Reconciliation of work and private life Jaime Cabeza Pereiro Vigo University

contents

• • Several public and private policies and some trends of opinion.

Main perspectives: – Gender equality.

– European Employment Strategy – Demography: chilbirth rate and care for elder people.

– Family protection.

Main policies

• • • Public –also private?- services available to care children and dependant people.

Parental leaves and time work reductions to care both- children and dependants. Social Security rights and allowances for this purpose. Care credits to be applied in retirement schemes.

Work arrangements and flexible work conditions to attend labour and private life –vg., part time, teleworking, flexible time arrangements…

Deep convitions

• • • Family conceptions. Values.

Contestation to public policies may be very sharp. For many groups and persons, family decisions must be kept out of public concern. They belong to the privacy and to the realm of Private Law.

Against these thinkings, the feminist movements have promoted the publification of family spaces in order to challenge the status quo and to change the conducts and the stereotypes.

CONFLICT BETWEEN TWO MODELS

• • • • • The classical breadwinner model, where men are supposed to provide only the economic resorces and women are expected to supply only the care unpaid work and without social recognition.

A different pattern, where both, men and women share all the tasks with equity or where any person is treated as an adult worker individual. Of course, changes in family structure are largely involved in this discussion.

Nevertheless, old schemes are still nowadays conditioning the reality. Gender stereotypes haven’t dissapeared at all.

Sometimes, it’s easy to appreciate a deep divorce betweeen convictions and behaviours. And large difficulties to change the attitudes.

New proposals and policies are avoiding the gender conflict in the assumption of responsabilities and tend to look for new perspectives. With this trends, old problems remain. And gender oriented distribution of roles remain alive.

Free choices?

• • • • The Commission adopts this topic in its proposals.

But this rethoric has encouraged classical possitions and has focused women in caring tasks.

At the end, the social patterns and also the retribution differences between both genders have resulted in the traditional model of male breadwinners and female carers. Although maybe women enjoy Social Security protection in their domestic work.

Free choices need equality and non discrimination as starting points.

Sharing responsabilities v.

• • • • • •

reconciliating private life and work

Actually, the emerging discussion of reconciliating work and private law has had the result of diminishing the debate about sharing responsabilities.

As an example, the traditional conflict about the assumption og domestic work had lost its intensity.

Among some member States it’s encouraged the maintenance of traditional patterns using the “reconciliating…” approach.

Por exemple, in any M.E. it is encouraged the formalised domestic work in the scope of Proximity Works. But in this way it’s secundary if men become implied in the development of this work.

Consequently inequalities spread in the labour market. Women are supposed to face up the burden of domestic work. So, the “reconciliation…” approach has been used as an strategy to avoid men responsabilities. If family responsabilities become compatible with the labour relations, caring responsabilities are not for much longer a barrier. The question about who cares is not a problem of paramount importance.

• •

Divorce between “reconciliating…” and gender equality

In this context, reconciliating work and family arises as a defence tool for men. The target is to help women with the purpose of making their social responsabilities compatible with their maintenance in the labour market. So, an implicit commitment with the sexist division of tasks between men and women is accepted.

“Reconciliating…” as help and assistance to mothers. This is the enthusiastic approach for the reactionaric political possitions to this topic.

• • • •

The European discussion

Avoiding the vast majority of references, the First Programme on Social Action -1974- included the debate about sharing responsabilities between both genders. But the change in the language is very clear and evident. In the Strasbourg Community Charter on Social Fundamental Rigths of Workers -1989- the word “sharing” dissapears and it’s replaced for “reconciliation”. And “care responsabilities” become “care obligations”.

“Sharing” is a discourse of equity –private and public- and equality. “Reconciliation…” is a market approach.

Consequently, the “reconciliation…” message has flourished in the European Employment Strategy.

Consequently, in the Law field, the equality and non discrimination rethoric has been very away from the parental leave developments. In this context, as it would be easy to predict , the ECJ has largely denied to appreciate indirect discrimination in cases about parental institutions. Vg, in the recente Gómez Limón case.

Recontructing the relationship

• • • • Nevertheless, equality and reconciliating are fields with many links and close relations. At least, the European Commission recongnises this nearness: reconciliating meassures have to tend to strengthening equality.

And social and familiar reality have reinforced an individual approach to all persons irrespective of his/her family. Actually, individualization has been one of the main challenges of feminist policies.

European policies have assumed these social changes, demographic pressures and new models of family.

And mainstreaming means taking into account gender perspective in a field of policies with deep impact.

Demographic problems

• Demographic concern is in the eye of the hurricane. There are several problems: ageing between European people, the low childbirth rate and female fertility. Behind these trends, the main discussions are the following: 1) 2) 3) Increase of needs for dependant carers which must me answered with formal tools better than with informal carers.

