Explore the vast range of titles available.

Previous research has shown that an advantaged social class position protects individuals from unemployment, but less is known about how this relationship has developed after the turn of the millennium, how it varies by gender and to what extent education contributes to the association between these factors. We assess these questions using register-based data on the Finnish labour force over a 28-year period between 1988 and 2015. The overall risk of unemployment was 2.7–3.7-fold among manual classes compared to upper non-manual classes, and 1.4–1.7-fold among lower compared to upper non-manual classes. Controlling for education attenuated the differences between social classes by about two-thirds. Social class disparities were somewhat more distinct among men than among women, but gender differences narrowed over time. Overall, temporal changes were small, especially among men, except for a curvilinear pattern observed for the relative unemployment risk of the lower non-manual class. To conclude, despite a comparatively egalitarian context and drastic changes in economic conditions and labour market structures over time, social stratification in unemployment has been substantial and considerably persistent. This is in line with the conceptualization of social class underpinning differing employment relations and, therefore, inherently creating variation in labour market risks.

In this paper, we use linked employer-employee data to study the reallocation of heterogeneous workers between heterogeneous firms. We build on recent evidence of a cyclical job ladder that reallocates workers from low-productivity to high-productivity firms through job-to-job moves. In this paper, we turn to the question of who moves up this job ladder and the implications for worker sorting across firms. Not surprisingly, we find that job-to-job moves reallocate younger workers disproportionately from less productive to more productive firms. More surprisingly, especially in the context of the recent literature on assortative matching with on-the-job search, we find that job-to-job moves disproportionately reallocate less educated workers up the job ladder. This finding holds even though we find that more educated workers are more likely to work with more productive firms. We find that while highly educated workers are less likely to match to low-productivity firms, they are also less likely to separate from them, with less educated workers more likely to separate to a better employer in expansions and to be shaken off the ladder (separate to nonemployment) in contractions. Our findings underscore the cyclical role job-to-job moves play in matching workers to better-paying employers.

How do changes in employment uncertainty matter for fertility? Empirical studies on the impact of employment uncertainty on reproductive decisionmaking offer a variety of conclusions, ranging from gender and socio-economic differences in the effect of employment uncertainty on fertility intentions and behaviour, to the effect of employment on changes in fertility intentions. This article analyses the association between a change in subjective employment uncertainty and fertility intentions and behaviour by distinguishing male and female partners' employment uncertainty, and examines the variation in these associations by education. Using a sample of men and women living in a couple from the Swiss Household Panel (SHP 2002-2011), we examine through multinomial analysis how changes in employment uncertainty and selected socio-demographic factors are related to individual childbearing decisions. Our results show strong gendered effects of changes in employment uncertainty on the revision of reproductive decisions among the highly educated population.

This article studies the beneficial return from potential work experience in preventing job loss, and seeks to explain whether its capacity for protection is different for immigrants compared with native workers. Logistic regression models are calculated from panel data of the Spanish Labour Force Survey between 2008 and 2010. Results indicate that for some foreign-born groups, the inequality with respect to natives grows over time. Whereas for Spaniards, increased years in the labour market reduce the risk of becoming unemployed, Africans, Latin Americans, and Eastern Europeans with more time in the labour market experience hardly any advantage when compared with their fellow immigrants. Although the ethnic penalty is slightly reduced after taking into account socio-demographic differences, the lower return is mainly explained by employment factors. Foreign-born workers are permanently over-represented in low-skilled and non-standard jobs where potential work experience does not result in more protection. The access through the bottom of a segmented labour market has prevented immigrants becoming upwardly mobile to more stable occupations. These positions would have provided them with protection against unemployment during the economic crisis, in the way that they have done for native workers.

