Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHardy, Jane
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-08T17:47:26Z
dc.date.available2017-06-08T17:47:26Z
dc.date.issued2017-01-15
dc.identifier.citationHardy , J 2017 , ' (Re)conceptualizing precarity: structure, institutions and agency ' , Employee Relations , vol. 39 , no. 2 , pp. 263-273 . https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-06-2016-0111
dc.identifier.issn0142-5455
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 10550985
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: cc50b618-96cb-42f4-8630-18e322772588
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85016271334
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/18301
dc.descriptionThis document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: Jane Hardy, "(Re)conceptualising precarity: Institutions, structure and agency", Vol 39 (3): 263-273, January 2017. The version of record is available online at doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-06-2016-0111. Published by Emerald.
dc.description.abstractGuy Standing’s The Precariat has had a significant impact in stimulating a debate about the changing nature of work across the broad sweep of the global economy. He advances the notion of precarious workers, originally put forward by Italian autonomist Marxists, to suggest that they constitute a new and separate class. This article reflects on the notion of precarious work and addresses the temporal, historical and analytical weaknesses manifest in many accounts by proposing a political economy synthesis. The discussion takes place through a political economy theoretical lens that takes seriously the structures and institutions of capitalism and the agency of workers individually and collectively. First, it is argued that two key structural influences on precarity are the spatiality of capitalism and its endemic tendency to crisis. Second, temporal and institutional ‘shapers’ of precarity are discussed in historical and comparative context. Third, the agential influence on precarity is examined with regard to the possibility of the self-organization precarious workers and their potential for forging solidarity with other groups. The article concludes that precarious work is intrinsic to capitalism and therefore the precariat cannot be understood as a class-in-itself. The implications of this for activists is that solidarity needs to be forged between all groups of workers in order to organise for decent and stable employment.en
dc.format.extent10
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEmployee Relations
dc.rights/dk/atira/pure/core/openaccesspermission/open
dc.title(Re)conceptualizing precarity: structure, institutions and agencyen
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Research on Management, Economy and Society
dc.contributor.institutionHertfordshire Business School
dc.contributor.institutionGlobal Work and Employment
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
dc.relation.schoolHertfordshire Business School
dc.description.versiontypeFinal Accepted Version
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-10-10
rioxxterms.versionAM
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.1108/ER-06-2016-0111
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue
herts.rights.accesstypeopenAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record