an article by Fran Bennett (University of Oxford, UK) published in Journal of Poverty and Social Justice Volume 27 Number 2 (June 2019)
Abstract
A recent government proposal to increase national insurance contributions for the self-employed in the UK, in return for improved pensions and potentially also parental benefits, was immediately reversed.
This article analyses the reasons behind this about-turn, linking them to tensions between the goals of thwarting ‘bogus’ self-employment and increasing tax revenues versus commitment to a higher wage, lower tax, lower welfare economy.
The analysis is set in the context of the singularity of the UK system in relation to much social protection in continental Europe, and wider debates about the roles of individual, state and labour market in providing security.
Showing posts with label social_protection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social_protection. Show all posts
Monday, 29 July 2019
Thursday, 25 July 2019
Mind the gaps: Universal Credit and self-employment in the United Kingdom
an article by Kevin Caraher and Enrico Reuter (University of York, UK) published in Journal of Poverty and Social Justice Volume 27 Number 2 (June 2019)
Abstract
Self-employment in the United Kingdom rose steadily until 2017, as part of wider changes in labour markets towards more flexible and potentially more vulnerable forms of employment. At the same time, welfare reform has continued under the current and previous governments, with a further expansion of conditionality with respect to benefit recipients.
The incremental introduction of Universal Credit is likely to intensify the subjection of vulnerable categories of the self-employed to welfare conditionalities and to thus accentuate the ambivalent nature of self-employment.
This article analyses the impact of Universal Credit on the self-employed by first discussing elements of precarity faced by the self-employed, and, second, by exploring the consequences of the roll-out of Universal Credit for those self-employed people who are reliant on the social protection system.
Abstract
Self-employment in the United Kingdom rose steadily until 2017, as part of wider changes in labour markets towards more flexible and potentially more vulnerable forms of employment. At the same time, welfare reform has continued under the current and previous governments, with a further expansion of conditionality with respect to benefit recipients.
The incremental introduction of Universal Credit is likely to intensify the subjection of vulnerable categories of the self-employed to welfare conditionalities and to thus accentuate the ambivalent nature of self-employment.
This article analyses the impact of Universal Credit on the self-employed by first discussing elements of precarity faced by the self-employed, and, second, by exploring the consequences of the roll-out of Universal Credit for those self-employed people who are reliant on the social protection system.
Thursday, 28 February 2019
Access to general social protection for immigrants in advanced democracies
an article by Carina Schmitt and Céline Teney (University of Bremen, Germany) published in Journal of European Social Policy Volume 29 Issue 1 (February 2019)
Abstract
Immigration has become a central socio-political issue in most advanced democracies. While research mainly focuses on immigrant-specific policies in the area of immigration, integration and citizenship, we still know very little about the incorporation of immigrants into mainstream social policies.
By analysing cross-national differences in the inclusion of immigrants into general social protection across 27 rich democracies on the basis of comparative indicators from the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) dataset, we seek to address this gap in a quantitative study.
A cross-national comparison of these indicators shows a particularly large variation in the inclusiveness of the access to social protection for immigrants across countries. By drawing on the welfare state and integration regime literature, we assess the power of two contrasting perspectives, namely, the post-national welfare state and the welfare chauvinism models, in explaining this large cross-national variation in immigrants’ access to social security and social housing.
Our overall findings suggest that both the welfare chauvinist and the post-national welfare state models comprise two theoretical perspectives that turn out to be fruitful to interpret cross-national variation in immigrants’ access to social protection.
According to the welfare chauvinism model, we find robust evidence that left-wing cabinets are particularly reluctant to open general social protection schemes to immigrants.
By contrast and in line with expectations derived from the post-national welfare state model, countries with an overall generous welfare state and countries facing large immigration flows tend to provide immigrants with more generous access to social protection.
Abstract
Immigration has become a central socio-political issue in most advanced democracies. While research mainly focuses on immigrant-specific policies in the area of immigration, integration and citizenship, we still know very little about the incorporation of immigrants into mainstream social policies.
