IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/120050.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Change, stagnation, and polarisation in UK job quality, 2012-2021: evidence from a new Quality of Work index

Author

Listed:
  • Stephens, Thomas C.

Abstract

This paper presents results from a new synthetic index of multidimensional Quality of Work (QoW) for the UK, using data from five waves of Understanding Society (Waves 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12) covering the years 2012-2013 to 2020-2021. The index operationalises a conceptual framework for measuring QoW using the Capability Approach (Stephens, 2023), with an emphasis on the objective rather than subjective aspects of work (Felstead et al., 2019). It comprises 6 Dimensions – Earnings, Insurance, Security, Autonomy and Voice, Work-Life Balance, and Prospects – and 11 Indicators. In line with a number of recent international studies, it adopts an indicator cut-off, weighting, and aggregation approach informed by the Alkire-Foster method (García-Pérez et al., 2017; González et al., 2021; Hovhannishan et al., 2022; Sehnbruch et al., 2020). QoW indicator scores are therefore assigned using cut-offs, with a mix of binary (2-level) and categorical (3-level) cut-offs depending on the indicator. These cut-offs then determine dimensional and, ultimately, index scores. The index suggests there has been a mixed picture for UK job quality over the past decade, with marked changes for some groups and dimensions but stagnation in others. There has been an improvement in mean QoW index scores for employees, led particularly by (a) a sharp rise in workplace pension enrolment as a result of the Pensions Act 2008 and, to a lesser extent, (b) an improvement in wages at the bottom 20% of the distribution. This provides new evidence to support trends already discussed in the literature. However, this masks significant underlying inequalities in job quality. There has been a decline in QoW amongst the self-employed, leading to increased labour market polarisation between employees and more insecure workers. Further, despite improvements in wages, the index also suggests there has been little-to-no corresponding improvement in the proportion of workers able to achieve sufficient earnings to meet the Minimum Income Standards – partly accounted for by a fall in working hours amongst the self-employed. The index also highlights marked sub-group differences in job quality by age, sex, geography, and ethnicity.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephens, Thomas C., 2023. "Change, stagnation, and polarisation in UK job quality, 2012-2021: evidence from a new Quality of Work index," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120050, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:120050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/120050/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephens, Thomas C., 2023. "The quality of work (QoW): towards a capability theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119832, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Belloni, Michele & Carrino, Ludovico & Meschi, Elena, 2022. "The impact of working conditions on mental health: Novel evidence from the UK," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Sabina Alkire & James Foster, 2011. "Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 289-314, June.
    4. Thomas C. Stephens, 2023. "The Quality of Work (QoW): Towards a Capability Theory," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 309-335, July.
    5. David BESCOND & Anne CHÂTAIGNIER & Farhad MEHRAN, 2003. "Seven indicators to measure decent work: An international comparison," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 142(2), pages 179-212, June.
    6. Paul Anand & Graham Hunter & Ian Carter & Keith Dowding & Francesco Guala & Martin Van Hees, 2009. "The Development of Capability Indicators," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 125-152.
    7. Alan Felstead & Duncan Gallie & Francis Green & Golo Henseke, 2019. "Conceiving, designing and trailing a short‐form measure of job quality: a proof‐of‐concept study," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 2-19, January.
    8. David A. Spencer, 2015. "Developing an understanding of meaningful work in economics: the case for a heterodox economics of work," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 39(3), pages 675-688.
    9. Sen, Amartya, 1991. "Welfare, preference and freedom," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 15-29, October.
    10. Timothy Weidel, 2018. "Moving Towards a Capability for Meaningful Labor," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 70-88, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Stephens, Thomas C., 2023. "The quality of work (QoW): towards a capability theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119832, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Nikolova, Milena & Cnossen, Femke, 2020. "What makes work meaningful and why economists should care about it," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Mitchell, Paul Mark & Roberts, Tracy E. & Barton, Pelham M. & Coast, Joanna, 2015. "Assessing sufficient capability: A new approach to economic evaluation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 71-79.
    4. L. Andreassen & M. L. Tommaso, 2018. "Estimating capabilities with random scale models: women’s freedom of movement," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(4), pages 625-661, April.
    5. Ballester, Miguel A. & de Miguel, Juan R. & Nieto, Jorge, 2004. "Set comparisons in a general domain: the Indirect Utility Criterion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 139-150, September.
    6. Theo Dijkstra, 2014. "Ridge regression and its degrees of freedom," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3185-3193, November.
    7. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    8. Alkire, Sabina & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Peterman, Amber & Quisumbing, Agnes & Seymour, Greg & Vaz, Ana, 2013. "The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 71-91.
    9. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Hoang Xuan Diem & Tran Van Hoang, 2018. "Multidimensional poverty in Vietnam: Evidence from a rural household survey," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2018-127, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Rubini, Lauretta & Pollio, Chiara & Spigarelli, Francesca & Lv, Ping, 2021. "Regional social context and FDI. An empirical investigation on Chinese acquisitions in Europe," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 402-415.
    12. Yang, Lin, 2017. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: concepts and measurement," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103491, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Vito Peragine & Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2008. "Poverty Rankings of Opportunity Profiles," Department of Economics University of Siena 548, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    14. Leßmann, Ortrud, 2011. "Empirische Studien zum Capability Ansatz auf der Grundlage von Befragungen: Ein Überblick," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2011, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    15. Yan Xin & Dongchuan Wang & Lihui Zhang & Yingyi Ma & Xing Chen & Haiqing Wang & Hongyi Wang & Kangjian Wang & Hui Long & Hua Chai & Jianshe Gao, 2022. "Cooperative analysis of infrastructure perfection and residents’ living standards in poverty-stricken counties in Qinghai Province," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3687-3703, March.
    16. Harry Hummels & Patrick Nullens, 2022. "‘Other-wise’ Organizing. A Levinasian Approach to Agape in Work and Business Organisations," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 211-232, October.
    17. Alkire, Sabina & Roche, José Manuel & Vaz, Ana, 2017. "Changes Over Time in Multidimensional Poverty: Methodology and Results for 34 Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 232-249.
    18. Alkire, Sabina & Santos, Maria Emma, 2014. "Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 251-274.
    19. Rémi Bazillier & Nicolas Sirven, 2006. "Les normes fondamentales du travail contribuent-elles à réduire les inégalités ?," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 21(2), pages 111-146.
    20. Paula Franklin & Wouter Zwysen & Agnieszka Piasna, 2022. "Temporal Dimensions of Job Quality and Gender: Exploring Differences in the Associations of Working Time and Health between Women and Men," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-18, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Alkire-Foster method; capability approach; employment; job quality; polarisation; self-employment; work;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • I39 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Other
    • J21 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Force and Employment, Size, and Structure
    • J28 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Safety; Job Satisfaction; Related Public Policy
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • J32 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Nonwage Labor Costs and Benefits; Retirement Plans; Private Pensions
    • J80 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ehl:lserod:120050. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.