Perceived employability among foreign-born employees,before and during crisis

Abstract

This article investigates the subjective prospects of job mobility via the perceived employability for different groups of employees. Based on comparative data from 2004 and 2010 for 16 European countries, the study explores whether perceived employability varies depending on country of birth. Furthermore, this study examines the influence of country-level factors on perceived employability. The analyses show that compared to native-born employees, foreign-born employees generally demonstrate a more positive view of their possibilities to find a new position that is similar to or better than the current one. Given that previous research indicates a rather negative de facto labour market outcome for foreign-borns compared to native-borns, the results of this study show that the foreign-borns’ self-estimation most likely differs from their expected labour market outcomes. Furthermore, these overall results are influenced by the strictness of employment protection legislation, the level of competition for qualified positions, and the general economic conditions.

Keywords

Foreign-born employees multilevel study perceived employability selective hiring social policy

Introduction

An individual’s subjective assessment of his or her job prospects – so-called perceived employability – is an important factor in turbulent organizational environments when employees face the risk of unemployment. Thus, in the current flexible and uncertain labour market, it is not only the actual possibilities that are important, but also individuals’ perceived possibilities of getting new employment. A high level of perceived employability implies that an uncertain situation feels less threatening (Berntson, 2008). Furthermore, perceived employability has been shown to be positively related to both health and wellbeing; the experience of job alternatives seems to reduce worries of losing a job (Berglund et al., 2014; Sverke et al., 2002). However, perceived employability is not independent of an individual’s characteristics. Most employers avoid hiring candidates from what are considered ‘risky groups’ (Heggebø, 2017; Siebers, 2018). Thus, individuals may assess comparable situations differently, depending on their individual characteristics. Having a foreign background will likely affect an individual’s labour market position.

The concept of employability has been central in European policy discussions over recent decades, with emphasis on the individuals’ responsibility for their own career development (EU, 2012; Forrier and Sels, 2003). To a large extent, the very solution for reducing the risk of unemployment has turned to the individuals’ ability to self-manage. Some measures – such as active labour market policies (ALMPs) and educational investment – have been deliberately developed to affect the employability of the workforce (Jacobsson, 2004). Still, the concept and the policy direction have not remained uncriticized. The so-called flexicurity approach reflects another strand of policy discussion, stressing the concept of employment security. Contrary to the employability nexus, this strand of policy discussion emphasizes the individual’s possibility to find a new job in case of job loss (Wilthagen and Tros, 2004). The flexicurity approach emphasizes measures such as generous unemployment benefits and active labour market measures to enhance the individual’s chances in the labour market. Following this perspective, general labour market policies, as well as the education system, may also be relevant for individuals’ employability, not only the actual possibilities but also their perception of being employable. Herein, the perceived employability is considered important since it captures social psychological factors at the individual level, as well as the actual employability, which is a direct consequence of more external aspects such as unemployment level and existing job positions available. This article aims to broaden the understanding of perceived employability by including several individual characteristics and country-level variables related to labour market policies and educational context and exploring how these different levels interact. In addition, the interaction between the two levels is believed to vary between different categories of the population. These measures are considered important for understanding the implication of current European policies, which (to a varying extent depending on the country-level context) focus on individuals’ ability – and responsibility – to self-manage in the labour market. Herein, such a system is believed to be more beneficial for native-born inhabitants.

Given different rates in native-born and immigrant individuals’ employment opportunities, a more specific aim of this article is to examine and compare the perceived employability of native- and foreign-born employees. Perceived employability is here defined as an individual’s assessment of his or her chances of finding new employment that is equal to or better than the current one (see also Berntson et al., 2006). Moreover, the article investigates whether some of the central aspects of current European policy discussions – the significance of active labour market policies, educational attainment, and the strictness of employment protection legislation – affect the perceived employability of foreign- and native-born individuals alike.

As previously stated, immigrants can be expected to face greater difficulties than individuals born inside the country of residence regarding access to qualified labour market positions (Acker, 1990, 2006). In particular, non-European migrants experience higher unemployment rates and lower wage incomes than natives (Rydgren, 2004). Furthermore, potential employers value the qualifications of immigrant and native-born workers differently (Åslund et al., 2014), and employers’ different appraisals most likely affect the perceived employability of the immigrant employees. These processes may be even more pronounced in times of reduced labour demand. Therefore, this study compares native- and foreign-born employees’ perceived employability before and after the economic crisis of 2008–2009 in Europe. In addition, the article also analyses if the country-level policies in focus have the same effects on these categories’ perceived employability before and during the crisis.

Thus far, the impact of individual- and country-level factors such as labour market policies and economic conditions on perceived employability has been studied without distinguishing between native-born and foreign-born employees (Chung and Van Oorschot, 2011). Assessing how the subjective experience differs between migrant groups and native-born employees, the present study contributes to a broadened understanding of the factors explaining individuals’ perceived employability. Data from the European Social Survey were analysed through a multilevel analysis, which allows for variations between countries by combining independent variables on both individual and country levels (Hox, 2010).

The article is structured as follows. First, a background section is provided, where theoretical arguments and the hypotheses are presented, emphasizing the relevance of studying perceived employability in relation to the employees’ country of origin and presenting three country-level factors that are present in the country of employment. Next, data sources and model specifications are explained. Finally, the results of the multilevel approach are presented, followed by a concluding discussion.

Theoretical perspectives and hypotheses

The significance of perceived employability and foreign-born origin

European societies have seen dramatic changes during recent decades, in which responsibility for employment has been transferred more and more from the government to the individual employee (Berntson, 2011; Jacobsson, 2004). This shift contrasts with earlier periods of de-commodification, in which the welfare state played a great role in helping its citizens to uphold reasonable living conditions independent of their situation in the labour market (see Esping-Andersen, 1990). In the 1990s, a ‘re-commodification of the workforce’ occurred when individuals became more dependent on market forces for their wellbeing (Breen, 1997; Svallfors, 2006). This relationship between market forces and individuals applies to many contemporary Western countries, albeit with varying patterns.

