The Problematic Of Precariatisation And Work Culture: A Study On The Search For A Balance Between Flexibility And Insecurity
Öz
In recent years, the "precariat" that is being created as a new class by the opportunities offered by digital technologies and the "precariatization" that is arising as a new emerging class as its consequence are progressively destabilizing the equilibrium between flexibility and insecurity in modern labor markets and the conventional work culture being harmed. This research aims to put in perspective the growing trend of precariatization of work life, the insecurity that this trend generates, the disorganization of labor, and the erosion of work culture. The second objective of the research, alongside this, is to explore the interaction between insecurity and flexibility through the phenomenon of precariatization conceptually and theoretically, and add to the literature on the subject. The research was conducted as a compilation, and the research data were collected through an extensive literature review. Conceptualizations, empirical observations, and policy suggestions of precariatization were analyzed by critically synthesizing the data. Descriptive statistical results indicate that flexibility policies adversely impact workers, such as insecurity and dissatisfaction created by disorganization. This issue needs to be addressed with new policies to reduce this tension. We know that the quest for a viable equilibrium between insecurity and flexibility is needed so that the precariat would not constitute a novel risky class. Possibly more than ever, employment security matters at a time when flexible labor strategies like home working and remote work are irreversible.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Telework Disorganization Precarious work Freelancing Independent Work
Etik Beyan
Etik kurallara uyularak hazırlanan bu çalışma için etik rapor gerekmemektedir.
Kaynakça
- Atkinson, J. (1984). Workforce strategies for flexible organisations. Personnel Management, 16(8), 28–31.
- Bailey, J., & Madden, A. (2017). The precarious workforce: An analysis of employment trends. Industrial Relations Journal, 48(3), 217–229.
- Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. Verso.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
- Broughton, A., Green, M., & Rickard, C. (2022). The Future of Work and Inequality. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound). https://doi.org/10.2806/379404
- Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058877
- Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
- Çelik, A. (2018). Prekaryalaşma ve yeni sınıfsal dinamikler. Çalışma ve Toplum, 4(59), 123–140.
- De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the “just-in-time workforce”: On-demand work, crowd work, and labor protection in the gig economy. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471–504.
- De Stefano, V., & Wouters, M. (2020). Algorithmic Management and Collective Bargaining. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 41(1), 123–146.
- Degryse, C. (2016). Digitalisation of the economy and its impact on labour markets. ETUI Research Paper–Working Paper.
- Doğan, E. (2020). Çalışma yaşamında prekaryalaşma: Esneklik, güvencesizlik ve sınıf ilişkileri. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 38(1), 56–73.
- Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 114–132.
- Eurofound. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on working lives: A global perspective. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Eurofound. (2021). Living and working in Europe 2020. Publications Office of the European Union.
- Eurofound. (2021). Platform Work: Employment and Working Conditions. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Ferrera, M. (2012). The boundaries of welfare: European integration and the new spatial politics of social protection. Oxford University Press.
- Fudge, J., & Owens, R. (Eds.). (2006). Precarious work, women, and the new economy: The challenge to legal norms. Hart Publishing.
- Gallie, D. (2013). Economic crisis, quality of work, and social integration: Issues and context. In D. Gallie (Ed.), Economic crisis, quality of work, and social integration: The European experience (pp. 1–29). Oxford University Press.
- Gould, E. (2018). Decades of disinvestment have exacerbated inequality in the labor market. Economic Policy Institute.
- Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
- Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
- International Labour Organization (ILO). (2023). World Employment and Social Outlook 2023: The Value of Essential Work. https://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-reports/weso/2023/lang--en/index.htm
- Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400101
- Kalleberg, A. L. (2018). Precarious lives: Job insecurity and well-being in affluent democracies. Polity Press.
- Mandl, I., Curtarelli, M., Riso, S., Vargas, O., & Gerogiannis, E. (2020). New forms of employment: 2020 update. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Messenger, J. C., & Gschwind, L. (2016). Three generations of Telework: New ICTs and the (R)evolution from Home Office to Virtual Office. New Technology, Work and Employment, 31(3), 195–208.
- OECD. (2023). Employment Outlook 2023: Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
- Özkan, B. (2019). Türkiye'de sendikalaşma oranları ve prekaryalaşma süreci. İş Gücü Piyasası Çalışmaları, 12(3), 45–60.
- Pugh, A. J. (2022). The Tumbleweed Society: Working and Caring in an Age of Insecurity.
- Rani, U., Kumar Dhir, R., Furrer, M., Gőbel, N., Moraiti, A., & Cooney, S. (2021). World Employment and Social Outlook: The Role of Digital Labour Platforms in Transforming the World of Work. Geneva: International Labour Organisation.
