Date post: | 03-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | uriel-witt |
View: | 24 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Care work in Europe: Current understandings and
future directions
Peter Moss
Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education
University of London
The Study• EC funded (Framework 5)
• 2001 - 2005
• 6 Partners: Denmark, Hungary, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and UK
• Main objective:To contribute to the development of good quality
employment in care work in services that are responsive to needs of changing societies
Specific aims
• What is ‘care work’? Analyse and compare understandings of care work across different types of care work and different countries
• How is ‘ care work’ structured? Identify different approaches to and models of care work
• Why is ‘care work’ women’s work? Examine the causes and consequences of the gendered nature of the care workforce
• What directions to take? Identify conditions necessary for the development of good quality employment in care work
Why is care work important?
• As a potential source of good quality employment
• As a condition for reconciliation of work and family life increased employment &gender equality
• As the main determinant of quality of care servicesgood quality of life for Europe’s citizens
Changing context
• Changing values : choice, flexibility, decentralisation, privatisation, rights, participation
• Changing images : e.g. the child as active subject and citizen
• Changing demands: increasing demand for paid care work, increasing recognition that care work is complex and demanding
Changing context
• Changing supply: care work – unpaid and paid – dependent on women working in poor conditions and subsidizing costs – but this ‘traditional’ supply is decreasing.
The problematique – in this changing context, is the current system sustainable? desirable?
Three stage study1. Mapping the care workforce; surveying use and demand for
care services; reviewing literature on quality, job satisfaction and gender issues
2. Three cross-national case studies of work: with young children (HU, DK, SP);
with older people (SW, ENG, SP + HU); with adults with severe disabilities (DK, NE, SW)
Development of video-based method for cross-national study of practice in care work (SOPHOS)
3. Innovative practice (36 examples); dissemination
All reports at www.ioe.ac.uk/tcru/carework.htm
Focus of study
• Childcare and out-of-school services• Child and youth residential and foster care• Care for adults with disabilities, including eldercare+• paid ‘front line’ care work – but recognise
importance of relationship with unpaid work
Border crossing
• Cross national• Cross-sectoral – from 0 to 100
– Differences and common ground• Policy and practice, structures and
understandings• Multi-method (secondary analysis of
LFS→video-based study of practice→in-depth interviews)
Main findingsWhat is care work?
‘Care work’ is a problematic term and concept, and can be an integral part of a wider field (such as education or pedagogy). Where it exists as a separate field, it is often weakly conceptualised.
Main findingsWhat is ‘care work’?
• Concept often unclear, e.g. many have difficulty defining ‘social care’?
• Border between ‘care’ and other fields is blurring, e.g.– Children: (child)care into education, e.g.
Spain moving from ‘childcare’ to ‘education for young children’ (guarderia > escuela infantile)
– Elderly people: (elder)care into health and housing
Main findingsWhat is ‘care work?’
• ‘Care’ not understood as a distinct field of policy, practice or employment, e.g.– Denmark, care as inseparable part of pedagogy, holistic approach to
working with people…not ‘care work’ but ‘pedagogical work’, not ‘care workers’ but ‘pedagogues’
– ‘pedagogy’: important theory, practice and profession in Continental Europe…but almost unknown in English-language world
Main findingsHow is care work structured?
The workforce is three tiered and highly gendered, though with considerable cross-sectoral and cross-national differences in size and quality of employment
Three tier workforce
High (tertiary level education)• Mainly work with children and young people; only
small groups (except Denmark) work with adults. Include teachers and (social) pedagogues
Medium (upper secondary education)• Mainly work with adults (e.g. auxiliary nurse in
Sweden), but also ‘childcare’ workers (e.g.nursery workers in Hungary, UK)
Low (secondary education)• Home-based workers; some assistants. Include family
day care, home carers, personal assistants
Profile of the workforce
• Highly gendered (% women highest with children and elderly)
• Mostly 25-44 (like total workforce) - many have own care responsibilities but no information
• Often (not always) low paid • Mostly specialist• Career prospects usually limited – vertically
and horizontally
Cross-sectoral/nationaldifferences
• Highest level in work with children…lowest in work with elderly people
• Highest level overall in Denmark, then Sweden…UK at lower end
• Largest workforce in Denmark (10%) and Sweden (9%); Netherlands and UK (7-9%, but high % part time); Hungary and Spain (<5%, but low % part time)
Danish pedagogue
• High level of education• Less gendered – 25% male in some services• Better pay (and other conditions)• Generalist - work with people from 0 to 100;
main worker with children, young people and younger adults
• Broad career prospects - vertical and horizontal
Main findingsWhy is ‘care work’ women’s work?
