2024[4]).
Czechia has the highest overall level of employment protection on regular contracts in the OECD (Figure 2.3). While tenure‑based differentiations exist, they are rather limited. The notice period is the same (two months) for workers of all ages. Severance pay amounts to average monthly earnings for workers who have been employed for less than a year, twice monthly earnings if they were employed between one and two years, and three times average earnings for all with tenure of more than two years. In comparison, on average across the OECD, severance pay for workers with 20 years tenure is seven times as high as that for workers with nine months tenure (OECD, 2020[10]).
While tenure‑based provisions on employment protection are limited in Czechia, the overall level of employment protection is very high at all ages, limiting incentives for workers to transition and for firms to hire. To increase mobility in the labour market, adjustments to employment protection for increased flexibility are needed (OECD, 2025[9]). In particular, combining relatively long notice periods with lower severance pay can help smooth job transitions while limiting costs for employers and employees (OECD, 2020[10]).
As part of its labour market mobility strategy, Czechia is taking action to increase labour market flexibility, including by making adjustments to the protection of regular employment contracts. Notice periods will start earlier, on the day the other party is informed, and will be reduced to one month instead of two in case of a breach of discipline or non-compliance with requirements. While this means that termination of employment will be more flexible in specific cases, for instance when employees are breaking the law, it will remain the same in most aspects. As such, further reforms to employment protection legislation could be envisioned.
Employment protection legislation (regular contracts), 2019
2.2.2. Self-employment is widespread among older workers, but there are concerns about its quality
Self-employment can be beneficial for older workers, provided that it is of high quality. Self-employment is associated with greater autonomy and flexibility, which workers may increasingly value as they age (Moulton and Scott, 2014[14]; Eurofound, 2025[15]). By enabling greater freedom in managing the latter part of one’s career, self-employment can constitute a bridge to retirement while potentially enabling longer participation (Halvorsen and Morrow-Howell, 2016[16]). However, self-employment is also associated with increased risk compared to regular employment, due to lower levels of employment rights and social protection associated with it, and research suggests that the quality of self-employment at old ages can vary substantially (Moulton and Scott, 2014[14]). For some older workers, self-employment may not be a choice, but rather an economic necessity driven by lack of access to regular employment opportunities (Patel, 2025[17]; Eurofound, 2025[15]).
Strengthening opportunities to move into good-quality self-employment for older workers is a concern for policy makers in Czechia. The Ministry of Industry and Trade is currently supporting the research project Entrepreneurship as a Second Career, which investigates the socio‑economic impact of entrepreneurship for workers older than 40 in Czechia, and identifies barriers and support factors for entrepreneurship at older ages (Bočková, 2024[18]). The project will develop strategic recommendations for supporting entrepreneurship in the age category 40+, to feed into national policy strategies such as the Czech SME strategy and the work of entrepreneurship support centres.
A high share of older workers in Czechia is self-employed
Many older workers are self-employed in Czechia, and a high share are own-account workers i.e. self-employed without any employees (Figure 2.4). In 2023, 17.5% of Czech workers aged 50‑64 were self-employed, compared to an EU rate of 16.5%. Notably, a large share of self-employed are not employers. Close to 15% of employed workers aged 50‑64 in Czechia are own-account workers, one of the highest shares amongst European OECD countries and more than 3 percentage points higher than the EU27 rate (10.9%).
Share of self-employed and own account workers in total employment by age, 2023
Source: OECD calculations based on the Eurostat dataset: Employment by sex, age, professional status and full-time/part-time (1000).
Self-employment in Czechia is not always genuine, and may inhibit transitions into regular, better-quality jobs
There are significant concerns about the quality of self-employment in Czechia. In particular, some self-employed appear to be bogus self-employed i.e. not genuinely self-employed. Under the so-called “svarc system” (švarc systém), employer-employee relations are based on a person acting as an independent entrepreneur and not being defined as an employee in legal terms (Strielkowski, 2013[19]). The purpose of the system is to divert taxation from dependent to independent employment. Bogus self-employment is illegal in Czechia, but uncovering cases in practice is rare (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]). Efforts to quantify the prevalence of bogus self-employment are underway, but currently, precise estimates do not exist. However, the practice appears to be common, particularly in sectors such as construction, manufacturing and accommodation and gastronomy (Strielkowski, 2013[19]).
Structural incentives for self-employment exist on both the employer and worker side in Czechia (Strielkowski, 2013[19]; Radvan, 2016[21]). Employers benefit financially from hiring workers as independent contractors, as they do not have to pay social insurance contributions (Radvan, 2016[21]). In addition, rigid employment protection further incentivises hiring on non-regular, potentially lower-quality contracts (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]). Workers can also benefit from self-employed status, as personal income tax is significantly lower due to the application of flat-rate expenses (Finardi and Melicharová, 2022[22]). These can amount to between 30% and 80% of overall gross income, depending on occupation (OECD, 2023[23]). Moreover, the tax base for social security contributions of the self-employed is only 50% of net income, lowering the overall contributions of self-employed workers relative to the employed significantly (OECD, 2023[23]).
While employees working under the svarc system may have financial benefits, their job quality is significantly lower, as they are not entitled to paid holidays or other benefits that employees receive (Strielkowski, 2013[19]). The high prevalence of self-employment, not all of which is genuine, may limit opportunities for workers to move into better-quality, regular employment. In addition, for the state, significant negative impacts on tax and social security contributions are the result. Estimates suggest that lost personal income tax and social security contributions could amount to CZK 14.4 billion (Finardi and Melicharová, 2022[22]). Reforms are therefore needed to reduce structural incentives for self-employment. In addition to reforms to employment protection legislations, this means aligning taxation more equally between employees and the self-employed, as well as adjusting the tax base for social insurance contributions of the self-employed.
While structural conditions play an important role in increasing mobility and job quality, they are only one piece of the puzzle. Access to flexible working arrangements in high-quality jobs can address the needs of workers with specific needs or those with caring obligations, particularly women. Flexibility before and after retirement age can also smooth the transition to retirement and enable longer labour force participation. However, to meet the needs of older women in particular, access to flexible working arrangements needs to be combined with policies that incentivise and enable greater female participation, including well-designed parental leave and high-quality care services.
2.3.1. Lack of access to flexible work arrangements impedes the participation of men and women as they age
As workers age, preferences may change, and evidence suggests that flexible work increasingly becomes a priority (OECD, 2024[4]). For instance, part-time work, if not associated with moves into lower-quality work, can offer valuable flexibility by enabling the reconciliation of work with family responsibilities or health needs (OECD, 2024[4]). However, flexible working arrangements also extend beyond part-time work, including for instance flexible schedules, remote work, and job sharing arrangements.
Access to flexible work arrangements is limited in Czechia
Access to flexible work arrangements is low in Czechia, despite the fact that legislation allows for the negotiation of shorter and flexible working arrangements (Martiníková, Krügerová and Petrová, 2022[24]). The rate of part-time work in Czechia is one of the lowest in the OECD (Chapter 1). This reflects a general trend in Central and Eastern European countries, where employers do not commonly offer part-time work (Beham et al., 2019[25]).
There are several factors driving the limited availability of part-time work in Czechia. From an employer perspective, part-time work is administratively and organisationally more costly, and employers have reservations with regard to limited productivity and effectiveness of part-time workers (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]; Martiníková, Krügerová and Petrová, 2022[24]). On the other hand, from an employee perspective, incentives to take up part-time work are limited given low overall wage levels and the low income associated with part-time work (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]). This is further reinforced by the high tax wedges on low income (Section 2.1.). In addition, part-time jobs in Czechia are often of rather low quality, with poor working conditions and limited opportunities for career progression (Marková, 2016[26]; Němcová, 2014[27])
Beyond part-time work, access to other flexible working arrangements is also limited in Czechia. Levels of working time flexibility offered by employers are rather low relative to the rest of Europe, in line with general trends in the CEE region (Magda and Lipowska, 2022[28]). In 2019, 16.7% of Czech employees indicated that they could fully decide on their working time, while 16.6% could decide with certain restrictions, compared to 17.6% and 20.6% in the EU, respectively (Eurostat, 2022[29]). 6.1% of employed persons worked from home in 2023, compared to 8.9% in the EU27 (Eurostat, 2025[30]). Remote work is slightly less common among those aged 50‑64, at 5.5% (EU 8.7%).
Work agreements offer flexibility, but there are concerns about their quality
While flexibility is often limited in regular employment contracts, it can be offered through work agreements in Czechia. Work agreements are designed as a more flexible alternative to regular contracts, originally intended for work of occasional nature and limited scope (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]). This makes them particularly attractive to workers who are in need of greater flexibility in employment, including older workers.
Two forms of work agreements exist in Czechia. First, agreements on work performance (dohoda o provedení práce, DPP) are designed for short-term work. Under this agreement, a worker can work for an employer for up to 300 hours in one year. Second, agreements on work activity (dohoda o pracovní činnosti, DPČ) can be used for longer-term part-time work, with contracts for a maximum of 20 hours per week with one employer. For both types of agreements, it is possible to work for several employers, with the limits of 300 or 20 hours calculated separately for each employer. For DPPs, it is also possible to have several agreements with one employer, but in this case, hours are added up to the limits.
