Organisational reforms in active welfare states: A comparative analysis of the turn to 'single gateways' in Western Europe

Based on the case of reforms aimed at integrating the provision of income protection and employment services for jobless people in Europe, this thesis seeks to understand the reasons which may prompt governments to engage in large-scale organisational reforms. Over the last 20 years, several European countries have indeed radically redesigned the organisational structure of their welfare state by merging or bundling existing front-line offices in charge of benefit payment and employment services together into 'one-stop' agencies. Whereas in academic and political debates, these reforms are generally presented as a necessary and rational response to the problems and inconsistencies induced by fragmentation in a context of the reorientation of welfare states towards labour market activation, this thesis shows that the agenda setting of these reforms is in fact the result of multidimensional political dynamics. More specifically, the main argument of this thesis is that these reforms are best understood not so such from the problems induced by organisational compartmentalism, whose political recognition is often controversial, but from the various goals that governments may simultaneously achieve by means of their adoption. This argument is tested by comparing agenda-setting processes of large-scale reforms of coordination in the United Kingdom (Jobcentre Plus), Germany (Hartz IV reform) and Denmark (2005 Jobcentre reform), and contrasting them with the Swiss case where the government has so far rejected any coordination initiative involving organisational redesign. This comparison brings to light the importance, for the rise of organisational reforms, of the possibility to couple them with the following three goals: first, goals related to the strengthening of activation policies; second, institutional goals seeking to redefine the balance of responsibilities between the central state and non-state actors, and finally electoral goals for governments eager to maintain political credibility. The decisive role of electoral goals in the three countries suggests that these reforms are less bound by partisan politics than by the particular pressures facing governments arrived in office after long periods in opposition.

Effects of bioaerosol exposure on work-related symptoms among Swiss sawmill workers

Objective Exposure to bioaerosols in the occupational environment of sawmills could be associated with a wide range of health effects, in particular respiratory impairment, allergy and organic dust toxic syndrome. The objective of the study was to assess the frequency of medical respiratory and general symptoms and their relation to bioaerosol exposure. Method Twelve sawmills in the French part of Switzerland were investigated and the relationship between levels of bioaerosols (wood dust, airborne bacteria, airborne fungi and endotoxins), medical symptoms and impaired lung function was explored. A health questionnaire was distributed to 111 sawmill workers. Results The concentration of airborne fungi exceeded the limit recommended by the Swiss National Insurance (SUVA) in the twelve sawmills. This elevated fungi level significantly influenced the occurrence of bronchial syndrome (defined by cough and expectorations). No other health effects (irritations or respiratory effects) could be associated to the measured exposures. We observed that junior workers showed significantly more irritation syndrome (defined by itching/running nose, snoring and itching/red eyes) than senior workers. Lung function tests were not influenced by bioaerosol levels nor dust exposure levels. Conclusion Results suggest that occupational exposure to wood dust in a Swiss sawmill does not promote a clinically relevant decline in lung function. However, the occurrence of bronchial syndrome is strongly influenced by airborne fungi levels. [Authors]

Perceived discrimination against diabetics in the workplace and in work-related insurances in Switzerland.

To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of perceived diabetes-related discrimination in the workplace and in work-related insurances in persons with diabetes mellitus in Switzerland. 509 insulin-treated diabetic subjects representative of the northwestern Swiss population responded to a self-report questionnaire on perceived diabetes-related discrimination in the workplace and in work-related insurances (salary loss insurance, supplementary occupational plan). Discrimination was defined as being treated differently at least once in relation to diabetes. The reported rates of different aspects of discrimination in the workplace and in work-related insurances ranged between 5-11% and 4-15% respectively. Risk factors that independently increased the risk of not being hired due to diabetes were the presence of at least two severe hypoglycaemic events/year and relevant diabetic complications (OR 5.6 and OR 2.6 respectively; both<0.05). The presence of at least two severe hypoglycaemic events/year was also associated with an increased risk of losing one's job (OR 6.5, <0.01). Overweight or obesity were related to increased discrimination in work-related insurances (OR for denial 2.1-2.4; OR for reserve 3.9-4.4; all<0.05). Perceived diabetes-related discrimination in the workplace and by work-related insurances is a common problem. In the light of our findings the introduction of effective non-discrimination legislation for patients with chronic illnesses appears to be desirable.

The role of just world beliefs and justice perceptions in explaining undesirable attitudes and behaviors at work

Perceiving injustice is a key antecedent of a large range of undesirable employee attitudes and behaviors at work. For example, research has shown that employees who perceive their workplace as unfair are less satisfied, less committed and engage in more counterproductive behaviors. In this study, we suggest that justice motives like the belief in a just world (BJW) contribute to explaining relations between justice perceptions and undesirable behaviors. Specifically, we propose that individual differences in BJW (i.e, the belief that the world is just, where everyone is rewarded for his or her behavior) are related to work-related behaviors and attitudes by coloring perceptions of workplace fairness. We investigated our hypotheses in a survey study with 176 employees of various organizations (36% women; mean tenure 12.3 yeares). Results showed that after controlling for other influencing factors (e.g., neuroticism) BJW was negatively related to self-reported work deviant behaviors and to cynical, disillusioned attitudes toward the current job. Moreover, BJW was positively related to overall job satisfaction. Consistent with our expectations, relations of BJW with deviant behaviors and with attitudes were mediated by perceptions of interactional and procedural justice. These results suggest extending models of justice and deviance by including motives such as BJW.

