By Mary Nichols, on November 13th, 2008
Around the world, millions of children are engaged in child labor. The International Labour Organization (ILO) has estimated that up to 1 in 5 children globally are working, with the proportion even higher in some regions of Africa and Asia. Recent estimates of the overall numbers involved range from 158 to 246 million, although the true scale is unknown. Studies have revealed that the majority of child workers, around 70% according to recent World Bank research, are employed in agriculture, followed by services and then manufacturing.
The involvement of children in employment per se is not necessarily a problem. As an ILO report observes, many children combine part-time jobs with their education and gain valuable skills or make a useful contribution to family income in the process. For many others, however, child labor means being exploited by unscrupulous employers, exposed to harmful or dangerous conditions or, at the very least, missing out on an adequate education. The ILO has estimated that in 2000, 171 million workers aged between 5 and 17 were involved in work that was “hazardous to their safety, physical or mental health, and moral development,” and that 8.4 million were employed in the most serious forms of child labor, for example as prostitutes, child soldiers and bonded labor.
The United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child requires governments to protect those aged under 18 from economic exploitation, from performing any hazardous work or any work likely to interfere with a child’s education. However, child labor is an intractable problem that is difficult to eradicate due to its perceived economic benefits at the family and household level. In low-income countries or communities, children are often sent out to work when the expected economic benefits to their family are higher than the perceived economic rewards of education, or when schooling their children is unaffordable for the parents.
Child Labor and Poverty
The links between child labor and poverty have been clearly demonstrated in many studies; there is evidence of a consistent negative association between the extent of child labor in a country and its GDP. The problem of child labor is not confined to the developing world, however. Although the vast majority of working children can be found in Africa and Asia, followed by Latin America, developed countries such as the U.S. also have significant numbers of child laborers, particularly among immigrant communities engaged in agriculture, where extra hands mean extra income. Moreover, countries with similar levels of GDP have differing levels of child labor, suggesting that other factors such as cultural traditions or attitudes and the availability of affordable education also play a role in determining the relative importance of child labor within their economies.
Child labor has an adverse affect on the development of human capital through education and skills development and is therefore likely to hamper economic development in the countries or communities concerned, as well as severely damaging the future prospects of the child workers for escaping poverty. There is a strong positive relationship between the proportion of children working in a country and the proportion not attending school, while not surprisingly, children who do attend school but also work long hours outside the home tend to perform poorly in academic examinations, according to World Bank research.
There is little consensus about the most effective policy options for reducing the prevalence of child labor. It is sometimes suggested that trade sanctions should be applied against countries with particularly high numbers of children working, but UNICEF argue this would make little difference since the majority of child laborers are employed in agriculture and relatively few in export sectors.
The preferred option of the ILO is for the introduction by national governments of “income transfer programs,” like those already in use in India, Mexico and Brazil, which offer financial benefits to low-income families whose children leave paid employment in order to attend school. At the same time, there is a need for adequate investment in the educational sector with the aim of making affordable, high quality education available to all. According to ILO research published in 2004, the long-term benefits of such policies for the countries concerned are likely to be significant; it was estimated that although the overall cost of eliminating child labor would be in the region of US$760 billion, the resultant benefits resulting from improved health and education, concentrated in the developing world, would be around US$ 5.1 trillion.
References
Duran, M.P. (2004). Investing in every child: An economic study of the costs and benefits of eliminating child labor. ILO: Geneva.
Fares, J. & Raju, D. (2007). Child labor across the developing world: Patterns and correlations. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4119, February 2007. Available from http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALPROTECTION/EXTCL/0,,contentMDK:20254527~menuPK:965612~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:390553,00.html.
International Labour Organization (1998). Child Labor: Targeting the Intolerable. ILO: Geneva.
International Labour Organization (2002). Every child counts: new global estimates on child labour. ILO: Geneva. Available from http://www.ilo.org/public//english/standards/ipec/simpoc/others/globalest.pdf.
UNICEF (1997). The State of the World’s Children 1997 – Child labour. Available from http://www.unicef.org/sowc97/.
US Department of Labor (1998). By The Sweat and Toil of Children, Vol. VI: An Economic Consideration of Child Labor.
By Mary Nichols, on November 6th, 2008
This year, unemployment rates among young people in the United States have been increasing to levels not seen since the early 1990s. Youth unemployment rates are usually a good indicator of the overall state of an economy, since young people typically face the greatest difficulties in finding employment in times of recession and, lacking experience, are often the first to be laid off by employers who need to cut back on labor costs. They may also lose out on job opportunities when more experienced older workers decide to defer retirement or return to the labor market, a common phenomenon in the current economic downturn.
The national unemployment rate for all workers in the U.S. has been steadily increasing over recent months, reaching 6.1% in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For 16 to 19 year-olds, however, the reported rate of unemployment is more than three times that for all workers, at 19.1% in September. Among ethnic and racial minorities youth unemployment rates are even higher, for example reaching 24.8% in July 2008 for African Americans aged between 16 and 24. The tight employment market is having a harsh impact not only on those looking for permanent, full-time employment, but on students seeking summer jobs, perhaps to help finance their education – it has recently been reported that it was harder to find jobs in summer 2008 than at any other time since the 1940s.
