Chapter 3 Gendered Work and Migration Regimes

Cox, Rosie

doi:10.1108/s2041-806x(2012)0000010007

Cited by 24 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In consequence of this exclusion from labour rights, a live‐in domestic worker can legally be asked to work seven days a week for several consecutive weeks without a single full day off work (Medici, ). Similar exceptions from standard work‐time regulations apply in the UK (Cox, , p. 47) as well as in Austria (Bachinger, ).…”

Section: Comparing the Four Casesmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Because of its association with the private sphere, and the related gender order (Fraser, ), the home is usually associated with private law and family law domains and not labour law. Consequently, the private household as workplace lacks regular protection (Cox, ). In Switzerland, for instance, the home is not covered by labour law stipulating maximum daily and weekly working hours, minimum rest periods, days off work and other worker's rights.…”

Section: Comparing the Four Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The existing literature emphasises the broad range of vulnerabilities, and varied forms of subordination, exploitation and abuse, associated with live‐in paid care and domestic work in households across the globe (see, for example, Pratt, and Stiell & England, on Canada; Yeoh & Huang, on Singapore; Constable, on Hong Kong; Lutz, on Germany; Mantouvalou, on the UK, the Gulf states and North Africa; and Silvey, 2004a, 2004b on Saudi Arabia). Many countries exempt domestic and care work in the household from employment protection (Cox, ; England, ). Under the pretence of the worker being “one of the family”, employers legitimise overlong working hours and constant surveillance (Bakan & Stasiulis, ).…”

Section: Introduction: the Nexus Of Care Labour And Migration Regulamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

At home with the boss: Migrant live‐in caregivers, social reproduction and constrained agency in the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland

Schwiter

Strauss

England

2018

Trans Inst British Geog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many countries of the global North, families increasingly rely on live‐in caregivers to look after their children and elderly. Although much care work remains unpaid and informal, several states have set up a variety of migration and labour regimes to guarantee a steady supply of workers to provide paid live‐in care in the home. This paper contributes to a broadening of the focus of labour geography beyond “productive” labour by factoring in the theoretical perspective of social reproduction into the debates on constrained agency. Our aim is to identify the mechanisms that make these regimes function for employers and employees, and their consequences for the social reproduction of the workers. To do so we compare live‐in care schemes in the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland and examine the ways in which live‐in care is differentially institutionalised. Our policy analysis in these four countries shows that the constrained agency of the workers does not solely stem from their status as migrants, but is produced by the nexus of specific migration, care and gendered labour regimes. Furthermore, we argue that we need to extend our perspective beyond the immediate work context to see how live‐in care regimes not only infringe, but also enable, the social reproduction of the workers – a fact that has often been neglected by existing research.

show abstract

Section: Comparing the Four Casesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Comparing the Four Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction: the Nexus Of Care Labour And Migration Regulamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

At home with the boss: Migrant live‐in caregivers, social reproduction and constrained agency in the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland

Schwiter

Strauss

England

2018

Trans Inst British Geog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These differences are also gendered with the masculinity of migrant men employed in occupations classed as female (such as domestic work) remoulded in order that it can be accommodated into the racialised, gendered order (Sarti and Scrinzi 2010). Men are sometimes seen as hyper-masculinised and as sexual threats (Tranberg Hansen 1989), at other times their labour is accommodated within dominant forms of masculinity by emphasising the heavy household work undertaken or the work performed outside the house such as gardening or home maintenance (Cox 2012;Palenga-Möllenbeck 2013;Ramirez 2011). Male domestic workers seek to professionalise their work by claiming how what is assigned as feminised and natural when done by women, is an object of training and is learned when they are required to perform the same tasks.…”

Section: Racialisation Gender Class Nationality and Legal Statusmentioning

confidence: 97%

Gendered Migrations and Global Social Reproduction

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Increasing numbers of families in the UK employ nannies and au pairs . This is, arguably, not directly related to the introduction of public funding, outlined above, but rather because of changes to migration policy which have facilitated an informal market for more affordable (and flexible) in‐home childcare (Busch ; Williams and Gavanas ; Busch ; Cox ). The opening up of the EU in 2004 resulted in an influx of migrants from (mostly) Eastern Europe seeking employment in lower paid domestic settings, including as nannies and other domestic workers.…”

Section: The Intersection Of Ecec and Migration Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Return of the Nanny: Public Policy towards In‐home Childcare in the UK, Canada and Australia

Adamson

Brennan

2016

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on early childhood education and care (ECEC) policy focuses overwhelmingly on formal, centre‐based provision and, to a lesser extent, on family day care (or childminding) provided in the homes of registered carers. Comparatively little research addresses the policy treatment of care provided in the child's home by nannies and au pairs. This article examines the position of in‐home childcare in Australia, the UK and Canada, and the varied nature and extent of public funding and regulation. Introducing a new dimension into comparative studies of ECEC, it also explores how shifts in migration policy in each country have intersected with ECEC funding and regulation to reshape the recruitment and employment of in‐home child carers. Australia, the UK and Canada are all liberal, market‐oriented countries, but there is considerable diversity in the way governments support and regulate in‐home childcare, their rationales for so doing, and in the connections between childcare and migration. We argue that connecting the analysis of in‐home childcare to migration policies raises new questions about the classification and comparison of ECEC policies.

show abstract

Chapter 3 Gendered Work and Migration Regimes

Cited by 24 publications

References 12 publications

At home with the boss: Migrant live‐in caregivers, social reproduction and constrained agency in the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland

At home with the boss: Migrant live‐in caregivers, social reproduction and constrained agency in the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland

Gendered Migrations and Global Social Reproduction

Return of the Nanny: Public Policy towards In‐home Childcare in the UK, Canada and Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About