Gatwick Employer and Travel to Work Survey Summary of Results

Transcription

1 Gatwick Employer and Travel to Work Survey 2016 Summary of Results

2 CONTENTS Page No. 1. Introduction 5 2. Report Headlines Employers Survey 6 Travel to Work Survey 7 3. Gatwick Employer Survey Summary of Results Table 1: Number of Employers by Company Type 8 Graph 1: % of Employers by Company Type 8 Table 2: Number of Employees by Company Type 9 Graph 2: % of Employees by Company Type 10 Table 3: Number of Employees by Job type 10 Graph 3: % of Employees by Job Type 11 Graph 4: % of Number of Temporary & Permanent employees 11 Table 5: Temporary & Permanent employees by Company Type 12 Table 6: Additional Temporary Employees by Job Type 12 Table 7: Employee Salaries 13 Graph 7: Employee Salaries 2016 vs Graph 8a: Employees by Gender 14 Graph 8b: Employees by Gender and Hours worked 14 Table 9: Age of Employees 15 Graph 9: Age of Employees 15 Table 10: Nationality of Employees 15 Table 11: Ethnic Origin of Employees Travel to Work Survey Summary of Results Table 12: Breakdown of survey sample by Job type 17 Table 13: Where employees report to work. 18 Graph 14: Proportion of shift to non-shift staff. 18 Table 15: Number of days work per week 19 Graph 15: Number of days work per week 2012 vs Table 16: Number of hours worked per week. 20 Graph 16: Number of hours worked per week 2016 vs Table 17: Flexibility with work times 20 Table 18: Frequency of working at home 21 Graph 19a: Hour started work 2016 vs Graph 19b: Hour finish work 2016 vs Graph 19c: Hour started work by Shift and Non-shift workers 22 Graph 19d: Hour finished work by Shift and Non-shift workers 23 Table 20: Mode of travel for journey to work today 24 Table 21: Distance to work by road 25 Graph 21: Distance to work by road 2016 vs P a g e

3 Table 22: Journey Time to Work 26 Graph 22a: Journey Time to Work 2016 vs Graph 22b: Average journey time to work by mode of transport 26 Table 23a: Employees county of residence 27 Table 23b: Top Postcodes within Sussex 27 Table 23c: Top Postcodes within UK 28 Figure 1: UK Postcodes by mode of transport 29 Figure 2: Sussex postcodes by mode of transport 30 Figure 3: Surrey postcodes by mode of transport 30 Figure 4: Kent postcodes by mode of transport 31 Figure 5: London postcodes by mode of transport 31 Figure 6: Postcodes amongst Train & Bus users 32 Figure 7: Postcodes amongst Car, Taxi & Motorbike users 32 Figure 8: Postcodes amongst those who Walk/run to work 33 Figure 9: Crawley Postcodes by mode of transport 33 Table 24: Alternative transport to using a car 2016 v Table 25: Reasons for choosing to travel by car rather than train 35 Table 26: Reasons for choosing to travel by car rather than bus 35 Table 27: What would encourage use of public transport [Shift vs. Shift-Workers] 36 Graph 27: What would encourage use of public transport amongst car users. 36 Table 28: Awareness of Gatwick Commuter initiatives 36 Table 29: Usage of Gatwick Travel Schemes [amongst those aware] 37 Table 30: Ownership and interest in Electric vehicles 37 Graph 31: Future interest in Electric vehicles 37 APPENDICIES: Appendix A: Employer Survey Methodology 37 Appendix B: Employers Questionnaire 39 Appendix C: Travel to Work Survey Methodology 49 Appendix D: Travel to Work Questionnaire 52 Appendix E: Gatwick Catchment area 62 3 P a g e

4 Introduction Gatwick Airport regularly undertakes research amongst companies and their employees for strategic planning purposes. The Employers and Employee Survey is conducted every 4/5 years with previous surveys having been undertaken in 1999, 2003, 2008, 2012, and the most current survey in This research seeks to build a picture of the economic importance of the airport at a local; regional & national level in addition to where those people employed on the Gatwick Campus travel from, what their surface transport needs are likely to be in the future and what is required to address those needs. The research comprises of 2 parts, the Employers Survey [census-based] survey, which is conducted amongst employers, and the Employee Survey [sample-based survey] which as renamed the Travel to Work which is conducted amongst their employees. The objectives of the research is to obtain detailed information on employee and employer characteristics which are widely used: As a basis for employment forecasting. In the planning and development of transport infrastructure and initiatives specifically catered to staff. To assist Local Authorities in their consideration of on-airport employment characteristics and the consequential provisions that flow into the planning of local facilities. The Employers survey is a long-standing comprehensive census of companies whose staff report for work within the boundaries of the Gatwick Airport site [see Appendix D] and were operating on the Gatwick Airport site as of the 12 th January The Travel to Work survey is conducted amongst staff and gathered information such as the job, working patterns/hours, method of transport used to travel to Gatwick and where they live. This information is used to inform travel and other surface access strategies. Research Method A consistent approach has been applied to the 2016 research methodology as was applied to previous waves of the research. This application allows the comparisons of trends can be maintained and consequently the research can confidently identify trends in Gatwick s employers and their workforce. When making comparisons with previous surveys it is important to note that there have been a number of changes at the airport affecting the underlying activity, as well as the impact of continual growth to consider. Both the Employers census and Travel to Work survey were conducted using a multi-method research approach, these being via an on-line survey; self-completion paper questionnaires; face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews. To encourage employees to complete the Travel to Work survey an incentive of Amazon Shopping Vouchers was offered. Employers Survey: On the Employers Survey all companies were ed and asked to complete the on-line survey. Companies that were not eligible to take part in the survey (e.g. did not employ staff that were Gatwickbased) were excluded from the survey. Travel to Work survey: The survey was distributed to staff in a number of ways with differing response rates. On-line: Employers were asked to send out an internal to all their Gatwick-based staff with a link to the online survey. Amongst GAL staff, a link to the online survey was put on the intranet and also all security staff were sent a letter to their home address with details on how to complete the on-line survey. Posters and flyers were also supplied to companies to put in their crew/rest rooms that detailed the url link to the on-line survey. Paper: Many companies with frontline staff (e.g. handling agents; aircrew; cleaners; etc.) requested to distribute paper questionnaires to their staff to complete in their breaks as access to the on-line survey was not possible. 4 P a g e