Necessity to improve the childbirth ratio. Public meassures are required. It is important not to delay the private decisions about paternity and maternity.

To get at the rejuvenation the society and to guarantee the intergenerational solidarity. For all these purposes, reconciliating measures are very important.

It is evident that States with lower percentajes of childbirth are at the same time those with worse balances between work and private life. Also, there is a direct relationship between female employment and fertility.

PARENTAL LEAVE

• • • 96/34/EC Directive 3rd June 1996. Agreement on parental leave.

Individual right for both parents to leave the work three months -4 months in the 18th Jube 2009 Agreemet- to care children until they reach the age of 8 years old. The apply for the leave or its enjoying must be protected against retaliation dismissal –or other disfavourable mesasures, in the new Agreement-. The worker has the right to keep his/her job or, at least, an equivalent job. During the leave, all adquired rights are preserved and also the rights in way of acquisition.

Also, workers have an individual right to leave the work in vis maior situations linked with urgent family events, like accident or illness.

OTHER ASPECTS OF THE DIRECTIVE

• • • No more compulsory rules Recomendation: the leave should be granted in a non-transferable basis. One month compulsoyy, in the new Agrement.

And concrete decisions: – Wheter the leave will be granted on full or part time basis, in a piecemeal way or as a time credit.

– If it will be required a previous lenght of services which shall not exceed one year. Cointing all temporary contracts with the same employer, says the new Agrement.

– To adjust the leave to the special circunstamves of adoption.

– To establish the notice periods in benefit of the company, specifying the beginning and the end of the leave.

– To define the circunstances in which the employer can pospone the granting of the leave.

– The authorization of special arrangements in the case of small companys.

• • • •

SOME REMARKS ABOUT THE DIRECTIVE

It is one of the first Directives which contain an European Agreement.

This bargained character explains some of the more evident gaps it has. The compulsory rules are few and it attends only the children care. There aren’t any minimum standards about remuneration or Social Security rights during the leave.

The UNICE –noe EUROBUSINESS- victory seems to be evident. Their thesis prevailed largely upon trade union’s positions.

But the bargained character has particular interest. Maybe it promotes changes in attitudes in the collective scope. The collective dialogue, in this sense, would be more permeable to the introduction of these measures.

• • • •

MORE REMARKS

At the end the Directive is acting as a soft law instrument. The threshold of compulsory measures is very small. And it offers to the States several posibilities to comply with its requirements. From this perspective, it’s said that the Parental Leva Directive is a good sample of new trends .

But it showes the minimum agreements in the mid-nities and the prudence of the European institutions in a moment when UK had opted out the Social Policy Agreement and when Sweden and Finland had become EU members too recently. Also, the poor policies of Mediterranean States.

Actually, the Swedish experience was very important in the progress of reconciliation policies in several countries: non transferable leaves and Social Security enought protection.

In this context, the Directive was designed more as a family policy tool and less as an instrument to look for the equality between both genders. The purpose was mainly to afford flexibility to the worker persons.

• • • •

BUT…

More recent approaches give priority to care services, although they are not guaranteed by hard law instruments.

From the employment point of view, parental leve is a doubtful thecnique: it is true that it links workers –mainly women- to the labour market. But it affects their professional careers very deeply. Their different alternatives -part-time, piecemeal basis or time-credit- can reduce the impact, but not avoid it.

If the leaves have long duration, the adverse impact is broader. And if they are not covered by Social Security por the coverage isn´t enought, they promote the male bradwinner model.

The challenge seems clear: to share the parental leave men and women. This target appears in the European Commission communications .

CONCRETE MEASURES

• • • • Leaves in non transferable basis: daddys’ months model. To promote the enjoying by fathers of caring leaves.

In the Social Security it is required to get a balence between lack of coverage or little coverage -which promotes male breadwinner model- and too generous protection, which can disuade reincorporation to work.

There is a doubt: if Social Security systems might encourage informal care or to develop patterns of formal caring.

And other challenge is to develop reconciliation measures in self-employed field.

• • • • •

CARING SERVICES

These measures show a greater degree of implication from the governments and regional authorities. It’s easier to recognise a parental leave, also if it implies social expenditure. But edfectiveness is greater in the case of caring services.

However, in this field European commitment only involves soft law approach: targets, benchmaring and monitoring.

Another values of services: they allow social integration, from the point of view of children and mothers. For mothers, working is fruitful with caring facilities. In this context, they are an important tool in the domain of EEE.

The Barcelona Council -2002- fixed quantitative targets to be achieved in 2010: there should be services enough for 90 per cent of children between 3 years old and the age of compulsory scholarship and for 30 per cent of chilfren under three years old. But this last percentaje is far away from being accomplished in 2010.

And there is a lack of qualitative targets in this field.

FLEXIBLE WORKING CONDITIONS

• • • • • The main attention was given to time work arrangements.

