Samfundsmæssige konsekvenser af ustabilitet på arbejdsmarkedet

Javascript is disabled in your browser. Please, enable it for a better user experience.

Authors

Eszter Sándor

Gillian Bell

Abstract

I denne rapport undersøges de samfundsgrupper, der kan have en ustabil tilknytning til arbejdsmarkedet, og som med størst sandsynlighed har atypiske ansættelsesforhold, samt konsekvenserne af sådanne ansættelsesforhold og jobusikkerhed for arbejdstagernes trivsel, social udstødelse, tillid, opfattelse af retfærdighed og politisk deltagelse. I rapporten konstateres negative resultater med hensyn til social udstødelse og tillid hos arbejdstagere, der ikke har fastansættelse, samt arbejdstagere med uformelle arbejdsforhold og usikre job. Jobusikkerhed kan desuden kobles sammen med dårligere trivsel. Den indeholder også aktuelle eksempler på politiske tiltag til håndtering af ustabilitet på arbejdsmarkedet, hvor fokus er på mere langsigtede tiltag i perioden efter pandemien.

Societal implications of labour market instability PDF

English (735.89 KB - PDF)

Key findings

• Selv om antallet af arbejdstagere med kortvarige midlertidige kontrakter er blevet mindre i det seneste årti, er anvendelsen af sådanne kontrakter stadig forholdsvis udbredt i visse medlemsstater, mest blandt unge og udlændinge med lavt uddannelsesniveau, som ikke kan finde et fast job, og især inden for uddannelses- og sundhedssektoren. Midlertidigt ansatte har ofte lange arbejdsdage og føler sig underbeskæftiget. Det er den gruppe af ansatte, der er mest tilbøjelige til at søge andet arbejde.

• Både tidsbestemte kontrakter og en usikker jobsituation er forbundet med en lavere grad af tillid til andre mennesker og en lavere grad af oplevet retfærdighed. Arbejdstagere, der ikke har fastansættelse eller en formel kontrakt, og arbejdstagere, der har en usikker jobsituation, er mindre tilfredse med den måde, demokratiet fungerer på i deres land.

• Arbejdstagere med tidsbegrænsede kontrakter og arbejdstagere i en usikker jobsituation er mindre tilbøjelige til at stemme ved valg. Dette gælder også, når udenlandske statsborgere, der ikke er stemmeberettigede (som er overrepræsenteret i disse kategorier), udelukkes fra analysen. De er også mindre tilbøjelige til at deltage i demonstrationer, hvilket er tegn på manglende engagement.

• Omsorgsforpligtelser er den primære årsag til deltidsarbejde. Sandsynligheden for at kvinder arbejder på deltid er næsten tre gange større end for mænd, og forskellen endnu større mellem forældre og personer uden børn. Selv om ufrivilligt deltidsarbejde har været faldende siden den store recession, kan det konstateres, at deltidsansatte er mere villige til at arbejde flere timer og er mere tilbøjelige til at søge nyt arbejde end fuldtidsansatte, hvilket forstærker tidligere konklusioner om, at en del "frivilligt" deltidsarbejde udføres, fordi det er en nødvendighed.

• Selv om der ikke blev fundet en sammenhæng mellem tidsbegrænset ansættelse og trivsel, er oplevet jobusikkerhed dog forbundet med en lavere grad af tilfredshed med livet, dårligere helbred og psykisk trivsel samt større sandsynlighed for at føle sig udstødt af samfundet. Sammenhængen mellem social udstødelse og jobusikkerhed svarer til forholdet mellem social udstødelse og arbejdsløshed, hvilket tyder på, at risikoen for at blive arbejdsløs er tilstrækkeligt til at arbejdstagere føler sig udstødt af samfundet.

Executive summary

Author(s):

Eurofound

Samfundsmæssige konsekvenser af ustabilitet på arbejdsmarkedet

dansk (50.7 KB - PDF)

The report contains the following lists of tables and figures.

List of tables

Table 1: Negative feelings and risk of depression, by employment status and contract type
Table A1: Regression analysis output (multinomial logistic regression) – temporary work
Table A2: Regression analysis output (multinomial logistic regression) – part-time work
Table A3: Regression analysis output (multinomial logistic regression) – self-employment
Table A4: Correspondents who contributed to the study

