Similarities in policy framework related to female worker in two germanys

Nội dung text: Similarities in policy framework related to female worker in two germanys

1. SIMILARITIES IN POLICY FRAMEWORK RELATED TO FEMALE WORKER IN TWO GERMANYS Mihoko Satogami, PhD. Kyoto University, Japan Introduction In German Democratic Republic both men and women had duty and right for work and GDR legislated for the equal rights of men and women in its early era. Then, in the late of 1980s female labour force participation rate was over 90%. Contrast to GDR, in Federal Republic of Germany female labour force participation rate was 42.53%1 in 1989. Concerning about female labour force participation, there was huge differences between two Germany. However these differences remain after the Unification. Since the Unification, many studies have been made on the differences and the reasons of the differences were explained as cultural continuities () or economically needs (). Although in GDR female workers were supported by various institutions in order to continue working, after the Unification almost these supportive institutions were gone and FRG institutions were introduced. Previous studies investigated the reason why female labour force participation rate in eastern Germany after the Unification remain much higher than that in western Germany without the supportive institutions in GDR(). Indeed, vanishment of these institutions and the introduction of the institutions of FRG had large impact on female labour force participation. If these different situations were supported by the institutions which were constructed with completely different policy framework, the newly introduced institutions in former GDR were completely different and the differences could not continue so much. Here I investigate the reason of continuity of difference in female labour force participation between eastern Germany and western Germany comparing the policy framework concerning about female workers between two Germany. 1. What is the “Policy Framework”? In modern industrial society, most of people earn with selling their labour forces. Their work places are separated from their home and this separation emerges the problem of how to combine their family life and their career. After WWII, western countries became welfare states with providing social policies. Such welfare states and their social policies varied from country to country and many studies focus on the variation of welfare states. One of the most influential study is Esping-Andersen 1 World Bank Datebase 2018/08/23 access 606
2. (1990). Esping-Andersen (1990) sets three types of welfare states; “social democratic”, “liberal”, “conservative”. “Social democratic” regime includes mainly Nordic countries, “liberal” regime includes Anglo-Saxon countries like a US and “conservative” regime includes continental Europe countries like a Germany. The criteria of defining these regimes are social stratification, de-commodification and later de-familialization added in Esping-Andersen (1999). Osawa (2004) defined the social policies and its relations with the institutions of family and business companies as the "social policy system". The reason why Osawa (2004) set the "social policy system" is that each social policy system supposes the standard model of gender relations in the combination of domestic work and paid work. According to Osawa (2004) Policy makers set this standard model intentionally or not. The standard model not only reflects the current situations of the family and employment, but also reproduces the family and gender relations which are defined with the model. From this point of view, we can investigate the standard model of gender relations which is supposed by the policy makers focusing on the social policy system. Dealing with capitalism states this approach can be applied without any difficulty. But when we focus on the socialist country like a GDR, this approach should be modified. It is said that socialist country does not need social policy and does not have any room for the needs for social policy officially2. In addition, there is no so-called "market" and the characters of companies in socialist countries are completely different from that in capitalist countries. To solve these difficulties I narrow down to policies concerning female workers and focus on the institutional design of these policies. Here I set this as the policy framework concerning female workers. 