Documents Emmenegger, Patrick 16 results

"This Working Paper focuses on the impact of the directive on fixed-term work and the EU's Court of Justice (CJEU) case law concerning fixed-term work from 2007 and 2013. By doing so, this working paper develops an analytical framework to analyse the Europeanisation of labour law with an eye on the literature on labour-market dualisation.



The findings of this publication show that the fixed-term work directive addresses and affirms the equal treatment of workers, while the position of the CJEU is rather restrictive (especially in cases of clear abuse of fixed-term contract and abusive recourse). The Court indirectly supports the politics of labour dualisation, whereby member states can continue to use fixed-term contracts to increase the labour supply."

"How does labour market disadvantage translate into political behaviour? Bringing together the literatures on political alienation, redistribution preferences and insider-outsider politics, we identify three mechanisms by which labour market disadvantages influence voting behaviour. Disadvantages can increase support for redistribution, reduce internal political efficacy or lower external political efficacy. This translates into support for pro-redistribution parties, vote abstention or support for protest parties. Using the Dutch LISS survey, we observe a twin effect of increased support for redistribution and decreased external efficacy. Mediated through redistributive preferences, we find a positive effect of labour market disadvantage on voting for left parties. Mediated through external efficacy we find a positive effect of labour market disadvantage on protest voting. In contrast, we do not find any effect of labour market disadvantage on internal efficacy. Hence, the observed effect of labour market disadvantage on political abstention is entirely mediated by external efficacy."

"In this introduction to the special issue, we review the various debates spurred by Esping-Andersen's The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Tracing its impact since the book's publication in 1990, we show that Three Worlds continues to be the point of reference for comparative welfare state research. A content analysis of articles in the Journal of European Social Policy citing the book indicates that Three Worlds may even have obtained a paradigmatic status and that its claims and findings are often taken for granted rather than challenged. We conclude that Three Worlds has become a classic that is likely to continue to have a major influence on welfare state research in its next 25?years."

"This article uses fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to examine the determinants of job security regulations – here understood as restrictions on hiring and firing – in Western democracies. Unlike previous studies, the analysis reveals three different paths to high levels of job security regulations. The first path covers the Southern European state capitalist countries. In these countries, conflicts between forces pushing for liberal democracy and groups alienated from modernisation have led to high levels of statism and crowded out other societal actors. Job security regulations were enacted relatively early in order to provide social security by means available to the state. Due to fragmented welfare states, job security regulations have remained one of the most important pillars of the social protection regime. The second path covers the Continental European managed capitalist countries and is also characterised by high levels of statism. In these countries, repressive governments employed a stick-and-carrot strategy to weaken the labour movement and tie the loyalties of the individual to the state. After the Second World War, these countries developed corporatist intermediation systems and encompassing and generous welfare states. Finally, the third path covers the Nordic managed capitalist countries. This path is characterised by a high degree of non-market coordination, strong labour movements and few institutional veto points. In the Nordic managed capitalist countries, job security regulations traditionally have been subject to collective agreements. However, in the 1960s, labour movements succeeded in pushing through the public legislation of job security despite opposition from employers' associations. Methodologically, this article demonstrates that cross-national differences in the level of job security regulations can only be explained if the methods used allow for complex causality. In contrast, methods which focus on ‘net effects' do not offer satisfactory explanations for the cross-national differences in the level of job security regulations."

"This article examines the role of business in the historical development of job security regulations in Germany from their creation in the inter-war period to the dawn of the crisis of the ‘German Model' in the 1990s. It contrasts a varieties of capitalism perspective, which views business as a protagonist, or at the very least a consenter, in the development of job security regulations, with a conflict-oriented perspective, which has the labour movement as the protagonist and business as an antagonist in the development of job security regulations. The empirical analysis is based on primary and secondary sources and shows that German employers have never favoured strict over flexible job security regulations. Quite the contrary, high levels of job security regulations were forced upon employers during periods of business weakness by a radicalized labour movement in the aftermath of both World Wars."

