(quick disclaimer: I know he is unpopular here, has holes in some of his arguments and leaves out evidence etc. I'm not planning on reading any more of his stuff)

In 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism(2010), he states that

even studies done by some free-market economists associated with institutions such as the University of Chicago or the IMF suggest that, below 8-10%, inflation has no relationship with a country's economic growth rate [cites Rosenberg & Birdzell, How the West Grew Rich] (p55)

He cites examples of Brazil after 1996 and South Africa after 1994 being punished with low growth after raising interest rates very high. He argues against high interest rates to tackle inflation because:

Real interest rates of 8, 10, or 12 per cent mean that potential investors would not find non-financial investments attractive, as few such investments bring profit rates higher than 7% [meaning returns on assets - he cites World Bank studies]...In this case, the only profitable investment is in high-risk, high-return financial assets. Even though financial investments can drive growth for a while, such growth cannot be sustained, as those investments have to be ultimately backed up by viable long-term investments in real sector activities, as so vividly shown by the 2008 financial crisis. (p56)

On job security, he states that

Between the 1990s and the outbreak of the 2008 crisis, even though unemployment fell, the chance of involuntary job termination increased, the share of short-term jobs rose

He puts this down to changes in labour market regulations and the rise of shareholder value maximisation/the Friedman doctrine. As floating shareholders can easily leave a company he argues that they are less interested in its long-term potential and says countries like Sweden and Germany which give more power to longer-term stakeholders makes their companies more viable in the long term. He cites the decline of General Motors while its managers and shareholders received high compensation as a prime example.

Obviously some economists argue that an individual company's long-term viability doesn't really matter, but companies failing more often inevitably means more layoffs. Job security is even more important to people than pay according to studies here and here.