Suchergebnisse

Het onderzoek "Nieuwe technologieën, nieuwe vormen van arbeidsorganisatie, nieuwe vormen van arbeidsverhoudingen?", werd opgezet om de flexibilisering van de arbeid in kaart te brengen. Er werden twintig Vlaamse bedrijven uit drie sectoren in het onderzoek betrokken. In eerste instantie werd nagegaan hoe fundamenteel de ontwikkelingen inzake functionele flexibiliteit zijn. Er werd vastgesteld dat er zich belangrijke verschuivingen voordoen maar dat de verspreiding van nieuwe arbeidsorganisatorische paradigma's beperkter is dan algemeen wordt aangenomen. Een groot aantal bedrijven blijft zweren bij de Tayloristisch-Fordistische arbeidsorganisatiepatronen. Meer-machinebediening en taakroulatie zijn wel veelvuldig voorkomende tendensen. Inzake numerieke flexibiliteit werd een onderscheid gemaakt tussen temporels en contractuele flexibiliteit. Temporels flexibiliteit wordt bekomen door een loskoppeling van arbeids- en produktietijd. Bijna alle bedrijven maken van deze mogelijkheid gebruik, maar de gradatie verschilt sterk van bedrijf tot bedrijf. De situatie op de afzetmarkt blijkt hierbij een cruciale rol te spelen. Contractuele flexibiliteit kan bekomen worden door variaties in het aantal en de aard van de arbeidsovereenkomsten. Het is op vallend dat er enerzijds bedrijven zijn die niet schommelen met het aantal werknemers, terwijl contractuele flexibiliteit een constante is in het personeelsbeleid van andere bedrijven. Wanneer de drie flexibiliteitsvormen aan elkaar gerelateerd worden, dan wordt een toenemende segmentering tussen hoog en laag geschoolden zichtbaar.

The past two decades saw an increase in political populism, set against the backdrop of turbulent economic and political developments. This is associated with a rise in workers worrying about job loss as well as an increase in individuals holding politicians and politics in disrepute. This study investigates whether these two processes are linked. Being concerned about maintaining one's job may be related to the experience of distributive injustice, which reflects people's perception that they do not get what they deserve. These injustice perceptions may, consequently, bring about a cynical attitude towards the political system. Using three‐wave longitudinal data in a sample of 857 British employees, we found that job insecurity was indeed indirectly related to feelings of political cynicism via the experience of distributive injustice. This study underscores the relevance of workplace experiences for the development of political (dis)engagement.

AbstractAlthough a basic income (BI) has already been widely debated, the COVID-19 crisis further intensified the discussion about this periodic cash payment that is unconditionally delivered to all. However, it remains unclear whether the crisis spurred a wave of public support for its introduction. To investigate this, we aim to answer two research questions: (1) How did support for a BI evolve in reaction to the COVID-19 crisis? and (2) To what extent did the evolution in support differ across regional contexts and social groups with varying levels of deprivation? We rely on a natural experiment by analysing data from the Belgian National Elections Study that was collected both before and during the pandemic. The results indicate an increase in support for a BI due to the pandemic, although it seems short lived and not necessarily specific to a BI. Importantly, however, the increase in popularity is only observable in the high-unemployment French-speaking region of Belgium and among relatively deprived groups.

Background: The purpose of this article is to examine how different views on power and politics manifest in organizational change, and how they can be integrated into a single model. Methods: Our research was based on an extensive literature review about power and politics and their relationship with organizational change. We used the systems model of organizational change developed by Maes and Van Hootegem to map the different views on power and politics in organizational change. This systems model integrated different change discourses and allowed us to post the various aspects of power and politics in organizational change. Results: Using the systems model as a reference to look at power and politics from different angles led to a better understanding of the role they play in organizational change so that actors can enter the political arena of change better prepared and play the game of change at a tactically higher level. Conclusions: The analysis contributes to the study of power and politics in three respects. First, using the metamodel of organizational change to map the different views on power and politics offers a more detailed and varied understanding of the use of power and politics in organizational change. Second, looking at power and politics from different discourses can accommodate greater complexity and nuance. Third, it shows that change projects rarely run smoothly but are constantly traversed by all kinds of obstacles and barriers that require specific political astuteness. Members of an organization, who have been introduced to political skills, will be better able to navigate the pitfalls of organizational change and its rhetoric and thus be better agents of change or better able to resist unreasonable change.

Background: The purpose of this article is to examine how different views on power and politics manifest in organizational change, and how they can be integrated into a single model. Methods: Our research was based on an extensive literature review about power and politics and their relationship with organizational change. We used the systems model of organizational change developed by Maes and Van Hootegem to map the different views on power and politics in organizational change. This systems model integrated different change discourses and allowed us to post the various aspects of power and politics in organizational change. Results: Using the systems model as a reference to look at power and politics from different angles led to a better understanding of the role they play in organizational change so that actors can enter the political arena of change better prepared and play the game of change at a tactically higher level. Conclusions: The analysis contributes to the study of power and politics in three respects. First, using the metamodel of organizational change to map the different views on power and politics offers a more detailed and varied understanding of the use of power and politics in organizational change. Second, looking at power and politics from different discourses can accommodate greater complexity and nuance. Third, it shows that change projects rarely run smoothly but are constantly traversed by all kinds of obstacles and barriers that require specific political astuteness. Members of an organization, who have been introduced to political skills, will be better able to navigate the pitfalls of organizational change and its rhetoric and thus be better agents of change or better able to resist unreasonable change.

AbstractPerceptions that others will contribute their fair share are fundamental to the legitimacy of the political system. To better understand how these perceptions take shape beyond the influence of political narratives and socializations, this paper investigates the role of the formative personal experiences of benefit recipiency and income changes in explaining views on welfare abuse as well as tax evasion. Theoretically, both increasing identification or 'othering' could occur when these experiences lead to new group adherence. To test this empirically, three‐wave Norwegian panel data (2014–2017) are analysed. Within‐ as well as between‐group analyses show that becoming dependent on benefits leads to lower perceptions of welfare abuse, while positive income changes prompt higher perceptions of tax evasion, albeit mostly among those with lower income levels. Overall, this article shows that formative personal experiences affect views that are fundamental to the perceived fairness, legitimacy and sustainability of the social and political system.

Abstract
Welfare generosity is a multidimensional concept that refers to both the access to benefits and the levels of benefits (in terms of the amounts paid to recipients). However, in analyses of public support for welfare, this distinction has been largely disregarded. To gain a fuller picture of attitudes towards welfare redistribution, the current study explicitly compares the two elements and examines which distributive justice principles—that is, equality, equity, and need—are preferred to govern, on the one hand, the access to benefits and, on the other hand, their levels. The article evaluates this distinction in two different distributive contexts (pensions and unemployment benefits) and contrasts social-structural as well as ideological dividing lines. For this purpose, data from the Belgian National Elections Study 2019 are analysed. The results indicate that the access to and levels of benefits are clearly distinct dimensions in public opinion, as different justice principles are preferred for the two policy dimensions. In addition, structural equation models illustrate that the access dimension is more ideologically structured, whereas preferences regarding the levels of benefits are more strongly stratified along social-structural lines. Overall, the results imply that social justice preferences are clearly different when considering the access to benefits or their level. This distinction should be taken into account in welfare attitude research.

The refugee question occupied centre stage at every political debate in Europe since 2015. Starting from the "long summer of migration", the polarization of opinions and attitudes towards asylum seekers among citizens of the EU has grown increasingly. The divergence between hospitality and hostility has also become evident in political reactions.