La protección ocupacional de nuevos riesgos socialesconciliación y formación proporcionada por la empresa

  1. Rodolfo Gutiérrez 1
  2. Gabriel Pruneda 1
  3. Sigita Doblytė 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

Revista:
RES. Revista Española de Sociología

ISSN: 2445-0367,  1578-2824

Año de publicación: 2020

Volumen: 29

Número: 2

Páginas: 325-345

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.22325/FES/RES.2020.18 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: RES. Revista Española de Sociología

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Una parte creciente del desarrollo del Bienestar Ocupacional (BO) gira en torno a la protección de nuevos riesgos sociales, principalmente mediantes programas ofrecidos por las empresas para facilitar la conciliación entre vida personal y laboral, y la formación continua. Estos programas son de singular importancia para la protección activa de la empleabilidad en un contexto postindustrial. Este artículo tiene como objetivo ofrecer un mapa del desarrollo reciente del BO. Se inicia con una perspectiva comparada dentro del ámbito europeo, para luego describir los perfiles de los beneficiaros de esos programas y analizar cómo las características de las empresas y de los puestos de trabajo condicionan el acceso a los mismos. Los resultados confirman el carácter limitado del BO en el caso español, pero también indican trayectorias recientes de expansión de los principales beneficios, conciliación y formación; algo que tiene gran interés por ocurrir durante un ciclo de crisis

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

Este trabajo recoge algunos de los resultados parciales del proyecto Bienestar Ocupacional en España: situación, determinantes y efectos (BIOCES), financiado por el Plan Estatal de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2017-2020 (referencia: MINECO-18-CSO2017-82648-R).