Association of working conditions with self-reported work-related symptoms: results from the Swiss dataset of the European Working Conditions Survey

Working conditions are important determinants of health. The aims of this article are to 1) identify working conditions and work characteristics that are associated with workers' perceptions that their work is harmful to their health and 2) identify with what symptoms these working conditions are associated.We used the Swiss dataset from the 2005 edition of the European Working Conditions Survey. The dependent variable was based on the question "Does your work affect your health?". Logistic regression was used to identify a set of variables collectively associated with self-reported work-related adverse health effects.A total of 330 (32%) participants reported having their health affected by work. The most frequent symptoms included backache (17.1%), muscular pains (13.1%), stress (18.3%) and overall fatigue (11.7%). Scores for self-reported exposure to physicochemical risks, postural and physical risks, high work demand, and low social support were all significantly associated with workers' perceptions that their work is harmful to their health, regardless of gender or age. A high level of education was associated with stress symptoms, and reports that health was affected by work was associated with low job satisfaction.Many workers believe that their work affects their health. Health specialists should pay attention to the potential association between work and their patients' health complaints. This is particularly relevant when patients mention symptoms such as muscular pains, backache, overall fatigue, and stress. Specific attention should be given to complaints of stress in highly educated workers.

Jevons et Walras : entre philosophie morale et économie sociale, un jalon dans la compréhension de la décision publique

This PhD dissertation deals with the question of evaluating social welfare and public policy making through the works of William Stanley Jevons (1835-1882) and Léon Walras (1834-1910), two economists who lived in the 19th century. These authors, well-known for their analyses on pure economics, were also deeply interested in the social problems of their time and proposed solutions to remedy them. In accordance with utilitarianism, Jevons was convinced that the reforms implemented by public authorities should improve social welfare (viewed as dependant on individual utilities). As for Walras, he defined a justice criterion based on a particular definition of natural law, and the reforms he proposed had the objective of restoring the rights following from this definition. We have drawn two principal conclusions from our work. First, the analyses of Jevons and Walras, who are often considered marginalise, are different not only in pure economics (as suggested by Jaffé in the seventies), but also from the point of view of welfare economics (defined as a science dealing with the evaluation of different social states). Secondly, these authors propose two different ways of justifying social reforms which have similarities with modern theory even though neither Jevons nor Walras are considered pioneers of welfare economics or public economics. Based on these two conclusions, we claim that studying these authors' theories might be of interest for the evaluation of public projects by the economists of today. Not only were their problems similar to ours, but also the original ideas present in their analyses may lead to the refinement of modern methods.Résumé en françaisCette these de doctorat porte sur les manières dont deux économistes du XIXe siècle, William Stanley Jevons (1835-1882) et Léon Walras (1834-1910), abordent la question du bien- etre collectif et la prise de décision publique. Connus principalement pour leurs travaux en économie pure, ces auteurs s'intéressent également à la question sociale et proposent des solutions pour y remédier. Jevons, conformément à son adhésion à la tradition utilitariste, estime que les interventions des autorités publiques doivent avoir pour objectif l'amélioration du bien- être collectif. Quant à Walras, il adopte un critère de justice qui relève du « droit naturel » et les propositions sociales qu'il préconise sont justifiées sur la base de leur conformité avec ce dernier. A l'issue du travail effectué dans le cadre de cette thèse, nous avons abouti à deux résultats principaux : (1) Les analyses de Jevons et Walras, deux économistes qui sont souvent considérés comme des « marginalistes » diffèrent fondamentalement non seulement dans leur analyse de l'économie pure, comme Jaffé le soulignait (1976), mais également en termes d'économie du bien-être (comprise comme une science ayant pour objectif l'évaluation des différents états sociaux). (2) Il existe deux voies originales pour justifier les réformes sociales dans les oeuvres de Jevons et Walras qui partagent des similarités importantes avec les théories modernes bien que ces auteurs ne fassent pas partie des jalons généralement retenus de l'histoire de l'économie du bien-être et de l'économie publique. Ces deux résultats nous conduisent à avancer que l'étude des approches de Jevons et de Walras peut contribuer à la formulation de nouvelles solutions à des problèmes rencontrés dans l'évaluation des différentes politiques publiques, car non seulement les préoccupations de ces auteurs était similaires aux nôtres, mais vu les éléments originaux que leurs propositions comportent, elles peuvent permettre de nuancer certaines aspects des méthodes modernes.