构建和谐社会政府应解决好就业问题

充分就业是民生之本,是保持政治、经济和社会稳定的关键因素。政府应解决好就业问题,大力发展劳动密集型产业,大力扶持中小型企业,大力发展民营企业,加强劳动力市场建设,以实现以人为本、安居乐业和构建和谐社会之目的。     

和谐的选择:鼓励富人投资增加穷人就业

二十多年的改革开放创造了经济奇迹,也积累起贫富不和谐的突出问题。经济全球化本身具有极化胜负优劣、扩大贫富差距的客观规律,要想使整个国家继续保持赢家地位,必须进一步顺应这个规律。我国构建和谐社会的最大的难点是就业不足,只能在充分就业之后社会才能充分和谐。在国家无力提供更多就业岗位的条件下,要想增加穷人就业,只有鼓励富人投资,而非抽肥补瘦。     

女大学生就业过程中的性别歧视研究

主流话语虽然关注女大学生的被歧视状况,但女大学生自己发出声音的却很少。本文通过对女大学生群体进行访谈发现,性别歧视在女大学生的求职过程中是一种弥散的、无所不在的状态,而女大学生常常不会以积极的态度应对性别歧视、重建自我,而多以沉默接受歧视,其重建的自我是“第二性”的。改变这种状况,需要加强女大学生求职过程中的社会支持网络的建立,同时,细化法律条文,使法律具有可操作性,让歧视者为其行为付出代价。     

论女大学生的就业优势及实践途径

女大学生就业难是个不争的事实,但女大学生也有自己的就业优势:她们交际能力强,语言沟通能力强,具有善解人意、了解他人心理的特点。高校应在女性人才培养上,突出女性特色;在毕业生就业指导上,对女生进行分类指导;在就业市场开拓上,搭建女性就业平台,从而促进女大学生的充分就业。     

二次就业教育应对城市青年失业

调查发现,城市失业青年较大比例从批发、零售贸易和餐饮业等不太需要技术或技能且薪水较低的行业中失业,主要原因是没有一定的职业技术或职业技能。所以,加强对城市失业青年的二次教育,提高个人素养和能力,才是解决城市失业青年问题的有效途径。     

The wage share and government job creation in Sweden, 1900–2016

ABSTRACT

This investigation explores the long-run relationship between the wage share in the non-construction private sector and government efforts to create jobs in public services and construction of infrastructure and houses, in Sweden in 1900 to 2016. In the present article, it is argued that the creation of employment with generous wages by the Swedish government has increased the bargaining power of workers outside of these sectors, thus raising the wage share, up to about 1980. Correspondingly, retrenchment from such policy has been detrimental for the wage share in recent decades. This argument is supported by the results of cointegration tests, estimation of long-run and short-run, speed of adjustment, coefficients, as well as by Impulse-response functions. While government consumption is often found to be an important determinant for the wage share, earlier research has neglected the full labor market effect of government job creation associated with an expansion of the welfare state. Sweden is an ideal case for studying the impact of welfare policy on the wage share, since it has been one of the most extensive welfare states and simultaneously has been one of the most egalitarian countries in the world.     

超越“劳动二分法”：平台用工法律调整的基本立场

平台用工是一个宽泛的概念,具有劳动法讨论意义的是组织型平台,包括基于劳动合同的模式和非基于劳动合同的模式,后者是法律关系定性争论的对象。此种非基于劳动合同的平台用工模式不同于常规劳动关系,在劳动过程中同时存在一定程度的平台控制与劳务提供者自主,不符合现有从属性标准,不成立劳动关系,在现行法中属于民事非典型合同中的混合合同。此种平台用工在当前"从属性劳动—独立性劳动"构成的"劳动二分法"框架下不能实现有效调整,给予劳务提供者的权益保障不足。问题的成因在于劳务提供者的学理定位是"类雇员",此种平台用工的本质是承揽合同社会化,属于"劳动二分法"下的制度空白地带。因此,应根据此种平台用工中劳务提供者的社会保护必要性,构建介于民法与劳动法之间的"类雇员"规范体系,推动法律对社会劳务给付的调整框架从"劳动二分法"向"劳动三分法"转型。     

零工经济中个体就业动机探析 ——以北京市外卖骑手为例

随着数字技术的发展和人们生活、用餐习惯的改变，数字经济中的餐饮行业获得了较快发展，为劳动者创造了大量的就业机会。本研究基于外卖平台骑手的数据探讨数字零工经济下个体的就业动机。研究发现：大多数外卖骑手表面上是为了追求工作灵活性、经济收益和扩大社交网络而主动选择零工就业，但实际上，他们并没有在平台真正实现这三方面的诉求。劳动力市场结构转变让他们为了谋求生存而被动“挤入”,而非主动选择进入零工就业中。因此，针对劳动密集型平台就业群体，需要深入分析其选择零工就业的真正原因，才能在对其帮扶的政策制定和执行中，实现“对症下药”和“精准帮扶”。     

关于大学生就业教育向创业教育转变的理性思考

大学生就业教育向创业教育转变已经成为高等教育的重要研究课题。就业教育向创业教育转变的前提是素质教育,转变的目标是实现多元化的创业价值,转变的途径是进行教育观念和模式的更新。同时,创业环境对创业教育的成效起着重要的制约作用。     

Finger in the Dyke or the Floodgates Stemmed? Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002

This article considers Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002 in the context of post-War developments in labour relations culminating in the National Industrial Relations Court. It considers the development of Employment Tribunal which rather than being the last resort intended by the legislators, has become the first resort of complainants, often for trivial matters by employees; or by employers taking an extremely broad view of Gross Misconduct by employees. Due to the volume of cases and the shortage of Chairs, cases are constantly delayed and postponed. The article posits that these are the principle reason behind the framing of Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002 which introduced a new Section 9(1)(a) into the Employment Tribunals Act 1995. This has given the Chair of an Employment Tribunal the authority to strike out a weak case at a Pre-Hearing Review that will strike the case out once and for all at this juncture. The aim is to encourage employers to have proper procedures and for employees to follow them. This article suggests that in fact the reforms will have the opposite effect; that they have introduced another layer of legal complexity which will further increase the number of cases brought before the Employment Tribunal.