Other important topic is teleworking. The 2002 European Agreement recognises its great possibilities for reconciliation purposes.

But this is a clear example showing that there is a risk to focus the reconciliation answers in the domain of attypical work.

Obviously, the develpment in some European contries –like the Netherlans- of part time work constitutes the easiest sample of this trend. It is the one and a half family earner model.

From the point of view of flexible models in time organization, the reconciliation challenges aren’t having been into account very much. As the best example, the 93/104/CEE Directive didn’t express any concern about them, nor the 2000/34/CE Directive. Only the 2008 draft proposals gave them some attention, but only as a concession to reinforce flexibility in favour of companies .

BUT…

• • Notwithstanding the little concern of European legislation in this problem, some internal measures have had broad consequences in allowing people to attend their private responsabilites. This was the case of the French 35 hours per week system, nowadays sharply eroded. It was suggested that the poor success of part time work in France is a result of this reduction in working time.

And also it would be very interesting to review the collective agreements’ approach to working time. It’s possible to find good practices with the purpose of reconciliating work and private life.

• • •

EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT STRATEGY

It’s the domain where the reconciliation topic has focused the attention at a broader extent, with the Lisbon target for 2010 of 60 per cent of female employment. It’s necessary to afford caring facilities to increase women participation in labour market.

European bodies clearly recognise that this is the established status quo: women have barriers which men haven’t. Actually, European approach isn’t reluctant at all whit this situation.

Only the broad objectives of economic policy have increased the commitment of the European Commissión in reconciliation measures. Mainly after the Win Kok report (2003-2004).

THE AMSTERDAM TREATY

• The 1997 Treaty in this context has had a great influence in the development of reconciliating policies: – It integrated the Social Policy Agreement into the Treaty after the UK opting in.

– It created a new Title VIII –Employment-, which was the origin of EEE.

– It recognized the mainstreaming approach at the highest level –art. 3- and introducted the possitive action measures in art. 141.

• • • •

RECONCILIATION AND EMPLOYMENT POLICIES

At the end, reconciliation has been coapted by the EEE. In this scope it has had the recongnition it lacked in other areas.

However the target is not the sharing of responsability but the creation of employment. Women are a colective which is necessary to attract to the labour market And reconciliation has affected also the flexicurity discourse. To progress in their professional careers, women need leaves, caring services and flexibility in work conditions. In transitional markets, it must be easy to move from work to parental leave and to come back to work. All without large costs nor losses in their professional development.

Unfortunately, women depend stronger on employment services. And the efficience of those services is higher in the case of men.

Women in attypical work

• • • But at the end, women become tied to the secundary labour market: part time, flexible conditions with less Social Security protection and less acquired rights. In broad terms, in attypical work.

From 2000 Lisbon Summit onswards, female worker has grown in quantitative terms, but not in quality.

In this path, parental leave policies , care services and flexibility in favour of workers can promote better qualitative standards.

Last comments

• • Nevertheless, in last years, the reconciliation policies seem to have lost visibility.

At the beginning of the EEE, one of the four pillars –equality- included in a natural way reconciliation policies. But since 2005, with the harminization of employment guidelines with economic guidelines, this pillar has disappeared.

LEGISLATIVE TRENDS

• • • • • Scandinavian models have spread their influence in some internal legislation. As an example, last reform in German has developed the system of non transferable leaves with reserve in favour of the father.

It has been improved social protection to override the male bradwinner model.

Also, it is encouraged early return of mothers to the labour market after a leave.

And it has been improved the net of child care services, mainly for chilfren under three years old.

These trends are expected to have impact in the childbirth rate.

OTHER TRENDS

• • • • In France family policies have been focused to child care services and Social Secrurity allowances. This system has helped women to face their double task as mothers and workers.

Last years the child care net of services has been maintained. But there has been a clear trend to increase the allowances in the case of parental leave or to contract a domestic workers.

So mothers are supposed to chose between working or caring children. Some policies have tried to encourange woment to leave the labour market with the purpose of fighting agains t high unemployment rates.

Fathers have had little incentives to take parental leave.

• • • • •

Other trends

Last reforms in Spain have been focused in the development of a paternity leave which is recognised for four weeks, but maintaning long leaves –ultil three years- and long time reductions to care children or other dependant relatives.

This leaves, except the paternity leave are not covered at all with Social Security measures so encouraging the male breadwinner model.

However, the modern legislation insist in the need of sharing responsabilities between both genders.

It has been passed an Act which pretends to afford care services for dependant people.

And some regional authoritues –”Comunidades Autónomas” are proposing quantitative targets in care services for children.

Conclusion

• • Two questions: 1) Which values must be followed and with which priority?

– Sharing responsabilities and equality?

– Family protection?

– Chilbirth rate increase and other demographic challenges?

2) Which tools must be priorised?