IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hdl/wpaper/2106.html

Can we steer clear of precariousness in domestic service work? Exploring labour market pathways of Belgian Service Voucher workers

Author

Listed:
  • Dries Lens
  • Ive Marx
  • Jarmila Oslejová
  • Ninke Mussche

Abstract

Can domestic service jobs ever be good jobs? We consider the case of the heavily subsidized, strongly regulated and yet also extremely popular Service Voucher Scheme in Belgium. Close to a quarter of Belgian households employ domestic service workers under the scheme. These workers are among the most generously protected in the world in terms of labour rights, social security rights, wages and other benefits. We ask: does this scheme provide an alternative to the precarious, bad quality jobs domestic workers often endure elsewhere? Or is this a case of institutionalised second-tier work? To that end we undertake a sequence-analysis approach on a representative large sample of subsidized workers. We find that the scheme’s subsidized jobs are very good quality in terms of pay, social benefits and labour protection. A substantial share of women finds a way out of vulnerable labor market situations through the scheme. However, a very significant number enter from steady employment. This is clearly at odds with the original objective of offering a steppingstone to women with a vulnerable labour market position. At least in part, the Belgian scheme can be seen as a case of policy overshooting. We suggest some potential improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Dries Lens & Ive Marx & Jarmila Oslejová & Ninke Mussche, 2021. "Can we steer clear of precariousness in domestic service work? Exploring labour market pathways of Belgian Service Voucher workers," Working Papers 2106, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    • Handle: RePEc:hdl:wpaper:2106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://medialibrary.uantwerpen.be/files/6663/0fdaff2f-92a0-4392-9074-95566b245283.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arne L. Kalleberg, 2018. "Job Insecurity and Well-being in Rich Democracies," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 49(3), pages 241-258.
    2. Esping-Andersen, Gosta, 1999. "Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198742005.
    3. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue nov.
    4. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1279-1333.
    5. Fasang, Anette Eva & Liao, Tim Futing, 2014. "Visualizing Sequences in the Social Sciences: Relative Frequency Sequence Plots," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 643-676.
    6. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning, 2007. "Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 118-133, February.
    7. Bruno Palier, 2019. "Work, social protection and the middle classes: What future in the digital age?," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(3), pages 113-133, July.
    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. Nisic, Natascha & Molitor, Friederike & Trübner, Miriam, 2023. "Rethinking paid domestic services in modern societies – Experimental evidence on the effect of quality and professionalisation on service demand," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 43(13/14), pages 106-128.
    2. Natascha Nisic & Friederike Molitor & Miriam Trübner, 2022. "A Matter of Quality? Experimental Evidence on Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Domestic Services," Working Papers 2209, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.

    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. Bürgisser, Reto, 2023. "Policy Responses to Technological Change in the Workplace," SocArXiv kwxn2, Center for Open Science.
    2. Enrique Fernandez-Macias & Martina Bisello, 2020. "A Taxonomy of Tasks for Assessing the Impact of New Technologies on Work," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2020-04, Joint Research Centre.
    3. Enrique Fernández-Macías & Martina Bisello, 2022. "A Comprehensive Taxonomy of Tasks for Assessing the Impact of New Technologies on Work," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 821-841, January.
    4. Loebbing, Jonas, 2018. "An Elementary Theory of Endogenous Technical Change and Wage Inequality," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181603, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Bhorat, Haroon & Goga, Sumayya & Stanwix, Benjamin, 2014. "Skills-biased labour demand and the pursuit of inclusive growth in South Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series 130, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Kudoh, Noritaka & Miyamoto, Hiroaki, 2025. "Robots, AI, and unemployment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    7. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    8. Léné, Alexandre, 2011. "Occupational downgrading and bumping down: The combined effects of education and experience," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 257-269, April.
    9. Silvia Vannutelli & Sergio Scicchitano & Marco Biagetti, 2022. "Routine-biased technological change and wage inequality: do workers’ perceptions matter?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 409-450, September.
    10. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2017. "Is Modern Technology Responsible for Jobless Recoveries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 168-173, May.
    11. David J. Deming, 2017. "The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1593-1640.
    12. Stenberg, Anders & Westerlund, Olle, 2016. "Flexibility at a cost – Should governments stimulate tertiary education for adults?," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 69-86.
    13. Maya Eden & Paul Gaggl, 2018. "On the Welfare Implications of Automation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 15-43, July.
    14. Bárány, Zsófia L. & Siegel, Christian, 2020. "Biased technological change and employment reallocation," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2025. "What workers and robots do: An activity-based analysis of the impact of robotization on changes in local employment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    16. Younjun Kim & Eric Thompson, 2021. "Routine-Biased Technological Change and Declining Employment Rate of Immigrants," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 47(3), pages 319-353, June.
    17. Comin, Diego & Mestieri, Martí & Danieli, Ana, 2020. "Income-Driven Labor Market Polarization," CEPR Discussion Papers 14980, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. David Kunst, 2019. "Deskilling among Manufacturing Production Workers," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-050/VI, Tinbergen Institute, revised 30 Dec 2020.
    19. Goos, Maarten & Rademakers, Emilie & Röttger, Ronja, 2021. "Routine-Biased technical change: Individual-Level evidence from a plant closure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    20. van der Velde, Lucas, 2022. "Phasing out: Routine tasks and retirement," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 784-803.

    More about this item

    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:hdl:wpaper:2106. 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: Santiago Burone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csbuabe.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.