Back

Precarious employment and associations with health during COVID-19: a nationally representative survey in Wales, UK

Gray, B. J.; Kyle, R. G.; Isherwood, K. R.; Humphreys, C.; Griffiths, M. L.; Davies, A. R.

2022-06-07 public and global health
10.1101/2022.06.07.22275493 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic had an early impact on employment, with the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) experiencing more severe immediate labour market impacts than other Western countries. Emerging evidence from the initial phase of the pandemic highlighted that job losses were experienced more by those holding atypical contracts. Furthermore, it is predicted that this associated unemployment will increase precarious employment arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper we seek to answer the following research questions: O_LIWhat is the prevalence of precarious employment in Wales and are there differences in employment precariousness by socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported health status? C_LIO_LIWhich domains are the main contributing factors of precarious employment in Wales? C_LIO_LIWhich domains of precarious employment are associated with poorer health? C_LIO_LIHaves there been changes in job quality (as reflected by precarious employment domains) during the COVID pandemic (between February 2020 and Winter 2020/2021)? C_LI MethodsData was collected from a national household survey carried out in May/June 2020, with a sample of 1,032 residents in Wales and follow-up responses from 429 individuals collected between November 2020 and January 2021. To examine the associations between experiencing precarious employment or the separate domains of employment precariousness and socio-demographics and health, chi-squared analyses and logistic regression models (multinomial and binary) were used. To determine longitudinal changes in precarious employment experienced by socio-demographic groups and furlough status, McNemars test was used. The data is presented as proportion of respondents or adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals following logistic regression. ResultsOverall, pre-pandemic, one in four respondents were determined to be in precarious employment (26.5%). A higher proportion of females (28.3%) and those aged 18-29 years (41.0%) were in precarious employment in February 2020. In addition, a greater percentage of individuals who reported poorer health across all self-reported measures were in precarious employment compared to those reporting better health. Worse perceived treatment at work was twice as likely in those who reported a pre-existing condition (aOR 2.45 95% CI [1.33-4.49]), poorer general health (aOR 2.33 95% CI [1.22-4.47]) or low mental wellbeing (aOR 2.81 95% CI [1.34-5.88]) when compared to their healthier counterparts. Those calculated to have high wage precariousness were three times more likely to report low mental wellbeing (aOR 3.12 95% CI [1.54-6.32]). In the subsample, there was an observed increase in the prevalence of precarious employment, with this being attributable to lower affordability of wages and a perceived increase in vulnerability at work. The subgroups that were most impacted by this decrease in job quality were females and the 30-39 years age group. ImplicationsImproving the vulnerability and wages domains, through the creation and provision of secure, adequately paid job opportunities has the potential to reduce the prevalence of precarious employment in Wales. In turn, these changes would improve the health and wellbeing of the working age population, some of which are already adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.1%
2
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
12.1%
3
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.0%
5
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
8
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
9
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
European Journal of Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.0%
11
Public Health
34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
12
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
13
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
15
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
16
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
17
Palliative Medicine
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.6%
18
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
19
SSM - Population Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
20
BMJ Public Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
21
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 73%
0.8%
23
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Public Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
25
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
26
Public Health in Practice
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
27
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
29
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
30
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%