The contemporary discourse on employability places the responsibility of employment on the individual. To be employable, the individual should constantly invest in recognized skills and competences (EU, 2012; OECD, 2011). For example, where there is a mismatch between an individual’s educational qualifications and present employment position this can be blamed on inappropriate attitudes on the part of the individual such as lack of initiative or wrong behaviour. Accordingly, if the individual worker wishes to gain labour market opportunities, he or she is forced to adapt to the demand side in a labour market (Peck and Theodore, 2000), in a system that favours employers:

The relationship between the employability-development opportunities provided by the higher education institution and the employment of the graduate is complicated by the role played by employers. In the end, it is the employers who convert the ‘employability’ of the graduate into employment. (Harvey, 2010: 102, author’s emphasis)

The above quotation illustrates that the meaning of relevant skills and competences becomes difficult to identify, and also that individuals may have unequal access to employability despite having similar characteristics, which will likely also affect their perceived employment opportunities. Therefore, an understanding of employability in terms of individual responsibility and adaptability to employers’ requirements de-emphasizes the role of labour market politics and economic conditions – factors that research has shown to affect perceived opportunities in the labour market (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015; Chung and Van Oorschot, 2011).

Furthermore, the individuals’ own assessments of objectively comparable situations may vary depending on characteristics regarding such factors as skills, competences, attitudes and motivation (Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden, 2006; Vanhercke et al., 2014). However, the present article focuses on the significance of country of origin for individuals’ perceived employability, and the native origin is a rather stable condition. Nevertheless, being a native employee can affect the chances of obtaining an attractive job, as (subtle) discrimination of foreign employees does occur (Acker, 1990; Furåker, 2005). It is not possible to know exactly whether discrimination is caused by preferences against migrants or by statistical discrimination; however, it is clear that non-European migrants are more likely to be unemployed (see Rydgren, 2004). Furthermore, foreign employees often have limited access to social networks and verbal skills, which often affects the recruitment process (Åslund et al., 2014; Granovetter, 1995), and such ‘soft skills’ are often nation-specific (Siebers, 2018). It is very likely that this also affects an immigrant’s subjective understanding of his or her employment prospects, which leads to our first general hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1a: The perceived employability for foreign-born employees is more negative than for native-born employees.

Other individual characteristics may also be salient, and are therefore important to control for in analyses of perceived employability. For example, younger individuals typically assume better chances in the labour market than older ones (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015; Berglund et al., 2014). Furthermore, the employee’s present employment conditions are believed to be important factors affecting the perceived employability, such as the type of employment contract, employment sector and occupational category (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015; Chung and Van Oorschot, 2011). Research also states that women have a lower perception of employability due to their general weaker labour market position, irrespective of their level of education (Fogde, 2009).

Moreover, of central importance for the perceived employability of employees is the level of education (see Berglund et al., 2014; Berntson et al., 2006), a subject to which we will return later. In general, individuals with limited education and skills have more limited labour market opportunities (Åberg, 2002). Furthermore, education leads to greater self-confidence about finding a new job (Anderson and Pontusson, 2007). Nevertheless, research shows that foreign-born inhabitants often experience difficulties in terms of transferring their educational competences and skills into ‘nation specific’ human capital (Rydgren, 2004; Siebers, 2018). Therefore, we develop a hypothesis which takes the significance of education and native origin into consideration:

Hypothesis 1b: The difference in perceived employability between low and high educated foreign-born employees is smaller than the difference between low and high educated native-born employees.

Perceived employability and country-level factors

Perceived employability is further analysed by adding the effects of institutional factors defined on a national level. Country of origin is examined in relation to three country-level factors, besides the unemployment rate, which forms a fourth control variable. Each country-level factor constitutes national conditions in the respective country of employment, herein assumed to impact the perceived employability of both native- and foreign-born employees.

The first country-level factor is the spending on active labour market policies, which has been found in previous research to be relevant for perceived employability (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015). Herein, focus lies on national spending on training activities. The aim of training activities is to activate unemployed individuals during periods of unemployment, either by improving or protecting their human capital (Bonoli, 2010). Thus, the focus on national spending on reskilling among the activation policies is relevant in terms of individual empowerment by providing tools for becoming more employable in a situation of unemployment.

Generous labour market policies, including active measures, have been shown to affect not only the unemployed, but employees as well (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015; Chung and Van Oorschot, 2011). Generous spending on training activities is assumed to have a direct positive effect on the general level of perceived employability among employees, making them less subject to feeling trapped in a specific employment position.

As the focus of this study is on the comparison between native- and foreign-born employees, the interest here is to analyse whether the effect of these country-level factors concerns native- and foreign-born individuals in the same way. Considering spending on training activities, the effect is assumed to be stronger for foreign-born employees. This argument is based on the general idea that the objective of training activities is to ‘upgrade’ individuals according to labour market demands; that is, training can help foreign-born employees adapt to nation-specific skills and competences in accordance with the present domestic context.

Hypothesis 2a: The perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees, is more strongly affected in a positive direction by the country-level spending on training activities.

The second country-level factor affecting individuals’ perceived employability is Employment Protection Legislation (EPL). Research indicates that the strictness of EPL predominantly influences the behaviour of employers by slowing the dismissal process and making them more fastidious in their hiring decisions (Skedinger, 2011). On an aggregate level, this may cause fewer job openings in countries with strict EPL, which could negatively affect a worker’s perceived possibility to find an equal or better position. When there is a low level of job openings, recruiters also become more likely to employ individuals similar to themselves – a situation that is beneficial for native-born individuals (Acker, 1990, 2006; Furåker, 2005). Thus, for the foreign-born group a strict legislation may be more detrimental, as they most likely experience increased difficulties to change jobs in the labour market (Likic-Brboric et al., 2013).

Hypothesis 2b: A strict EPL more negatively affects the perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees.

The third country-level factor is related to the percentage of inhabitants with a tertiary level of education. Here, the individual’s qualifications and skills are seen from a macro-level context, where nations have different access to qualified and educated workers. According to theories on learning or the knowledge-based economy (Lundvall and Lorenz, 2012), it is argued that a large proportion of highly educated people can create a more dynamic economy and labour market; that is, investments in education cause prosperity. A general assumption within this study is that a high percentage of people with a tertiary degree affects the general level of perceived employability in a positive direction (Berglund and Wallinder, 2015), but mainly for native-born employees. This assumption is based on the fact that foreign-born individuals, with a high probability of having foreign qualifications, most likely perceive greater difficulties in getting their competences recognized. This is due to classification routines within bureaucratic systems in the country of employment (Diedrich et al., 2011) and/or the (subtle) discrimination of foreign-born employees in the recruitment process (Åslund et al., 2014; Furåker, 2005). Consequently, a large number of educated citizens increases the competition for qualified positions, which is assumed to boost subtle discrimination even more, leading to an amplified negative effect for foreign-born employees.

Hypothesis 2c: A large share of inhabitants with tertiary education affects the perceived employability of foreign-born employees more negatively than native-born employees.