The prevalence of work agreements in Czechia cannot be quantified perfectly, but evidence suggests that they are widespread. Based on survey data collected by the Czech Statistical Office, in Q42024, almost 1.5 million work agreements existed in Czechia (
Figure 2.5). While this cannot be interpreted as the number of people working on work agreements, since agreements can be combined, work agreements are clearly very commonly used in Czechia. Of the overall number of work agreements, the majority are agreements on work performance (ca. 1.15 million), while agreements on work activity are less widespread (ca. 300 000). Following a reform in 2024, employers are now obliged to submit electronic reports on concluded agreements on work performance to the Czech Social Security Administration on a monthly basis. This will allow for more precise estimates of the prevalence of work agreements in Czechia.1 Data on the distribution of work agreements by age is not available.
Estimated number of people performing work under agreements, 2020‑24
Note: These estimates are based on quarterly questionnaires which the Czech Statistical Office sends to employers. Persons with multiple agreements with the same employer are included only once, but persons with multiple agreements with several employers are included several times.
Source: Czech Statistical Office Experimental Statistics on Persons working under agreements on work performed outside an employment relationship.
While work agreements can increase flexibility, there are concerns about their quality, as they do not offer the same level of social protection and other entitlements as regular contracts. However, Czechia has already undertaken several reforms in this regard. While employers originally did not pay social security contributions for employees with work agreements, since a reform in 2012, they have to pay mandatory social and health insurance contributions for agreements exceeding a value of CZK 10 000 per month (Martišková and Sedláková, 2016[20]). As of January 2025, this limit has been increased to CZK 11 500. With the adoption of the 2019 EU Directive on transparent and predictable working conditions, the quality of work agreements was improved further, with workers being, for instance, entitled to leave and equal provisions in terms of working hours regulation (Komendová, 2025[31]). Some difference remains, such as the fact that workers do not have protection from dismissal like regular employees do (e.g. in case of pregnancy or illness).
In practice, the different approach to the obligation to pay social security appears to contribute significantly to the use of work agreements (Komendová, 2025[31]). Available data suggests that the large majority of work agreements are agreements without the obligation to pay social insurance contributions (CSSZ, 2024[32]). At the same time, the practice of combining several agreements, with one or several employers, is not uncommon. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that in some cases where several agreements are combined with the same employer, the scope of work resembles that of an employment relationship (Komendová, 2025[31]). However, such abuse is difficult to quantify. The changes to the regulation of work agreements effective from January 2025 were originally intended to limit potential abuse, by lowering the threshold for paying social insurance contribution to CZK 4 500 if an employee has multiple work agreements. However, this amendment was repealed by the government.
Recent amendments increasing the level of rights and protections associated with work agreements are a step in the right direction and may limit the abuse of these types of contracts. However, further adjustments may be necessary to restrict non-payment of insurance contributions, thereby limiting incentives for substitution with regular employment and potential abuse. Careful monitoring of work agreements, based on the new obligation to register, should serve as a basis for this.
There are encouraging initiatives to increase access to higher-quality flexible working arrangements, but progress is slow
Czechia has made several efforts to incentivise greater flexibility in employment arrangements beyond work agreements. Some of these measures aim to encourage employers to offer more flexible working arrangements. Since February 2024, social security contributions for part-time workers have been reduced by 5%. These discounts only apply for specific groups, including students, workers under 21, newly retrained workers, persons with disabilities, anyone caring for a child under 10 and workers over 55. In addition, Czechia provides financial support for large employers who implement flexible work policies through the European Social Fund (MPSV, 2025[33]).
Furthermore, job sharing was legally regulated in the Czech Labour Code in 2021. Job sharing involves the sharing of one position between two or more employees in a workplace, based on an agreement between the employer and the part-time employees (Zapletal, 2021[34]). However, the use of job sharing is very limited in practice, partially driven by administrative complexities associated with dividing a job between several people and the fact that the agreement cannot be used for more than 40 working hours combined (Martiníková, Krügerová and Petrová, 2022[24]).
The initiatives to increase access to flexible working arrangements in Czechia are encouraging, but to date, use remains limited. Some initiatives, such as the tax incentives for part-time work, are rather recent and may show effects in the future. Moreover, in view of the potential to substitute for part-time work agreements, structural reforms play an important role in increasing access to higher-quality forms of flexible work.
