Previous studies have shown that overeducation is inferior to adequate employment. For example, overeducated workers have lower earnings, participate less often in continuing education and training, and are less satisfied with their jobs. This article changes perspectives by asking whether it is better for the unemployed to take up a job for which they are overeducated or to remain unemployed and continue the search for adequate employment. Theoretically, we rely on the established confrontation of the stepping-stone and trap hypotheses, which make opposing predictions in terms of long-term employment chances and job quality. Using the German Socio-Economic Panel (1984–2012) and applying a dynamic propensity score matching approach, the analyses reveal an interesting trade-off. Although an overeducated re-entry increases the long-term employment chances persistently, it also implies strong lock-in effects into overeducation for up to 5 years after re-employment. In sum, the results support the stepping-stone hypothesis in terms of future employment chances, but also highlight non-negligible risks of remaining trapped in a job that is below one’s level of educational qualification.
Rigid employment protection legislation (EPL) has been blamed as the root of youths’ labour market integration problems in Europe. Many European countries have reacted by deregulating employment protection laws, often targeting youths as a group. However, doubts about the effectiveness of EPL reforms have arisen. Against this background, this article investigates whether EPL reforms succeeded in integrating youths into labour markets or whether they were ineffective and just promoted temporary employment as a crucial new social inequality in Europe. Based on two-step, three-level analyses using micro-data from the European Labour Force Survey for 19 European countries for the period from 1992 to 2012, our results show that deregulating the use of temporary contracts increased temporary employment risks of youths but did not reduce (for low-educated young men, even increased) unemployment risks. In contrast, we find some evidence that decreasing the protection of permanent jobs was successful in decreasing risks of inequality/insecurity (in terms of temporary jobs) without affecting the risks of labour market exclusion.
Many young people experience episodes of unemployment and precarious
employment such as insecure temporary jobs and skill-inadequate jobs during their
school-to-work transition period. This essay summarizes key theoretical ideas and
main previous empirical findings on the determinants and career consequences of
having such a nonoptimal start into the working life. Then, this essay highlights
cutting-edge research that has advanced our knowledge by providing more detailed
insights into the individual-level career dynamics as well as the macro-level
institutional and structural determinants of cross-country differences. This article
concludes with a discussion of five key issues for future research. First, there is
need for a better understanding of the institutional and structural influences on
the career consequences of having a nonoptimal labor market entry. Second, the
experiences during the economic crisis of 2008/2009 and its aftermath ask for a
better understanding of why some countries performed better than other countries
in protecting youths from that severe crisis. Third, a more detailed analysis of
different forms of nonemployment and precarious employment is required in order
to account for the strong variation of labor market experiences of youths. Fourth, to
fully assess not only the risks but also the chances of taking up temporary jobs and
skill-inadequate jobs at labor market entry, we have to complement the standard
“upward comparison” to regular employment with a “downward comparison” to
the alternative of nonemployment. Finally, this entry calls for an interdisciplinary
and integrative approach analysing not only the work career consequences of bad
labor market starts but also the social, economic, psychological, health, and familial
Gecekondu are informal settlements that have been at the heart of the rapid urbanisation of modern Turkey, especially in Istanbul and Izmir. Gecekondu squatting started in the 1940s as a need-oriented practice of poor rural migrants who needed cheap accomodation in Turkey's growing cities. Over time, gecekondu neighborhoods were legalized, and their dwellers became part of the urban middle class by erecting apartment buildings on their plots. In the 1980s, it became common to buy, and later to steal, privately owned agricultural land in order to construct apartment buildings on it. Appropriation was no longer geared towards need, but towards profit.
Appropriation of state-owned (agricultural) land was already a common practice in Ottoman times, and so was rural work migration to major cities, such as Istanbul and Izmir. In the aftermath of the Armenian Genocide and the Population Exchange with Greece, private property of Armenians and Greeks was appropriated and squatted by Muslims. This article argues that these historical precedents informed the way in which gecekondu dwellers legitimated their need-oriented appropriation of state land. With the arrival of neoliberalism, however, appropriation of state property no longer served to alleviate poverty, but became big business. Today, it is major real estate firms and the state-owned public housing authority (TOKI) that privatize state land in order to build gated communities for the upper middle class.
This article studies the application of laws regulating the settlement and compensation of
migrants who came to Turkey from Greece in the course of the population exchange. By
using petitions and administrative documents, it discusses the questions of legality and
legitimacy with regard to two problems: First, the status of exchangees as a group privileged
by law, and second, the bureaucratic procedure through which they were given temporary
property rights (tefvīż ). The article shows that laws can by no means be taken to be identical
with their application, and that various notions of legality and legitimacy were at play, both in
different state administrations and among those affected by their policies. It thus makes an
important contribution to a better understanding of the relationship between law, state and
society in early Republican Turkey.