À la carte careers
WOMEN were hit hardest by the changes in working patterns during the
1980s. In response, an élitist feminism has begun to develop in support of proposals which could create à la carte careers for the well-off - and misery for the poor. Our correspondent reports.
International Viewpoint #254 March 1994 demonstration called by the "Women Against the Crisis" coalition, which put forward the demands "for the right to work", "reduction in work hours for all without loss of pay and with job creation", "no to part-time work". This
IDA DEQUEECKER* — Antwerp, 14 February 1994
T HE first major offensive
on work flexibilisation and unequal distribution of work in Belgium in the 1980s was, given the large-scale introduction of part-time work, directed against women. The consequences were lasting and harmful. This policy, which was requested by the bosses and promoted by the coalition Liberal/Christian Democrat governments, had, alongside a general increase in flexibility, a dual effect on women. On the one hand it sharpened their structural inequality in the labour market, on the other there was a worrying ideological drift in the terms of the discussion on. the redistribution of work and the problems related to combining a paid job with responsibilities for the home.
of debate on the redistribution of work. Previously, the collective redistribution of the work available was the central idea, based on the principle of equality and justice. Today, it is the idea of the individual redistribution of work, based on the principle of individual free choice. This shift took place during the 1980s, a period in which the neo-liberal austerity offensive pushed the workers' movement onto the defensive.
Up to 1975, the length of the working week was reduced by cross-sectoral agreements between the employers' organisations and the trade unions from 45 hours (1955) to 43 hours (1969) to 40 hours (1975). In 1976, faced with the crisis and a worrying increase in unemployment, the two main union federations (Socialist and Christian Democrat)
put forward the slogan of "36 action was repeated every year until 1983. But the movement lost its vitality in the wake of the capitulation of the trade-union leaderships to the unprecedented austerity offensive of the Liberal/Christian Democrat government. This started with the devaluation of the Belgian franc in 1981 and opened a period of generalised wage freeze with a drop in real wages and a collective -but above all individual - redistribution of work with loss of wages.
It was the successive governments in power between 1981 and 1988 which thus imposed the employers' formulas for a reduction in work hours. This first took the form of imposing part-time work. Thus, from 1981, the legislation governing part-time work has been constantly adapted, in two ways. First of all the social legislation has been modified in order to give greater protection to part-time workers. Second, the door has been opened to flexibility "made to measure" for the enterprise (for example
"The movement lost its vitality in the hours in 1980"
wake of the capitulation of the trade- with full wage union leaderships to the unprecedented austerity offensive of the Liberal/Christian Democrat government."
A striking fact is how the Greens
(particularly in Flanders) have become
. the spearhead of a new "left" current which has accepted the bosses' belief that full-time jobs for all are no longer possible. They are thus in the front line of the polemic with the sections of the women's movement and the left who persevere with the so-called old-fashioned idea of a radical reduction in working time for all without loss of wages and new jobs created to compensate for lost production. This not only is a response to high unemployment but also a precondition for an equitable sharing of housework and childcare.
In the last ten to fifteen years there has been an amazing shift in the terms
22 compensation and job creation. The employers rejected the 36 hour demand. On the one hand they proposed "38 hours in 1981" (which has still not been achieved in all sectors, for example small retail businesses) and on the other hand through the FEB (Fédération des Entreprises de Belgique), they put forward, as a counter-proposal, part-time work, that is a bigger reduction of the working week but limited to certain people, and above all, with a corresponding cut in wages.
The women's movement supported the trade-union demand for a generalworking day or the working week. In 1980, this movement succeeded in mobilising 15 thousand women in a flexible working hours). The most striking measure that the government took during this period was undoubtedly that of subsidies for imposed part-time work. The was that this form of work organisation spread rapidly. Since the beginning of the 1980s, the number of men and above all women in (involuntary) part-time work has increased by almost 200 thousand. Part-time work has become the dominant form (80%) in the increase in the number of women at work in the last few years. In addition, the increase in waged work is in great measure due to the increase in part-time jobs.?
While the illusion was thus being created that new jobs were being created
*The author is a member of the Socialist Workers' Party (POS/SAP, Belgian section of the Fourth International.
1. An unemployed person working at reduced time "to avoid unemployment" receives benefits as part-time unemployed. This concerns women above all.
2. Between 1984 and 1990 the active waged population increased by 177,686, part-time workers by 138,367. Between June 1983 and June 1987, the total workforce dropped from 2,533, 150 to 2,503,807 (Nieuwsbrief Steunpunt WAV, April 1993).
