This article explores how parents in couple families reconcile employment and child-care, and how far the current emphasis of EU-level policy on enhancing the formal provision of child-care fits with patterns and/or preferences in Western European member states. We use European Social Survey data from 2004-05 on working patterns and preferences, and on child-care use and preferences regarding the amount of formal provision. We find that working hours remain a very important dimension of work/family reconciliation practices, with large differences in both patterns and preferences. There is very little evidence of convergence towards a dual, full-time worker model family outside the Nordic countries, although the balance between the hours which men and women spend in paid work is becoming less unequal. The part that kin (partners and grandparents) play in providing child-care remains important in all but three countries, and, for the most part, mothers report that they are content with the amount of formal child-care available. We suggest that work/family reconciliation measures need to encompass a more extended policy package, the components of which are likely to be specific to member states.
Three successive Labour governments have developed a range of work/family balance (WFB) policies, including child care services, leaves and flexible working hours, which have also become an increasingly coherent package. Drawing on Hall (1993), we explore the extent to which these represent a significant change at three levels: that of ideas (the goals of policy), mechanisms (the nature of the policy instruments), and settings (the fine-tuning of policy instruments). We examine how far the ideas driving the policy developments have been about the welfare of the family and its members, and the nature of the balance of continuity and change in policy instruments and settings, making some suggestions as to how this might be explained.
Since 1997 , Labour has developed a wide range of policies on childcare services, care leaves and flexible working hours. In 2000 , the term 'work-life balance' was introduced and has been used by Government Departments and by the academic community with very little discussion of its meaning vis à vis the use of 'family-friendly' policies, or the promotion of 'work and family balance'. We explore the introduction of the term work-life balance, the reasons for it, and its significance at the policy level, especially in terms of its implications for the pursuit of gender equality. We find that at the policy level, its use was more a matter of strategic framing than substantive change. Nevertheless, because of the UK Government's largely gender-neutral approach to the whole policy field, it is important to make explicit the tensions in the continuing use of the term work-life balance, particularly in relation to the achievement of gender equality.
In 2007 the UK established a new single equalities body, to bring together the existing equality Commissions dealing with gender, disability, and race and ethnicity into a Commission for Equality and Human Rights. The promotion and enforcement of 'equality and diversity' is one of the three duties of the new body. This paper briefly explores diversity in relation to the theory of gender equality and also examines developments in policy at the EU level, which has provided much of the impetus for change. Our focus is on the policy approach and the tensions that the policy documents reveal about the emphasis on equality and diversity approach, in particular the extent to which attention to gender issues may get lost in the diversity bundle, and the extent to which a focus on the individual may be strengthened over the group.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.