In addition, strengthening the rights of employees in accessing flexible work could make a difference, particularly in view of prevailing employer reservations towards offering flexible working time options. In Czechia, individuals caring for a child under 15 or a dependent person are able to request shorter working hours or other flexible working hours. The employer can deny this request for “serious operational reasons” only. In the past, this justification was used rather liberally, as “serious operational reasons” were not clearly defined (Martiníková, Krügerová and Petrová, 2022[24]). As of 2023, employers must submit a written response to the request. This may enable better monitoring of requests to provide flexible work and incentivise employers to carefully assess requests. However, the right to request flexible work is limited only to specific groups. To increase access to flexible work arrangements for all workers, the right to request flexible work could be extended, following the example of other OECD countries such as the United Kingdom (Box 2.1). Extending the right to request flexible work to all workers would increase workers’ bargaining power and lessen the risk of discrimination against groups of workers with additional entitlements (OECD, 2019[35]).
The United Kingdom introduced a right for all employees to request flexible work from their first day on the job in April 2024. Flexible work can include changes to working hours, start or finish times, days of work and the place of work.
To request flexible work, employees make a statutory application to their employer in writing. The employer is then required to make a decision within two months. Employers must deal with requests in a “reasonable manager” and have to discuss the request with the employee before any refusal. However, employers can refuse requests if there is a good business reason to do so. Employees then have the option of complaining in an employment tribunal.
2.3.2. Flexible working arrangements can smooth the transition to retirement and enable longer labour market participation
Access to flexible working arrangements and reductions in working time in the run-up to retirement can match the preferences of workers at older ages, smooth the entry into retirement, and potentially enable labour market participation post-retirement (OECD, 2019[11]; OECD, 2017[36]). Taking action to increase access to flexible working arrangements plays an important role in this regard. In addition, countries can also enable more flexible combinations of pensions and income from work. Many OECD countries allow workers to combine work and pension receipt in some form to make retirement entries more flexible, but the design of these schemes varies across countries.
In Czechia, work and pensions can be combined rather flexibly after retirement. The minimum age of retirement is three years before the statutory retirement age, with a penalty on pension benefits amounting to 1.5% of the reference wage for every 90 days of early retirement. Conversely, workers are also free to defer the start of their pension, with pension benefits increasing by 1.5% relative to the reference wage for every 90 days of extra work, four times as much as before the retirement age.
While few people defer their retirement, despite the financial incentives, the number of individuals who work while receiving a pension is rather high. Czech data on the number of retirements by timing of retirement show that only a few hundred people a year defer their pension (Figure 2.6, Panel B). However, the number of individuals deferring retirement does not accurately represent the number of working pensioners. Combining work and pensions is possible without restrictions in Czechia, and partial pension receipt post-retirement is also available (Jahoda, 2025[37]). In the 2023 EU Labour Force Survey, 18.9% of people receiving an old-age pension stated that they continued working without changes at the beginning of pension receipt, while a further 8.8% continued working with changes (Figure 2.6, Panel B). This is significantly higher than a large number of European OECD countries as well as the EU shares (7.4% and 6.2%, respectively). While precise numbers do not exist, estimates from the Czech social security administration suggest that ca. 100 000 pensioners work while receiving a pension, a number that is rather stable over time.
Note: In Panel B, the low number of entries into retirement into 2023 can be attributed to additional pension indexations for pensions claimed in 2022, which led to many early pension claims in 2022, leading to a depleted pool of potential pensions in 2023. In practice, individuals who claimed their pension early in 2022 largely continued working until the retirement age, but had locked in the pension formula condition for 2022.
Source: Eurostat dataset: Persons receiving an old-age pension by their work situation at the beginning of pension receipt (Panel A) and OECD calculations based on data provided by the Czech Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (Panel B).
In addition to flexibility in combining work and pensions after retirement, flexibility in the transition to retirement can benefit older workers and potentially encourage longer labour market participation. OECD countries are increasingly taking action to increase access to flexible work arrangements and phased retirement pathways at the end of the career (OECD, 2023[38]). In Czechia, flexibility in the transition to retirement is rather limited. Taking action to promote the access of older workers to flexible working arrangements, including part-time work, and promoting phased retirement could encourage greater participation of workers as they near the end of their career.
