Job Quality in an Era of Flexibility

Experiences in a European Context

Tommy Isidorsson, Julia Kubisa

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351358521
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

This is the era of flexibility. Under constant pressure to be adaptable, organizations increasingly adopt employment practices such as zero-hours contracts, the casualization of the workforce and the use of temporary and agency labour. These flexible practices are central to debates about the changing nature of job quality and its causes, trends and consequences.

Arguing that job quality is central to understanding contemporary work, this book explores the internal and external pressures for flexibility in workplaces, professions and sectors and how this pressure shapes workers' experiences of job quality. By studying job quality dynamics via case studies from organizations and occupations in the UK, Poland, Belgium and Sweden, the volumes illustrates the diversity of practices and experiences, as well as market pressures and institutional arrangements which effect working lives. Finally, the editors propose a policy debate on the new concept "flexiquality" - a combination of flexibility and job quality that can be beneficial for both management and workers.

1
Job quality in an era of flexibility

Introduction

Julia Kubisa and Pedro Mendonca

Throughout the most part of the last 20 years, flexibility has been viewed as a defining feature of relations in the labour and economic markets. The challenges of a globalising economy, the race for lower costs of production and the pressure to limit public spending have created a constant need to answer and to adapt to changes – by companies in the private sector and by public enterprises. This brought a prevalence of ‘no long term’ relationships, a short-term perspective and acceptance of risk that have become perceived as a norm in an everyday life shaped by the managerial discourse.

What about the working lives? While flexibility is increasingly recognised as inevitable, its drawbacks have been pointed out within the debate on the rise of a precarious class and diminishing social securities for workers (Standing, 2009, 2011, 2014). There is increasing consensus that the European attempt to balance the flexibility for employers by state protection of social security and lifelong learning for workers under the name of flexicurity has brought an unbalanced development of flexibility in comparison to securities (Burroni and Keune, 2011). In this context, it is relevant to ask what are the consequences for the everyday experiences of workers in their jobs? What is happening to forms of contracts, working time arrangements, autonomy or social work environment? In times of a constant need for change – what is happening to job quality?

The overarching aim for the volume is not only to describe how but also to explain why job quality is affected or influenced by different strategies for flexibility. Placed within the context of job quality debates in European policies in the period of post-crises labour market deregulation, the edited volume aims to illustrate how the pursuit for job quality within the setting of flexibility shapes the working conditions in occupations, at workplaces and in sectors in chosen European countries. At the same time, the volume is concerned with exploring the workers’ experiences and the ways in which they are able to reshape and recast the quality of their own jobs by regulating the employers’ behaviour. The authors within this volume show a far more complex picture of how job quality is shaped, experienced and regulated, when compared to macroeconomic research dominating the research field of job quality in Europe. Overall, the volume presents the recent quantitative and qualitative research in the field of job quality and flexibility conducted by the members of the 7th Framework Programme, Marie Curie Initial Training Network, ChangingEmployment.

The order of this chapter is as follows. It starts with an overview on debates on job quality in order to grasp its multi-dimensional character. Then in broad lines it presents what is happening to job quality in an era of flexibility. This is followed by a theoretical framework with conceptualisations of flexibility and the index of job quality that will serve as point of reference for the research presented in the volume. The last sections are dedicated to introducing the European context for the research presented in the volume and the structure of the following chapters.

Understanding job quality

Job quality had been central to the EU’s employment strategy in the beginning of the 2000s. It was claimed that job quality, and not only job creation, contributes to economic sustainability, social cohesion and individual well-being (European Commission, 2001; European Commission, 2002). The ‘more and better jobs’ agenda aspired by the European Union would allow its members to endure competition from low-wage countries and compete in a knowledge-based and highly skilled economy. This aspiration has been consequently followed up with renewed European employment strategies aimed at smart, sustainable and inclusive growth that included commitment to fostering high levels of employment and productivity (Hurley, Fernández-Macías and Storrie, 2013).

However, the 2008 financial crisis shifted emphasis from quality to quantity of jobs, in order to fight the increasing unemployment (Muñoz de Bustillo, Fernández-Macías, Esteve and Antón, 2009). During and after the crisis, there was a significant shift towards more aggressive flexible labour market policies. As Meardi (2014) argues, the once distinctive European ‘social model’ was replaced by a financial focus, fiscal retrenchment, and policies rooted on providing employers with higher flexibility leverage to face economic downturns. However, the emphasis on flexibilisation that this model advocates has led to researchers identifying an aggravated trend towards labour market dualisation, where lower-quality jobs with little job security and fewer skill requirements became more common (Eurofound, 2012; Gallie, 2013). This has been accompanied by increasing problems of economic inequalities, growing labour market insecurity, decreasing levels of social integration and lower levels of general quality of working life (Dieckhoff and Gallie 2007; Burroni and Keune, 2011; Eurofound, 2012; Gallie, 2013; Holman and McClelland, 2011).

The centrality of job quality in the political agenda in the context of dismantling the European social model has made it the aim of considerable scrutiny from regulatory organisations and academics, working to understand its causes, trends and consequences (Appelbaum, Bernhardt and Murnane, 2003; Coats, 2009; Gallie, 2007, 2013; Green, 2006, 2013; Holman, 2013; Warhurst, Carre, Findlay and Tilly, 2012; Clark, 2005; European Commission, 2001; Grimshaw and Rubery, 2005). Yet the nature and components of job quality are still debated. Analyses tend to focus on a number of dimensions of what might comprise job quality, typically highlighting the importance of pay and skills (Clark, 2005). However, many researchers have drawn emphasis to its other potential components, such as job security, training and development, work organisation, task discretion, employee voice, job satisfaction, working time and work-life balance (Green, 2006; Gallie, 2007, 2013; Coats, 2009; Kalleberg, 2011). The European Commission has identified ten job quality dimensions, including both subjective and objective elements: intrinsic job quality; skills, lifelong learning and career development; gender equality; health and safety at work; inclusion and access to labour market; work organisation and work-life balance; flexibility and security; social dialogue and worker involvement; diversity and non-discrimination; and work performance (Kelliher and Anderson, 2008). It thus emerges that job quality can be understood as multi-dimensional, though the precise definition and the full understanding of the interconnections between its components are yet to be clear and consensual (Muñoz de Bustillo, Fernández-Macías, Antón and Esteve, 2011; Carré, Findlay, Tilly and Warhurst, 2012).

One of the most challenging aspects in political economy is to understand how economies can contribute to creating more good quality jobs in different sectors and at different skill levels within the labour market despite employers’ effort to use flexibility. Progress is likely to be limited without addressing job quality through a multi-dimensional and multilevel approach (Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2011). As Muñoz de Bustillo et al. (2011, p. 457) argue ‘jobs do not exist in a vacuum, but in a social context in which there are public and private institutions like a welfare state and the family’. Thus, jobs, and consequently individuals, are influenced by the context in which they are embedded, meaning that a comprehensive examination of job quality involves looking at different sectoral and institutional country contexts, as well as the perspectives of social actors, such as managers, workers and trade unions. The examination of these perspectives may help to better assess and understand the ways in which job quality is shaped in an era of flexibility; whether job quality under flexible working practices differs in different organisational, sectoral and national settings; and, finally, what are the workers’ experiences of job quality and strategies to improve or maintain the quality of their own jobs.

Both quantitative and qualitative studies have contributed significantly to the understanding of trends, drivers and experiences of job quality in existing research. On the one hand, there are those studies analysing job quality through European – or nationwide – datasets at the ‘macro’ level in order to track and understand changes in job quality over time. These macroeconomic studies argue that organisations are embedded in institutional frameworks that shape job quality outcomes (Gallie, 2013; Green, 2006; Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2009) and tend to focus on the impact of static measures such as employment protection legislation on labour market indicators such as the rate of unemployment (Howell and Rehm, 2009) or underemployment (Bell and Blanchflower, 2010).

On the other hand, job quality has also been analysed on ‘micro’ or work-place levels. These studies aim to investigate job quality through the lenses of specific types of workplace regimes (Taylor, Hyman, Mulvey and Bain, 2002; Thompson, 1989; Thompson and Warhurst, 1998). Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses. Although the first provides the analysis of job quality with clear measures and representative datasets, it may leave what is happening in the workplace as a ‘black box’ and fall short in connecting directly with the concrete work experience of workers (Sengupta, Edwards and Tsai, 2009). The second approach provides strong accounts of the context in which job quality is analysed, allowing for a finely detailed picture of workplace regimes and workers’ experiences. At the same time, it is limited in conceptualising and measuring job quality, as well as identifying the wider politico economic factors that shape jobs at the workplace level (Sengupta et al., 2009). This volume contributes to job quality debates by exploring how institutional factors feed into the organizational level for a more complete picture as well as exploring additional drivers, such as market forces.

As Muñoz de Bustillo et al. (2009, 2011) point out, the standard analysis of the labour market usually focuses on quantity: the number of jobs and the employment or unemployment rates. However, jobs differ – they can be ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and each of those characteristics is multi-dimensional and dependent on the sectoral and national context (Kalleberg, Reskin and Hudson, 2000; McGovern, Smeaton and Hill, 2004; Gallie, 2013; Grimshaw and Lehndorff, 2010). Although there is established evidence that job quality outcomes vary between countries (Gallie, 2013; Eurofound, 2012), there is also increasing literature stressing the role of sectoral and organisational factors in the variation of job quality outcomes (Crouch, Schröder and Voelzkow, 2009; Lloyd and Payne, 2016), providing critical information on the segmented differences in working life experiences. Additionally, Muñoz de Bustillo et al. (2009, 2011) underline it is crucial to study job quality in times of crisis, when policy priorities are shifted towards job quantity and fighting unemployment. They point out that monitoring job quality is important as it allows to see the dynamics of change within the context of crisis – whether that would be destruction of worst jobs, or overall improvement. As Doogan (2009) frames it, knowledge about the quantity and quality of jobs, and the job structure enables better understanding of deep changes that we are facing as societies – such as globalisation or technological change.

The era of flexibility and its impact on job quality

Flexibility has become the driving concept behind the restructuring of work (Bradley, Erickson, Stephenson, and Polity, 2000). Currently, flexibility is presented as a solution that helps to bear the pressures of contemporary markets. The customers who seek for new niche products, the increasing globalised competition and the fact that ‘change’ is the only phenomenon we can be sure about – this all creates a context in which flexibility solutions are seen as inevitable. While the concept is commonly used in the public discourse, it is also value-saturated and surprisingly undefined (Engstrand, 2007). Flexibility is generally seen as beneficial and positive, even though this kind of argumentation comes from the managerial discourse that conflates the interests of employers and workers under a common goal. As an example, employment flexibility is associated with personal choice and freedom, and opportunity for personal regeneration (Handy, 1995).

The flexibility that is advised and promoted is mostly organization-oriented, just as it was described over 30 years ago in Atkinson’s model of ‘flexible firm’ (Atkinson, 1984), promoted by managerial theorists (Womack, Jones and Roos, 1990) and still a firm point of reference for management debates. The model presents several types of flexibility. The functional flexibility means quick and smooth redeployment of employees between activities and tasks, along with changes of products and production methods. The numerical flexibility can be external or internal and stands for an increase or decrease of the number of employees according to a company’s needs, including working hours, which loosens the contractual relationship between manager and worker. This is supported by financial flexibility that is based on new pay and remuneration systems such as assessment-based pay and a cost-cutting approach, and on organisational flexibility that relates to the suppleness of the organisation of a corporation (Atkinson, 1984; Atkinson and Meager, 1986; Womack et al., 1990; Furåker, Håkansson and Karlsson, 2012).

As flexibility became a subject of critical debate within the sociology of work and political economy, it was pointed out that it must be linked with factors such as economic pressures, an unstable market, technological change, privatisation, high unemployment, decline in the power of trade unions, deregulation of the employment relations and weakening of social benefits (Ladipo and Wilkinson, 2002). A crucial change in the economy and labour market composition happened when flexible labour was moved from the peripheries of Fordist production to the core post-Fordist capital accumulation, along with the development of the service sector (Hardt and Negri, 2000). That points to a direct connection between flexibility and uncertainty, instability, vulnerability and insecurity, which is a result of the transfer of risks from states and businesses to workers, their families and communities (Hewinson, 2016). The incorporation of flexible labour practices into global production networks can be viewed as a coercive process that engages in competition from both supplier firms and the states. The strategies of the latter to show their ability to provide a flexible investment environment include not only tax benefits, but first and foremost the provision of disciplined, cheap or skilled workers.

Companies use flexibility to adjust to supply and demand of the external labour market. They can take up distancing strategies, like the use of temporary work agencies, self-employment of former employees or sub-contracting. They can use functional flexibility by introducing multi-skilled employees and group organisation or they can take advantage of internal and external numerical flexibility by using different working time and contract arrangements – part-time, temporary work and agency work workers (Furåker et al., 2012; Hudson, 2002).

The rise of zero-hour contracts has brought into research focus the issue of flexible working time arrangements – a form of flexibility once overlooked. Rubery, Ward, Grimshaw and Beynon (2005) and more recently Wood (2016) have suggested that working time flexibility may represent a new regulation within the employment relationship. Some researchers have linked this type of flexibility as beneficial to the employee, providing opportunity to choose their own working hours (Guest, 2002). Contrastingly, others have argued that it is more common to find flexible working time practices that are detrimental for employees’ job quality experience and undermine workers’ coping arrangements while benefiting employers (Wood, 20...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• List of contributors
• List of figures and tables
• 1 Job quality in an era of flexibility: introduction
• 2 Job quality in Europe
• 3 Deregulation, job security and employability during the Great Recession: a multilevel analysis
• 4 Quality of working time in the police: the experience of shift extensification for officers and staff
• 5 ‘Supply chain capitalism’: exploring job quality for delivery workers in the UK
• 6 For the sake of quality of care: nurses’ struggles for job quality in the context of flexibility arrangements: the case of Poland
• 7 Job quality dynamics at the call centre: workers’ strategies in Poland
• 8 Voice and its implications for employment quality in temporary agency work in Sweden and Belgium
• 9 Job quality, flexibility and obstacles to collective agency
• 10 Job quality for temporary agency workers and client organization employees at a Swedish manufacturing plant
• 11 The social dimension of job quality: perceived social support in contrasting regulatory contexts for temporary agency work
• 12 Job quality in an era of flexibility: conclusions and new emerging issues on job quality for research and policy makers
• Index