This article examines the impact of the globalization process on individual life courses and employment careers in modern societies from an international comparative perspective. Empirical results are summarized from the GLOBALIFE research project (Life Courses in the Globalization Process), which studied the effects of globalization on life courses for the first time. As the results demonstrate, the globalization process has had diverse effects on different phases of the life course. Qualified men in their mid-careers are broadly protected from the effects of globalization, while young adults are the losers of the globalization process. We also find that educational and class characteristics determine the extent to which an individual faces increasing labour market risks. Under globalization, these effects have intensified. The results of the GLOBALIFE project thus indicate that globalization triggers a strengthening of existing social inequality structures. Another central finding is that globalization has not led to the same outcome across various modern societies. Globalization appears to be distinctly filtered by deeply embedded national institutions. These 'institutional packages' entail diverse strategies of labour market flexibilization which themselves differentially shape patterns of social inequality in modern societies.

The aftermath of the Global Financial and Economic Crisis of 2007/2008 turned out as a veritable “stress test” for European welfare states. Aiming to stabilize citizens’ living conditions and mitigate socio-economic hardship, European governments have engaged in active crisis management. Yet, the protective capacities of European welfare states vary, as does individuals’exposure to crisis-induced social risks. Hence, the crisis has impacted countries and the members of different social classes unequally. Against this backdrop, this paper asks how Europeans’ perceptions of the personal impact of the crisis are associated with their welfare attitudes, focusing on variations between social classes and across nations. Using cross-sectional Eurobarometer survey data from 2010 for 27 European countries, I find that perceived crisis impact is associated with greater support for welfare state responsibility and redistribution. However, this association is not homogeneous but moderated by an individual’s class position as well as national economic conditions and social spending levels. More specifically, on the individual level, perceived crisis impact is associated with more favourable welfare attitudes not only among its traditional supporters—such as the working class or the unemployed—but also among its traditional opponents, notably the self-employed. Furthermore, where social spending is higher, welfare state support is less strongly related to perceived crisis impact, suggesting that more encompassing welfare states mitigate the subjective impacts of the crisis. However, redistribution appears to be slightly more contested between those affected and those not affected by the crisis under better economic conditions. Given the challenges facing welfare states across Europe, it remains to be seen how stable a basis of popular support can be formed on these grounds.

In this article, I examine the impact of atypical working arrangements on both objective and subjective dimensions of social inequality. The analysed types of atypical employment are fixed-term contracts, temporary agency work, and part-time employment, respectively. It is argued that these working arrangements are not homogeneous with respect to their socio-economic consequences, because they modify different aspects of the standard employment relationship. In order to investigate the effects of these types of employment, I use data from the German Socio-Economic Panel 2001–2005 on non-self-employed respondents. The results show that fixed-term contracts and agency work (being forms of external flexibility) have more severe negative socio-economic consequences than part-time employment (being a form of internal flexibility). Given that weak labour market groups face an increased risk of holding temporary jobs, the empirical findings clearly indicate the substantial impact of atypical employment on the extent and the structure of social inequality.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how active labour market policy (ALMP) training programmes and hiring subsidies increase or decrease differences in the unemployment risk between lesser and higher educated people during an economic downturn. A focus is put on potential job competition dynamics and cumulative (dis)advantages of the lesser and higher educated. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses multi-level data. The fifth wave (2010) of the European Social Survey was used and combined with macro-level data on labour market policies of the OECD. The sample consisted of 18,172 observations in 19 countries. Findings The results show that higher levels of participation and spending on training policies are related to a smaller difference in the unemployment risks of the educational groups. Higher training policy intensity is associated with a lower unemployment risk for the lesser educated and a higher unemployment risk for the higher educated. This implies that the lesser educated are better able to withstand downward pressure from the higher educated, thereby, reducing downward displacement during an economic downturn. Hiring subsidies do not seem to be associated with the impact of education on unemployment. Originality/value The paper adds to the discussion on ALMP training and hiring subsidies that are primarily rooted in the human capital theory and signalling theory. Both theories ignore the social context of labour market behaviour. The job competition theory and cumulative (dis)advantage theory add to these theories by focussing on the relative position of individuals and the characteristics that accompany the social position of the individual.