Socialiniai ir ekonominiai prekariato plėtros aspektai
| Author |
|---|
Guogis, Arvydas |
| Date | Issue | Start Page | End Page |
|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 19 (1) | 11 | 25 |
Prekariato plėtra – tai neoliberalaus politinio ir ekonominio projekto pagimdytas socialinis reiškinys, kurio mokslinei analizei tiek pasaulyje, tiek Lietuvoje, autorių nuomone, skiriama nepakankamai dėmesio. Straipsnyje pristatoma kokybinė analizė, kurioje apžvelgiama prekariato, kaip palyginti naujo kokybinio ekonominio ir socialinio reiškinio, formavimasis ir plėtra. Šio reiškinio įtaka įvairioms visuomeninio gyvenimo sritims pastaruoju metu nekelia abejonių, tačiau ypač stipriai ji paliečia tokias sferas, kaip artimesnė ir tolimesnė darbo aplinka, socialinio dialogo bei darbuotojų socialinės apsaugos galimybės, socialinių paslaugų bei socialinio darbo vystymas.
The authors of the article state that the development of precariat is a social phenomenon produced by the neoliberal political and economic project, for the scientific analysis of which both worldwide and in Lithuania, according to the authors, insufficient attention is paid. The article introduces a qualitative analysis reviewing the formation and development of precariat, as a comparatively new qualitative economic-social phenomenon. The influence of this phenomenon for various areas of the societal life has not raised any doubts recently, yet they have huge influence on such areas as closer and more distant work environment, the opportunities of social dialogue and social security of employees. Theoretically it is not clear if the development of precariat should be considered as the formation of “some kind of class” with its own attributes, or “work status”, where an employee is merely short of a number of things within his work environment and his social security rights are not ensured. Even though for some “voluntary” precariat representatives such unstable, “unbound” situation associates with the “economics of happiness”, for many members of involuntary precariat it marks a much greater exploitation by the employers, less security, “dequalification” and worse rights in the area of social security. [...]