2. Policy Framework in GDR In GDR people had the right to work and the duty to engage in production work. and the principle of “equal pay for equal work” was introduced in 1949. Such a right and duty were given equally to men and women. In the ideology of socialism that women engage in productive work means emancipation of women and gender equality was established legally in the early years of GDR. GDR government also expanded opportunity of education for women and provided special opportunities to improve the qualifications of women (Bauernschuster and Rainer 2012). In this result female labour participation rate was over 90%, the ratio of female workers who completed vocational education was 87% and half of college students were women in 1980s. On the other hand people cannot avoid reproduction work. Someone must take the duty and the responsibility of care work or everyone must share that. Like other countries before the separation of Germany German shared the value of the 2 After the mid of 1960s GDR emphasized the social policy which was unique one and different from one in capitalist states(Ritter, 2007) 2 607
3. traditional gender role but total war of WWII changed more or less. Because many men were sent to war and there was a tight labour shortage, women were pulled into workplace. During wartime women not only worked outside, but also kept up with domestic work because of absence of her husband. There was no alternative of her. In GDR many women worked outside. Who engaged in domestic work in GDR era? In order to include women in production work GDR provided the supportive institutions. The list of the major institutions related to female workers as the following3; a) protection of pregnant women and nursing mothers: claim for redeployment without a wage cut, prohibition against overtime work and layoff. b) subsidy for childbirth: 1000 DM per child. c) maternity leave: 6 weeks before and 20 weeks after childbirth with maternity pay as social insurance benefit. d) feeding duration: 45 minutes each time, twice a day. e) childcare leave: one year (a year and a half for the third and later child), three years if nursery centre could not be found. f) childcare allowance during childcare leave: 250DM a month for the first born child, 300DM for the second child, 70–90% mother’s earnings (at least 350DM) for the third and later children. g) child-raising allowance: 95DM a month for the first born (115DM for child 12 years and older), 145DM for the second child (165DM for child 12 years and older), 195DM for the third and later children (215DM for child 12 years and older). h) redeployment for pregnant women and nursing mothers: preventing such women from doing jobs that endangered mother or baby. i) prohibition against night work and overtime work: to prevent pregnant women and nursing mothers from such work; mothers with pre-school children had a right to refuse such work. j) prohibition of dismissal on grounds of marriage, pregnancy or childbirth: in principle, it was not possible to dismiss a female worker who was under one of the following conditions: a) pregnancy, b) nursing or brest-feeding period, c) who had children under 1 year old, d ) on maternity leave, e) single mothers (until the child reached 3 years of age). k) reduction of working hours: mothers with children 16 years and younger could have a cut in working hours from 43 hours and 45 minutes to 40 hours per week without a pay cut. l) day-care centre: for children 0–3 years old, organized by the company or government authorities, available 7 days per week from 7 a.m. to 19 p.m., 1.40 DM per day (or for daily centers Monday–Friday, 2 DM per day); 80.2% of all children who needed day-care center services received them. 3 Satogami (2011) 608
4. m) kindergarten: for children 3 years old until the first year of school, Monday– Friday (Sat.), 6 a.m.–19p.m., the costs of children attending—0.5 DM per day, 95.1% of all children of the specified age. n) after-school care for children: grades 1–4, facilities were constructed as annexes to schools, 6(7) a.m.–19 p.m.; 81.2% of all children who needed these services received them. o) nursing-care leave for child: mothers who had two or more children under 14 years of age were eligible. 2 children—6 weeks, 3 children—8 weeks, 4 children—10 weeks, 5 and more children—up to 13 weeks; depending on the insurance, for the first two days 90% of salary is paid, from the third day,70–90% depending on the amount of children. p) extension of annual holiday: female workers working full-time and as substitutes who had more than two children under the age of 16 were eligible to apply. The usual 20 days holiday was extended to 22–25 days (depending on the type of employment and number of children). q) holiday for housework: female workers working full-time could apply for 1 day off per month under one of the following conditions: a) married female worker, b) having children under 18 years old, c) single