IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v9y2021i3p163-174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Segmentation of the Academic Labour Market and Gender, Field, and Institutional Inequalities

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Vohlídalová

    (AMBIS University, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Using data from a 2017 survey of Czech academics this article examines the casualisation of working conditions in the Czech academic labour market (ALM) and explores gender, sectoral, and institutional inequalities through the lens of the theory of labour market segmentation. A hierarchical cluster analysis reveals three segments in the Czech ALM: core (40%), periphery (28%), and semi‐periphery (32%), which roughly align with work positions in the early, middle, and senior stages of an academic career. In the semi‐periphery gender is found to be a key factor in in determining working conditions, while in the periphery working conditions are most affected by the type of institution. In the core, gender differences are mainly reflected in the gender wage gap. The effects of casualisation on working conditions are found to be more pronounced in STEM fields than in the social sciences and humanities across the ALM, but wages are generally higher in STEM fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Vohlídalová, 2021. "The Segmentation of the Academic Labour Market and Gender, Field, and Institutional Inequalities," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 163-174.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v9:y:2021:i:3:p:163-174
    DOI: 10.17645/si.v9i3.4190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4190
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/si.v9i3.4190?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v9:y:2021:i:3:p:163-174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.