5 Face-to-face: Interviewers from Gatwick s Market Research Survey Team also interviewed staff around the terminal building/airport campus which were recorded on either tablets [on-line] or on paper questionnaires. A full description of the methodology used on both surveys can be found in Appendix A and Appendix C. Survey Content Both survey questionnaires were kept broadly consistent in order to maintain comparability with previous years. The content of both surveys was reviewed to ensure they were still relevant and also that the survey was not so lengthy as to increase drop-out rates. Some questions were extended on the Employer survey to provide additional information on future recruitment plans. Likewise on the Travel to Work survey additional questions were incorporated on alternative transport options on order to inform Gatwick s transport and surface access strategy. Both survey questionnaires can be found at Appendix B and [Employer Survey] and Appendix D [Travel to Work Survey]. Survey Findings & Conclusions When analysing the employer s data it came to light that, when all the airline data was consolidated, the total number of aircrew recorded had increased substantially compared with After further investigation with the Gatwick ID unit and re-contacting some airlines it was established that the rise was primarily due to some airlines aircrew being designated as London airport based [meaning they could be rostered to work out of more than one London Airport] and consequently the aircrew could not be directly classified or differentiated as Gatwick-based aircrew. Having referred back to the 2003 and 2008 reports a similar pattern was observed and in both these instances the aircrew figures were adjusted by taking the total annual aircraft movements [for each airline] across Heathrow and Gatwick and then calculating the Gatwick percentage share of these movements which was then applied to the staff number for the respective airlines. For the 2016 survey, the same algorithm has been applied using total aircraft movements for the 12 month period July 15 June 16 and the Gatwick percentage share has been applied to the total staff for each airline. This adjustment to the 2016 survey data means that results are comparable with the 2003, 2008 and 2012 survey results. Data interpretation This report presents the summary of results from the 2016 Employers and Travel to Work Surveys conducted during April August Where comparable data is available the 2016 results will be displayed alongside the 2008 and 2012 survey results. Weighting: Unless otherwise stated, all of the Travel to Work survey data have been weighted [grossed up] to represent the total staff numbers recorded on the Employers Survey. A full explanation of the weighting procedure is documented in Appendix C. Rounding of Numbers & Percentages: All numbers [and most percentages] in this report have been rounded to the nearest whole number and therefore some totals do not always add to exactly 100%. Multiple responses: A number of questions on the Travel to Work survey permit the employee to select multiple answers and therefore the total percentages will exceed 100% in these instances. Totals/Bases: Not all questions were answered by employers on the Employers Survey for reasons explained in the methodology in Appendix A. In this instance the figures are re-based on those providing a valid response. Similarly on the Travel to Work survey some questions may not have been completed so the figures will have been rebased on those providing a valid response. Base sample sizes may differ on each table which takes account of any incomplete data. All survey records had to have an employer name, employer type and job type to be included in the survey datasets. 5 P a g e

6 Headlines from the Employers Survey The following narrative summarises the headlines from the 2016 Employers Survey which was conducted between April-August The Employers Survey is a study of all companies whose staff work within the boundaries of Gatwick Airport and a map of the campus area is contained in Appendix D. The survey included all companies that were operating at Gatwick Airport as of 12th January The census survey recorded there to be 23,807 staff employed on the Gatwick Airport site. This is an increased headcount of 2,788 staff which is an 13% increase on the number of staff employed in 2012, which was reported at 21,019. The initial total staff headcount reported across all companies was 27,374, however this figure was reduced by 3,567 staff as a result of adjustments made due to the crew-report factor. A full explanation of this adjustment is detailed on page 5 under heading Survey Findings and Conclusions. A total of 252 companies were recorded in the survey as employing Gatwick-based staff. This represents an increase of 9.6% on the 230 companies recorded in There were an additional 4 companies who were located on the Gatwick Airport site but declined to take part in the survey. Building/development/maintenance companies are still the highest employer type across the airport at 26% but the biggest growth in employer type was in catering and retail which has risen to 21% [up 3.6% on 2012] and this was driven by an additional 13 catering/retail employers operating on the Gatwick Airport site. Staff who work for an Airline account for 35% (8,446) of all Gatwick s workforce which is a drop of 3.4% compared with Handling agent staff account for 12% of workforce, an increase of 991 staff and up 3.1% on 4 years ago. Retail & Catering staff combined increased by a headcount of 1,147 and stands at 17%, up 3.2% up on Gatwick Airport Ltd is the third largest employer with headcount up by 130 staff compared with In terms of job type, Cabin crew account for 25% all employees which is an increase of 1,849 staff, an uplift of 3.8% versus Staff in Passenger services/sales roles accounted for 16% of all staff, down 1.3% share points. 12% of staff are employed in Catering, Cleaning and Housekeeping roles and have increased by 982 staff [2.2%] compared with The greatest drop in staff numbers is in Management roles which were down by 3.3% points on 2012 levels. The majority [92%] of Gatwick s workforce are employed on permanent contracts which is down around 3% compared to 4 years ago. Nearly a quarter (24%) of all companies now employ temporary staff [up 12%] with nearly half [46%] of temporary staff working for an airline or handling agents. 26% of companies stated they would be employing more staff over the summer period [July- September 16] which would add a further 2,108 to the Gatwick workforce with most of these staff working in catering, passenger services/sales and cabin crew roles. 37% of permanent staff earned 13,000-19,999 per annum which has increased by 10% since A further 16% of staff earned 24,000-30,999 per annum, up 4% points on The mean average salary is between 25,032 and 27,190, which compares with an average of 23,144 to 24,584 in The workforce is made up of 56% male to 44% females which is a to 7% swing to females since P a g e

7 Headlines from the Travel to Work Survey The following narrative summarises the headlines from the 2016 Travel to Work Survey which was conducted between April-September A total of 5,323 staff completed the survey. 63% of Gatwick staff live in Sussex and a further 19% live in Surrey. Of those staff who live in Sussex over half [51%] live in the Crawley postal district RH11 and RH10 which is up from 35% recorded in Around 6 out of 10 staff [61%] travel to work at the airport by car which is down 9% on % travel by bus/coach which is up 4% on Staff commuting by rail was up slightly to 12% although it is possible that the underlying proportion may be higher due to the rail disruption that took place during the survey period, which may have resulted in more staff driving to work. Staff using company transport has increased to 6% [up 4%] as more staff, particularly aircrew and cleaning staff, are now commuting from outside the typical catchment area. Compared to 2012, staff on average have shorter journeys in terms of distance but journey times have increased which suggests a rise in congestion on road network and delays/disruption on rail services. The average commute is 23 miles compared with 25 miles in Staff who commute 4-10 miles [selfestimated by road] was 36% which is on par with Staff commuting up to 3 miles was 11%, up 2% points, and 8% of staff now commute over 50 miles. Average journey times to Gatwick have increased to 43 minutes compared with 38 minutes in 2012, an increase of 5 minutes on average commute. A third of all staff [33%] have commute times of up to 20 minutes, down 5% compared with Journey times of minutes are up 2% points to 11% and journeys of 91+ minutes is 6%, up 2% on Rail disruption at the time of the survey are likely to have inflated journey times. Two thirds [66%] said they could have used alternative transport with train [31%] being the most likely alternative transport followed by car sharing at 29% and Bus/Coach on 24%. When car users were asked about likelihood of changing from car to public transport [trail or bus] the main obstacles for not using the train were the train station being too far from home [43%], longer journey time [39%], more expensive [39%]. The lack of interest in commuting by bus was mainly longer journey time [57%] and no buses running at work start/finish time and bus stops too far from their home. Nearly two thirds of staff [65%] gave at least one factor that might persuade them to change to public transport [rail or bus] to travel to work. The greatest incentive to change was cheaper fares [37%], better staff discounts [33%], more frequent services [28%] and earlier/later services [28%] which was particularly important to shift workers. The majority [84%] of Gatwick s workforce are shift workers which mirrors the 2012 figure. 40% of all staff work 5 days a week which is up 4% versus % work 4 days a week which correlates with a 4- on-4-off shift pattern. Average days worked per week was 4.3 on par with On average staff are working longer hours per week than in A quarter of staff [25%] are now working hours a week which is a rise of 12% compared with % of staff are working hours per week which is down 32% on The average hours worked per week across all staff is now 43 hours versus 40 hours recorded 4 years ago. Staff are starting work earlier than in 2012 with 20% now arriving between , up 9%. 13% start between and the biggest increase was in those working between , up to 11% on The majority of staff [43%] finish work between Nearly a third [31%] of staff have some flexibility when they start/finish work which is up 6% on 2012 and proportion of staff who are able to work from home is up to 19% from 11% in P a g e

