Distemper
Temporary work may dim future employment prospects
Mar 11th 2010 | From The Economist print edition
IS ANY job better than no job? Some research has suggested that unemployed workers should take up any job they can get, including temporary work, as a bridge to higher-paying employment. But what may be good for the economy, reducing the drain on government coffers, may be bad for the individuals concerned. In a forthcoming paper in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Susan Houseman of the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Michigan show that taking up temporary work after a spell of unemployment can hurt future earnings.
The authors looked at data from Detroit’s “Work First” welfare-to-work initiative, which uses placement agencies to put low-skilled unemployed people into paid jobs. They then assessed participants’ earnings and job tenure before and after their involvement in the programme.
The results revealed huge differences in average outcomes for people placed into temporary work and those placed directly with an employer. Participants who got a full-time job enjoyed, on average, increased job stability and saw annual earnings rise by almost $2,000 above their previous income two years after taking up their post. Those who were placed into temp work saw their average job tenure decline and their yearly earnings drop by around $1,000.
An obvious possibility is that better candidates are more likely to get full-time jobs. But “Work First” candidates are assigned to placement agencies on a rotating basis, and these agencies, in turn, have different propensities to put jobseekers into either temporary or full-time work. The assignment of candidates to types of job is, in effect, random.
A better explanation is employment stability. Temporary jobs usually end too quickly to have a durable positive effect on the earnings of participants before, in Mr. Autor’s words, “the process of unemployment, discouragement, and job search begins anew.” Whether the study’s findings apply in times of sustained high unemployment, such as now, is less clear. The number of temporary workers in America jumped for the fifth consecutive month in February, even as payrolls fell by 36,000 jobs. Holding out for full-time work is a lot easier when employers are hiring.
|
不安?
临时性的工作对就业前景可能不利
. 3月11日 2010 | 来自《经济学人》打印版
做任何一份工作真的总比没有工作强吗?一些研究表明,失业者应该接受他们能找到的任何工作,包括临时性的工作,以此作为获得高薪职业的跳板。但是对经济有好处的做法,如减少国库开支,对相关个体的利益却未必有利。在《美国经济季刊:应用经济学》一篇即将发表文章上,麻省理工大学的戴维·奥托尔和密歇根州W.E. Upjohn就业研究机构的苏珊·霍斯曼指出,经过一段空档期后从事临时性工作会对他们未来的收入带来负面的影响。
- drain: n. 排水沟, 消耗, 排水
- government coffers: 国库
- a spell of unemployment: 职业空档期
. .
这两位作者查阅了底特律“工作第一”福利工作方案的数据,这项方案旨在通过设置中介机构来帮助低技能失业人员获得有报酬的工作岗位,之后他们再对参与人员加入这项方案前后的收入和工作时间进行评估。
. .
结果显示,被安排临时工作的雇员和直接去从事固定工作的雇员之间在平均收入上相差很大。平均而言,那些获得全职工作的受试者更喜欢这种稳定的工作,并且在工作两年之后每年都能获得差不多2000美元的额外加薪。而那些被安排临时工作中的受试者面临的是平均工作时间的减少和每年大约1000美元的收入降低。
(横线那句有疑问?)
. .
显而易见的是,越是优秀的求职者就越可能得到全职工作。但是在“工作第一”方案中,求职者被轮番安排给中介机构,然后这些中介机构又反过来以不同的倾向程度地给求职者安排临时工作或者全职工作。实际上,对求职者工作类型的安排完全是随机的。
- propensity: n. 倾向, 爱好, 习性
.
工作稳定性更好地解释了上述结论。临时性工作通常结束的太快,用奥托尔的话说便是:在下一个“失业、沮丧和重新开始找工作”周期开始之前,不会给求职者的收入带来持续的积极影响。在现在这种有持续高失业率的时期,这项研究结论是否适用还尚不清楚。虽然美国在职岗位减少了36000个,但是到今年二月份,从事临时工作的人数还是连续第5个月激增。在雇主招人时,坚持要求全职工作是很容易的。
最后一句这样会明白些:“现在雇主都不怎么雇人,坚持要求全职工作倒是很不容易了。”
|
Recent Comments