Perceived employability and changes in national economic conditions

In the autumn of 2008, an economic downturn started to affect most EU countries. Consequently, the demand for labour varied to a large extent between 2004 and 2010. Previous research indicates that unemployment rates affect individuals’ perceived employability (Berglund et al., 2014; Berntson et al., 2006); thus, the comparison between the two time points is important for understanding the conditions for native- and foreign-born employees’ perceived employability. A major downturn in the economy most likely has a different significance for native- and foreign-born employees’ perceived employability, and this effect most likely influences the significance of country-level institutional factors.

In a post-crisis context with high unemployment rates, employers are likely to be more selective when hiring, and have a tendency to recruit individuals with a similar background (such as qualifications and attributes) as their own (Åslund et al., 2014). A period of economic stability, on the other hand, results in increased employment possibilities, with more positions available, which could be beneficial for foreign-born individuals who are at higher risk of being subject to subtle discrimination in the recruiting process. Thus, a situation of recovery from an economic recession is likely to increase the difference between native- and foreign-born employees’ perceived employability.

In addition to the general effects of aggregate demand on perceived employability, the functions of the country-level factors on which this study focuses may work differently in a stable labour market than in a situation of recovery from the recession. For example, generous possibilities to retrain and reskill could be of more importance in a post-crisis context (Bonoli, 2010), especially for foreign-borns, who are more likely to have gained their education abroad and thus needing to adapt their qualifications in accordance with the present domestic context. On the other hand, strict EPL could imply an even stronger negative effect for employees’ perceived employability in a period of recovery with fewer available positions. Furthermore, the national percentage of tertiary education may have been more negative for the individuals’ perceived employability during the recovery in 2010, due to increased competition for qualified positions. In such cases, well-educated individuals may be forced to apply for positions below their qualifications, squeezing out those with low levels of education (Åberg, 2002). While these effects assume a general change in terms of perceived employability, the following hypotheses state that this comparison, across time, may have a diverse effect for native- and foreign-born individuals alike. More precisely:

Hypothesis 3a: The perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees, is even more positively affected by policy incentives supporting the individual’s ability to retrain during the recovery from an economic recession.

Hypothesis 3b: The perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees, is even more negatively affected by strict EPL during the recovery from an economic recession.

Hypothesis 3c: The perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees, is even more negatively affected by high levels of competition for qualified positions during the recovery from an economic recession.

Perceived employability for graduate foreign-born employees

As previously mentioned, the comparison between 2004 and 2010 highlights good versus bad economic times. In addition, possibilities for intra-European mobility have changed dramatically in the last decade, wherefore the composition of foreign-borns might be different in 2004 and 2010; the share of foreign-borns coming from other European countries is most likely larger in 2010, and many of the intra-European migrants are highly educated. Besides, extended possibilities for academics seeking work abroad have been increasingly promoted by European policy-makers (Eurydice, 2012).

According to theories on human capital, possessing a higher education degree should enhance the chance of acquiring a job, but may also instil a general feeling of self-confidence in the individual (Anderson and Pontusson, 2007; Becker, 1997). Both mechanisms could increase the perceived labour market possibilities. However, a large proportion of tertiary educated in a country can also reduce the perceived employability through increased competition for qualified jobs. This would lead to smaller benefits from education for the individual. Therefore, human capital is likely to yield diverse returns depending on factors such as economic conditions and the level of concurrence for qualified employment positions in the labour market.

As stated above, this study underlines the diverse contextual conditions prior to and after the economic recession following 2008–2009. With this comparison, the final analysis of perceived employability relates the effect of individuals’ level of education to the significance of country of birth and country-level factors. The effect of an individual’s level of education is believed to be of particular importance for the perceived labour market opportunities during the aftermath of an economic crisis. Here, however, this effect is expected to differ depending on whether the employee is native- or foreign-born, as foreign-born individuals are more likely to experience (subtle) discrimination in the recruiting process when employers become more fastidious, mainly recruiting individuals similar to themselves. A general question for this investigation is whether certain macro-level factors might overturn or improve a tertiary-educated individual’s perceived employability in a post-economic crisis context, where employers are believed to be more selective in their hiring, causing a more detrimental situation for the group of non-natives. These assumptions lead to the final hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: The effect of foreign-born employees’ level of education on perceived employability is influenced by the national context in their respective country of employment.

To measure the national context in the country of employment, the three country-level variables defined in the previous hypotheses were used: the spending on training activities; EPL; and the average percentage of inhabitants with a tertiary level of education. Moreover, the article proposes that these effects most likely differ during the recovery from an economic downturn for individuals with different origins.

Data and method

Data

The data originate from the European Social Survey (ESS), a biennial cross-sectional survey performed since 2002.¹ The empirical findings are based on Round 2 from 2004, and Round 5 from 2010. The total survey included 25 European countries in 2004 and 27 in 2010; whereas, the analyses include 16 identical countries at each time point due to a limitation caused by small group size among foreign-born employees.² In each country, data were collected via face-to-face interviews. The target group are employees aged 16–65, living in the specific countries during the period of data collection. All countries followed the same basic principles of strict probability and representativeness, and individuals were selected based on strict random probability methods. The response rate was 43.6–79.3% in 2004 and 47.1–74.7% in 2010. All countries were required to aim for a minimum ‘effective achieved sample size’ (ESS, 2016), taking the variation of population size and design effects into consideration. However, the meagre response rate in some countries could still create a selection bias, particularly among the foreign-born employees. There is, most likely, an over-representation of middle-class individuals, while working-class members are more likely to be under-represented (see Favell and Guiraudon, 2011).

The data are nested and exist at different levels, which makes multilevel linear regression a useful approach (Hox, 2010). The first level comprises individuals and individual characteristics (based on ESS data). On the second level, country-specific variables provide an institutional and macro-economic dimension. The reason for combining these two levels in an interactive analysis is that national variations are assumed to impact individual inhabitants.

The consistency of the multilevel technique includes independent variables on both individual- and country-level. Seven variables referring to individual characteristics (gender, age, if born within country of employment, and level of education³) and work-related characteristics (occupational group, type of employment contract and employment sector) are included. In the final model, only occupational group was included as a work-related variable, as those measuring employment contract and sector did not affect the outcome.