8 Gatwick Employers Survey Summary of Results Employer Types In 2016 a total of 252 companies completed the Employer Survey which was a 9.6% increase from the 230 companies who participated in These companies are categorised by company type in the table below. Table 1: Number of Employers by Company Type. COMPANY TYPE 2012 EMPLOYERS % 2016 EMPLOYERS % Absolute Change 2016 vs % Change 2016 vs Building/development/maintenance 61 27% 65 26% 4.0 (0.7)% Catering/Retail 41 18% 54 21% % Other Passenger Services 28 12% 29 12% 1.0 (0.7)% Airline/Airline Handling Agent 29 13% 22 9% -7.0 (3.9)% Government Services 3 1% 8 3% % Cargo/freight/courier service 2 1% 8 3% % Gatwick Airport Ltd 1 0% 1 0% 0.0 (0.0)% Other (All other employers) 65 28% 65 26% 0.0 (2.5)% TOTAL Building/development/Construction companies are still the largest employer type accounting with 65 companies [up by 4] and overall account for 26% of all companies types located on the Gatwick site which is on par with The second largest employer type are in Catering/Retail at 21% [up 3.6% on 2012] and an increase of 13 companies in real terms. This increase reflects the ongoing development of facilities which has been driven by Gatwick s growth over the last 4 years. Airlines and Airline Handling agents account for 9% of employer types but in real terms have decreased by 7 companies since 2012, which is a fall of 3.9%. This decline is in some part due to smaller airlines not having any staff based at Gatwick with the operations being managed from other UK or overseas locations and more companies using multi-service providers. Cargo/freight/couriers companies have grown by 6 companies, up 2.3% on 2012, which has been driven by airlines outsourcing these operations and the growth in cargo/freight traffic. Graph 1: Extended breakdown by Company Type 2016 vs P a g e

9 Employees at Gatwick The census recorded a total number of 23,807 staff employed in the Gatwick site which is an increase of 2,788 staff in real terms and is an increase of 13% on the 2012 employee survey. The increased headcount is predominantly due to an increase in Handling Agent and Catering staff with both of these groups employing 3% more staff than they did in 2012 which converts to an additional 1,848 staff in total. Headline figures compared with 2012: Total staff are 23,807 which is up 2,788 [+13%]. Permanent staff are 21,941, an increase of 1,967 [+9.4%] and temporary* staff are 1,866, an increase of 821 [+3.9%]. * Contract of less than 6 months. Table 2: Number of Employees by Company Type [from Employers Survey]. COMPANY TYPE 2012 TOTAL EMPLOYEES % 2016 TOTAL EMPLOYEES % Absolute Change 2016 vs % Share Change 2016 vs Airline 8,163 39% 8,446 35% 283 (3.4)% Airline Handling Agent 1,859 9% 2,850 12% % Gatwick Airport Ltd 2,650 13% 2,780 12% 130 (0.9)% Retail 1,886 9% 2,176 9% % Catering 1,128 5% 1,985 8% % Building/development/maintenance 824 4% 1,114 5% % Government Services 599 3% 1,072 5% % Other (All other companies) 1,649 8% 801 3% ( 848 ) (4.5)% Hotel 622 3% 729 3% % Other Passenger Services 351 2% 678 3% % Cleaning 904 4% 532 2% ( 372 ) (2.1)% Car park operator 184 1% 259 1% % Bus or taxi operator % 221 1% % Cargo/freight/couriers 9 0.0% % % Fuel company % % ( 32 ) (0.2)% TOTAL 21, % 23, % 2, % Airline staff account for 35% of all staff who work at Gatwick, this figure is up by 283 staff in absolute terms but down 3.4% on 2012 levels. This decline is due to more airlines outsourcing departments such as engineering, ramp operations and cargo to handling agents and specialist service providers. Handling Agents staff have grown by 991 [12% of staff] which is a 3.1% increase on 2012 and correlates with airlines outsourcing ground handing/cargo operations and also the demand for more staff to handle the increase in aircraft movements and passenger volumes, both of which have increased considerably in the last 4 years. Catering and Retail staff combined employ 17% of staff and have increased by 1,147 in absolute numbers which is up 3% for catering and 0.9% for retail. Staff employed by Gatwick Airport Ltd represent 12%, down 0.9% on 2012 but up 130 staff in absolute terms. Government services staff have grown by 473 which account for 5% of staff which is up 1.7% points on Building/Construction staff were up by 290 and overall represents 5% of the workforce which slightly up [0.8%] on P a g e

10 The number of cleaning staff as fallen by 372 which is down 2.4% on 2012 levels although this could be due to companies providing multiple services on airport [e.g. cleaning, security and special assistance] so some of their would have been categorised as Other Passengers service [which has increased by 327 staff] rather than solely Cleaning staff which could have been in the case with the 2012 data. Graph 2: % of Employees by Company Type 2016 vs [from Employers Survey]. Employees by Job Type Staff working as cabin crew has grown by 1,849 in absolute numbers and account for 25% of all staff, an increase of 3.8% points on Pilots/ATC/Flight Operations staff accounted for 7% of staff with staff numbers up by 98 but share is down 1.4% on These two job roles combined represent 31% of all Gatwick s workforce and this uplift are a results of new airlines starting operations and the growth in route/schedules over the past 4 years. Table 3: Employees by Job type [from Employers Survey]. JOB TYPE 2012 EMPLOYEES % 2016 EMPLOYEES % Absolute Change 2016 vs % Share Change 2016 vs Air Cabin Crew 3,942 21% 5,791 25% 1, % Passenger Services/Sales & Clerical 3,138 17% 3,660 16% 522 (1.3)% Catering, Cleaning & Housekeeping 1,855 10% 2,837 12% % Apron/Ramp/Cargo/Baggage Handling 1,812 10% 2,434 10% % Maintenance Trades Staff 1,624 9% 1,897 8% 273 (0.9)% Security & Passenger Search/Control 1,800 9% 1,822 8% 22 (1.2)% Management Other & IT 1,682 9% 1,603 7% ( 79 ) (2.1)% Pilots/ATC/ Flight Operations 1,435 8% 1,533 7% 98 (1.4)% Customs/Immigration/Police/Fire Service 588 3% 1,073 5% % Management - Airport/Airline specific 747 4% 671 3% ( 76 ) (1.1)% Recorded data 18,623 23,321 Missing 2, TOTAL 21, % 23, % 10 P a g e

11 Passenger services staff [e.g. check-in/handling agents] and sales staff account for 16% of the overall workforce which is down 1.3% on 2012 but in absolute terms staff employed in these role have increased by 522 versus % of the workforce are employed in Catering/Cleaning /Housekeeping roles and these staff have increase by 982 which is up 2.2% on Apron/Ramp/Cargo/Baggage Handling staff account for 10% of the workforce and have increased by 622 in real terms which is up 0.4% on Staff employed in managerial roles [airport specific and other combined] is down by 3.2% points with 155 fewer staff in these roles compared Staff working within Customs, Immigration and Police was up by 485 in absolute numbers which up 1.6% versus It is worth noting that some key government organisations declined to take part in the survey and therefore staff in these role will be under represented. Graph 3: Employees by Job type 2016 vs 2008 & 2012 [from Employers Survey]. Permanent & Temporary Employees Out of the 252 companies surveyed, around a quarter [24%] employed temporary staff who were on contracts of less than 6 months which is an increase of 12% compared to Graph 4: % of Temporary and Permanent Staff 2016 vs and 2012 [from Employers Survey]. 11 P a g e