Setting Precedents
Previous studies have documented the serious knock-on effects that youth unemployment has on the individuals affected as well as the economy as a whole. For example, using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, researchers at the Employment Policies Institute found that early unemployment was associated with lower future earnings as well as repeated spells of unemployment; this was attributed to the delays in the accumulation of employment experience and training while unemployed. The demoralizing effects of prolonged unemployment may also have adverse psychological effects on young people, including depression or low confidence which may further decrease their future likelihood of gaining employment.
For the economy and society as a whole, high unemployment rates among youth also have potentially serious consequences. Unemployment is a factor contributing to social exclusion and disruptive behavior such as crime and drug-taking, which not only increase social unrest but also the overall costs of health, law enforcement and other public services. At the same time, overall economic growth may be hampered by the under-use of a large group of recently-educated people who could potentially make a major contribution not only to overall productivity but to innovation and technological development.
So what can the government do to increase employment rates among young people in the United States, and thus maximize their contribution to the economy?
The Role of Education
International research unfortunately suggests that there are few viable ways of making a difference in the short-term, in the absence of an improved economy and more dynamic labor market. For example, a pan-European study by researchers at the European Central Bank found that direct interventions such as preferential hiring policies and greater wage flexibility have relatively little impact on improving job prospects for young people when markets are generally slow. However, the higher rates of youth employment in countries with apprenticeship systems suggests that the development of education and training programs linked specifically to labor market needs may be a promising longer-term option; there is also evidence from the literature that entrepreneurship and work-related training targeted at particular groups can help to increase employment rates. More generally, it can be hoped that policies intended to increase the academic attainment levels of all students in the United States, notably the No Child Left Behind Act, will help to improve the job prospects of young people in the longer-term, and thus maximize the contribution of this group to economic growth.
References
DeFreitas, G. (Ed.) (2008). Young Workers in the Global Economy: Job Challenges in North America, Europe and Japan. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishers.
Gomez-Salvador, R. & Leiner-Killinger, N. (2008). An Analysis of Youth Unemployment in the Euro Area. European Central Bank Occasional Paper Series No. 89, June 2008.
International Labour Office (2000). Employing Youth: Promoting employment-intensive growth. Geneva.
Kalwiji, A.S. (2004). Unemployment Experiences of Young Men: on the Road to Stable Employment? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 66, 2, p. 205.
Mroz, T.A. & Savage, T.H. (2001). The Long-Term Effects of Youth Unemployment. Employment Policies Institute. Retrieved from http://www.epionline.org/studies/mroz_10-2001.pdf
Sum, A., McLaughlin, J., Khatiwada, I. & Palma, S. The Continued Collapse of the Nation’s Teen Job Market and the Dismal Outlook for the 2008 Summer Labor Market for Teens: Does Anybody Care? Boston, Massachusetts: Center for Labor Market Studies. Retrieved from http://www.clms.neu.edu/publication/documents/The_Continued_Collapse_of_the_Nations_Teen_Job_Market.pdf.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008). Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. U.S. Department of Labor. Available online at http://www.bls.gov/cps/.
By Mary Nichols, on October 30th, 2008
Unscheduled staff absence due to illness or other reasons can be very costly for employers, official statistics and survey data reveal. In the UK it was reported by the Health and Safety Commission that 36 million days of work were lost due to sickness absence in 2006 and 2007, and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) estimated the annual cost of sickness absence to UK employers to be £659 per employee. An earlier study by the Institute of Employment Studies (2001) had put the potential costs much higher at between 2% and 16% of the total salary bill, or up to £2,271 per employee. This study found that employers significantly underestimated the costs to their organizations of unplanned absenteeism.
In the United States, the 2007 Mercer National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans, which covered 455 employers, found that the equivalent of around 9% of total salary costs were incurred due to unplanned absence. However, the costs of unplanned absenteeism in the U.S. vary considerably between different types of organizations, being much higher in the U.S. public sector than in the private sector, for example, due to a higher rate of sickness absence among government employees. Illness is by no means the only reason for unplanned absence – the CCH Inc. 2000 Unscheduled Absence Survey found that sickness absence accounts for only around 40% of all unscheduled absenteeism, followed by family factors which account for 21% and “personal needs” accounting for 20%. However, there is international evidence of a worrying increase in sickness absence, especially long-term absence, which is related to stress and other mental health problems. In the UK, a study by the Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health puts the total cost to UK employers of sickness absence due to mental health problems at £8.4 billion, with an average of 21 days leave being taken by each employee suffering from mental health-related sickness.
International Trends
Overall patterns of sickness absence are quite similar between different countries, being higher among women than men and among older rather than younger employees. However, there are also considerable variations in overall levels of sickness absence between countries, which may be attributable in part to legislation regarding sick pay benefits. In many countries, employers are required to provide employees with a minimum number of paid sick leave days per year, and there is some evidence that levels of absence are higher where benefits are generous, as in Sweden. On the other hand, other countries such as France also have good sick pay benefit systems but considerably lower rates of absence, so the relationship is not a straightforward one.
The United States is quite unusual among developed countries in that employers are not generally required by law to make sickness absence payments, and it has been reported that many workers, especially in lower-paid and part-time jobs, have no provision at all for paid sick leave. Moreover, there has been a recent trend for employers who previously paid employees for sick leave to reduce the maximum number of days payable, or to replace paid sick leave with “time off” programs, in which each employee can take a specified maximum number of days off in a year for the purpose of vacation, sickness or other reasons. A countervailing recent trend, however, is for state and city governments to introduce paid sick leave legislation to protect workers. Some argue that the costs of paying sick leave benefits if required to do so by law will just encourage employers to compensate by cutting back on salaries and other employee benefits.
