It is often argued that job insecurity and precarious work are on the rise. However, the evidence to back these arguments remains mixed and inconclusive. In this study, we define and measure precarious work in Finland using five variables that reflect both objective and subjective insecurity: atypical employment, actually experienced unemployment, the threat of dismissal or unemployment, poor chances of finding a new job, and low earnings. Results based on Statistics Finland’s Quality of Work Life Surveys from 1984 to 2013 indicate that, from a labour market or forms of employment perspective, the proportion of precarious wage earners has increased from 11% in 1984 to 13% in 2013. From a second perspective, however, focusing on changing working conditions, growing inequality and eroding social security mechanisms, we also analyse how a precarious labour market position is related to intrinsic job quality. Precarious workers experience decreased levels of skill and discretion, and they work in a less supportive environment than other employees.

This article analyses whether the extent of public welfare provision influences the speed at which (quasi-)jobless households get (back) into employment. (Quasi-)joblessness is one of the key criteria defining the risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU. Moreover, the perceived tension between the main functions of social benefits (protecting households from poverty and incentivising job search) is most acute among these households. Based on EU-SILC data, we examine changes of household work intensity during one year after benefit receipt. We observe that “more-generous” social benefits have a slightly negative impact. This can potentially be due to a disincentive effect of social benefits, but it can also mean that the additional financial leeway is used by job seekers to wait for more adequate job offers or engage in further training. Even though statistically significant, the estimated negative effects are very small.

This paper examines the sources of knowledge workers’ work intensity and the self-leading strategies they apply to deal with it. The paper is based on focus group interviews with management consultants in a Danish management consultancy firm. Work intensity was identified as resulting from a combination of: (1) a results-only focus, (2) vagueness, (3) boundaryless work, and (4) low control of the quantitative load. A framework for self-leading strategies is developed based on the dimensions of reactive/proactive and self-focused/externally focused strategies in different combinations. The results indicate that while consultants expressed a belief in internal self-discipline strategies of a more reactive nature, in fact, external and proactive strategies were the most effective in practice. In conclusion, the paper contributes to an extension of self-leadership theory to better account for current research on self-control.