The Experts below are selected from a list of 1221 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bouwhuis S. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
'Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 201490.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers.2 p
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Contains fulltext : 654093-20200429110909-9101436535ea94435ac7ed2.32111418.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account.13 p
-
Health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study among Dutch workers
'Public Library of Science (PLoS)', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 214750.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Introduction: Precarious employment is associated with poor health. Among employees in precarious employment, those with Multiple Jobs may face additional health risks, e.g. due to combining work schedules and Job roles. Our research question is: do differences in health exist between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment? Methods: Participants in the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey 2012 aged 25-64 years who were not employed through the Act on Social Work Provision and who had a precarious Job were included. To select employees in precarious employment (n = 3,609), latent class analysis was performed, based on variables based on indicators described by Van Aerden. Differences in general self-perceived health, burnout complaints, musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence between Multiple and single Job holders were studied cross-sectionally using logistic regression analyses. Results: No significant differences were found between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment for self-perceived health (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.3), burnout complaints (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.2), and musculoskeletal health (OR = 1.1; 95%CI = 0.8–1.5). In crude analyses, Multiple Job holders experienced less sickness absence than single Job holders (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.5-0.9). In adjusted analyses, this difference was no longer statistically significant (OR = 0.8; 95%CI = 0.6-1.0). Conclusions: Despite potential health risks related to Multiple Job Holding, we did not find health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands. More longitudinal research is necessary to provide recommendations for policy makers regarding Multiple Job holders in precarious employment.14 p
Beek, A.j. Van Der - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
'Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 201490.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers.2 p
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Contains fulltext : 654093-20200429110909-9101436535ea94435ac7ed2.32111418.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account.13 p
-
Health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study among Dutch workers
'Public Library of Science (PLoS)', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 214750.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Introduction: Precarious employment is associated with poor health. Among employees in precarious employment, those with Multiple Jobs may face additional health risks, e.g. due to combining work schedules and Job roles. Our research question is: do differences in health exist between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment? Methods: Participants in the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey 2012 aged 25-64 years who were not employed through the Act on Social Work Provision and who had a precarious Job were included. To select employees in precarious employment (n = 3,609), latent class analysis was performed, based on variables based on indicators described by Van Aerden. Differences in general self-perceived health, burnout complaints, musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence between Multiple and single Job holders were studied cross-sectionally using logistic regression analyses. Results: No significant differences were found between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment for self-perceived health (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.3), burnout complaints (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.2), and musculoskeletal health (OR = 1.1; 95%CI = 0.8–1.5). In crude analyses, Multiple Job holders experienced less sickness absence than single Job holders (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.5-0.9). In adjusted analyses, this difference was no longer statistically significant (OR = 0.8; 95%CI = 0.6-1.0). Conclusions: Despite potential health risks related to Multiple Job Holding, we did not find health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands. More longitudinal research is necessary to provide recommendations for policy makers regarding Multiple Job holders in precarious employment.14 p
Boot C.r.l. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
'Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 201490.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers.2 p
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Contains fulltext : 654093-20200429110909-9101436535ea94435ac7ed2.32111418.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account.13 p
-
Health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study among Dutch workers
'Public Library of Science (PLoS)', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 214750.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Introduction: Precarious employment is associated with poor health. Among employees in precarious employment, those with Multiple Jobs may face additional health risks, e.g. due to combining work schedules and Job roles. Our research question is: do differences in health exist between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment? Methods: Participants in the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey 2012 aged 25-64 years who were not employed through the Act on Social Work Provision and who had a precarious Job were included. To select employees in precarious employment (n = 3,609), latent class analysis was performed, based on variables based on indicators described by Van Aerden. Differences in general self-perceived health, burnout complaints, musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence between Multiple and single Job holders were studied cross-sectionally using logistic regression analyses. Results: No significant differences were found between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment for self-perceived health (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.3), burnout complaints (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.2), and musculoskeletal health (OR = 1.1; 95%CI = 0.8–1.5). In crude analyses, Multiple Job holders experienced less sickness absence than single Job holders (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.5-0.9). In adjusted analyses, this difference was no longer statistically significant (OR = 0.8; 95%CI = 0.6-1.0). Conclusions: Despite potential health risks related to Multiple Job Holding, we did not find health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands. More longitudinal research is necessary to provide recommendations for policy makers regarding Multiple Job holders in precarious employment.14 p
Alexandros Zangelidis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Multiple Job Holding skill diversification and mobility
Industrial Relations, 2014Co-Authors: Georgios A Panos, Konstantinos Pouliakas, Alexandros ZangelidisAbstract:type="main" xml:id="irel12055-abs-0001"> In this article, we investigate the interrelated dynamics of dual JobHolding, human capital, occupational choice, and mobility, using a panel sample (1991–2005) of UK employees from the British Household Panel Survey. The evidence suggests that individuals may be using Multiple JobHolding as a conduit for obtaining new skills and expertise and as a stepping-stone to new careers, also involving self-employment. Individuals doing a different secondary Job than their primary occupation are more likely to switch to a new primary Job in the next year, and a Job that is different than their current primary employment. The results show that there are human capital spillover effects between primary and secondary employment.
-
May 2011Multiple Job Holding as a Strategy for Skills Diversification and Labour Market Mobility
2013Co-Authors: Georgios A Panos, Konstantinos Pouliakas, Alexandros Zangelidis, A PanosAbstract:The inter-related dynamics of dual Job-Holding, human capital and occupational choice between primary and secondary Jobs are investigated, using a panel sample (1991-2005) of UK employees from the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS). A sequential profile of the working lives of employees is examined, investigating, first, the determinants of Multiple Job-Holding, second, the factors affecting the occupational choice of a secondary Job, third, the relationship between Multiple-Job Holding and Job mobility and, lastly, the spillover effects of Multiple Job-Holding on occupational mobility between primary Jobs. The evidence indicates that dual Job-Holding may facilitate Job transition, as it may act as a stepping-stone towards new primary Jobs, particularly self-employment
-
is it all about money an examination of the motives behind moonlighting
Applied Economics, 2011Co-Authors: Heather Suzanne Dickey, Verity Watson, Alexandros ZangelidisAbstract:Multiple-Job Holding is an important labour market phenomenon. In this article, we examine individuals’ motives for Multiple-Job Holding. Specifically, we estimate an empirical model of the motivation for moonlighting assuming that individuals hold a second Job for either financial or for nonpecuniary motives. Our results contribute to a better understanding of Multiple-Job Holding. We find that Multiple-Job Holding is used by individuals as a way to deal with the financial difficulties or the increased financial commitments in their household. Individuals are more likely to moonlight for money in the early stages of their adult life. Finally, individuals with more labour market experience are more likely to moonlight for pecuniary than nonpecuniary reasons.
-
Multiple Job Holding as a strategy for skills diversification and labour market mobility
2011Co-Authors: Georgios A Panos, Konstantinos Pouliakas, Alexandros ZangelidisAbstract:The inter-related dynamics of dual Job-Holding, human capital and occupational choice between primary and secondary Jobs are investigated, using a panel sample (1991-2005) of UK employees from the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS). A sequential profile of the working lives of employees is examined, investigating, first, the determinants of Multiple Job-Holding, second, the factors affecting the occupational choice of a secondary Job, third, the relationship between Multiple-Job Holding and Job mobility and, lastly, the spillover effects of Multiple Job-Holding on occupational mobility between primary Jobs. The evidence indicates that dual Job-Holding may facilitate Job transition, as it may act as a stepping-stone towards new primary Jobs, particularly self-employment.
Geuskens G.a. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers
-
Multiple-Job Holding is not a type of precarious employment
'Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 201490.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)We are writing in regards to the review by Koranyi et al (1) on precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries. In the review, Multiple-Job Holding was classified as a type of precarious employment. In this letter, we argue Multiple-Job Holding should not be considered a type of precarious employment and that Multiple-Job holders constitute a heterogeneous group of workers.2 p
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account
-
Distinguishing groups and exploring health differences among Multiple Job holders aged 45 years and older
'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m., Hoekstra T., Beek, A.j. Van DerAbstract:Contains fulltext : 654093-20200429110909-9101436535ea94435ac7ed2.32111418.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Purpose: To identify distinct groups of older Multiple Job holders and to explore health differences between these groups. Methods: We selected respondents from STREAM, a Dutch cohort study among persons aged 45 years and older, who reported having Multiple Jobs (N = 702). We applied latent class analysis to identify groups of Multiple Job holders. The association between these groups and health, measured with the SF-12, was studied cross-sectionally and longitudinally (1 year of follow-up), using linear regression analyses. Results: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders were identified: (1) a vulnerable group (N = 145), who preferred having one Job, and had Jobs with high demands and low resources; (2) an indifferent group (N = 134), who did not experience many benefits or disadvantages of Multiple Job Holding (MJH); (3) a satisfied hybrid group, who were all self-employed in their second Job (N = 310); and (4) a satisfied combination group, who all had a second Job as an employee (N = 113). Both the satisfied hybrid and satisfied combination groups preferred MJH and experienced benefits of it. At baseline, the vulnerable group experienced significantly lower physical and mental health than the other groups. We found no significant differences regarding changes in health after 1 year. Conclusions: Four groups of older Multiple Job holders could be distinguished. The vulnerable group experienced lower physical and mental health at baseline than the other three groups. Policies and interventions supporting vulnerable Multiple Job holders may need to be developed. Future research is recommended to take heterogeneity among Multiple Job holders into account.13 p
-
Health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study among Dutch workers
'Public Library of Science (PLoS)', 2019Co-Authors: Bouwhuis S., Geuskens G.a., Beek, A.j. Van Der, Boot C.r.l., Bongers P.m.Abstract:Contains fulltext : 214750.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Introduction: Precarious employment is associated with poor health. Among employees in precarious employment, those with Multiple Jobs may face additional health risks, e.g. due to combining work schedules and Job roles. Our research question is: do differences in health exist between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment? Methods: Participants in the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey 2012 aged 25-64 years who were not employed through the Act on Social Work Provision and who had a precarious Job were included. To select employees in precarious employment (n = 3,609), latent class analysis was performed, based on variables based on indicators described by Van Aerden. Differences in general self-perceived health, burnout complaints, musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence between Multiple and single Job holders were studied cross-sectionally using logistic regression analyses. Results: No significant differences were found between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment for self-perceived health (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.3), burnout complaints (OR = 0.9; 95%CI = 0.7-1.2), and musculoskeletal health (OR = 1.1; 95%CI = 0.8–1.5). In crude analyses, Multiple Job holders experienced less sickness absence than single Job holders (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.5-0.9). In adjusted analyses, this difference was no longer statistically significant (OR = 0.8; 95%CI = 0.6-1.0). Conclusions: Despite potential health risks related to Multiple Job Holding, we did not find health differences between Multiple and single Job holders in precarious employment in the Netherlands. More longitudinal research is necessary to provide recommendations for policy makers regarding Multiple Job holders in precarious employment.14 p