Cui bono – business or labour? Job retention policies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1177/10242589221079151
B. Ebbinghaus, Lukas Lehner
{"title":"Cui bono – business or labour? Job retention policies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe","authors":"B. Ebbinghaus, Lukas Lehner","doi":"10.1177/10242589221079151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Europe has been faced with multiple challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the problem of how to secure jobs and earnings. In our comparative analysis, we explore to what degree European welfare states were capable of responding to this crisis by stabilising employment and workers’ incomes. While short-time work was a policy tool already partly used in the 2008/2009 Great Recession, job retention policies were further expanded or newly introduced across Europe in 2020 in the wake of the pandemic. However, cross-national variations persist in the way in which these schemes were designed and implemented across European welfare states, aiming more or less to hoard labour and thereby avoid mass dismissals throughout the employment crisis. We distinguish between business support and labour support logics in explaining the variation in job retention policies across Europe. Our finding is that Continental, Mediterranean and liberal welfare states did more to foster labour hoarding using short-time work than Nordic or Central and Eastern European countries.","PeriodicalId":23253,"journal":{"name":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","volume":"33 1","pages":"47 - 64"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10242589221079151","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

Europe has been faced with multiple challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the problem of how to secure jobs and earnings. In our comparative analysis, we explore to what degree European welfare states were capable of responding to this crisis by stabilising employment and workers’ incomes. While short-time work was a policy tool already partly used in the 2008/2009 Great Recession, job retention policies were further expanded or newly introduced across Europe in 2020 in the wake of the pandemic. However, cross-national variations persist in the way in which these schemes were designed and implemented across European welfare states, aiming more or less to hoard labour and thereby avoid mass dismissals throughout the employment crisis. We distinguish between business support and labour support logics in explaining the variation in job retention policies across Europe. Our finding is that Continental, Mediterranean and liberal welfare states did more to foster labour hoarding using short-time work than Nordic or Central and Eastern European countries.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
崔波诺——生意还是劳工?2019冠状病毒病大流行期间欧洲的就业保留政策
在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,欧洲面临着多重挑战,包括如何确保就业和收入的问题。在我们的比较分析中,我们探讨了欧洲福利国家在多大程度上能够通过稳定就业和工人收入来应对这场危机。虽然短期工作是2008/2009年大衰退期间已经部分使用的政策工具,但在大流行之后,2020年欧洲各地进一步扩大或新推出了就业保留政策。然而,这些计划在欧洲福利国家的设计和实施方式存在跨国差异,其目的或多或少是囤积劳动力,从而避免在整个就业危机期间大规模解雇。在解释欧洲各地就业保留政策的差异时,我们区分了商业支持和劳动力支持逻辑。我们的发现是,与北欧或中欧和东欧国家相比,欧洲大陆、地中海和自由福利国家在利用短期工作促进劳动力囤积方面做得更多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research
Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Governing neo-nationalism, trade unions and industrial relations: the cases of Hungary and Poland From a handful of activists towards an organising subculture: institutionalisation of transnational union organising in Central and Eastern Europe Round Table. Implementing the EU Directive on adequate minimum wages in the Low Countries: the case of the Netherlands Promoting employed worker status on digital platforms: how France’s labour inspection and social security agencies address ‘uberisation’ Internalising precariousness: experiences of Georgian platform workers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1