All Non-Standard Employment Arrangements Are Not Created Equal: Data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey

Monday, June 20, 2016: 2:20 PM
Tubughnenq' 3, Dena'ina Convention Center
Sara E. Luckhaupt , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
Chia-ping Su , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
BACKGROUND:  Non-standard employment arrangements are increasing. Certain types of non-standard arrangements (e.g., employment through a temporary services agency) have been associated with increased risk of occupational injury, but little is known about the general characteristics or general health of workers with various types of non-standard arrangements compared with workers employed through traditional arrangements.

METHODS:  The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is an annual nationally representative household survey designed to be representative of the US population. We analyzed 2010 NHIS data from adults who were employed in the week prior to interview according to responses to the following question: “Which of the following best describes your work arrangement?” Workers who chose responses of “independent contractor, independent consultant or freelance worker” (freelance); “on-call and work only when called to work” (on-call); “paid by a temporary agency” (temporary); “work for a contractor who provides workers and services to others under contract” (contract); or “other” non-standard arrangements were compared to those who chose “regular, permanent employee” (traditional) .

RESULTS:  Overall, 17.8% of workers reported arrangements other than traditional.  Freelance was the most common, accounting for 9.6% of all workers. This was followed by other non-standard (3.4%), on-call (2.4%), contract (1.6%), and temporary (0.8%) arrangements. Compared with traditional workers, freelance workers were more likely to be male, aged ≥65, have less education, and reside in the West. On-call workers were also more likely to be ≥65, have less education, and reside in the West. Other non-standard workers were more likely to be ≥ 65. Contract workers were more likely to have less education. Temporary workers were more likely to be 18-29 years old and less likely to be non-Hispanic White.  Workers in all of the non-standard categories were more likely to not have health insurance and to earn < $35,000 per year than traditional employees; both of these characteristics were most common among temporary workers. Workers in all non-standard categories except for “other” were more likely to work in the construction industry; and freelance, on-call, and temporary workers were more likely to work in the services industries than traditional employees. Temporary workers were most likely to report fair or poor health, but differences in health status were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS:  Workers with non-standard employment arrangements differ from both traditional employees and by subcategory within the broad category of non-standard employment arrangements. This diversity should be considered in planning further studies and recommendations.