- Rubery, J., Grimshaw, D., & Keizer, A. (2018). Flexibility bites back: The multiple and hidden costs of flexible employment policies. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(3), 470–485.
- Rubery, J., Grimshaw, D., & Keizer, A. (2018). Challenges and contradictions in the ‘normalizing’ of precarious work. Work, Employment and Society, 32(3), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017751790
- Sassen, S. (2014). Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy. Harvard University Press.
- Schnell, T., & Noack, C. (2020). The structure of meaning in work: A configurational approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 608846. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.608846
- Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury Academic.
- Stewart, A., & Stanford, J. (2022). Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options? The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 33(1), 57–75.
- Tutar, H., & Erdem, A. T. (2020). Örnekleriyle Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri ve SPSS Uygulamaları. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
- Tutar, H. (2023). Sosyal Bilim Araştırmalarında Kullanılan Yöntem ve Teknikleri. Umuttepe Yayıncılık.
- Tutar, H., Eryüzlü, H., Mutlu, H. T., & Nam, S. (2024). Bilimsel Analiz Teknikleri (Nicel, Nitel, Karma Yöntem ve Ekonometrik Analiz Teknikleri). Umuttepe Yayınları.
- Vosko, L. F. (2006). Precarious Employment: Understanding Labour Market Insecurity in Canada. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
- Wilthagen, T., & Tros, F. (2004). The concept of ‘flexicurity’: A new approach to regulating employment and labor markets. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 10(2), 166–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/102425890401000204
- Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75.
- Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The Gig Economy: A Critical Introduction. Polity Press.
Prekaryalaşma ve Çalışma Kültürü Sorunsalı: Esneklik ve Güvencesizlik Arasında Denge Arayışları Üzerine Bir İnceleme
Öz
Son yıllarda, dijital teknolojilerin sunduğu fırsatlarla yeni bir sınıf olarak yaratılan "prekarya" ve bunun sonucu olarak ortaya çıkan yeni bir sınıf olarak ortaya çıkan "prekaryalaşma", modern işgücü piyasalarında esneklik ve güvencesizlik arasındaki dengeyi giderek istikrarsızlaştırıyor ve geleneksel çalışma kültürü zarar görüyor. Bu araştırmanın genel amacı, iş hayatının güvencesizleştirilmesi eğiliminin, bu eğilimin yarattığı güvencesizliğin, işgücünün dağınıklığının ve iş kültürünün aşınmasının perspektifini ortaya koymaktır. Araştırmanın ikinci amacı, bunun yanı sıra güvencesizlik ve esneklik arasındaki etkileşimi güvencesizlik olgusu aracılığıyla kavramsal ve teorik olarak incelemek ve konuyla ilgili literatüre katkıda bulunmaktır. Araştırma bir derleme olarak yürütülmüş ve araştırma verileri kapsamlı bir literatür taraması yoluyla toplanmıştır. Verileri eleştirel bir şekilde sentezleyerek güvencesizliğin kavramsallaştırmaları, ampirik gözlemleri ve politika önerileri analiz edilmiştir. Tanımlayıcı istatistiksel sonuçlar, esneklik politikalarının çalışanlar üzerinde olumsuz etkileri olduğunu, örneğin, düzensizliğin yarattığı güvencesizlik ve tatminsizlik olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sorun, bu gerginliği azaltmak için yeni politikalar formüle etmelidir. Güvencesizlik ve esneklik arasında uygulanabilir bir denge arayışının, süreç güvencesizliğinin yeni bir riskli sınıf oluşturmaması için gerekli olduğunu biliyoruz. Muhtemelen her zamankinden daha fazla, evden çalışma ve uzaktan çalışma gibi esnek emek stratejilerinin geri döndürülemez olduğu bir zamanda istihdam güvenliği önemlidir.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Uzaktan Çalışma Emeğin Örgütsüzleşmesi Güvencesiz Çalışma Serbest Çalışma Bağımsız Çalışma
Kaynakça
- Atkinson, J. (1984). Workforce strategies for flexible organisations. Personnel Management, 16(8), 28–31.
- Bailey, J., & Madden, A. (2017). The precarious workforce: An analysis of employment trends. Industrial Relations Journal, 48(3), 217–229.
- Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. Verso.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
- Broughton, A., Green, M., & Rickard, C. (2022). The Future of Work and Inequality. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound). https://doi.org/10.2806/379404
- Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058877
- Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
- Çelik, A. (2018). Prekaryalaşma ve yeni sınıfsal dinamikler. Çalışma ve Toplum, 4(59), 123–140.