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
BELGIUM
International Viewpoint #254 March 1994
- although it was in fact simply the conversion of full-time jobs to part-time jobs — the discussion on the redistribution of work declined. There were exceptions, such as the women's movement which protested against the increase in part-time work. It was only with the recession of the 1990s and the new frightening increase in unemployment? that the discussion came back onto the agenda in 1993, although in a situation where the relationship of forces was a lot less favourable to the women's and workers' movements than it had been in the 1970s. This time around, the themes of the discussion are those advanced by the bosses: full-time jobs for all are no longer possible and individual redistribution of work is much preferable. These two ideas are particularly damaging for women, who are the principal victims of unemployment (2/3 of the fully unemployed) and the unequal distribution of
Work and family
In 1989, the then Flemish minister of labour, Mr Vanden Brande, organised a tripartite conference on "harmonisation of work and the family". Part-time work was highlighted as one of the most popular measures in this framework. The fact that it is mainly women who take part-time jobs did not appear to worry the minister. According to him, women and men are free to choose which one will work part-time in order to be able to combine work and home responsibilities. The government should, he continued, only intervene to create the conditions to make this choice possible.
The ideological character of this discourse is scarcely hidden. First of all, when the government starts to promote part-time work it is nothing to do with its worries about people's family problems. It has, on the other hand, everything to do with creating the conditions to allow the employers to introduce part-time work on their own initiative into certain specific sectors (services, hotel and catering, retail, industrial cleaning) where they need a flexible, unskilled, cheap and part-time work-force. These are sectors where the overwhelming majority of the work-force is women. In short, women have accepted part-time jobs because they have no other choice, and often only after a struggle against them. In addition, this type of job does nothing to help the combination of work and family responsibilities as Mr Vanden Brande claims, given the changing and irregular work-hours (evening shifts, work at peak hours, standby contracts, etc. Perhaps it seems strange but more married women have irregular working hours than married men.4 Most women who work part-time are not in fact women with small children, but older women (35-60 years
The ideological discourse is clearly very far removed from concrete reality. But it gives the tone. If part-time work is the result of individual free choice why should it continue to be subsidised? Indeed, in 1992, the system of subsidies for part-time workers was practically eliminated by the government. Only those with dependents were more or less spared, but not many were in this situation, if only because it is not possible to keep a family on a part-time wage.
In 1993, the regional and federal governments organised tripartite conference with the employers and trade unions on the question of employment. The proposals which emerged were along the lines of those made in the 1980s: part-time work (but without the financial compensation which existed at the time); flexibility, deregulation, creation of cheap jobs (for young people and unskilled workers). These same proposals were included in the Socialist/Christian Democrat government's last austerity plan, put forward in the framework of the European economic recovery policy, the so-called "Plan for employment, competitiveness and social security"
### Freedom of choice
This plan gives the absolute priority to restoring the competitiveness of the Belgian enterprises. On the one hand it starts from the assumption that it must be accepted that full-time jobs for all are no longer possible. On the other, the so-called employment measures are framed within a modernist discourse which calls on individual freedom of choice. Thus the federal employment minister, Madame Smet, herself a feminist and responsible for the equal opportunities policy for women and men, has put forward the formula of "an à la carte professional
', implying that workers will have a choice between different formulas such as interruption of careers, alternation between full and part-time work, reduced working hours at the beginning and end of careers, and so on. (Attention! They all imply a loss of wages of course.) The same minister states: "As far as the redistribution of work is concerned, I of course prefer voluntary redistribution. Undoubtedly in every enterprise there will be people who wish to work less: 3/5 time, free Wednesday afternoons, Fridays free... I prefer à la carte careers rather than a reduction in working time for all. "And for the harmonisation of work and family responsibilities, it is no longer part-time but career breaks which are the preferred formula: "Harmonisation of work and family responsibilities through career breaks seems to me very important. It is true that career breaks are not only for that. But they are nevertheless important, particularly now that they have become a right in the private sector."5
The reality is a lot less idyllic. Many people work part-time because there are not full-time jobs, subsidies to the employers turn one full-time job into two part-time ones, the unemployed cannot refuse part-time jobs on the grounds that they want full-time ones, long-term unemployed are forced to take temporary jobs without their status of unemployed changing, enterprises in difficulty are forced to reduce working hours with corresponding wage reductions, young people are forced to undertake three-year training schemes at reduced wages. All so many limitations on free choice!
However the idea of freedom of choice is attractive. It has seduced certain feminists and women workers, disappointed by the failure to obtain a generalised reduction in work-time. Among certain feminists the idea is spreading that women are victims of their own demand, that in going to work for a wage they force themselves to work a double day (at work and at home). This has been confirmed by a series of surveys. They see no perspective except at an individual level. This idea has also been bolstered by the results of surveys, even if some questions can be asked about the interpretations and the conclusions of the researchers who themselves are not free from the influence of the dominant ideology.?
The question arises of who is able to choose an "à la carte career". A few months ago a number of women in management-level jobs issued a "Charter for a family-friendly enterprise",
3. There are currently more than 0.5 million fully unemployed in receipt of benefits. The real number of people affected unemployment is more than 1.1 million.
4. According to a recent survey by the CBS (Study Centre on Population and the Family), 1992.
5. Interview in Nieuwsbrief Steunpunt WAV, August 1993.
6. According to a recent study a working woman will work 10 years more than her husband during her working life because of the double work day.
