Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. [https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politiquedutilisation/]Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. www.erudit.org Tous droits réservés © Département des relations industrielles de l'Université Laval, 2009 74 © département des relations industrielles, université laval -issn 0034-379X -ri/ir, 65-1, 2010, 74 -97 Gender Differences in Precarious Work Settings
Marisa C. YoungThis study uses human capital and gender stratification theory to answer three research questions concerning the gendered patterns of precarious employment, the effects of human capital investments and family obligations on precarious employment, and the extent that these investments and obligations affect precarious employment differently for men and women. Lucrative jobs that offer benefits, union protection, with full-time work status were considered indicators of high quality and therefore non-precarious employment. Using data from U.s. respondents, findings suggest: a) a "gender" to precarious employment in that women are more likely to work in low quality job settings; b) gender discrepancies in benefits and union protection are explained by differences in men's and women's human capital, family investments, and other work-related situations; and, c) gender differences in wages and parttime work status result from workplace discrimination towards women. The implications of these findings are discussed along with recommendations for future research.KeYWorDs: precarious work, nonstandard work, gender differences, human capital theory, gender stratification theory
IntroductionThe past several decades have reflected a proliferation in non-standard jobs, including part-time and over-time work, double-shifts, and temporary positions in all sectors of the labour market (Presser, 2003;Vosko, 2006). These jobs are often defined as precarious in nature as they provide low wages, few benefits, and modest security (Vosko, 2000), and may have health consequences for workers (Kim et al., 2008). Exceptions include some voluntary shift work, or alternate or reduced work schedules that provide workers the opportunity to juggle competing work and family demands (Thompson, Beauvais, and Lyness, 1999).Traditionally, research in this area focussed on "non-standard" employment, defined as anything deviating from the standard employment relations (SER) of the early 1900's (Economic Council of Canada, 1990;Kalleberg, 2000;Krahn, 1991). Yet recent research has argued against such crude characterizations and instead emphasizes levels of precarity across non-standard employment (Cranford, Vosko, and Zukewich, 2003;Kalleberg, Reskin, and ...