Non-standard work and benefits: Has anything changed since the Wallace Report?
Auteurs: Isik U. Zeytinoglu et Gordon B. Cooke
Aperçu
Résumé (français)
Veuillez noter que les résumés n'apparaissent que dans la langue de la publication et peuvent ne pas avoir de traduction.
Résumé (anglais)
This paper examines whether there has been improvement in benefits coverage for non-standard workers since the Wallace Report in 1983. This study uses Statistics Canada’s Workplace and Employee Survey (WES) 1999 data. Results show significant differences in the receipt of benefits among non-standard workers, suggesting heterogeneity within this group of workers in terms of benefits coverage. Regular part-time and temporary full-time workers receive fewer benefits than regular full-time workers. Temporary part-time workers have significantly less likelihood of receiving benefits than the other three groups of workers. Overall, results show that since the Wallace Report findings, there has been little improvement in benefits coverage for non-standard workers, and they continue to be relatively disadvantaged in comparison to regular full-time workers.
Détails
Type | Article de journal |
---|---|
Auteur | Isik U. Zeytinoglu et Gordon B. Cooke |
Année de pulication | 2005 |
Titre | Non-standard work and benefits: Has anything changed since the Wallace Report? |
Volume | 60 |
Nom du Journal | Industrial Relations / Relations industrielles |
Numéro | 1 |
Pages | 29-63 |
Langue de publication | Anglais |
- Isik U. Zeytinoglu
- Isik U. Zeytinoglu et Gordon B. Cooke
- Non-standard work and benefits: Has anything changed since the Wallace Report?
- Industrial Relations / Relations industrielles
- 60
- 2005
- 1
- 29-63