1.
Ågren, Maria
Service, help and delegation: What vaguely described work can tell us about labour relations in the past Book Chapter
In: Bischoff, Jeannine (Ed.): Beyond Slavery and Freedom: Bonn Centre for Slavery and Dependence Studies Publications, 2020.
@inbook{nokey,
title = {Service, help and delegation: What vaguely described work can tell us about labour relations in the past},
author = {Maria Ågren},
editor = {Jeannine Bischoff},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
urldate = {2020-01-01},
booktitle = {Beyond Slavery and Freedom: Bonn Centre for Slavery and Dependence Studies Publications},
abstract = {This article explores a dataset of verb-phrases culled from early modern Swedish sources, all of which describe work in vague terms. The analysis shows that vaguely described work (e.g. ‘to work’, ‘to serve’) often appeared together with information on for whom, where and under what conditions the work in question had taken place. In other words, work was neither described as a concrete task nor as an occupation; instead, it was the labour relation that people tended to describe.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
This article explores a dataset of verb-phrases culled from early modern Swedish sources, all of which describe work in vague terms. The analysis shows that vaguely described work (e.g. ‘to work’, ‘to serve’) often appeared together with information on for whom, where and under what conditions the work in question had taken place. In other words, work was neither described as a concrete task nor as an occupation; instead, it was the labour relation that people tended to describe.
2.
Schiel, Juliane; Vito, Christian De; van Rossum, Matthias
From Bondage to Precariousness? New Perspectives on Labor and Social History Journal Article
In: Journal of Social History, vol. 54, iss. 2, pp. 1-19, 2020.
@article{nokey,
title = {From Bondage to Precariousness? New Perspectives on Labor and Social History},
author = {Juliane Schiel and Christian De Vito and Matthias van Rossum},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
journal = {Journal of Social History},
volume = {54},
issue = {2},
pages = {1-19},
abstract = {This article explores the possibility of a new, empirically based analytical and methodological framework for the study of labour relations and the reinterpretation of contemporary issues, including precariousness, „modern slavery,” social inequality, and dependence. It proposes a contextualized, interrelational and transepochal approach and discusses the potential of three research strategies.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article explores the possibility of a new, empirically based analytical and methodological framework for the study of labour relations and the reinterpretation of contemporary issues, including precariousness, „modern slavery,” social inequality, and dependence. It proposes a contextualized, interrelational and transepochal approach and discusses the potential of three research strategies.
3.
Fudge, Judy
(Re)Conceptualizing Unfree Labour: Local Labour Control Regimes and Constraints on Workers‘ Freedoms‘ Journal Article
In: Global Labour Journal , vol. 10, iss. 2, pp. 108-122, 2019.
@article{nokey,
title = {(Re)Conceptualizing Unfree Labour: Local Labour Control Regimes and Constraints on Workers‘ Freedoms‘},
author = {Judy Fudge},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
journal = {Global Labour Journal },
volume = {10},
issue = {2},
pages = {108-122},
abstract = {Disputes over the meaning of human trafficking, forced labour and modern slavery have both provoked and coincided with a reinvigorated debate in academic and policy literatures about how to conceptualise unfree labour. This article traces the contours of the debate over free and unfree labour, identifying its key stakes as the debate has developed and paying particular attention to recent interventions. It begins by identifying a problem common to both canonical liberal and Marxian approaches to the free/unfree labour distinction, which is to fetishise the labour market. It then discusses the consensus that is emerging across disciplines and in leading international organisations that labour unfreedom in contemporary capitalism is best conceptualised as a continuum rather than a binary, highlighting recent disciplinary-specific contributions. It argues that the metaphor of a continuum of labour unfreedom obscures more than it illuminates. Drawing upon the growing body of literature that advocates a multifaceted approach to labour unfreedom, this article argues that a robust concept of local labour control regime does a much better job of capturing the complex mix of consent and coercion involved in extracting value from labour power than the idea of a continuum of labour unfreedom.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Disputes over the meaning of human trafficking, forced labour and modern slavery have both provoked and coincided with a reinvigorated debate in academic and policy literatures about how to conceptualise unfree labour. This article traces the contours of the debate over free and unfree labour, identifying its key stakes as the debate has developed and paying particular attention to recent interventions. It begins by identifying a problem common to both canonical liberal and Marxian approaches to the free/unfree labour distinction, which is to fetishise the labour market. It then discusses the consensus that is emerging across disciplines and in leading international organisations that labour unfreedom in contemporary capitalism is best conceptualised as a continuum rather than a binary, highlighting recent disciplinary-specific contributions. It argues that the metaphor of a continuum of labour unfreedom obscures more than it illuminates. Drawing upon the growing body of literature that advocates a multifaceted approach to labour unfreedom, this article argues that a robust concept of local labour control regime does a much better job of capturing the complex mix of consent and coercion involved in extracting value from labour power than the idea of a continuum of labour unfreedom.
2020
Ågren, Maria
Service, help and delegation: What vaguely described work can tell us about labour relations in the past Book Chapter
In: Bischoff, Jeannine (Ed.): Beyond Slavery and Freedom: Bonn Centre for Slavery and Dependence Studies Publications, 2020.
