Везде
LABOR IN THE UNCERTAINTY EPOCH
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
LABOR IN THE UNCERTAINTY EPOCH
Annotation
PII
S0132-16250000338-7-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Roman I. Anisimov 
Edition
Volume 403 Issue 11
Pages
44-52
Abstract
The article deals with concepts of the uncertainty growth of labor relations in modern society. The Western and Russian experience of studying this problem was analyzed. It was revealed that the precariat concept of the British scientist G. Standing, in which the growth of uncertainty in labor was considered from the viewpoint of changing working conditions, is the most widespread in the academic community. This position is opposed by the concept of the American scientist D. Pink, who focuses attention on changing the content of labor in the post-industrial economy. The positions of G. Standing and D. Pink reflect opposite estimates of the growing uncertainty in the labor sphere. A comparative analysis of both concepts was carried out in this article. The general foundations of the concepts are following: both authors consider the transition of a large number of workers from standard employment to non-standard, indicate similar reasons for the growth of uncertainty in labor activity. This is globalization, the growing flexibility of the economy, the development of new technologies. Distinctive features of the concepts are: theoretical and methodological basis of the G. Standing’s concept is holism, D. Pink is a methodological individualist, Standing studies employees, Pink – self-employed. Standing considers changes in working conditions, Pink – change in the value orientations of workers. Standing proposes to solve the problem of growing uncertainty by introducing an unconditional base income and advocating Social-Democratic positions. Pink suggests reducing bureaucratic barriers to independent agents and acting from liberal positions. The common drawback of both concepts is their one-factority, which does not permit to reflect the complexity of this phenomenon. Therefore, for a more holistic understanding of labor activity with increasing uncertainty, the article attempted to synthesize both concepts by combining the conditions and content of labor, as well as the sector of the economy in which work is done.
Keywords
uncertainty, non-standard labor relations, precariat, a nation of free agents
Date of publication
01.11.2017
Number of purchasers
4
Views
508
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

Bauman Z. (2002) The Individualized Society. Moscow: Logos. (In Russ).


Beсk U. (2000) The Risk Society. On the Way to Another Modernity. Moscow: Progress-Tradicija. (In Russ).


Bobkov V. N, Veredjuk O.V., Kolosova R.P., Razumova T.O. (2014) Employment and social precarization in Russia: introduction to analysis: monograph. Moscow: TEIS (in Russ).


Gasjukova E.N. (2015) Precarization: conceptual bases, factors and evaluation. The world and Russia. Problemnyj analiz i gosudarstvenno-upravlencheskoe proektirovanie [Problem Analysis and Public Administration Projection]. No. 6 (44): 28–46. (In Russ).


Gimpel’son V.E., Zudina A.A. (2011) “Informals” in the Russian economy: how much and who are they? Voprosy Ekonomiki [Economic issues] No. 10: 53–76. (In Russ).


Golenkova Z.T. (2015) Prekariat as a new phenomenon in the modern structure. In: Employee in modern Russia. Moscow: Novyj hronograf. (In Russ).


Kastel’ R. (2009) Metamorphosis of the Social Issue. Chronicle of Wage Labor. Saint-Petersburg: Aletejja. (In Russ).


Kordonskij S.G. (2010) Russia: Manors Federation. Moscow: Europe. (In Russ).


Pink D. (2005) Nation of free agents. How new independent workers change the life of America, Moscow: Sekret firmy. (In Russ).


Labor force, employment and unemployment (2016). In: Statistical Yearbook. URL: http://www.gks.ru/bgd/regl/b16_61/Main. htm (accessed 10.05.17). (In Russ).


Rakovski K.A. (2000) Convergence and divergence in the Latin American debate on the informal sector. Jekonomicheskaja teorija prestuplenij i nakazanij [Economic theory of crime and punishment]. URL: http://corruption.rsuh.ru/magazine/2/n2–05.shtml (accessed 10.05.17). (In Russ).


Scott J. (2010) Seeing like a State. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition have failed. Moscow. Universitetskaja kniga. (In Russ).


Standing G.(2014) The Precariat. The new dangerous class. Moscow. Ad marginem press. (In Russ).


Toshchenko Zh. (2015) Precariat – a new social class. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 6: 3–13. (In Russ.)


Florida R. (2016) The Rise of the Creative Class. Moscow: Mann, I ivanov I Ferber. (In Russ).


Shkaratan O.I., Karacharovskij V.V., Gasjukova E.N. (2015) Precariat: theory and empirical analysis (polls in Russia, 1994–2013 data). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 12: 99–110. (In Russ.)

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate