Between dystopias and alternative ideas of caring

Aulenbacher, Brigitte; Riegraf, Birgit

doi:10.1108/edi-03-2018-0048

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Profits are valued over care (Tronto, 2013; Waring, 2004); and people and business prioritised over the environment (Milne et al, 2009; Phillips, 2019). Both WLB and green WLB has, generally, prioritised organisational outcomes and profit and have largely failed to recognise the complex context of care and paid work that is situated within communities, society and the environment (Aulenbacher & Riegraf, 2017; Cosgriff, 2011; Pocock et al, 2012; Siegel et al, 2018; Singh, 2013; Tronto, 2013). The very phrases used in WLB research such as conflict, spillover, work and life are based in an idea that these are separate, competing demands.…”

Section: Care and Its Underpinning Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is argued that this ‘failing’ is due to society's assumptions of ‘what is care’. Aulenbacher and Riegraf (2017) emphasise this through their critique of capitalist notions of ‘care’ that promote both individual responsibility and self‐interest, and the pursuit of profit for organisations. Capitalism, therefore, ignores the reciprocal nature of care and that how care is provided and organised can enable economic and social participation in communities (Aulenbacher & Riegraf, 2017; Tronto, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Greening work–life balance: Connecting work, caring and the environment

Ravenswood

2021

Industrial Relations Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emerging field of green work-life balance (growing from the work-life balance and sustainability fields) largely centres its analysis around the organisational benefits of green work-life balance policies. Consequently, it often focuses on the way in which individual behaviours can reduce the environmental footprint of the organisation. This paper argues that the gendered assumptions underpinning the research mean that the nascent field of green work-life balance has failed to theorise the way in which personal, community, environmental and organisational needs interconnect. Specifically, it has failed to address the way in which 'care'-for people and the environment-lacks recognition because of gender norms of carework. This paper proposes a theoretical framework of green work-life balance that centres both environmental and people care. This theoretical framework can be used to inform both research and practice, including the way in which unions bargain and campaign for green clauses and just transition.

show abstract