Absenteeism vs. Presenteeism
However, there are some hidden costs of not providing paid sick leave. For one thing, there are likely to be reduced productivity costs associated with sick employees attending work rather than losing pay, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as “presenteeism,” not to mention the knock-on costs of reduced productivity or absenteeism among coworkers if contagious illnesses are involved.
Employers can take steps to reduce the overall costs of sickness absence and other forms of unplanned absenteeism by proactively looking after the health of their employees and providing employment conditions which facilitate a healthy work-life balance. For example, they might introduce health screening programs for employees, ensure that working conditions do not contribute to stress or mental health problems or introduce working time arrangements which help for employees to combine their work and family responsibilities. Studies have provided considerable evidence that preventative measures like these can have a significant impact on reducing unscheduled absences.
References
Anonymous (2001). Absence makes the business run slower. The Journal of Business Strategy 22, 1, p.3.
Anonymous (2008). Leave Benefits in the United States. Medical Benefits 25, 17, p.3-4.
Barmby, T., Ercolani, M. & Treble, J.G. (2002). Sickness Absence: An International Comparison. Economic Journal, 112, pp. F315-F331.
Bevan, S. & Hayday, S (2001). Costing Sickness Absence in the UK. Institute for Employment Studies report 382.
CCH Inc. (2002). 2002 CCH Unscheduled Absence Survey. Available from http://www.cch.com/press/news/2002/20021016h.asp.
Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (2008) Annual Report 2008: Absence Management. Retrieved from http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6D0CC654-1622-4445-8178-4A5E071B63EF/0/absencemanagementsurveyreport2008.pdf.
Dewis, P. & Bevan, S. (2002). Counting the Cost. Occupational Health. 54, 11; pp. 21-23.
Health and Safety Commission (2007). HSC/E publishes Health and Safety Statistics for 2006/07. Retrieved from http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2007/c07020.htm.
Mercer (2008). 2007 National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans. Available from http://www.mercer.com/ushealthplansurvey.
Parsonage, M. & Grove, B. (2007). What are the costs of mental ill health at work? What can we do about them? The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health. Retrieved from http://www.publicmentalhealth.org/Documents/749/Bob%20Grove.pdf.
Tanner, L. (2004). Paid time off offers greater flexibility. Dallas Business Journal. 28, 4, p. 29.
By Mary Nichols, on October 22nd, 2008
The current financial crisis in the U.S. is hitting everyone hard, perhaps not least the older population. Many in this age group will have taken early retirement in recent years and may now be starting to feel the pinch due to unexpected price rises. Some of these seniors, along with others who just miss the activity and companionship of the workplace, may be considering a return to work on a full or part-time basis.
In fact, the trend towards earlier retirement in recent decades means that the U.S. has a large non-economically active older population in their 60s and early 70s, many of whom hold valuable skills and experience and who enjoy much higher levels of health and fitness at this stage of life than any earlier generation.
Increasingly, employers will need to tap into this older labor pool in order to ease recruitment difficulties. Demographic changes, including a falling birthrate and the aging of the U.S. population, mean that fewer young people are now entering the labor force. As the first cohort of the baby boomer generation reaches retirement age this year, the labor force can be expected to shrink considerably within a short period of time, even taking into account a continuing influx of immigrants.
Aging Workforce
Moreover, the workforce itself is aging, as reflected in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Market Statistics’ data on the employment participation of different age groups. Between 1977 and 2007, it is reported, there was a 101% increase in the employment of workers aged 65 and above, compared with a 59% increase in total employment. By 2016, it is estimated, the number of workers aged 55 to 65 will increase by 36.5%, while the number of workers aged 65 and over will increase by more than 80%, with the latter group accounting for more than 6% of the total labor force by that time.
Simple supply and demand considerations, therefore, suggest that future employment opportunities for older people will be good. Moreover, a raft of legislative and policy changes over recent decades, including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 and the elimination of mandatory retirement in 1986, have also theoretically improved recruitment and retention prospects for the country’s seniors.
Yet there is evidence that age discrimination on the part of employers is rampant in the U.S., hindering not only the opportunity for older people to improve their finances but also potentially hampering the ability of the labor market to adjust to the demographic changes. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission statistics show a vast increase in age discrimination lawsuits in recent years, while research studies also provide evidence that age discrimination is widespread, at least in terms of recruitment and displacement, if not in terms of earnings. However, this is often very subtle and more difficult to prove than other forms of discrimination; for this reason it is likely that the statistics vastly under-estimate its true extent.
Benefits of Retirement-Age Workers
Studies have suggested that many employers are reluctant to hire older workers as they fear higher healthcare and insurance costs and hold concerns about their abilities and likely productivity. In fact, while there is some evidence that physical strength steadily declines after the age of 40, research has also indicated that there is little deterioration in mental faculties until over the age of 70. Moreover, published case studies of organizations in the U.S. and Europe that actively recruit and retain older workers, including McDonalds and the book retailer Borders, provide evidence of many benefits of such policies, such as lower rates of absenteeism, lower turnover, higher profits and improved customer satisfaction.
The increased employment of older workers is also likely to bring wider economic benefits to the U.S. by helping to ease the burden on the Social Security and pensions schemes resulting from early retirement patterns and the increased lifespan of Americans. A remaining barrier, however, is the restrictive pension scheme regulations which often deter older people from continuing to work beyond retirement age or re-entering the workforce. The U.S. may be well-advised to consider adopting the type of gradual retirement programs already in place in many Scandinavian and European countries.
