Popular in Social Sciences

Political Science

V-Dem’s Conceptions of Democracy and Their Consequences

University of Notre Dame Michael Coppedge

Central Monetary Authorities

Macroeconomic modelling of CBDC: a critical review

European Central Bank Ulrich Bindseil

Social Identities and Divisions

A new explanation of antisemitism: Jew hatred as a civilisational phenomenon

Boston University Liah Greenfeld

Central Monetary Authorities

Financing Private Credit

Federal Reserve Bank of New York Nina Boyarchenko

Economics

Failing Banks

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Emil Verner

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

American Politics

Collective bargaining in Canada in the age of precarious employment

View more insights in Social Sciences - Economics - Labor Economics

View more figures from McMaster University

View the page of Wayne Lewchuk

Read the Study

Next in Economics

Do renewable energy investments create local jobs?

Natalia Fabra | University Carlos III Madrid

An early indicator for anomalous stock market performance

Thomas Gries | Universität Paderborn

The decline in the prevalence of the Standard Employment Relationship in Canada has created challenges for Canadian unions. Wayne Lewchuk discusses the available estimates of the prevalence of precarious employment and gig work in Canada.

Image courtesy of interviewee. July 16, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video discusses significant changes in the labor market over the past 30 to 40 years, highlighting a shift from stable, full-time employment—often unionized—to more precarious work arrangements. By 2017, less than half of middle-aged Canadians were in full-time, year-round jobs, leading to a rise in part-time, self-employment, and other insecure employment forms.

This video shift has impacted how workers navigate their employment relationships, which can involve parties such as temp agencies or gig platforms (e.g., Uber), resulting in workers feeling like "free agents" without long-term job security. The changing nature of employment has posed challenges for unions, which traditionally supported permanent employees, as many workers now have multiple, short-term employers.

This video outlines various responses from unions and government to address these changes, including adapting union structures to support precarious workers and examining policy measures like minimum wage laws, pension enhancements, and universal basic income trials. Research indicates that precarious employment correlates with poorer health and household stability, affecting community participation as individuals feel unable to commit to social roles or further education due to the unpredictable nature of their jobs. Overall, the text stresses the need for a re-evaluation of labor market dynamics and the supporting structures around workers to address the ongoing crisis in employment stability.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.255 --> 00:02.635
The labor market has undergone some pretty fundamental

00:02.635 --> 00:04.675
changes in the last 30 or 40 years.

00:05.175 --> 00:09.795
The whole process by which people, find work, keep work,

00:10.215 --> 00:12.395
and from time to time renegotiate the terms

00:12.415 --> 00:14.275
and conditions of work has changed.

00:14.775 --> 00:17.835
You know, we've moved from, a world where,

00:18.065 --> 00:21.475
many people had full year, full-time, employment,

00:21.925 --> 00:22.955
often unionized.

00:23.375 --> 00:26.435
So sort of once you, you know, as a young person, you kind

00:26.435 --> 00:28.075
of stumbled around a little bit, looked for

00:28.265 --> 00:29.475
what kind of a job you wanted.

00:29.615 --> 00:32.635
But once you got on a career path, you had a sense

00:32.635 --> 00:34.635
that you were, you were set for life,

00:34.635 --> 00:36.035
that you had a, a long-term job.

00:36.695 --> 00:39.715
Uh, you had some benefits. You often had a union who was,

00:39.815 --> 00:41.995
negotiating the terms of employment.

00:42.375 --> 00:44.635
Um, and you just had to keep putting in your time.

00:44.635 --> 00:46.555
And as long as you didn't do anything particularly

00:46.835 --> 00:49.115
egregious, you know, you, you kept your job.

00:49.625 --> 00:52.115
What we've seen in the last 30 years is,

00:52.175 --> 00:55.315
is a shift away from that model of, of employment

00:56.055 --> 01:00.635
in 2017, for the very first time in Canada,

01:00.635 --> 01:03.235
since this data was collected, less than half

01:03.235 --> 01:06.635
of middle-aged people were in what they described

01:06.635 --> 01:08.955
as full year, full-time employment.

01:10.075 --> 01:12.015
The other half were in something different.

01:12.205 --> 01:15.255
Part-time, self-employment, various forms

01:15.435 --> 01:16.455
of insecure employment.

01:16.755 --> 01:20.055
So what we've seen is this, this rise of, of a, of a,

01:20.255 --> 01:23.895
a more insecure model of the employment relationship,

01:24.265 --> 01:27.575
where, you know, people are employed through temp agencies.

01:28.085 --> 01:32.935
They're employed, through online, sites, such

01:32.935 --> 01:36.455
as Uber Drivers Mechanical Turk, you know, they,

01:36.455 --> 01:40.255
they're self-employed, sometimes incorrectly classified

01:40.255 --> 01:42.455
as self-employed, but the employer has called them

01:42.455 --> 01:45.695
self-employed often in the trucking industry, et cetera,

01:45.795 --> 01:48.335
to, you know, it gives people a kind of a different,

01:48.335 --> 01:49.775
perspective on tax, et cetera.

01:50.275 --> 01:52.975
And so increase what we've seen is that, you know,

01:52.975 --> 01:55.455
people are, they're very much on their own.

01:55.455 --> 01:57.415
They're, they're, they're now free agents.

01:57.835 --> 02:00.895
Uh, they don't have this long-term stability, and,

02:00.955 --> 02:02.655
and they're needing to sort out the,

02:02.655 --> 02:04.415
their employment relationships themselves.

