Since the 1980’s the changing structure of employment in the Federal Republic of Germany is increasingly visible. Whereas the socially secured, dependent and unlimited full time employment - the so called “regular employment relationsship” – has since then gained high rates of increase and an increasing differentiation.
On the basis of microcensus data this article examines the alteration of employment forms between 1985 and 2005 and compares the development in the Federal Republic of Germany with that of Berlin. Whereas in the Federal Republic a slightly stronger decrease of the regular employment relationship is indicated only since some years, in Berlin a dramatic decline of normal employment relationsship has taken place since the beginning of the 1990’s, and still continues until today. Compared with that the other employment forms show large growth rates in the Federal Republic as well as in Berlin, in particular the marginal part-time work, the self employment in part-time and the temporary work.
This brings us to the question whether it still seems appropiate to adhere to the term of the atypical employment forms in view of their increasing quantitative meaning or if the term of precarious employment forms is a more accurate description?
Furthermore, this article investigates whether the actual labour market policy has forced the change of employment forms. The reorientation of the active labour market policy in the context of the so called “Hartz-Reforms” aims at an expansion of low wage work and atypical employment forms. In particular the deregulation of the industrial law, the introduction of new instruments as well as the cutback of traditional labour market policy mechanisms contribute to the expansion of atypical employment forms.
In this regard it is also of interest, in the context of the Hartz-Reforms, of how the labour market policy promotion of the atypical employment forms effects the social security insurance and whether it contributes to the displacement or substitution of regular employment liable for social security benefits. Throughout the literature there are quite a few indications for at least partial displacement of regular employment liable to social security benefits as a result of the promotion of atypical employment, and the liberty of social security benefits obligation of the new, politically promoted employment forms or its reduction burdens the social security system.