References
Adams, S.J. & Neumark, D. (2002). Age Discrimination in U.S. Labor Markets: A Review of the Evidence. Public Policy Institute of California Working Paper No. 2002-8.
Anonymous (2007). Age discrimination: don’t let the joke be on you; Best practices from JD Wetherspoon, the Metropolitan Police and McDonalds. Human Resource Management International Digest, 15, 3, 21-23.
Conference Board of Canada (2006). Canada’s Demographic Revolution Adjusting to an Aging Population.
Crampton, S.M. & Hodge, J.W. (2007). Age Discrimination and Downsizing. The Business Review 7, 1, 341-347.
Dychtwald, K., Erickson, T.J. & Morison, R. (2006). Workforce Crisis : How to Beat the Coming Shortage of Skills and Talent. Harvard Business School Press.
Kantarci, T. & Van Soest (2008). Gradual Retirement: Preferences and Limitations. De Economist, 156, 2; 113-144.
MacNicol, J. (2006) Age Discrimination: An Historical and Contemporary Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McMahan, S. & Philips, K. (1999) America’s Ageing Workforce: Ergonomic solutions for reducing the risk of CTDS. American Journal of Health Studies 15, 199-202.
Santora, J.C. & Seaton, W.J. (2008). Age Discrimination: Alive and Well in the Workplace? The Academy of Management Perspectives 22, 2, 103.
Turner, J.A. (2008) Work Options for Older Americans: Employee Benefits for the Era of Living Longer. Benefits Quarterly, 24, 3, 20-26.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008). Spotlight on Statistics: Older Workers. July 2008. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2008/older_workers/
By Mary Nichols, on September 3rd, 2008
According to a national study by researchers at Cornell University, only 37.7% of people with disabilities in the U.S. population were employed in 2006, compared with 79.7 percent of people without disabilities. Moreover, surveys have consistently shown the average annual earnings of employed people with disabilities to be significantly lower than those for the non-disabled employee population. In 2000 for example, people with disabilities earned an average of $33,109 compared with $43,269 for non-disabled employees.
According to the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) definition, a person with a disability is someone who a) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, b) has a record of such an impairment or c) is regarded as having such an impairment. This definition embraces an extremely heterogeneous group of people with different forms and severities of disability.
Although some people may be prevented from participating in the labor force due to the nature of their disabilities, this is not the case for a large number of people with disabilities: an NOD/Harris Poll conducted in 2000 found that more than two-thirds of all people with disabilities who were unemployed wanted to be employed.
An Increasingly Important Population
Since there are around 30.6 million people aged between 21 and 64 in the U.S. who have some form of disability, this group represents a potentially valuable source of recruitment that is likely to become increasingly important as the size of the working age population in the U.S. declines due to demographic change. On the other hand, if the labor force participation rate of people with disabilities does not rise, the pressures on the U.S. economy to support an increasingly large dependent population, consisting of non-economically active older people, children and the non-employed, will be exacerbated.
Clearly there are sound economic reasons why the U.S. labor market and economy would benefit from a higher rate of employment for people with disabilities. Yet there are also some significant barriers to be overcome if this is to occur.
Even though the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) made it unlawful for employers to discriminate against a job applicant or employee with a disability, there is little evidence that the legislation has had much impact on the labor market situation of people with disabilities. Moreover, studies have suggested that although some discrimination against people in the labor market does persist, this is often less due to direct prejudice than to misperceptions about this group on the part of employers, a lack of awareness about how to attract job applicants with disabilities or uncertainty about what would be expected of them as an employer of people with disabilities.
Lack of Qualifications
At the same time, many people with disabilities find themselves at a disadvantage when competing for jobs due to factors such as relatively limited work experience, a discontinuous work history or the low confidence or self-esteem that characterizes some disabilities, particularly mental health disorders. As a group, they also have lower levels of qualifications than the non-disabled population: the Disability and Health in the United States, 2001-2005 survey found that adults without disabilities were significantly more likely, on the whole, to hold a college degree than those with various forms of disabilities.
The ADA specifies that employers should provide “reasonable accommodation” if required in order for a person with a disability to carry out the requirements of a job, unless that results in “undue hardship” in the form of significant difficulty or expense. Yet it can be difficult to establish what constitutes undue hardship to the employer and to balance this against the potential benefits of hiring a disabled job applicant, which may include their particular skills or expertise as well as a range of more intangible factors. For example, the U.S. Business Leadership Network, which actively promotes the employment of people with disabilities, stresses that the business benefits of hiring people with disabilities can include the improved creativity and productivity often associated with a more diverse workforce as well as the enhanced business reputation and possible increased market that results from being seen as an equal opportunities employer.
References
Altman B, Bernstein A. Disability and Health in the United States, 2001–2005. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2008. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/disability2001-2005.pdf.
Human Resources and Social Development Canada (2004). Advancing the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities 2004. http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=/en/hip/odi/documents/advancingInclusion04/chap4.shtml&hs=pyp.
Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Disability Demographics and Statistics. (2007). 2006 Disability Status Report. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office on Disability website.
US Business Leadership Network website.
