I'm not sure how people are defining contingent work, but MANPOWER, INC., the daily hiring agency used for restaurants and blue collar laboring work is now the largest employer in the united states. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 96-12-31 15:08:34 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >bj: [PEN-L:8000] contingent work >Date: 96-12-31 15:08:34 EST >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Multiple recipients of list) > >Doug writes >>I'm amazed at how contingent work in general gets >so much ink, but at least in the U.S. doesn't seem all that >pervasive - under 5% of employment, and something like half of >those are happy with their contingency.<< > >but doesn't this phenomenon deserve a lot of ink if, over time, >the importance of contingent work is increasing? and if "regular" >work is becoming more and more like contingent work? that is, if >contingent work somehow symbolizes where the work organization is >going, i.e., the shrinkage of the old "primary labor markets" and >the growth of secondary labor markets? > >happy new year! > >in pen-l solidarity, > >Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. >7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA >310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 >"It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed. > > > >----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 31 15:07:55 1996 >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Received: from anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu (anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu >[132.241.1.25]) by emin47.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id >PAA14469; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 15:07:53 -0500 >Received: from anthrax (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu >(8.8.2/8.8.2) with SMTP id MAA12426; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 12:02:45 -0800 (PST) >Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 12:02:45 -0800 (PST) >Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: bulk >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [PEN-L:8000] contingent work >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas >X-Comment: Progressive Economics >Content-Description: cc:Mail note part >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >Mime-Version: 1.0 --------------------- Forwarded message: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Multiple recipients of list) Date: 96-12-31 15:08:34 EST Doug writes >>I'm amazed at how contingent work in general gets so much ink, but at least in the U.S. doesn't seem all that pervasive - under 5% of employment, and something like half of those are happy with their contingency.<< but doesn't this phenomenon deserve a lot of ink if, over time, the importance of contingent work is increasing? and if "regular" work is becoming more and more like contingent work? that is, if contingent work somehow symbolizes where the work organization is going, i.e., the shrinkage of the old "primary labor markets" and the growth of secondary labor markets? happy new year! in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.
