|
Article Excerpt
Over the past two decades, a sizeable number of employees in countries such as Australia, Canada, England, Japan, Taiwan and the United States of America have lost their jobs through redundancy (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004; Campbell & Webber, 1996; Crespo, Boisjoly, & Bernard, 1998; Huang, 2003; Weir, 2003). Job redundancy is defined as the planned process of 'cutting back on human resources' (Hardy, 1986, p. 275) by terminating or making redundant, an individual's position within the organization (Hardy, 1986). Many redundant employees do not find a new job immediately (Campbell & Webber, 1996; Crespo et al., 1998; Leana & Feldman, 1992). This move into unemployment is disturbing for the employee considering the strong association between unemployment and psychological distress (Creed & Reynolds, 2001; Fryer & Fagan, 2003; Winefield, 2002). One important, underresearched, factor in the amount of psychological distress experienced during unemployment may be the way in which a person exits their previous job.
The current paper reports the findings of two studies. Study 1 uses a cross-sectional design to compare levels of depression and job-search activity during unemployment between people who volunteered for their job redundancy and employees who were made involuntarily redundant. Study 2 is follow-up research that examines the subset of participants who gained re-employment in the 3 months following Study 1. The voluntary and involuntary groups are compared on depression, perceived job insecurity, organizational commitment and perceived re-employment quality. Predictions for differences in depression and job search during unemployment in Study 1 will be made using the learned helplessness theory (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978; Peterson & Seligman, 1983) (Hypotheses 1 and 2). In addition, learned helplessness theory will be used to make predictions about depression and quality of re-employment in Study 2 (Hypotheses 3 and 6). Predicted differences in depression, organizational commitment and perceived job insecurity upon re-employment in Study 2 are based upon Fineman's (1983) unemployment legacy (Hypotheses 4 and 5).
This paper contributes to the job loss literature by following a group of employees, who experience job redundancy, into their next job to see if there is any carry-over effect in the new job from being made redundant. Although there is a vast body of literature on the effects of job loss, there is comparatively little research on the reemployment experiences of people who have been made redundant. Indeed, Pugh, Skarlicki, and Passell (2003) state that 'the relationship between the layoff experience and victims' attitudes at their new place of work remains relatively unexplored' (p. 201). Yet, as suggested by Kinicki, Prussia, and McKee-Ryan (2000) 'research on what happens to displaced workers after they become re-employed is clearly needed' (p. 98).
This paper makes a further contribution to the job loss literature by separating job redundancy into the categories of voluntary and involuntary. Involuntary redundancy programmes target employees for job loss despite their own wishes (Macken, O'Grady, & Sappideen, 1997). Voluntary redundancy programmes 'allow eligible employees to choose whether or not to participate' (DeWitt, Trevino, & Mollica, 1998, p. 594).
A review of the broader job loss and turnover literature shows that job redundancy is typically treated as a form of involuntary turnover, so that terms such as lay-off, downsizing and job redundancy are often automatically taken to mean that the employee's exit was involuntary and that the employee was a passive actor in the job loss process (e.g. Campion, 1991; Iverson & Pullman, 2000). However, there is growing evidence of the use of voluntary workforce reduction programmes (e.g. DeWitt et al., 1998; Morehead, Steele, Alexander, Stephen, & Duffin, 1997). For example, companies such as Nortell Networks, Australia Post, General Motors and American Airlines all allow employees the opportunity to volunteer for their own job redundancy. Yet, despite the growth in the use of voluntary job redundancy programmes, the phenomenon of voluntary job redundancy has received inadequate research attention.
Leana and Feldman (1992), Miller and Hoppe (1994) and Winefield, Tiggemann, and Winefield (1992) suggest that the experience of job-leavers (e.g. those that quit) is likely to differ from job-losers (e.g. those that are fired or made redundant). Despite the appeal of this proposition, Hanisch (1999) concluded that '[m]ost of the research treats unemployment as a state removed from the process of termination' (p. 192). In the rare instance where the reason for a participant's job loss is reported (e.g. Wanberg, 1995; Wanberg, Hough, & Song, 2002), it is either not used in the statistical analysis or it is used only as a control variable. The current study will address this gap by comparing the experiences of involuntarily redundant employees with voluntarily redundant employees. *
STUDY I: DIFFERENCES IN DEPRESSION AND JOB SEARCH DURING UNEMPLOYMENT BETWEEN VOLUNTARILY AND INVOLUNTARILY REDUNDANT GROUPS
This study follows suggestions made by Feather (1990), Rodriguez (1997) and Winefield (2002) that learned helplessness may play a role in people's psychological reactions during unemployment. Depression and passivity, two major aspects of the learned helpless theory, will be used to make predictions about levels of depression and low job-search activities (a manifestation of passivity) in unemployed people who experience voluntary and involuntary job redundancy.
