A sociological investigation of underemployment and the lived experiences of underemployed workers
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Bristol
Department Name: Management
Abstract
This project will address one of the most important issues facing society: the increase in underemployed, vulnerable workers resulting from industrial changes, the 2008 recession, and the Covid-19 pandemic. How we work is changing, with potential to deliver greater efficiency and wellbeing, but also greater precarity and inequality (Beck et al, 2020; Schwab, 2016). Short- and longer-term effects of labour market ruptures have seen underemployment spiral upwards (ILO, 2020) as employers seek to protect profits and/or business. At the same time, staff and skills shortages in the wake of Brexit; the precarious nature of work in some sectors; and the effects of furloughing provide further risk and insecurity for workers but also potential for changes in employment and working conditions. The coexistence of underemployment and staff shortages makes this investigation relevant to policy makers and practitioners. We aim to understand impacts of labour market changes on underemployment, the ways that social inequalities affect vulnerability to underemployment and the effect of the latter on inequalities, and, utilising robust results in discussions with policy makers and practitioners, identify how this can be mitigated.
In the process, the reoccurring policy mantra that employment is the best way out of poverty and that any job is better than no job is challenged. Developing good quality employment in hours, skill use, and wages (HSW) is crucial because 1 in 7 food bank users are (mainly part time) employed, with problems deepening during the pandemic (Trussell Trust, 2019, 2021). Headline government figures extol record numbers in employment but disguise the complexity of the contemporary labour market. Before the pandemic, nearly a million (2.7%) UK workers were in involuntary part-time jobs, with 5.2% preferring more hours (Bell and Blanchflower, 2013, 2019). At the height of the pandemic, almost a third of men working part-time in the UK said that they were doing so because they could not find a full-time job (Torres et al. 2021). Between 30 and 51% of employees were overqualified and 37% overskilled for their current job (CIPD, 2018). In-work poverty affected 13% of the workforce, with 18% of low-paid workers wanting more hours (JRF, 2019). Low paid workers were hit hardest by the fallout of the pandemic, facing increasing risks of precarious work, rising living costs and financial hardship (Warren et al, 2021). Employment no longer equals full-time, sufficient, secure or good work.
The spread and potential upsurge of underemployment raises concerns about limited theoretical and empirical understandings of this concept. Supply-side economic and psychological perspectives (Dooley, 2003; Mousteri et al, 2020) dominate debates and emphasise individual choices and preferences. Our proposed research innovatively shifts understanding towards a sociological perspective focused on lived experiences of underemployment. This shift is important because access to decent, paid employment is not evenly distributed. For example, women (Kamerade and Richardson, 2018; Bond et al, 2009; McQuaid et al., 2010), younger/older workers (Beck, 2015; Beck and Williams, 2015), and the working-class (Warren, 2015) are more vulnerable to underemployment. Exploring the range of lived experiences allows an investigation into the causes and consequences of underemployment. Feldman (1996) and Dooley (2003) warned of risks for underemployed workers' job security, incomes, well-being and social standing.
Key knowledge gaps addressed in this project include ways in which social inequalities alter outcomes of underemployment for workers and their families; trends in each indicator of underemployment (hours, wages, skills), their combined effects, and how underemployment affects industrial relations systems, employers and businesses, business models, unions, communities, policymakers and their practices, especially given Covid-19, Brexit and recessions.
In the process, the reoccurring policy mantra that employment is the best way out of poverty and that any job is better than no job is challenged. Developing good quality employment in hours, skill use, and wages (HSW) is crucial because 1 in 7 food bank users are (mainly part time) employed, with problems deepening during the pandemic (Trussell Trust, 2019, 2021). Headline government figures extol record numbers in employment but disguise the complexity of the contemporary labour market. Before the pandemic, nearly a million (2.7%) UK workers were in involuntary part-time jobs, with 5.2% preferring more hours (Bell and Blanchflower, 2013, 2019). At the height of the pandemic, almost a third of men working part-time in the UK said that they were doing so because they could not find a full-time job (Torres et al. 2021). Between 30 and 51% of employees were overqualified and 37% overskilled for their current job (CIPD, 2018). In-work poverty affected 13% of the workforce, with 18% of low-paid workers wanting more hours (JRF, 2019). Low paid workers were hit hardest by the fallout of the pandemic, facing increasing risks of precarious work, rising living costs and financial hardship (Warren et al, 2021). Employment no longer equals full-time, sufficient, secure or good work.
The spread and potential upsurge of underemployment raises concerns about limited theoretical and empirical understandings of this concept. Supply-side economic and psychological perspectives (Dooley, 2003; Mousteri et al, 2020) dominate debates and emphasise individual choices and preferences. Our proposed research innovatively shifts understanding towards a sociological perspective focused on lived experiences of underemployment. This shift is important because access to decent, paid employment is not evenly distributed. For example, women (Kamerade and Richardson, 2018; Bond et al, 2009; McQuaid et al., 2010), younger/older workers (Beck, 2015; Beck and Williams, 2015), and the working-class (Warren, 2015) are more vulnerable to underemployment. Exploring the range of lived experiences allows an investigation into the causes and consequences of underemployment. Feldman (1996) and Dooley (2003) warned of risks for underemployed workers' job security, incomes, well-being and social standing.
Key knowledge gaps addressed in this project include ways in which social inequalities alter outcomes of underemployment for workers and their families; trends in each indicator of underemployment (hours, wages, skills), their combined effects, and how underemployment affects industrial relations systems, employers and businesses, business models, unions, communities, policymakers and their practices, especially given Covid-19, Brexit and recessions.