mother more than 40 years old, d) having family member that needs special care. Male workers having children under 18 years old, or having a spouse in need of special care, were eligible for this benefit Table 1: The fulfilment of day-care centre (under 3 years old) the proportion of the number of the number of children Year children who go to facilities in day-care day-care 1955 2,341 67,106 9.1 1965 4,798 142,242 18.7 1975 5,867 233,626 47.8 1988 7,770 355,089 79.9 Date: Statistisches Jahrbuch der DDR 1990 These institutions can be divided into two categories; one is the support for childcare and the other is reduction of their operations. As for the childcare, GDR government set many childcare facilities and in the end of 1980s the proportion of the infants under 3 years old who went to day-care centre was almost 86%4. Not only the needs of nursery schools but also the needs of kindergartens and after school cares were almost fulfilled. The fees for using these facilities were very low and correspond to 4 Statistisches Jahrbuch der DDR, 1990, S. 378. 4 609
5. 1~3% of average wage5. Using these facilities mothers who had small children were not necessarily required to stay at home in order to take care of their children. Table 2: Spending times for domestic work (per day) 1965 1970 1974 1980 1985 wife 5:24 5:18 4:43 4:17 3:49 husband 0:47 0:52 1:34 1:44 1:42 Date: Lange(1974),Winkler(1990) As for reduction of their operations, there were many institutions especially for working mothers and wives. Although laws prohibited discrimination based on pregnancy or maternity, working mothers were allowed to some additional holiday. In order to keep housework, these additional holidays were given to married women. In addition to the above institutions, there also were housework support services which were provided by the specific civic group and delegated from GDR government. These institutions means that in GDR a part of childcare and housework could be socialized and de-familialization were proceeding. However these holidays for childcare or housework and the measures of reduction of working hours were allowed only for female workers. This means that GDR government regarded women as the responsible person for housework and childcare. Based on such views about gender roles whether that were recognized or unrecognized, the institutions were constructed in order to involve women in production work. As for occupations and qualifications of job women could access only specified area and certain occupations were dominated by women. Wages of such occupations were lower than average and so gender pay gap existed. Gender segregation was clearly observed in employment fields and such job placement was compatible with special treatment for female workers. In fact, gender equality seemed fulfilled for example equal rights of men and women were already regulated legally in early stage of GDR. But substantive emancipation of women was not accomplished. In these points of view, GDR situation in gender assignment did not mean emancipation of women and gender segregation in GDR was consistent with and strengthened by GDR policy framework. 5 “Marktwirtschaftliche Moeglichkeiten einer Erziehungsfreundlichen erwerbsarbeit in Deutschland”, Sozialer Fortschritt, 39. Jahrgang, Heft 7, Juli 1990, S.153. 610
6. Table 3: Proportions of female workers in each industrial sectors 1970 1980 All Sectors 48.3 49.9 Whole Production Sector 43.6 44.1 Manufacturing 42.4 43.3 Construction 13.2 16.3 Handicraft 40.1 37.8 Agriculture and Forestry 45.8 41.6 Transport and Communication 35.5 36.9 Trade 69.2 72.8 Other Production Sector 53.6 55.3 Non-Production Sector 70.3 72.9 Education 71.3 76.3 Health and Welfare 80.9 83.6 Date: Statistisches Jahrbuch der DDR 1988) 3. Differences and Similarities between GDR and FRG As I showed in chapter 2, in GDR most of women joined production work and their contribution to household was larger than in FRG6. On the issue of labour force participation there were huge differences between two Germanys. In FRG their family model was combination of male bread-winner and housewife. This model was not strange but familiar to other capitalist countries after WWII. But as years go by and various conditions change, the number of female workers was increasing. FRG introduced childcare leave law in 1979. This law criticised so much because the law allowed only for mothers to take childcare leave with pay not for fathers and adoptive parents and non-working mothers were not beneficial at all. Among such widespread criticisms it was remarkable criticism that fathers were not allowed to take childcare leave. This suggested the request for the participation in childrearing