IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/woemps/v16y2002i4p655-674.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Jobseekers and Gatekeepers: the Role of the Private Employment Agency in the Placement of the Unemployed

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Gray

    (South Bank University, UK grayam@sbu.ac.uk)

Abstract

This paper discusses two conflicting discourses about the role of temporary work agencies. Some labour market analysts argue that they mobilize the unemployed labour reserve to undercut established employees' pay and conditions, thus offering the unemployed worse opportunities than they could obtain through other channels. By contrast, current UK policy on the reintegration of the unemployed assumes that any job is better than no job and encourages them to use agencies as a job search channel. This tiny segment of the labour market demands our attention for its rapid growth and particular importance in the experience of those moving in and out of unemployment. This paper examines the paradox that whilst employers increasingly turn to agencies to reduce labour costs, agencies seek to maximize the value of the labour they sell, in some circumstances acting as `levellers' of pay and prospects for disadvantaged jobseekers. It then considers how the unemployed will be affected by the response of agency employment to the proposed European directive on temporary work.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Gray, 2002. "Jobseekers and Gatekeepers: the Role of the Private Employment Agency in the Placement of the Unemployed," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 16(4), pages 655-674, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:16:y:2002:i:4:p:655-674
    DOI: 10.1177/095001702321587415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/095001702321587415
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/095001702321587415?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peck, Jamie & Theodore, Nikolas, 2000. "Commentary: 'Work First': Workfare and the Regulation of Contingent Labour Markets," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(1), pages 119-138, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Santos, Miguel, 2010. "From Training to Labour Market. Holocletic Model," MPRA Paper 26617, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maite Blázquez, 2009. "Earnings mobility in Spain: the role of job mobility and contractual arrangements," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 179-205, September.
    2. Haddad, Lawrence James & Adato, Michelle, 2001. "How effectively do public works programs transfer benefits to the poor?," FCND briefs 108, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Karen Soldatic & Helen Meekosha, 2012. "The Place of Disgust: Disability, Class and Gender in Spaces of Workfare," Societies, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Peichl, Andreas & Siegloch, Sebastian, 2012. "Accounting for labor demand effects in structural labor supply models," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 129-138.
    5. Dina Bowman & Michael McGann & Helen Kimberley & Simon Biggs, 2017. "‘Rusty, invisible and threatening’: ageing, capital and employability," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 31(3), pages 465-482, June.
    6. Karen Soldatic & Kelly Somers & Kim Spurway & Georgia van Toorn, 2017. "Emplacing Indigeneity and rurality in neoliberal disability welfare reform: The lived experience of Aboriginal people with disabilities in the West Kimberley, Australia," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(10), pages 2342-2361, October.
    7. Herwig Immervoll & Stephen P. Jenkins & Sebastian Königs, 2015. "Are Recipients of Social Assistance 'Benefit Dependent'?: Concepts, Measurement and Results for Selected Countries," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 162, OECD Publishing.
    8. Jurgen Essletzbichler, 2003. "From Mass Production to Flexible Specialization: The Sectoral and Geographical Extent of Contract Work in US Manufacturing, 1963-1997," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(8), pages 753-771.
    9. Georgia van Toorn, 2021. "Neoliberalism’s friends, foes and fellow travellers: What can radical feminist and disability perspectives bring to the policy mobilities approach?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(4), pages 723-740, June.
    10. Amuedo-Dorantes, Catalina & Serrano-Padial, Ricardo, 2007. "Wage Growth Implications of Fixed-Term Employment: An Analysis by Contract Duration and Job Mobility," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 829-847, October.
    11. Holzner, Christian & Meier, Volker & Werding, Martin, 2010. "Workfare, monitoring, and efficiency wages," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-168, March.
    12. Daniel Perkins & Rosanna Scuttella, 2008. "Improving Employment Retention and Advancement of Low-Paid Workers," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 11(1), pages 97-114.
    13. Gary Slater, 2002. "The Poverty of Flexibility," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 243-251.
    14. Julian Clarke, 2014. "Pre-employment training for the unemployed: A case study of a call centre foundation programme," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 29(1-2), pages 113-128, February.
    15. Holland, Brian, 2018. "Defining and Measuring Workforce Development in the United States in a Post-Bipartisan Era," GLO Discussion Paper Series 234, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:16:y:2002:i:4:p:655-674. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.