This paper argues that the UK Pension System is gender blind and is structured around a heteropatriarchal experience. It does so by analyzing two key pieces of UK pension policy; the New Flat Rate State Pension, and Auto-Enrolment. Since the 1980s the value of the British State Pension has fallen, and is now worth half of that which it was in 1979 (Ginn and MacIntyre, 2013). This presents a particular disadvantage for women who not only tend to be lower paid, but because of a gendered occupational life course, they also tend to work parttime hours, and thus also fail to work the number of qualifying years for the full state pension. Traditionally, this results in a pension penalty for women. It is argued that the New Flat Rate State Pension and Auto-Enrolment will counteract this disadvantage, and political discourses used by policy makers claim that they will also create a fairer society.The argument presented here seeks to demonstrate that this claim is problematic by exposing how i) gender blindness prevents gender equality in pension provision delivery, and also ii) how the formulation of these policies are actually reinforced by a heteropatriarchal welfare system, which fundamentally undermines the contribution made by women to the economy.

From Beveridge to Turner: Laissez-faire to Neo-liberalismCurrent attacks on pensions can be seen as part of the neo-liberal project to undermine welfare provision. This paper argues that current attacks upon the pension system are not new; Since 1601 the very need for pensions has been questioned by the Right, with arguments usually orientated around; affordability and individual responsibility. An historical comparison shows that many of the commonly held assumptions and arguments against pension provision are often mistaken, and in some cases highly misleading. Discourses or ideologies, touted in the 1940s are being re-used in the current period. This paper identifies which arguments were misleading or false in the past, thus allowing us to see through them in their current form.In this paper previous tendencies driving the conceptual apparatus of laissez-faire policies are re-visited, albeit with some new twists, in the guise of the neo-liberal project.Pensions, Welfare State, neo-liberalism, laissez-faire, historical comparison, the third way, discourse.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of specific active labour market policies (ALMP) and increased use of zero hour contracts (ZHCs) in creating an environment in which low-wage jobs flourish. Alongside these, it examines the role of financialization over the last 30 years in fostering the nuturalization of policies that institutionalize low wages and deregulate the economy in favour of big business. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws upon academic literature, official statistics, and analyses via the concept of neoliberalism. Findings This paper demonstrates that via a set of interconnected macro and micro factors low pay is set to remain entrenched in the UK. It has demonstrated that this is not the result of some natural response to labour market demands. Far from it, it has argued that these policy choices are neoliberal in motivation and the outcome of establishing low pay and insecure employment is a significant character of the contemporary labour market is deliberate. Research limitations/implications This paper encourages a re-think of how the authors address this issue of low pay in the UK by highlighting alternative forms of understanding the causes of low pay. Practical implications It presents an alternative analysis of low pay in the UK which allows us to understand and call into question the low-pay economy. In doing so it demonstrates that crucial to this understanding is state regulation. Social implications This paper allows for a more nuanced understanding of the economic conditions of the inequality caused by low pay, and provides an argument as to alternative ways in which this can be addressed. Originality/value The paper examines the relationship between the rise of neoliberalism and finance capital, the subsequent emergence of the neoliberal organization, the associated proliferation of ALMP and ZHCs, and the impact of these on creating a low-wage economy. It makes the argument that the UK’s low-wage economy is the result of regulatory choices influenced by a political preference for financialization, even if such choices are presented as not being so. Thus, the contribution of this paper is that it brings together distinct and important contemporary issues for scholars of employee relations, but connects them to the role of the state and neoliberal regulation.

No abstract

No abstract