Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:54:52.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Older Workers and the Peripheral Workforce: The Erosion of Gender Differences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2008

Angela Dale  and
Claire Bamford
Angela Dale
Affiliation:
Stratification and Employment Group, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 5XH, UK.
Claire Bamford
Affiliation:
Health Care Research Unit, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, 21, Claremont Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AAUK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

At a time when the proportion of full-time permanent jobs is decreasing and there is evidence of a growth in ‘peripheral’ forms of work, it is important to review the position of older workers, both men and women. Using data from the Labour Force Survey of 1984, it is shown that, while the employment rate falls sharply in the ten-year period prior to state retirement age, it is only those of post-retirement age who are disproportionately represented in peripheral forms of work. It is suggested that some ‘peripheral’ forms of work allow greater flexibility in age of retirement than permanent full-time jobs. While there are clear gender differences among those of pre-retirement age, with a higher proportion of women than men in peripheral jobs, there is a marked erosion of these gender differences amongst men and women who work beyond state retirement age.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , March 1988 , pp. 43 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 Atkinson, J., Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower Management. Institute of Manpower Studies, Report No. 89, University of Sussex, Brighton, 1985.Google Scholar

2 Meager, N., Temporary Work in Britain: its Growth and Changing Rationale. Institute of Manpower Studies, Report No. 106, University of Sussex, Brighton, 1985.Google Scholar

3 Atkinson, J. and Meager, N., New Forms of Work Organisation. IMS Report No. 121, Institute of Manpower Studies, Brighton, 1986.Google Scholar

4 Coyle, A., Dirty Business. West Midlands Low Pay Unit, Birmingham, 1986.Google Scholar

5 Fevre, R. ‘Contract work in the recession’, in The Changing Experience of Employment (eds), Purcell, K., Wood, S., Watson, A. and Allen, S.Macmillan, London, 1986.Google Scholar

6 Department of Employment, 1984 Census of Employment and revised employment estimates. Employment Gazette, 01, 95, (1987), 31–53.Google Scholar

7 Department of Employment, 1986 Labour Force Survey and revised employment estimates, Employment Gazette, 04, 95, (1987), 201–209.Google Scholar

8 Coyle, , 1986, op. cit.Google Scholar

9 Labour Research, Privatisation: Paying the Price. Labour Research Department Publications, London, 1987.Google Scholar

10 Wilkinson, F., The flexible firm and the structured labour markets. Work and Society, no. 10, 10, 2–3, 1985.Google Scholar

11 Rodmell, B., Flexibility: the implications for public policy. Manpower Policy and Practice, vol. 1, Summer, 38–40, 1985.Google Scholar

12 Phillipson, C., Capitalism and the Construction of Old Age. Macmillan, London, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Dex, S. and Phillipson, C., ‘Social policy and the older worker’, in Phillipson, C. and Walker, A. (eds), Ageing and Social Policy. Gower, Aldershot, 1986.Google Scholar

14 Phillipson, C., 1982, op. cit.Google Scholar

15 Parker, S., Work and Retirement. George Allen & Unwin, London, 1982.Google Scholar

16 Department of Employment, 1987, op. cit.Google Scholar

17 Parker, S., 1982, op. cit.Google Scholar

18 Phillipson, C., 1982, op. cit.Google Scholar

19 Parker, S., Older Workers and Retirement. OPCS, HMSO, London, 1980.Google Scholar

20 Long, P., Retirement: Planned Liberation. Institute of Personnel Management, London, 1981.Google Scholar

21 Atkinson, J., Early Retirement. Institute of Manpower Studies Report No. 94, University of Sussex, Brighton, 1985.Google Scholar

22 Long, P., 1981, op. cit.Google Scholar

23 Atkinson, J., 1985, op. cit.Google Scholar

24 Parker, S., 1980, op. cit.Google Scholar

25 Manpower Services Commission, Male part-time employment. Labour Market Quarterly Report, 05, 15–17, 1985.Google Scholar

26 Parker, S., 1982, op. cit.Google Scholar

27 Bushell, R., ‘Great Britain, the Job Release Schemes’. Paper produced for OECD Panel, ‘Measures to assist early retirement’, mimeo, OECD, Paris, 1984.

28 Manpower Services Commission, Training. Labour Market Quarterly Report, 02, 5–7, 1987.Google Scholar

29 Dale, A. and Bamford, C., ‘Temporary workers: cause for concern or complacency’. Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 2, No. 2 (forthcoming).Google Scholar

30 Beechey, V., ‘Women and production: a critical analysis of some sociological theories of women's work’, in Feminism and Materialism (eds), Kohn, A. and Wolpe, A. M., Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1978.Google Scholar

31 OPCS, Labour Force Survey 1983 and 1984, HMSO, London, 1986.Google Scholar

32 Martin, J. and Roberts, C., Women and Employment: A Lifetime Perspective. HMSO, London, 1984.Google Scholar

33 Long, P., 1981, op. cit.Google Scholar

34 Long, P., 1981, op. cit.Google Scholar

35 Dex, S. and Phillipson, C., 1986, op. cit.Google Scholar

36 Zabalza, A., Pissarides, C. and Barton, M., Social security and the choice between full-time work, part-time work and retirement. Journal of Public Economics, 4, 245–276, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 We would like to thank an anonymous referee for suggesting this table format. For a discussion of the categories contained within the group ‘not in paid work’ see Laczko, F., ‘Between work and retirement: becoming “old” in the 1980s’ in Bytheway, B. (ed.), Becoming and Being Old. Sage, (1988).Google Scholar

38 It is important to note that those beyond state retirement age are no longer covered by employment protection legislation. Therefore the permanency of any job at this age must be open to some question.

39 Hakim, C., Occupational Segregation. Department of Employment Research Paper No. 9. 1979.Google Scholar

40 OPCS, Labour Force Survey 1979, HMSO, London, 1982.Google Scholar

41 Elias, P. and Main, B., Women's Working Lives. Institute of Employment Research, University of Warwick, 1982.Google Scholar

42 MSC, 1985, op. cit.Google Scholar

43 Dale, A., ‘Occupational inequality, gender and life-cycle’. Work, Employment and Society, 1, no. 3, 326–351, 1987.Google Scholar

44 Dale, A. and Bamford, C., ‘Flexible working and the peripheral workforce’, mimeo, University of Surrey, 1987.Google Scholar

45 This differs slightly from the distinction made by Hakim (Homeworking in Britain, Employment Gazette, 02, 95, 2, (1987) 92–104, who categorises as peripheral all those who are not defined as full-time permanent employees.Google Scholar

46 Parker, S., 1980, op. cit.Google Scholar

47 Dex, S. and Phillipson, C., 1986, op. cit.Google Scholar

48 Parker, S., 1980, op. cit.Google Scholar

49 The LFS uses show cards containing five reasons for part-time working.

These are:

I took a part-time job rather than a permanent job because:

I was a student/I was at school.

I was ill or disabled.

I could not find a full-time job.

I did not want a full-time job.

Other reason.

50 Walker, A., 1982, The social consequences of early retirement. Political Quarterly, 53, 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar