Who agree three years of insecurity? The more I look, the more I read the newspapers, the more I think of that comes from the manifest of the PDCI: "If three years have seem a few."
I try to take a step back to reflect on why
was introduced flexibility into the labor market . The points were basically two: managing phases alternate with periods of overwork in lean companies, they allow businesses a reasonable period of time to know the employee before accollarselo life. Three years. There are phases of overwork
company that last three years? It takes three years to learn how to work a person? honestly do not think.
The classic objection to this reasoning is that you must leave their companies to hire and fire freely because in this way can workers take light-heartedly knowing potersene leave just as easily. Theory.
And if you get an economic crisis? liberal economic theory would say that the adjustment demand and supply of labor is easier to be accommodated in an open and dynamic. Now look at what's happening in the U.S. mortgage crisis with the high-risk
A simple touch of the interest rate (not the loss of employment) has devastated an entire sector, the stock dropped heavily, reduced bankrupted a number of companies and employees who lost their jobs. Everyone says that in Italy there are no subprime mortgages, for heaven's sake. But the loans granted to temporary workers, those yes, even if they are not the same thing.
What if in 5 years, in full recession a number of fixed-term contracts were not confirmed? Panico. At that point it could be worth the scroll riformetta Prodi regarding social safety nets. We read: 60% of salary for one year. Then, panic.
that it does not an ideological issue, I tell you I'm willing to admit not three, but 30 years of insecurity. But if there are adequate social safety nets. With the protection offered today, a year seems more than enough.
And because the risks on economic sisetma that might trigger a mass of precarious one wonders who agree to three years of insecurity.
