Cargando…
Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility
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 m...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9364861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35966833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12651-022-00316-5 |
_version_ | 1784765233335631872 |
---|---|
author | Herzog-Stein, Alexander Nüß, Patrick Peede, Lennert Stein, Ulrike |
author_facet | Herzog-Stein, Alexander Nüß, Patrick Peede, Lennert Stein, Ulrike |
author_sort | Herzog-Stein, Alexander |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9364861 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93648612022-08-10 Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility Herzog-Stein, Alexander Nüß, Patrick Peede, Lennert Stein, Ulrike J Labour Mark Res Original Article 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. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-08-10 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9364861/ /pubmed/35966833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12651-022-00316-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access.This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Herzog-Stein, Alexander Nüß, Patrick Peede, Lennert Stein, Ulrike Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title | Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title_full | Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title_fullStr | Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title_full_unstemmed | Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title_short | Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
title_sort | germany and the united states in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9364861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35966833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12651-022-00316-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT herzogsteinalexander germanyandtheunitedstatesincoronavirusdistressinternalversusexternallabourmarketflexibility AT nußpatrick germanyandtheunitedstatesincoronavirusdistressinternalversusexternallabourmarketflexibility AT peedelennert germanyandtheunitedstatesincoronavirusdistressinternalversusexternallabourmarketflexibility AT steinulrike germanyandtheunitedstatesincoronavirusdistressinternalversusexternallabourmarketflexibility |