"Poverty, increased inequality, and social exclusion are back on the political agenda in Western Europe, not only as a consequence of the Great Recession of 2008, but also because of a seemingly structural trend towards increased inequality in advanced industrial societies that has persisted since the 1970s. How can we explain this increase in inequalities? Policies in labor markets, social policy, and political representation are strongly linked in the creation, widening, and deepening of insider-outsider divides--a process known as dualization. While it is certainly not the only driver of increasing inequality, the encompassing nature of its development across multiple domains makes dualization one of the most important current trends affecting developed societies.



However, the extent and forms of dualization vary greatly across countries. The comparative perspective of this book provides insights into why Nordic countries witness lower levels of insider-outsider divides, whereas in continental, liberal and southern welfare states, they are more likely to constitute a core characteristic of the political economy. Most importantly, the comparisons presented in this book point to the crucial importance of politics and political choice in driving and shaping the social outcomes of deindustrialization. While increased structural labor market divides can be found across all countries, governments have a strong responsibility in shaping the distributive consequences of these labor market changes. Insider-outsider divides are not a straightforward consequence of deindustrialization, but rather the result of political choice.



A landmark publication, this volume is geared for faculty and graduate students of economics, political science, social policy, and sociology, as well as policymakers concerned with increasing inequality in a period of deep economic and social crisis."

"All causal statements based on historical data — both in qualitative and quantitative social research — rely on counterfactuals. In quantitative research, scholars attempt to arrive at valid counterfactuals by emulating an experimental design. However, because of treatments that are impossible to manipulate and the non-random assignment of data to treatment and control groups, causal statements are often based on invalid counterfactuals. In qualitative research, scholars attempt to arrive at valid counterfactuals by probing the historical and logical consistency of counterfactuals and by acknowledging the interconnectedness of events. Criteria to evaluate counterfactuals have been developed that allow for a discussion of the quality of counterfactuals used in causal statements. In this article, we suggest using these qualitative criteria to evaluate counterfactuals in quantitative macro-comparative welfare state research. We argue that these criteria can help us identify erroneous causal inferences in quantitative research based on historical data."

"This article explores the relationship between skills and preferences for job security regulations. Two contrasting arguments are examined: the relative skill specificity thesis advanced by Iversen and Soskice [Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2001) ‘An Asset Theory of Social Policy Preferences', American Political Science Review, 95, 875–893] and the replaceability thesis propounded by Goldthorpe [Goldthorpe, J. H. (2000) On Sociology. Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory, New York, Oxford University Press]. Both arguments are based on the concept of asset specificity from transaction cost economics. However, they offer conflicting expectations. Iversen and Soskice expect employees with relatively specific skills to demand more job security regulations so as to increase the likelihood that there will be a return on investment. In contrast, Goldthorpe's reasoning implies that employees with very specific skills are difficult to replace. Consequently, they are less concerned about their job security than employees with few specific skills. Analysis of survey data lends support to Goldthorpe's replaceability thesis."

"Job security regulations, here understood as restrictions on hiring and firing, figure prominently in the policy recommendations of international organizations or national reform programmes. However, in contrast to the prominence of job security regulations in the current reform discourse, hardly any attention is paid to their determinants. In this article, the insider/outsider theory of employment and unemployment is examined. Advocates of this approach argue that job security regulations mainly benefit the labour market insiders. As a consequence, insiders will fight all reforms that aim to dismantle these regulations. The insiders are supported by Social Democratic parties, which only represent the interests of the insiders. In this article it is maintained that this simple argument is wrong. Labour market outsiders can be expected to be equally supportive of job security regulations and Social Democratic parties as labour market insiders. This claim is supported by the empirical analysis using survey data."

"This article examines the role of business in the historical development of job security regulations in Germany from their creation in the inter-war period to the dawn of the crisis of the 'German Model' in the 1980s. It contrasts the varieties of capitalism approach, which sees business as protagonists, or at least consenters, in the development of job security regulations with a conflict-oriented approach, which sees the labour movement as protagonists and business as antagonists in the development of job security regulations. The empirical analysis is based on primary and secondary sources and shows that at no point in time German employers preferred strict over flexible job security regulations. Quite the contrary, high levels of job security regulations have been forced upon employers by radicalized labour movements in periods of business weakness in the aftermath of both World Wars. "