Precarious work and the commodification of the employment relationship: the case of zero hours in the UK and mini jobs i
Typologies of the welfare state are concerned with the extent of the decommodification of labour (Esping-Andersen 1990). However, the sustainability of decommodification by the state also depends upon employer behaviour. Where employers treat labour as a
- PDF / 316,878 Bytes
- 16 Pages / 419.528 x 595.276 pts Page_size
- 27 Downloads / 148 Views
1
Introduction
Typologies of the welfare state are concerned with the extent of the decommodiÀcation of labour (Esping-Andersen 1990). However, the sustainability of decommodiÀcation by the state also depends upon employer behaviour. Where employers treat labour as a disposable commodity to be bought and sold without regard to its social reproduction, all the burden of decommodiÀcation is placed on the state instead of it being a shared responsibility, with employers covering some of the risks of income loss when work is not possible or desirable. The standard employment relationship (SER), as Bosch (2004) argues, derives its primary social purpose from its role in decommodiÀcation –“[it] enables employees to plan for the long term. This applies not only to the planning of everyday life, such as the use of leisure time, but also to workers’ investment, and that of family members, in their own capacity for work, for example through education and training” (Bosch 2004: 619). However, if instead all employers used spot contracts for labour without contributing to the cost of its social reproduction, then the support needed from the state (as well as the family) would be unsustainable. The core argument of Bosch’s plea for extending rather than abandoning the SER is that the form (‘permanent full-time’) of the relationship needs to be distinguished from its substance (de-commodiÀcation). While the form can change without erosion of the
G. Bäcker et al. (Hrsg.), Den Arbeitsmarkt verstehen, um ihn zu gestalten, DOI 10.1007/978-3-658-12159-4_19, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016
240
Jill Rubery and Damian Grimshaw
substance, if employment, social protection and a welfare state are not provided then ‘it makes no sense to speak of SER’ (Bosch 2009). While the full-time and open-ended contract remains the most common employment form across Europe, two developments are challenging the SER and its role in decommodiÀcation. The Àrst is the development of non-standard employment contracts which do not provide the same extent of protection as more standard contracts. The second is an erosion of decommodiÀcation within the full-time open-ended contract itself. These two changes are undoubtedly interconnected (Cappelli et al. 1997; Rubery 1998, 2007) as non standard employment is not primarily a protective buffer for standard employment but instead provides a competitive challenge to terms and conditions within standard contracts (Rubery 1998). These developments are known to vary across countries in form and intensity, with high non standard employment anticipated where protection of the SER remains strong. The UK is often cited as evidence for this, as its apparent low use of temporary work is said to be because the limited protection attached to open-ended contracts, reduces the incentive to use non-standard contracts. The implication is that less regulated labour markets may be more inclusive and stabilise around a single form of employment contract that provides a balance between Áexibility and security. However, the
Data Loading...
