Reconceptualizing the Nature and Health Consequences of Work-Related Insecurity for the New Economy: The Decline of Workers' Power in the Flexibility Regime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to reconceptualize job insecurity in a manner relevant to shifts in the power relations of work that have accompanied globalization, in order to assess the implications for workers' health. The linkage between job insecurity and health has been well established, but little formal theorizing has analyzed the mechanisms responsible. Implicitly, however, the assumption remains that its role as a stressor is limited to the realm of job strain, whereby workers lack control over a threatened employment situation. Within this framework, job insecurity and related dimensions of power remain locked in the "box" of the standard employment relationship, precluding an analysis of work-related insecurity in the new context of globalization. In contrast, the author constructs a model of work-related insecurity that takes into account current shifts in the balance of power toward employers, which in turn has undermined the fundamental quid pro quo associated with the standard postwar model of employment. She proposes that job insecurity is no longer a mere temporary break in an otherwise predictable work-life pattern but rather a structural feature of the new labor market. Emerging contingencies associated with the New Economy, "flexibilized" employment relationships, and diminution of workers' power have constituted work-related insecurity as a chronic stressor with several implications for long-term health outcomes at the individual and societal levels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".