2001
DOI: 10.1086/321302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Welfare Regimes, Family‐Supportive Policies, and Women’s Employment along the Life‐Course

Abstract: This article examines women's employment patterns during the child-rearing period and the consequences of those patterns for earnings later in life, in 12 industralized countries. This study proposes an analytic framework that combines "welfare regime" and genderspecific policies to explain country differences. The findings presented here suggest that institutional arrangements mediate the costs to women's part-time and intermittent employment. Within welfare regimes, employment continuity is highest among cou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
235
0
9

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 332 publications
(254 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
10
235
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…While a high level of decommodification of services tends to stifle the growth of low-wage jobs in the private sector (Iversen 2005;Scharpf 2001), it increases intra-class inequality since the absence of uniform social rights makes part-time and intermittent workers more vulnerable to wage discrimination -and these workers are mostly women (Mandel and Shalev 2009). Stier et al (2001) To conclude, the role of the welfare system has been considered crucial in supporting not only women's labour-market inclusion but also their employment stability and level of wages: for example, the presence of childcare services facilitates full-time work, while part-time and temporary jobs become more frequent when such services are less generous. Moreover, inequality among women depends on institutional factors: the higher the level of commodification, the more likely inequality and dualization become.…”
Section: Welfare System As a Frame For Women's Vulnerabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While a high level of decommodification of services tends to stifle the growth of low-wage jobs in the private sector (Iversen 2005;Scharpf 2001), it increases intra-class inequality since the absence of uniform social rights makes part-time and intermittent workers more vulnerable to wage discrimination -and these workers are mostly women (Mandel and Shalev 2009). Stier et al (2001) To conclude, the role of the welfare system has been considered crucial in supporting not only women's labour-market inclusion but also their employment stability and level of wages: for example, the presence of childcare services facilitates full-time work, while part-time and temporary jobs become more frequent when such services are less generous. Moreover, inequality among women depends on institutional factors: the higher the level of commodification, the more likely inequality and dualization become.…”
Section: Welfare System As a Frame For Women's Vulnerabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…External child care permits shorter interuptions; and paid leaves will compensate for foregone wages and potentially also diminish interruptions (Gustafsson and Stafford, 1992;Gauthier and Hatzius, 1997;Waldfogel, 1998;Stier et al, 2001;Esping-Andersen, 2002;Del Boca et al, 2003). Both may, however, produce ambiguous effects.…”
Section: Fertility and Opportunity Costmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is not only the direct conflicts between care and wage work at the time of intense parenting that create inequality but also the design of employment and welfare institutions to fit a male biography of continuous full-time work and of male or single earner responsibility for a family. Furthermore, while reformed welfare regimes coupled with genderspecific policies could significantly reduce parenthood costs (Gornick et al 1997;Stier et al 2001), the main policy drivers for reform in this direction are just as likely to be the agendas of higher employment, lower welfare dependency or countering the ageing society as the promotion of gender equality. Policies may even be promoted in the opposite direction, reflecting resurgent conservative ideologies or government concerns to reduce open unemployment.…”
Section: Gender Inequality and Parenthood Transitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%