Abstract | Tags: dependency, early modern history, historical semantics, new history of work, service, sweden
@inbook{nokey,
title = {Service, help and delegation: What vaguely described work can tell us about labour relations in the past},
author = {Maria Ågren},
editor = {Jeannine Bischoff},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
urldate = {2020-01-01},
booktitle = {Beyond Slavery and Freedom: Bonn Centre for Slavery and Dependence Studies Publications},
abstract = {This article explores a dataset of verb-phrases culled from early modern Swedish sources, all of which describe work in vague terms. The analysis shows that vaguely described work (e.g. ‘to work’, ‘to serve’) often appeared together with information on for whom, where and under what conditions the work in question had taken place. In other words, work was neither described as a concrete task nor as an occupation; instead, it was the labour relation that people tended to describe.
},
keywords = {dependency, early modern history, historical semantics, new history of work, service, sweden},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
This article explores a dataset of verb-phrases culled from early modern Swedish sources, all of which describe work in vague terms. The analysis shows that vaguely described work (e.g. ‘to work’, ‘to serve’) often appeared together with information on for whom, where and under what conditions the work in question had taken place. In other words, work was neither described as a concrete task nor as an occupation; instead, it was the labour relation that people tended to describe.
Schiel, Juliane; Vito, Christian De; van Rossum, Matthias
From Bondage to Precariousness? New Perspectives on Labor and Social History Journal Article
In: Journal of Social History, vol. 54, iss. 2, pp. 1-19, 2020.
Abstract | Tags: dependency, global labour history, historical semantics, methodology, new history of work
@article{nokey,
title = {From Bondage to Precariousness? New Perspectives on Labor and Social History},
author = {Juliane Schiel and Christian De Vito and Matthias van Rossum},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
journal = {Journal of Social History},
volume = {54},
issue = {2},
pages = {1-19},
abstract = {This article explores the possibility of a new, empirically based analytical and methodological framework for the study of labour relations and the reinterpretation of contemporary issues, including precariousness, „modern slavery,” social inequality, and dependence. It proposes a contextualized, interrelational and transepochal approach and discusses the potential of three research strategies.
},
keywords = {dependency, global labour history, historical semantics, methodology, new history of work},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article explores the possibility of a new, empirically based analytical and methodological framework for the study of labour relations and the reinterpretation of contemporary issues, including precariousness, „modern slavery,” social inequality, and dependence. It proposes a contextualized, interrelational and transepochal approach and discusses the potential of three research strategies.
2019
Fudge, Judy
(Re)Conceptualizing Unfree Labour: Local Labour Control Regimes and Constraints on Workers‘ Freedoms‘ Journal Article
In: Global Labour Journal , vol. 10, iss. 2, pp. 108-122, 2019.
Abstract | Tags: capitalism, contemporary, dependency, forced labour, labour markets, new history of work, slavery
@article{nokey,
title = {(Re)Conceptualizing Unfree Labour: Local Labour Control Regimes and Constraints on Workers‘ Freedoms‘},
author = {Judy Fudge},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
journal = {Global Labour Journal },
volume = {10},
issue = {2},
pages = {108-122},
abstract = {Disputes over the meaning of human trafficking, forced labour and modern slavery have both provoked and coincided with a reinvigorated debate in academic and policy literatures about how to conceptualise unfree labour. This article traces the contours of the debate over free and unfree labour, identifying its key stakes as the debate has developed and paying particular attention to recent interventions. It begins by identifying a problem common to both canonical liberal and Marxian approaches to the free/unfree labour distinction, which is to fetishise the labour market. It then discusses the consensus that is emerging across disciplines and in leading international organisations that labour unfreedom in contemporary capitalism is best conceptualised as a continuum rather than a binary, highlighting recent disciplinary-specific contributions. It argues that the metaphor of a continuum of labour unfreedom obscures more than it illuminates. Drawing upon the growing body of literature that advocates a multifaceted approach to labour unfreedom, this article argues that a robust concept of local labour control regime does a much better job of capturing the complex mix of consent and coercion involved in extracting value from labour power than the idea of a continuum of labour unfreedom.
},
keywords = {capitalism, contemporary, dependency, forced labour, labour markets, new history of work, slavery},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Disputes over the meaning of human trafficking, forced labour and modern slavery have both provoked and coincided with a reinvigorated debate in academic and policy literatures about how to conceptualise unfree labour. This article traces the contours of the debate over free and unfree labour, identifying its key stakes as the debate has developed and paying particular attention to recent interventions. It begins by identifying a problem common to both canonical liberal and Marxian approaches to the free/unfree labour distinction, which is to fetishise the labour market. It then discusses the consensus that is emerging across disciplines and in leading international organisations that labour unfreedom in contemporary capitalism is best conceptualised as a continuum rather than a binary, highlighting recent disciplinary-specific contributions. It argues that the metaphor of a continuum of labour unfreedom obscures more than it illuminates. Drawing upon the growing body of literature that advocates a multifaceted approach to labour unfreedom, this article argues that a robust concept of local labour control regime does a much better job of capturing the complex mix of consent and coercion involved in extracting value from labour power than the idea of a continuum of labour unfreedom.