Nowadays talking about the contemporary and future

talking about the contemporary and future labour markets wouldn’t be possible
without using the new term -precariat. What is it about? Do we really need to consider
precariat as a modern way of employment structure?

is a very common social phenomenon that generates uncertainty and instability
in society. Becoming an important characteristic of modern development and
inherent in many countries, precariat carries the danger of destroying human
resources from rising unemployment. It also has significant cultural and
political consequences, reinforcing social instability in society as a whole.
The criteria for identifying precariat are:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now


growth of employment on the basis of flexible employment contracts and the
reduction of their terms,


the percentage of income reduction in the working population,


the irregularity of income generation,


reducing social protection, weakening the position of trade unions in certain
segments of the labour market.


forms of flexible employment, such as freelance, extra work, distance
employment, do not fit well into the current labour legislation. Often,
employees employed in such forms are close to informal employment. This
increases the volatility of employment and the risks of labour relations. The
manifestation of precariat in the labour market are the following phenomena and
trends: a massive shift to the use of flexible employment contracts, the use of
flexible forms of employment on the initiative of the employer (that is, the
form of incomplete forced employment), mass dismissal and new hiring of
employees, payment of part of the salaries “in an envelope “, The
reduction of the constant part of wages in the structure of the employee’s
total salary and the increase in the share of variable (non-guaranteed
payments), the deterioration of working conditions, such as
safety of work and insurance payments including medical/life insurance.

conditions of a flexible, conditionally equal market, representatives of many layers
of the population do not have hereditary material and intellectual goods – they
are alienated from the results of their activities, they are turned off from
the process of active consumption and are subject to anxiety. This is especially
true for the service sector, which is almost entirely in the extremely insecure
commercial sector of the economy. Workers, formally provided with the fullness
of social guarantees, in fact have no rights, are alienated from their
professional activities, frustrated, knocked out of life. This category, as
well as the numerous employees of the lower segment of state institutions –
museums, libraries and other cultural institutions – also belongs to precariat.