By analysing cross-national differences in the inclusion of immigrants into general social protection across 27 rich democracies on the basis of comparative indicators from the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) dataset, we seek to address this gap in a quantitative study.
A cross-national comparison of these indicators shows a particularly large variation in the inclusiveness of the access to social protection for immigrants across countries. By drawing on the welfare state and integration regime literature, we assess the power of two contrasting perspectives, namely, the post-national welfare state and the welfare chauvinism models, in explaining this large cross-national variation in immigrants’ access to social security and social housing.
Our overall findings suggest that both the welfare chauvinist and the post-national welfare state models comprise two theoretical perspectives that turn out to be fruitful to interpret cross-national variation in immigrants’ access to social protection.
According to the welfare chauvinism model, we find robust evidence that left-wing cabinets are particularly reluctant to open general social protection schemes to immigrants.
By contrast and in line with expectations derived from the post-national welfare state model, countries with an overall generous welfare state and countries facing large immigration flows tend to provide immigrants with more generous access to social protection.
Friday, 4 January 2019
Testing the resilience of Europe's inclusive growth model
a column by Jacques Bughin and Christopher Pissarides for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
Europe’s social contracts to protect their citizens from socioeconomic risks are based on an inclusive growth model characterised by a more egalitarian view of revenue generation and distribution. But this model is under strain, with various global trends placing upward pressure on inequality that could intensify.
This column suggests that keeping the essence of Europe’s current inclusive growth model does not preclude it from adapting its current social contracts to protect its citizens, whatever the disruptions that lie ahead.
Continue reading
Europe’s social contracts to protect their citizens from socioeconomic risks are based on an inclusive growth model characterised by a more egalitarian view of revenue generation and distribution. But this model is under strain, with various global trends placing upward pressure on inequality that could intensify.
This column suggests that keeping the essence of Europe’s current inclusive growth model does not preclude it from adapting its current social contracts to protect its citizens, whatever the disruptions that lie ahead.
Continue reading
Wednesday, 5 September 2018
Challenges and Contradictions in the ‘Normalising’ of Precarious Work
an article by Jill Rubery, Arjan Keizer and Mathew Johnson (The University of Manchester, UK) and Damian Grimshaw (The University of Manchester, UK; International Labour Organisation, Switzerland) published in Work, Employment and Society Volume 32 Issue 3 (June 2018)
Abstract
Precarious work is increasingly considered the new ‘norm’ to which employment and social protection systems must adjust.
This article explores the contradictions and tensions that arise from different processes of normalisation driven by social policies that simultaneously decommodify and recommodify labour. An expanded framework of decommodification is presented that identifies how the standard employment relationship (SER) may be extended and flexibilised to include those in precarious work, drawing examples from a recent study of precarious work across six European countries.
These decommodification processes are found to be both partial and, in some cases, coexisting with activation policies that position precarious work as an alternative to unemployment, thereby recommodifying labour.
Despite these challenges and contradictions, the article argues that a new vision of SER reform promises greater inclusion than alternative policy scenarios that give up on the regulation of employers and rely on state subsidies to mitigate against precariousness.
Abstract
Precarious work is increasingly considered the new ‘norm’ to which employment and social protection systems must adjust.
This article explores the contradictions and tensions that arise from different processes of normalisation driven by social policies that simultaneously decommodify and recommodify labour. An expanded framework of decommodification is presented that identifies how the standard employment relationship (SER) may be extended and flexibilised to include those in precarious work, drawing examples from a recent study of precarious work across six European countries.
These decommodification processes are found to be both partial and, in some cases, coexisting with activation policies that position precarious work as an alternative to unemployment, thereby recommodifying labour.
Despite these challenges and contradictions, the article argues that a new vision of SER reform promises greater inclusion than alternative policy scenarios that give up on the regulation of employers and rely on state subsidies to mitigate against precariousness.
Wednesday, 29 August 2018
Challenges and Contradictions in the ‘Normalising’ of Precarious Work
an article by Jill Rubery, Arjan Keizer and Mathew Johnson (The University of Manchester, UK) and Damian Grimshaw (The University of Manchester, UK; International Labour Organisation, Switzerland) published in Work, Employment and Society Volume 32 Issue 3 (June 2018)
Abstract
Precarious work is increasingly considered the new ‘norm’ to which employment and social protection systems must adjust.
