[PEN-L:6743] Re: una preguntita

[knowware@xxxxxxxx (Tom Walker)]

Doug Henwood wrote,

>Most studies of turnover/instability/tenure I've seen for the U.S. show no
>significant increase from the 1970s. I know this is counterintuitive, and
>it pisses people off when I say it sometimes, but it seems to be true. What
>may have happened is that some instability has crept up the social ladder,
>making middle managers vulnerable to the instability that blue/pink collar
>workers have long known, which attracts more attention than in the past.
>Also, behind the flattish average tenure figures, men are falling but women
>are rising.

The Canadian studies I've seen have shown significantly rising tenure. So it
doesn't piss me off that Doug mentions the same thing for the U.S. Based on
the industries where I have direct contacts (communications, forests, and
autoworkers), I suspect that one explanation for the increased average
tenure is the dirth of quits from "good" full-time jobs. Another factor IN
CANADA would no doubt be the substantial withdrawal of people from the
labour force over the past ten years. Most of those people would no doubt
have either been precariously employed or unemployed but instead became
simply non-employed. I haven't looked at comparative labour force
participation in the U.S. lately, but my impression was it hasn't fallen to
the same extent as in Canada. Is that right, Doug?

regards,

Tom Walker
http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm