Documents short time working 150 results

"This article discusses how the actors in the internationally exposed sectors of four Nordic economies responded to the economic crisis of 2008. Though Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden are commonly viewed as similar countries, there are important variations in the regulation of workers' rights and the available measures of labour market adjustment such as short-time working and temporary lay-offs. We find that such differences produced significant differences in adjustment patterns, in the cooperation and influence of trade unions during these processes and in institutional adaptation. "

"Many European countries try to reduce seasonal unemployment by subsidizing short-time employment during the winter period. Despite such costly efforts, pronounced seasonal unemployment patterns continue to exist. This puts doubts on the effectiveness of such policy interventions. This paper provides a first empirical assessment of the effectiveness of different subsidy schemes by exploiting the institutional variation in a German subsidy scheme that applies to the construction sector and the variation in local weather and business cycle conditions across 20 years. The findings confirm that generous short-time subsidies reduce individual lay-off probabilities in the case of poor weather conditions. However, the link between weather conditions and seasonal lay-offs is much less strong than expected, making planned capacity reductions the main suspect for causing seasonality in unemployment patterns."

"This box analyses labour market developments in the euro area since the onset of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, contrasting the developments in business and consumer survey data with the main headline labour market indicators for the euro area. On the one hand, business and consumer survey data point to a strong deterioration in the euro area labour market since the introduction of the containment measures to limit the spread of the virus. On the other hand, the extensive margin of the labour market has shown a muted response, with both employment and unemployment adjusting moderately to the COVID-19 shock. The adjustment of the euro area labour market is occurring instead via a strong decline in the average number of hours worked per employed person, shaped by the widespread use of short-time work schemes in the euro area. These schemes have been successful in containing dismissals, supporting incomes and helping firms to effectively reduce their payroll costs and liquidity needs, while maintaining the worker-job relationship. However, the continued success of the widespread use of short-term work schemes in supporting the euro area labour market depends critically on the dynamics and duration of the crisis."

"This report discusses the question of a long-term institutional convergence of national unemployment benefit schemes in Europe using the examples of Germany and France. The comparison shows many similarities between the two countries. Traditionally, the areas of funding, the organisation of benefits and governance structures have been the most similar, as well as the scope of benefits. Since the 2000s, both benefit schemes have diverged in slightly different directions due to the Hartz reforms in Germany. However, recent reforms in France have brought its system closer to German developments, e.g. the stronger use of activation measures and sanctions. In both countries, these developments were driven by problematic labour market situations. The findings show that, overall, the benefit schemes of both France and Germany show a significant degree of compatibility, despite important differences in questions of detail. One difference which remains is the stronger role of the social partners in France. The study also refers to challenges in social policy which are leading to similar reform needs in both countries, e.g. in the areas of short-term employment, precarious self-employment and a stronger, more forward-looking labour market policy through investments in human capital. In this respect, both countries can learn and benefit from each other's experiences. "

"The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the unprecedented slowing of economic activity that followed caused severe disruptions to labor markets around the globe. In contrast to the United States, European Union countries funded short-time work programs to maintain jobs during a period of lockdown that was expected to be transitory. This succeeded in avoiding sharp increases in unemployment early in the recession. However, if the pandemic leads to a permanent reallocation of economic activity, short-time work programs may slow the process of workers moving from shrinking to growing sectors of the economy."

"In response to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, EU member states put various tools in place to support employment, from traditional short-time work (STW) schemes and wage subsidy (WS) schemes to new income support schemes for self-employed and atypical workers.

The European Union offered financial support to these schemes through the creation of a new financial assistance facility – temporary Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) – with a capacity of €100 billion to be distributed in the form of loans to those countries that requested it. As of May 2021, 19 member states have obtained financial support from SURE for a total of almost €95 billion. Despite its smooth functioning and success, SURE remains a temporary mechanism linked to the pandemic. In the (unfortunate) case of future crises, the EU will not have a similar tool to provide immediate support to countries in need. As already advanced in 2020, we argue that SURE should become a permanent mechanism."