Impact of the Nature of Employment on the Quality of Working Life
Technological and demographic changes have actualized the question of the influence of the nature of employment and the parameters of the workplace on the quality of a person’s working life. A scientific review and analysis of the impact of current trends in employment modes on the quality of human life is presented. Based on the literature review, it has been concluded that if there is unanimity among scientists about the positive impact of the regime of protected and standard employment on the quality of life, there is active debate about the impact of the regime of vulnerable and precarious employment. Also, based on the analysis of the literature, it has been determined that people’s subjective satisfaction does not always coincide with a positive impact on the objective quality of life. The study is based on comparative and correlation analysis as a method for processing statistical data from the OECD, ILO and WB. The employment regimes were classified according to four enlarged groups: economic sectors, professions, status, and employment regime. The assessments of the quality of life were classified according to three indicators: the human development index, the quality of life index and the international happiness index. The most important factors in the development of the labor market, influencing the quality of working life, have been identified: parameters of the quality of the workplace (the level of wages, employment stability, qualifications of workers, the level of social and legal guarantees) and the general level of employment. The most reasoned point of view was revealed: the regime of standard protected employment (permanent full-time work under a formal contract) has a positive effect, and the regime of precarious work (various options for informal, temporary or part-time employment) has a negative impact on the quality of life. The protected employment regime (hired labor and selfemployment as an entrepreneur) has a positive effect, while the vulnerable employment regime (individual self-employment and intra-family employment) has a negative impact on the quality of life. The transition to a “new” economy and highly skilled jobs has a significant impact on the quality of working life. The opinion of experts about non-standard forms of employment as a single category is refuted. The positive influence of the mode of part-time employment on the quality of life is revealed, the contradictory influence of the mode of temporary employment on the quality of life is shown. Achievement of material well-being and sociopolitical stability to a large extent contradicts the subjective happiness of people and the protection of the environment.
Keywords
labor market,
employment regime,
quality of life,
standard employment,
nonstandard employment,
precarious work,
protected employment,
vulnerable employment,
selfemployment,
temporary employment,
part-time employmentAuthors
| Babyshev Vyacheslav Yu. | Tomsk Polytechnic University | vacheslav84@mail.ru |
| Barysheva Galina A. | Tomsk Polytechnic University | ganb@tpu.ru |
| Tran Ngoc Thi Bich | Hanoi University of Science and Technology | bichngoc2201@gmail.com |
| Binh Dao Thanh | Hanoi University of Science and Technology | binh.daothanh@hust.edu.vn |
Всего: 4
References
Ciarini A. The social investment approach as a field of job creation. From the ‘recalibration’ to a resurgent trade-off between employment growth and low wage (white) jobs. A comparison between Germany and Italy // International Review of Sociology. 2016. № 26 (3). Р. 497-512.
Кастель Р. Метаморфозы социального вопроса. Хроника наемного труда / пер. с фр.; общ. ред., ред. пер. Н.А. Шматко. СПб. : Алетейя, 2009. 574 с.
Нестандартные формы занятости. Анализ проблем и перспективы решения в разных странах. Обзорная версия. Женева : МБТ, 2017. С. 1-39.
International Labour Organization. Outcome Document to the Workers’ Symposium on Policies and Regulations to combat Precarious Employment. From precarious work to decent work. URL: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/ed_dialogue/-actrav/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_179787.pdf (date of access: 02.11.2020).
International Labour Organization. Non-standard employment around the world. Understanding challenges, shaping prospects. URL: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/-dgreports/- dcomm/-publ/documents/publication/wcms_534326.pdf (date of access: 02.11.2020).
International Labour Organization. ACTRAV Symposium on Precarious Work (47 October, 2011). Workers Symposium on Policies and Regulations to Combat Precarious Employment (Geneva, 4-7 October 2011). Conclusions. URL: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---actrav/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_165275. pdf (date of access: 02.11.2020).
Гимпельсон В.Е., Капелюшников Р.И. Нестандартная занятость и российский рынок труда // Вопросы экономики. 2006. № 1. С. 122-143.
Супонин Д.М., Костенко Р.В. Занятость и безработица в национальной экономике // Вестник современных исследований. 2018. № 10.2 (25). С. 234-237.
Цыганкова И.В. Качество трудовой жизни молодежи России - концептуальные вопросы формирования : автореф. дис.. д-ра экон. наук. М., 2009.
Cueto B., Pruneda G. Job Satisfaction of Wage and Self-Employed Workers. Do Job Preferences Make a Difference? // Applied Research in Quality of Life. 2017. № 12 (1). Р. 103-123.
Дашкова Е.С., Дорохова Н.В. Нестандартная занятость в России // Вестник Воронежского государственного университета. Серия: Экономика и управление. 2014. № 2. С. 19-21.
Niederfranke A., Drewes M. Non-standard forms of employment in a globalized world: Risk of undermining labour standards and social security provisions? // Sozialer Fortschritt. 2017. № 66 (12). Р. 919-934.
Burgess J., Connell J. Vulnerable work and strategies for inclusion: an introduction // International Journal of Manpower. 2015. № 36 (6). Р. 794-806.
Gammarano R. Paid employment vs vulnerable employment: a brief study of employment patterns by status in employment // ILOstat. Spotlight on work statistics. 2018.
Van Lancker W. The European World of Temporary Employment: Gendered and poor? // European Societies. 2012. № 14 (1). Р. 83-111.
Dixon J.C., McCollum D.B., Fullerton A.S. Who Is a Part-Time Worker Around the World and Why Does It Matter? Examining the Quality of Employment Measures and Workers’ Perceived Job Quality // Sociological Spectrum. 2018. № 38 (4). Р. 1-23.
Russo C., Terraneo M. Mental Well-being Among Workers: A Cross-national Analysis of Job Insecurity Impact on the Workforce // Social Indicators Research. 2020. № 152 (2). Р. 421-442.
Lee H.-K. Employment and life satisfaction among female marriage migrants in South Korea // Asian and Pacific Migration Journal. 2013. № 22 (2). Р. 199-230.
Zella S., Harper S. The Impact of Life Course Employment and Domestic Duties on the Well-Being of Retired Women and the Social Protection Systems That Frame This // Journal of aging and health. 2018. № 32 (5-6). Р. 285-295.
Федорова А.Э., Парсюкевич А.М. Прекаризация занятости и ее влияние на социально-экономическое благополучие наемных работников // Известия Уральского государственного экономического университета. 2013. № 5 (49). С. 76-81.
Голенкова З.Т., Голиусова Ю.В. Новые социальные группы в современных стратификационных системах глобального общества // Социологическая наука и социальная практика. 2013. № 3 (03). С. 5-15.
Дружилов С.А. Прекариат и неформальная трудовая занятость в России: социально-психологические аспекты // Гуманитарные научные исследования. 2015. № 1-2 (41). С. 53-61.
Монусова Г.А. Тип трудового контракта и субъективное благополучие // Социологический журнал. 2013. № 25 (3). С. 46-6б.
OECD.Stat. Job quality. All dimensions. 2020. URL: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=LAB_REG_VAC (date of access: 02.11.2020).
ILOSTAT. Employment statistics. Employment distribution by economic activity (by sex) // ILO modelled estimates. Nov. 2019 (%) | Annual. 2020. URL: https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/employment/(date of access: 02.11.2020).
ILOSTAT. Employment statistics. Employment distribution by occupation (by sex) -ILO modelled estimates. Nov. 2019 (%) | Annual. 2020. URL: https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/ employment/(date of access: 02.11.2020).
The World Bank. Vulnerable employment, total (% of total employment) (modeled ILO estimate). 2020. URL: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.EMP.vULN.ZS (date of access: 02.11.2020).
OECD. Stat. Full-time Part-time employment. Incidence of FTPT employment -common definition. 2020. URL: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=LAB_REG_ VAC# (date of access: 02.11.2020).
OECD. Stat. Permanent temporary employment. Incidence of permanent employment. 2020. URL: https://stats.oecd.org/]ndex.aspx?DataSetCode=LAB_REG_VAC# (date of access: 02.11.2020).
Visser J. The first part-time economy in the world: a model to be followed? // Journal of European Social Policy. 2002. № 12 (1). Р. 23-42.