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2002/cb02ff11.html
http://www.accessiblesociety.org/topics/demographics-identity/census2000.htm
By Mary Nichols, on August 21st, 2008
Extremist political groups and parties often flourish in regions of economic deprivation, where populations feel alienated from the establishment, disillusioned by mainstream politics and seek convenient scapegoats for their circumstances. This may mean that one outcome of the current global economic downturn and its exacerbating impact on already disadvantaged areas may be a expansion of the neo-Nazism which is already taking a grip in some rural areas of Eastern Germany and has been making its presence felt in other European countries.
In Germany, the spread of neo-Nazism especially in the former Communist-controlled rural eastern provinces has been a growing problem over the past decade. Although Nazi organizations have been officially banned in Germany since the end of World War II, poor clarity and enforcement of the laws have allowed a large number of mainly small neo-Nazi groups to emerge – it was estimated in 2001 that these had a total membership of at least 50,000. Blatantly racist neo-Nazi activity came to public attention as a result of media coverage of violent racist attacks as well as high-profile campaigns such as the 2001 Berlin demonstration against the opening of a Crimes of the Wehrmacht exhibition, which resulted in violent clashes between neo-Nazi demonstrators and left-wing anti-Nazi opponents. Between 1999 and 2000 the number of racist and other far right crimes rose by 59% to 16,000 in Germany, with violent crime accounting for more than 1,000 cases, including more than 30 brutal murders of foreigners. Neo Nazi racism and xenophobia was partly fuelled in the late 1990s, as in other parts of Europe, by the influx of large numbers of refugees and asylum seekers. Members of these groups became the most common targets of neo-Nazi racial violence, purportedly because they were stealing jobs from German nationals, committing crime and ruining traditional German communities.
Mainstream Racism
Although many German neo-Nazi groups are small and operate outside the formal political system, a more sinister force is reportedly driving the escalation of far right extremism through the use of official political channels and by strong marketing of nationalism to disaffected German youth. The far right National Democratic Party (NDP), which blatantly promotes its own fashion brands and nationalistic pop music to young people, has been making significant gains in mainstream politics at state level in rural eastern Germany in recent years. The party secured 9.2% of votes in Saxony in 2004 and nearly 7.3% in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in 2006, giving it a number of seats at state parliament level. It has recently been forecast to take control of a significant number of town councils in local elections to be held in 2009, which would extend its stronghold over a vast area of eastern Germany from the Baltic Sea coast to its southern borders. Already, anti-racists have been warning racial minorities to avoid this area, where the NDP would like to establish “freed zones” of white Germany supremacy, a sentiment which is spookily reminiscent of the anti-Semitism of 1930s Germany. In May 2008, the German Government responded to the resurgence of neo-Nazi activity in eastern provinces by banning two explicitly neo-Nazi groups, Collegium Humanum and the Association for the Rehabilitation of People Persecuted for Denying the Holocaust, yet the NDP continues to make political strides. Perhaps most alarming is its strong appeal to rural east-German youth: 28% of under-18s expressed support for the NDP in a recent survey in Saxon Switzerland, a region near the Czech border.
Germany is not the only European country which is witnessing a growth in neo-Nazi and far right political activity and racial violence. In Russia, a number of extreme Nationalist groups and parties have recently held rallies and demonstrations in Moscow and the Russian provinces, and there have been increasing numbers of reported violent attacks and murders of foreigners throughout the country. A 2007 report by a Human Rights group noted that in both France and Britain, anti-Semitic threats and acts had risen dramatically in the previous year. More generally, political parties on the far right, whose main agenda is preventing further immigration to their respective countries, have been making significant gains in a number of countries including Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Denmark. It remains to be seen whether such parties and the various neo-Nazi groups and organizations throughout the continent are able to capitalize on the economic difficulties now facing Europe.
References
Anonymous (2001). Europe: Charlemagne: Otto Schily puts the cuffs on Germany’s far right. The Economist 358, 8213, Mar 17, 2001.
Anonymous (2001). Europe: An untamed beast; Germany’s far right. The Economist 377, 8448, Oct 15, 2005.
Anonymous (2008). Russian human rights activist comments on rise of neo-Nazism
BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union. London: May 10, 2008.
Benoit, B. (2007). On the march – how Germany’s extreme right is making gains in the blighted east Europe: Patient fieldwork is enabling the National Democratic party to build a power base at local level in poor parts of the countryside. Financial Times, Jan 9, 2007.
Besser, J.D. (2007). Human rights groups recognize rise in European anti-Semitism
Jewish News, 61, 23, June 7, 2007.
Kulish, N. (2008). Germany: 2 Groups Banned For Neo-Nazism. New York Times. Late Edition (East Coast). New York, N.Y.: May 8, 2008.
Paterson, T. (2001). (December 2, 2001). Berlin police use tear gas to quell anti-Nazi protest. Telegraph.co.uk, December 2, 2001.
By Mary Nichols, on August 8th, 2008
Overcrowding of prisons is putting pressure on criminal justice systems to use alternatives to custodial sentences. Electronic tagging is one method which can be used either instead of, or to reduce the length of, a prison sentence or as part of a non-custodial sentence. This is in effect a form of house arrest or curfew, in which offenders are required to stay at or close to their homes for a specified number of hours per day. An electronic tag worn on their person, usually on the ankle, alerts a control center if they violate these conditions.
Although tagging has been used in the United States since the mid-1980s, it has only recently been more widely adopted around the world in countries including Canada, Australia, Singapore, Sweden and the Netherlands. Within Europe, the UK was the first country to introduce electronic tagging, initially on a trial basis in 1989 as a condition of bail, with electronic monitoring as a specific curfew order sentence later introduced under the 1991 Criminal Justice Act.
The main potential benefits of electronic tagging are cost savings to the criminal justice system and the more optimal use of prison space. However, tagging hasn’t yet been adopted as standard practice in many countries, and where it is in use, relatively little systematic research has been conducted into its costs and benefits. Much of the research which has been conducted has been in the UK, where a great deal of controversy surrounds the practice of electronic tagging.
Human Rights Issues
Although there have been no successful legal challenges to the use of tagging on grounds of human rights, it has sometimes been argued that electronic tagging violates either Convention Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” or Article 8, which provides the right to “private and family life.” In a UK study, tagged offenders complained of being stigmatized and treated like animals; cases were also identified in which tagged individuals were attacked by others who suspected them of being sex offenders. On the other hand, there is evidence that some prisoners prefer tagging to prison sentences, leading to charges on the part of opponents of tagging that it is a soft option and one which does not deter individuals from re-offending.
The case for tagging hasn’t been helped by some high-profile bad publicity, such as the case of a female suspected burglar in England, who escaped for a two-week vacation without detection while tagged, and other media stories about individuals slipping off their tags to go on a crime spree. These types of incidents generally result from inadequacies in the monitoring system used rather than a problem with electronic tagging more generally, but their sensationalist aspects tend to overshadow more serious debate about the potential role of tagging in fighting crime. Moreover, the whole issue of tagging offenders has been mixed up with proposals and counter-arguments on both sides of the Atlantic about its use for other groups, such as juvenile truants and asylum seekers, which have brought the human rights aspects of tagging to the fore.
In the absence of successful legal challenges to tagging on grounds of human rights, any future expansion of its use is likely to be driven by cost considerations as well as more robust evidence of its effectiveness in reducing re-offending. Yet the limited research in both these areas has produced findings which are inconclusive and contradictory.
Costs and Benefits
Some studies have generated estimates of significant cost savings from the use of electronic tagging, mostly extrapolated from evaluations of small-scale trials or fairly simplistic number-crunching exercises. An early evaluation of trials in the UK claimed that several million pounds a year would be saved if curfew orders with tagging were rolled out nationally, with at least two-thirds of these orders replacing custodial sentences; an online BBC report recently claimed that tagging an offender for a year costs less than 10% of the cost of imprisonment for the same period. However, electronic tagging can only generate cost savings if used to replace custodial rather than other community-based sentences, with the latter perhaps being less costly to implement and monitor. A Canadian study by the John Howard Society of Alberta observed that tagging may even add costs to the correctional system by increasing levels of control to an extent which is unnecessary for some lower-risk offenders.
Similarly, there is conflicting research evidence on the impact of tagging on re-convictions. For example, a 1999 Canadian evaluation reported that electronic monitoring had no identifiable impact on future criminal behavior, yet a 2006 Florida-based study of 75,661 tagged offenders found evidence of significant reductions in the likelihood of conviction for a technical violation or new offense. However, a 2004 Florida study provided evidence that a high proportion of the tagged individuals in that state were low-risk offenders who would probably have received non-custodial sentences anyway, so the cost-savings of electronic tagging may have been minimal.
According to 1999 research with magistrates in the UK, tagging is a useful way of disrupting patterned criminal behavior such as night-time burglaries, shoplifting and late-night public order offenses and is also effective for long-term monitoring of sex offenders and other ex-offenders who continue to present a public safety risk. However, the magistrates interviewed argued that tagging is not an appropriate way of dealing with all types of convicted criminals, especially those who might present a risk to their own family members if confined to their homes. More systematic research is needed into the use of tagging for different categories of offenders to identify how the practice can generate the greatest cost savings to the penal system as well as helping to reduce overall crime rates. Criminal justice researchers will also need to examine the potential use of new forms of surveillance technology, such GPS satellites, which may open up opportunities for more effective monitoring of offenders in the community but will also certainly bring human rights issues into the center of the debate.
References
BBC News (2005, March 20). Electronic tagging investigated. Retrieved from BBC News.
Bonta, J., Wallace-Capretta, S., & Rooney, J. (1999). Electronic Monitoring in Canada. Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada.
Bottoms, A.E., Gelsthorpe, L. & Rex, S. (2001). Community Penalties: Policy, Practice and Future Directions. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
John Howard Society of Alberta (2000). Electronic Monitoring. Retrieved from The John Howard Society of Alberta.
Mortimer, E., Pereira, E., & Walter, I. (1999). Making the tag fit: further analysis from the first two years of the trials of curfew orders. Home Office Research findings (105).
Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (2005). Electronic Monitoring should be Better Targeted to the Most Dangerous Offenders. Report No. 05-19. Retrieved from The Florida Monitor.
Padgett, K., Bales, B. & Blomberg, T. (2006). The Long-Term Effects of the Electronic Monitoring of Offenders in the Community. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Los Angeles Convention Center, Los Angeles, CA, Nov 01, 2006.
Stacey, T. (2006). Electronic tagging of offenders: a global view. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 20, 1-2.
By Mary Nichols, on August 3rd, 2008
According to a recent article in the New York Times Magazine, Europe is in the grip of “an anti-Islamic bias that is becoming institutionalized in the continent’s otherwise ordinary politics.” In the UK, a research report published earlier this year by the Institute of Race Relations argued that Islamophobia is hindering efforts to integrate Muslims into European societies.