2.3.3. Removing barriers to women’s labour market participation and career progression
Women face particular barriers in the Czech labour market, partially driven by gender inequalities in the distribution of time spent on unpaid care work. These inequalities are largely a result of the unequal division of caring labour and resulting periods of inactivity around childbirth, but have significant long-term consequences for employment quality and career progression (See Chapter 1). Women often do not return to their original position, may struggle to find employment at similar levels of qualification and wages, and are over-represented in the secondary labour market and in precarious work (Turečková et al., 2024[39]; Hašková and Dudová, 2016[40]).
Long periods of inactivity after childbirth in Czechia are driven by a number of factors, including social norms assigning childcaring duties to women, unavailability of flexible work arrangements, weak childcare support and generous cash benefits for parents (Křížková et al., 2025[41]). Policy approaches to enable greater and higher-quality female labour force participation need to be multi-pronged. While greater access to flexible working arrangements plays a key role, it needs to be complemented by actions to increase incentives for female labour force participation by investing in care services and redesigning parental leave.
Generous parental leave leads to long periods of absence from the labour market
The long duration of parental leaves is one of the key drivers of career interruptions following childbirth in Czechia. While paid parental leave can have a positive influence on female employment and job mobility up to a certain length, leave periods longer than two years exert a negative effect on female employment (Thévenon and Solaz, 2013[42]). Moreover, longer leave can have negative effects on the quality of women’s labour market outcomes upon returning from leave, including their earnings and the skill level associated with employment (Thévenon and Solaz, 2013[42]; Pertold-Gebicka, 2019[43]). In Czechia, the timing of return to work and mothers’ quality of employment following leave in Czechia are very sensitive to changes in parental leave design (Pertold-Gebicka, 2019[43]; Bičáková and Kalíšková, 2019[44]; Grossmann, Pertold and Šoltés, 2024[45]). Making sure that parental leave is time-limited and shared between parents can reduce the risks of negative effects on women’s career progression (OECD, 2024[4]).
Czechia has one of the most generous parental leave schemes in the OECD. Following six months of maternity leave after childbirth, parents can take up to 2.5 years of parental leave, with financial amounts for leave remaining the same no matter how long leave is (CZK 350 000). Parents can choose how much of the allowance to draw monthly, influencing the total duration of leave. The maximum combined duration of maternity leave and parental leave is therefore three years, compared to an average length of parental leave of 33 weeks across the OECD (OECD, 2025[9]). While leave can be split up between parents in theory, 98% of parents on parental leave are mothers.
Over the years, the parental leave system has been reformed several times with the aim of increasing flexibility in choosing the total duration of leave and incentivizing earlier return to work for mothers. Most recently, in 2024, the maximum length of parental leave was reduced from 3.5 years to 2.5 years. In 2018, a week of paid paternity leave was introduced, which was extended to two weeks in 2022. In addition, following a recent amendment to the Labour Code, employees will have a right to return to the same position in their company provided they return before the child reaches the age of two. Previously, this was only the case if mothers returned after the initial maternity leave of six months. However, in international comparison, parental leave remains very generous. Czechia should move further towards limiting the generosity of parental leave to encourage mothers’ earlier return to the labour market and limit negative consequences for future career development and progression. In addition, incentives for fathers to take up parental leave can be further strengthened. This could be achieved through longer periods of parental leave reserved for fathers or incentive schemes such as “bonus weeks”, following the example of other OECD countries (Box 2.2).
OECD countries are increasingly taking policy action to encourage the more equal sharing of parental leave between partners. To incentivise more fathers to take up parental leave, many countries have introduced non-transferable weeks of parental leave that can be exclusively used by mothers or fathers. With the introduction of the EU Directive on work-life balance, all EU countries have been required to introduce a minimum of 10 days paternity leave for fathers, but some are going further. Estonia introduced a non-transferable right to 30 days of paid parental leave for fathers in 2020. Scandinavian countries have a long tradition of non-transferable paternity leave.
Other countries implement different incentives for fathers to participate in parental leave. Some countries, including Austria and Germany, have introduced “bonus weeks” which offer additional paid leave if both parents use a certain portion of the family entitlement. This means that both parents have to participate in parental leave if parents want to maximise their entitlement to parental leave. In 2019, Austria added a one‑month job protection element to their bonus scheme, effectively transforming it into paid paternity leave.
Source: OECD (2023[46]), Joining Forces for Gender Equality: What is Holding us Back?, https://doi.org/10.1787/67d48024-en.
The lack of care infrastructure impedes women’s labour market participation and progression
While reforms to parental leave design can incentivise shorter career breaks, they cannot work without significant investment in care infrastructure, to enable more women to actually take up employment. Caring responsibilities play a significant role in the earlier career, where they can shape labour market transitions significantly, but also at older ages, in the form of caregiving to parents and partners (OECD, 2024[4]). To enable high-quality labour market participation and career progression of women across the life course, investment in both early childhood education and care and care services for adults is therefore a key priority.