02:05.355 --> 02:07.535
And so, as a result of this, you know, there's, there's a,

02:07.535 --> 02:08.815
there's a need to understand this

02:09.505 --> 02:11.415
shift in the nature of employment.

02:11.695 --> 02:13.375
I, I'm, I'm actually an economic historian.

02:13.395 --> 02:16.175
So these kind of long-term changes really quite fascinating.

02:16.595 --> 02:19.615
Uh, and so, you know, what we're, you know, what,

02:19.615 --> 02:21.975
what we're trying to understand now is how are,

02:22.475 --> 02:24.375
how are workers trying to replicate the kind

02:24.375 --> 02:27.055
of security they enjoyed After World War ii?

02:27.055 --> 02:28.815
Those were 30 glorious years.

02:29.485 --> 02:31.255
When employment became more secure,

02:31.265 --> 02:33.055
often better paid benefits improved.

02:33.275 --> 02:36.535
And that kind of ended in, in the, in the early,

02:36.935 --> 02:38.415
eighties, or or mid eighties.

02:38.835 --> 02:41.095
And so what are, how are workers responding?

02:41.095 --> 02:42.975
And, you know, there's a number of things that are going on.

02:43.395 --> 02:46.495
Um, one is, you know, unions are looking, what,

02:47.275 --> 02:49.575
how do they respond to this change in the labor market?

02:49.875 --> 02:52.135
And that's a real, that's a, you know, that's a real problem

02:52.195 --> 02:55.735
for unions because unions, are, are, were,

02:55.735 --> 02:58.895
were structured to provide,

02:59.625 --> 03:01.205
Uh, support to workers

03:01.305 --> 03:03.605
who are in permanent full-time employment.

03:03.795 --> 03:07.165
They had a, a long-term relationship with a single employer.

03:07.705 --> 03:09.605
That's increasingly not the case for,

03:09.665 --> 03:10.765
for, for workers anymore.

03:10.795 --> 03:11.925
They have, they now have

03:12.205 --> 03:13.325
multiple employers at the same time.

03:13.555 --> 03:15.845
They're moving between employers quite often.

03:16.465 --> 03:19.165
Um, and, and, you know, they don't have that kind

03:19.165 --> 03:21.485
of stability that, that unions can take advantage of.

03:21.485 --> 03:22.485
So there's, that's one area

03:22.585 --> 03:23.925
of interest that we wanted to look at.

03:24.545 --> 03:25.965
And, but the other is, what are,

03:25.965 --> 03:27.685
what are governments doing to respond to this?

03:27.885 --> 03:30.005
'cause in many ways, the kind of stability

03:30.005 --> 03:33.205
that workers enjoyed after World War II was in large part

03:33.205 --> 03:35.925
result of changes at, at the, at the state level.

03:36.425 --> 03:38.885
You know, the facilitation of unions, the spread

03:38.885 --> 03:43.285
of the welfare states, PE pension plans, government

03:43.795 --> 03:45.485
provide pension plans, et cetera.

03:45.785 --> 03:47.045
And so now, what is, what are,

03:47.045 --> 03:50.205
what's the state doing in order to respond

03:50.205 --> 03:52.245
to this fundamental change in the nature

03:52.245 --> 03:55.045
of labor market markets since, the 1980s?

03:55.185 --> 03:56.445
You know, there's been a, a, a lot

03:56.445 --> 03:58.005
of literature now on this whole issue

03:58.005 --> 03:59.125
of precarious employment.

03:59.465 --> 04:01.405
Uh, and it, it goes into a,

04:01.445 --> 04:02.605
a number of different categories.

04:02.625 --> 04:05.845
One, there's been a number of teams who are looking, trying

04:05.845 --> 04:07.845
to measure what this thing is,

04:07.965 --> 04:09.245
'cause it's, it's really, it's really complex.

04:09.265 --> 04:12.205
And we've, we've come to understand pretty clearly that

04:12.235 --> 04:14.965
what the governments have been collecting, kind

04:14.965 --> 04:17.365
of standard information they have is just not doing the job.

04:17.925 --> 04:20.245
'cause for the most part, what governments do is they

04:20.245 --> 04:21.965
collect information on the form

04:21.965 --> 04:23.245
of the employment relationship.

04:23.665 --> 04:25.125
Are people in part-time employment?

04:25.125 --> 04:27.605
Are they in permanent employment? Are they self-employed?

04:27.925 --> 04:29.165
I mean, that's relatively easy to do.

04:29.165 --> 04:30.685
It's a single question. You throw it out there

04:30.685 --> 04:32.725
and people respond back, respond.

04:32.785 --> 04:36.445
The problem we now understand is that that form

04:36.445 --> 04:39.325
of the employment itself has changed in the last 30 years.

04:39.325 --> 04:42.325
So what's permanent employment today is not as permanent

04:42.325 --> 04:43.445
as it was 30 years ago.

04:43.825 --> 04:45.605
And so you need to start really looking at the

04:45.605 --> 04:48.205
characteristics of employment within each

04:48.205 --> 04:50.125
of these different forms of employment.

04:50.505 --> 04:52.285
And that's given rise to a number of teams.

04:52.705 --> 04:55.285
Uh, you know, there's a, there's a group out of, Spain

04:55.285 --> 04:57.485
and Chile, that have been looking at this,

04:57.485 --> 04:59.085
this issue developed some indexes.

04:59.345 --> 05:02.285
Uh, my colleague Michael Quinlan in Australia has,

05:02.345 --> 05:03.645
has been studying this issue.

05:04.105 --> 05:07.205
Uh, I'm currently part of a, a team out of Sweden led

05:07.205 --> 05:10.605
by Theo Boden, who was also trying to, to measure this.

