Employmentweb_low

policies and interventions
precarious employment
other parts of this book have pointed to extensive evidence on the adverse
health effects of precarious employment in poor and wealthy countries,
across a broad spectrum of different policy settings. downsizing and job
insecurity affects the health and well-being of workers in social democratic
norway or sweden, just as it does in neo-liberal Usa or post-communist
china. even comparatively speaking, comprehensive labour standards and
social protection regimes (in countries where unions have retained
influence) have been unable to do more than mitigate the consequences of
ill-health, since the growth of insecure and contingent work arrangements
either bypass or undermine these protective regimes (Bernstein, lippel,
Tucker, & vosko, 2005; Johnstone & Wilson, 2006). The growth of precarious
employment has further debilitated the ailing workers’ rights advocacy
groups (such as workplace committees and health and safety
representatives) and unions and their involvement in shaping and regulating
the working environment. (Baugher & Timmons roberts, 2004; Johnstone,
Quinlan, & Walters, 2005) (see case studies 86 and 87).
in wealthy countries, government responses to these problems have
been belated and fragmented. policy interventions have generally involved
amending occupational health and safety and minimum labour standard
laws, codes and guidance material, adding contractual obligations (e.g.,
occupational health and safety provisions in government tender standards),
strategic enforcement campaigns, industry-specific packages (e.g., tripartite
agreements dealing with small builders and subcontractors in construction),
and the establishment of (often union-backed) roving safety representatives
(e.g., the swedish regional safety representatives system; see Walters, 2004).
in most poor countries, limited laws, shortfalls in regulatory resources,
weak or repressed unions, and a political climate not conducive to
enforcement inhibits the implementation of basic standards, let alone
recognition of the difficulties associated with precarious labour (Balzano,
2004; Baumecker & de faria, 2006). research indicates that temporary
foreign workers and undocumented immigrants are especially vulnerable to
exploitation. They are further used by employers to fracture regulatory
standards (even where bilateral agreements, protocols or multi-country
directives exist, like saudi arabia and the european Union) and can be denied
access to workers’ compensation when injured (Guthrie & Quinlan, 2005;
Woolfson & sommers 2006).
large-scale international workers movements may sometimes
represent a serious challenge to essentially closed national welfare state
regimes (freeman, 1986). yet, in the context of neo-liberal-inspired
reductions in worker entitlements, it is possible that an underclass of
foreign-born workers will become entrenched in this precarious class
position across generations. in the international merchant marine, for
hazardous work on wooden scaffoldings.
Building reconstruction and renovation
site. Tianjin (China).
source: ilo (2007)
337