Labnet: CFP: History of Labour Intermediation - a workshop in Vienna, 27-28 November

[labnet at lists.labourhistory.net]

From: Labourhistory.net 

CFP: History of Labour Intermediation - a workshop in Vienna, 27-28
November
URL: http://labourhistory.net/news/i0904_12.php 

History of Labour Intermediation. Institutions and Individual Ways of
Finding Employment (19th and early 20th centuries)

The Production of Work (ERC-Starting Grant); Department of Economic and
Social History; University of Vienna, Vienna 27.11.2009-28.11.2009,
University of Vienna
Deadline: 30.06.2009

Questions of labour market and labour intermediation have been a
political concern in most European countries as well as the USA and
Canada since the late 19th century. In contemporary debates, public
labour exchanges have been depicted as a tool to cope with the confusing
complexity of labour markets and to match the supply and demand of
labour more effectively. On the one hand, labour intermediation was
designated to provide adequate labourers for employers. On the other
hand, providing employment opportunities for those in search of
employment was seen as a tool of social policy in the fight against
poverty. In this context, a new understanding of being out of
workemerged: "unemployment" was conceived as an integral aspect of
labour markets and therefore as an outcome of economic processes. As a
result, public labour exchange came to be and is still commonly regarded
as an inevitable requirement of modernization. 

However, public labour exchange did not just coordinate or regulate a
given labour market but also participated in the historical creation of
labour and segregation of labour markets. Public labour exchanges
fundamentally contributed to the codification of practices of work by
imposing new categories of wage labour and of being out of
employment.They established formal criteria of classifying occupational
skills and employability. Public labour intermediation defined
acceptable as well as unacceptable employment according to training,
career, age, gender and nationality. While selectively including some
practices in labour markets, it excluded other practices as well. Thus,
it contributed to the creation and differentiation of national workforce
and a segregated labour market. By defining regular employment, it
helped impose a particular distinction between formal and informal (or
casual) work, between the "real" economy and a shadow economy. Finally -
in respect to unemploym
 ent benefits - it aimed at distinguishing those willing and able to
work from those deemed "work-shy". 

Up to now, only a few studies have asked how public labour exchanges
contributed to the emergence and differentiation of nationalized labour
markets. Previous research has mostly focussed on the political aims and
formal regulations of labour intermediation. By contrast, we know little
about how labour exchanges functioned practically and what it meant to
be subjected to those practices. It would, however, be quite misleading
to assume that explicit aims and rules mirror actual practices in labour
intermediation.

Moreover, we have to reflect on the practical impact of public labour
exchange in seeking jobs and the position of exchange within the variety
of forms of intermediation. Public labour offices have always been only
one of many possible ways of finding employment or employees, but they
have not necessarily been the dominant one. According to contemporary
and recent estimates, informal practices of finding employment with the
help of kin or other social networks, newspaper ads or direct inquiries
have been important job search practices. Job placement by commercial
mediation, charitable organisations, trade unions or associations has
been quite common as well. However, in debates of the late 19th and
early 20th centuries, "irregular" forms of labour intermediation were
often criticized as ineffective. They were not only accused of failing:
(1) to organize the labour market effectively; (2) to prevent migration
into the cities; or (3) to provide reliable data on labour markets. 
 Abuses and fraud against people in search of a job were seen as common.
To prevent this, public control of intermediation was put into practice.

Still, particularly as public labour exchange was emerging, there was no
political consensus that labour intermediation should be a monopoly of
the state since control of intermediation was seen as a way to control
wages, labour conditions and strikes. As international comparison shows,
a state monopoly of labour intermediation was the outcome of
conflict-laden historical processes, but not an inevitable effect of
modernization. 

The workshop we have planned aims at comparing practices of labour
intermediation and ways of finding employment in the 19th and 20th
centuries across a variety of countries. Historians as well as
researchers in other disciplines (such as sociology, anthropology,
economics) are invited to participate.

At the workshop, questions such as the following should be addressed.

Read more >>http://hsozkult.geschichte.hu-berlin.de/termine/id=11305