an article by Pepita Barlow (University of Cambridge, UK), Aaron Reeves ((London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK; University of Oxford, UK), Martin McKee (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK) and David Stuckler (Bocconi University, Milan, Italy) published in Social Policy and Administration Volume 53 Issue 7 (December 2019)
Abstract
Sociologists have long acknowledged that being in a precarious labour market position, whether employed or unemployed, can harm peoples' health. However, scholars have yet to fully investigate the possible contextual, institutional determinants of this relationship.
Two institutions that were overlooked in previous empirical studies are the regulations that set minimum compensation for dismissal, severance payments, and entitlements to a period of notice before dismissal, notice periods. These institutions may be important for workers' health as they influence the degree of insecurity that workers are exposed to.
Here, we test this hypothesis by examining whether longer notice periods and greater severance payments protect the health of labour market participants, both employed and unemployed.
We constructed two cohorts of panel data before and during the European recession using data from 22 countries in the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (person years = 338,000).
We find more generous severance payments significantly reduce the probability that labour market participants, especially the unemployed, will experience declines in self‐reported health, with a slightly weaker relationship for longer notice periods.
Full text (PDF 19pp)
Showing posts with label job_loss. Show all posts
Showing posts with label job_loss. Show all posts
Wednesday, 4 December 2019
Tuesday, 30 April 2019
Will robots really take our jobs? [feedly]
a post by Daniel Aaronson and Brian Phelan for the OUP blog
Robot arm technology by jarmoluk. Public domain via Pixabay
The fear of automation technology and its potential to displace a large portion of the global labor force is nearly ubiquitous. A 2018 survey from the Pew Research Center reports that almost 80 percent of respondents across 10 countries believe that robots and computers are likely to take over much of the work currently done by humans sometime in the next 50 years and this change will cause much more harm than good, including job loss and rising inequality.
A certain unease about technology is warranted as there is strong evidence that technological innovation causes some people to lose their jobs. However, there is no credible evidence that technological change – at any point in time – has led to a net decline in overall employment. Still, it’s only natural to wonder whether this time could be different.
Continue reading
Robot arm technology by jarmoluk. Public domain via Pixabay
The fear of automation technology and its potential to displace a large portion of the global labor force is nearly ubiquitous. A 2018 survey from the Pew Research Center reports that almost 80 percent of respondents across 10 countries believe that robots and computers are likely to take over much of the work currently done by humans sometime in the next 50 years and this change will cause much more harm than good, including job loss and rising inequality.
A certain unease about technology is warranted as there is strong evidence that technological innovation causes some people to lose their jobs. However, there is no credible evidence that technological change – at any point in time – has led to a net decline in overall employment. Still, it’s only natural to wonder whether this time could be different.
Continue reading
Saturday, 14 October 2017
Working History
an article by Ryan Avent published in RSA Journal Issue 4 2016-17
In a paper published in 2014, Carl Benedict Frey and Michael Osborne, of Oxford University, analysed the nature of the tasks involved in different lines of work to gauge their “automatability”. They reckoned that 47% of jobs in the USA are at risk of computerisation in the next few decades.
A paper published by the OECD in 2016 looked instead at the potential for automation of tasks within jobs, rather than of occupational categories as a whole, and concluded that while many workers will see their jobs change as certain tasks are automated away, only about 9% of jobs are fully automatable.
See The Wealth of Humans: Work, Power, and Status in the Twenty-first Century by Ryan Avent at https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25663661-the-wealth-of-humans
In a paper published in 2014, Carl Benedict Frey and Michael Osborne, of Oxford University, analysed the nature of the tasks involved in different lines of work to gauge their “automatability”. They reckoned that 47% of jobs in the USA are at risk of computerisation in the next few decades.
A paper published by the OECD in 2016 looked instead at the potential for automation of tasks within jobs, rather than of occupational categories as a whole, and concluded that while many workers will see their jobs change as certain tasks are automated away, only about 9% of jobs are fully automatable.