12 The vast majority [92%] of Gatwick s workforce are employed permanently with these staff totalling 21,941 which is up 1,967 on the 2012 figure but overall percentage of permanent staff was down by 3% points compared with Temporary staff have grown by 821 staff in absolute terms with most of these staff being seasonal staff employed by airlines, handling agents and retail companies. Gatwick Airport Ltd has increased its permanent headcount between by a net total of 130, with permanent staff up by 484 and temporary staff down by 354. Table 5: Number of Temporary and Permanent Employees by Company Type [from Employers Survey]. COMPANY TYPE 2012 TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 2012 PERMANENT EMPLOYEES 2016 TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 2016 PERMANENT EMPLOYEES Absolute Change 2016 vs 2012 Temporary Employees Absolute Change 2016 vs 2012 Permanent Employees Airline 40 8, , ( 209 ) Airline Handling Agent 22 1, , Gatwick Airport Ltd 354 2,296 2,780 ( 354 ) 484 Retail 165 1, , Catering 63 1, ,941 ( 19 ) 876 Building/development/maintenance ,039 ( 53 ) 343 Government Services Other (All other companies) 67 1, ( 851 ) Hotel Other Passenger Services Cleaning ( 9 ) ( 363 ) Car park operator Bus or taxi operator Cargo/freight/couriers Fuel company ( 2 ) ( 30 ) TOTAL 1,045 19,974 1,866 21, ,967 It was also noted that there has been an increase in employers, airlines and handling agents in particular, that are using specialist companies to source their temporary staff rather than traditional employment agencies. When companies were asked about employing additional staff over the summer period [July-September 16], 26% said they would be taking on more staff which amounted to an additional 2,108 staff to the Gatwick workforce. 37% of these additional staff were in catering/cleaning roles, 22% in passenger services/sales and 13% were cabin crew/pilots. Table 6: Additional Temporary Employees by Job Type [from Employers Survey]. JOB TYPE 2016 ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 2016 ADDITIONAL PERMANENT EMPLOYEES 2016 TOTAL ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES % Catering, Cleaning % Passenger Services/Sales % Air Cabin Crew % Apron,Ramp. Cargo, Baggage Handing % Security % Maintenance Trades Staff % Pilots % Management - Other & IT % Customs, Immigration, Police, Fire Service % Management/Airport/Airline specific % TOTAL 902 1,206 2, out of the 252 employers [24%] stated they currently had staff vacancies with a small number proportion of these vacancies [14%] having been unfilled for more than 3 months. Most of these vacancies were in catering, cleaning/housekeeping and maintenance. A shortage of specific/technical skills and unattractive salary were the main reason for these posts not being filled. A small number (4%) of companies said they anticipated long-term problems in recruiting and/or retaining staff. 12 P a g e

13 Employee Salaries Overall 79% of the employers surveyed provided the information on their permanent staff s salaries compared with a 65% compliance rate in There has been a significant increase in staff earning 13,000-19,999, up 10% [2,576 staff] on 2012 levels and this is still the most common [mode] income bracket with 37% of all staff within this salary banding. Staff who earn 24,000-30,999 account for 16% of sample which is up 4% [1,547 staff] on Across the workforce the estimated mean average salary is between 25,032 and 27,190 which compares with an average of 23,144 to 24,584 in Table 7: Employee Salaries [from Employers Survey] SALARY [Permanent employees] 2012 EMPLOYEES % 2016 EMPLOYEES % Absolute Change 2016 vs % Share Change 2016 vs Under 5,000 per annum 342 3% 689 3% % ,999 per annum 404 3% 623 5% % 9,000-12,999 per annum 2,651 19% 1,792 10% ( 859 ) (9.0)% 13,000-19,999 per annum 3,725 27% 6,301 37% 2, % 20,000-23,999 per annum 2,292 17% 1,437 8% ( 855 ) (9.0)% 24,000-30,999 per annum 1,683 12% 3,230 16% 1, % 31,000-40,999 per annum 1,134 8% 1,665 8% % 41,000-49,999 per annum 516 4% 696 3% 180 (1.0)% 50,000-74,999 per annum 414 3% 662 5% % 75,000+ per annum 435 3% 861 5% % Recorded data 13,596 65% 17,956 82% Not specified 7,513 3,985 TOTAL 21, % 21, % Graph 7: Employee salaries 2016 vs and P a g e

14 Employee Demographics Male vs. Female Employees Compared to the 2012 survey there has been a swing of 7% from males to females with male staff account for 56% versus 44% females. This swing to more females is likely to be due to the increase in aircrew although this could not be directly correlated as job type was not segmented by gender. Graph 8a: Gender of Employees [from Employer Survey]. The majority of the workforce [85%] work over 16 hours per week and twice as many females than males to work under 16 hours per week. Graph 8b: % of Employee Gender and Working Hours [from Employers Survey] Looking at the age group distribution across the Gatwick workforce there have been some marginal changes across the age spectrum compared to 2012 and year olds are the largest age group followed by year olds on 22% both of these 2 groups down 1%. 20% of workforce are aged down 2% on and 65+ are5-54 at 19%, down 3% on years olds were up 2% and now account for 15% of the workforce. 14 P a g e

15 Table 9: Age of employees [from Travel to Work survey] AGE GROUPING % 13% 15% % 29% 28% % 23% 22% % 22% 20% % 10% 10% 65 and over 0% 1% 1% Refused/Not stated 1% 2% 4% Unweighted base 6,827 4,597 5,323 Graph 9: Age of employees [from Travel to Work] 2016 vs and Nationality & Ethnicity Employers were asked to provide a breakdown of the staff by nationality and ethnicity and overall the majority of companies [87%] provided this information which was a higher than the response rate of 79% in Some employers could not provide this as this detail was not held in their HR records and a small number of employees were unwilling to provide this information for sensitivity reasons. Table 10: Nationality of Employees from the Employers Survey [from Employers Survey]. NATIONALITY 2008 % 2012 EMPLOYEES 2012 % 2016 EMPLOYEES 2016 % UK 81% 12,851 73% 10,613 95% Other EU 13% 3,980 23% Other European 1% 571 5% 693 4% Non EU/European 5% Recorded data 17,524 11,184 Not specified/disclosed 6,283 TOTAL 22,707 21,019 23, P a g e

16 The majority of staff [12,851] are UK nationals who account for 73% of all staff. A like-for-like comparison with 2012 nationalities could not be made as separate UK and Other EU figures were not gathered although when combined the figures were comparable with EU standing at 96% compared to 95% in out of the 252 companies (27%) provided a breakdown on the ethnicity of their staff which a significantly lower than the response rate of 54% in 2012 and will have an impact on the 2016 figures. White staff account for 85% of staff which is on par with both 2008 and 2012 levels but absolute numbers of white staff has decreased by 1,217. Asian Indian staff account for 4% of staff which mirrored 2012 levels Black African staff account 3% of staff which is up by 1% on 4 years ago. Table 11: Ethnic Origin of Employees [from Employers Survey] ETHNIC ORIGIN 2008 EMPLOYEES % 2012 EMPLOYEES % 2016 EMPLOYEES % Absolute Change 2016 vs % Share Change 2016 vs White 10,228 84% 9,790 86% 8,573 85% ( 1,217 ) (1.0)% Asian Indian 551 5% 417 4% 417 4% - 0.0% Black African 483 4% 189 2% 257 3% % Other Black 165 1% 365 3% 245 2% ( 120 ) (1.0)% Asian Other 392 3% 187 2% 178 2% ( 9 ) 0.0% Asian Pakistani 122 1% 264 2% 157 2% ( 107 ) 0.0% Black Caribbean 157 1% 149 1% 138 1% ( 11 ) 0.0% Asian Chinese 56 1% 46 0% 87 1% % Asian Bangladeshi 35 0% 43 0% 83 1% % Recorded data 12, % 11, % 10, % Not specified/disclosed 10,522 46% 9,569 46% 13,672 57% TOTAL 22,711 21,019 23, P a g e

