writing a 3 - 5 page paper

' '

"When I think about what I do every day-1 cook meals for my family, I make cereal for

breakfast and sandwiches for lunch and meat and potatoes for supper. Nothing unusual

about that. But when I think about all those thousands of other women all doing the same

thing, then I realize I'm not just making porridge. I'm part of a whole army of women who

are feeding the country."

Source: Stay-at-home mother. Meg Luxton. (1980). More than a Labour of Love. Women's Press, p. 13.

"There are times when I go insane. There are times when I think the demands of the home are

too much, the responsibilities and the constant nagging and the whining of the kids and the

diapers and the crap .... Sometimes I think, By God, my life would be a lot less complicated if

I just had a nine-to-five job .... But there are other times-just being with them in the summer,

being in the backyard, colouring or doing puzzles or hanging out with them, just playing

squirt -gun games for an entire hour-that are just great. There is nothing that can replace that."

Source: Tom, stay-at-home father. Andrea Doucet. (2006). Do Men Mother? Fathering, Care and Domestic Responsibility. University of Toronto Press, p. 3-4.

"You know the first question they always ask you is, 'Well, what do you do? Where do you

work?' And I say, 'Well I'm not working now. I'm staying home with my children.' And it

was like this wall of invisibility. You know, I remember reading The Invisible Man by Ralph

Ellison .... And that was what came to mind. It was like all of a sudden I didn't exist. If I didn't

have an identity in the working world, I didn't exist."

Source: Maeve Turner, stay-at-home mom and lawyer. Pamela Stone. (2007). Opting Out? Why Women Really Quit Careers and Head Home. University of California Press, p. 145.

INTRODUCTION

In October 2012, Jessica Stilwell, a social worker and mother living in Calgary, made national and international headlines when she went on a

NEL 219

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

"household strike," refusing to clean up after her two 12-year-old twin daughters and their younger 10-year-old sister. Frustrated by their unwilling­ ness to pick up after themselves and pitch in with daily household chores, Stilwell reduced her housework to the bare minimum, cooking meals and packing school lunches. Everything else, from washing her children's dirty dishes, to picking up their toys, games, and clothes, to unpacking their school lunch bags, was left to her daughters. She did not remind or nag them about what needed to be done; in fact, she did not even tell them she was going on strike she simply quit cleaning up after them. Six days later, her house in disarray, with dirty dishes overflowing from the dishwasher, unpacked lunch bags fermenting on the kitchen counter, and clothes, jackets, toys, and games strewn about, her children called a truce, apologizing for not doing more. They then spent two frenzied days cleaning and returning the house to its original pristine condition, serving coffee to their mother while she watched them work.1

Such examples highlight the important, but often taken-for-granted and "invisible" nature of household, family, and caring work. In this chapter,

we examine this work, exploring the skills and demands involved, and how participation in and responsibility for such work is distributed among family members. We also consider how families accomplish household and caring work in a context where women have increased their attachment to paid work, but where traditional ideas about gender and household respon­ sibility persist. What is striking, for instance, about media coverage on Jessica Stilwell's strike is the sole focus on her as a mother. Her husband and the father of her daughters, who lives in the same household, merits just a passing mention, and it seems to be assumed that the work of organizing the household naturally belongs to her. What gives rise to such assumptions? And to what extent are gendered patterns of household and caring work really shifting? Moreover, how does responsibility for household and caring work underlie or contribute to the broader gender inequalities we observe in the labour market and paid work? We examine these questions while considering how employers and governments are supporting women's and men's changing roles as earners and caregivers, and their efforts to balance work and family life.

220 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

HOUSEHOLDS, FAMILIES, AND WORK

Conceptualizing Household and Family Work

Most early studies in the sociology of work paid scant, if any attention to

household work, unpaid work, or caregiving. In her article "Invisible Work,"

sociologist Arlene Kaplan Daniels suggests several reasons for this. First, to

the extent that caring and housework are done in the private realm, they are

often seen as falling outside the formal economy, thus lacking economic value.