List of figures

Figure 1: Proportion of employees in temporary work in the EU, by duration of contract (%)
Figure 2: Temporary work as a proportion of total employment, by reason, EU27, 2013–2021 (%)
Figure 3: Temporary work as a proportion of total employment, by duration of contract, EU27, 2021 (%)
Figure 4: Probability of engaging in temporary work, by relationship status and age (average marginal effect)
Figure 5: Probability of engaging in temporary work, by education and citizenship (average marginal effect)
Figure 6: Probability of engaging in temporary work, by economic activity (NACE Rev. 2) (average marginal effect)
Figure 7: Part-time work as a proportion of total employment, by reason (%)
Figure 8: Part-time work as a proportion of total employment, by sex, EU27, 2013–2021 (%)
Figure 9: Short-time work as a proportion of total employment, by age, EU27, 2013–2021 (%)
Figure 10: Probability of engaging in part-time work, by age and citizenship (average marginal effect)
Figure 11: Probability of engaging in part-time work, by education, sex and presence of children (average marginal effect)
Figure 12: Probability of engaging in part-time work, by economic activity (Nomenclature of Economic Activities Rev. 2) (average marginal effect)
Figure 13: Self-employment without employees as a proportion of total employment, by occupation (%)
Figure 14: Types of employment as a proportion of total employment, EU27, 2013–2021 (%)
Figure 15: Probability of being self-employed, by year and degree of urbanisation (average marginal effect)
Figure 16: Levels of labour market instability across EU Member States
Figure 17: Perceived job insecurity, by working arrangement (%)
Figure 18: Perceived health, by perceived likelihood of losing one’s job in the next six months (%)
Figure 19: Logistic regression model of average marginal effect of selected factors on perceiving health as ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’
Figure 20: Negative feelings and risk of depression, by perceived likelihood of losing one’s job in the next six months (%)
Figure 21: Linear regression model of determinants of mental well-being (on a scale of 0–10)
Figure 22: Logistic regression model of average marginal effect of selected factors on risk of depression
Figure 23: Life satisfaction (on a scale of 1–10), by main activity, 2018
Figure 24: Life satisfaction (on a scale of 1–10), by contract type, 2018
Figure 25: Life satisfaction (on a scale of 1–10), by perceived likelihood of losing one’s job in the next six months
Figure 26: Life satisfaction (on a scale of 1–10), by contract type and employment status
Figure 27: Linear regression model of determinants of life satisfaction (on a scale of 1–10)
Figure 28: Perceived social exclusion, by employment status and perceived likelihood of losing one’s job in the next six months (%)
Figure 29: Logistic regression model of average marginal effect of selected factors on perceived social exclusion
Figure 30: Trust in people (on a scale of 1–10), by main activity, 2018
Figure 31: Trust in people (on a scale of 1–10), by work contract, 2018
Figure 32: Linear regression analysis of determinants of trust in people among those in employment, 2018
Figure 33: Linear regression analysis of determinants of trust in people among those not in employment, 2018
Figure 34: Perception of fairness (on a scale of 0–10), by main activity, 2004–2018
Figure 35: Perception of fairness (on a scale of 0–10), by contract type, 2018
Figure 36: Linear regression analysis of determinants of perception of fairness among those in employment, 2018
Figure 37: Linear regression model of determinants of trust in people, 2022
Figure 38: Satisfaction with the government (on a scale of 0–10), by activity status, 2018
Figure 39: Satisfaction with the government (on a scale of 0–10), by contract type, 2018
Figure 40: Linear regression model of determinants of satisfaction with the government among those outside paid employment, 2018
Figure 41: Linear regression model of determinants of satisfaction with the government among those in employment, 2018
Figure 42: Linear regression model of determinants of trust in the government, 2022
Figure 43: Satisfaction with the functioning of democracy, by activity status, 2018
Figure 44: Satisfaction with the functioning of democracy, by contract type, 2018
Figure 45: Linear regression model of determinants of satisfaction with democracy among those outside employment, 2018
Figure 46: Linear regression model of determinants of satisfaction with democracy among those in employment, 2018
Figure 47: Linear regression model of determinants of satisfaction with the functioning of democracy, 2022
Figure 48: Proportion of people who voted in the last election, by work contract type (%)
Figure 49: Proportion of people who voted in the last election, by activity status, 2018
Figure 50: Proportion of workers who voted in the last election, by contract type, 2018
Figure 51: Logistic regression model of average marginal effect of selected factors on voting in the last election
Figure 52: Proportion of workers who participated in public demonstrations, by activity status (%)
Figure 53: Logistic regression model of the average marginal effect of selected factors on participation in demonstrations
Figure 54: Target groups of policy measures addressing labour market instability (%)

Figure A1: Temporary work, by occupation in the International Standard Classification of Occupations 2008 (average marginal effect)
Figure A2: Part-time work, by occupation in the International Standard Classification of Occupations 2008 (average marginal effect)

Number of pages: 82

Reference nº: EF23011

ISBN: 978-92-897-2341-1

Catalogue nº: TJ-04-23-771-EN-N

DOI: 10.2806/570695

Permalink: eurofound.link/ef23011

Cite this publication
Eurofound (2023), Societal implications of labour market instability, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Samfundsmæssige konsekvenser af ustabilitet på arbejdsmarkedet

Key findings

Samfundsmæssige konsekvenser af ustabilitet på arbejdsmarkedet

List of tables

List of figures

Share this page

Tell us what you think