17 Travel to Work Survey Results A total of 5,323 staff completed the survey, which is a 15% increase in participation compared with 2012, and the table below shows the breakdown of the number of staff who took part across the different job types. The survey sample structure was derived from the Employers Survey and full details of the methodology applied can be found in Appendix C. The table below shows the number of staff by job type [as stated in the Employers Survey] against the number of completed surveys [unweighted] by each job type. The survey sample overall represents 22% of the total staff recorded in the Employers Survey. Table 12: Breakdown of staff by job type [Employers and Travel to Work Survey data]. JOB TYPE 2016 Employers Survey % 2016 Travel to Work Unweighted Sample Air Cabin Crew 5,791 25% 1,147 22% Passenger Services/Sales & Clerical 3,660 16% 1,183 22% Catering, Cleaning & Housekeeping 2,837 12% 315 6% Apron/Ramp/Cargo/Baggage Handing 2,434 10% 349 7% Maintenance Trades Staff 1,897 8% 320 6% Security & Passenger Search/Control 1,822 8% 469 9% Management Other & IT 1,603 7% % Pilots/ATC/ Flight Operations 1,533 7% 305 6% Customs/Immigration/Police/Fire Service 1,073 5% 284 5% Management - Airport/Airline specific 671 3% 377 7% Missing data 486 Total 23, % 5, % % Work Location Over a quarter of all staff [29%] report to work at a South Terminal location which is down from 37% recorded in 2012 which would have been mainly due to Norfolk House changing from offices into the Bloc Hotel. The biggest growth is amongst staff reporting to Atlantic House which has risen to 20% [up from 3% in 2012] as a result of a number of airlines relocating their crew reporting from Concorde House to this location plus new airlines basing their crew reporting in this building. Staff working/reporting to Jubilee House was 16% which is up from 11% in 2012 and is a result of air crew reporting and office-based staff moving from Concorde House to this building. The combination of the Atlantic House and Jubilee House crew reporting has in the Concorde House staff figure falling to 2% from 15% in Longbridge House staff reports also declined significantly due to being converted to the Hampton Hilton Hotel. 17 P a g e

18 Table 13: Where employees report to work [from the Travel to Work Survey]. WORK LOCATION South Terminal 31% 37% 29% Jubilee House 12% 11% 16% Atlantic House 0.5% 3% 16% North Terminal 26% 19% 17% Airfield/Apron 7% 1% 8% Concorde House 17% 15% 2% Ashdown House 1% 2% Maintenance Area 1 1% 2% First Point, Buckingham Gate 1% 1% Viking House 1% 1% Ashdown House Sofitel Hotel Hilton Hotel Viewpoint Maintenance Area 1 Gatwick Police Station 10% 3% 5% World cargo Centre Southside Industrial Area Fuel Farm Longbridge House Other 3% 7% 1% Unweighted base 6,827 4,597 5,323 Weighted base 22,542 21,019 23,807 Working Patterns The majority [84%] of Gatwick s workforce are shift workers which has remained unchanged since The majority of shift workers are aircrew [cabin and pilots] who account for over a third [28%] of all shift workers followed by Passenger Service/handling agents/sales at 15% and Cleaning/Catering/Housekeeping on 12%. Graph 14: Proportion of shift to non-shift staff [from the Travel to Work Survey]. 18 P a g e

19 Across all staff 40% work 5 days a week compared with 36% in 2012, a rise of 4% points, and 35% work a 4 day week which is on par with 2012 levels. There are significant differences amongst shift/non-shift workers with 68% of non-shift workers working 5 days a week which is typical of office-based staff work patterns. By contrast, 39% of shift workers work 4 days a week, up 3% points on 2012, which correlates with more staff working a 4-on-4-off shift pattern. Table 15: Number of days work per week. DAYS WORKED PER WEEK 2008 SHIFT WORKERS 2012 SHIFT WORKERS 2016 SHIFT WORKERS 2016 NON SHIFT WORKERS 2012 ALL STAFF 2016 ALL STAFF 1 Day 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 2 Days 2% 6% 6% 5% 6% 6% 3 Days 5% 8% 8% 5% 8% 7% 4 Days 6% 36% 39% 15% 36% 35% 5 Days 81% 36% 34% 68% 36% 40% 6 Days 3% 10% 9% 4% 10% 8% 7 Days 0% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% Mean Average Unweighted Base 2,490 3,752 4,196 1,127 4,597 5,323 Across all staff the average days worked per week is 4.3 which is on par with Shift workers work less days per week averaging 4.2 days per week versus 4.5 days per week amongst non-shift workers. Graph 15: Number of days worked per week 2016 vs Overall, staff at Gatwick are working longer hours per week compared with % of staff work hours which is up 12% on 2012 and 15% work over 50 hours per week which is up 11% on 4 years ago. Staff working hours is 17%, down 32% versus This increase in hours is likely to be caused by a combination of more temporary staff working more hours, more shift workers on 4-on-4-off shift pattern [48 hours per week] and staff contracted to work longer hours. Across all staff, average hours worked per week is 43 which is an additional 3 hours per week compared to 40 hours recorded in When comparing the average hours amongst shift and non-shift workers, shift workers on average worked longer hours, averaging at 43 hours per week compared to 39 hours amongst non-shift workers. 19 P a g e

20 Table 16: Number of contracted hours worked per week. HOURS WORKED PER WEEK 2012 ALL STAFF 2016 SHIFT WORKERS 2016 NON SHIFT WORKERS 2016 ALL STAFF % Change 2016 vs hours 8% 7% 8% 7% -1% hours 4% 5% 3% 5% 1% hours 7% 6% 4% 6% -1% hours 5% 8% 7% 8% 3% hours 48% 14% 32% 17% -32% hours 11% 15% 21% 16% 5% hours 13% 27% 13% 25% 12% hours 1% 5% 2% 5% 4% hours 2% 5% 2% 4% 2% 61+ hours 1% 6% 1% 6% 5% Mean Average Unweighted base 4,597 4,196 1,127 5,323 Graph 16: Number of hours worked per week 2016 vs The majority of staff [69%] have no flexibility over when they could start or finish their working day/shift although this proportion is down on the 2012 figure of 75%, which suggests that employers are allowing more flexible working arrangements. Not surprisingly there was more flexibility in start/finish time amongst nonshift workers whereas shift workers are more likely to have to hand over to another staff member on the next shift. Table 17: Flexibility with work times. FLEXIBILITY IN START/FINISH TIME 2012 STAFF 2016 STAFF Yes: I have some flexibility when I start or finish 25% 31% No: I have to start and finish at set times 75% 69% Unweighted base 4,597 5, P a g e

21 The opportunity for Gatwick staff to work from home has increased over that in 2012 with 19% of staff working from home between 1-4 times per month compared with only 7% in Non-shift workers who are able to work from home has risen to 42%, versus 38% in 2012 and 17% in This is testament to improvements in mobile working technology which has given staff the flexibility and tools to work remotely. Table 18: Frequency of working at home. FREQUENCY OF HOME WORKING 2012 STAFF 2016 STAFF Never 89% 81% 3-4 times per month 3% 17% 1-2 times per month 4% 2% Less than once a month 4% 0% Unweighted Base 4,597 5,323 Hourly Working Patterns The increase in the number of flights departing early morning has had a significant effect on what time staff are reporting to work at Gatwick with the peak being earlier than in % of staff now start work between which compares with 17% in 2012, a rise of 9%. 13% of staff start between , up from 8%, and a further 11% between up from 10% recorded in The largest increase was staff starting work between which has risen to 11% an increase of 6% compared with Overall, 52% of staff regularly arrive before which correlates with an increase in the number of aircrew, handling agents, check-in and other flight operations roles. Graph 19a: Hour started work 2016 vs P a g e