The growing hostility towards Muslims in Europe is often linked to the fear of terrorism and associated concerns about the increasing involvement of young Muslims in radical political movements with connections to Al Qaeda. Yet Islamophobia has not emerged to any notable extent in the United States, despite the experience of the September 11 terrorist attacks, suggesting that other factors are also driving the phenomenon in Europe. In any case, Islamophobia had been observed in Europe for some years before the September 11 attacks, linked to concerns about the increased involvement of Muslims, especially of North African origin, in domestic European politics. Although there was undoubtedly a rise in anti-Islamic views and discrimination after September 11 and the London bombings of July 2005, these attacks only served to exacerbate a phenomenon which was already on the increase.
Islamophobia takes a range of forms in Europe, including the more traditional types of socio-economic discrimination and racist attack historically suffered by other ethnic or religious minorities. However, its distinctive feature – as documented by the New York Times article – is the extent to which it has infiltrated European mainstream politics and culture. In recent years many high-profile incidents from across Western Europe have exemplified this trend: the publication in Danish newspaper Jyllens Posten in 2005 of a cartoon portraying the Prophet Mohammad as a terrorist; the online release earlier this year by Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders of the movie Fitna, which directly links Islam with terrorism; the banning in French schools of the Islamic hijab, or headscarf, and the debates which are raging throughout Europe over the right to build mosques.
Political Encouragement
The growth of Islamophobia and its seep into mainstream politics have been attributed to the recent strategies of political parties on the Far Right. These have repackaged their traditional messages in a lighter form in order to capitalize on widespread concerns among many European populations about high levels of immigration to Europe and the impact of this on jobs, crime rates and the like. As these parties make political gains, as has been the case in the Netherlands, Italy, Denmark and Austria for example, mainstream parties often adopt similar themes, reinforcing the anti-Islamic stance in national politics. The media also plays a big role: several studies have documented evidence of a bias against Muslims in newspaper reports in countries including Germany and the UK, and more generally there has been much sensationalist reporting about the threat of Islamic terrorism which fails to distinguish between radical Islam and Muslims in general.
Some writers have linked the development of Islamophobia in Europe to the relatively homogenous nature of European populations, the associated development of strong national cultures and identities and a tendency for integration of immigrants to be regarded as synonymous with assimilation. When immigrant cultures or religious beliefs are seen to clash with dominant national ideology, as has occurred in many European countries in the case of Islam, the people concerned are seen as a threat to national identity and become the target of discrimination and prejudice.
Other Factors
Socio-economic factors also play a significant role in contributing to Islamophobia and the factors that drive it. Compared with the U.S., where Muslims are on average better educated and higher earners than the native population, Europe’s Muslim populations are concentrated in low socio-economic groups, at least in part because of the structural discrimination they have experienced over time. This not only makes them an obvious target for racism among those who see them as direct competition for low-skilled jobs but also generates a pool of Muslim youths who are alienated from societies which offer them few rewards and are ready prey for Islamic fundamentalist movements.
A number of European countries, alerted by the threat to their social stability posed not only by Islamic extremism but by growing Islamophobia, are now taking steps to promote better dialogue with their Muslim communities and to enforce new anti-discrimination legislation. This is a positive development for Europe, yet such measures may only be able to skim the surface of a problem which appears deep-rooted in a multitude of cultural, political and socio-economic factors.
References
Al-Azmeh, A. & Fokas, E. (2006). Islam in Europe: Diversity, Identity and Influence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cesari, J. (2006). Muslims in Western Europe After 9/11: Why the term Islamophobia is more a predicament than an explanation. Submission to the Changing Landscape of Citizenship and Security. 6th PCRD of European Commission.
Fekete, L. (2008). Integration, Islamophobia and civil rights in Europe. London: Institute of Race Relations.
Feldman, N. (2008). The New Pariahs? New York Times Magazine, June 22, 2008.
Ford, G. (2007). In the wake of xenophobia: the new racism in Europe. UN Chronicle. September 2007.
Saeed, A. (2007). Media, Racism and Islamophobia: The Representation of Islam and Muslims in the Media. Sociology Compass 1, 2: 443–462.
By Mary Nichols, on July 23rd, 2008
With soaring fuel prices adversely affecting consumers and businesses throughout the world, this might be a good time for employers to explore or reexamine the possible benefits of teleworking. Also often referred to as telecommuting, a name which reflects the idea of technological communications replacing the traditional commute to work, telework involves regularly working at home or in another location remote from one’s employer at least some of the time.
The current situation is reminiscent of the oil crises of the 1970s, when the pressures of rising transportation costs and the promises of new technology first sparked off interest in teleworking. Futurist authors such as Alvin Toffler were soon predicting that traditional working patterns would be dramatically changed by telework which would, it was often argued, bring about additional benefits such as improved productivity and reduced costs for employers as well as an improved work-home life balance for their staff.
The pace and nature of technological change since then has far exceeded the expectations of many 1970s futurists, with the Internet and the widespread use of portable computers and handheld devices making it theoretically possible for people to work almost anywhere. Yet on the surface, at least, there is little evidence that these technologies have been used to transform working practices to the extent expected.
