Are atypical employment relationships precarious? : an empirical analysis of social risks

Abstract

"The paper examines the extent to which atypical forms of employment are exposed to greater social risks than standard employment relationships. The empirical analysis, based on data from the Socio-Economic Panel, compares temporary work, fixed-term and 'marginal' part-time work as well as regular part-time work with permanent fulltime employment relationships. The criteria for social risks comprise wages, participation in company training schemes and employment stability. The panel regressions confirm the assumption that people who are atypically employed are exposed to greater social risks than those comparably employed in standard employment forms. The most significant disadvantages are to be seen in wage levels in all forms of atypical employment. A greater stability risk is found amongst fixed-term employees and temporary workers. Furthermore, the results indicate that access to company further training is not independent of the duration of the employment. Part-time workers and those who are marginally employed have lower chances of taking part in further training than workers with standard employment contracts. The results obtained do not mean, however, that according to the characteristics analysed here the majority of atypical employment relationships can be described as precarious." (Author's abstract, IAB-Doku) ((en))

Cite article

Brehmer, W. & Seifert, H. (2008): Sind atypische Beschäftigungsverhältnisse prekär? Eine empirische Analyse sozialer Risiken. In: Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung, Vol. 41, No. 4, p. 501-531.