Extreme working hours in Western Europe and North America: A new aspect of polarization. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 92/2015 May 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the trends and root causes of extreme working hours in sixteen Western European countries, Canada, and the United States between 1970 and 2010. Earlier literature has revealed increasing trends in extreme working hours in the United States and recognized the negative repercussions of this new aspect of labor market polarization. As European average working hours have declined over the past decades, scholars have turned little attention to the analysis of extreme working hours in European countries. First, the article documents diverging patterns of extreme working hours in Western Europe. Whereas the Scandinavian and French ratios of workers with extreme hours remained very low, most other countries in Western Europe exhibit significantly higher ratios of extreme workers after the beginning of the 1990s than in the previous two decades. Second, the article detects the development of two diverging trajectories in the advanced capitalist world: one with a strong and stable labor regulation along with a balanced working hour profile and one with gradual deregulation along with an increasing ratio of long work weeks. Finally, using a series of pooled cross-section OLS estimations, the article tests five specific hypotheses, motivated by theories of the welfare state and political economy theories of globalization. The results provide strong empirical evidence for the notion that patterns of extreme working hours are not inherent in post-industrial development. The article uses data from the author’s extreme working hours standardized meta-database which had been compiled from two large micro data collections: the Luxembourg Income Study database (LIS) and the Multinational Time Use Study (MTUS).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".