The psychological threat of being declared nonessential during the COVID‐19 pandemic: effects on professional identification

This research applies a social identity lens to show that, during the COVID‐19 pandemic, the classification of occupations and labor market sectors as essential versus nonessential negatively affected the professional identity of those categorized as nonessential workers. We hypothesized that nonessential workers would report lower professional identification (PI) during the pandemic relative to essential workers; explored whether this was partially due to mandatory shifts to working from home and working fewer hours; whether gender differences would emerge in the impact of (non)essential categorization on PI; and if lower PI would negatively relate to work productivity and performance during the pandemic. Empirical evidence based on three datasets sampled among the Dutch working population during two peak waves of COVID‐19 infections and national lockdowns (May/June 2020; Study 1: N = 371; November/December 2020, Study 2: N = 467; Study 3 = 735) confirmed nonessential workers' lower PI relative to essential workers. During the first peak wave (Study 1), nonessential workers' lower PI was partially explained by being home‐bound by reduced work hours. As the pandemic continued (second peak wave; Studies 2 and 3), gender differences emerged, with more negative consequences of being classified as nonessential for women than men. Nonessential workers' lower PI levels were associated with lower work productivity and performance. These findings underscore the importance of understanding social identity processes during the pandemic. We discuss the sociopsychological ramifications of government regulations to control health crises, given how these may inadvertently undermine the professional identity of over half a working population in society.