Post by account_disabled on Feb 22, 2024 4:11:38 GMT -5
At the end of March , when two years had passed since the declaration of the state of alarm and subsequent approval of Royal Decree-Law 8/2020 on “extraordinary urgent measures to address the economic and social impact of ”, the total membership to Social Security reached historical highsplacing it above that existing before the pandemic after the creation of million jobs in just eighteen months ( table 1 ), with the consequent reduction in unemployment compared to that recorded at the hardest moment of the crisis), which contrasts with the 11 years it took to recover employment levels after the previous recession. When everything seemed to confirm that we were in the exit phase of the crisis caused by COVID and moving towards normal health and economic recovery, the collateral damage derived from the war unleashed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, in addition to the humanitarian drama that it represents , threaten to stop this process and open a new/old stage of uncertainty and recession.
It is, therefore, time to analyze the crisis management models developed so far, evaluate their results and consider their possible adaptation to the new scenario. Paradigm shift in crisis management While the financial crisis was managed unilaterally by the conservative Government, both in its legal regulation (labor reform of and economic (cuts, Costa Rica WhatsApp Number salary freeze) and social (layoffs, weakening of collective bargaining) , the governance of the health crisis promoted by the progressive government represents an authentic paradigm shift, both due to the methodology used (social and institutional dialogue) and the legal (negotiated labor reform) and socioeconomic strategies developed. (public investment, increase in the SMI, aid to workers and companies, reinforcement of collective bargaining). Table 1 Affiliation with Social Security, registered unemployment and workers in ERTE (2020-2022) erte table 1 Source.- Social Security and SEPE The effects of both management models are also very different.
While in the great recession there were million unemployed in the first quarter of of the active population), after the pandemic crisis the unemployment data is exactly in half million and according to the latest EPA) During the first years of the previous crisis, GDP fell by , while employment fell practically twice as much showing how the harsh adjustment was fundamentally burdened on workers due to the via individual and collective layoffs alone through termination EREs), contractual precariousness and salary devaluation, with the consequent increase in social inequality. On this occasion, the behavior of the labor market has been very different, despite the strong initial shock ( table 2 ). To begin with, employment fell less than GDP and percent, respectively, during the second quarter of and recovered sooner (third quarter OR while at the end of last year the GDP was still 4% below that registered at the end of 2019. Table 2 Quarterly evolution of GDP, employment and unemployment erte table 2 Source.
It is, therefore, time to analyze the crisis management models developed so far, evaluate their results and consider their possible adaptation to the new scenario. Paradigm shift in crisis management While the financial crisis was managed unilaterally by the conservative Government, both in its legal regulation (labor reform of and economic (cuts, Costa Rica WhatsApp Number salary freeze) and social (layoffs, weakening of collective bargaining) , the governance of the health crisis promoted by the progressive government represents an authentic paradigm shift, both due to the methodology used (social and institutional dialogue) and the legal (negotiated labor reform) and socioeconomic strategies developed. (public investment, increase in the SMI, aid to workers and companies, reinforcement of collective bargaining). Table 1 Affiliation with Social Security, registered unemployment and workers in ERTE (2020-2022) erte table 1 Source.- Social Security and SEPE The effects of both management models are also very different.
While in the great recession there were million unemployed in the first quarter of of the active population), after the pandemic crisis the unemployment data is exactly in half million and according to the latest EPA) During the first years of the previous crisis, GDP fell by , while employment fell practically twice as much showing how the harsh adjustment was fundamentally burdened on workers due to the via individual and collective layoffs alone through termination EREs), contractual precariousness and salary devaluation, with the consequent increase in social inequality. On this occasion, the behavior of the labor market has been very different, despite the strong initial shock ( table 2 ). To begin with, employment fell less than GDP and percent, respectively, during the second quarter of and recovered sooner (third quarter OR while at the end of last year the GDP was still 4% below that registered at the end of 2019. Table 2 Quarterly evolution of GDP, employment and unemployment erte table 2 Source.