The Role of Domestic Employment Policies in Shaping Precarious Work
The Role of Domestic Employment Policies in Shaping Precarious Work
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/spol.12288
复制
发表时间：
2017-03-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Jokela, Merita
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jokela, Merita
本文比较了富裕国家有关国内就业的政策方法，并探讨了它们对不稳定工作的影响。根据二手文献和政策文件，本研究确定了富裕国家通常采用的五种政策方法来规范和发展国内就业：（1）负担得起的服务； (2)简化使用； （三）规范就业； （四）规范劳动力流动； (5) 无政策。对不同政策类型的比较分析表明，政策设计对于调节就业条件和有偿家务劳动的不稳定程度至关重要。在文献综述的基础上，对不稳定工作的三个维度进行了研究：（1）就业的性质（正式/非正式）； （二）雇佣关系； (3) 雇佣形式（临时或永久、兼职或全职）。我认为，当前的政策措施可能会通过促进非正规和非正规工作直接增加不稳定因素，或者通过家庭间接增加不稳定因素（为削弱工人地位的家庭提供激励措施）。分析还确定了积极措施，通过使家庭工作正规化，有助于为家庭工作创造更安全的就业条件。尽管不同政策类型的结果存在差异，但研究结果表明，在福利国家中，国内就业政策仍然主要是需求驱动的，并维持了家庭工作的传统、特殊性质——往往以工人的利益为代价。
This article compares policy approaches regarding domestic employment in affluent countries and examines their impact on precarious work. Drawing on secondary literature and policy documents, this study identifies five policy approaches commonly applied in affluent countries to regulate and develop domestic employment: (1) affordable services; (2) simplifying use; (3) regulating employment; (4) regulating labour migration; and (5) no policy. The comparative analysis of different policy types shows that policy design is crucial in regulating employment conditions and the level of precariousness in paid domestic labour.Based on a literature review, three dimensions of precarious work are studied: (1) the nature of employment (formal/informal); (2) the employment relationship; and (3) the form of employment (temporary or permanent, part time or full time). I argue that the current policy measures in place may increase precariousness either directly by promoting, for example, informal and irregular work, or indirectly through households (offering incentives for households that weaken workers' positions). The analysis also identifies positive measures that contribute to creating more secure employment conditions in domestic work through formalizing the sector. While there are differences in the outcomes of the different policy types, the findings suggest that across welfare states, domestic employment policies are still mostly demand driven and sustain the traditional, special nature of domestic work - often at the workers' expense.