05:10.865 --> 05:14.045
And much of this work has focused on the relationship

05:14.045 --> 05:16.925
between precarious employment and individual health.

05:17.345 --> 05:19.525
Uh, you know, that's one, one of the big, the big issues.

05:20.225 --> 05:22.725
Um, another group of researchers,

05:22.745 --> 05:26.565
has been looking more at the response of the states to this,

05:26.635 --> 05:27.725
this change here.

05:27.745 --> 05:30.085
I'm thinking of David Wheel in the United States,

05:30.175 --> 05:32.925
who's been looking at this thing called the fied workplace.

05:33.385 --> 05:36.045
Uh, how the spread of, of contracting out

05:36.045 --> 05:38.605
and precarious employment has fundamentally changed the

05:38.605 --> 05:40.485
relationship between wages and employment

05:40.705 --> 05:42.005
and security and employment.

05:42.305 --> 05:44.965
Of course. Then there's the, the work, of,

05:44.985 --> 05:46.525
guy standing in in Britain

05:46.865 --> 05:48.005
and his, his book on,

05:48.025 --> 05:50.485
on the precarious is also looking at that.

05:50.485 --> 05:53.685
So those are kinda the two major two, directions.

05:54.705 --> 05:56.245
Our study was, you know, it was,

05:56.265 --> 05:57.405
it was a little bit different.

05:57.425 --> 06:00.925
Uh, my, our our, my study was, it was a joint piece of work

06:00.995 --> 06:02.325
with the United Way of Toronto,

06:02.945 --> 06:06.085
and their concern was not really occupational health.

06:06.335 --> 06:08.205
Their concern was the health of community

06:08.465 --> 06:09.645
of households and community.

06:10.285 --> 06:13.285
'cause what they were seeing is that there, there'd been a,

06:13.925 --> 06:18.005
a decline in, in the, in, in the, in large parts of,

06:18.005 --> 06:20.045
of the community around Toronto and Hamilton,

06:20.385 --> 06:22.165
and the ability to, to support themselves.

06:22.545 --> 06:23.845
And they, they had this sense

06:23.845 --> 06:25.605
that there was something going on in the labor market

06:25.605 --> 06:28.765
that was behind this crisis in households and community,

06:28.905 --> 06:30.045
but they weren't quite sure what it was.

06:30.045 --> 06:31.805
And so they came to me and said, can we kind

06:31.805 --> 06:35.245
of generate some hard data to convince policy makers that,

06:35.245 --> 06:36.805
you know, maybe we need, they need to make a change.

06:36.805 --> 06:39.205
Because they were having trouble getting policy makers to,

06:39.345 --> 06:40.525
to focus on this issue.

06:40.525 --> 06:43.325
They, they were focusing on low wages and,

06:43.325 --> 06:44.765
and certainly low wages are a problem,

06:45.025 --> 06:46.485
but there have always been low wages.

06:46.865 --> 06:48.405
And in many ways, the, the,

06:48.405 --> 06:50.445
the average wage hasn't really changed all

06:50.445 --> 06:51.805
that much in the last 30 years.

06:51.905 --> 06:53.325
You know, for some groups it's fallen.

06:53.585 --> 06:54.885
For other groups, it's gone up.

06:55.065 --> 06:57.565
But there hasn't been a really big shift in wages.

06:58.255 --> 07:01.685
Where there has been a big shift is in the variability

07:01.705 --> 07:04.365
of wages of, of, of, of your wage going up

07:04.365 --> 07:06.285
and down each week, each month, each year.

07:06.545 --> 07:08.805
So people are going from high wages to low wages,

07:08.995 --> 07:11.045
from low wages to high wages in a

07:11.045 --> 07:12.285
relatively short period of time.

07:12.585 --> 07:14.285
And it, and it's that issue that,

07:14.285 --> 07:15.645
that precarity really addresses

07:15.645 --> 07:17.245
and that we were really interested in looking at.

07:17.305 --> 07:19.045
So, so that's where our study fit in.

07:19.225 --> 07:21.965
But there's also sort of a, a now I, I think a fourth stream

07:21.965 --> 07:22.965
of research in this area,

07:22.965 --> 07:24.485
which I think is really quite interesting.

07:24.705 --> 07:26.965
And that, and that's sort of the response to precarity,

07:27.025 --> 07:29.965
and that's the growing interest in basic income

07:30.435 --> 07:33.445
that somehow is basic income, the solution

07:33.465 --> 07:36.845
to this highly variable income stream now as a result of,

07:36.845 --> 07:39.445
of precarious employment, sorry, guy standing is, has,

07:39.445 --> 07:40.605
has been advocating that.

07:40.825 --> 07:42.965
But also we've seen that, a real interest in

07:42.965 --> 07:45.565
that here in, in Canada, even at the government level,

07:45.565 --> 07:47.765
there's, there's bills before the Senate trying

07:47.765 --> 07:50.525
to encourage the federal government to move forward on,

07:50.525 --> 07:51.645
on, on a basic income.

07:51.865 --> 07:54.365
And I was part of a little study here in Hamilton when they

07:54.365 --> 07:57.085
did a pilot of a basic income project,

07:57.145 --> 07:58.645
and looking at that, that impact.

07:58.645 --> 07:59.845
So those are some of the main areas

07:59.845 --> 08:01.045
where people are working on

08:01.045 --> 08:02.125
this area of procures employment.

08:02.155 --> 08:03.205
This was a joint project.

