Globalization and deregulation: Does flexicurity protect atypically employed? 1

Hitherto, discussion of flexicurity has focused on normal employment (permanent full-time), with atypical work receiving only cursory attention. Nevertheless, the most affected are just atypically employed (= other than normally employed). To monitor effects of flexicurity policies in Europe, flexicurity indices are constructed from: (a) scores of the strictness of employment protection legislation provided by the OECD, (b) qualitative juridical data on social security benefits (unemployment insurance, public pensions, etc.), and (c) data on the dynamics of employment types (permanent, temporary, full-time, part-time, self-employed, etc.). The empirical investigation shows that, contrary to political promises and theoretical opinions, the deregulation of European labour markets absolutely predominates. Its moderate compensation by advantages in social security occurred only twice: in Denmark and Netherlands at the end of the 1990s. The flexibilization reduces the average employment status, i.e. employees are more often employed not permanently but temporarily, not full-time but part-time, and more frequently they involuntary turn to self-employment. On the other hand, the eligibility to social benefits depends on the employment status. Thereby these trends disqualify employees from social benefits. The apparent compensation of the labour market deregulation by social advantages is therefore insufficient.