- De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the “just-in-time workforce”: On-demand work, crowd work, and labor protection in the gig economy. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471–504.
- De Stefano, V., & Wouters, M. (2020). Algorithmic Management and Collective Bargaining. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 41(1), 123–146.
- Degryse, C. (2016). Digitalisation of the economy and its impact on labour markets. ETUI Research Paper–Working Paper.
- Doğan, E. (2020). Çalışma yaşamında prekaryalaşma: Esneklik, güvencesizlik ve sınıf ilişkileri. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 38(1), 56–73.
- Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 114–132.
- Eurofound. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on working lives: A global perspective. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Eurofound. (2021). Living and working in Europe 2020. Publications Office of the European Union.
- Eurofound. (2021). Platform Work: Employment and Working Conditions. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Ferrera, M. (2012). The boundaries of welfare: European integration and the new spatial politics of social protection. Oxford University Press.
- Fudge, J., & Owens, R. (Eds.). (2006). Precarious work, women, and the new economy: The challenge to legal norms. Hart Publishing.
- Gallie, D. (2013). Economic crisis, quality of work, and social integration: Issues and context. In D. Gallie (Ed.), Economic crisis, quality of work, and social integration: The European experience (pp. 1–29). Oxford University Press.
- Gould, E. (2018). Decades of disinvestment have exacerbated inequality in the labor market. Economic Policy Institute.
- Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
- Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
- International Labour Organization (ILO). (2023). World Employment and Social Outlook 2023: The Value of Essential Work. https://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-reports/weso/2023/lang--en/index.htm
- Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400101
- Kalleberg, A. L. (2018). Precarious lives: Job insecurity and well-being in affluent democracies. Polity Press.
- Mandl, I., Curtarelli, M., Riso, S., Vargas, O., & Gerogiannis, E. (2020). New forms of employment: 2020 update. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
- Messenger, J. C., & Gschwind, L. (2016). Three generations of Telework: New ICTs and the (R)evolution from Home Office to Virtual Office. New Technology, Work and Employment, 31(3), 195–208.
- OECD. (2023). Employment Outlook 2023: Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
- Özkan, B. (2019). Türkiye'de sendikalaşma oranları ve prekaryalaşma süreci. İş Gücü Piyasası Çalışmaları, 12(3), 45–60.
- Pugh, A. J. (2022). The Tumbleweed Society: Working and Caring in an Age of Insecurity.
- Rani, U., Kumar Dhir, R., Furrer, M., Gőbel, N., Moraiti, A., & Cooney, S. (2021). World Employment and Social Outlook: The Role of Digital Labour Platforms in Transforming the World of Work. Geneva: International Labour Organisation.
- Rubery, J., Grimshaw, D., & Keizer, A. (2018). Flexibility bites back: The multiple and hidden costs of flexible employment policies. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(3), 470–485.
- Rubery, J., Grimshaw, D., & Keizer, A. (2018). Challenges and contradictions in the ‘normalizing’ of precarious work. Work, Employment and Society, 32(3), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017751790
- Sassen, S. (2014). Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy. Harvard University Press.
- Schnell, T., & Noack, C. (2020). The structure of meaning in work: A configurational approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 608846. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.608846
- Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury Academic.
- Stewart, A., & Stanford, J. (2022). Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options? The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 33(1), 57–75.
- Tutar, H., & Erdem, A. T. (2020). Örnekleriyle Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri ve SPSS Uygulamaları. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
- Tutar, H. (2023). Sosyal Bilim Araştırmalarında Kullanılan Yöntem ve Teknikleri. Umuttepe Yayıncılık.
- Tutar, H., Eryüzlü, H., Mutlu, H. T., & Nam, S. (2024). Bilimsel Analiz Teknikleri (Nicel, Nitel, Karma Yöntem ve Ekonometrik Analiz Teknikleri). Umuttepe Yayınları.
- Vosko, L. F. (2006). Precarious Employment: Understanding Labour Market Insecurity in Canada. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
- Wilthagen, T., & Tros, F. (2004). The concept of ‘flexicurity’: A new approach to regulating employment and labor markets. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 10(2), 166–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/102425890401000204
- Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75.
- Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The Gig Economy: A Critical Introduction. Polity Press.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Konular | Sosyal Güvenlik |
| Bölüm | Makaleler |
| Yazarlar | |
| Erken Görünüm Tarihi | 23 Haziran 2025 |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 1 Temmuz 2025 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 4 Ocak 2025 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 29 Nisan 2025 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2025 Sayı: 28 |
- Makale Dosyaları