In Table 1, all country-level indicators are included. Country-level indicators for measuring the national context are as follows: (1) tertiary education completed as a percentage of the total 30–34 age group;⁴ (2) national spending on training activities;⁵ and (3) employment protection legislation.⁶ Additionally, unemployment rate is used as a control. Further, spending on training activities was standardized against the level of unemployment, i.e. the percentage of GDP spending was divided by the unemployment rate. These variables give a better indication of governmental ambition and generosity (Chung and Van Oorschot, 2011; Van den Berg et al., 1997). All country-level variables outlined in Table 1 were collected from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Statistics and Eurostat. It is worth noting that OECD figures on governmental social spending include potential errors since national categories do not always match with given categories provided by the OECD statistics. For example, Streeck and Mertens (2011) stated that there are difficulties in terms of measuring and comparing national spending on ALMPs. Nonetheless, the analysis herein will be based on data gathered from OECD sources since access to other comparable data is nearly impossible.

Table 1.

Country-level determinants: 2004 and 2010.

	Tertiary education completed,% of total agegroup 30–34		Training activities(% of GDP), cat. 2of ALMP		Employment protection legislation (EPL), OECD index version 2		Unemploymentrate (%)
	2004	2010	2004	2010	2004	2010	2004	2010
Denmark	34.9	41.2	0.54	0.67	2.56	1.77	5.5	7.5
Norway	39.4	47.3	0.40	0.22	2.38	2.72	4.3	3.6
Sweden	34.5	45.3	0.25	0.04	2.58	2.18	7.4	8.6
Finland	38.0	45.7	0.42	0.53	2.08	2.03	8.8	8.4
Belgium	39.6	44.4	0.16	0.16	2.76	2.50	8.4	8.3
Germany	22.9	29.8	0.38	0.31	3.09	2.39	10.5	7.1
Netherlands	34.2	41.4	0.13	0.14	2.92	2.13	5.1	4.5
Switzerland	30.4	44.2	0.29	0.21	2.18	1.77	3.9	4.5
France	38.5	43.5	0.31	0.38	2.73	2.89	8.9	9.7
Spain	38.4	40.6	0.15	0.20	2.76	3.01	11.0	20.1
Greece	24.6	28.3	0.03	0.02	2.93	2.81	10.6	12.6
Ireland	40.4	50.1	0.26	0.45	1.81	1.32	4.5	13.9
UK	35.1	43.0	0.03	0.02	1.68	1.10	4.7	7.8
Estonia	28.4	40.0	0.03	0.06	2.48	2.29	10.1	16.9
Poland	22.6	35.3	0.09	0.04	2.41	2.19	19.1	9.7
Slovenia	24.3	34.8	0.04	0.04	2.50	2.57	6.3	7.3

Source: Eurostat; OECD Employment and Labour Market Statistics.

Operationalization of perceived employability and foreign origin

In this study the dependent variable, perceived employability, is operationalized and measured by the question: How difficult or easy would it be for you to get a similar or better job with another employer if you had to leave your current job? The respondent could answer on an 11-point scale, ranging from 0 = Extremely difficult to 10 = Extremely easy. Thus, the focus lies on already employed individuals’ perceived ability of securing new employment within the labour market. The data include a sample of 33,297 (2004) and 30,842 (2010) individuals, out of which 16,291 (2004) and 14,850 (2010) were in the paid workforce. A total of 13,323 (81.8%) in 2004 and 12,118 (81.6%) in 2010 responded to the question.

The comparison between the two periods, 2004 and 2010, respectively, exemplifies two different contexts in terms of possibilities for intra-European labour market mobility. Thus, the group composition of foreign-born employees included in the data has most likely changed between the two periods (see Barslund et al., 2014; Likic-Brboric, 2011). However, it is important to mention that EU citizens living in other countries within Europe are most likely highly selective. Although the (subtle) discrimination in the recruiting process is likely to be higher for certain groups, such as non-European/non-OECD citizens, this might also affect the perceived employability among the group of foreign-born employees. Therefore, the operationalization of the individual-level variable ‘foreign origin’ divides between European-born and non-European-born employees – at least in the first three parts of the analysis. As expected, the distribution of European-born immigrants is larger in 2010 (6.8% compared to 5.5%). Furthermore, the total percentage of foreign-born is marginally larger in 2010 (11.5% in comparison to 10%). In the final part, the data sets are divided into two separate samples, comparing foreign- and native-born employees in separate analyses.

Model specification

Initially, a null model studied the relationship between individual (level-1) and country-level (level-2) factors. This model included no explanatory variables, only the dependent variable and country-level variance. For this reason, the null model is used as a reference point to estimate if additional variables could improve the level of explanation. This empty model explains the country-specific intercepts. Within-country and between-country variances are measured by using the intra-class correlation (ICC) (Hox, 2010: 15).

A means of improving the model is to include independent, individual-level variables, which control for distributional differences among countries. The last steps involve country-level variables to explain variations among countries, followed by the introduction of cross-level interactions, assumed to appear between individuals’ country of origin and different labour market characteristics. Further models include cross-level interactions with individuals’ level of education, and each country-level factor is divided into two separate analyses: those born and not born in the country of employment. Due to small sample size, these analyses do not divide the foreign-born employees between European- or non-European-born employees. A final step is to compare the results divided between native- and foreign-born with the same models including the whole sample. All models with cross-level interactions include each micro- and macro-level variable, yet the outcomes of these are not shown in the final tables. For the exploration of hierarchical patterns, Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) estimation is used due to the small number of cases at the higher level. Moreover, for statistical analysis, Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) functions were used as adjustments to deviance to assess model parsimony (compare with Hox, 2010: 50).

A mode of centring⁷ the dependent and the independent non-dummy variables is used. Hox (2010) describes the main reason for this technique as related to the problem with slope variations for independent variables. In the final models, using subpopulations with native- and foreign-born separately, all variables are centred within each subpopulation.

Results

The first step of the analysis was to provide descriptive statistics of the study population, describing the mean distribution of central individual characteristics in each sample. Here, it is clear that variations do occur, for example when comparing the mean age among native-born and foreign-born groups (see Table 2). Thereafter, we estimated how much of the total variance could be explained at the country level. The null model contains only intercepts and error terms, yet the total variance can be calculated by combining the individual- and country-level variance (Hox, 2010). Table 3 shows the ICC for the whole sample, measuring 8.9% in 2004 and 7.3% in 2010.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics of the study population: ESS 2004 and ESS 2010, mean (SD).

