Advertisement

The Decline of the Worker as Collective Subject

  • Vicente Sánchez Jiménez
Chapter

Abstract

Work has lost its central role as a mechanism of social cohesion and establishment of collective solidarities. This is demonstrated by its replacement to a large extent as an element unifying the individual and society. In practice, this goes hand in hand with the undermining of labour rights, to the point of decisively influencing the actual configuration of labour relations, and an ever-increasing imbalance between the two collective subjects intrinsic to the labour market: employer and employee. This manifests itself in the appearance of an ever wider range of contractual models and the weakening of traditional boundaries between categories, such as self-employment and waged employment, formal and informal work, employment and unemployment.

References

  1. Abdelnour, Sarah. 2013. “L’entrepreneuriat au service des politiques sociales: la fabrication du consensus politique sur le dispositif de l’auto-entrepreneur.” Sociétés contemporaines 89: 131–154.Google Scholar
  2. Alaluf, Mateo. 1999. “Evolutions démografiques el rôle de la protection sociale: le concept de cohesion.” Rapport Préliminaire (DGV/ULB). Bruxelles: Commission Européenne.Google Scholar
  3. Alonso, Luis Enrique. 1999. Trabajo y ciudadanía. Estudios sobre la crisis de la sociedad salarial. Madrid: Trotta.Google Scholar
  4. Alonso, Luis Enrique. 2001. Trabajo y postmodernidad. El empleo débil. Madrid: Editorial Fundamentos.Google Scholar
  5. Asenjo, Almudena, and Inmaculada Cebrián. 2015. “Precarización y empobrecimiento de la población trabajadora en España.” La precariedad del empleo como factor estructural de la pobreza laboral. Madrid: Fundación 1º A0de Mayo.Google Scholar
  6. Barroso, Durao. 2013. Discurso sobre el estado de la Unión. Bruselas: Comisión Europea.Google Scholar
  7. Bernaciak, Magadalena, Rebecca Gumbell-McCormic, and Richard Hyman. 2012. El sindicalismo europeo: ¿de la crisis a la renovación?, en Colección Cuadernos nº40. Madrid: Fundación 1º de Mayo.Google Scholar
  8. Bernard, Sophie, and Marnix Dressen. 2014. “Penser la porosité des satatus d’emploi.” La Nouvelle revue du Travail. Indépendance el salariat, parasité des status. http://nrt.revues.org/1823.
  9. Caveng, Rémy. 2014. “Institutionnalisation el usages d’un salariat libéral.” La Nouvelle Revue du Travail. Indépendance el salariat, parasité des status. http://nrt.revues.org/1823.
  10. Drahokoupil, Jan. 2015. The Outsourcing Challenge: Organizing Workers Across Fragmented Production Networks. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.Google Scholar
  11. Drahokoupil, Jan, and Brian Fabo. 2015. “Outsourcing, Offshoring and the Deconstruction of Employment: New and Old Challenges in the Digital Economy, the Outsourcing Challenge.” In Organizing Workers Across Fragmented Production Networks, edited by Jan Drahokoupil. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Galbraith, John Kenneth. 2012. La sociedad opulenta. Madrid: Planeta.Google Scholar
  13. Groot, L. 2016. “¿Algo a cambio de nada?” Madrid: El País, 11 de septiembre de.Google Scholar
  14. ILO. 2015. Las formas atípicas de empleo. Ginebra: Organización Internacional del Trabajo.Google Scholar
  15. INE. 2015. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. http://www.ine.es/prensa/np917.pdf.
  16. INE. 2016. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. http://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Tabla.htm?t=9376&L=0.
  17. Keune, Maarten. 2015a. “Less Governance Capacity and More Inequality: The Effects of the Assault on Collective Bargaining in the EU.” In Wage Bargaining Under the New European Economic Governance, edited by Guy Van Gyes and Thorsten Schulten, 283–296. Brussels: ETUI.Google Scholar
  18. Keune, Maarten. 2015b. “Shaping the Future of Industrial Relations in the EU: Ideas, Paradoxes and Drivers of Change.” International Labour Review. Geneva: International Labor Organization. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2015.00225.x/abstract.
  19. Keune, Maarten, and Amparo Serrano Pascual. 2014. Deconstructing Flexicurity and Constructing Alternative Approaches. Towards New Concept and Approaches for Employment and Social Policy. London: Routledge Advances in Sociology.Google Scholar
  20. LFS. 2015. Informe cuarto trimestre de 2015. Encuesta de Población Activa. ine.es/daco/daco42/daco4211/epa0415.pdf.
  21. Menoux, Thibaut. 2014. “Indépendants subordonnés oy salariés autonomes?” La Nouvelle Revue du Travail. Indépendance el salariat, parasité des status. http://nrt.revues.org/1823.
  22. Navarro, Vicenç. 2004. El Estado de Bienestar en España. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
  23. OECD. 2015. Union Members and Employees. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?Datasetcode=U_D_D.
  24. Prieto, Carlos. 1999. La crisis del empleo en Europa. Germanía: Valencia.Google Scholar
  25. Sánchez, Vicente, and Mónica Puente. 2016. Responsabilidad social empresarial y participación de los trabajadores: un estudio crítico del marco normativo-institucional actual. Gijón: Congreso Nacional de Sociología.Google Scholar
  26. Valenduc, Gérard, and Patricia Vendramin. 2016. “Work in the Digital Economy: Sorting the Old from the New.” Working Paper 2006.03, ETUI, Brussels.Google Scholar
  27. Veblen, Thorstein. 2008. La Teoría de la clase ociosa. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Complutense University of MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations