Suppr超能文献

德国和美国在新冠疫情困境下:内部劳动力市场灵活性与外部劳动力市场灵活性对比

Germany and the United States in coronavirus distress: internal versus external labour market flexibility.

作者信息

Herzog-Stein Alexander, Nüß Patrick, Peede Lennert, Stein Ulrike

机构信息

Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK), Georg-Glock-Str. 18, 40474 Düsseldorf, Germany.

University of Koblenz-Landau, 76829 Landau, Germany.

出版信息

J Labour Mark Res. 2022;56(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s12651-022-00316-5. Epub 2022 Aug 10.

Abstract

Germany and the United States pursued different economic strategies to minimise the impact of the Coronavirus Crisis on the labour market. Germany focused on safeguarding existing jobs through the use of internal flexibility measures, especially short-time work (STW). The United States relied on a mix of external flexibility and income protection. On this basis, we use macroeconomic time series to examine the German strategy of securing employment through internal flexibility by contrasting it with the chosen strategy in the United States. In Germany, temporary cyclical reductions in working hours are mainly driven via STW. US unemployment rose at an unprecedented rate, but unlike in previous recessions, it was mostly driven by temporary layoffs. However, a closer look at the blind spots of the chosen strategies in both countries showed that despite the different approaches, people in weaker labour market positions were less well protected by the chosen strategies.

摘要

德国和美国采取了不同的经济策略,以尽量减少冠状病毒危机对劳动力市场的影响。德国专注于通过采用内部灵活性措施,特别是短时工作(STW)来保障现有工作岗位。美国则依赖外部灵活性和收入保护的组合。在此基础上,我们使用宏观经济时间序列,通过将德国通过内部灵活性保障就业的策略与美国所选择的策略进行对比,来研究德国的这一策略。在德国,工作时间的临时周期性减少主要是通过短时工作来推动的。美国失业率以前所未有的速度上升,但与以往衰退不同的是,这主要是由临时裁员推动的。然而,仔细审视两国所选择策略的盲点可以发现,尽管方法不同,但处于较弱劳动力市场地位的人受到所选策略的保护较少。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0d3/9364861/df8ad76e89b6/12651_2022_316_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验