No abstract

No abstract

This study investigates the characteristics that affect access to social capital for employees in a single industrial firm in Sweden, and the impact of their social capital on their monthly salaries. The results demonstrate that being a member of a stigmatised immigrant group is associated with a substantial social capital deficit. This deficit arises because immigrant workers are embedded in social networks that constrain their ability to acquire valuable social resources or are excluded from social networks with valuable resources. Another finding is that the average salary earned by members of stigmatised immigrant groups is lower than that earned by native-born workers. The observed wage gap cannot be explained by ‘human capital’ variables. However, when social capital variables were taken into account, wage gaps noticeably shrank, which indicates that part of the wage disadvantage experienced by immigrants is likely to represent the impact of unequal access to social capital.

When encountering problems and dissatisfaction in the workplace, employees may choose between three strategies: voice, exit or silence. Using survey data and interview material from a study of employees in an elderly care organisation in Sweden, this article investigates the workers' perceptions of the eligibility and prospects of these strategies and which individual characteristics and situational factors might affect them. The focus is on racialised workers (operationalised through their region of birth) who, according to earlier studies, are less likely than other employees to choose voice behaviour. Contrary to some earlier studies, the results here attribute such a propensity to the importance of power differences across 'racial hierarchies' rather than to differences in cultural values. Individuals in this (racialised) category have a lower occupational status, earn less and experience less favourable relationships with their managers.