and the share of responsibility for care work. On the other hand nursery school remained unpopular. Some attempts like a "Tagesmutter" put into practical use but the number of its user was little. In 1980s chancellor Kohl promoted working outside to mothers and housewives who were allowed to work outside keeping their housework tasks. At that time FRG government tried to drive the expansion of part-time work. The main target of this were non-working mothers and housewives. In this case, one of the biggest problems was childrearing. If mothers wanted to get their jobs outside, someone had to take care of their children instead while mothers were working outside. Women who could find a substitute like her mother or so could be an employed worker. As certain number of women joined labour market various gaps emerged. The gaps between full-time female worker and part-time female worker emerged, for 6 In the end of 1980s the contribution of women to their households was almost 40% in GDR and 18% in FRG. 6 611
7. example. The fundamental difference of policy framework between two Germanys is the position of female workers in each country. In GDR almost women even mothers and married women worked outside as full-timers and in FRG many married women and mothers stayed at home as housewives or worked only as part-timers. These different situations reflected the policy framework in each country well. In GDR there was chronic labour shortage like other socialist countries (Kornai 1980, Verdery 1996). In order to cope with this situation GDR government needed to involve women in production work and provided the above institutions. As a result, male workers were not single earner in their family and female workers could keep their employment and housework tasks. This means undermining of male bread-winner model (Nickel 1993). In contrast to GDR, in FRG with maintaining male bread-winner model women were involving in work outside home as part-timers. In order to combine employment and housework for women, government supported their housework and childrearing in GDR and government promoted new employment pattern which could be compatible with their traditional family model. Thus most of women in GDR worked as full-timers and less than half of women in FRG worked outside as part-timers. However traditional gender role was preserved in both countries. Similarity is here. From the view point of policy framework women were responsible for housework and childrearing and men were main earner and stayed in the core of labour market in both GDR and FRG. In this regard, socialization of childrearing and housework did not mean change of gender role in GDR. 4. Effects of the Differences and the Similarities on Female Labour Force Participation after the Unification After the Unification the institutions of FRG were introduced in former GDR area. Most of the institutions that were provided for female workers were vanished for example "Holiday for housework". The Unification was equal to the transition from socialism to capitalism. In capitalist economy there is chronic labour surplus which is equal to unemployment (Kornai 2014). With changing all the conditions surrounding female workers in former GDR area, Female unemployment rate was rapidly increasing. This increase of female unemployment rate means that many women stayed in labour market despite the difficulties of finding their job and lack of the institutions supported them. Indeed the labour market situation was so severe especially for women, the institutions in FRG did not exclude person who wanted to continue working. Duration of the unemployment insurance payment is limited and many women could not find their jobs within this duration. After that the unemployment assistance was available for them. FRG had the institutions which supported people who did not have ample means and needed to work to maintain their lives. Although there was also social assistance for people who did not join labour market, social assistance seemed to carry a certain stigma for people who lived in GDR. That is because people had the right to 612
