Flexibility and security: an asymmetrical relationship?
2. Implications of various forms of
flexicurity combinations
2.1. Implications for workers
The impact of flexicurity policies on labour ultimately depends on how effective these policies
are in addressing not only the problem of unemployment but also of quality of life and social cohe-
sion. When the security dimension of the flexicurity strategies is sacrificed in favour of the flexibility
dimension, as is often the case when labour’s negotiating power is weak, problems of vulnerability
and social exclusion are bound to emerge.
Some groups of workers, in particular, are more vulnerable than others when exposed to high
levels of flexibility that is not traded-off against some sort of security. Temporary workers (and all
the variants of short-term workers), are considered as the most vulnerable segment of the workforce
as, with few exceptions, they are usually trapped in low quality and insecure jobs and, most common-
ly, they have limited or no access to training, few if any employment and social security rights, and
uncertainty regarding their future job prospects as well as difficulties in reconciling work and family
life. Part-time workers, especially in the case of involuntary part-time work, also face serious discrimi-
nations compared to full time workers, in terms of access to training schemes, career prospects and
professional status, but they are in a better position to combine work with family life due to their
reduced working hours. Other vulnerable categories of flexible or atypical workers that benefit the
least from flexicurity policies include the low educated workers, workers with irregular contracts, self-
employed workers without employees, pseudo-independent (bogus) self-employed workers, workers
in small firms, freelance workers, etc.
The household composition also plays a role in the employment patterns of the family members
and, hence, in their degree of vulnerability. According to a Eurofound analysis of in-work poverty,
there is a clear association between household composition, non-permanent contracts or interrupted
career paths and greater vulnerability of workers, reflecting the growing incidence of the working
Page • 17