Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis

Flexicurity policies comprise a relatively novel approach to the regulation of work and welfare that aims to combine labour market flexibility with social security. Advocates of this approach argue that, by striking the right balance between flexibility and security, flexicurity policies allow firms...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Faraz Vahid Shahidi, Deborah De Moortel, Carles Muntaner, Owen Davis, Arjumand Siddiqi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2016-12-01
Series:SSM: Population Health
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827316300702
id doaj-f545dc702d29446384194f6e11e46449
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f545dc702d29446384194f6e11e464492020-11-24T21:36:21ZengElsevierSSM: Population Health2352-82732016-12-012674682Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysisFaraz Vahid Shahidi0Deborah De Moortel1Carles Muntaner2Owen Davis3Arjumand Siddiqi4Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Corresponding author.Interface Demography, Department of Sociology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, BelgiumDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Bloomberg School of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, CanadaSchool of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, UKDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United StatesFlexicurity policies comprise a relatively novel approach to the regulation of work and welfare that aims to combine labour market flexibility with social security. Advocates of this approach argue that, by striking the right balance between flexibility and security, flexicurity policies allow firms to take advantage of loose contractual arrangements in an increasingly competitive economic environment while simultaneously protecting workers from the adverse health and social consequences of flexible forms of employment. In this study, we use multilevel Poisson regression models to test the theoretical claim of the flexicurity approach using data for 23 countries across three waves of the European Social Survey. We construct an institutional typology of labour market regulation and social security to evaluate whether inequalities in self-reported health and limiting longstanding illness between temporary workers and their permanent counterparts are smaller in countries that most closely approximate the ideal type described by advocates of the flexicurity approach. Our results indicate that, while the association between temporary employment and health varies across countries, institutional configurations of labour market regulation and social security do not provide a meaningful explanation for this cross-national variation. Contrary to the expectations of the flexicurity hypothesis, our data do not indicate that employment-related inequalities are smaller in countries that approximate the flexicurity approach. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and conclude that there remains a relative lack of evidence in support of the theoretical claims of the flexicurity approach. Keywords: Health inequalities, Cross-national, Temporary, Employment, Flexicurity, Multilevelhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827316300702
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Faraz Vahid Shahidi
Deborah De Moortel
Carles Muntaner
Owen Davis
Arjumand Siddiqi
spellingShingle Faraz Vahid Shahidi
Deborah De Moortel
Carles Muntaner
Owen Davis
Arjumand Siddiqi
Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
SSM: Population Health
author_facet Faraz Vahid Shahidi
Deborah De Moortel
Carles Muntaner
Owen Davis
Arjumand Siddiqi
author_sort Faraz Vahid Shahidi
title Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
title_short Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
title_full Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
title_fullStr Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
title_full_unstemmed Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis
title_sort do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? a cross-national comparative analysis
publisher Elsevier
series SSM: Population Health
issn 2352-8273
publishDate 2016-12-01
description Flexicurity policies comprise a relatively novel approach to the regulation of work and welfare that aims to combine labour market flexibility with social security. Advocates of this approach argue that, by striking the right balance between flexibility and security, flexicurity policies allow firms to take advantage of loose contractual arrangements in an increasingly competitive economic environment while simultaneously protecting workers from the adverse health and social consequences of flexible forms of employment. In this study, we use multilevel Poisson regression models to test the theoretical claim of the flexicurity approach using data for 23 countries across three waves of the European Social Survey. We construct an institutional typology of labour market regulation and social security to evaluate whether inequalities in self-reported health and limiting longstanding illness between temporary workers and their permanent counterparts are smaller in countries that most closely approximate the ideal type described by advocates of the flexicurity approach. Our results indicate that, while the association between temporary employment and health varies across countries, institutional configurations of labour market regulation and social security do not provide a meaningful explanation for this cross-national variation. Contrary to the expectations of the flexicurity hypothesis, our data do not indicate that employment-related inequalities are smaller in countries that approximate the flexicurity approach. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and conclude that there remains a relative lack of evidence in support of the theoretical claims of the flexicurity approach. Keywords: Health inequalities, Cross-national, Temporary, Employment, Flexicurity, Multilevel
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827316300702
work_keys_str_mv AT farazvahidshahidi doflexicuritypoliciesprotectworkersfromtheadversehealthconsequencesoftemporaryemploymentacrossnationalcomparativeanalysis
AT deborahdemoortel doflexicuritypoliciesprotectworkersfromtheadversehealthconsequencesoftemporaryemploymentacrossnationalcomparativeanalysis
AT carlesmuntaner doflexicuritypoliciesprotectworkersfromtheadversehealthconsequencesoftemporaryemploymentacrossnationalcomparativeanalysis
AT owendavis doflexicuritypoliciesprotectworkersfromtheadversehealthconsequencesoftemporaryemploymentacrossnationalcomparativeanalysis
AT arjumandsiddiqi doflexicuritypoliciesprotectworkersfromtheadversehealthconsequencesoftemporaryemploymentacrossnationalcomparativeanalysis
_version_ 1725941548471812096