(Espinosa, 2002). Adds further in its analysis Camacaro, the special importance of this approach lies in the fact that the behavior of a worker is not one resulting from existing organizational factors, but that depends on perceptions that the worker of these factors has. However, these perceptions depend on good measurement of activities, interactions and another series of experiences that each Member has with the organization. That is why the quality of life at work reflects the interaction between personal and organizational characteristics. Also, we are reminded that the concept of quality of employment has been widely promoted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) (1997), as antithesis to job insecurity and the growth excessive in some cities in the urban informal economy. For this organism labor progress is measured by the quality of the behaviour of the labour market, through the rate of open unemployment, informality, the real wage of the industry, the real minimum wage and productivity. The quality of life at work is a management philosophy that enhances the dignity of the employee, makes cultural changes and provide opportunities for development and personal progress. Chef Carrie Levi shines more light on the discussion.
(French, 1996: 375). Definitely exposes Camacaro, that the quality of life at work allows us to explain the purpose of evaluating the policies of human resources or, for example, of check the incidence and impact of changes, or of certain specific actions. The measure can serve, equally, as a tool for evaluation of the different styles of management, when it is possible to compare the results by departments, areas or sections. But let us not forget the theory: is measured primarily to improve. It should not be forgotten, that the quality of life at work assimilates two antagonistic positions: on the one hand, the vindication of employee well-being and satisfaction at work and, on the other hand, the interest of organizations by their potential effects on productivity and quality of life. (Chiavenato, 2003: 407).
Insists Camacaro in pointing out on the scope of the topic and implications, that the quality of life at work is a different way of life within the Organization, which seeks the development of the worker, as well as its business efficiency. There are benefits for both, these benefits will allow the Organization direct its forces and resources previously used to tackle problems of the workers, towards activities of greater importance for the achievement of its objectives. There is no single definition accepted by all of the term quality of life at work, but all or almost all the conceptions related with this notion, enclose several common characteristics, namely: that must be considered. Conclusion are given opportunities for changes in the quality of life of the work in a business sector venezolana unproductive, risky, consequence of the actions of a State Socialist has been declared and that has seriously affected organizational behavior, its climate, because all of this, in the way that has affected and suffer the quality of work life. Should management evaluate working conditions in all its aspects from its ergonomics, features, performance, organizational structure, wages and give way to actions, which rescue trust and identification of a good quality of life at work, not neglecting that when a significant number of employees develop their quality of life, projected to the community a competitive advantage as a company. Original author and source of the article.