• NOT poor pay
• BUT understandings of the work as essentially female, replicating the gendered nature of care work in the home
• AND gendering of the workforce is reproduced in training and employment practices (which presume female students and workers).
Main findingsCommon requirements and
competencies
There are strong commonalities in work across different sectors: whether with children, young people or adults, it is becoming more complex and demanding and requires many common competencies.
Commonalities in care work
• Fulfilling fundamental physiological needs and needs for protection
• Supporting development and/or autonomy • Relating: communication, listening, empathy• Supporting the integrative relationship between the
individual, family and friends and wider communities• Networking (with family, community) and
teamworking (with other workers and services)• Working with diversity.• Renewing knowledge
Common competencies
• Communicative (many languages, listen)• Reflective and analytic; make contextualised
judgements• Understanding and valuing learning as lifelong
process• Personal competencies/experiences + the ability to
connect the personal & professional• Working between theory and practice• Working with complexity, diversity, change• Teamworking and networking• Musical and aesthetic
Main findingsQuality of employment
Much care work has features of poor quality employment (e.g.pay and other employment conditions, levels of education). But reported job satisfaction is high, and much care work has features of good quality employment (e.g. job autonomy). The social status of the work, however, is perceived by workers to be low.
Good qualityemployment
• Pay, benefits and employment • Education, initial and ongoing (Lifelong learning) • Supportive environment • Health and safety• Career prospects• Decision latitude (autonomy)• Meaningful employment• Social recognition and status• Equal opportunities and non-discrimination• Work and family reconciliation
Main findingsRecruitment and retention
There is evidence of actual or envisaged shortages of care workers, which may reflect an emergent crisis of care.
What directions to take?Conditions for good quality
employment• Strong valuation of all those who are ‘cared
for’ (older people as well as children)• Well organised workforce with strong and
articulate public voice• Making the work more visible• Development of ‘learning organisations’
• Recognition that good quality employment needed for sustainability and quality
• Strong funding base (e.g. Nordic welfare state – but what other possibilities?)…government requiring high standards
• Reconceptualisation of ‘care work’ – ‘care work’ is low quality work
What directions to take?Move to two tier workforce
Care work requires:
• Reflective professional practitioner with tertiary level education working with…
• …“other worker” with upper secondary education
What directions to take?Diversifying the workforce
Diversifying the workforce – especially gender and ethnicity – is :
• necessary
• desirable
Concluding questions
• What proportion “professional” and “assistant”? Does the professional supervise and manage or also do ‘front line’ work? Who blows noses?
• A generalist workforce educated to work across all/most of the life course or more specialist groups? Nursery worker or lifecourse worker?
Concluding questions
• Is a market/managerial orientation compatible with a a reflective professional adopting a holistic approach and exercising contextualised judgement?
• What are the implications for care work of ‘cash-for-care’ policies?
Concluding questions
• Is there an emerging ‘crisis of care’ as women’s socio-economic position changes fundamentally?
• What solutions?
– Recruit non-employed (welfare to work)
– Recruit under-represented groups (e.g. men)
– Recruit migrant labour
– Revalue work, improve quality
“Wherever the present standard for any category of job is ‘low qualified women around the age of 30’, there will unmistakably be a strong need to improve the quality of job so it will be acceptable to people with higher educational attainments. And if no improved professionalisation of the job is achieved then it will rapidly end up in a severe labour supply shortage” (Géry Coomans, 2002)
Concluding questions
• How to pay for good quality employment? – Per capita GDP: DK= $31600; Ire=$35800;– Tax as % GDP: DK = 49%; Ire=28%
• Is ‘care’ a distinct field of policy, practice and employment? Or is ‘care’ part of other fields, e.g. education, pedagogy, health? Does ‘care work’ have an independent future?