Non-Standard Employment and Unemployment during the COVID-19 Crisis : Economic and Health Findings from a Six-Country Survey Study

The COVID-19 crisis is a global event that has created and amplified social inequalities, including an already existing and steadily increasing problem of employment and income insecurity and erosion of workplace rights, affecting workers globally. The aim of this exploratory study was to review employment-related determinants of health and health protection during the pandemic, or more specifically, to examine several links between non-standard employment, unemployment, economic, health, and safety outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden, Belgium, Spain, Canada, the United States, and Chile, based on an online survey conducted from November 2020 to June 2021. The study focused on both non-standard workers and unemployed workers and examined worker outcomes in the context of current type and duration of employment arrangements, as well as employment transitions triggered by the COVID-19 crisis. The results suggest that COVID-19-related changes in non-standard worker employment arrangements, or unemployment, are related to changes in work hours, income, and benefits, as well as the self-reported prevalence of suffering from severe to extreme anxiety or depression. The results also suggest a link between worker type, duration of employment arrangements, or unemployment, and the ability to cover regular expenses during the pandemic. Additionally, the findings indicate that the type and duration of employment arrangements are related to the provision of personal protective equipment or other COVID-19 protection measures. This study provides additional evidence that workers in non-standard employment and the unemployed have experienced numerous and complex adverse effects of the pandemic and require additional protection through tailored pandemic responses and recovery strategies

Experiences of insecurity among non-standard workers across different welfare states : A qualitative cross-country study

In recent decades, economic crises and political reforms focused on employment flexibilization have increased the use of non-standard employment (NSE). National political and economic contexts determine how employers interact with labour and how the state interacts with labour markets and manages social welfare policies. These factors influence the prevalence of NSE and the level of employment insecurity it creates, but the extent to which a country’s policy context mitigates the health influences of NSE is unclear. This study describes how workers experience insecurities created by NSE, and how this influences their health and well-being, in countries with different welfare states: Belgium, Canada, Chile, Spain, Sweden, and the United States. Interviews with 250 workers in NSE were analysed using a multiple-case study approach. Workers in all countries experienced multiple insecurities (e.g., income and employment insecurity) and relational tension with employers/clients, with negative health and well-being influences, in ways that were shaped by social inequalities (e.g., related to family support or immigration status). Welfare state differences were reflected in the level of workers’ exclusion from social protections, the time scale of their insecurity (threatening daily survival or longer-term life planning), and their ability to derive a sense of control from NSE. Workers in Belgium, Sweden, and Spain, countries with more generous welfare states, navigated these insecurities with greater success and with less influence on health and well-being. Findings contribute to our understanding of the health and well-being influences of NSE across different welfare regimes and suggest the need in all six countries for stronger state responses to NSE. Increased investment in universal and more equal rights and benefits in NSE could reduce the widening gap between standard and NSE.

Diabetes Affects Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Older Residents of Long-term Care Facilities: Data From the GeroCovid Vax Study

Objective: Type 2 diabetes may affect the humoral immune response after vaccination, but data concerning coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) vaccines are scarce. We evaluated the impact of diabetes on antibody response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in older residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and tested for differences according to antidiabetic treatment. Research design and methods: For this analysis, 555 older residents of LTCFs participating in the GeroCovid Vax study were included. SARS-CoV-2 trimeric S immunoglobulin G (anti-S IgG) concentrations using chemiluminescent assays were tested before the first dose and after 2 and 6 months. The impact of diabetes on anti-S IgG levels was evaluated using linear mixed models, which included the interaction between time and presence of diabetes. A second model also considered diabetes treatment: no insulin therapy (including dietary only or use of oral antidiabetic agents) and insulin therapy (alone or in combination with oral antidiabetic agents). Results: The mean age of the sample was 82.1 years, 68.1% were women, and 25.2% had diabetes. In linear mixed models, presence of diabetes was associated with lower anti-S IgG levels at 2 (β = -0.20; 95% CI -0.34, -0.06) and 6 months (β = -0.22; 95% CI -0.37, -0.07) after the first vaccine dose. Compared with those without diabetes, residents with diabetes not using insulin had lower IgG levels at 2- and 6-month assessments (β = -0.24; 95% CI -0.43, -0.05 and β = -0.30; 95% CI -0.50, -0.10, respectively), whereas no differences were observed for those using insulin. Conclusions: Older residents of LTCFs with diabetes tended to have weaker antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination. Insulin treatment might buffer this effect and establish humoral immunity similar to that in individuals without diabetes