This article explores the contradictions and tensions that arise from different processes of normalisation driven by social policies that simultaneously decommodify and recommodify labour. An expanded framework of decommodification is presented that identifies how the standard employment relationship (SER) may be extended and flexibilised to include those in precarious work, drawing examples from a recent study of precarious work across six European countries.
These decommodification processes are found to be both partial and, in some cases, coexisting with activation policies that position precarious work as an alternative to unemployment, thereby recommodifying labour.
Despite these challenges and contradictions, the article argues that a new vision of SER reform promises greater inclusion than alternative policy scenarios that give up on the regulation of employers and rely on state subsidies to mitigate against precariousness.
Abstract
Precarious work is increasingly considered the new ‘norm’ to which employment and social protection systems must adjust.
This article explores the contradictions and tensions that arise from different processes of normalisation driven by social policies that simultaneously decommodify and recommodify labour. An expanded framework of decommodification is presented that identifies how the standard employment relationship (SER) may be extended and flexibilised to include those in precarious work, drawing examples from a recent study of precarious work across six European countries.
These decommodification processes are found to be both partial and, in some cases, coexisting with activation policies that position precarious work as an alternative to unemployment, thereby recommodifying labour.
Despite these challenges and contradictions, the article argues that a new vision of SER reform promises greater inclusion than alternative policy scenarios that give up on the regulation of employers and rely on state subsidies to mitigate against precariousness.
Monday, 23 February 2015
On the transnational social question: How social inequalities are reproduced in Europe
an article by Thomas Faist (Bielefeld University, Germany) published in Journal of European Social Policy Volume 24 Number 3 (July 2014)
Abstract
What are the consequences of cross-border employment and social protection practices for social inequalities in Europe?
The transnational social question is a multifaceted one: it is linked not only to inequalities generated by heterogeneities such as class, gender, ethnicity, legal status and religion, but also to the perception that cross-border interdependence has grown and that transnational interactions themselves have become a criterion for differentiation.
International migration is of strategic significance for an understanding of the transnational social question, because it reveals the cross-connections of the fragmented world of social protection. In particular, it provides a window into the social mechanisms that support social protection across borders and how these mitigate old and generate new social inequalities.
Abstract
What are the consequences of cross-border employment and social protection practices for social inequalities in Europe?
The transnational social question is a multifaceted one: it is linked not only to inequalities generated by heterogeneities such as class, gender, ethnicity, legal status and religion, but also to the perception that cross-border interdependence has grown and that transnational interactions themselves have become a criterion for differentiation.
International migration is of strategic significance for an understanding of the transnational social question, because it reveals the cross-connections of the fragmented world of social protection. In particular, it provides a window into the social mechanisms that support social protection across borders and how these mitigate old and generate new social inequalities.
Monday, 11 June 2012
Working poor, labour market and social protection in the EU: a comparative perspective
an article by Yannis Dafermos and Christos Papatheodorou (affiliation(s) not provided) published in International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy Volume 6 Number 1/2 (2012)
Abstract
This paper offers some crucial insights into the incidence and determinants of in-work poverty in the EU.
It shows that in-work poverty plays a principal role in the determination of overall poverty, and it explores the impact of the social protection system and labour market conditions on the incidence of in-work poverty. The comparative analysis illustrates that higher flexibility in the labour market may have an unfavourable impact on in-work poverty.
It also brings to the fore the prominent role of the social protection system in the alleviation of poverty among the working population.
Abstract
This paper offers some crucial insights into the incidence and determinants of in-work poverty in the EU.
It shows that in-work poverty plays a principal role in the determination of overall poverty, and it explores the impact of the social protection system and labour market conditions on the incidence of in-work poverty. The comparative analysis illustrates that higher flexibility in the labour market may have an unfavourable impact on in-work poverty.
It also brings to the fore the prominent role of the social protection system in the alleviation of poverty among the working population.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
