The Role of Short-Time Work and Discretionary Policy Measures in Mitigating the Effects of the COVID-19 Crisis in Germany

Christl, Michael; Poli, Silvia De; Hufkens, Tine; Peichl, Andreas; Ricci, Mattia

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3848334

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is why further discretional measures were taken in a later stage of the Coronavirus Crisis to reduce the blind spots of the STW instrument. These additional discretionary policies as in example the one-off payments for children and an increase in STW replacement rates for long term recipients helped to cushion the income loss (Christl et al 2021).…”

Section: Differences In Income Protection In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility

Herzog-Stein

Nüß

Peede

et al. 2022

J Labour Market Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Germany and the United States pursued different economic strategies to minimise the impact of the Coronavirus Crisis on the labour market. Germany focused on safeguarding existing jobs through the use of internal flexibility measures, especially short-time work (STW). The United States relied on a mix of external flexibility and income protection. On this basis, we use macroeconomic time series to examine the German strategy of securing employment through internal flexibility by contrasting it with the chosen strategy in the United States. In Germany, temporary cyclical reductions in working hours are mainly driven via STW. US unemployment rose at an unprecedented rate, but unlike in previous recessions, it was mostly driven by temporary layoffs. However, a closer look at the blind spots of the chosen strategies in both countries showed that despite the different approaches, people in weaker labour market positions were less well protected by the chosen strategies.

show abstract

Section: Differences In Income Protection In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility

Herzog-Stein

Nüß

Peede

et al. 2022

J Labour Market Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Siegenthaler and Kopp (2021) use as control group firms that did not get the authorization to use STW in Switzerland during the Great Recession, and find that the policy paid for itself. Christl et al (2021) investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on German household income using a micro-level approach. They find the consequences of the crisis to be highly regressive with a strong impact on the poorest households.…”

Section: Microeconomic Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Labor Market Insurance Policies in the XXI Century

Boeri

Cahuc

2022

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Arellano, Bai, and Mihalache (2020) and Hürtgen (2020) address fiscal stability issues due to the pandemic, which we entirely ignore in this analysis (as they are, most likely, less important in Germany). Christl, Poli, Hufkens, Peichl, and Ricci (2021) analyse the effects of short-time working scheme and discretionary measures on household income, relying on a micro-level approach and find the one-off payments to be a beneficial tool to support poorer households. That the pandemic affected different sectors differently is documented e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%