Financiadores

  • MINECO Spain
    • MINECO-18-CSO2017-82648-R

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Anttila, T., Oinas, T., Nätti, J. (2015). Working-Time Regimes and Work-Life Balance in Europe. European Sociological Review, 31(6), 713-724.
  • Anxo, D., O’Reilly, J. (2000). Working time regimes and transitions in comparative perspective. En J. O’Reilly, I. Cebrian y M. Lallement (Eds.), Working Time Changes: Social Integration through Transitional Labour Markets (pp. 61-90). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
  • Arulampalam, W., Booth, A.L., Bryan, M.L. (2004). Training in Europe. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(2/3), 346-360.
  • Ascoli, U., Natali, D., Pavolini, E. (2018). Still a weak occupational welfare in Southern Europe? Evidence from the Italian case. Social Policy & Administration, 52(2), 534-548.
  • Autor, D.H. (2001). Why Do Temporary Help Firms Provide Free General Skills Training? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1409–1448.
  • Bonoli, G. (2007). Time matters. Postindustrialization, new social risks, and welfare state adaptation in advanced industrial democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 40(5), 495-520.
  • Brescoll, V.L., Glass, J., Sedlovskaya, A. (2013). Ask and Ye Shall Receive? The Dynamics of Employer-Provided Flexible Work Options and the Need for Public Policy. Journal of Social Issues, 69(2), 367-388.
  • Brunsdon, E., May, M. (2007). Occupational welfare. En M. Powell (Ed.), Understanding the Mixed Economy of Welfare (pp. 149-176). Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
  • Cabrales, A., Dolado, J.J., Mora, R. (2014). Dual Labour Markets and (Lack of) On-the-Job Training: PIAAC Evidence from Spain and Other EU Countries. IZA Discussion Papers, 8649.
  • Chung, H. (2011). Work-Family Conflict across 28 European Countries: A Multi-level Approach. En S. Drobnic y A.M. Guillén (Eds.), Work-Life Balance in Europe: The Role of Job Quality (pp. 42-68). Hamshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Chung, H. (2018), “Dualization and the access to occupational family-friendly working-time arrangements across Europe”, Social Policy and Administration 52, 491-507.
  • Chung, H. (2019). National-Level Family Policies and worker’s Access to Schedule Control in a European Comparative Perspective: Crowding Out or In, and for Whom? Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 21(1), 25-46.
  • Chung, H. y Tijdens, K. (2013). Working time flexibility components and working time regimes in Europe: using company-level data across 21 countries. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7), 1418-1434.
  • Clark, S.C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770.
  • Cohen, M., Gagin, R. (2005). Can Skill-Development Training Alleviate Burnout in Hospital Social Workers? Social Work in Health Care, 40(4), 83-97.
  • Den Dulk, L., Groeneveld, S., Ollier-Malaterre, A., Valcour, M. (2013). National context in work-life research: A multi-level cross-national analysis of the adoption of workplace work-life arrangements in Europe. European Management Journal, 31, 478-494.
  • Eurofound (2017a). Sixth European Working Conditions Survey – Overview report (2017 update). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  • Eurofound (2017b). Work-life balance and flexible working arrangements in the European Union. Dublin, Ireland: Eurofound.
  • Farnsworth, K. (2004). Welfare through work: an audit of occupational social provision at the turn of the new century. Social Policy and Administration, 38(5), 437-455.
  • Gallie, D., Russell, H. (2009). Work-family conflict and working conditions in Western Europe. Social Indicators Research, 93, 445–467.
  • González Begega, S. (2018). Bienestar ocupacional: concepto y demarcaciones. Paper presentado al VII Congreso REPS, Zaragoza, 4-5 de octubre.
  • Jones, M. K., Jones, R. J., Latreille, P. L., Sloane, P. J. (2009). Training, job satisfaction and workplace performance in Britain: Evidence from WERS 2004. Labour, 23(1), 139-175.
  • Lott, Y. (2015). Working-time flexibility and autonomy: A European perspective on time adequacy. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 21(3), 259-274.
  • Luque Balbona, D. (2018). Estado de bienestar ocupacional: una imagen panorámica de la evidencia empírica reciente. Paper presentado al VII Congreso REPS, Zaragoza, 4-5 de octubre.
  • Macky, K., Boxall, P. (2008). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being: a study of New Zealand worker experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 46(1), 38-55.
  • Mapelli, L. (2017). The development and determinants of “occupational welfare” in the recalibration of European welfare regimes: a comparative perspective. Working Papers Persorsi Secondo Welfare-OSE, 1/2017.
  • Martínez Poza, A. (2018). Protecting occupational pensions and unemployment benefits in Spain: a weak occupational welfare system. En D. Natali, E. Pavolini con B. Vanhercke (Eds.), Occupational Welfare in Europe: Risks, opportunities and social partner involvement (pp. 193-213). Brussels, Belgium: ETUI.
  • Natali, D., Pavolini, E. (2014). Comparing (Voluntary) Occupational Welfare in the EU: Evidence from an international research study. OSE Research Paper 16.
  • Natali, D., Keune, M., Pavolini, E., Seeleib‐Kaiser, M. (2018a). Sixty years after Titmuss: New findings on occupational welfare in Europe”, Social Policy and Administration, 52(2), 435-448.
  • Natali, D., Pavolini, E., Vanhercke B. (2018b). Occupational Welfare in Europe: state of play, determinants and policy implications. En D. Natali, E. Pavolini con B. Vanhercke (Eds.), Occupational Welfare in Europe: Risks, opportunities and social partner involvement (pp. 239-257). Brussels, Belgium: ETUI.
  • Sparks, K., Faragher, B., Cooper, C.L. (2001). Well‐being and occupational health in the 21st century workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 489–509.
  • Swanberg, J.E., Pitt-Catsouphes, M., Drescher-Burke, K. (2005). A Question of Justice: Disparities in Employees’ Access to Flexible Schedule Arrangements. Journal of Family Issues, 26(6), 866-895.
  • Taylor-Gooby, P. (2004). New Social Risks and Welfare States: New Parading and New Politics? En P. Taylor-Gooby (Ed.), New Risks, New Welfare. The Transformationof the European Welfare State (pp. 209-238). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Wiß, T. (2017). Paths towards Family‐friendly Working Time Arrangements: Comparing Workplaces in Different Countries and Industries. Social Policy and Administration, 51, 1406–1430.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet