The impact of job insecurity on workers’ psychological well-being in russia: difference between manual and non-manual labor workers

General comments: some thoughts in the paper, though they appear commonsense, need justifications from the literature to add more credibility to the paper. Whenever I think you need to add citation, I put [cite] next to the phrase.

This is a very interesting and exciting topic, and I think you have a contribution to make above what’s been done. In your literature review, I didn’t see this paper: http://mesharpe.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,4,7;journal,7,39;linkingpublicationresults,1:110657,1

Check it out to see their theoretical development, etc. – the paper is very close, but they do the test on the banks, and you test the differences between types of labor. Both are important in their own right, but you can see how they’ve organized their paper and see which theories they’ve put to work.

In times of economic recessions and uncertainty, job insecurity is a common feeling among workers, both in manual and non-manual jobs. It is known to have adverse effects on workers’ psychological well-being[cite]. However, it has never been studied in Russia, which has been going through a difficult economic and social transition over the past twenty years. We explore how different types of job insecurity affect workers at a Russian factory undergoing downsizing, and whether the effects differ for workers of manual and non-manual labor. We [expect to] find a negative relationship between both quantitative and qualitative types of job insecurity and psychological well-being for all workers, with manual workers being more adversely affected by potential job loss than non-manual workers and more sensitive to quantitative job insecurity than qualitative job insecurity.

Over the past several decades, globalization has brought new challenges to businesses around the world and thus changed the conditions of working life for many employees[cite]. Intensified global competition has forced companies to cut costs and become more flexible, resulting in workforce shifts, and introduce new technologies that limit job options for less skilled workers; besides, a belief in market-driven economies resulted in relaxation of employment legislation in many countries (Davy, Kinicki, & Scheck, 1997; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Hartley, Jacobson, Klandermans, & Van Vuuren, 1991; Sparrow, 1998). Most importantly, organizational downsizing and close-offs caused by recent economic recessions brought large-scale layoffs in the workforce and increased uncertainty among remaining employees (Burke & Nelson, 1998; Hitt, Keats, Harback, & Nixon, 1994; Kozlowski, Chao, Smith, & Hedlund, 1993). The conditions for those at work have changed as well: companies now tend to employ more workers on the basis of short- and fixed-term contracts rather than long term contracts, while the employees have to manage their work with fewer resources, larger work-loads and increased uncertainty regarding the expected job performance (McLean Parks, Kidder, & Gallagher, 1998; Burke & Nelson, 1998).

In light of the mentioned changes in the working life, such phenomenon as job insecurity has become increasingly relevant[cite]. Job insecurity is defined as “expectations about continuity in a job situation” (Davy, Kinicki, & Scheck, 1997: 323). There is a significant number of publications, indicating that perceptions of job insecurity have been detrimental to employees’ attitudes, their psychological well-being, and physical health (Davy, Kinicki, & Scheck, 1997; Rosenblatt, Talmud, & Ruvio, 1999; De Witte, 2010; Sidney, Dekker, & Schaufeli, 1995; Sverke & Hellgren, 2001; Mohr, 2000). Job insecurity has also been linked to problems in workers’ families (Westman, Etzion, & Danon, 2001; Manuno & Kinnunen, 2002). All these effects matter not only at the individual level but may also result in increased costs to the society as a whole, including negative economic consequences (Benito, 2006). Therefore, they are important to understand and mitigate.

The relationship between perceived job insecurity and workers’ psychological well-being has been studied in various aspects. Overall, job insecurity is associated with lower psychological well-being (Sverke & Hellgren, 2002; Dekker & Schaufeli, 2011). De Witte (1999) found that women were less subject to the harmful consequences of job insecurity than men. In accordance with the psychological contract theory, temporary employees suffer less from psychological effects of job insecurity than permanent employees (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2010). Quantitative job insecurity (the continuity of one’s employment) has been shown to have stronger negative consequences for workers’ psychological well-being than qualitative job insecurity (the existence of important job features) (Hellgren & Sverke, 1999). Roskies and Louis-Guerin (1990) indicated the difference between chronic, ambiguous job insecurity and job insecurity associated with firms in acute crisis. In the former case, workers were more worried about qualitative job insecurity while in the latter case, quantitative insecurity mattered more. Self-reported minor psychiatric morbidity was higher among those who lost job security; besides, the residual negative effects for those who gained job security were also observed (Ferrie, Shipley, Stansfeld, & Marmot 2002).

However, little research has been done on the difference in psychological consequences of job insecurity for manual and non-manual labor workers. A meta-analysis by Sverke and Hellgren (2002) showed that the behavioral effects of job insecurity among manual workers were more detrimental than among non-manual workers. Orpen (1993) found that security was higher in “safe” managerial jobs among white workers in South Africa than in “unsafe” production jobs among black workers; however, the levels of stress and anxiety were not significantly different between the two groups.

In Russia, the influence of perceived job insecurity on psychological well-being of manual and non-manual labor workers is especially interesting to explore because of the peculiar historical context and the current economic situation[cite]. Historically, Russia has been transitioning from planned to a market economy over the past two decades with high instability in the 90s and more steady development in 2000s. Wage arrears, unemployment, and job insecurity were prevalent in the 90s due to the disruption of the economy country-wide[cite]. Even though the economy has been recovering, there is currently a sharp deficit of employees in manual-labor occupations (Korovkin, Dolgova, & Korolev, 2006). In this context, understanding the difference in the effects of perceived job insecurity on psychological well-being between manual and non-manual labor workers may contribute to better understanding of the reasons behind the lack of manual workers in the Russian economy.

Therefore, the first goal of this study is to establish whether there is a relationship between perceived job insecurity (quantitative) and the psychological well-being of manual and non-manual labor workers at a Russian factory. Second goal of this study is to explore how quantitative and qualitative job insecurity affects the psychological well-being of Russian factory workers.