This study focuses on the consequences of the use of computerized work equipment (hereafter: computer use) on the content and quality of work. It investigates, first, the relationship between computer use and both job tasks and task discretion and, second, their mediating role for the relationship between computer use and job satisfaction. With our German‐UK comparison, we contribute to the long‐standing debate on the upskilling/de‐skilling nature of the use of technology and its repercussions on the quality of work. We analyse data from the Skills and Employment Surveys for the UK and the BIBB/BAuA Employment Surveys for Germany using structural equation modelling. In line with the literature on routine‐biased technological change, we show that computers are complementary to the performance of less routine and more abstract cognitive tasks and that this relationship is conducive to a higher level of task discretion and job satisfaction in both countries. Accounting for differences in job tasks performed, we find a negative direct effect of computer use on both task discretion and job satisfaction in the United Kingdom but not in Germany. Our results indicate that the ultimate effect of computer use on both task discretion and job satisfaction depends on the institutional contexts in which technology is introduced.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of two-tier firm-level collective agreements on firms’ propensity to use temporary employment, accounting for the process of self-selection of firms into different bargaining levels in the Italian context. It further examines which firm-level characteristics drive this process of selection. Design/methodology/approach The empirical analysis uses a panel data set of Italian firms for the years 2005, 2007, 2010 and 2015. Estimations are produced and compared through ordinary least square regression, random-effects and fixed-effects models. Findings Results show that enterprises adopting two-tier firm-level agreements (TTFA) are associated with lower levels of temporary workers. However, a longitudinal analysis suggests that introducing a TTFA does not impact firms’ propensity to employ temporary workers. This novel finding highlights the presence of a selection process based on firm-level time-constant characteristics. The paper argues that these characteristics refer to management orientation toward high-road rather than low-road employment strategies. Further evidence is brought in support of this claim, showing that firms’ propensity toward the provision of training for their labor force partially explain the process of selection. Originality/value The study is the first to analyze the impact of secondary-level collective agreements on firms’ reliance on temporary employment, offering new evidence on the causes of the expansion of temporary employment. It further highlights the relevance of employers’ strategies in shaping the impact of the bargaining structure.
The article investigates historical developments in lifespan inequality and the familial component in lifespan and longevity in the United States over the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries, using crowdsourced genealogical data from the Familinx project. It contributes to the existing literature by expanding the estimates of the familial component beyond the nuclear household to include multi-generational and horizontal classes of relatives of different sexes. Furthermore, it explores historical trends in lifespan inequality and in the intergenerational transmission of lifespan and longevity. Results confirm the presence of a familial component for all classes of relatives considered and highlight a stronger association for horizontal and same-sex relatives. Despite declining levels of lifespan inequality, we do not find evidence of decreasing family association throughout history, and, if anything, results indicate a strengthening of the parent-child association. Finally, results contribute to the debate on the representativity and usability of crowdsourced genealogical data by emphasizing the importance of sample selection based on the quality of information recorded.
Earnings inequalities in the US have steadily grown in the last decades, and between-class inequalities have been a central component of this process. However, while research has highlighted the strengthening relationship between occupational social classes and earnings, less attention has been paid to what factors have altered the market returns of different social classes. The present article investigates the contribution of two of the most widely recognized drivers of wage inequalities – de-unionization and technological change – to the growth of between-class inequalities. Using direct measures for computerization and union density at the industry level, this article analyses their relationship to the earnings growth of employees in different social classes from 1984 to 2019. Descriptive results underline the diverging earnings growth of manual and non-manual workers. Furthermore, minor support is found for the claim that computerization at the industry level was associated with the earnings growth of salariat and non-manual workers. In contrast, de-unionization is related to the diverging fortunes of manual and service classes in two ways. First, unionization is positively associated with the earnings of all social classes but more strongly with those of the lower classes. Second, manual workers were employed in much greater numbers in industries that experienced severe declines in union density and have thus been majorly affected by its decay. Finally, the growth in educational levels for non-manual classes emerges as a crucial determinant of their faster earnings growth. Overall, results support recent sociological literature suggesting that institutional factors, rather than technological change, are primarily responsible for rising inequalities in the US.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.