Why Employers Use Flexible Staffing Arrangements: Evidence from an Establishment Survey

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractThis paper examines which employers use flexible staffing arrangements, why they use these arrangements, and their implications for workers and public policy, drawing on a nationally representative survey of private sector establishments. Use of flexible staffing arrangements-including temporary help agency, short-term, on-call, regular part-time, and contract workers-is widespread and two-thirds of employers believe this use will increase in the near future. Traditional reasons concerning the need to accommodate fluctuations in workload or absences in staff are the most commonly cited reasons for using all types of flexible staffing arrangements. Many employers also use agency temporaries and part-time workers to screen candidates for regular positions. Finally, savings on benefits costs is an important factor determining employers' use of flexible staffing arrangements. Workers in flexible staffing arrangements typically are not covered by regulations governing benefits, and they typically do not receive key benefits, like pension benefits and health insurance, when these benefits are offered to regular full-time workers.

Non-Standard Employment in Europe

“…Especially in labour-intensive service sectors, efficient work scheduling increases productivity. Besides staffing or scheduling needs, other establishment reasons for using part-time work are screening candidates and cost advantages in terms of wages and/or benefits (Houseman, 2001;Allaart and Bellmann, 2007;Kauhanen, 2008). However, not only establishment needs matter.…”

Contingent work and ill-health: Conceptualizing the links

“…Workers are viewed not as pawns of the labor market but as active shapers of that market (Mills, 2004). Conceptually, there is no distinction between organizational and individual flexibility, and as Barker (1993) and Houseman (2001) observe any mismatch between employee and employer preferences is generally ignored. Just as managers must administer the resources of the firm so that it continues to be a going concern, workers must be entrepreneurs who are reflexive about themselves as 'commodities' or 'products', in order to ensure personal success.…”

Causes and Consequences of the Divergent Working-Time Patterns of Employed Mothers in the UK and the US: Developing a Comparative Analysis

“…There are both incentives and disincentives for employers to create part-time jobs in the US [45], but it appears there are also more alternatives for employers to create flexible staffing arrangements and cut labour costs in the US, particularly through the 'employment-at-will' system. Comparatively, there have been greater incentives historically to create part-time jobs in the UK, where exemptions from social insurance taxation and the creation of low paying, low status, segregated forms of employment have been, and still are, hallmarks of part-time jobs.…”