Varieties of buffers against precarity mediating the consequences of flexibility for worker's wellbeing: A comparative study of worker experiences

各种针对不稳定因素的缓冲措施调节灵活性对工人福祉的影响：工人经验的比较研究

• 批准号: 2070294
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of Manchester
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2018
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2018 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2070294
• 关键词: Varieties; buffers; against; precarity; mediating

1. OverviewStudy of the ways variations in labour market flexibility, and access to individual and collective buffers against precarity, affect workers' wellbeing. Comparative empirical research in 2 phases: mapping the contrasting institutional and policy landscapes of 2 European welfare states and conducting interviews with workers.Research questions:1. In what ways do variations in labour market flexibility affect workers' material and immaterial wellbeing?2. To what extent does this depend on varying access to buffers against precarity?3. Are worker experiences of flexibility more striking in their commonality or variety?2. Context2.1 Varieties of flexibilityAtkinson's (1984) schema distinguishes 4 types of flexibility present depending on the ease with which: employees can be hired and fired; or worker's hours, job role, or wages be varied.2.2 Material and immaterial wellbeing of flexible workersFlexibility may have positive or negative, material or immaterial consequences for wellbeing.Potential negatives can be explored using 2 concepts: precarity of income and precarity of self-understanding.Drawing on Crouch's (2015, p.8) work on the effects of insecure employment on consumerconfidence, 2 elements to precarity of income can be distinguished: uncertainty vs. actual insufficiency of workers' income to meet basic needs.Precarity of self-understanding draws primarily on the work of Sennett (1998) to describe (i) an inability to form a narrative about one's own life that is coherent and satisfying, and (ii) an inability to both settle on and practice character traits which require long-term and stable employment and personal relations.Expected to be found in instances of worker-oriented flexibility, concepts relating to potentialpositive consequences for wellbeing will be developed.2.3 Buffers against negative consequences for wellbeingBuffers against precarity (Clement et. al 2009, p.242) are features of worker's lives whichprevent them bearing (all) the consequences of precarious employment that may result fromemployer-side flexibility. Buffers may be material or immaterial (see Figure 2).3. Methodology3.1 Dimensions of comparative analysis: country, sector, unionisation, job level, privatecircumstanceAn initial literature review will recognise the extent of variation in transfers and services (T&S) and labour market regulation (LMR) between European welfare states. 2 contrasting countries will be studied in detail. As an indication, the UK is likely to be chosen as an economically liberal case, for its limited LMR, and the low level and high conditionality of its T&S. A second case is likely to be either Germany or the Netherlands. The former for its tighter LMR, institutionalised industrial relations, and its variously generous T&S. The latter as a hybrid 'flexicurity' case combining flexible labour markets with (fairly) universal and generous T&S.3.2 Interview strategyInterviewing allows the investigation of both the material and immaterial consequences of flexibility for worker's wellbeing. To explore immaterial wellbeing, of self-understanding, it is necessary to find out how workers understand their own lives. Filtering questions will identify which varieties of flexibility a worker is subject to, and which collective and individual buffers they have access to. Flexible workers will be interviewed in the 2 selected countries: in a range of sectors, degrees of unionisation, job levels, and private circumstances, alongside a small control group in the standard employment relationship.4. Impact4.1 AcademicWorker experiences will be brought to the front and centre of the analysis. Theoretically, the findings will have relevance for the dominant approaches to comparative research.4.2 PolicyPolicy influence will be sought by producing a policy framework on flexibility, which takes worker's experience and institutional context seriously.

1. 概述研究劳动力市场灵活性的变化，以及获得个人和集体缓冲以防止不稳定，如何影响工人的福祉。两个阶段的比较实证研究：绘制两个欧洲福利国家不同的制度和政策景观，并对工人进行访谈。研究问题:1。劳动力市场灵活性的变化在哪些方面影响工人的物质和非物质福利？这在多大程度上取决于对不稳定缓冲的不同获取途径？灵活性的员工体验是在共性上还是在多样性上更引人注目？背景2.1灵活性的多样性atkinson（1984）的图式根据其容易程度区分了四种类型的灵活性：员工可以被雇用和解雇；或工人的工作时间，工作角色，或工资是不同的。2.2弹性工人的物质和非物质的幸福灵活性可能有积极的或消极的，物质的或非物质的后果。潜在的负面影响可以用两个概念来探讨：收入的不稳定性和自我理解的不稳定性。根据克劳奇（2015,p.8）关于不安全就业对消费者信心的影响的工作，可以区分收入不稳定的两个因素：不确定性与工人收入满足基本需求的实际不足。自我理解的不稳定性主要借鉴了Sennett（1998）的工作来描述(i)无法形成一个连贯和令人满意的关于自己生活的叙述，以及（ii）无法确定和实践需要长期稳定的就业和个人关系的性格特征。预计将在以工人为导向的灵活性的实例中发现，将开发与福祉潜在积极后果相关的概念。2.3对福祉负面后果的缓冲对不稳定性的缓冲（克莱门特等人2009年，第242页）是工人生活的特征，阻止他们承担（所有）不稳定就业的后果，这可能是由雇主方面的灵活性造成的。缓冲可以是物质的，也可以是非物质的（见图2）。3.1比较分析的维度：国家、部门、工会组织、工作水平、私人环境。初步的文献综述将认识到欧洲福利国家之间在转移和服务（T&S）以及劳动力市场监管（LMR）方面的差异程度。2 .对比国家将被详细研究。作为一个迹象，英国很可能被选为经济自由主义的案例，因为它的LMR有限，而且T&S的水平低，条件高。第二个案例可能是德国或荷兰。前者因其更严格的LMR、制度化的劳资关系和各种慷慨的T&S而受到青睐。后者是将灵活的劳动力市场与（相当）普遍和慷慨的T&S.3.2访谈策略相结合的混合“灵活性”案例。访谈允许对灵活性对工人福利的物质和非物质后果进行调查。为了探索非物质的幸福和自我理解，有必要弄清楚工人是如何理解他们自己的生活的。筛选问题将确定员工所受的灵活性种类，以及他们可以使用的集体和个人缓冲。弹性员工将在两个选定的国家接受采访：在一系列部门，工会程度，工作级别和私人情况下，以及标准雇佣关系中的小型对照组。影响4.1学术工作者的经验将被带到分析的前沿和中心。从理论上讲，研究结果将与比较研究的主要方法相关。4.2政策将通过制定一个关于灵活性的政策框架来寻求政策影响，该框架将认真考虑工人的经验和制度背景。