Second, the fact that household work is unpaid that it does not receive a

salary or wage reinforces common perspectives that it lacks value, as it is

not readily thought of in dollar terms. Finally, according to Daniels, women's

historical and ongoing responsibility for household work further contributes

to its devaluation. Rather than being seen as skilled work requiring knowledge

and ability, caring and cleaning are seen as something women "naturally" do.

Illustrating this, Daniels asks how many people consider the following to be

work: comforting a child, cooking meals, creating warm and caring family

relations. Certainly, she contends, such activities are work, but traditional

ideas about family and gender impede this recognition.

Today, while some Canadians continue to hold the views described by

Daniels, there is also growing awareness of the importance of household

and caring work. Sociologists, in particular, have increasingly focused on the

household as an important site of research and study. Not only does such

research help us build a more complete picture of work, but it also helps us

understand the fluid boundary between the labour market and household.

Equally important, given that women still carry much of the responsibility

for families, a sharper picture of household work is key to understanding the

nature of the gender inequality we observe in Canada and other countries.

Typically, household responsibilities are far more likely to limit women's labour

force participation, keeping women financially dependent on their partners.

Some experts argue that gender inequality is the result of two systems

of domination: capitalism and patriarchy. Broadly speaking, patriarchy refers

to male domination over women, but more specifically it describes forms

of family organization in which fathers and husbands hold the power.2

Capitalism incorporated earlier patriarchal social arrangements. Remnants of

patriarchy still reinforce stereotypes of women as cheap, expendable labour.

NEL 221

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

Women's traditional roles as mothers and partners also restrict their economic opportunities and, for those who are employed, create a double day of paid and unpaid work.

In delving into the work of households, researchers have identified and shed light on a wide variety of work, including housework (e.g., cooking, cleaning, laundry), caring and emotion work (e.g., bearing and raising children, caring for the elderly and infirm), and kin and community work (e.g., commu­ nicating and coordinating with larger family networks and neighbours). Taken together, such activities have often been referred to as domestic work, unpaid work, or social reproduction (as opposed to production which occurs in the formal economy). Laslett and Brenner (1989: 382) define social reproduction as activities "involved in the maintenance of life on a daily basis, and inter­ generationally." Such work is organized and accomplished through "family strategies" or decisions made by families about the nature of family life (e.g., size of family) and the division of labour in the home and labour market. As we will see, the work of households is also shaped both by economic realities and dominant cultural ideals about how family life should be.

Changing Family Forms

We have already outlined in previous chapters the important role of house­ holds and families in Canada's economic development. But the specific nature of that role has changed and shifted over time. Before the rise of capitalism and industrialization, the household operated as a primary site of economic production with men, women, and children working together to sustain family life (Cohen 1988). The emergence of factory production and a wage­ labour economy shifted the role of the household again, as men (primarily) were drawn into paid jobs in the labour market, leaving women responsible for a wide range of work in the home from cooking and cleaning, to caring for children, the elderly, and the infirm.

Although we tend to think of families and households as part of the pri­ vate realm, standing apart from the market and economy, the household was a site for paid work, though often at the margins of the informal economy. In early industrializing Canada, for example, working-class women often took in laundry or boarders to earn extra money for their families (Bradbury 1993). Women also sewed piecework at home as part of factory-based "putting out"

222 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

systems. At the other end of the economic spectrum, families with resources

hired domestic servants to cook and clean, bringing employment relationships

into the home. Boundaries between the household and market, and private and public realms, were therefore fluid and not always clearly demarcated a situation that persists today.

Traditional gender ideologies, especially the idea of"separate spheres," also

played an important role, ensuring that household work remained culturally

and materially associated with women. Typically, married women and mothers

did not work for pay, except in cases of dire economic need. At certain points

in the 20th century, these gender norms relaxed for example, during World War II when women were drawn into the war effort and formal economy

(Pierson 1986). But such moments were fleeting. Mter World War II, a return

to breadwinner norms meant that the most common pattern was for women

to work briefly before having children, stay home to raise them, and then

return to the labour force in middle age after the children had grown up. 3

Because most mothers in the 1950s responded to the demands of child rearing

by leaving the labour force, employers tended to assume women had a weak

attachment to paid work. Yet, while some women did leave voluntarily, others

did not. Instead, they were forced out by marriage or pregnancy bars formal

policies and informal practices that required women to resign their jobs upon marriage or motherhood (Sangster 1995, 2010).4

