Gendered work–family balance in Spain from a European comparative perspective

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis of work–family balance (WFB) arrangements in Spain by gender within the comparative framework of family policies enacted by the different welfare regimes in Europe. The article is based on the premise that there is a confluence of factors in Spain – such as its historical legacy and the familism embedded in the cultural framework and lack of family policies, which has contributed to producing a model of unequal gender relations in WFB. In order to test this hypothesis, we carried out a descriptive comparative analysis of family policies (childcare services and parental leave) as well as two statistical cluster analyses using data from module 5 of the 2005 European Labour Force Survey (ELFS) and the 2008 Eurobarometer (EB) in order to analyse the work–family arrangements and dilemmas by a group of European countries. The main finding derived from this empirical data is that different models of family policies prevailing in different countries have had unequal effects on WFB by gender. In particular in the Spanish case, the lack of public policies addressing WFB and family culture has reinforced the role of the mother and family as the main caregivers.

Keywords:

• work–family balance
• gender
• family policies
• Spain
• Europe

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful for the support given to the project I+D+I Nº: 151/06 by the Instituto de la Mujer de España. I am also grateful for the helpful comments received from the anonymous reviewers and the editor.

Notes

1. The concept of familism has been widely used in scientific literature to explain a unique aspect of southern European societies, especially Spain and Italy. It originated in Banfield's anthropological study of a region of southern Europe and defined familism as a form of intergenerational solidarity (amoral familism) involving the pursuit of family interests at the expense of collective interests in the face of a precarious economic environment. Any analysis of the modern welfare state should include an assessment of the importance of norms and legitimated practises in the establishment and maintenance of welfare regimes. A moral ethos based on notions of family and family responsibility contributes significantly to the formation and legitimisation of welfare regimes. Leitner (2003) identified varieties of familism and used a comparative perspective to describe the function of the family in child and elder care. She suggested the use of public policies as indicators of familism. In the cases of Spain and Italy, Moreno Mínguez (2007) and Naldini (2003) have referred to familism as an expression of protecting the family from risks in the social and economic environment. This is managed within the family mainly by women through solidarity between family members in response to a hostile institutional environment that threatens the safety of the family (Reher, 1998).

2. The concept of family policy is a wide term and deals with various aspects of the family life. In this case, we refer to policies designed by governments for the purpose of promoting the work–life balance and the co-responsibility for the family between the sexes. These measures include particularly paternity leave and the offer of public childcare services. These policies, although they are not strictly gender policies, have a clear impact on gender relations due to the fact that unpaid family work is highly feminised, especially in countries in southern Europe such as Spain.

3. Defamilisation is understood as ‘policies that lessen individuals’ reliance on the family, maximising individuals’ command of economic resources independently of familial or conjugal reciprocities’ (Esping-Andersen, 1999, p. 44).

4. In this work, we understand by familisation/defamilisation the degree to which family policies for combining work and family and the family culture have contributed to favouring gender equality in addressing the work–life balance, as well as the outsourcing of family care in the various European countries. This idea is based on the works of Esping-Andersen (1999), Gornick and Meyers, (2003), Haas, (2005), Moreno Mínguez, (2007) and Edlund (2007). These concepts attempt to capture whether the family or the state is recognised as the dominant provider of social services and care.

5. Welfare regimes are not considered equivalent to gender regime (see Walby, 2004). However, in the case of Spain, these categories are very closely linked, as the lack of family policies designed to improve the work–life balance has contributed to the creation of a gendered welfare regime based on the figure of the male breadwinner. In this case, we refer to family policies relating to parental leave and family childcare services.

6. Classification of women's work-lifestyle preferences in the twenty-first century according to Hakim (2000): Home-centred: Family life and children are the main priorities. Prefer not to work. Number of children is affected by government social policy. Not responsive to employment policy. Adaptative: This group is most diverse and includes women who want to combine work and family, plus drifters and unplanned careers. Want to work, but not totally committed to work career. This group is very responsive to government social policy and employment policy. Work-centred: Childless women are concentrated in this group. Main priority in life is employment. Committed to work or equivalent activities. Responsive to economic opportunity. Not responsive to social/family policies.

7. The theory of family regimes builds on the idea that the relationship between gender and life chances is determined culturally and by social policies (Edlund, 2007; Haas, 2005; Korpi, 2000).

8. Countries excluded from the analysis are Denmark, Ireland, France, Malta, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Croatia.

9. This fact is understandable if we remember that family policy in Spain only began to become part of the political debate as an instrument to favour the incorporation of women into the workforce in 1999. Moreover, the ‘familism’, which characterises Spanish society and which has been discussed in other articles (Ferrera, 1996; Flaquer, 2002; Moreno Mínguez, 2007), has contributed to the idea that the family and its problems are a private matter that must be resolved in private and not in public.