Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Health Policy ; 126(7): 619-631, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1926473

ABSTRACT

The Covid-19 pandemic has revealed the importance of social protection systems, including income security, when health problems arise. The aims of this study are to compare the follow-up regimes for sick-listed employees across nine European countries, and to conduct a qualitative assessment of the differences with respect to burden and responsibility sharing between the social protection system, employers and employees. The tendency highlighted is that countries with shorter employer periods of sick-pay typically have stricter follow-up responsibility for employers because, in practice, they become gatekeepers of the public sickness benefit scheme. In Germany and the UK, employers have few requirements for follow-up compared with the Nordic countries because they bear most of the costs of sickness absence themselves. The same applies in Iceland, where employers carry most of the costs and have no obligation to follow up sick-listed employees. The situation in the Netherlands is paradoxical: employers have strict obligations in the follow-up regime even though they cover all the costs of the sick-leave themselves. During the pandemic, the majority of countries have adjusted their sick-pay system and increased coverage to reduce the risk of spreading Covid-19 because employees are going to work sick or when they should self-quarantine, except for the Netherlands and Belgium, which considered that the current schemes were already sufficient to reduce that risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Employment , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Sick Leave
2.
Int Soc Secur Rev ; 75(2): 3-24, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1895989

ABSTRACT

Based on original evidence from the European Social Policy Network (ESPN), the article investigates the extent to which self-employed and non-standard workers, who are less protected by "ordinary" social protection, were included in "extraordinary" income protection and job retention schemes during the COVID-19 pandemic in the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom. When the crisis hit, countries quickly introduced unprecedented emergency income replacement measures for the self-employed. Nevertheless, most of these schemes provided only basic support through lump sums and were, in some cases, subject to a variety of eligibility conditions. Non-standard workers were in general included in job retention schemes, but substantial gaps remained in some countries. The article discusses how such gaps were addressed in five EU Member States. The article concludes by highlighting some policy pointers for better and more adequate "extraordinary" income protection for the self-employed and non-standard workers in times of crisis.


Sur la base de données inédites du Réseau européen de politique sociale (ESPN), l'article examine dans quelle mesure les travailleurs indépendants et atypiques, qui sont moins protégés par la protection sociale «ordinaire¼, ont été inclus dans des régimes «extraordinaires¼ de protection du revenu et de maintien dans l'emploi pendant la pandémie de COVID­19 dans l'Union européenne (UE) et au Royaume­Uni. Lorsque la crise est survenue, les pays ont rapidement mis en place des mesures d'urgence sans précédent de remplacement du revenu pour les travailleurs indépendants. Cependant, la plupart de ces régimes ne fournissaient qu'une aide de base sous forme de montants forfaitaires et étaient, dans certains cas, soumis à diverses conditions d'ouverture des droits. Les travailleurs atypiques étaient en général inclus dans les programmes de maintien dans l'emploi, mais des lacunes importantes subsistaient dans certains pays. L'article examine comment ces lacunes ont été comblées dans cinq États membres de l'UE. Il conclut en mettant en évidence quelques pistes pour améliorer et rendre plus adéquate la protection des revenus «extraordinaires¼ des travailleurs indépendants et des travailleurs atypiques en temps de crise.


Sobre la base de datos originales de la Red Europea de Política Social (REPS), en el artículo se investiga hasta qué punto se incluyó a los trabajadores por cuenta propia y a los trabajadores atípicos, menos cubiertos por los sistemas de protección social "ordinarios", en los regímenes "extraordinarios" de protección de los ingresos y de mantenimiento del empleo durante la pandemia de COVID­19 en la Unión Europea (UE) y el Reino Unido. Con la llegada de la crisis, los países adoptaron rápidamente medidas de emergencia sin precedentes para garantizar la sustitución de los ingresos de los trabajadores por cuenta propia. No obstante, la mayoría de estos regímenes solo prestaron una ayuda básica en forma de pagos únicos que, en algunos casos, estaban sujetos a diversas condiciones de elegibilidad. En general, los trabajadores atípicos fueron incluidos en los regímenes de mantenimiento del empleo, pero en algunos países siguió habiendo deficiencias importantes. En el artículo se analiza cómo se abordaron esas deficiencias en cinco Estados miembros de la UE, y concluye destacando algunas pautas políticas para que la protección de los ingresos "extraordinaria" en tiempos de crisis sea mejor y más adecuada para los trabajadores por cuenta propia y los trabajadores atípicos.


Com base em evidências originais da Rede europeia em matéria de política social (ESPN, European Social Policy Network), este artigo investiga até que ponto trabalhadores autônomos e trabalhadores não padronizados, que são menos protegidos pela proteção social "comum", foram incluídos em regimes "extraordinários" de proteção de renda e manutenção de emprego durante a pandemia de COVID­19 na União Europeia (UE) e no Reino Unido. Quando a crise chegou, os países rapidamente introduziram medidas emergenciais sem precedentes de reposição de renda para os trabalhadores autônomos. No entanto, a maioria desses regimes proporcionou apenas apoio básico por meio de parcelas únicas e, em alguns casos, estavam sujeitos a uma variedade de condições de elegibilidade. Em geral, os trabalhadores não padronizados foram incluídos em regimes de manutenção de emprego, mas lacunas substanciais se mantiveram em alguns países. Este artigo discute como essas lacunas foram abordadas em cinco Estados­membros da União Europeia. O artigo conclui destacando alguns indicadores políticos para uma proteção de renda "extraordinária" melhor e mais adequada para os trabalhadores autônomos e os trabalhadores não padronizados em tempos de crise.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL