Suchergebnisse

Las figuras jurídicas de suspensión del empleo y de reducción del tiempo de trabajo son conocidas en Europa, en especial desde la pasada crisis iniciada en 2007. En España, los Expedientes de Regulación Temporal de Empleo (ERTEs) son instrumentos que existían, pero que, hasta abril de 2020 por la pandemia de COVID-19, no han tenido protagonismo. Desde entonces, estas herramientas han logrado sostener el empleo y contener el incremento del paro. Sus ventajas económicas y sociales son evidentes, sirviendo como instrumento de política destinado a mantener la ocupación y las rentas de las familias y, por ende, el consumo y la demanda interna. Sin embargo, a medida que se alarga la crisis sanitaria, con un escenario aún de incertidumbre sobre su duración, se plantean dudas sobre la sostenibilidad del logro de los ERTEs. Por un lado, las implicaciones financieras y de cumplimiento de estabilidad macroeconómica con la Unión Europea; por otro, la desigual situación entre personas con empleo y sin él (tanto en lo referente al elevado desempleo estructural y el paro oculto, como a jóvenes y mujeres entre otros colectivos), obliga a introducir en la agenda política medidas adicionales para el sostenimiento de la economía y del empleo. ; The legal forms of suspension of employment and reduction of working time are known in Europe, especially since the last crisis that began in 2007. In Spain, the Short Time Work Schemes (STWS) are instruments that existed, but which, until April 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, they have not had a leading role. Since then, these tools have managed to sustain employment and contain the increase in unemployment. Its economic and social advantages are evident, serving as a policy instrument aimed at maintaining employment level and family income and, therefore, consumption and domestic demand. However, as the health crisis lengthens, with a scenario that is still uncertain about its duration, doubts raise about the sustainability of the achievement of the ERTEs. On the one hand, the financial implications and compliance with macroeconomic stability with the European Union. On the other, the unequal situation between people with and without jobs (both in relation to high structural unemployment and hidden unemployment, as well as youth and women, among other groups) forces the introduction of additional measures on the political agenda to sustain the economy and the employment. ; Sin financiación ; No data 2020 ; UEM

This paper highlights the need to analyse the quality of employment differentiated by gender, framed in the debate launched by United Nations on interactions between Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) –in this case, SDG 8 for decent work, and SDG 5 for gender equality -.The analysis is focused on the European Union from 2000 (the starting year for the Lisbon Strategy) to 2017 (when the European Pilar of Social Rights was launched). To this purpose, a multidimensional index, built on with six partial indexes, and with a gender perspective, is used

Desde la Estrategia Europea de Empleo (EEE), el debate en temas laborales, tanto en la academia como en el ámbito de la política laboral, se está centrando en la capacidad de las economías europeas para crear empleo y de calidad. En este paper se desarrolla un análisis tipo panel data, para caracterizar la estructura de la negociación colectiva (centralización, coordinación y poder sindical) y la calidad del empleo (indicadores de calidad de la EEE), para los países del núcleo central de la UE en la última década. El análisis trata de contrastar una hipótesis de trabajo acerca de la posible influencia de las características de los diferentes sistemas de negociación colectiva en la evolución macroeconómica del empleo, no sólo en cantidad, sino en calidad, interpretando ésta por las condiciones laborales vigentes en cada mercado laboral ; Since the European Employment Strategy, the discussion on labour issues, both in academia and in labour policy arena, is focusing on the ability of European economies to create jobs and qualified jobs. This paper develops a panel data analysis to characterize the structure of collective bargaining (centralization, coordination and union power) and employment quality (quality indicators of the EES) for the core countries of the EU in the last decade. The analysis seeks to contrast a hypothesis about the likely influence of different collective bargaining systems characteristics on macroeconomic employment development, not only in quantity terms but in quality ones, identifying last one as the working conditions prevailing in each labour market

Desde la Estrategia Europea de Empleo (EEE), el debate en temas laborales, tanto en la academia como en el ámbito de la política laboral, se está centrando en la capacidad de las economías europeas para crear empleo y de calidad. En este paper se desarrolla un análisis tipo panel data, para caracterizar la estructura de la negociación colectiva (centralización, coordinación y poder sindical) y la calidad del empleo (indicadores de calidad de la EEE), para los países del núcleo central de la UE en la última década. El análisis trata de contrastar una hipótesis de trabajo acerca de la posible influencia de las características de los diferentes sistemas de negociación colectiva en la evolución macroeconómica del empleo, no sólo en cantidad, sino en calidad, interpretando ésta por las condiciones laborales vigentes en cada mercado laboral. ; Since the European Employment Strategy, the discussion on labour issues, both in academia and in labour policy arena, is focusing on the ability of European economies to create jobs and qualified jobs. This paper develops a panel data analysis to characterize the structure of collective bargaining (centralization, coordination and union power) and employment quality (quality indicators of the EES) for the core countries of the EU in the last decade. The analysis seeks to contrast a hypothesis about the likely influence of different collective bargaining systems characteristics on macroeconomic employment development, not only in quantity terms but in quality ones, identifying last one as the working conditions prevailing in each labour market.

Sin financiación ; No data JCR 2019 ; 0.117 SJR (2019) Q4, 337/394 Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous), 96/108 Demography, 576/751 Law, 1048/1299 Sociology and Political Science ; 0.104 IDR (2019) C3, 50/85 Sociología, 76/175 Economía ; UEM

The paper's main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical framework used is linked to the varieties of unionism. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility

The paper's main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical frame-work used is linked to the varieties of unionism. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility.

The paper's main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical framework used is linked to the varieties of unionism and to the debate on the tendency towards the international homogenization or heterogenization of collective bargaining between the European Union countries. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility

The paper's main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical framework used is linked to the varieties of unionism and to the debate on the tendency towards the international homogenization or heterogenization of collective bargaining between the European Union countries. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility. ; Sin financiación ; 1.134 JCR (2020) Q4, 285/376 Economics ; 0.367 SJR (2020) Q2, 138/390 Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous) ; No data IDR 2019 ; UEM

The paper's main objective is to analyze the collective bargaining response in terms of internal flexibility during the Great Recession (GR) in five EU countries (Spain, Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom), and three economic sectors (industry, commerce and hospitality, and financial services and real estate), at the establishment level (ECS2013 database). The theoretical framework used is linked to the varieties of unionism and to the debate on the tendency towards the international homogenization or heterogenization of collective bargaining between the European Union countries. Using a descriptive statistical analysis and a probit model, this paper presents new evidences. However, the responses were heterogeneous between countries and sectors, the use of internal functional flexibility has been more intense than the numerical and salary internal flexibility. Moreover, it is related to the intensity of GR. These results, in general, while requiring a more detailed analysis of the effects of the GR on internal flexibility in the EU countries, contribute to introducing a new perspective in the socioeconomic literature about the collective bargaining and internal flexibility. ; Sin financiación ; 1.098 JCR (2019) Q3, 231/373 Economics ; 0.314 SJR (2019) Q2, 144/406 Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous) ; No data IDR 2019 ; UEM