quality, work and employment: history, concepts and ... · pressure on productivity growth in a...

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for Research, TechnologicalDevelopment and Demonstration under Grant Agreement No 312691

Quality, Work and Employment: History, Concepts and Theories, Example

Thomas Amossé (CEE)

9th of May, 2016


Main issues

• When and how has emerged this question in social sciences and the political debate?

• How has been defined and assessed what is important for the quality of work?

• What theories has thus for been developed?


Outline of the presentation

1. From Working conditions to Vulnerability andQuality of working life: Milestones of an History

2. Definitions, Measures, Theories

3. An example: an anglo-french comparison withWERS and REPONSE


1. From Working conditions to Vulnerability and Quality of working life

• A pre-history (from mid XIXe to the 1960s): Industrial health, safety and security

• Ingeneering and organisation of production as leadingapproaches

• Industrial Medicine (inc. Psychopathology of work): adaptingworkers to work constrains

• Corrective policies: Labour and economic administration,public insurance



• The emergence of the “working conditions” (the 1970s and 1980s):

• Growing unemployment and transformation of work, thecritical turn in social sciences (micro based approaches, autonomy of individuals)

• Taylorism, fordism… and their crisis: adapting work toworkers?

• An object of public debate: for instance in France, thecreation of the Anact and of statistical surveys (1978)



• Job quality and psychosocial risks (the 1990s and2000s):

• Quality as a specific political aim : ILO (1999) and the EU (Laeken, 2001)

• International statistical surveys (Eurofound)

• Opening to social sciences (sociology, psychology, economics) as a way to better understand the links between work andworkers



• Job quality and psychosocial risks (the 1990s and2000s):

• Intensification and objectivation processes (Gollac, Green)

• Suffering, harassment (Dejours, Hirigoyen), stress andpsycho-social risks (Karasek, Theroell)

• Job satisfaction and economics of well-being (Clark), in addition to only employment and wages

• Institutional and comparative analyses (Gallie, Green, Hall and Soskice, Kalleberg, Osterman)



• Quality of working life and vulnerability (a reframing in the 2010s):

• Ethical, scientific and ideological critiques of the psycho socialrisks approach in France (Clot, 2013; QWL nationalagreement, 2013; PST n°3, 2015) : “compassional despotismand managerial hygienism gestionnaire” (Coutrot, 2015).

• Work and workers are not problems, they are solutions forboth economy and society (work as a source of heath, workersas productive strengths).

• A new collectively built approach…



• Quality of working life and vulnerability (a reframing in the 2010s):

• Identifying vulnerable populations and not only compensatingtheir exclusion of the labour market…

• …But helping them to have an employment with, if necessary, adapted working conditions.

• Consistency with the general inclusive aim of a social andeconomic performance “model”. Only intentions?



• As a first conclusion

• A clear trend in the attempts of taking into account whatworkers live and desire

• But cyclical steps backwards due to (conjonctural and/or structural?) political and economic reasons (quantity vs quality, pressure on productivity growth in a neo-liberal era)

• Leads to / should imply reflections on the notion of socialprogress



• Not one but many definitions

• More or less normative: • Should we (who, indeed?) decide what is or not a good job? • Unicity vs plurality of aspects taken into account, of ways of

linking them, of values on each of them…

• Linked to different scientific and political aims: • understanding phenomena• correcting disorders or inequalities• penalising unwanted behaviours• incitating employers, managers, workers



• Different levels (micro / meso / macro), with fuzzyboundaries

• Quality of work (working conditions including work intensity, autonomy, hours; learning opportunities; etc.)

• Quality of job (type of contract; wage, rewards; socialprotection, etc.)

• Quality of the firms / branches / labour market (voice friendlypolicies ; gender balance; participation and flexicuritymeasures, etc.).



• Subjective vs objective concepts of work/job quality

• Subjective / hedonist approach: • the ‘utility’ a worker derives from a job-usually measured through ‘job

satisfaction’.• each individual’s subjective evaluation of a job: high quality jobs are those

that lead to high personal job satisfaction (problems of reference groups, of downward adaptation, of lack of knowledge).

• ‘Objective’ approach: • job quality encompasses job features that can be shown empirically / set

politically to enhance workers’ psychological and/or physical well-being.• Can be declared, administratively registered or directly observed (problems

of objectivation: what counts? Only financial, contractual or objectivable aspects?).



• The objective measures:• Inter-subjective validity, with a more or less explicitly normative

approach• High quality jobs are those that correspond to:

• Widely shared values for self-determination and personal development (consistency positive psychological well-being).