In Czechia, access to early childhood education and care is very limited, particularly for the group of 0‑2 year‑olds (Figure 2.7). Among 3‑5 year‑olds, 84.2% of children are enrolled in early childhood education and services, compared to an OECD average of 86.4%. Enrolment rates among 0‑2 year‑olds are among the lowest in the OECD, with only 7.7% of children in this age group attending early childhood education services. In comparison, the OECD average stands at 35.9%, with high-performing countries such as the Netherlands (72.8%), Korea (64.2%) and Norway (59.2%) reaching rates around 60% and more. The lack of access to childcare services impedes the labour market participation of women after childbirth, but also later in the career, as grandparents frequently provide assistance with childcare to compensate for lack of services (Paloncyová and Höhne, 2023[47]).
Further investment in affordable, high-quality childcare is a key priority for Czechia to enable more labour market participation of women in the mid and late career. Czechia is already investing in increasing access to ECEC services. The creation of children’s groups, which can be established by public or private entities to provide care for children from age six months, has diversified service provision, but also created issues of quality control (OECD, 2025[9]). Additional investment is needed to meet demand for childcare services and ensure affordability and quality of services provided.
Share of children enrolled in early childhood education and care services, latest available year
Note: Panel A: Data generally include children enrolled in early childhood education services (ISCED 2011 level 0) and other registered ECEC services (ECEC services outside the scope of ISCED 0, because they are not in adherence with all ISCED‑2011 criteria). Data refer to: 2018 (Costa Rica, Iceland, the United Kingdom); 2019 (Japan); 2021 (Australia, Austria, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Israel, Korea, Lithuania, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Türkiye). Data for Belgium, Czechia, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic and the United Kingdom are OECD estimates for 2022 based on information from EU-SILC. For this latter group and Japan, data refer to children using centre‑based services (e.g. nurseries or day care centres and pre‑schools, both public and private), organised family day care, and care services provided by (paid) professional childminders, regardless of whether the service is registered or ISCED-recognised. OECD is an average of the 36 countries shown. Panel B: Data refer to: 2019 (Belgium, Greece) and 2018 (United States). Data include children enrolled in early childhood education and care (ISCED 2011 level 0) and primary education (ISCED 2011 Level 1). For Greece, data include only part of the children enrolled in Early childhood development programmes (ISCED 01). OECD is an average of the 37 countries shown.
Potential mismatches between the enrolment data and the coverage of the population data (in terms of geographic coverage and/or the reference dates used) may affect enrolment rates. For details on the ISCED 2011 level 0 criteria and how services are mapped and classified, see OECD (2023[48]), Education at a Glance 2023, Indicator B2 (www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm).
Source: OECD Family Database | OECD, Indicator PF3.2.
In addition to early childhood education and care services, strengthening the long-term care system is a key priority for enabling higher labour market participation of older workers, and particularly old women. The number of long-term care workers is very low in Czechia (Figure 2.8). In 2021, the latest available year, there were 2.4 long-term care workers per 100 people aged 65 and over in Czechia, one of the lowest values of OECD countries with available data.
Long-term care workers per 100 people aged 65 and over, 2011 and 2021 (or latest available year)
Note: For New Zealand, latest data refer to 2018. The purple markers refer to the average of the 22 countries shown with data for both years.
Source: OECD (2023[49]), Health at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, https://doi.org/10.1787/7a7afb35-en, Figure 10.12.
As a result of the limited infrastructure for long-term care, informal caring is widespread (Maresova et al., 2020[50]). Over 70% of older people in need rely exclusively on informal carers (Rocard and Llena-Nozal, 2022[51]; MPSV, 2023[52]), and around 19% of people aged 50 and over in Czechia provide informal care at least weekly – well above the OECD average of 13% (Rocard and Llena-Nozal, 2022[51]). Two-thirds of daily informal carers are women aged 35‑64 (Rocard and Llena-Nozal, 2022[51]; MPSV, 2023[52]). Estimates suggest that between 200 000 and 300 000 individuals provide unpaid care, with half unable to participate in full-time employment as a result (European Commission, 2024[53]). Therefore, investment in strengthening long-term care services is needed to enable labour market participation of older workers, particularly women.
References
[13] Behaghel, L., B. Crépon and B. Sédillot (2008), “The perverse effects of partial employment protection reform: The case of French older workers”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 92/3-4, pp. 696-721, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.12.004.
[25] Beham, B. et al. (2019), “Part-time work and gender inequality in Europe: a comparative analysis of satisfaction with work–life balance”, European Societies, Vol. 21/3, pp. 378-402, https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2018.1473627.
[44] Bičáková, A. and K. Kalíšková (2019), “(Un)intended effects of parental leave policies: Evidence from the Czech Republic”, Labour Economics, Vol. 61, p. 101747, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2019.07.003.
[18] Bočková, N. (2024), “Podnikání jako druhá kariéra - Podnikání 2.0”.
[1] Causa, O. et al. (2022), “Getting on the job ladder: The policy drivers of hiring transitions”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1710, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0304c673-en.
[32] CSSZ (2024), Za první měsíc povinné registrace DPP nahlásili zaměstnavatelé přes 1 milion dohod o provedení práce, https://www.cssz.cz/web/cz/-/za-prvni-mesic-povinne-registrace-dpp-nahlasili-zamestnavatele-pres-1-milion-dohod-o-provedeni-prace (accessed on 27 March 2025).
[15] Eurofound (2025), Keeping older workers in the labour force.
[53] European Commission (2024), 2024 Country Report - Czechia.
[30] Eurostat (2025), Employed persons working from home as a percentage of the total employment, by sex, age and professional status (%), https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsa_ehomp__custom_16035259/default/table?lang=en (accessed on 28 March 2025).
[29] Eurostat (2022), Persons in employment by working time flexibility, educational attainment level and professional status, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfso_19fxwt01/default/table?lang=en (accessed on 28 March 2025).
[22] Finardi, S. and A. Melicharová (2022), “Impact of Svarc system on Tax Revenues in the Czech Republic”, Český finanční a účetní časopis, Vol. 2021/4, pp. 19-29, https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cfuc.566.
[8] Flek, V., M. Hála and M. Mysíková (2020), “The Older Unemployed Worker’s Conundrum in the Czech Republic and Slovakia: Find a Job or Leave the Labour Market?”, Ekonomický časopis, Vol. 68/6, pp. 541-562.
[45] Grossmann, J., F. Pertold and M. Šoltés (2024), “Parental allowance increase and labor supply: Evidence from a Czech reform”, Labour Economics, Vol. 89, p. 102589, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2024.102589.
[16] Halvorsen, C. and N. Morrow-Howell (2016), “A Conceptual Framework on Self-Employment in Later Life: Toward a Research Agenda”, Work, Aging and Retirement, p. waw031, https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw031.
[40] Hašková, H. and R. Dudová (2016), “Precarious work and care responsibilities in the economic crisis”, European Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 23/1, pp. 47-63, https://doi.org/10.1177/0959680116672279.
[37] Jahoda, R. (2025), Flexible retirement pathways. Czechia, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
[31] Komendová, J. (2025), “Dohody o pracích konaných mimo pracovní poměr – nástroj flexibility v pracovněprávních vztazích nebo cesta k nelegální práci?”, 60 let zákoníku práce – Pocta Jarmile Pavlátové, https://doi.org/10.24132/zcu.2025.12693.61-72.
[41] Křížková, A. et al. (2025), “Strong Gender Contract, Weak Institutions: Gender Pay Gap in Slovenia and Czechia”, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, Vol. 32/1, pp. 174-197, https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxae038.
[28] Magda, I. and K. Lipowska (2022), “Flexibility of Working Time Arrangements and Female Labor Market Outcome”, in Mothers in the Labor Market, Springer International Publishing, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99780-9_7.
[50] Maresova, P. et al. (2020), “The social and economic burden on family caregivers for older adults in the Czech Republic”, BMC Geriatrics, Vol. 20/1, p. 171, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01571-2.
[26] Marková, H. (2016), “Nízká atraktivita částečných úvazků v ČR a její příčiny”, GRANT Journal, Vol. 5/1, pp. 54-59.
[24] Martiníková, J., M. Krügerová and M. Petrová (2022), “Potential, Benefits, and Barriers of Flexible Working Arrangements”, International Conference on European Integration.
[20] Martišková, M. and M. Sedláková (2016), The rise of the dual labour market: fighting precarious employment in the new member states through industrial relations. Country report Czechia, Central European Labour Studies Institute, Bratislava.
[6] MOLSA (2024), Analýza změn podpory v nezaměstnanosti: cesta k flexibilnímu trhu práce, Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Prague.
[5] MOLSA (2024), Reforma systému podpory v nezaměstnanosti a podpory během rekvalifikace, Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Prague.