8. work on the basis of socialistic discipline in the socialism era. In addition the basis of Sozial Staat is the social insurance system which has so long history since the end of 19C. In GDR there also was social insurance system. Social insurance system is strongly connected with employment. This is also one of the reasons women continue searching job despite of severe labour market situation. As I mentioned above, there was a similarity of gender role in policy framework between two Germanys. Even after the Unification women were treated as responsible people and required to be responsible for housework within FRG policy framework. In this regard, women need not to change their life style because they had managed housework and production work until the Unification. Under such conditions, one of the biggest obstacles for female employment was childbirth. Childbirth means break of their careers and in the stage of transition recession women who might become pregnant had huge disadvantage for employment. As previous studies mentioned, many young women in Eastern Germany postponed or gave up their childbirth in order to continue their employment or find their job. Fertility rate in Eastern Germany was rapidly decreasing and reached 0.77 at the bottom in 19947. Women in Eastern Germany elected not to give a birth but to continue working outside. In other words, women in Eastern Germany assessed that they could continue their employment unless they became pregnant under new circumstances. For women who had lived in GDR, both policy frameworks concerning about female workers were close enough. They could adopt new institutions after the Unification without changing their life courses. Tentative Conclusion 9 There was huge difference about female labour force participation between GDR and FRG. 9 GDR showed higher female labour participation rate than other socialist countries. 9 FRG showed much lower female participation rate than GDR and regarded male bread-winner model as standard family model. 9 But policy framework in both countries had some similarities. 9 Both government regarded women as responsible persons for housework and childrearing and men as main earners staying in the core of labour market. 9 Differences in the institutions could be seen in socializing of childrearing and housework. 9 Except for the difficulties in childbirth and childrearing women in Eastern Germany could continue their working life after the Unification. 9 The similarities of gender role view in policy framework enabled to do the above things. 7 Statistiches Bundesamt. 8 613
9. References Cooke, L., 2007, Persistent Policy Effects on the Division of Domestic Tasks in Reunified Germany, Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 69. No. 4, pp. 930-950. Esping-Andersen, G., 1990, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Cambridge: Polity Press. Esping-Andersen, G., 1999, Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ferree, M., 1993, The Rise and Fall of "MOMMY POLITICS": Feminism and Unification in (EAST) GERMANY, Feminist Studies, 19, no.1, pp. 89-115. Kornai, J. 1980, Economics of Shortage, Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. Kornai, J., 2013, Dynamism, Rivalry, and the Surplus Economy: Two Essays on the Nature of Capitalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bauernschuster, S., and Rainer, H., 2012, Political regimes and the family: hoe sex-role attitudes continue to differ in reunified Germany, Journal of Population Economy, Vol. 25, pp. 5-27. Kranz, S., 2017, "Der Sozialismus Siegt": Women's Ordinary Lives in an East German Factory, Journal of International Women's Studies, Vol.18, Issue 4, pp.50-68. Meier, U., 1989, Equality without Limits? Women's work in the socialist society of the German Democratic Republic, International Sociology Vol.4, No.1, pp.37-49. Nickel, H. M. 1003, 'Mitgestalterinnenn des Sozialismus' – Frauenarbeit in der DDR, in Franen in Deutschland: 1945-1992, edited by Helwig, G., and Nickel, H. M., pp. 233-256. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Ritter, G., 2007, DER PREIS DER DEUTSCHEN EINHEIT, Verlag C. H. Beck. Rudd, E., 2006, Gendering Unemployment in Postsocialist Germany: 'What I Do Is Work, Even If It's Not Paid', ETHOS, Vol 71:2, pp. 191-212. Sackmann, R., and Haussermann, H., 1994, Do regions matter? Regional differences in female labour-market participation in Germany, Environment and Planning, Vol. 26, pp. 1377-1396. Satogami, M., 2011, Changes in the Female Labour Market in German New Lọnder, The Journal of Comparative Economic Studies Vol.6, pp.59-78. Trappe, H., 1996, Work and Family in Women's Lives in the German Democratic Republic, Work and Occupations, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 354-377. Rosenfeld, R., Trappe, H., and Gornick, J., 2004, GENDER AND WORK IN GERMANY: Before and After Reunification, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 30, pp. 103-124. Verdery, K. 1996, What Was Socialism, and What Comes Next?, Princeton University Press. In Japanese ኱ἑ┿⌮㸦2004㸧㸪ࠕࠕ⏨ᛶ✌ࡂ୺ࠖᆺ࠿ࡽ⬺༷࡛ࡁࡿ࠿̿♫఍ᨻ⟇ࡢࢪ࢙ࣥࢲ࣮୺ὶ໬ࠖ㸪♫఍ᨻ⟇Ꮫ఍ㄅ ➨ 11 ᕳ㸪52㸫66 ࣮࣌ࢪࠋ ㎷ⱥྐ࣭ᕝ㉺ಟ⦅㸦2016㸧㸪ࠗṔྐࡢ୰ࡢ♫఍ᅜᐙ 20 ୡ⣖ࢻ࢖ࢶࡢ⤒㦂࠘㸪ᒣᕝฟ∧♫ ᰆᮌ⌮Ꮚ㸦2002㸧ࠕࢻ࢖ࢶ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ௙஦࡜ᐙᗞࡢ୧❧⟇̿ࢩ࣮ࣗࣞࢲ࣮ᨻᶒ࡟ࡳࡿࠕࢪ࢙ࣥࢲ࣮୺ὶ໬ࠖࡢ ヨࡳࠖ㸪ᕝᮧᏛᅬዪᏊ኱Ꮫ⣖せ➨ 13 ᕳ➨ 2 ྕ㸪141-158 ࣮࣌ࢪ 614