The Great Reversal: How an Influential International Organization Changed Its View on Employment Security, Labor Market Flexibility, and Collective Bargaining

J. Evans, W. Spriggs
{"title":"The Great Reversal: How an Influential International Organization Changed Its View on Employment Security, Labor Market Flexibility, and Collective Bargaining","authors":"J. Evans, W. Spriggs","doi":"10.5070/lp63159036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": The claim that labor market flexibility — the lack of regulations and collective bargaining constraints on employers — is essential to maximizing employment, minimizing unemployment, and obtaining growth does not have empirical support. That the claim lacks evidence can be seen by tracing how the market fundamentalist assertions made in the initial OECD Jobs Strategy in 1994 have been reversed by the OECD and by other international financial institutions. The OECD now notes that new evidence “ shows that countries with policies and institutions that promote job quality, job quantity, and greater inclusiveness perform better than countries where the focus of policy is predominantly on enhancing market flexibility.” It has also rejected the argument that collective bargaining defends the interest of “insiders” against “outsiders” in the labor market. While OECD reports previously made almost indiscriminate calls for lowering labor standards to increase labor market flexibility, they now caution that irregular work can be a danger.","PeriodicalId":425370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Political Economy","volume":"140 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/lp63159036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

: The claim that labor market flexibility — the lack of regulations and collective bargaining constraints on employers — is essential to maximizing employment, minimizing unemployment, and obtaining growth does not have empirical support. That the claim lacks evidence can be seen by tracing how the market fundamentalist assertions made in the initial OECD Jobs Strategy in 1994 have been reversed by the OECD and by other international financial institutions. The OECD now notes that new evidence “ shows that countries with policies and institutions that promote job quality, job quantity, and greater inclusiveness perform better than countries where the focus of policy is predominantly on enhancing market flexibility.” It has also rejected the argument that collective bargaining defends the interest of “insiders” against “outsiders” in the labor market. While OECD reports previously made almost indiscriminate calls for lowering labor standards to increase labor market flexibility, they now caution that irregular work can be a danger.
大逆转:一个有影响力的国际组织如何改变其对就业保障、劳动力市场灵活性和集体谈判的看法
劳动力市场的灵活性——缺乏对雇主的监管和集体谈判约束——对于最大化就业、最小化失业和获得增长至关重要,这种说法没有实证支持。通过追溯1994年最初的经合组织就业战略中提出的市场原教旨主义主张是如何被经合组织和其他国际金融机构推翻的,可以看出这种说法缺乏证据。经合组织现在指出,新的证据“表明,拥有促进就业质量、就业数量和更大包容性的政策和制度的国家,比政策重点主要放在增强市场灵活性上的国家表现得更好。”它还驳斥了集体谈判捍卫劳动力市场中“内部人”利益、反对“外部人”利益的说法。虽然经合组织的报告以前几乎不分青红皂白地呼吁降低劳动标准,以增加劳动力市场的灵活性,但它们现在警告说,不规律的工作可能是一种危险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信