Labour Market Flexibility in the Netherlands

Abstract

Almost two decades have passed since Dutch employers, unions and the government, in their struggle against unemployment, agreed on a policy to increase labour market flexibility. Over the years the share of flexible jobs in the Netherlands has gradually increased to around ten percent. According to some parties the introduction of more labour market flexibility would lead to more inequality and a division in the labour market between workers with permanent employment and an underclass of women, immigrant workers and poorly educated workers with temporary contracts. The Dutch government has always claimed that a special set of legal rules regarding labour market flexibility would prevent the development of such an underclass. In this article three questions are addressed: Who has a flexible labour contract and who is in permanent employment? What is the pattern of transition to permanent contracts? What are the consequences for wage rates for those on permanent or flexible contracts respectively? The answers to these questions are provided using panel data for the period 1986-96.The results show that labour market flexibility has been introduced into the Dutch labour market without detrimental consequences for specific groups of workers.

Dimensions of work–home culture and their relations with the use of work–home arrangements and work–home interaction

“…Employees were asked to indicate for each arrangement whether they (had) used it (0 0''no,'' 1 0''yes''). Of these arrangements, two were issued by law (part-time work and parental leave); subsidized childcare arrangements were arranged through collective labour agreements, and flextime was the most frequently offered arrangement in the Netherlands (Den Dulk, 2001;Remery, van Doorne-Huiskes, & Schippers, 2002).…”

Home ownership under changing labour and housing market conditions: tenure preferences and outcomes among freelancers and flex workers

“…However, some individuals, such as young people who are exploring the labour market, may not be in a phase where they seek stability and in fact feel restricted by the inflexibility of terms of employment such as a longer period of notice. These are referred to as risk takers, who have fewer commitments to others (Remery et al, 2002). Also some specific family households which have many commitments may still prefer more risk because they expect higher returns from self-employment (freelancing) above permanent employment contracts.…”

“…Such commitments are best met by means of solid employment contracts with stable income streams. Remery et al (2002) indicate that a majority of households prefer a permanent contract because of the security and 'a clear perspective on the future'. However, some individuals, such as young people who are exploring the labour market, may not be in a phase where they seek stability and in fact feel restricted by the inflexibility of terms of employment such as a longer period of notice.…”

“…The literature indicates that permanent contracts and income stability have a strong relation with stable phases in the life course of households (see Remery, Van Doorne-Huiskes, & Schippers, 2002). Stable phases in the life course can be regarded as an outcome of choices by individuals (Remery et al, 2002). For instance, individuals decide to marry and raise children which leads to certain commitments.…”

“…Again, income stability is crucial because it strongly determines the possibilities of gaining access to mortgaged loans. The literature indicates that permanent contracts and income stability have a strong relation with stable phases in the life course of households (see Remery, Van Doorne-Huiskes, & Schippers, 2002). Stable phases in the life course can be regarded as an outcome of choices by individuals (Remery et al, 2002).…”