Health Protection and Inequalities in the Labor Market

A special issue of Societies (ISSN 2075-4698).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 October 2021) | Viewed by 3638

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Social and Behavioural Health Sciences Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7, Canada
Interests: health and human consequences of work-related risk exposures; structural origins of health determinants; longitudinal methods
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

An increasingly competitive globalized capitalism has coupled with both accelerating technological change and a series of progressively “hardening” socio-political-economic factors to produce growing inequality in contemporary labor markets. The ongoing erosion of public policies devoted to social welfare and the redistribution of wealth have fed into extant structural contingencies to create a more stratified system that limits access to opportunity structures for disadvantaged groups, beginning in early childhood. These factors have created a virtuous circle whereby inequities in education, training, and social capital accumulate throughout the life course to exacerbate the social patterning of human capital and, in turn, structural inequalities in the labor market. The expansion of elite, human-capital-intensive jobs such as those in technology, finance, and management has increased labor-share among workers with the highest levels of training and skill, while workers employed in mid- and lower-tier sectors of the economy are exposed to under-employment via reduced work hours and wages. At the individual level, we know that precarious work, poor working conditions, and the psychic burden of low social position at work are associated with adverse health outcomes. More broadly, the population health consequences of labor market and wealth inequality are associated with not just an increased burden of disease, but also, critically, a gradual decline in social cohesion, civic behaviors, and the broad societal commitment to mores that support democratic institutions. The focus of this Special Issue is on exploring the full range of implications and consequences of rising labor market inequality for public health, and to provide strategic recommendations for mitigating structural disadvantage through healthy public policy.

Contributions must follow one of the three categories of papers (article, conceptual paper, or review) for the journal and address the topic of the Special Issue.
We look forward to receiving your contributions.

Dr. Heather Scott-Marshall
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as conceptual papers are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Societies is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • labor market inequality
  • social stratification
  • precarious work
  • structural disadvantage across the life course
  • social patterning of health outcomes
  • health protection through public policy

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

22 pages, 281 KiB  
Article
An Analysis of Comparative Perspectives on Economic Empowerment among Employment-Seeking Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and Service Providers
by Sarah Tarshis, Heather Scott-Marshall and Ramona Alaggia
Societies 2022, 12(1), 16; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12010016 - 28 Jan 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3166
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare perspectives on economic empowerment in the context of employment seeking among intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors and service providers specializing in IPV-related trauma. This study addressed the following question is: How do employment-seeking IPV [...] Read more.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare perspectives on economic empowerment in the context of employment seeking among intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors and service providers specializing in IPV-related trauma. This study addressed the following question is: How do employment-seeking IPV survivors and service providers conceptualize and understand empowerment? Insights into how each group conceives of economic empowerment and its attainment following IPV experiences can help to inform an effective service curriculum that can be used to facilitate optimal employment outcomes among survivors. Methods: A constructivist grounded theory method was used to develop a theoretical framework for conceptualizing how economic empowerment is understood by employment-seeking survivors of IPV, and IPV service providers. Twenty-six participants were recruited (survivors, n = 16; service providers, n = 10) in a large northeastern U.S. city. Interview questions focused on how IPV survivors and service providers identify and conceptualize economic empowerment, and how support services respond to survivors’ needs around empowerment, particularly through help with employment seeking. Results: Data were coded and analyzed following data analysis stages: (a) initial coding; (b) constant comparison; and, (c) focused coding. Three main themes emerged from the narrative data: (1) structural characteristics shape individual experiences and perspectives of empowerment; (2) peer support as an integral component to empowerment; and (3) employment attainment as economic empowerment. Though perspectives on economic empowerment were often aligned, some key differences emerged. Whereas providers tended toward a more restricted, micro-level view of empowerment as primarily an attribute of the individual, survivors were inclined toward a structuralist perspective that considers how individuals’ experiences of empowerment are shaped by broader, institutional-level factors. Conclusions: Findings from this study build on prior research on the experiences of IPV survivors. The focus on experiences of empowerment in the context of employment-seeking can inform work on building more effective support services for survivors that avoid reductionist approaches that could be perceived by survivors as “victim-blaming” by incorporating a sensitivity to empowerment as derived from structural factors that shape individual experience. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Health Protection and Inequalities in the Labor Market)
Back to TopTop