According to the basic tenets of learned helplessness theory, when someone is exposed to a negative, uncontrollable event they may conclude that their efforts are unrelated to their outcomes. In the context of the current study, when people experience involuntary job loss they may conclude that their job skills and performance are unrelated to their ability to maintain a secure job. One of the major consequences of this 'response-outcome independence' (Peterson & Seligman, 1983, p. 103) is depression (Abramson et al., 1978). According to Abramson et al., depression results when an individual is confronted with an aversive event and where the individual believes that they cannot change the event (e.g. involuntary job loss). Latack, Kinicki, and Prussia (1995) argued that when unemployed people 'do not see a connection between their efforts and outcomes, they can become depressed' (p. 332). Hence, if people who experience involuntary job redundancy see a disconnection between their behaviour and outcomes, this may lead to depression. Learned helplessness theory has, therefore, been used to develop the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis I. People who experience involuntary job redundancy will report higher levels of depression during unemployment than those who experience voluntary job redundancy.
Feelings of 'response-outcome independence' (Peterson & Seligman, 1983, p. 103) may also create a response of passivity through an expectation that future actions in the broader-related domain (e.g. employment) will also be unsuccessful (Seligman, 1975). Feather (1990) argued that when people feel helpless during unemployment they may reduce their job-search and coping efforts 'because they expect that regardless of how hard they try they will remain unemployed' (p. 72). It is therefore argued in this paper that a person's feelings of helplessness over job loss, created via involuntary redundancy, may be transferred into passivity over job gain. In this situation, it is likely that these people may not engage in high levels of job-search activities due to a belief that their effort (job search) is unlikely to affect the outcome (re-employment). Learned helplessness theory has been used to inform Hypothesis 2.
Hypothesis 2. People who experience involuntary job redundancy will report lower levels of job-search activity during unemployment than those who experience voluntary job redundancy.
STUDY 2: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VOLUNTARILY AND INVOLUNTARILY REDUNDANT RE-EMPLOYEES ON DEPRESSION, PERCEIVED JOB INSECURITY, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT, AND PERCEIVED RE-EMPLOYMENT QUALITY
It is now well-established that people moving from unemployment to re-employment generally report improvements in psychological health, particularly if the re-employment is of a high quality (Caplan, Vinokur, Price, & Van Ryn, 1989; Wanberg, 1997). Jahoda (1988) argued that improvements in psychological health upon re-employment occur because employment provides people with social status, professional identity and collective purpose, each of which are difficult to obtain during unemployment but are vital for psychological health.
However, it is not always the case that psychological health improves upon reemployment. For instance, Fineman (1983) found that, for some re-employed people, 'a sour legacy remained' (p. 7) and depression did not automatically lift. Other authors have also found evidence of a legacy effect where distress, coping and life satisfaction do not improve upon re-employment (Latack et al., 1995; Leana & Feldman, 1995).
The question remains as to why some people report reductions in distress upon reemployment while others do not. This paper posits that type of job redundancy may be one factor partly to influence whether people experience a 'sweet or sour' effect upon re-employment. Although Latack and Dozier (1986) suggested that the legacy effect may be influenced by the type of termination experienced, their proposition has not been empirically tested.
Learned helplessness theory was used to predict that people who lose their job involuntarily may suffer higher levels of depression than those who volunteer for redundancy. Deep depression associated with involuntary job loss may be experienced as a longer-term phenomenon, not lifting immediately upon re-employment. In contrast, if people who volunteer for redundancy experience only minor depression during unemployment they may follow the more typical pattern of reductions to distress upon re-employment.
Hypothesis 3. Employees who experience involuntary job redundancy will continue to report high levels of depression in their new job while employees who volunteered for their job redundancy will experience a drop in the level of depression in their new job.
As well as its influence on psychological health upon re-employment, the legacy effect has also been found to influence affective employee outcomes such as commitment, insecurity, distrust and cynicism (Burke, 1986; Feldman & Leana, 2000; King, 2002). Again, there has been no empirical test of whether a legacy effect on affective employee outcomes is influenced by the way in which a person exited their last job. However, indirect evidence of...
|