See The Wealth of Humans: Work, Power, and Status in the Twenty-first Century by Ryan Avent at https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25663661-the-wealth-of-humans
Thursday, 20 July 2017
No more robot wars in London
a post by Torsten Bell published by Resolution Foundation on 2 May 2017
“The robots are coming to take our jobs”, the Evening Standard told Londoners in December 2016. In case that didn’t depress their readers enough, the article went on to spell out the coming doom: “The sheer pace of change in computational power and grinding efficiencies of automation will alter or eliminate many of our jobs, far faster than we anticipate.”
And then, to ensure the anxiety was sufficiently widespread, they reminded their middle-class readers that “many of the relatively fortunate in the professional class in London will face upheavals too”.
Anxiety about the impact of robots on the world of work has been a hot topic across Western countries for several years. You couldn’t move at Davos last year without seeing grown men (it’s always men) with their heads in their hands predicting the end of work. Bill Gates is so worried that he has called for a robots tax.
Continue reading
“The robots are coming to take our jobs”, the Evening Standard told Londoners in December 2016. In case that didn’t depress their readers enough, the article went on to spell out the coming doom: “The sheer pace of change in computational power and grinding efficiencies of automation will alter or eliminate many of our jobs, far faster than we anticipate.”
And then, to ensure the anxiety was sufficiently widespread, they reminded their middle-class readers that “many of the relatively fortunate in the professional class in London will face upheavals too”.
Anxiety about the impact of robots on the world of work has been a hot topic across Western countries for several years. You couldn’t move at Davos last year without seeing grown men (it’s always men) with their heads in their hands predicting the end of work. Bill Gates is so worried that he has called for a robots tax.
Continue reading
Monday, 13 May 2013
Gender Differences in Involuntary Job Loss: Why Are Men More Likely to Lose Their Jobs?
an article by Roger Wilkins and Mark Wooden (The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) published in Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society Volume 52 Issue 2 (April 2013)
Abstract
Empirical studies have consistently reported that rates of involuntary job loss are significantly lower among female employees than among males. Only rarely, however, have the reasons for this differential been the subject of detailed investigation.
In this article, household panel survey data from Australia are used that also find higher rates of job loss among men than among women. This differential, however, largely disappears once controls for industry and occupation are included.
These findings suggest that the observed gender differential primarily reflects systematic differences in the types of jobs into which men and women select.
Abstract
Empirical studies have consistently reported that rates of involuntary job loss are significantly lower among female employees than among males. Only rarely, however, have the reasons for this differential been the subject of detailed investigation.
In this article, household panel survey data from Australia are used that also find higher rates of job loss among men than among women. This differential, however, largely disappears once controls for industry and occupation are included.
These findings suggest that the observed gender differential primarily reflects systematic differences in the types of jobs into which men and women select.
Friday, 15 March 2013
Job loss and its aftermath among managers and professionals: wounded, fragmented and flexible
an article by Yiannis Gabriel (University of Bath, UK) and David E Gray and Harshita Goregaokar (University of Surrey, UK) published in Work Employment Society Volume 27 Number 1 (February 2013)
Abstract
Based on longitudinal fieldwork with unemployed managers and professionals in their 50s, the article examines the meaning of job loss to these people and charts their subsequent efforts to restore their lives.
The article identifies core similarities in their experiences and discerns different narrative strategies through which they have tried to make sense of their dismissal and sustain their selfhood.
For all, job loss was a considerable trauma leading to a fragmentation of identity; this was compounded by subsequent rejection and perceived discrimination. Few were able to resume their earlier careers; the majority had to adjust their expectations downwards and opt for either virtual deskilling in less well paid and less demanding jobs or for an assortment of part-time, casual and voluntary work.
Best ‘adapted’ (and least fragmented) were those who were prepared to forsake hopes of a return to high-powered jobs and display flexibility, resourcefulness and opportunism in adapting to their reduced circumstances.
Abstract
Based on longitudinal fieldwork with unemployed managers and professionals in their 50s, the article examines the meaning of job loss to these people and charts their subsequent efforts to restore their lives.
The article identifies core similarities in their experiences and discerns different narrative strategies through which they have tried to make sense of their dismissal and sustain their selfhood.
