1 | S t r o n a Table of contents Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 Information on the data collection ................................................................................. 3 A summary of the results of the survey ............................................................................ 5 Conclusions from the survey ....................................................................................... 24 Annex 1: comparison of results — correlations ................................................................. 27 Annex 2: map ......................................................................................................... 43 List of figures ......................................................................................................... 44 2 | S t r o n a Introduction A survey among the employees of Warsaw/Modlin Airport was conducted by the Mazovian Office for Regional Planning in Warsaw with the support of the airport management. The data was collected using PAPI and CAWI methods, i.e. the results were based on both paper and online surveys. 247 employees of the Warsaw/Modlin Airport participated in the survey. The report from the survey conducted among the airport staff consists of the following parts: Information about the data collection; A summary of responses; Conclusions from the study; A presentation of the results relevant to the objective of the study, including correlations, particularly those between: o answers to general questions (gender, age, education, earnings, work system), and the usually chosen means of transport in commuting to/from work; o the time of commuting to work and the distance travelled, and the usual means of transport in commuting to/from work; o the assessment of individual means of transport and the usual mode of transport in commuting to/from work; o the assessment of individual means of transport and the place of residence; o the awareness of the problem of CO2 emissions and the tendency to resign from the car, and answers to general questions (gender, age, education, earnings, work schedule) and default means of transport when commuting; o the factors that would lead to giving up commuting by car, and time needed to travel to work, distance travelled, stopping on the way to/from work and the place of residence. Information on the data collection The survey was conducted from 23.03 to 6.04.2018. 247 respondents, employees of the Warsaw/Modlin Airport, participated in the survey. Figure 1. Date of filling in the survey 25% 21.5% 20% 19.0% 15% 13.0% % of % responses 9.3% 10% 7,.% 6.9% 5.3% 4.9% 5.7% 5% 3.2% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.8% 0.4% 0.8% 0% Source: own research based on (results of) survey 3 | S t r o n a According to 57.4% of respondents participating in the survey, the weather was cloudy at the time of answering. On other days it was sunny (23.89%), or it was snowing (11.34%). It should be noted that the answer "cloudy" was chosen mainly on the following days: March: 23–31.03.2018, April: 01–06.04.2018, Figure 2. What was the weather like when you left for work? cloudy 57% sunny 24% snow 11% rain 3% dark 2% thunderstorm 1% glazed frost 0% dawn 0% frost 0% refusal to answer 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% % of responses Source: own research based on (results of) survey 4 | S t r o n a A summary of the results of the survey Among the respondents there was a larger number of men than women — their share in the research sample amounted to as much as 61.54%. Women constituted 38.06% of respondents (due to 0.4% of participants not answering this question). Figure 3. Respondents’ gender 38% 62% women men Source: own research based on (results of) survey The research sample was considerably diversified in terms of the age of the respondents. The majority of respondents were in the age groups of 26–35 and 36–46 years (respectively 34.01% and 30.77%). A relatively high share also consisted of people aged 46–55 (18.22%). The share of no other age group exceeded the 10% threshold. Figure 4. Respondents’ age 40% 34% 35% 31% 30% 25% 20% 18% % of responses% of 15% 10% 10% 7% 5% 0% 0% < 26 years 26 - 35 years 36 - 45 years 46 - 55 years 56 - 65 years refusal to asnwer Source: own research based on (results of) survey 5 | S t r o n a Regarding the level of education of the respondents taking part in the survey, the largest number of people had higher education (almost 60% of all respondents). The second most numerous category were people with secondary education (over 35%). The remaining variants of the response were chosen by a significantly lower number of participants. Figure 5. Respondents’ level of education 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 35% 30% % of % responses 20% 10% 4% 0% 1% 0% primary secondary higher vocational refusal to answer Source: own research based on (results of) survey In the case of the question concerning current professional occupation, many respondents refused to answer this question (almost 14). Nevertheless, the most frequently indicated position was that of a border guard officer which was chosen by 22% of survey participants. The next most numerous category were specialist positions, indicated by 17% of respondents, and customer service (16% of responses). Slightly less frequently chosen by respondents were the occupations of a physical worker (8%) and fireman (7%), while the lowest number of respondents represented managerial positions (5%). 6 | S t r o n a Figure 6. Respondents’ professional occupation Officer of the Border Guard 21.86% specialists (in total) : 17.35% official 4.45% administrtion 2.02% office worker 2.02% economist 1.62% administration employee 1.62% inspector 0.81% engineer 0.81% IT administrator 0.40% automation engineer 0.40% builder 0.40% member of the civil service corps 0.40% surveyor 0.40% sales representative 0.40% civil engineer 0.40% IT 0.40% accountant 0.40% employee of MSW 0.40% customer service (in total): 16.57% service worker 4.86% cashier for the currency exchange 3.64% agent for passenger service 2.83% coordinator 1.62% independent agent for passenger service 1.21% information and service employee 0.81% pax agent 0.40% customer service 0.40% parking lot service 0.40% passenger service 0.40% labour worker (in total): 8.47% mechanic 2.43% electrician 1.21% maintenance technician 0.81% security control operator 0.81% OUP 0.81% working pensioner 0.40% driver 0.40% hardware operator 0.40% trainee - IT technician 0.40% port and terminal service technicians 0.40% guard 0.40% fire service (in total): 7.28% firemen 6.88% Airport Rescue and Fire Service 0.40% management (in total): 4.84% manager 1.62% airport operational officer 1.62% compliance manager 0.40% chief accountant 0.40% key specialist 0.40% safety manager 0.40% 0,00% 5,00% 10,00% 15,00% 20,00% 25,00% % of responses Source: own research based on (results of) survey 7 | S t r o n a The highest percentage of respondents in this study consisted of people whose net salary was in the range of PLN 2,001––3,000 (38.46%). A smaller number of respondents (29.15%) earned from PLN 3,001 to PLN 4,000, and the earnings of a little over 19% of respondents exceeded PLN 4,000. Less than 9% of respondents stated that their earnings do not exceed PLN 2,000, and the remaining 4.45% refused to answer this question. Figure 7. Respondents’ earnings [PLN] 40% 38% 35% 29% 30% 25% 19% 20% % of responses% of 15% 9% 10% 4% 5% 0% 1500-2000 2001-3000 3001-4000 more than 4000 refusal to answer Source: own research based on (results of) survey Concerning the work schedules of respondents, just over half (55.47%) of participants of the survey stated that they work in a multi–shift (rotating) system. The one–shift system, in turn, was the choice of almost 43% of respondents. 1.62% refused to answer this question. Figure 8. Respondents’ type of work schedule 2% 43% 55% one-shift multi-shift refusal to answer Source: own research based on (results of) survey The departure points of the respondents’ journey to work were very diverse. Due to the proximity of the city to the airport, the largest share of employees commuted from Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki (1/3 of respondents). A considerable number of respondents came from Warsaw (16%), but given the division of the city into districts, the percentage of employees from individual districts was not high (up to 3.13%). Among the towns that constitute important starting locations of commuting employees, Legionowo (7.59%) and Płońsk (4.91%) should be mentioned. The remaining cities are 8 | S t r o n a characterized by lower shares of responses in the research sample, however, their total share was very high– over 38% , resulting from a considerable fragmentation of commuting sources. Figure 9. From where do you commute to work? (Part 1 of 2) Baboszewo 0.89% Białystok 0.45% Brochów 0.45% Bydgoszcz 0.45% Chotomów 0.89% Cieksyn 0.45% Czarnowo 0.45% Czerwińsk nad Wisłą 0.45% Czosnów 0.89% Dębina 0.45% Dębinki 0.45% Dziekanów Nowy 0.45% Gasocin 0.45% Grodzisk Mazowiecki 0.89% Jabłonna 2.23% Janówek Pierwszy 0.45% Kampinos 0.45% Kazun Polski 0.45% Kazuń Bielany 0.89% Kątne 0.45% Kosewko 0.89% Kroczewo 0.89% Legionowo 7.59% Maków Maz. 0.89% Marki 1.34% Nasielsk 3.13% Nowe Grochale/Leoncin 0.45% Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki 33.40% Nowy Kamion 0.45% Ostrów Maz. 0.45% Płock 0.45% Płońsk 4.91% Pomiechówek 3.13% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% % of responses Source: own research based on (results of) survey 9 | S t r o n a Figure 10.