	All		Natives		Born within Europe		Born outside Europe
	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010
Perceived employability	4.6(2.6)	4.7(2.8)	4.5(2.7)	4.7(2.7)	4.5(2.9)	4.9(2.8)	4.2(2.8)	4.6(2.8)
Age (16–65 years)	40.8(11.3)	41.7(11.4)	40.9(11.4)	41.8(11.5)	53.1(17.4)	41.8(10.4)	53.5(28.7)	40.4(11.1)
Education	2.2(0.8)	2.3(0.7)	2.1(0.7)	2.4(0.7)	2.0(0.8)	2.4(0.7)	1.9(0.8)	2.2(0.8)
Sex	0.49(0.5)	0.50(0.5)	0.49(0.5)	0.49(0.5)	0.51(0.5)	0.52(0.5)	0.55(0.5)	0.51(0.5)
N	12,303	11,300	11,072	9998	677	769	554	533

Comment: Perceived employability measures an 11-point scale (0-10): 0 equals low level of perceived employability, and 10 measures very high perceived employability. Education is measures in 3 levels: primary (1), secondary (2), tertiary (3) level of education. Sex measures men (0), women (1).

Table 3.

Empty model. Mixed multilevel linear regression with REML estimation (unstandardized regression coefficients).

	ESS 2004	ESS 2010
Intercept	0.28***	0.23***
Variance
Individual-level	6.9650	7.2955
Country-level	0.6759	0.5740
ICC	0.089	0.073
Statistics
LL	−29,431	−27,295
BIC	58,890	54,618
N	12,303	11,300
Countries	16	16
Min. N	477	469
Max. N	1027	1217

Levels of significance: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

If calculating ICC only for foreign-born, the ICC was estimated at 5.6% (2004) at the lowest and 10.2% at the highest (2010) (not shown in the table). The ICC comparing native-born varies to a lesser degree upon comparison of the years 2004 (9.9%) and 2010 (7.5%). Consequently, the largest difference between countries can be found comparing the group of foreign-born employees prior to and after the recession, as the country-level variance is nearly double within this group during the crisis in 2010.

Table 4 shows the specific individual- and country-level variables within the two periods. In Model 1, individual-level variables control compositional effects within each country (see Table 4), indicating several relationships regarding the effect on individual levels. As expected, a positive effect of higher education on perceived employability exists. Besides, there is a significant difference between the group of native- and foreign-born employees, with those foreign-born more positive in terms of perceived employability – irrespectively of whether they are born in or outside Europe. However, the effect among European-born employees is more positive compared to those born outside Europe (even if the difference is reduced over time).

Table 4.

Individual-level variables in Model 1 and country-level variables in Model 2. Mixed multilevel linear regression with REML estimation (unstandardized regression coefficients).

	Model 1Individual-level predictors		Model 2Separate level-2 models		Model 3Full model
	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010
Individual-level
Women	−0.14***	−0.25***			−0.16**	−0.25***
Age (ref. = 50–65)
16–29 years old	1.37***	1.31***			1.36***	1.31***
30–49 years old	0.95***	0.93***			0.96***	0.93***
Level of education (ref. = lower)
Secondary education	0.16*	0.02			0.15*	0.02
Tertiary education	0.36***	0.24**			0.35***	0.23**
Birth country (ref. = native-born)
European-born	0.32***	0.18**			0.32***	0.17**
Non-European-born	0.08	0.06*			0.11	0.06
Occupation (ref. = manual workers)
Service workers	−0.01	0.10			−0.01	0.09
Semi-professionals	0.15*	0.20*			0.18*	0.20*
Professionals	0.03*	0.32**			0.01*	0.32**
Managers	0.18***	0.29***			0.19*	0.29***
Country-level
Percentage tertiary education			0.10***	0.08**	0.08***	0.08***
Training activities			11.15	12.92*	0.59	1.12
EPL			0.06*	−0.21	−0.04	0.35
Unempl. rate			−0.26***	−0.12***	−0.19***	−0.12***
Intercept	−0.67***	−0.54***			−1.04***	−0.90***
Variance
Individual-level	6.6866	7.0029			6.6594	6.997
Country-level	0.7166	0.6533			0.153	0.137
ICC
Statistics
LL	−28,432	−26,448			−28,372	−26,062
BIC	56,808	52,286			56,741	52,126
N	12,303	11,300			12,303	11,300
Countries	16	16			16	16
Min. N	477	469			477	469
Max. N	1027	1217			1027	1217

Note: The models include fixed effects.

Levels of significance: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

Next, the results from four separate country-level variable analyses, including one macro-level per context, plus the individual variables (Model 2) are compared with a full model (Model 3) including all country-level variables. The results indicate that the percentage of tertiary educated and the unemployment rate remain significant both when analysed separately and in the full model of each time point. However, the level-2 variable effect of spending on training activities implies a positive effect when analysed separately, which is clearly reduced with control of the other level-2 variables. The reduction is mainly due to the introduction of unemployment rate. Further, during the aftermath of the economic crisis in 2010, the effect of EPL becomes positive when controlling for all other level-2 variables (only significant at the 10% level).

As we include interaction effects between tertiary level of education and foreign origin (whether born within or outside Europe, see Table 5), a significant result appears among the tertiary educated European-born employees in 2004. However, Model 4 shows that there is hardly no difference in terms of marginal effects among educated and non-educated European-born employees. Still, highly educated European-born foreigners perceive a higher employability than highly educated native-born employees (with an effect size of 0.43, compared to 0.25). The perceived employability of highly educated non-European employees is lower compared to educated native-borns (effect size of 0.15 compared to 0.25), but the marginal effect is still larger than for the non-educated native-born employees. However, during the recovery from the crisis, in 2010, the effect of having a tertiary education is larger among the non-European-born employees compared to all other groups (effect size of 0.44 compared to 0.20 for natives and 0.33 for Europeans). Besides, the difference between highly educated and lower educated non-Europeans seems to be larger during the recovery from the crisis. If gender is added as a component, women perceive lower employability in general: among the educated natives, the effect size is reduced to −0.05. One reason for this could be that the group of non-natives proportionally include more men than women compared to the native group, causing a potential selection-bias in terms of gender distribution among non-native employees. Still, tertiary education seems to be beneficial for foreign-born employees in general – particularly among the group of non-European-born employees.

Table 5.

Individual-level interactions between tertiary education and place of birth. Mixed multilevel linear regression with REML estimation (unstandardized regression coefficients).

