就业不稳定的主观认知:不稳定是坏事吗?

E. Gasiukova, A. Petrova
{"title":"就业不稳定的主观认知:不稳定是坏事吗?","authors":"E. Gasiukova, A. Petrova","doi":"10.17323/1726-3247-2021-3-39-70","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays in the literature, there are two perspectives on the spread of atypical labor contracts and unstable employment trajectories: some authors insist on the vulnerability of modern employees and the weakening of their bargaining position; others emphasize new opportunities for flexibility and independence from the employer. However, it remains unclear how employees react to these new employment conditions. Is instability a benefit or a sign of vulnerability for them? This discussion is most relevant for skilled young workers, as freedom and flexibility are of great value to them. The authors make an attempt to discover which position is closer to unstable workers in Russia. The Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey-Higher School of Economics (RLMS-HSE) data for 2014-2018 were used for the analysis. The panel data was used to construct the variable of instability in the labor market, taking into account the previous working status of the respondents (the sample size was 1,507 respondents). The main method of analysis was linear regression. The dependent variables were the components of subjective well-being, and the explanatory variable was the status of employment instability. The results show that employment instability is not related to respondents’ subjective well-being, nor to job insecurity. No differences in the subjective assessments of stable and unstable employees with different skills and income levels were found. The findings allow us to state that employment instability is not perceived by Russian employees as a distinct situation in the labor market, or as referring to negative or positive type of work or social position of an individual.","PeriodicalId":53970,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Sociology-Ekonomicheskaya Sotsiologiya","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Subjective Perception of Employment Instability: Is It Bad to Be Unstable?\",\"authors\":\"E. Gasiukova, A. Petrova\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/1726-3247-2021-3-39-70\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Nowadays in the literature, there are two perspectives on the spread of atypical labor contracts and unstable employment trajectories: some authors insist on the vulnerability of modern employees and the weakening of their bargaining position; others emphasize new opportunities for flexibility and independence from the employer. However, it remains unclear how employees react to these new employment conditions. Is instability a benefit or a sign of vulnerability for them? This discussion is most relevant for skilled young workers, as freedom and flexibility are of great value to them. The authors make an attempt to discover which position is closer to unstable workers in Russia. The Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey-Higher School of Economics (RLMS-HSE) data for 2014-2018 were used for the analysis. The panel data was used to construct the variable of instability in the labor market, taking into account the previous working status of the respondents (the sample size was 1,507 respondents). The main method of analysis was linear regression. The dependent variables were the components of subjective well-being, and the explanatory variable was the status of employment instability. The results show that employment instability is not related to respondents’ subjective well-being, nor to job insecurity. No differences in the subjective assessments of stable and unstable employees with different skills and income levels were found. The findings allow us to state that employment instability is not perceived by Russian employees as a distinct situation in the labor market, or as referring to negative or positive type of work or social position of an individual.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Sociology-Ekonomicheskaya Sotsiologiya\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Sociology-Ekonomicheskaya Sotsiologiya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/1726-3247-2021-3-39-70\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Sociology-Ekonomicheskaya Sotsiologiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1726-3247-2021-3-39-70","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于非典型劳动合同和不稳定就业轨迹的传播,目前文献中有两种观点:一些作者坚持认为现代雇员的脆弱性及其议价地位的削弱;其他人则强调灵活性和独立于雇主的新机会。然而,目前还不清楚员工对这些新的就业条件有何反应。对他们来说,不稳定是一种好处还是脆弱的标志?这一讨论与熟练的年轻工人最为相关,因为自由和灵活性对他们来说是非常重要的。作者试图找出哪个职位更接近俄罗斯的不稳定工人。俄罗斯纵向监测调查-高等经济学院(RLMS-HSE)数据用于2014-2018年的分析。面板数据用于构建劳动力市场不稳定性变量,考虑到受访者以前的工作状态(样本量为1,507名受访者)。分析的主要方法是线性回归。因变量为主观幸福感成分,解释变量为就业不稳定状态。结果表明,就业不稳定性与被调查者的主观幸福感无关,与工作不安全感无关。不同技能和收入水平的稳定员工和不稳定员工的主观评价没有差异。研究结果表明,俄罗斯雇员并不认为就业不稳定是劳动力市场上的一种特殊情况,也不认为就业不稳定是指个人的消极或积极的工作类型或社会地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Subjective Perception of Employment Instability: Is It Bad to Be Unstable?
Nowadays in the literature, there are two perspectives on the spread of atypical labor contracts and unstable employment trajectories: some authors insist on the vulnerability of modern employees and the weakening of their bargaining position; others emphasize new opportunities for flexibility and independence from the employer. However, it remains unclear how employees react to these new employment conditions. Is instability a benefit or a sign of vulnerability for them? This discussion is most relevant for skilled young workers, as freedom and flexibility are of great value to them. The authors make an attempt to discover which position is closer to unstable workers in Russia. The Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey-Higher School of Economics (RLMS-HSE) data for 2014-2018 were used for the analysis. The panel data was used to construct the variable of instability in the labor market, taking into account the previous working status of the respondents (the sample size was 1,507 respondents). The main method of analysis was linear regression. The dependent variables were the components of subjective well-being, and the explanatory variable was the status of employment instability. The results show that employment instability is not related to respondents’ subjective well-being, nor to job insecurity. No differences in the subjective assessments of stable and unstable employees with different skills and income levels were found. The findings allow us to state that employment instability is not perceived by Russian employees as a distinct situation in the labor market, or as referring to negative or positive type of work or social position of an individual.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: Journal of Economic Sociology is aimed at consolidating international standards of studies in economic sociology, presenting new research carried out by Russian and international scholars, introducing new books and research projects, and attracting young scholars into the field. Journal of Economic Sociology is a specialized academic journal representing the mainstreams of thinking and research in international and Russian economic sociology. Economic Sociology provides a framework for discussion of the following key issues: major theoretical paradigms in economic sociology, sociology of markets and organizations, social and economic strategies of households, informal economy. Journal of Economic Sociology also welcomes research papers written within neighboring disciplines — new institutional economics, anthropology, economic psychology and the related fields, which can be of interest to economic sociologists. Each journal issue presents papers and information organised along the following rubrics: ''Interviews'' contains texts of interviews collected with the leading international scholars in the field of economic sociology and related areas. ''New Texts'' present most recent original papers in economic sociology and related areas. ''New Translations'' offers translations of most important studies into Russian. ''Beyond Borders'' introduces the studies from the neighbor disciplines (institutional economics, economic anthropology, economic psychology, etc.). ''Professional Reviews'' provides overviews of the streams of research and literature in various fields of economic sociology. ''Book reviews'' attracts attention to most important books published in Russia and worldwide. ''Conferences'' shares information on the events already took place or planned for the future.
期刊最新文献
Ethical Consumption as a Sphere of Russian Civil Society: Factors and the Development Potential of Market Practices Non-Jural Labor Practices at Kuzbass Coal Enterprises: The Experience of Sociological Analysis Within the Historical Context The Main Ideas of the Economic and Sociological Concept of Emotions by Eva Illouz. Reply to Nina Lyubinarskaya’s Review The Valuation of Online APE Courses: The Case of Online Consumer Reviews on the Educational Platform Subjective Well-being of Rural Dwellers in Russia: Factors and Their Significance
×
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