Jérôme De Henau

Maybe baby: Comparing partnered women's employment and child policies in the EU - 15

Abstract This paper examines how child-related public policies influence womens employment in Europe. The analysis compares the difference in employment status between partnered mothers and nonmothers across the EU-15 using a wide range of self-constructed indicators of child policies such as childcare provision, parental leave, and tax-cash benefits. Using the recycled predictions method, it is possible to isolate the impact of the presence of a child from other characteristics likely to influence womens labor-market outcomes. Country-specific employment gaps among women are computed at different ages for the youngest child, for different outcomes (inactivity and part-time or full-time work), and for different levels of education. The main conclusion is that when it comes to securing equal labor-market access and conditions for mothers of young children and non-mothers, public childcare provision has the strongest impact. In the absence of public childcare, not even the most highly educated mothers can cope.

Making time for working parents: comparing public childcare provision

Introduction Early childhood education and care differ substantially across countries. First, opinions diverge as to the optimal age at which childrens socialisation should begin, that is, the age at which children should be cared for outside the family circle, and these differences are reflected in the way a countrys childcare system is organised (Letablier 1998). Some countries emphasise the importance of outside childcare options being available for children from as early as the end of maternity leave onwards. Others are in favour of children being cared for in the close family circle when they are very young and do not focus on developing outside care until children are 3 years of age (and up to the age at which they enter primary school). Second, countries also differ as to the sharing of childcare responsibilities between the domestic, the public and the private sphere. In some countries, ‘having children’ is considered to be a private choice, so that parents have to pay for the cost of children. In others, it is considered to be a public matter, in which case the state helps parents maintain their standard of living when they decide to have children. As a result, the former countries rely heavily on market intervention, while the latter focus on making the public system as all-encompassing as possible. Governments can act on three levels to provide care for children and to avoid deterring dual-earner families from having children.

Within-household inequalities across classes? Management and control of money

Both women and men strive to achieve a work and family balance, but does this imply more or less equality? Does the persistence of gender and class inequalities refute the notion that lives are becoming more individualised? Leading international authorities document how gender inequalities are changing and how many inequalities of earlier eras are being eradicated. However, this book shows there are new barriers and constraints that are slowing progress in attaining a more egalitarian society. Taking the new global economy into account, the expert contributors to this book examine the conflicts between different types of feminisms, revise old debates about ‘equality’ and ‘difference’ in the gendered nature of work and care, and propose new and innovative policy solutions.

Financial Togetherness and Autonomy Within Couples

This chapter examines the implications of the concepts of togetherness and financial autonomy for gender equality, drawing on findings from both qualitative and quantitative research. The qualitative research explored the two concepts in individual interviews with men and women in low- to moderate- income couples. The quantitative research used the British Household Panel Survey to analyse the factors affecting the differing assessments of their household income by men and women in couples across the range of incomes. The findings support the argument that an honest recognition of interdependence (or togetherness) is essential when analysing women’s financial autonomy.

Support for market care: comparing child cash and tax benefits

Introduction Besides public childcare provision and maternity/paternity leave arrangements, a third way for the state to intervene in the childcare sphere is to grant benefits to families with young children. These could help them finance the cost of childcare purchased on the market or cover part of their child-related expenses. However, the problem with this support is the broad use that parents can make of it. On the one hand, financial support can help families buy care time on the market and thus allow both parents to work (e.g. Del Boca et al. 2003; Viitanen 2005). On the other hand, when benefits are not issued for the specific purpose of purchasing market care, they can and are used to pay for other needs (food, clothes, etc.). A possible effect, which is very important from the gender point of view, is that, if financial support is perceived as being too generous, it risks inducing mothers to quit the labour market (e.g. Lewis and Ostner 1994; Naz 2004). The effect of such support on the work/family balance is then less clear. In the following sections we will present indicators that measure purely financial generosity, knowing that it should be kept in mind that ‘general’ cash or tax benefits have an ambiguous effect.