Inclusivity in global research questionnaire.

<div> Background World economies increasingly rely on non-standard employment arrangements, which has been linked to ill health. While work and employment conditions are recognized structural determinants of health and health equity, policies aiming to protect workers from negative implications predominantly focus on standard employment arrangements and the needs of workers in non-standard employment may be neglected. The aim of this study is to explore workers’ experiences of gaps in labour regulations and social protections and its influence on their health and well-being across 6 countries with differing policy approaches: Belgium, Canada, Chile, Spain, Sweden, and the United States. Methods 250 semi-structured interviews with workers in non-standard employment were analyzed thematically using a multiple case-study approach. Results There are notable differences in workers’ rights to protection across the countries. However, participants across all countries experienced similar challenges including employment instability, income inadequacy and limited rights and protection, due to policy-related gaps and access-barriers. In response, they resorted to individual resources and strategies, struggled to envision supportive policies, and expressed low expectations of changes by employers and policymakers. Conclusions Policy gaps threaten workers’ health and well-being across all study countries, irrespective of the levels of labour market regulations and social protections. Workers in non-standard employment disproportionately endure economic risks, which may increase social and health inequality. The study highlights the need to improve social protection for this vulnerable population. </div>

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-03-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320248.s003
Primary Topic
Employment and Welfare Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Inclusivity in global research questionnaire.

Figshare
Employment and Welfare Studies
article

Inclusivity in global research questionnaire.

article en

Abstract

<div> Background World economies increasingly rely on non-standard employment arrangements, which has been linked to ill health. While work and employment conditions are recognized structural determinants of health and health equity, policies aiming to protect workers from negative implications predominantly focus on standard employment arrangements and the needs of workers in non-standard employment may be neglected. The aim of this study is to explore workers’ experiences of gaps in labour regulations and social protections and its influence on their health and well-being across 6 countries with differing policy approaches: Belgium, Canada, Chile, Spain, Sweden, and the United States. Methods 250 semi-structured interviews with workers in non-standard employment were analyzed thematically using a multiple case-study approach. Results There are notable differences in workers’ rights to protection across the countries. However, participants across all countries experienced similar challenges including employment instability, income inadequacy and limited rights and protection, due to policy-related gaps and access-barriers. In response, they resorted to individual resources and strategies, struggled to envision supportive policies, and expressed low expectations of changes by employers and policymakers. Conclusions Policy gaps threaten workers’ health and well-being across all study countries, irrespective of the levels of labour market regulations and social protections. Workers in non-standard employment disproportionately endure economic risks, which may increase social and health inequality. The study highlights the need to improve social protection for this vulnerable population. </div>

Figshare
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Employment and Welfare Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.