22 The distribution of times when staff finish work is more evenly spread across a 6 hour period between and The peak finish times are between accounting for 33% of all finish times which correlates with office-based working patterns [ ] and shift-workers in a 12 hours shift running from Graph 19b: Hour finish work 2016 vs When analysing the start and finish times amongst shift and non-shift workers the shift workers the survey captured multiple shift times for shift workers to give greater granularity to the reporting profiles. Graphs 19c and 19d shows the combined start and finish times for shift workers and therefore percentages will total more than 100%. There are distinct differences in start and finish times between shift and non-shift workers. The peak start time amongst shift workers is at 29% with a further 20% starting and and 16% between Amongst non-shift workers the peak start time is [40%], which is a typical start time for office-based staff. Graph 19c: Hour started work by Shift and Non-shift workers. 45% 40% 35% 30% Hour started work SHIFT WORKERS NON-SHIFT WORKERS 40% 29% 25% 20% 15% 16% 20% 17% 16% 10% 5% 0% * 2016 shift times are based on a multiple shift times from shift workers and non-shift workers so do not add to 100%. 22 P a g e

23 The distribution of finish times amongst shift workers are more evenly distributed across the day. That said, 29% of shift workers finish between and a similar proportion finished in the evening between % finished between and a further 13% finished at both of which correlates with a 12 hour shift pattern. The majority of non-shift worker [59%] finish work between which is in-line with typical office-based hours. Graph 19d: Hour finished work by Shift and Non-shift workers. Hour finished work 35% 30% 25% SHIFT WORKERS NON-SHIFT WORKERS 31% 28% 20% 15% 13% 14% 15% 17% 14%14% 10% 5% 0% * 2016 shift times are based on a multiple shift times from shift workers and non-shift workers so do not add to 100%. 23 P a g e

24 Journey to Work Staff were asked how they usually travel to work at Gatwick and where they used more than one mode they were asked to identify the mode used for the longest part of their journey. Overall, 61% of staff travelled to work by car which is down 9.2% on four years ago. Within the car users, those who travelled to work alone was 52% compared with 60% in Of the car users 6% travelled with passengers and the majority [86%] of these passengers also worked at Gatwick and a small proportion 14% dropped off passengers on route which tended to be children at a nursery or school. Public bus/coach usage was 16% up 4% on 2012 levels and is a result of an increase in the number of routes and frequency of local bus services. Train usage was 12% up marginally on 2012 though the underlying figure may be higher as the survey coincided with rail service disruption that may have affected these results. The highest growth is in staff using company transport which was 6%, up 4% on This increase is a result of more companies providing company transport to get their staff to Gatwick as more staff are being recruited from outside the traditional catchment areas. In addition to this more airline staff are designated as London Airport based and therefore crew transport is being provided to Gatwick Airport. There has been no change in those walking [1%] or cycling to work [2%]. Table 20: Mode of travel for journey to work today. MODE OF TRANSPORT TO/FROM WORK % Change 2016 vs Car driver travelling alone 60% 52% -7% 65% Car driver with passenger 6% 6% 0% I am a passenger in the car 4% 5% 2% -2% CAR: All those travelling by car 69% 70% 61% -9% Public Bus/Coach 13% 12% 16% 4% Rail 11% 11% 12% 1% Company Transport 1% 1% 6% 4% Bicycle 1% 2% 2% 0% Walk/run 1% 1% 1% 0% Motorbike 1% 1% 1% 0% Plane 1% 1% 0% Taxi 2% 1% 1% 0% Not stated 1% 1% 2% Unweighted base 6,827 4,597 5,323 The range of distances travelled by staff to work has remained fairly consistent with 4 years ago although those with short commutes [up to 3 miles] is up to 11% [+2%] and those with long commutes [51+ miles] has also grown to 8% which would have been influenced by the rise in use of company transport and wider catchment area. The largest proportion of staff [36%] travel between 4-10 miles to work which on par with The overall effect of these changes in distance has meant the average journey distance to work at Gatwick is 23 miles which is down from 25 miles recorded 4 years ago. 24 P a g e

25 Table 21: Distance to work by road [self-estimated miles] DISTANCE TO WORK BY ROAD Change 2016 vs Up tp 3 miles 9% 11% 2% 4-10 miles 37% 36% -1% miles 9% 8% -1% miles 8% 8% 0% miles 7% 7% 0% miles 8% 8% 0% miles 5% 4% -1% miles 4% 5% 1% miles 6% 6% -1% miles 3% 4% 1% 71+ miles 4% 4% 0% Average No. of miles Unweighted Base 4,510 5,323 Graph 21: Distance to work by road [self-estimated miles] 2016 vs Staff journey times to Gatwick have increased since % of employees at Gatwick estimate their journey time to work as 20 minutes or less which is down 5% on % of staff had journey times of between minutes. The biggest growth was in journeys of minutes, now 11% and up 2% on The number of staff with journeys of over 60 minutes has also increased by 2% to 14%. It is worth noting that the rail disruption at the time of the survey are likely to have inflated journey times as well as an increase of commute distances. 25 P a g e

26 Table 22: Journey Time to Work [self-estimated]. JOURNEY TIME TO WORK Change 2016 vs minutes 12% 9% -3% mins 26% 24% -2% mins 18% 18% 0% mins 12% 10% -2% mins 12% 12% 0% mins 9% 11% 2% mins 2% 2% 0% mins 3% 3% 0% mins 3% 3% 0% 91+ mins 4% 6% 2% Average No. of minutes Unweighted Base 4,510 5,323 Average journey time is 43 minutes which is up from 38 minutes in 2012, so average commute times have increased by 5 minutes. Graph 22a: Journey Time to Work by Road [estimated] 2016 vs Graph 22b: Average journey time to work by mode of transport. 26 P a g e

27 Workforce Catchment area Gatwick s workforce is predominantly drawn from Sussex with 63% of staff living in this county and further 19% living in Surrey. Kent and London both accounted for a further 5% of postcodes. Of the 3.4% who commuted from Other UK locations, Dorset, West Midlands, Bedfordshire and Wiltshire were most common locations. A small proportion [0.8%] lived overseas [mainly Spain and France] and the majority of these staff were aircrew. Table 23a: Employees main place of residence. COUNTY OF RESIDENCE 2016 Weighted Count 2016 SUSSEX % SURREY % KENT % LONDON % HAMPSHIRE 363 1% ESSEX 236 1% BERKSHIRE 156 1% MIDDLESEX % BUCKINGHAMSHIRE % Other UK Location % Overseas 204 1% Not completed 491 Weighted base 23, % Of those staff who live within Sussex over half [51%] live in the Crawley postcode districts RH11 and RH10 which is up from 35% recorded 4 years ago. 8% commute from Horsham [RH12 & RH13] and a further 5% from Brighton and Hove area [BN1/BN2/BN3]. Table 23b: Top Postcode Districts for amongst employees who reside within Sussex. TOP SUSSEX POSTCODES POSTCODE DISTRICT 2016 Weighted Count 2016 RH11 Crawley % RH10 Crawley % RH12, 13 Horsham % BN1, BN2, BN3 Brighton & Hove 740 5% RH15 Burgess Hill 414 3% BN11, BN12, BN13, BN14, BN15, BN16 Worthing 393 3% RH17, RH19 East Grinstead 357 2% RH16 Haywards Heath 311 2% BN20, BN21 BN22, BN23, BN24, BN26 Eastbourne 241 2% BN2 Brighton 170 1% RH10 Copthorne 149 1% TN22 Uckfield 120 1% BN15 Lancing 109 1% RH10 Crawley Down 105 1% BN6 Hassocks 94 1% BN43 Shoreham 92 1% RH13 Southwater 92 1% RH14 Billingshurst 88 1% BN25 Seaford 76 1% RH16 Lindfield 73 1% Other Sussex postcodes % Not specified 3 Weighted base 14, % 27 P a g e

