[PEN-L:11696] Re: questions about part time jobs

[Laurence Shute <lshute@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I was bothered by this WSJ piece myself.  I have forgotten how many
hours/week one needs to work to be counted as being employed "full-time."
My impression is that it's pretty low, something like 15 hours/week.  In
any case I also believe that stringing together several part-time jobs can
make one employed "full-time," not a part-timer.  Hence, the data are
misleading.   Or, at least the article is -- and I've left it at home so I
can't quote.  Can someone enlighten me on these points?

Also, today's New York Times reports that part-timers in fact get "good"
benefits, I believe hospitalization being the crucial one.  Again, my copy
is at home.

My understanding was that part-time employment, as a percentage of the
labor force, was increasing world-wide, from Europe to Asia.  Does anyone
have data on this?

Larry Shute
Cal Poly Pomona

Thanks for your message at 06:10 PM 8/11/97 -0700, Michael Perelman.  Your
message was:
>1. The Wall Street Journal says that part time jobs are not increasing?
>Any thoughts.
>
>2. If a person has 2 part time jobs, does that count as a single part
>time worker or 2?
>
>3. I thought that I heard on KPFA [Berkeley Pacifica station] that UPS
>part timers did get reasonable benefits, even though their wages were
>lower.
>
>4. Could UPS hire enough scabs [replacement workers]to operate w/o the
>unionized workers?
>--
>Michael Perelman
>Economics Department
>California State University
>Chico, CA 95929
>
>Tel. 916-898-5321
>E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
--------------------------------------
Laurence Shute			Voice: 909-869-38500
Department of Economics		FAX:   909-869-6987
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
3801 West Temple Avenue
Pomona, CA  91768-4070   USA	e-mail: <lshute@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---------------------------------------