For all, job loss was a considerable trauma leading to a fragmentation of identity; this was compounded by subsequent rejection and perceived discrimination. Few were able to resume their earlier careers; the majority had to adjust their expectations downwards and opt for either virtual deskilling in less well paid and less demanding jobs or for an assortment of part-time, casual and voluntary work.
Best ‘adapted’ (and least fragmented) were those who were prepared to forsake hopes of a return to high-powered jobs and display flexibility, resourcefulness and opportunism in adapting to their reduced circumstances.
Friday, 2 November 2012
Employability, well-being and job satisfaction following a job loss
an article by Mary A. Gowan (Elon University, North Carolina, USA) published in Journal of Managerial Psychology Volume 27 Issue 8 (2012)
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate changes in psychological well-being over time for individuals who experienced a career disruption in the form of a company closing, and to examine the relationships between employability, well-being, and job satisfaction. It seeks to expand on previous work of job loss relative to the long-term impact of the experience and on Fugate et al.’s psycho-social conceptualisation of employability.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected at the time of job loss (T1) and six years later (T2). The 73 respondents at T2 represent a stratified random sample of the T1 respondents. Hypotheses were tested with paired sample t-tests and hierarchical multiple regression.
Findings
Results indicate that the negative psychological impact of job loss diminishes over time. Additionally, employability predicted well-being and job satisfaction.
Practical implications
The results of the study provide guidance for the design and administration of outplacement and related programs that focus on increasing employability and psychological well-being, and suggest ways that individuals can shield themselves from the negative consequences associated with a job loss.
Social implications
The results have policy implications for the design of government funded outplacement and retraining programs.
Originality/value
The paper is the first to examine job loss over a six-year period of time, and the first to examine the impact of employability attributes on multiple indicators of well-being and on job satisfaction in the job loss context.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate changes in psychological well-being over time for individuals who experienced a career disruption in the form of a company closing, and to examine the relationships between employability, well-being, and job satisfaction. It seeks to expand on previous work of job loss relative to the long-term impact of the experience and on Fugate et al.’s psycho-social conceptualisation of employability.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected at the time of job loss (T1) and six years later (T2). The 73 respondents at T2 represent a stratified random sample of the T1 respondents. Hypotheses were tested with paired sample t-tests and hierarchical multiple regression.
Findings
Results indicate that the negative psychological impact of job loss diminishes over time. Additionally, employability predicted well-being and job satisfaction.
Practical implications
The results of the study provide guidance for the design and administration of outplacement and related programs that focus on increasing employability and psychological well-being, and suggest ways that individuals can shield themselves from the negative consequences associated with a job loss.
Social implications
The results have policy implications for the design of government funded outplacement and retraining programs.
Originality/value
The paper is the first to examine job loss over a six-year period of time, and the first to examine the impact of employability attributes on multiple indicators of well-being and on job satisfaction in the job loss context.
Wednesday, 25 July 2012
Clash of Career and Family: fertility decisions after job displacement
an article by Emilia Del Bono (University of Essex), Andrea Weber (University of Mannheim) and Rudolf Winter-Ebmer (University of Linz and IHS Vienna) published in Journal of the European Economic Association Volume 10 Issue 4 (August 2012)
Abstract
In this paper we investigate how career considerations may affect fertility decisions in the presence of a temporary employment shock. We compare the birth rates of women displaced by a plant closure with those of women unaffected by job loss after establishing the pre-displacement comparability of these groups.
Our results reveal that job displacement reduces average fertility by 5%–10%, and that these effects are largely explained by the response of women in more skilled occupations. We offer an explanation of our results based on career interruptions of women.
JEL classifications: J13 J64 J65 J24
Abstract
In this paper we investigate how career considerations may affect fertility decisions in the presence of a temporary employment shock. We compare the birth rates of women displaced by a plant closure with those of women unaffected by job loss after establishing the pre-displacement comparability of these groups.
Our results reveal that job displacement reduces average fertility by 5%–10%, and that these effects are largely explained by the response of women in more skilled occupations. We offer an explanation of our results based on career interruptions of women.
JEL classifications: J13 J64 J65 J24
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