08:03.385 --> 08:06.765
So there was actually two co-PIs myself at,

08:06.795 --> 08:07.845
from the university sector,

08:07.905 --> 08:08.965
but also the, the head

08:08.965 --> 08:11.725
of research at the United Way Toronto, which is,

08:11.725 --> 08:14.125
you know, basically they're, they're basically a,

08:14.235 --> 08:15.965
they raise funds,

08:15.965 --> 08:18.685
and then they distribute those funds to frontline agencies

08:18.905 --> 08:21.885
who are supporting people who in need in crisis, et cetera.

08:22.305 --> 08:24.125
Uh, and so it, it was really driven

08:24.145 --> 08:25.405
by those, those two groups.

08:25.585 --> 08:28.125
And it, and it shaped as a result, you know, the kind

08:28.125 --> 08:30.325
of questions we asked and, and, and,

08:30.325 --> 08:32.085
and what answers we were looking for.

08:32.145 --> 08:33.925
We were really looking for this issue of

08:33.925 --> 08:35.245
what was happening to our society.

08:35.445 --> 08:37.805
'cause there's this sense that somehow Procurious employment

08:37.825 --> 08:39.125
was not just about the individual,

08:39.125 --> 08:40.485
though it had effects there.

08:40.665 --> 08:44.365
It was also a, about what was going on in our society and,

08:44.365 --> 08:46.965
and, and, and crises in our society, in our community.

08:46.965 --> 08:48.605
And so that's what they were really interested in.

08:49.065 --> 08:52.685
So they, I had been writing, doing some work,

08:53.045 --> 08:54.205
previously on this issue.

08:54.345 --> 08:56.485
I'm curious what Employment and health published a book.

08:56.665 --> 08:57.685
And this came to the attention

08:57.685 --> 08:58.885
that people at the United Way.

08:58.885 --> 09:00.965
So they asked me, you know, would you, you know, work

09:00.965 --> 09:02.845
with us on a project to try and figure this out?

09:03.145 --> 09:05.965
And so we, we started doing, mass surveys.

09:05.965 --> 09:07.925
So we did three surveys, three waves

09:07.925 --> 09:11.845
of surveys starting in 2011, ending in 2017.

09:12.505 --> 09:13.765
And we, we inter

09:13.865 --> 09:16.645
or we interviewed over the phone, through a, a, a,

09:16.845 --> 09:19.645
a corporate polling agency, about 10,000 people.

09:20.585 --> 09:23.725
And we put together, you know, various reports, and,

09:23.725 --> 09:24.925
and tried and, and,

09:24.925 --> 09:27.245
and tried to understand really what was going on.

09:27.265 --> 09:28.765
And the key here is we didn't just

09:29.355 --> 09:31.285
interview people in precarious employment.

09:31.355 --> 09:32.485
This was a mass survey.

09:32.905 --> 09:36.325
So our, our real goal is to compare what's the difference

09:36.325 --> 09:37.605
between someone in a full year,

09:37.605 --> 09:40.285
full-time job versus someone in a precarious job?

09:40.385 --> 09:41.645
What's it doing to their household?

09:41.645 --> 09:43.005
What is it doing to the community?

09:43.105 --> 09:44.405
And so that's, you know, kind of

09:44.405 --> 09:45.805
how we put this, study together.

09:46.245 --> 09:48.805
I think not surprising, certain to myself

09:48.805 --> 09:51.165
and to, to anyone else, is that, you know,

09:51.165 --> 09:53.645
being in precarious employment has a number of downsides.

09:54.185 --> 09:57.885
Uh, certainly we saw, heightened health problems,

09:57.885 --> 09:59.005
general health problems

09:59.225 --> 10:00.805
for those people in precarious employment.

10:01.185 --> 10:04.285
We certainly saw much elevated mental health problems

10:04.625 --> 10:06.405
for people in, in precarious employment.

10:06.405 --> 10:08.525
So I think those things, weren't surprising.

10:09.145 --> 10:13.165
One thing about our study is we made a distinction between,

10:13.825 --> 10:17.295
the precarity of the employment relationship

10:18.635 --> 10:20.055
and income levels.

10:20.555 --> 10:21.815
So in, in economics terms,

10:21.915 --> 10:23.535
we are interested in both the mean income

10:23.755 --> 10:25.655
and the vari variance in the income.

10:25.785 --> 10:28.135
Those are two, to me, those are two separate factors.

10:28.755 --> 10:31.295
As I said earlier, the, the mean income hasn't changed all

10:31.295 --> 10:33.375
that dramatically for most people in the last 30 years.

10:33.635 --> 10:35.775
But what has changed is the variance in income.

10:35.805 --> 10:37.975
It's, it, it is much higher than it used to be.

10:37.975 --> 10:39.655
So we wanted to separate those two things out.

10:40.235 --> 10:43.135
And I think what we, what we, what we found is that, look,

10:43.315 --> 10:45.135
it is absolutely dreadful

10:45.475 --> 10:47.815
to be in a low wage precarious job.

10:47.975 --> 10:49.255
I mean, that's the worst situation

10:49.255 --> 10:50.455
to be, it's bad for your health.

10:50.795 --> 10:52.015
Um, it's, it's bad for your,

10:52.015 --> 10:53.695
for your household, it's bad for the community.

10:54.035 --> 10:56.615
But what's somewhat more surprising is how,

10:57.035 --> 10:59.975
how strong the results were for those people who were in,

11:00.315 --> 11:03.615
middle income jobs, but pr perhaps precarious.