28 Looking at the top postcodes across all counties, 32% reside in the Crawley postcode districts RH11 and RH10. A further 5% reside in Horley [RH6] and 3% in Horsham [RH12]. Table 23c: Top Postcode Districts within UK TOP UK POSTCODES POSTCODE DISTRICT 2016 Weighted Count 2016 RH11 Crawley % RH10 Crawley % RH6 Horley % RH12 Horsham 743 3% CR0 Croydon 567 2% RH15 Burgess Hill 414 2% RH13 Horsham 380 2% RH19 East Grinstead 357 2% BN1 Brighton 340 1% RH16 Haywards Heath 311 1% RH2 Reigate 295 1% RH1 Redhill 280 1% BN3 Hove 230 1% BN2 Brighton 170 1% RH10 Copthorne 149 1% BN14 Worthing 138 1% TN22 Uckfield % CR2 Croydon % BN15 Lancing % BN13 Worthing % BN11 Worthing % RH10 Crawley Down % BN6 Hassocks % Other postcodes % Weighted base 23, % 28 P a g e

29 Catchment area maps The following series of maps plots the postcodes by the mode of transport used to travel to the airport which have been colour-coded to illustrate the concentration of postcodes. Figure 1: UK postcodes by mode of transport. 29 P a g e

30 Figure 2: Sussex (63%) postcodes by mode of transport. Figure 3: Surrey (19%) postcodes by mode of transport. 30 P a g e

31 Figure 4: Kent (4.9%) postcodes by mode of transport. Figure 5: London (4.9%) postcodes by mode of transport. 31 P a g e

32 Figure 6: Postcodes for staff who commute to work by train, bus/coach or company transport. Figure 7: Postcodes for staff who commute to work by by car, taxi, motorbike or Other. 32 P a g e

33 Figure 8: Postcodes for staff who commute to work by bicycle or walk/run. Figure 9: Crawley Postcodes [RH10/RH11] by mode of transport. 33 P a g e

34 Transport Options All staff who had driven to work [with no passengers] were asked whether they could have realistically used an alternative methods of transport to travel to Gatwick. Two thirds of car drivers [66%] mentioned at least one alternative to driving that they could use and multiple modes of transport could be given. 31% of drivers said that train was a viable alternative to driving which was down 9% on 2012 levels but is figure may be underrepresented due to the rail disruption at the time of the survey. 29% said they had an option to car share which compared with 14% in % said they could travel by bus/coach and 12% could use a taxi. Company transport was a new option to emerge as a possible alternative with 2% giving this response. Graph 24: Alternative transport to using a car 2016 v Alternative transport to commuting by car * % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Train Car Share Bus or Coach Taxi/Minicab Bicycle Motorbike Walk Company transport 2% 2% 7% 9% 12% 24% 29% 31% * Multiple response question so will not total 100% When staff were asked about the likelihood of them using public transport [train or bus] the main reasons for choosing to travel by car rather than by train were that the station is too far from home [43%] with a further 39% stating journey would take longer and 39% felt the train more expensive. 37% said the train services were not running when they started/finished work and 34% felt the train service was unreliable but this would have been influenced by the rail disruption at the time of the survey. 34 P a g e

35 Table 25: Reasons for choosing to travel by car rather than train. REASONS FOR NOT TRAVELING BY TRAIN % Change 2016 vs Train station too far away from home 37% 43% 6% Journey takes longer by train 36% 39% 3% Trains more expensive than going by car 35% 39% 4% Trains not running when I start or finish 32% 37% 5% Train service unreliable 16% 34% 18% Have to change trains too many times 15% 12% -3% Trains overcrowded 7% 12% 5% Train station too far away from workplace 11% 6% -5% Don't know train times or how often they run 7% 5% -2% Have to drop-off/pickup other people 2% 5% 3% Do not feel safe on trains 4% 4% 0% No service to Gatwick/no direct service 2% Comfort/Have luggage/work equipment 1% Other 12% 5% -7% NB. Multiresponse question so will not add to 100% Unweighted Base: 2,733 3,077 The top reasons for not wanting to travel to Gatwick by bus was longer commute times [57%]. A further 36% said bus services not running at shift start/finish time and 25% felt bus stops were too far away from their home to be an option. Table 26: Reasons for choosing to travel by car rather than bus. REASONS FOR NOT TRAVELING BY BUS % Change 2016 vs Journey takes longer time by bus 43% 57% 14% Buses not running when I start/finish 32% 36% 4% Bus stop too far away from home 20% 25% 5% Buses more expensive than driving 16% 22% 6% Buses not reliable 16% 20% 4% Have to change buses too many times 19% 17% -2% Don't know bus times or how often they run 12% 11% -1% Buses overcrowded 5% 8% 3% Bus stop too far away from workplace 9% 8% -1% No bus route/service available 7% Have to drop someone off at another location 3% 6% 3% Do not feel safe on buses 4% 4% 0% Comfort/flexibility 2% Other 15% 4% -11% NB. Multiresponse question so will not add to 100% Unweighted Base: 2,733 3,077 When staff were asked about what might encourage them use public transport to travel to work nearly two thirds of staff [65%] gave at least one factor that might persuade them to change to rail or bus. The greatest incentive was cost with 37% wanting cheaper fare s and a third [33%] mentioning there would need to be better staff discounts for them to consider changing to public transport. 35 P a g e

36 Frequency and times of services was also a deterrent with 28% of staff saying they would need more frequent services, 28% wanting earlier morning services and 22% wanting later services in the evening which was particularly important for shift workers. Table 27: What would encourage use of public transport amongst car users. WHAT WOULD ENCOURAGE USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT 2016 SHIFT WORKER 2016 NON SHIFT WORKER 2016 ALL STAFF Cheaper fares generally 37% 33% 37% Would never change to public transport 36% 35% 35% Staff discounts scheme 35% 27% 33% Earlier services in the morning 29% 22% 28% More frequent/quicker services 31% 10% 28% More reliable services 27% 25% 26% Later services in the evening 24% 6% 20% New routes/stops closer to my home 18% 18% 18% Make public transport more comfortable 6% 7% 6% New routes/stops closer to workplace 6% 6% 6% Make public transport safer 4% 3% 4% Other 3% 6% 4% NB. Multiresponse so will not add to 100% Unweighted Base: 2, ,077 Graph 27: What would encourage use of public transport amongst car users. What would encourage car users to change to public transport * 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Cheaper fares generally 37% Would never change to public transport 35% Staff discounts scheme 33% Earlier services in the morning 28% More frequent/quicker services 28% More reliable services 26% Later services in the evening 20% New routes/stops closer to my home 18% Make public transport more comfortable 6% New routes/stops closer to workplace 6% Make public transport safer 4% * Multiple response question so will not total 100% Awareness of Gatwick Travel Schemes has declined since 2012 with only just over half of all staff [52%] being aware of local bus or coach services which was down on the 62% who were aware of the schemes in Staff who knew about the Ride-to-work scheme was also down to 24% [from 45% in 2012] and awareness of train discounts were 34% compared to 61% in Table 28: Awareness of Gatwick Commuter initiatives. AWARENESS OF GATWICK TRAVEL SCHEMES Discounts on local bus services 34% 62% Discounts on coach services 18% Ride-to-work scheme 45% 24% Discounts on train travel within Gatwick Staff Travel area 61% 34% Unweighted Base: 4,597 5, P a g e

37 Amongst those staff who were aware of the travel schemes just over a quarter [26%] were currently using the discounted local bus services and a further 8% of staff are using discounts on coach services and these two discounts combined at up 22% compared with usage in % of staff were using the train discount which has increased by 9% on 2012 usage. 5% are currently benefiting from the Ride-to-work scheme up 4% on 2012 figures. Table 29: Usage of Gatwick Travel Schemes [amongst those who were aware]. USAGE OF TRAVEL SCHEMES [Amongst those who are aware] Travel Scheme Travel Scheme User User Discounts on local bus services 26% 12% Discounts on coach services 8% Ride-to-work scheme 1% 5% Discounts on train within Staff Travel area 7% 16% Unweighted Base: 1,444 When employees were asked about their ownership of electric vehicles only 3% of employees said they owned/leased an electric vehicle with most using the vehicle to Gatwick 4-5 times a week. 10% chose not to drive the vehicle to work as the train was easier or a family member used it during the week. With regard to future interest in electric vehicles, 13% of employees said they had either looked into or considered buying/leasing an electric vehicle in the future with hybrid vehicles attracting more interest than a full electric vehicle. Table 30: Ownership and interest in Electric vehicles. OWNERSHIP OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE % HAVE LOOKED INTO BUYING AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE [Amongst Non-owners] % Hybrid vehicle 0.60% Hybrid vehicle 5.7% Plug-in Hybrid vehicle 0.10% Plug-in Hybrid vehicle 8.7% Full Electric vehicle 0.30% Full Electric vehicle 3.6% Do not own/lease an electric vehicle 96.7% Not stated 2.3% Would not consider buying an electric vehicle 85% Unweighted Base: 5,323 Unweighted Base: 5,274 When non-owners of electric vehicles were asked about the likelihood of buying/leasing this type of vehicle in the future, just over half [55%] said they would be very/quite unlikely to do so, 15% would be very/quite likely and the remaining 27% were undecided. Graph 31: Future interest in Electric vehicles. 37 P a g e

38 Appendix A: Methodology Employer Survey Sample Structure The same methodology was adopted as that used in the 2012 and previous Employer surveys. The survey aimed to include all companies that are located within the boundaries of Gatwick airport. The boundary for the purpose of this survey is that used by the planning authorities. This is different from the land or property owned by Gatwick Airport Ltd (GAL) and also differs from the boundary defined by the Gatwick Commuter scheme. This means in practise that employers such as Premier Inn were included in this survey but do not have access to the Gatwick Commuter scheme. No single definitive sample list of companies with staff on site was available to structure the survey sample. As with all previous surveys the sample was derived from a combination of sources to provide a master employer list. This was an amalgamation of companies who participated in the 2012 survey, companies with staff who held a valid airport ID pass [provided by the GAL unit] and companies with premises on the airport site [provided GAL Property] and an audit of other companies who were known/thought to Gatwick-based staff. A total 560 companies were contacted and 252 completed the survey, 103 companies confirmed they did not/no longer had staff based at Gatwick and 11 companies declined to take part in the survey. The master employer list was updated with contact details of the staff members [name, job title, address and telephone number] within each employer that could provide information on employee numbers. In the instance that the was not valid then alternative contact details were obtained from the Gatwick ID unit authorised signatory list or a site visit was made to the employer offices. Employers who were eligible to take part but did not complete the survey within the deadline were contacted by phone to ask them to complete the on-line survey. Some employers were unable to complete the on-line survey [due to internal IT firewalls] so they were either sent a PDF of the questionnaire which was completed and e- mailed back or they completed the survey by telephone with an interviewer from the Gatwick Survey Team. The majority of key employers known to have a significant workforce at the airport completed the survey and other those who did not respond confirmed they no longer had staff based at Gatwick and were therefore ineligible to participate. Employers who provided separate staff data for different departments [e.g. Engineering, Aircrew and Customer Services] were amalgamated to give total staff number. Where possible, the parent company of multiple outlets [e.g. TRG The Restaurant Group who own multiple catering outlets] was surveyed to obtain the data for all their operators on the Gatwick site. If this was not possible the individual outlets were surveyed separately and responses added together to provide a single employer record. Similarly where separate South & North staff numbers were provided for the same employers these were also amalgamated. Survey Design & Distribution The 2012 survey questionnaire was reviewed with the Gatwick s Master Planning and Community Engagement teams and the majority of the content was retained. Some questions relating to Gatwick Commuter scheme were removed and replaced with additional questions on future recruitment but key questions were retained to ensure consistency/comparability with previous year s survey data. A copy of the Employer survey can be found at Appendix C. A small number of key employers [known to have significant workforce at the airport] declined to participate in the survey. In this instance these employers were contacted and asked, at a minimum, to provide their total number of staff. Although most complied with this request some Government employers still declined to participate so are underrepresented in this survey although employee numbers were not significant enough to bias the overall survey findings. 38 P a g e

39 The letter below was ed to all eligible employers which detailed the background on the survey with a link to the on-line survey. Dear colleague, Gatwick Airport Employment Survey 2016 Every 4 years Gatwick Airport Limited undertakes a survey amongst employers and their employees who work on airport. In the 2012 survey the majority of companies [600+] completed the on-line survey so we hope we get a similar response this year and, as a valued partner, we would really appreciate your participation. The survey has 2 parts, the Employers Survey, which focuses on your company s permanent & temporary staff who work at Gatwick Airport. This information will provide important employment information to GAL and local/regional government to help plan sustainable services and facilities in the future. It also provides confirmation on how the airport contributes to the local economy. The attached document details the key information required. The second survey, called Travel to Work Survey, is completed by your employees and will gather information such as travel to/from the airport and working patterns. We will send you a separated with details on this survey shortly. Please find below the link to the Employers Survey and would appreciate you completing it by Tuesday 31 st May Begin the Employers Survey If you have any questions about the survey please Sarah Kemp [Research & Insight Manger] at Research@gatwickairport.com. Yours sincerely, Guy Stephenson Chief Commercial Officer Gatwick Airport Limited Alison Addy Head of Community Engagement Gatwick Airport Limited Data Cleaning For quality control purposes all surveys where checked to ensure that the detailed breakdown of employee characteristics matched the total employee numbers specified. If errors were identified the employer was contacted back by phone to obtain correct information or a PDF copy of their questionnaire was ed back to them to be revised and provide amendments. After correspondence with some airlines, handling agents and retailers it came to light that a significant number of their staff were employed through agencies [6 in total] and in this instance staff numbers supplied by the agencies were removed from the survey data to ensure these figures were double-counted. 39 P a g e

40 Appendix B: Employer Survey Questionnaire 40 P a g e

41 41 P a g e

42 42 P a g e

43 43 P a g e

44 44 P a g e

45 45 P a g e

46 46 P a g e

47 47 P a g e

48 48 P a g e

49 49 P a g e

50 Appendix E: Gatwick Boundary Map 50 P a g e