L'intérim

Glaymann, Dominique

doi:10.3917/dec.glaym.2007.01

Cited by 16 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We include samples of agency workers, fixed-term and permanent employees. Because agency work is by far the least secure type of job contract in France (Glaymann, 2010), we had a specific focus on the autonomy-related motives and compensating features of job contracts of agency workers. Because we expected to compare fixed-term and permanent employees with up to three subgroups of agency workers, power analysis for a one-way ANOVA with five groups was conducted to determine a sufficient sample size using an alpha of 0.05, a power of 0.80, and a medium effect size (f 2 = 0.25) (following the procedure of Faul et al, 2009).…”

Section: Methods Participants and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Acknowledging this heterogeneity, some studies provided typologies of temporary workers on the basis of their level of autonomy/volition in contract choice and on the presence or absence of compensations for a less secure job ( de Jong et al, 2009;Engellandt & Riphahn, 2005;Feldman, 2006;Glaymann, 2010;Marler et al, 2002). When combined together, these typologies allow the differentiation of three sub-types of temporary workers:…”

Section: Examining the Roles Of Autonomy Compensations And Ingroup Id...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 answers). These items were inductively derived from the sociological work of Glaymann (2010) who has investigated the diversity of French agency workers' autonomy-related motives. Three measured a constrained choice /involuntary situation (e.g., I didn't choose agency work; α = .77), three other items measured a transitory /contingent choice (e.g., I have chosen agency work because I'm pending for another job or for a home move; α = .81), and the remaining items measured a voluntary choice (e.g., I have chosen agency work because I like change and to be independent; α = .67).…”

Section: Measures Specific To Agency Workersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Work motivation and reactions to injustice of temporary workers: Roles of social identities, autonomy, and compensations

Lheureux

Parmentier

2022

Eur. J. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the impact of temporary employment on workers’ social identification, work motivation, and reactions to injustice at the workplace. More precisely, we examined whether organisational identification mediates the effect temporary work (compared to permanent employment) on work motivation, and reactions to injustice. We also examined whether autonomy in contract-choice and compensating features of job contracts (employment duration, qualification matching, and negotiated wages) have positive effects on the organisational and ingroup identifications of temporary workers. Finally, we examined whether ingroup identification of temporary workers act as a mediator and moderates the effect of organisational identification. Results from a survey comparing agency workers with fixed-term and permanent employees mainly from the industry sector first reveal that organisational identification mediates the negative effect of temporary work on work motivation and its positive association with self-centred reactions to injustice. Nevertheless, cluster analysis revealed the existence of three subgroups of agency workers, a minority of them—autonomous and compensated—having similarly high levels of identification and motivation than permanent employees. Additionally, autonomous and compensated workers identify more with their ingroup than low-autonomy and low-compensations workers, ingroup identification explaining their difference in terms of work motivation. Furthermore, ingroup identification of agency workers interact with organisational identification to determine their reactions to injustice. Implications, limitations, and research perspectives deriving from this study are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methods Participants and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%