11:03.995 --> 11:07.455
Um, so they were getting by, okay, they, you know,

11:07.455 --> 11:08.855
they had more than a living wage today,

11:09.035 --> 11:10.575
but they were always looking over their shoulder

11:10.595 --> 11:12.575
and saying, you know, this is a precarious job.

11:12.835 --> 11:16.855
It may be paying me 60 or $70,000 Canadian this year.

11:17.535 --> 11:19.295
I may not have that job in six months or a year.

11:19.395 --> 11:22.535
And so in a year, I may be the parking attendant, at,

11:22.535 --> 11:24.935
at minimum wage, at, at the local garage.

11:25.395 --> 11:27.855
And, and so what we found is that in, in many

11:27.855 --> 11:30.575
of the negative effects of precarious employment,

11:30.765 --> 11:33.855
were not just those low wage precarious people,

11:34.035 --> 11:36.375
it was also those middle income, precarious employment.

11:36.555 --> 11:37.575
And I think what that speaks

11:37.575 --> 11:40.335
to the precarious employment is, is not just a problem

11:40.355 --> 11:43.295
of the people at the bottom of the, of the,

11:43.295 --> 11:44.335
of the economic ladder.

11:44.725 --> 11:47.215
It's, it's those people, the vast majority of people

11:47.215 --> 11:48.735
who are in the middle, who to be frank,

11:48.835 --> 11:50.495
are always looking over their shoulder

11:50.555 --> 11:52.335
and thinking, will that be me?

11:52.565 --> 11:53.805
Will that be me next year?

11:54.225 --> 11:56.245
And, and, you know, how does, how is that gonna affect you?

11:56.625 --> 11:58.525
And so what, so what are some of those effects?

11:58.555 --> 12:00.725
What, what we've, what we've found is that

12:01.395 --> 12:04.085
there's a real crisis in terms of households

12:04.595 --> 12:06.205
when employment is precarious.

12:06.205 --> 12:08.965
There's a real crisis in terms of participation in

12:09.525 --> 12:11.045
participating in community when

12:11.115 --> 12:12.685
there's precarious employment.

12:12.825 --> 12:15.765
But people are saying, look, I I, I, I can't, I, I can't,

12:15.765 --> 12:18.805
say sign up to coach my kids' ball team or hockey team.

12:19.245 --> 12:21.005
'cause I never know when my, my employment is.

12:21.565 --> 12:24.405
I can't sign up to take another, a course to improve myself.

12:24.405 --> 12:26.525
Because, you know, the job that is, is,

12:26.525 --> 12:30.045
is they work this week, maybe evening work next week.

12:30.425 --> 12:33.125
So there's that real crisis in, in engaging in,

12:33.145 --> 12:35.325
in your family and your, and your society.

12:35.585 --> 12:37.205
And I think in some ways it's, it's those,

12:37.595 --> 12:39.285
it's those second generation effects,

12:39.465 --> 12:43.005
not just on the individual, but on their household and

12:43.005 --> 12:45.205
therefore their children and on the community.

12:45.545 --> 12:48.245
And therefore our, our political process and our,

12:48.245 --> 12:50.805
and our, our social stability that are as important

12:50.805 --> 12:52.205
as what's happening to individuals.

12:52.515 --> 12:54.525
Yeah. Well, here, you know, I think, you know, you could,

12:54.525 --> 12:55.525
you can look at unions

12:55.665 --> 12:57.525
and certainly you would wanna see a response

12:57.545 --> 12:59.085
by unions to this issue.

12:59.345 --> 13:01.725
And, and, you know, there have been some res some responses.

13:01.945 --> 13:04.925
So in certain, areas, you know, sort of in construction,

13:04.925 --> 13:08.925
at least in Canada, ii, who, helped, you know,

13:09.105 --> 13:11.045
put on a lot of the theater and the, and the, and the,

13:11.045 --> 13:12.365
and the shows on TVs

13:12.365 --> 13:14.845
and organize a lot of the, of the, of the support staff.

13:14.845 --> 13:18.385
And that they have found a way to build a union,

13:18.385 --> 13:19.545
basically contract workers.

13:19.945 --> 13:22.305
'cause in, in, in, in, in, in the arts, you know, you,

13:22.305 --> 13:25.185
you get a contract for, for, for three months while the,

13:25.185 --> 13:27.745
the show's in town, when that show leaves, that's it.

13:27.745 --> 13:29.265
You don't have another employer. So you, you look

13:29.265 --> 13:30.945
for another kind of a contract.

13:31.125 --> 13:34.665
So they've, they have found a way to, to fill in the gap

13:35.175 --> 13:38.105
that, many workers in procures employment are facing in

13:38.105 --> 13:39.705
terms of how do you organize a pension?

13:39.765 --> 13:40.825
How do you organize healthcare,

13:41.085 --> 13:42.705
how do you organize finding work?

13:42.885 --> 13:44.865
So I mean, they, they provide those functions.

13:45.085 --> 13:46.665
The employer contributes to the union,

13:46.885 --> 13:48.585
but then the union manages the pension

13:48.735 --> 13:50.025
fund, the health fund.

13:50.365 --> 13:53.385
Uh, they provide the mechanisms by which you find work so

13:53.385 --> 13:55.785
that those that works in those areas, a lot

13:55.785 --> 13:57.785
of other unions are, they're, they're struggling.

13:57.785 --> 13:59.385
They're, they're finding it difficult to,

13:59.605 --> 14:03.345
to move from a model which is really reliant on the full

14:03.345 --> 14:06.665
year, full-time employment, to a model

14:06.665 --> 14:10.225
where people are moving from job to job on a regular basis.

14:10.845 --> 14:13.505
And, you know, certainly some of them have been able

14:13.505 --> 14:15.105
to bring Procurious workers into the fold.

14:15.105 --> 14:17.305
But to be frank, our research shows, you know,

14:17.305 --> 14:20.145
they haven't really made a big impact on raising the

14:20.345 --> 14:21.825
standard, those workers,

14:21.985 --> 14:23.785
'cause it's, you know, often very difficult to, to,

14:23.885 --> 14:25.025
to, to bargain for them.

14:25.475 --> 14:27.385
Other unions have offered this a form

14:27.385 --> 14:29.305
of called unionization light.

14:29.845 --> 14:32.225
So, you know, they don't have a formal bargaining

14:32.225 --> 14:33.425
relationship for these workers

14:33.705 --> 14:35.225
'cause they don't have a formal employer,

14:35.445 --> 14:37.785
but they're offering the unions some of the union services,

14:37.835 --> 14:41.825
legal services, advice, advice on how to write contracts.

14:42.005 --> 14:43.985
You know, what happens if your employer doesn't pay the

14:43.985 --> 14:45.345
salary they, they provided you.

14:45.525 --> 14:47.425
So that kind of a model, again, it's helpful,

14:47.565 --> 14:50.305
but not perhaps, you know, what is, is, is really needed.

14:51.585 --> 14:54.405
The other area where we've, we have seen changes and,

14:54.405 --> 14:56.685
and I think we're gonna have to see more changes is in, in,

14:56.705 --> 14:59.445
in, in the role of, of the state of, of, of the government.

14:59.865 --> 15:03.765
Uh, you know, we've seen now a number of reviews as,

15:03.765 --> 15:04.925
governments have have said, look

15:04.925 --> 15:05.965
it, something's changing here.

15:06.185 --> 15:07.925
We need to reevaluate what we're doing.

15:08.155 --> 15:09.725
Changes in minimum laws.

15:09.815 --> 15:11.845
We've seen a lot of action in, in the states,

15:11.845 --> 15:14.565
particularly in California, where, you know,

15:14.565 --> 15:15.765
workers now, are,

15:15.785 --> 15:18.005
are guaranteed health benefits in the restaurant sector.

15:18.065 --> 15:19.205
So I dunno if you've ever been

15:19.205 --> 15:20.205
to a restaurant in California,

15:20.205 --> 15:22.685
there's a little addition onto your bill that says,

15:22.685 --> 15:23.925
this is for health benefits for workers.

15:24.145 --> 15:25.325
That's a fantastic idea.

15:25.325 --> 15:26.605
You know, it's, it's a, it's a good thing.

15:26.865 --> 15:30.245
You know, here in Canada we have extended the public pension

15:30.435 --> 15:32.485
plan, and mainly in responses.

15:32.485 --> 15:33.805
More and more people in procures employment

15:33.805 --> 15:35.085
don't have a company pension plan.

15:35.385 --> 15:38.085
So they've, they've, they've, they've enhanced that to, to,

15:38.185 --> 15:40.405
to make it closer to a living wage for people

15:40.405 --> 15:42.045
who enter their retirement years.

15:42.065 --> 15:44.445
So that's another area where there's been a lot of activity.

15:44.825 --> 15:47.085
And I said the third area is really this issue

15:47.085 --> 15:48.285
of, of basic income.

15:48.725 --> 15:51.565
I know we've, we're seeing pilots across the, the globe,

15:51.585 --> 15:53.405
as, as, as, as, as governments trying

15:53.405 --> 15:54.845
to figure out is this a solution?

15:55.145 --> 15:56.605
You know, there's still a lot of questions

15:56.625 --> 15:58.045
to be answered about that,

15:58.425 --> 16:02.005
but I think it certainly is one area we're quite fruitful in

16:02.005 --> 16:03.085
terms of future developments.

"Transformations in the Labor Market: From Stability to Insecurity Over the Past Four Decades"

00:00:00 - The labor market has undergone some pretty fundamental changes in the last 30 or 40 years. The whole process by which people, find work, keep work, and from time to time renegotiate the terms and conditions of work has changed. You know, we've moved from, a world where, many people had full year, full-time, employment, often unionized. So sort of once you, you know, as a young person, you kind of stumbled around a little bit, looked for what kind of a job you wanted. But once you got on a career path, you had a sense that you were, you were set for life, that you had a, a long-term job. you had some benefits. You often had a union who was, negotiating the terms of employment.
00:00:44 - And as long as you didn't do anything particularly egregious, you know, you, you kept your job. What we've seen in the last 30 years is, is a shift away from that model of, of employment in 2017, for the very first time in Canada, since this data was collected, less than half of middle-aged people were in what they described as full year, full-time employment. The other half were in something different. Part-time, self-employment, various forms of insecure employment. So what we've seen is this, this rise of, of a, of a, a more insecure model of the employment relationship,
00:01:28 - They're employed, through online, sites, such as Uber Drivers Mechanical Turk, you know, they, they're self-employed, sometimes incorrectly classified as self-employed, but the employer has called them self-employed often in the trucking industry, et cetera, to, you know, it gives people a kind of a different, perspective on tax, et cetera. And so increase what we've seen is that, you know, people are, they're very much on their own. They're, they're, they're now free agents. they don't have this long-term stability, and, and they're needing to sort out the, their employment relationships themselves.
00:02:07 - there's a need to understand this shift in the nature of employment. I, I'm, I'm actually an economic historian. So these kind of long-term changes really quite fascinating. and so, you know, what we're, you know, what, what we're trying to understand now is how are, how are workers trying to replicate the kind of security they enjoyed After World War ii? Those were 30 glorious years. When employment became more secure, often better paid benefits improved. And that kind of ended in, in the, in the early, eighties, or or mid eighties. And so what are, how are workers responding? And, you know, there's a number of things that are going on. one is, you know, unions are looking, what,
00:02:49 - And that's a real, that's a, you know, that's a real problem for unions because unions, are, are, were, were structured to provide, support to workers who are in permanent full-time employment. They had a, a long-term relationship with a single employer. That's increasingly not the case for, for, for workers anymore. They have, they now have multiple employers at the same time. They're moving between employers quite often. and, and, you know, they don't have that kind of stability that, that unions can take advantage of. So there's, that's one area of interest that we wanted to look at. And, but the other is, what are, what are governments doing to respond to this?
00:03:30 - that workers enjoyed after World War II was in large part result of changes at, at the, at the state level. You know, the facilitation of unions, the spread of the welfare states, PE pension plans, government provide pension plans, et cetera. And so now, what is, what are, what's the state doing in order to respond to this fundamental change in the nature of labor market markets since, the 1980s? You know, there's been a, a, a lot of literature now on this whole issue of precarious employment. and it, it goes into a, a number of different categories. One, there's been a number of teams who are looking, trying to measure what this thing is,

"Understanding the Evolving Landscape of Employment: Data Gaps and the Quest for Security in an Era of Precarity"**

00:04:09 - And we've, we've come to understand pretty clearly that what the governments have been collecting, kind of standard information they have is just not doing the job. 'cause for the most part, what governments do is they collect information on the form of the employment relationship. Are people in part-time employment? Are they in permanent employment? Are they self-employed? I mean, that's relatively easy to do. It's a single question. You throw it out there and people respond back, respond. The problem we now understand is that that form of the employment itself has changed in the last 30 years. So what's permanent employment today is not as permanent as it was 30 years ago. And so you need to start really looking at the characteristics of employment within each
00:04:50 - And that's given rise to a number of teams. you know, there's a, there's a group out of, Spain and Chile, that have been looking at this, this issue developed some indexes. my colleague Michael Quinlan in Australia has, has been studying this issue. I'm currently part of a, a team out of Sweden led by Theo Boden, who was also trying to, to measure this. And much of this work has focused on the relationship between precarious employment and individual health. you know, that's one, one of the big, the big issues. another group of researchers, has been looking more at the response of the states to this, this change here. I'm thinking of David Wheel in the United States,
00:05:33 - how the spread of, of contracting out and precarious employment has fundamentally changed the relationship between wages and employment and security and employment. Of course. Then there's the, the work, of, guy standing in in Britain and his, his book on, on the precarious is also looking at that. So those are kinda the two major two, directions. Our study was, you know, it was, it was a little bit different. my, our our, my study was, it was a joint piece of work with the United Way of Toronto, and their concern was not really occupational health. Their concern was the health of community of households and community.
00:06:13 - a decline in, in the, in, in the, in large parts of, of the community around Toronto and Hamilton, and the ability to, to support themselves. And they, they had this sense that there was something going on in the labor market that was behind this crisis in households and community, but they weren't quite sure what it was. And so they came to me and said, can we kind of generate some hard data to convince policy makers that, you know, maybe we need, they need to make a change. Because they were having trouble getting policy makers to, to focus on this issue. They, they were focusing on low wages and, and certainly low wages are a problem, but there have always been low wages. And in many ways, the, the, the average wage hasn't really changed all
00:06:51 - You know, for some groups it's fallen. For other groups, it's gone up. But there hasn't been a really big shift in wages. Where there has been a big shift is in the variability of wages of, of, of, of your wage going up and down each week, each month, each year. So people are going from high wages to low wages, from low wages to high wages in a relatively short period of time. And it, and it's that issue that, that precarity really addresses and that we were really interested in looking at. So, so that's where our study fit in. But there's also sort of a, a now I, I think a fourth stream of research in this area, which I think is really quite interesting. And that, and that's sort of the response to precarity, and that's the growing interest in basic income that somehow is basic income, the solution
00:07:36 - of precarious employment, sorry, guy standing is, has, has been advocating that. But also we've seen that, a real interest in that here in, in Canada, even at the government level, there's, there's bills before the Senate trying to encourage the federal government to move forward on, on, on a basic income. And I was part of a little study here in Hamilton when they did a pilot of a basic income project, and looking at that, that impact. So those are some of the main areas where people are working on this area of procures employment. This was a joint project. So there was actually two co-PIs myself at, from the university sector, but also the, the head of research at the United Way Toronto, which is, you know, basically they're, they're basically a,

Title: "Exploring the Societal Impacts of Precarious Employment: Insights from Collaborative Research"