	Model 4
	ESS 2004	ESS 2010
Individual-level
Level of education(ref. = below tertiary education)
Tertiary education	0.25***	0.20***
Birth country (ref. = native-born)
European-born	0.42**	0.21*
Non-European-born	−0.08*	−0.07
Interactions (Education*Foreign-born)
Tertiary edu*European	−0.24*	−0.08
Tertiary edu*Non-European	−0.02	0.31**
Intercept	−0.56***	−0.52***
Statistics
LL	−28,684	−26,626
BIC	57,968	53,237
N	12,303	11,300

Note: Including all individual-level variables and country-level variables from Model 3 (not shown). Random effect of individual level of education is added, increasing the degrees of freedom for each model.

Levels of significance: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

When including cross-level interaction effects between individuals’ country of origin and each country-level factor, a diverse pattern appears. Table 6 includes those interactions with significant outcomes (where p < .05) for at least one of the time points. Model 5 shows interactions between country of origin and EPL. In 2010, the perceived employability of foreign-born (both for European- and non-European-born) employees lowers when the employment protection legislation becomes stricter. In the pre-crisis context, this effect was reversed. Further, Model 6 indicates that the level of inhabitants possessing a tertiary education has a significant positive effect for foreign-born employees in 2004, but a reduced effect in 2010 (not significant). Consequently, these two country-level variables affect the foreign-born employees differently prior and post the crisis context – particularly regarding the strictness of EPL.

Table 6.

Cross-level interaction with birth country and EPL/percentage with tertiary education. Mixed multilevel linear regression with REML estimation (unstandardized regression coefficients).

	Model 5Interaction EPL		Model 6Interaction % with tertiaryeducation
	ESS 2004	ESS 2010	ESS 2004	ESS 2010
Individual-level
Birth country (ref. = native-born)
European-born	0.32***	0.15*	0.48**	0.33**
Non-European	0.14*	0.06	0.19*	0.18*
Country-level
Percentage tertiary education			0.08***	0.08***
EPL	0.17	0.39*
Interactions
European born*	0.16*	−0.31**	0.04*	−0.03
Non-European*	0.22**	−0.30*	0.03*	−0.02
Variance
Individual-level	6.661	6.994	6.659	6.977
Country-level	0.150	0.121	0.153	0.112
Statistics
LL	−29,024	−27,469	−26,924	−27,072
BIC	58,023	54,846	52,043	54,312
N	12,303	11,300	12,303	11,300

Levels of significance: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

The final model(s) (see Table 7) include cross-level interaction effects between individual level of education and each country-level variable, so differences in individual effects of education can be identified. As previously discussed, the general effect of individual education is assumed to vary when comparing native- and foreign-born employees, and due to sample size, the foreign-born variable does not separate between whether the employee is born within or outside Europe. Therefore, the data divide between two groups of employees for each time point, resulting in four different outcomes for each cross-level interaction. Again, only the significant outcome of the interactions (where p < .05) for at least one of the time points is presented, yet excluding significant interaction terms with unemployment rate.⁸

Table 7.

Cross-level interactions in separate analyses for native- and foreign-born at the different time points.

	Model 7
	ESS 2004		ESS 2010
	Native-	Foreign-born	Native-	Foreign-born
Individual-level
Level of education(ref. = lower sec.)
Secondary education	0.23**	−0.09	−0.04	0.43*
Tertiary education	0.43***	0.22**	0.20*	0.37*
Country-level
EPL	0.10	0.49*	0.70**	0.14
Interactions
Secondary edu*EPL	−0.12	−0.39*	−0.43**	−0.33
Tertiary edu*EPL	−0.10	−0.55*	−0.33*	−0.18
Intercept	−1.23***	−0.66***	−0.90***	−0.81***
Statistics
LL	−24,664	−2896	−24,074	−2985
BIC	49,514	5913	48,323	6105
N	11,024	1279	10,059	1241

Note: Including all individual-level variables (except for European/non-European-born employee) and country-level variables from Model 3 (not shown). Random effect of individual level of education is added, increasing the degrees of freedom for each model.

Levels of significance: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

In Model 7, a significant negative effect of tertiary level of education in combination with EPL can be seen in 2004 among foreign-born, and further among the native-born employees in the period of recovery after late 2008.⁹ These analyses investigate if the individual-level effect of tertiary education is independent of the institutional level (that is, being employed in a country with various strict employment protection legislation) as well as the labour market situation. The analyses of tertiary education on EPL indicate a pattern in which highly educated foreign-born employees (2004) and native-born employees (2010) are most affected by EPL strictness. If calculating the 90% confidence intervals of the margin effects (not shown), there is a significant effect among the foreign-born employees in 2004 and native-born employees in 2010, but only with about a two-step difference in EPL strictness. This means that a similar pattern for foreign-versus native-born employees prior to and after the economic recession of 2008/9 appears. In the pre-crisis context, foreign-born employees with tertiary education are negatively affected by strict legislation regarding their perceived employability, while a similar pattern applies for native-born in the post-crisis context.

Finally, a comparison among different models clarifies that the overall pattern with coefficients remains stable (cf. Hox, 2010: 40).¹⁰ To perform a robustness test of the model fit, all analyses were first compared with the exclusion of the Nordic countries due to their historical similarity and relation to social democratic institutional characteristics (Esping-Andersen, 1990). Second, a separate analysis was performed with the exclusion of Spain due to its high unemployment level in 2010 (see Table 1). The coefficients were rather indifferent when excluding the Nordic countries (except for level of significance) concerning EPL and percentage of inhabitants possessing a tertiary education (that is, the main variables that were significant in the models using cross-level interactions (see Models 5, 6 and 7). The country-level effects of governmental spending on training activities, however, radically changed when excluding the Nordics. Spending on training activities are more similar to the separate effect shown in Model 2 in 2004 (when all 16 countries are included), as generous spending on training activities generates a clear positive effect on the perceived employability – although this effect turns negative in 2010. However, when Spain is excluded, the country-level effects in the full model are only marginally changed.

Concluding discussion

This article aimed to investigate how the employee’s country of birth affects the subjective assessment of the prospects of job mobility, the so-called perceived employability. Over recent decades, European politicians have increasingly promoted the individual’s own responsibility for remaining employed. Thus, the very solution for battling rising unemployment levels increasingly turned to the individual’s ability to self-manage in the labour market. Still, an individual’s migrant status has been shown to affect the chances of getting an attractive job (Acker, 1990; Åslund et al., 2014; Furåker, 2005; Siebers, 2018).

