1. Capabilities and gender equality: a response to the deregulation debate Jill Rubery Manchester Business School

2. RECWOWE and the political and economic context European social models under threat from Deregulation agenda Austerity measures Increasing social needs for support- changing lifecourse, changing labour markets, changing families Gender equality measures under specific threat from: End to ‘work for all ‘ assumptions to new ways of rationing work Cut backs to public sector – employment opportunities and WLB opportunities Refocused attention on excluded youth and men

3. Gender and regulation: the debate Similar approach in both deregulation/neoliberal and varieties of capitalism literature No compelling evidence that regulated/coordinated economies fare worse in overall employment performance But regulation/ coordination argued to act against disadvantaged groups including women

4. Assumptions in gender and regulation debate General 1.Women are labour market outsiders- have common behaviour/ characteristics across societies/ over time- carers first/ contingent employees- no scope for law/ welfare system to change norms/ behaviour 2.Women prefer to maximise employment over other aspects of inequality- pay, WLB options, security, segregation 3.Deregulated markets provide a more level playing field between insiders/outsiders, men and women WLB debate 1.Gender preferences for WLB options the same across countries 2.Rights to WLB do not improve women’s prospects as increase employers’ perceived costs- WLB at expense of employment 3.Deregulated labour markets offer opportunities to choose working time to match preferences

5. Gender and regulation: a critique General 1.Gender is not a universal essentialist characteristic but instead is socially constructed- women’s tendency to be outsiders or carers first varies by welfare system, social group etc. 2.Women are both insiders and outsiders- not necessarily competing against men- and women outsiders seek insider status (Emmenegger) not least because of discrimination which may intensify by age/ number of times returning to the labour market. 3.Deregulated labour markets give rise to wider pay inequalities, more gender segregation, WLB 1.Preferences vary according to both gender and welfare regime and regulation of working time for full-timers 2.High penalties of WLB choices in deregulated economies not related to productivity effects- WLB opportunities in segregated jobs rather than spread through job structure, high pay and career penalties 3.Fiction of freely chosen hours-deregulated economies mean working according to employer preferences

6. Beyond the regulation debate Regulation for gender equality for two related purposes Empowerment of individual –increase options/ realise capabilities Inclusive labour markets- change environment to reduce penalties associated with choices, aiding empowerment WLB Empowered choices mean that options do not involve long term dependency or heavy penalties- – requires options for continuity – and for compensation for care time Inclusivity involves options to exercise WLB thru’ the job and organisational structure- – action on working time regimes, – access to employment and training, – and on ensuring costs of WLB borne by social wage not by specific employer

7. transparent harmonised high social wage coordinated /transparent Domestic childcare Formal childcare No or short leave/ mothers only Medium paid leave/ fathers and mothers Long/rigid hoursFlexible work options Tax/benefit disincentivesTax/benefit incentives opaque differentiated low social wage fragmented Inclusive labour markets Disempowered women Empowered women Exclusive labour markets Gender equality Gender inequality

8. WLB, austerity and social needs Regulating for WLB under attack from two directions Re-regulation/ capabilities approach may be regarded as utopian in age of austerity Capabilities argument promotes social justice but more easily ignored when no business case/ war for talent- women now can be targeted for disproportionate share of the cuts and unemployment WLB an issue for the more privileged- combining non standard work with insider status (public sector/ professionals) - instead need to focus on new ways of regulating for the precariat Responses Changes in gender relations and families not reversible- genie is out of the bottle and cannot be put back in- women no longer mainly a reserve army Short term cost cutting /long term costs if don’t utilise women’s skills by facilitating WLB- another alternative may be reduced fertility Dual earner households better able to withstand recession/ unemployment risks Equating women’s employment with the precariat does not do justice to its diversity especially across countries. Need to reform systems of regulation to be more inclusive and more empowering- not a case of either protection for insiders or for outsiders- need to find common ground and new ways and principles o f protection.