7. For example "A reasonable policy of work redistribution should create good conditions for all families and organisations to be able in the most flexible and correct fashion define their division of labour", (see CBGS study).
23
International Viewpoint #254 March 1994 which is a plea for an optimal combination of the interests of the family and those of the enterprise, through reciprocal flexibility. "Managers would be happy to work a bit less, obviously with a corresponding salary reduction," stated the spokeswoman of this movement.8
But it is the Greens in Flanders who are putting themselves forward as the spokespersons for disillusioned feminists. In this role they are not attacking neo-liberal policies as responsible for women's worsening situation, but feminism and the women's movement. "By putting forward paid work as the lever for women's economic the spokespersons, and above all their spokeswoman, make it an immediate demand. In addition, Mieke Vogels makes it quite a violent polemical point against the women's movement, considered as old-fashioned: the basic income and the greater value given to household tasks are in fact put forward as an alternative to the generalised reduction of work time and against the idea of full-
"The Greens in Flanders are putting independence, themselves forward as the spokespersons for disillusioned feminists. " subordinating themBut this needs a certain income level. According to the surveys, many women and men workers would like to work less, on condition that they did not suffer a loss of wages.º Some university researchers propose a redistribution of work formulated according to income levels. For the higher-income groups they propose the "à la carte careers" the lower-income groups, the classic generalised weekly reduction, with job creation. Some go even further for the less well-off, with work for the unemployed. A segmented society at different speeds is being proposed, with freedom of choice for the better-off. Against this background an élitist feminism is also developing which is only interested in the emancipation of a better-off layer.
The women's movement, even if it does not have the strength that it had in the early 1980s, resists this discourse and the governmental measures which use it. On 11 November, the annual women's day in Flanders, in which several thousand women participate each year, the women's movement once again stated its position in favour of the collective and radical reduction of the working week without loss of pay and with the creation of new jobs. For this movement, this is the only way to solve the unemployment question in a minimally egalitarian fashion on the one hand, and on the other to start to create the conditions for a fair division of domestic tasks. In a public debate which was reported in the media, the federal and regional employment ministers were challenged on their policies against women, as were the trade-union leaders for their unclear positions on the different formulas for the redistribution of work. Thus the women's movement is nevertheless raising a clear voice for the right to work and a decent wage for all, women and men, as the only guarantee of emancipation for all women. 24 women are totally selves to the laws of market. In this period of high unemploywhen full-time employment for all is becoming more and more and out-ofdate dream, this is leading more and more women to frustration," diagnoses Mieke Vogels, main spokeswoman of the Flemish Green party in her recent book, which received a lot of media coverage. Then she asks, "What is now the credibility of the slogan 'redistribution of work outside the home and in the home'?" She caricatures the traditional rejection by the women's movement of any form of "wages for housework": "The women's movement has always denigrated housework." She thus proposes a new strategy which takes housework as its starting point, "All women have an interest in giving increased value to the caring tasks traditionally called 'feminine' and which are in reality always taken on by women." How does she propose to do this? Even though the Flemish Green party sup ports the 32 hour week, it proposes at the same time to break the link between work and income and supports a basic income for all, so that economic independence is guaranteed without being obliged to go out to work for a wage. Small detail, the idea of a basic income concerns above all women. "It [the basic income] gives women the chance to be in the forefront of developing new modern forms of informal services, local solidarity, and social employment, and thus it will become clear that the tasks that are traditionally considered feminine are not superfluous and easy to pass on to others [the state], but on the contrary essential for a society on the road to emancipation."10
Family policy
Even though there is a discussion among the Greens on the notion of a basic income, as well as whether or not this can become an immediate demand, time waged work.
It is undoubtedly the case that the elements of criticism of women's difficult situation that exist in the Greens discourse evoke a response among women, and even among feminists, particularly as the party is very popular. But the "basic income" answer is closer to the government's measures than the Greens would like. As an immediate demand, the basic income would result in an institutionalisation of the current situation of under-employment in Belgium which affects more than one million people, a majority of whom are women, who are in fact already partly or totally sent back
Thus the Greens' positions do more to confirm the government's current employment policy than they do to fight it. This is a policy which is consciously linked to a certain traditional family policy which is at the same time adapted to the new developments of capitalism which needs the female work-force. The norm is no longer the family with the woman at home, it is more and more the two-income family. This is very concrete. The crisis has not had more effect on people because the drop in individual incomes has been compensated above all in two-income families. But these two incomes are not equal. The policy of wide-spread introduction of part-time work for women has gone along with a conscious policy of one-and-a-half incomes per family. The reduced unemployment benefit for "dependents", that is to say people who are dependents in a household has the same function. In this situation of of social inequality women remain tied to the home, they remain those mainly responsible for housework and they have a double work day. It seem that the only solution is the demand for a sharing out of paid work. Thus the fact that the women's movement has not dropped this demand, unlike many other currents, is an important
8. De Standaard, 3 June 1993.
9. Recent survey by the KWB (Catholic Workers League).
10. Mieke Vogels, Jos Geysels, Politieke Herbebossing, 1993.