Institutions, employment insecurity and polarization in support for unemployment benefits

Abstract

Research has shown that workers' support for public unemployment benefits (UB) depends on their level of employment insecurity: the insecure workers are more supportive of benefits than the secure workers. It can also be hypothesized that this polarization in support for UB is increased or decreased by the institutional settings of a country. We are particularly interested in two types of institutional conditions: the level of employment protection and the generosity of unemployment benefits. We discuss how public provision of social protection in terms of job security and income might motivate the subjectively secure and insecure workers in different ways and thereby polarize or unite support for unemployment benefits. We find that protection of temporary job contracts and generous unemployment benefits bring the attitudes of the secure and insecure closer together. We argue that the convergence of attitudes can be explained by the distribution of underlying social risks and existing social norms about solidarity.

Dualization and subjective employment insecurity: Explaining the subjective employment insecurity divide between permanent and temporary workers across 23 European countries

“…It is the subjective perception of individuals that have larger implications for well-being and policy/political preferences (e.g., Burgoon and Dekker, 2010;Dekker, 2010;Carr and Chung, 2014;Marx, 2014;Paskov and Koster, 2014). Thus, our focus needs to move beyond assumptions as to the utility of objective indicators to consider more direct subjective aspects of insecurity.…”

“…On the other hand, countries with high levels of ALMP and PLMP are those where feelings of insecurity are low for both permanent and temporary workers. Given the implications subjective vulnerability has on policy support and political preferences (Burgoon and Dekker, 2010;Marx, 2014;Paskov and Koster, 2014), protecting EPL at the cost of developing generous labour market policies may not be politically fruitful as assumed. Another point to raise from this result is the discrepancy found between institutional dualization and dualized market outcomes.…”

Diversity of youth policy regimes and early job insecurity – towards an integrated approach

“…More generous unemployment protection is linked with a higher level of subjective perception of job security (Anderson and Pontusson, 2007;Clark and Postel-Vinay, 2009), with this relationship being stronger for temporary workers (Clark and Postel-Vinay, 2009). Workers who feel they are in insecure employment are more in favour of higher unemployment benefits than workers who feel more secure (Paskov and Koster, 2014).…”

The divergent logics of labour market reforms in times of permanent austerity

“…However, UBs are also seen as increasing the workers' reservation wage and reducing their incentive to take up a job, thereby extending unemployment spells (Boeri & Van Ours, 2008). Additionally, UBs must be financed from taxes or social contributions, making them a fiscal burden for the state (Paskov & Koster, 2014). EPL, defined as a set of norms, rules and procedures that determine the possibilities for firing redundant workers, can include restrictions on dismissals, administrative or court procedures to follow, or compensation that employers must pay employees in case of dismissal (Boeri & Van Ours, 2008).…”

“…However, UBs are also seen as increasing the workers’ reservation wage and reducing their incentive to take up a job, thereby extending unemployment spells (Boeri & Van Ours, ). Additionally, UBs must be financed from taxes or social contributions, making them a fiscal burden for the state (Paskov & Koster, ).…”