When Covid struck, hotel employees were thrown into a new and uncertain labour market situation. Mass redundancies, extensive use of short-time work schemes, and rapidly changing working conditions blurred the boundaries between the internal and external labor market—creating a prolonged in-between state with consequences for individuals, organizations, and the labour market at large. Elin Storman, newly awarded a PhD in Working Life Science, has written the dissertation “Navigating Organisational Restructuring and Job Transitions – A Case Study of Workers in the Swedish Hotel Sector.”
Covid hit the hotel industry unusually fast and hard. In a sector already characterized by insecure employment conditions, the sudden drop in demand led to mass redundancies and widespread implementation of short-time work—a crisis tool that was, at the time, used for the first time in its new form in Sweden.
At the same time, restrictions and fluctuating infection rates caused sharp shifts in occupancy rate, ranging from almost empty hotels to periods of full activity, for example during domestic “staycation” tourism. Given that previous research on restructuring and short-time work has primarily focused on the industrial sector, questions arose as to how these rapid changes were experienced by hotel workers, and how their positions in the labor market were affected in a new and uncertain situation.
Elin Storman, how did organisational restructuring and short-time work affect hotel workers’ everyday working lives?
– Everyday work changed fundamentally. For those who remained employed, short-time work did not only mean fewer working hours and lower income, but also significantly altered job roles. Tasks became broader, onboarding and support were neglected, and schedules became fragmented and difficult to plan, as they had to be adjusted to a customer base heavily affected by infection rates and arriving in waves.
The pandemic also reshaped working relationships. Working alone became more common, colleagues disappeared, and the professional role shifted partly from hospitality to enforcing rapidly changing restrictions. Work was characterized by abrupt alternations between low workload and intense peak periods with fewer staff on site, which weakened social interaction and reduced opportunities for joint meetings and learning.
What distinguished the experiences of those who remained employed from those who lost their jobs?
– There were differences compared to those who lost their employment, but the extensive implementation of short-time work gave rise to several consequences similar to those identified in previous research on job loss, such as income loss and reduced access to several other latent functions associated with work, explains Elin Storman. Although many were able to adapt well to the changes, the consequences were felt more strongly by those with limited financial margins, a pronounced need for the routines that work provides, or a restricted social network outside working life. Those who lost their jobs, however, faced more direct and long-lasting consequences, including income loss, the loss of everyday structure, identity, and social contexts, as well as major difficulties finding new employment in a constrained labour market characterized by economic fluctuations and recurring waves of the pandemic and its restrictions.
You talk about liminality in the labour market—what does this mean in practice for employees?
– Liminality refers to a dimension of the labour market that contains positions where people find themselves between established categories such as ‘employed’ and ‘unemployed,’ explains Elin Storman. In practice, this involves having some form of work, but without sufficient income, security, or future prospects to plan one’s life.
– This may involve working only a few hours per week while actively job-seeking, moving between short-term contracts, or holding a part-time job that neither matches one’s skills nor meets one’s financial needs. For employees, this results in prolonged insecurity, where they are neither fully covered by the benefits of employment nor by the support systems directed at the unemployed.
What are the most important lessons from the study for employers and policymakers in future crises?
– A key lesson is that crisis measures such as short-time work can indeed save jobs, but at the same time risk creating new forms of insecurity if used for extended periods and without sufficient support, says Elin Storman. Employers therefore need to maintain a focus on systematic work environment management even during crises and be aware of the consequences that both the implementation and long-term use of short-time work may entail. Greater awareness of how short-time work affects organizations and employees can enable earlier risk assessments, thereby reducing the negative outcomes identified in the study.
For policymakers, the lesson is that short-time work is an important crisis tool, but one that requires an understanding of the unintended consequences that may arise. These effects do not only affect workers in the internal and external labor markets, but also those in the in-between position where “liminals” are found. The implementation of short-time work thus affects not only the work environment of those who remain in organizations, but also overall labour market mobility. High levels of short-time work may also carry a signalling effect that contributes to reduced labour market movement.
– My study also shows that knowledge of both short-time work schemes and transition support was low among employees and, in some cases, also among managers within the sector, says Elin Storman. This points to a need for increased awareness of existing support structures and the importance of ensuring that they reach those affected by restructuring. Understanding both the unintended consequences of crisis measures and the need for better dissemination of information about support structures is crucial to reducing the negative effects of restructuring in future crises.