00:08:15 - and then they distribute those funds to frontline agencies who are supporting people who in need in crisis, et cetera. and so it, it was really driven by those, those two groups. And it, and it shaped as a result, you know, the kind of questions we asked and, and, and, and what answers we were looking for. We were really looking for this issue of what was happening to our society. 'cause there's this sense that somehow Procurious employment was not just about the individual, though it had effects there. It was also a, about what was going on in our society and, and, and, and crises in our society, in our community. And so that's what they were really interested in. So they, I had been writing, doing some work, previously on this issue.
00:08:56 - And this came to the attention that people at the United Way. So they asked me, you know, would you, you know, work with us on a project to try and figure this out? And so we, we started doing, mass surveys. So we did three surveys, three waves of surveys starting in 2011, ending in 2017. And we, we inter or we interviewed over the phone, through a, a, a, a corporate polling agency, about 10,000 people. And we put together, you know, various reports, and, and tried and, and, and tried to understand really what was going on. And the key here is we didn't just interview people in precarious employment. This was a mass survey. So our, our real goal is to compare what's the difference
00:09:37 - full-time job versus someone in a precarious job? What's it doing to their household? What is it doing to the community? And so that's, you know, kind of how we put this, study together. I think not surprising, certain to myself and to, to anyone else, is that, you know, being in precarious employment has a number of downsides. certainly we saw, heightened health problems, general health problems for those people in precarious employment. We certainly saw much elevated mental health problems for people in, in precarious employment. So I think those things, weren't surprising. One thing about our study is we made a distinction between, the precarity of the employment relationship
00:10:20 - So in, in economics terms, we are interested in both the mean income and the vari variance in the income. Those are two, to me, those are two separate factors. As I said earlier, the, the mean income hasn't changed all that dramatically for most people in the last 30 years. But what has changed is the variance in income. It's, it, it is much higher than it used to be. So we wanted to separate those two things out. And I think what we, what we, what we found is that, look, it is absolutely dreadful to be in a low wage precarious job. I mean, that's the worst situation to be, it's bad for your health. it's, it's bad for your, for your household, it's bad for the community. But what's somewhat more surprising is how, how strong the results were for those people who were in,
00:11:03 - so they were getting by, okay, they, you know, they had more than a living wage today, but they were always looking over their shoulder and saying, you know, this is a precarious job. It may be paying me 60 or $70,000 Canadian this year. I may not have that job in six months or a year. And so in a year, I may be the parking attendant, at, at minimum wage, at, at the local garage. And, and so what we found is that in, in many of the negative effects of precarious employment, were not just those low wage precarious people, it was also those middle income, precarious employment. And I think what that speaks to the precarious employment is, is not just a problem
00:11:43 - of the economic ladder. It's, it's those people, the vast majority of people who are in the middle, who to be frank, are always looking over their shoulder and thinking, will that be me? Will that be me next year? And, and, you know, how does, how is that gonna affect you? And so what, so what are some of those effects? What, what we've, what we've found is that there's a real crisis in terms of households when employment is precarious. There's a real crisis in terms of participation in participating in community when there's precarious employment. But people are saying, look, I I, I, I can't, I, I can't, say sign up to coach my kids' ball team or hockey team. 'cause I never know when my, my employment is.

"The Crisis of Precarious Employment: Impact on Families, Communities, and Labor Responses"

00:12:24 - Because, you know, the job that is, is, is they work this week, maybe evening work next week. So there's that real crisis in, in engaging in, in your family and your, and your society. And I think in some ways it's, it's those, it's those second generation effects, not just on the individual, but on their household and therefore their children and on the community. And therefore our, our political process and our, and our, our social stability that are as important as what's happening to individuals. Yeah. Well, here, you know, I think, you know, you could, you can look at unions and certainly you would wanna see a response by unions to this issue. And, and, you know, there have been some res some responses.
00:13:04 - at least in Canada, ii, who, helped, you know, put on a lot of the theater and the, and the, and the, and the shows on TVs and organize a lot of the, of the, of the support staff. And that they have found a way to build a union, basically contract workers. 'cause in, in, in, in, in, in the arts, you know, you, you get a contract for, for, for three months while the, the show's in town, when that show leaves, that's it. You don't have another employer. So you, you look for another kind of a contract. So they've, they have found a way to, to fill in the gap that, many workers in procures employment are facing in terms of how do you organize a pension? How do you organize healthcare, how do you organize finding work?
00:13:45 - The employer contributes to the union, but then the union manages the pension fund, the health fund. they provide the mechanisms by which you find work so that those that works in those areas, a lot of other unions are, they're, they're struggling. They're, they're finding it difficult to, to move from a model which is really reliant on the full year, full-time employment, to a model where people are moving from job to job on a regular basis. And, you know, certainly some of them have been able to bring Procurious workers into the fold. But to be frank, our research shows, you know, they haven't really made a big impact on raising the standard, those workers, 'cause it's, you know, often very difficult to, to,
00:14:25 - Other unions have offered this a form of called unionization light. So, you know, they don't have a formal bargaining relationship for these workers 'cause they don't have a formal employer, but they're offering the unions some of the union services, legal services, advice, advice on how to write contracts. You know, what happens if your employer doesn't pay the salary they, they provided you. So that kind of a model, again, it's helpful, but not perhaps, you know, what is, is, is really needed. The other area where we've, we have seen changes and, and I think we're gonna have to see more changes is in, in, in, in the role of, of the state of, of, of the government. you know, we've seen now a number of reviews as, governments have have said, look
00:15:06 - We need to reevaluate what we're doing. Changes in minimum laws. We've seen a lot of action in, in the states, particularly in California, where, you know, workers now, are, are guaranteed health benefits in the restaurant sector. So I dunno if you've ever been to a restaurant in California, there's a little addition onto your bill that says, this is for health benefits for workers. That's a fantastic idea. You know, it's, it's a, it's a good thing. You know, here in Canada we have extended the public pension plan, and mainly in responses. More and more people in procures employment don't have a company pension plan. So they've, they've, they've, they've enhanced that to, to, to make it closer to a living wage for people who enter their retirement years. So that's another area where there's been a lot of activity. And I said the third area is really this issue
00:16:02 - I know we've, we're seeing pilots across the, the globe, as, as, as, as, as governments trying to figure out is this a solution? You know, there's still a lot of questions to be answered about that, but I think it certainly is one area we're quite fruitful in terms of future developments.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Research

Policy

Analysis