Teenagermutterschaften. Verbreitung, Ursachen, Folgen und Empfehlungen

Seils, Eric; Baumann, Helge

doi:10.2378/uj2019.art42d

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, the number of atypical employments is rising. To be more precise, the common employment relationship has lost its importance in both relative as well as absolute terms (DESTATIS 2021c; Seils and Baumann 2019;Sperber and Walwei 2017). From 1991 to 2007, the proportion of atypical employees rose from 12.8% to 22.6% (Seils and Baumann 2019).…”

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To be more precise, the common employment relationship has lost its importance in both relative as well as absolute terms (DESTATIS 2021c; Seils and Baumann 2019;Sperber and Walwei 2017). From 1991 to 2007, the proportion of atypical employees rose from 12.8% to 22.6% (Seils and Baumann 2019). The proportion of atypical employees in the permanent staff currently stagnates at a high level Women finding themselves more often in atypical employment than men: At present, 30.5% of all women in employment pursue atypical employment, as opposed to only 12.2% of all men.…”

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The proportion of atypical employees in the permanent staff currently stagnates at a high level Women finding themselves more often in atypical employment than men: At present, 30.5% of all women in employment pursue atypical employment, as opposed to only 12.2% of all men. Individuals without a recognized professional qualification make up 36.6% of the entire labour force in atypical employment (Seils and Baumann 2019).…”

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Inclusion Opportunities of Work 4.0? Employment Realities of People with Disabilities in Germany

Jochmaring¹,

York²

2023

Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The normative and political call for an inclusive working world as the UNCRPD explicates is not consistent with the current employment realities of people with disabilities in Germany and in the Nordic countries such as Iceland, Norway or Sweden. Only a fraction is able to find employment on the labour market, while segregated systems are expanding at the same time. We reference the 'Work 4.0' discourse with a particular focus on substitutability potentials and automation processes in the course of digitalization. These developments go hand in hand with the pluralization of employment constellations as well as progressive expansion of education and devaluation of qualifications. This article takes a critical look at these processes of change in the working world with regard to their effects on people with disabilities. The central contradictions between political, legal, and normative demands for employment realities to be organized inclusively as well current developments in the area of technology, employment, and knowledge are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pluralization Of Employment Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inclusion Opportunities of Work 4.0? Employment Realities of People with Disabilities in Germany

Jochmaring¹,

York²

2023

Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, migration regimes are not just about entry controls but also create an internal ‘multiplication of labour’ (Mezzadra and Neilson, 2013) or ‘juridical division of labour’ (Könönen, 2019) which restricts who can get what job. Consequentially, the chance of non-European migrants in Germany to be in atypical employment is nearly doubled compared to natives (Seils and Baumann, 2019: 5). Moreover, certain residence statuses are coupled to an existing employment which exerts further pressure, especially on refugees, to endure various forms of over-exploitation (Berntsen, 2016; Kalbermatter, 2020; MacKenzie and Forde, 2009).…”

Section: Migration Regime and Workplace Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Algorithmic Integration and Precarious (Dis)Obedience: On the Co-Constitution of Migration Regime and Workplace Regime in Digitalised Manufacturing and Logistics

Schaupp

2021

Work, Employment and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses the interaction of the algorithmic workplace regime and the migration regime in manual work in platform logistics and manufacturing in Germany. Based on ethnographic case studies, the article reconstructs how companies integrate migrant workers by using systems of algorithmic work control. These simplify the labour process and direct workers without relying on a certain language. Algorithmic work control, however, does not realise its intended disciplining effects on its own but is dependent on external factors. A precarious residence status is such an external disciplining factor as it can create an implicit alliance of migrant workers with their employers in the hope for permanent residence. Nonetheless, the interaction of the two regimes also produced new forms of solidarity between the workers, which in some cases led to new forms of self-organisation. Thus, workplace regime and migration regime co-constitute each other.

show abstract

Teenagermutterschaften. Verbreitung, Ursachen, Folgen und Empfehlungen

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Inclusion Opportunities of Work 4.0? Employment Realities of People with Disabilities in Germany

Inclusion Opportunities of Work 4.0? Employment Realities of People with Disabilities in Germany

Algorithmic Integration and Precarious (Dis)Obedience: On the Co-Constitution of Migration Regime and Workplace Regime in Digitalised Manufacturing and Logistics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About