As shown in previous research, immigrants born outside Europe are most likely to face labour market discrimination (see Rydgren, 2004; Siebers, 2018), which, in this article, is believed to affect their perceived employability. The present study shows that current European policies affect the perceived labour market opportunities of native-born and foreign-born employees in different ways, also when comparing European- and non-European-born foreign employees. Given the immigrants’ lower rates in employment opportunities, it is interesting that foreign-born employees in general demonstrate a more positive view of their employment prospects (rejecting Hypothesis 1a) irrespectively of their tenure, even if the positive effect is lower in 2010. Furthermore, the effect of tertiary education among both groups of foreign-born employees is partly more positive than for native-born employees, even if the effect is larger for European-born educated employees (thus rejecting Hypothesis 1b). These results need to be considered in the light of the study’s focus on employees, as it does not include individuals outside the labour market. Despite the observed differences between the foreign- and native-born employees’ perceived employment opportunities, it is crucial to consider that we are unaware of the employee’s actual position in relation to his or her level of qualification, which would reflect the level of mismatches. However, it is important to consider the inherited problem with selection bias in terms of response rate in some countries: This probably causes over-representation of educated foreign-born individuals (Favell and Guiraudon, 2011), which might further affect the positive view of their employment prospects. Still, the results indicate that those who are foreign-born (particularly those born within Europe) might see the contemporary flexible and uncertain labour market as less threatening, given that they might be more ‘used to’ an unpredictable work-life in general.

This analysis of perceived employability also highlighted the significance of country-level factors, which were believed to differ depending on national economic conditions based on data comparison from 2004 and 2010. Can the country-level factors be seen as a compensatory mechanism, improving the immigrants (and native) employees’ perceived employability? The perceived employability of foreign-born employees, compared to native-born employees, was assumed to be more positively affected by the country-level spending on training activities (Hypothesis 2a). This positive influence on foreign-born employees was assumed to increase during the aftermath of an economic downturn in 2010 (Hypothesis 3a). As the results show, this is not the case.

Furthermore, the perceived employability of foreign-born employees, in comparison to native-born employees, was assumed to be more negatively affected by a strict employment protection legislation (Hypothesis 2b), and this was believed to further increase in the aftermath of an economic recession (Hypothesis 3b). The results show that a strict EPL seemed to be beneficial for foreign-born individuals in the pre-crisis labour market, while proving to be more detrimental during the aftermath of an economic recession (patterns favouring Hypothesis 3b). These results tie in with previous research stating that a strict EPL renders employers more selective when hiring (Skedinger, 2011). With the increase of competition due to a deteriorating labour market, this mechanism seems to negatively hit foreign-borns – irrespectively of whether born within or outside Europe – by affecting their perceived possibility of finding an equal or better position. During economic growth, however, when more positions are available and local employers are more likely to hire, the same effect of EPL does not influence foreign-born individuals. Rather, in a pre-crisis context, a strict EPL can be seen as beneficial for ‘vulnerable groups’ such as foreign-born employees, and even slightly more beneficial for non-European-born in comparison to European-born employees.

Additionally, the perceived employability of foreign-born employees was assumed to be negatively affected by a high level of competition for qualified positions (Hypothesis 2c), and this effect was believed to increase even more during the aftermath of an economic recession (Hypothesis 3c). The analysis indicates that the level of competition for qualified positions significantly affected foreign-born employees in 2004, distinguishing between a larger marginal effect among European-born (0.6) compared with non-European-born inhabitants (0.3). In general, an increase in the degree of highly educated workers seems to be more positive for foreign-born employees than for native-born employees in the post-crisis context, while patterns were similar in 2010 but reduced and insignificant. Thus, the economic recession – a situation which most likely implies increased competition for qualified positions – seems to affect the perceived labour market possibilities among the foreign-born employees. These patterns support other findings conducted with unemployment rate as a control variable, indicating that foreign-borns generally perceive greater difficulties in terms of finding an equal or better position when the competition for qualified jobs increases (as was the case in 2010).

Moreover, the analysis of perceived employability underscores the significance of tertiary-level education, which has been promoted in the current employability nexus in order to increase individuals’ perceived labour market possibilities (Anderson and Pontusson, 2007; Becker, 1997). In this paradigm, the significance of employees’ level of education adds an important contextual dimension to the relation between employees’ perceived employability, foreign origin and national context. The effect of tertiary education among foreign-born was believed to be influenced by the national context in their respective country of employment (Hypothesis 4). The results indicate that deteriorated labour markets with strong employment protection may infer a risk-averse attitude among the highly educated native-born employees, who most probably have obtained a better position in their present job compared to lower educated individuals. Therefore, remaining in relatively good – and, via EPL, strongly protected – positions might be a rational strategy colouring the employees’ perceived chances of finding an equal or better position in the external labour market. However, this reasoning does not explain why the effect of EPL on education is not the same for foreign-borns. In general, foreign-born employees most likely will experience increased difficulties while making transitions in the labour market during economic crises (Likic-Brboric et al., 2013). In a pre-crisis condition, with economic upswing, the advantage of having a degree among foreign-born employees seems to fade in strongly regulated labour markets. Only in a context with liberal employment protection legislation, is the education effect still present. However, it cannot be fully explained as to why this effect seems to be lower in an economic upturn in more regulated labour markets.

In conclusion, it needs to be stressed that foreign-born employees, in general, have a more positive view of their own labour market prospects, a result that might be partly explained by compositional differences among the group of foreign-born employees. However, this effect also remains when separating the group of foreign-born employees between those born within or outside Europe. The fact that the group of foreign-born were employed might be of importance here, given the immigrants’ difficulties to enter the labour market in the first place (see Acker, 1990; Furåker, 2005; Likic-Brboric et al., 2013). These results emphasize the importance of studying the subjective labour market opportunities, which can differ from an individual’s actual opportunities and de facto labour market outcomes. Nevertheless, foreign-born employees might be less satisfied in their present employment positions than native-born employees due to their increased likelihood of being over-educated (see Åberg, 2002; Åslund et al., 2014). Therefore, further research on the level of mismatch is needed, requiring thorough information on the immigrants’ type of educational training. Besides, given the non-existent effect of reskilling activities (rejecting Hypothesis 2a and 3a), more detailed analysis on whether the different educational measures have a positive impact on the level of mismatch is required (requiring more detailed information on both individual level of education as well as the macro-level context of the various training activities in place). Still, the article’s results show a potential discrepancy between the immigrants’ de facto labour market outcomes and their own predictions. With regard to strict EPL, this seem to be beneficial for the perceived employability of foreign-born employees during a pre-crisis context with vacancies, indicating that the assumed discrepancy between expected outcomes and assumptions among foreign-born is still sensitive to employers’ prospective mode of hiring, which can be partly explained by current national settings.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author biography

Ylva Wallinder is about to finish her PhD in sociology at the Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg. In her research, she focuses on institutional aspects of individuals’ perceived labour market opportunities, especially how structural factors and individual characteristics intervene and condition individuals’ (trans)national labour market mobility in a European context.

References

Åberg

(2002) Unemployment persistency, over-education and the employment chances of the less educated. European Sociological Review 19(2): 199–216.

Acker

(1990) Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organisations. Gender and Society 4(2): 139–158.

Acker

(2006) Class Questions: Feminist Answers. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Anderson

Pontusson

(2007) Workers, worries and welfare states: Social protection and job insecurity in 15 OECD countries. European Journal of Political Research 46(2): 211–235.

Åslund

Hensvik

Nordström Skans

(2014) Seeking similarity: How immigrants and natives manage in the labor market. Journal of Labor Economics 32(3): 405–441.

Barslund

Busse

Vargas-Silva

, et al. (2014) Labour mobility in the EU: Dynamics, patterns and policies. Intereconomics 49(3): 116–158.

Becker

(1997) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, 3rd edn. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Berglund

Wallinder

(2015) Perceived employability in difficult economic times: The significance of education systems and labour market policies. European Societies 17(5): 674–699.

Berglund

Furåker

Vulkan

(2014) Is job insecurity compensated for by employment and income security? Economic and Industrial Democracy 35(1): 165–184.

10.

Berntson

(2008) Employability perceptions: Nature, determinants, and implications for health and well-being. PhD thesis, Department of Psychology, Gothenburg University.

11.

Berntson

(2011) Market-oriented relationships in work life – on the perception of being employable. In: Garsten

Lindvert

Thedvall

(eds) Makeshift Work in a Changing Labour Market. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

12.

Berntson

Sverke

Marklund

(2006) Predicting perceived employability: Human capital or labour market opportunities? Economic and Industrial Democracy 27(2): 223–244.

13.

Bonoli

(2010) The political economy of active labor-market policy. Politics and Society 38(4): 435–457.

14.

Breen

(1997) Risk, recommodification and stratification. Sociology 31(3): 473–489.

15.

Chung

Van Oorschot

(2011) Institutions versus market forces: Explaining the employment insecurity of European individuals during (the beginning of) the financial crisis. Journal of European Social Policy 21(4): 287–301.

16.

Diedrich

Eriksson-Zetterquist

Styhre

(2011) Sorting people out: The uses of one-dimensional classificatory schemes in a multi-dimensional world. Culture and Organization 17(4): 271–292.

17.

Esping-Andersen

(1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

18.

ESS (2016) Sampling Guidelines: Principles and Implementation for the European Social Survey. The ESS Sampling Expert Panel. London: ESS ERIC Headquarters.

19.

EU (2012) Third CoR Monitoring Report on Europe 2020. Brussels: Committee of the Regions, The EU’s Assembly of Regional and Local Representatives.

20.

Eurydice (2012) The European Higher Education Area in 2012: Bologna Process Implementation Report. Brussels: Eurydice.

21.

Favell

Guiraudon

(2011) Sociology of the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

22.

Fogde

(2009) The Work of Job Seeking: Studies on Career Advice for White-collar Workers. Örebro: Örebro University.

23.

Forrier

Sels

(2003) The concept employability: A complex mosaic. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management 3(3): 102–124.

24.

Furåker

(2005) Sociological Perspectives on Labor Markets. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

25.

Granovetter

(1995) Getting a Job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. London: University of Chicago Press.

26.

Harvey

(2010) Defining and measuring employability. Quality in Higher Education 7(2): 97–109.

27.

Heggebø

(2017) Are immigrants and descendants with ill health more prone to unemployment? Evidence from 18 European countries. Ethnicity and Health 22: 402–424.

28.

Hox

(2010) Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. New York: Routledge.

29.

Jacobsson

(2004) A European politics for employability: The political discourse on employability of the EU and the OECD. In: Garsten

Jacobsson

(eds) Learning to be Employable. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

30.

Likic-Brboric

(2011) EU enlargement, migration, and asymmetric citizenship: Political economy of inequality and the demise of the European Social Model? Globalizations 8(3): 277–294.

31.

Likic-Brboric

Slavnic

Woolfson

(2013) Informalisering – migration och arbete i ett utvidgat Europa. In: Dahlstedt

Neergard

(eds) Migrationens och etnicitetens epok. Stockholm: Liber.

32.

Lundvall

Lorenz

(2012) From the Lisbon strategy to EUROPE 2020. In: Morel

Palier

Palme

(eds) Towards a Social Investment State? Ideas, Policies and Challenges. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

33.

OECD (2011) Towards an OECD Skills Strategy. Report for the meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level Paris, 25–26 May 2011.

34.

Peck

Theodore

(2000) Beyond ‘employability’. Cambridge Journal of Economics 24(6): 729–749.

35.

Rydgren

(2004) Mechanisms of exclusion: Ethnic discrimination in the Swedish labour market. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 30(4): 697–716.

36.

Siebers

(2018) When nationalism meets soft skills: Towards a comprehensive framework for explaining ethno-migrant inequality in the Dutch labour market. In: Rijken

de Lange

(eds) Towards a Decent Labour Market for Low Waged Migrant Workers. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

37.

Skedinger

(2011) Employment consequences of employment protection legislation. Nordic Economic Policy Review 1: 45–83.

38.

Streeck

Mertens

(2011) Fiscal austerity and public investment: Is the possible the enemy of the necessary? MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/12. Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln.

39.

Svallfors

(2006) Introduction. In: Svallfors

(ed.) The Political Sociology of the Welfare State: Institutions, Social Cleavages, and Orientations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

40.

Sverke

Hellgren

Näswall

(2002) No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 7(3): 242–264.

41.

Van den Berg

Furåker

Johansson

(1997) Labour Market Regimes and Patterns of Flexibility. A Sweden–Canada Comparison. Lund: Arkiv.

42.

Van der Heijde

Van der Heijden

(2006) A competence-based and multidimensional operationalization and measurement of employability. Human Resource Management 45(3): 449–476.

43.

Vanhercke

De Cuyper

Peeters

De Witte

(2014) Defining perceived employability: A psychological approach. Personnel Review 43(4): 592–605.

44.

Wilthagen

Tros

(2004) The concept of ‘flexicurity’: A new approach to regulating employment and labour markets. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 10: 166–186.