the effect of partition from a largely full-time economy into an economy divided between statistically distinct classes of full-time and part-time workers (the so-called “precariat”) does seem to be occurring.
There are multiple factors in play here, but my impression is that mostly (but not entirely) this is a good thing.
Essentially people who have a valid (from the point of view of their finances, lifestyle, etc.) choice between working full-time and part-time are exercising their choice. It works from both ends—to take stereotypical examples, a contract programmer might reduce his workload to part-time because he earns enough money and values leisure more; and a stay-at-home mom might pick up a part-time job because she has enough time and energy for it, but not for a full-time job. This is good—it represents the availability of choice.
Anecdotally, I can attest that in the overemployed professions, some employers have started offering part-time hours at high hourly rates (or contracting/consulting jobs working part-year-round) as a fringe benefit to attract elite, high-skilled workers. Your contract worker is an example: I’ve done that one, earning a perfectly respectable monthly salary as a contract programmer but only working a few months at a time to get a frugal income quickly.
However, we do know that outside the conventionally-overemployed, high-hourly-rate professions, stay-at-home parenting has declined and part-timing has risen without necessarily being by choice.
I would venture to say that we should look for some numbers on hourly earnings (potentially split into full-time and part-time workers) to see what’s really going on. That sounds at least intuitively right, as I’ve known more than a few “highly-paid” scientists, programmers, lawyers, etc who end up with fairly moderate or even low hourly earnings once you account for their immense working hours.
There are multiple factors in play here, but my impression is that mostly (but not entirely) this is a good thing.
Essentially people who have a valid (from the point of view of their finances, lifestyle, etc.) choice between working full-time and part-time are exercising their choice. It works from both ends—to take stereotypical examples, a contract programmer might reduce his workload to part-time because he earns enough money and values leisure more; and a stay-at-home mom might pick up a part-time job because she has enough time and energy for it, but not for a full-time job. This is good—it represents the availability of choice.
This is a very complicated issue to unravel.
Anecdotally, I can attest that in the overemployed professions, some employers have started offering part-time hours at high hourly rates (or contracting/consulting jobs working part-year-round) as a fringe benefit to attract elite, high-skilled workers. Your contract worker is an example: I’ve done that one, earning a perfectly respectable monthly salary as a contract programmer but only working a few months at a time to get a frugal income quickly.
However, we do know that outside the conventionally-overemployed, high-hourly-rate professions, stay-at-home parenting has declined and part-timing has risen without necessarily being by choice.
I would venture to say that we should look for some numbers on hourly earnings (potentially split into full-time and part-time workers) to see what’s really going on. That sounds at least intuitively right, as I’ve known more than a few “highly-paid” scientists, programmers, lawyers, etc who end up with fairly moderate or even low hourly earnings once you account for their immense working hours.