• Conditions considered as necessary for maintaining good psychological and physical health (work intensity, job control, job security ; physical dangers, but also stress)

• Various institutional definitions:• The decent work (ILO, 1999)• The Laeken indicators (EU, 2001)• Eurofound (Dublin, 2012 for a recent presentation)• The EU’s Employment Committee Indicators Group (2013)



• Eurofound Job Quality Dimensions• Earnings• Prospects• Intrinsic Job Quality (skill use and discretion, social environment, physical

environment, work intensity)• Working Time Quality

• EU’s Employment Committee (EMCO) Indicators Group 2013• Socio-Economic Security (earnings, contracts, prospects for career advancement)• Education and Training (skills development, firm policy)• Working Conditions (health and safety, work intensity, autonomy, collective

representation, • Work-Life (hours, parental leave, time flexibility) and Gender Balance (pay and

supervisory status)



• A wide spectrum of disciplines and issues for social sciences

• More at a micro level, understanding what is / can be a good job: psychology, sociology, management, organisational studies. • Quantitative vs qualitative approaches• Pluralism vs one best way, normative or not

• At a meso / macro level, two main contrasting types of theory (political economics and sociology)• Universalistic theories assess / predict / promote growing convergence between

models (firm, industries, countries)• Institutional theories try to explain / predict / promote persisting distinctiveness of

different countries or types of models (firm, industries, countries)



• Optimistic universalistic theories

• Industrialism (Clark Kerr; Blauner; Piore and Sabel), post-industrialism/Informational Society (Daniel Bell; Castells) andKnowledge-Economy (OECD; EU)

• Technology and knowledge as main drivers of progress

• Implications: upskilling (new forms of organisation) and relative disadvantage of low skilled workers (life long education, flexicurity).



• Pessimistic universalistic theories

• Marxian/labour process theory (Friedmann; Braverman),Flexibility Theories (Atkinson; Capelli; Kalleberg), SkillPolarization Theories (Autor; Goos & Manning)

• Focus put on perverse effects of generalised (and un-controled)competition such as deskilling or polarisation, intensification,growing insecurity.

• Implications: ‘la lutte’ against liberalisation and deregulationprocesses at stake.



• Institutional Theories:• Varieties of Capitalism/Production Regime Theory (Soskice, Hall,

Estevez-Abe),• Power Resource/Employment Regime Theory (Korpi, Esping-Anderson,

Gallie)

• Varieties of Capitalism/Production Regime Theory• Different national paths in solving coordination problems concerning

industrial relations, vocational training, corporate governance, inter-firm relations, employee cooperation, etc.

• Key distinction between liberal (Britain, US ; like the pessimistuniversalists) and coordinated economies (Germany, Scandinaviancountries, like the optimist universalists).



• Power Resource/Employment Regime Theory

• Different national welfare state regimes reflecting employer strategies constrained/conditioned by the balance of power in the country (nature of government policies, strength of trade unions)

• Key distinction between liberal (UK, Ireland), dualistic (Continental), inclusive (Nordic) systems.



• As a second conclusion

• On the main quantitative indicators, some trends upward (skills)but also growing intensity and insecurity and some increasinginequalities.

• National typologies useful to summarize the diversity, but limitedto understand specific evolutions.

• The complexity of national/cultural differences and dynamics…


3. An example: an anglo-french comparison with WERS and REPONSE

A comparative and collaborative project

• To use WERS and REPONSE, two comparable LEED, to compare and contrast employment relations practices and processes in Britain and France

• With a view to obtaining a better understanding of economic and social outcomes in the two countries

• Are there common sets of practices that are associated with ‘good’ outcomes for employers and employees in both countries (universal best practice)?

• Or do similar practices perform differently due to national idiosyncrasies (Varieties of Capitalism)?



Team Britain:

John Forth (NIESR), Alex Bryson (NIESR).

France: Thomas Amossé (CEE, Nantes), Philippe Askenazy (Cepremap, PSE),Christine Erhel (CEE , Paris 1), Heloise Petit (CEE, Lille 1),Antoine Rebérioux (Université Paris 7), Zinaida Salibekyan (CEE, Lest).



Final Book edited by PalgraveComparative Workplace Employment

RelationsAn Analysis of Britain and France

Thomas Amossé, Alex Bryson, John Forth and Héloïse Petit (editors)



List of contents

Chapter 1: Managing and working in Britain and France – An introductionChapter 2: Workplace structure and governance – How do employers differ between Britain and France?Chapter 3: Employee expression and representation at work – Voice of Exit?Chapter 4: Tenure, skill development and pay – The role of internal labour marketsChapter 5: Work organisation and HRM – Does context matter?Chapter 6: Job qualityChapter 7: How did workplaces respond to recession?Chapter 8: Vive la différence! Managing and working in Britain and France



What are WERS/REPONSE?