International Comparisons
From the available data, it appears that teleworking has been taken up at a faster pace and to a greater degree in the U.S. than in other countries. In the U.S., the growth in telework has been boosted by the championing effects of the government’s own telework initiative as well as the perceived wisdom following the September 11 terrorist attacks of having dispersed, less vulnerable workforces. An IDC survey reported that 2.44 million employees were working at home full-time in 2007, a 30% increase since 2005, while a WorldatWork survey estimated that 12.4 million employees were being allowed to work from home at least one day each month in 2006, an increase of 63% since 2004. According to an Office of Personnel Management survey, the number of federal employees who regularly telework increased by 37% between 2003 and 2004, reaching 140,694.
Directly comparable recent data on teleworking among employees in European countries is not readily available, but it was estimated in 2001 that there were a total of 2.2 million teleworkers in the UK, including both employees and the self-employed, an increase of up to 70% since 1997, and with the fastest growth among employees teleworking. The percentage of employees teleworking in the UK at this time was reported to be slightly above average when compared with nine other European countries: Finland had the highest percentage of employees teleworking and Germany and France the lowest.
Recently, there have been reports that some major U.S. employers who have traditionally been heavy users of teleworking, including the federal government, have been bringing teleworkers back into office environments. One of the main reasons for their apparent reversal in policy, despite claims that they still support teleworking, is a reported concern about data security; another is the view that teams work better when co-located. Anecdotally, these decisions are reported to be unpopular with many of the employees affected, some of whom have opted to leave their companies rather than revert to more traditional working arrangements. Decisions to reduce rather than increase opportunities for teleworking may prove to somewhat short-sighted in the face of impending recruitment pressures relating to demographic changes, let alone the rising fuel costs which may lead people to seek jobs closer to home if teleworking is not an option.
By Mary Nichols, on July 15th, 2008
The previous article in this series highlighted the variations in hours of work between different countries and the factors which influence these. This article examines international differences in the extent and composition of non-standard employment, such as part-time and temporary work and fixed-term contracts, and explores some of the reasons for these differences.
In the 1980s and 1990s, nearly all developed countries experienced significant increases in the proportion of total employment accounted for by non-standard jobs, with the main growth accounted for by part-time work and temporary work. For example, over half of all new jobs created in Europe between 1987 and 1997 were part-time, as were a substantial proportion of new jobs in countries such as the U.S., Canada and Japan. By the mid-1990s, just over a third of all employment in the UK and the U.S., more than 40% of employment in the Netherlands and nearly half of all employment in Australia and Japan consisted of non-standard work. Self-employment and shift-work are usually included in official definitions of non-standard working, but these categories have not contributed significantly to the recent expansion in non-standard work.
New Trends
Across OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries as a whole, part-time work continued to expand by 7% between 1993 and 2006 but with considerable variations between countries in the rate of growth and the extent of part-time working. In 2006 the OECD countries with the highest rates of part-time work, accounting for around a quarter or more of all jobs, were Australia, Japan, the UK, Israel, the Netherlands and Switzerland, while countries such as Turkey, Korea and most Eastern European countries had less than 10% of their workers in part-time jobs. Most western and southern European countries, as well as the U.S. and Canada, had fairly high rates of part-time working in 2006, generally 16% or more of total employment.
Temporary work also expanded in many OECD countries in the 1980s and 1990s, again with considerable variations between countries in both the growth rate and the proportion of the workforce consisting of temporary workers. By 2000, Spain had the highest proportion of temporary work, accounting for a third of all jobs in that country, while a number of other nations including the U.S. and the UK had only around a tenth of all workers in temporary jobs. This category of non-standard employment includes a very diverse range of workers including, for example, agency temps employed in industrial or office work, seasonal agricultural workers and professionals on fixed-term contracts.
Need for Flexibility
The major expansion of non-standard employment in recent decades has been linked to the need for greater flexibility in human resource practices in order to improve the productivity and competitiveness of firms, particularly in conditions of economic recession, which has encouraged employers to create part-time, fixed-term or temporary jobs rather than traditional full-time permanent jobs. At the same time, there is a demand among many workers for non-standard forms of employment which enable them to combine paid employment with other commitments such as looking after a family or studying. Some workers are pushed into non-standard jobs because they are unable to obtain full-time permanent work, but OECD statistics indicate that the majority of part-time workers, at least, choose to work part-time. Overall, women account for the majority of non-standard workers in most countries, usually well over half of all part-time workers and at least half of all temporary employees.
Non-standard work in many countries has traditionally meant inferior terms and conditions of employment, with non-standard workers often being paid lower average hourly rates than their full-time, permanent counterparts and receiving fewer benefits such as pensions and health insurance. Ironically, those countries with strong employment protection legislation, such as Germany, France and Japan, have experienced expansions in non-standard forms of employment which are not covered by the legislation. On the other hand, the rapid expansion of Japan’s part-time work sector has been boosted by tax benefits offered to women whose earnings remain below a certain level. In Europe, the employment conditions of non-standard workers are now being addressed by EU initiatives such as the Framework Agreement on Part-Time Work as well as the proposed Agency Workers Directive still being discussed by the European Council. It remains to be seen whether improved employment protection for temporary and part-time workers will affect the supply of such jobs since the benefits to employers in terms of reduced costs and increased flexibility may be reduced. A counteracting factor may be the demographic changes that will increasingly reduce the available labor pool in many countries, putting pressure on employers to create high quality non-standard jobs to attract those workers looking for more flexibility in their own employment arrangements.
|
|
Most Popular Posts