[14] Moulton, J. and J. Scott (2014), “Good and Bad? An Analysis of Self-Employment at the Older Ages”, Public Policy & Aging Report, Vol. 24/4, pp. 155-161, https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/pru041.
[33] MPSV (2025), Diverzita a flexibilita - vstupní evaluační zpráva, MPSV, Prague.
[52] MPSV (2023), Obětavost zaslouží naše uznání. Nominujte Pečující roku 2023 | MPSV, https://www.mpsv.cz/obetavost-zaslouzi-nase-uznani-nominujte-pecujiciho-roku-2023 (accessed on 17 March 2025).
[2] Nekoei, A. and A. Weber (2017), “Does Extending Unemployment Benefits Improve Job Quality?”, American Economic Review, Vol. 107/2, pp. 527-561, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150528.
[27] Němcová, I. (2014), “Zkrácené pracovni úvazky a jejich kvalita v České republice”, RELIK 2014.
[9] OECD (2025), OECD Economic Surveys: Czechia 2025, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7a70af5c-en.
[4] OECD (2024), Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en.
[7] OECD (2023), Benefit Reforms for Inclusive Societies in the United States: Income Security During Joblessness, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/32d8f005-en.
[48] OECD (2023), Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en.
[49] OECD (2023), Health at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7a7afb35-en.
[46] OECD (2023), Joining Forces for Gender Equality: What is Holding us Back?, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/67d48024-en.
[23] OECD (2023), OECD Economic Surveys: Czech Republic 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e392e937-en.
[38] OECD (2023), Retaining Talent at All Ages, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/00dbdd06-en.
[10] OECD (2020), OECD Employment Outlook 2020: Worker Security and the COVID-19 Crisis, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1686c758-en.
[35] OECD (2019), Part-time and Partly Equal: Gender and Work in the Netherlands, Gender Equality at Work, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/204235cf-en.
[11] OECD (2019), Working Better with Age, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c4d4f66a-en.
[36] OECD (2017), Pensions at a Glance 2017: OECD and G20 Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/pension_glance-2017-en.
[47] Paloncyová, J. and S. Höhne (2023), Slaďování práce a rodiny. Souhrnná výzkumná zpráva z šetření „Současná česká rodina 2020–2022“., RILSA, Prague.
[17] Patel, P. (2025), “For older and poorer: the implications of self-employment among individuals over 50”, Applied Economics, pp. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2025.2464818.
[43] Pertold-Gebicka, B. (2019), “Parental leave length and mothers’ careers: what can be inferred from occupational allocation?”, Applied Economics, Vol. 52/9, pp. 879-904, https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1646870.
[21] Radvan, M. (2016), “Taxation of Employment Income in the Czech Republic”, Kwartalnik Prawa Podatkowego 1, pp. 23-35, https://doi.org/10.18778/1509-877x.2016.01.02.
[51] Rocard, E. and A. Llena-Nozal (2022), “Supporting informal carers of older people: Policies to leave no carer behind”, OECD Health Working Papers, No. 140, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0f0c0d52-en.
[3] Sjöberg, O. (2007), “Labour market mobility and workers’ skills in a comparative perspective: exploring the role of unemployment insurance benefits”, International Journal of Social Welfare, Vol. 17/1, pp. 74-83, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00493.x.
[19] Strielkowski, W. (2013), “Undeclared Work in the Czech Republic and its Implications for the Czech Labor Market”, Central European Business Review, Vol. 2/4, pp. 7-14, https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.59.
[42] Thévenon, O. and A. Solaz (2013), “Labour Market Effects of Parental Leave Policies in OECD Countries”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 141, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5k8xb6hw1wjf-en.
[39] Turečková, K. et al. (2024), “Women’s Return to Work after Parental Leave: A Case Study on the Czech Republic”, Revija za socijalnu politiku, Vol. 31/2, pp. 231-249.
[12] Vodopivec, M. et al. (2019), “Increasing Employment of Older Workers: Addressing Labour Market Obstacles”, Journal of Population Ageing, Vol. 12/3, pp. 273-298, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-018-9236-4.
[34] Zapletal, R. (2021), “Work-life balance in the light of the Directive (EU) 2019/1158 on the example of job-sharing in accordance with the Czech Labour Code”, The Lawyer Quarterly, Vol. 11/4, pp. 641-650.
← 1. Data from the first month of registration, July 2024, shows that 1 010 946 agreements were recorded, with a total volume of CZK 5.7 billion and a total number of 850 873 persons working on such an agreement (CSSZ, 2024[32]). This suggests that the practice of combining several agreements, from either one or several employers, is not uncommon.