About 30% of households are intimately involved in paid domestic work in Latin America, either as employers or as workers. Paid domestic workers overwhelmingly are female, from racial and ethnic minorities, and earn low wages. Labour codes have historically accorded them fewer rights and protections. Domestic workers have organized to demand equal rights, and recently, this organizing has begun to pay off. This article discusses the dynamics of paid domestic work through the themes of commodification and changes in government policies. Through a comparison of post-millennium Brazil, Uruguay, Mexico and Peru, the article compares the working conditions and struggles of domestic workers and highlights the factors that explain different outcomes in terms of labour rights and protections across these countries. It is argued that stronger rights and protections were made possible by the interactive effects of domestic workers organizing, more sympathetic left-wing governments, and the watershed ILO 2011 Convention on Domestic Workers.

This study uses the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) data from 2013 to study (1) the contribution of child maintenance to the income packages of lone mothers, (2) the proportion of lone mothers receiving child maintenance and the level of child maintenance for those receiving it and (3) the extent to which child maintenance is helping families who may need it the most (those at the low end of the income distribution), compared with families with moderate or higher incomes. Our analysis covers data from five countries: Finland, Germany, Spain, United Kingdom and the United States. Our results show that in all countries except the United Kingdom, labour income is an important source of income for lone mothers and less than 40 percent of income comes from social transfers. Child maintenance contributes significantly to the income of lone mothers, particularly in Spain, followed by the United States and Germany. We find the highest coverage of child maintenance receipt in Finland. In the other countries, only one-third of lone mother households receive child maintenance. The median amounts of maintenance are the lowest in the United Kingdom and Finland, but there is great variation in the level of child maintenance within countries. The comparison of the quintile groups reveals that in the United States, the lone mothers in lowest income quintile do not seem to benefit as much from child maintenance compared with the highest income quintiles, whereas in Finland, Germany and Spain, more lone mothers in the low-income quintiles receive maintenance. However, amounts are quite equal across income quintiles.

In many developed countries lone parent families face high rates of child poverty. Among those lone parents who do get child maintenance there is a hidden problem. States may retain all, or a proportion, of the maintenance that is paid in order to offset other fiscal costs. Thus, the potential of child maintenance to alleviate poverty among lone parent families may not be fully realized, especially if the families are also in receipt of social assistance benefits. This paper provides an original comparative analysis exploring the effectiveness of child maintenance to reduce child poverty among lone parent families in receipt of social assistance. It addresses the question of whether effectiveness is compromised once interaction effects (such as the operation of a child maintenance disregard) are taken into account in four countries Australia, Finland, Germany and the UK using the LIS dataset (2013). It raises important policy considerations and provides evidence to show that if policy makers are serious about reducing child poverty, they must understand how hidden mechanisms within interactions between child maintenance and social security systems can work as effective cost recovery tools for the state, but have no poverty reduction impact.

This article compares policy approaches regarding domestic employment in affluent countries and examines their impact on precarious work. Drawing on secondary literature and policy documents, this study identifies five policy approaches commonly applied in affluent countries to regulate and develop domestic employment: (1) affordable services; (2) simplifying use; (3) regulating employment; (4) regulating labour migration; and (5) no policy. The comparative analysis of different policy types shows that policy design is crucial in regulating employment conditions and the level of precariousness in paid domestic labour. Based on a literature review, three dimensions of precarious work are studied: (1) the nature of employment (formal/informal); (2) the employment relationship; and (3) the form of employment (temporary or permanent, part time or full time). I argue that the current policy measures in place may increase precariousness either directly by promoting, for example, informal and irregular work, or indirectly through households (offering incentives for households that weaken workers' positions). The analysis also identifies positive measures that contribute to creating more secure employment conditions in domestic work through formalizing the sector. While there are differences in the outcomes of the different policy types, the findings suggest that across welfare states, domestic employment policies are still mostly demand driven and sustain the traditional, special nature of domestic work – often at the workers' expense.

In this article we examine the role of child support in the economic well‐being of children in single‐parent families in Latin America. We use the Luxembourg Income Study wave IX and the 2012 Colombian Quality of Life Survey to answer three questions: (1) Are children in single‐parent families more likely to be poor than children in two‐parent families? (2) What is the relative importance of different income sources in the income packages of these families? and (3) Are child support transfers improving the economic well‐being of children in single‐parent families? Our results show that children in single‐parent families are disproportionally poor relative to two‐parent families in Brazil, Colombia, Panama, Paraguay, and Uruguay. For other countries, poverty rates are similar (Guatemala and Peru), or higher in two‐parent families than single‐parent families (Mexico). Labor income is the most important income source for both types of families in all of these countries. However, child support represents between 20% and 39% of total income among families receiving this transfer. The largest antipoverty effectiveness of child support is also observed among these families. Child support brings between 30% and 55% of children receiving this transfer out of poverty.