Leave policies in challenging times: what have we learned? What lies ahead?

Abstract

This article reflects on the studies included in this special issue on leave policies during challenging economic times. It highlights three major conclusions: (1) the regime-type framework remains illuminating; (2) the recent period is characterized by resilience of leave provisions; and (3) persistent gender disparities in leave-taking continue to shape policy debates. Three recommendations are made for future lines of work: (1) adopt a life course perspective; (2) reassess the growing emphasis on instrumental justifications for policy provision; and (3) continue to assess the possibility of unintended consequences, in particular the potential for harmful effects on women’s employment outcomes.

L'auteur analyse les études de ce numéro spécial sur les politiques de congé en période de conjoncture économique difficile. Elle met en évidence trois éléments importants: (1) le type de régime économique reste un facteur déterminant; (2) la période récente est caractérisée par la résilience des dispositions en matière de congés; et (3) les disparités persistantes entre les sexes par rapport à la prise de congé continuent d'alimenter les débats politiques. Elle fait également trois recommandations pour l'avenir: (1) prendre en compte le parcours de vie de l'individu; (2) insister sur l' importance croissante du caractère instrumental des politiques; et (3) continuer à guetter l'apparition de conséquences involontaires, en particulier d'éventuels effets néfastes sur la carrière professionnelle des femmes.

Keywords:

• leave
• policy
• gender
• welfare state regimes
• life course

Mots-clés:

• conge
• politique
• sexe
• état providence
• parcours de vie

Notes on contributor

Janet Gornick earned her Ph.D. in Political Economy and Government from Harvard University in 1994. She is Professor of Political Science and Sociology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). Since 2006, she has also served as Director of LIS (formerly, the Luxembourg Income Study), a cross-national data archive and research center located in Luxembourg. Most of her research is comparative, across the industrialized countries, and concerns social welfare policies and their impact on family well-being, gender equality, and income inequality.She is co-author or co-editor of three books: Families That Work: Policies for Reconciling Parenthood and Employment (Russell Sage Foundation 2003); Gender Equality: Transforming Family Divisions of Labor (Verso Press 2009); and Income Inequality: Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries (Stanford University Press 2013). She is currently working on a book about how and why inequality varies across the American states.She has published articles on gender, employment, and social policy in several journals, including American Sociological Review; Annual Review of Sociology; Social Forces; Socio-Economic Review; Journal of European Social Policy; European Sociological Review; Social Science Quarterly; Monthly Labor Review; and Feminist Economics. In 2006–2007, she served as Guest Editor for “Work-Family Reconciliation Policies in High-Employment Economies: Policy Designs and their Consequences,” a special double issue of the Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. She has also presented her work in popular venues, including The American Prospect; Dissent; and Challenge Magazine.Her research has been supported by several sponsors, including the Russell Sage Foundation, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, the US Department of Health and Human Services, the US Social Security Administration, the US National Science Foundation, the National Governors' Association, the World Bank, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.She serves on several advisory boards, including A Better Balance: The Work and Family Legal Center; Journal of European Social Policy; IPUMS-International; Statistics Canada's Advisory Committee on Labour and Income Statistics; the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP); and the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).