French employment market policies: dualisation and destabilisation

Author(s):  
Hélène Caune ◽  
Sotiria Theodoropoulou

In this chapter explores whether the direction of labour market reforms in France has changed since 2010 by comparison with the previous two decades. It looks into broad labour market policy areas, namely, income support for the unemployed, active labour market policies and employment protection legislation before and after 2009 and asks the following questions. What form has retrenchment taken under the recent fiscal pressures and how has it been distributed across these policy domains? Has the emphasis of active labour market policy instruments changed? How have policy changes affected insiders and outsiders in the labour market? It is shown that during economic crisis and the subsequent fiscal austerity period there were no paradigmatic changes in French labour market policies, which continued to develop along a path pursued since the early 2000s. Successive governments, both centre-right and centre-left, have implemented flexicurity à la française, with a focus on flexibility at the expense of security. External flexibility – firms’ ability to hire and dismiss workers – has been developed for both core workers and more precarious forms of employment (temporary work). Furthermore, new measures also introduced important changes in the field of internal flexibility (working-time organisation, wages).

Author(s):  
Johan Bo Davidsson

For many decades it seemed that the Swedish model was immune to change. Welfare scholars saw in Sweden a paragon of an equal society based on a generous welfare state that had withstood the pressures of globalisation. While it is true that some welfare institutions are still intact, that is no longer the case in labour market policy. This cannot be explained by fiscal austerity imposed by the EU; rather it was the economic crisis in the early 1990s that first set reforms in motion. This chapter traces labour market reforms in Sweden over the past two decades. The pattern suggested here is one in which labour market outsiders have borne the brunt of reforms. This can be seen in the manner in which labour market flexibility was introduced, the fact that many of the unemployed now stand outside the social insurance system, in the declining value of social assistance benefits and perhaps most strikingly in the radical cuts to spending on active labour market policy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Umney ◽  
Ian Greer ◽  
Özlem Onaran ◽  
Graham Symon

This article looks at two related labour market policies that have persisted and even proliferated across Europe both before and after the financial crisis: wage restraint and punitive workfare programmes. It asks why these policies, despite their weak empirical records, have been so durable. Moving beyond comparative-institutionalist explanations which emphasise institutional stickiness, it draws on Marxist and Kaleckian ideas around the concept of ‘class discipline’. It argues that under financialisation, the need for states to implement policies that discipline the working class is intensified, even if these policies do little to enable (and may even counteract) future stability. Wage restraint and punitive active labour market policies are two examples of such measures. Moreover, this disciplinary impetus has subverted and marginalised regulatory labour market institutions, rather than being embedded within them.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUC BENDA ◽  
FERRY KOSTER ◽  
ROMKE VAN DER VEEN

AbstractEvaluation studies of active labour market policy show different activation measures generate contradictory results. In the present study, we argue that these contradictory results are due to the fact that the outcomes of activation measures depend on other institutions. The outcome measure in this study is the long-term unemployment rate. Two labour market institutions are of special interest in this context: namely, employment protection and unemployment benefits. Both institutions, depending on their design, may either increase or decrease the effectiveness of active labour market policies in lowering long-term unemployment. Based on an analysis of macro-level data on 20 countries over a period of 16 years, our results show that employment protection strictness and unemployment benefit generosity interact with the way in which active labour market policies relate to long-term unemployment. Our results also indicate that, depending on the measure used, active labour market policies fit either in a flexible or in a coordinated labour market. This suggests that active labour market policies can adhere to both institutional logics, which are encapsulated in different types of measures.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
Laura Južnik Rotar

Abstract Background: Labour market policy aims to fight against unemployment and to raise employment. With this study we attempt to contribute to the evidence of the effectiveness of active labour market policy. Objectives: In the empirical part of the paper we aim to research the relations between the labour market policies and macroeconomic variables. Methods/Approach: In order to distinguish the effects of expenditures for labour market policies on unemployment rate, we separately analysed the effects of expenditures for active labour market policies and the effects of expenditures for passive labour market policies on unemployment rate using panel regression analysis. Results: The expenditures for active labour market policies have negative and statistically significant effect on unemployment rate, whereas the expenditures for passive labour market policies have positive and statistically significant effect on unemployment rate. Conclusions: Not only the activation strategies with benefit conditioning, but also encouraging and enabling unemployed person to actively approach in searching for a job should be implemented. The implementation of activation strategies which create favourable conditions for unemployed people to develop their skills, fulfil their potential, continuously maintain contacts with the employers and actively participate in the society should be supported.


2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID RUEDA

Active labour-market policy is an important tool for governments interested in the promotion of employment. This article explores a topic in the comparative political economy literature in need of more attention: the politics behind the promotion of active labour policies. It is argued here that social democratic governments are often not interested in employment promotion measures; labour is divided into those with secure employment (insiders) and those without (outsiders); it is contended that social democratic governments have strong incentives to pursue labour-market policies that benefit insiders but not outsiders. There are factors, however, that either exacerbate or limit the effects of insider–outsider differences on social democracy. These claims are tested in three ways. First, the interplay of government partisanship and employment protection is explored in the British case. Secondly, the individual preferences assumed in the model are tested with Eurobarometer data. And thirdly, the effects of social democracy on active labour-market policy are analysed using data from sixteen industrialized democracies.


2019 ◽  
pp. 79-98
Author(s):  
Marina A. Giltman ◽  
Natalia V. Obukhovich ◽  
Oksana E. Tokareva

The article explores the evolution of active and passive labour market policies in the Russian Federation from the 1990s to nowadays, highlighting the roles of the federal center and the regions in its implementation. The study was based on descriptive and institutional analysis, as well as content analysis of regional employment programs. The results have shown that decentralization was applied only to an active labour market policy. At the same time the most ambitious goals were continued to be reached with additional organizational and financial support from the centre.


2015 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 635-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Lindley ◽  
Steven Mcintosh ◽  
Jennifer Roberts ◽  
Carolyn Czoski Murray ◽  
Richard Edlin

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document