ABSTRACT
This chapter undertakes a comparative analysis of the extraordinary regularisation of precarious public employment in Portugal and Spain. Employing a qualitative comparative design, it scrutinises Portugal's and Spain's programmes through the triangulation of elite interviews, parliamentary debates, media reporting, and official data. Mobilising the book's framework of governing social blocs, decision arenas, and European Union leverage, the chapter shows that both cases moved towards inclusive settlements but with different depth and architecture. In Portugal, regularisation was conditional and procedurally demanding, rooted in a test of permanent need and continued reliance on open competitions, which constrained reach and left important pockets of temporariness. In Spain, the reform combined more automatic stabilisation paths, sanctions for abuse of fixedterm hiring, and tighter deadlines for administrations, producing a broader shift. The divergence can be chiefly explained by two interrelated factors: the lesser cohesion of the governing social bloc in Portugal compared to Spain, as the Socialist Party and its left-wing partners failed to reach consensus on all matters, and the greater EU leverage exerted in Spain. Together, these elements account for the observed differences between the two countries.