• National surveys mapping employment relations in workplacesacross Great-Britain/France

• Unique, comprehensive and linking employer and employee data: rich information collected from managers, worker representatives and employees in the same workplaces

• Well-established: 1980 (/ no edition), 1984 (/ no edition), 1990/1993, 1998/1999, 2004/2005, 2011

• Large-scale: almost 2,700 / 4,000 workplaces in 2011/2010

• Endorsed by a range of employer, union and independent organisations/ the French Ministry of Labour



Scope of the comparison based on WERS and REPONSE in 2004-5/2011

All workplaces with 11/21 or more employees, in the private sector ofSections C (Manufacturing) to S (Other Service Activities) of the NACE Rev 2 except Section R (Public Administration): • 1,256/1,602 management questionnaires for WERS (corresponding to a coverage

of 54%/49% of all employees in Great-Britain),

• 2,924/3,947 management questionnaires for REPONSE. (corresponding to a coverage of 55%/45% of all employees in France)

Employees with 15 months or more of tenure of these workplaces: • 11,169/11,581 employee questionnaires for WERS (45%/39% of all employees in

Great-Britain),

• 7,923/11,244 employee questionnaires for REPONSE (50%/41% of all employees in France).


3. An example: an anglo-french comparison with WERS and REPONSEAn illustration: Union and voice in France and Britain

(chapter 3)

The opposition between a more voluntarist employment relations system (Britain) and a more legally framed (France). Voice regimes are:

- More uniform across French workplaces (albeit with differences relating to the size thresholds for regulations)

- More strongly linked with the attitudes of managers and employees in Britain (both attitudes, such as pro-unionism, and practices such as wage bargaining, are strongly consistent with the workplace’s observed voice regime).

Unions are less prevalent in Britain but often seen (by local managers and employees) as beneficial when they are present; conversely, they are more prevalent in France but the perceived benefits appear weaker, at least at the local level.



An illustration: Union and voice in France and Britain (chapter 3)

Many of the workplace characteristics and social outcomes associated with voice regimes are similar in the two countries.

Unions are more common in - larger workplaces, - those belonging to listed organizations, - those that are not family-owned, - in specific industries such as Transport, Education, Health, Manufacturing, - and in workplaces with a less skilled workforce.

They are also - negatively associated with employee quit rates,- and positively associated with collective unrest.



An illustration: Union and voice in France and Britain (chapter 3)

The economic counterparts of voice regimes seem to be, at best, second order effects,

Although they have been widely commented upon in theoretical and empirical research.

Globally, the common traits and the higher prevalence of unions in France, and of direct voice in Britain, contribute to a characterization of - France as a union and voice-focused country, - and Britain as one focused on direct communication and exit.



• As a third conclusion

• The necessity to examine precisely in each case if a universalist or ainstitutionalist frame seems to be pertinent.

• It is hard to define in a similar way what is good in two different countriessince the values are inter-dependent with many other « local » variables.


Conclusion

• A personal feeling: a growing part of what may be crucial at work isnot understood with the quantitative approaches usually followed to study job quality.

• With the on-going new transformation of our economies(globalisation, numerisation), the quality and role of work and employment in individual lives and social destinies are still open questions.

• They more than ever imply reflexive and critical views in order to define categories of analyses which are not only influenced by political orientations.

TÁRKI Social Research Institute Inc. (HU)Amsterdam Institute for Advanced labour Studies, Universiteit van Amsterdam (NL)The Swedish Institute for Social Research, Stockholms Universitet (SE)Fachbereich IV, Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistik, Universität Trier (DE) Centre d’Etudis Demogràfics, Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)Centre d’Etudes de Population, de Pauvreté et de Politiques Socio-Economiques (LU)Centre for Social Policy, Universiteit Antwerpen (BE)Institute for Social & Economic Research, University of Essex (UK)Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, Universität Bremen (DE)Department of Dynamics of Organisations of Work, Centre d’Etudes de l’Emploi (FR)The Centre for European Policy Studies (BE) Dipartimento di Economica e Menagement, Università di Pisa (IT)Social Statistics Division, University of Southampton (UK)Luxembourg Income Study, asbl (LU)WageIndicator Foundation (NL)School of Social Sciences, The University of Manchester (UK)

Partners

Co-ordinator

Inclusive Growth Research Infrastructure Diffusion

Contract No 312691

For further information about the InGRID project, please contact [email protected]

www.inclusivegrowth.bep/a HIVA – Research Institute

for Work and SocietyParkstraat 47 box 5300

3000 Leuven Belgium

Guy Van GyesMonique Ramioul

InGRID

Thank your for your attention. Questions are welcome!

quality, work and employment: history, concepts and ... · pressure on productivity growth in a...

Documents