Since the 1970s, there has been a pervasive trend in Canada and other

industrialized nations for mothers to continue working while raising their

children, and this group accounts for most of the increase in labour market

participation in recent decades. Looking back to Figures 3.3 and 6.1 reminds us of how dramatic this change has been. Today, far fewer women leave the labour force when they have children, and those who "take time out" do so for

a much shorter time. Growing numbers of women are now juggling paid work

with family roles, and the traditional single-earner family has been eclipsed. In

2011, for instance, most Canadian families were dual-earner, accounting for

nearly two-thirds (62.8o/o) of all families (see Statistics Canada, CANSIM, Table 111-0020). In comparison, single-earner families comprised just one­

quarter of all families with single female-earner and single male-earner

families making up 7.9 percent and 17.2 percent of all families, respectively.

Lone-parent families made up the remainder (12.2o/o of all families), and

roughly 80 percent of these were headed by women (Milan et al. 2011: 12).5

NEL 223

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

In short, there is growing diversity in families, and the traditional breadwinner family (where a working male earns the sole wage) is no longer the norm.

TRENDS IN HOUSEHOLD AND CARING WORK

Given these dramatic changes, especially women's growing role as earners, how has the work of households changed? Is there now more sharing of unpaid work among family members, or do traditional patterns persist? Evidence from early time budget studies, which ask people to detail their use of time, suggests that despite change, many working women are still responsible for what U.S. sociologist Arlie Hochschild calls a "second shift" in the home.6

After working seven or eight hours on the job, they come home to cook, clean, shop, and look after children the same domestic work their mothers and grandmothers did as full-time housewives. Hochschild's findings in her classic 1989 study, The Second Shift, echo those of earlier Canadian research: Martin Meissner and colleagues (1975) found that a job outside the home meant a double burden for working women and a decrease of 13.5 hours per week in leisure time.

But perhaps these early studies reflect a time period when families had not yet adjusted to the new realities of working women. If so, are new generations redefining how household work is done? Media stories and television often give the impression that men are doing more cooking and cleaning; however, do recent studies confirm this?7

Housework

To answer these questions we can draw on time-use data generated from self­ reported responses to survey questions or diaries, as well as qualitative infor­ mation from individual- or couple-level interviews or observation. Studies of housework typically distinguish between core/regular housework, such as meal preparation, meal cleanup, indoor cleaning, and laundry that are done daily; and non-core/infrequent housework, such as outdoor cleaning, interior or exterior maintenance, and repairs (Marshall 2006: 2). Note that house­ work is measured separately from childcare even though both tasks may be done at the same time and the amount of housework is strongly shaped by the presence and age of children. An important distinction can also be made

224 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

between the time spent on activities and who carries responsibility that is,

planning and anticipating household work, rather than simply carrying it out.

Concerning the extent of change, Kan, Sullivan, and Gershuny (2011)

compare time-use trends in housework from the 1960s to the present for 16 different countries (including Canada). They find evidence of convergence

in the time women and men spent on housework, but note that the gap is

narrowing largely due to reductions in women's housework, with much smaller

increases in the time contributions of men. Casting a glance over more detailed

Canadian data confirms and helps to unpack this dynamic. Using Statistics

Canada's General Social Survey (GSS), we can compare participation and time use in housework for Canadian households for 1986, 1992, 1998, and 2005.

Trends for the 1990s8 confirm that women in dual-earner families still hold pri­

mary responsibility for housework (defined in the GSS as meal preparation and

cleanup, cleaning, and laundry). Comparing the mid-1980s to the mid-2000s,

however, suggests change. More men participated in housework by the mid- 2000s three-quarters (71 o/o) reported they had contributed to housework in

2005, compared to just over half (54o/o) in 1986. But they increased the time

they spent on housework only slightly, from 1.1 hours in 1986 to 1.5 hours per

day by 2005. In comparison, women reduced the time they spent on house­

work, from 3.3 hours per day in 1986 to 2.8 hours per day by 2005. Taken together, these studies suggest that men are becoming more involved, but in

time-limited ways, while women continue to hold domestic responsibility.9

Of course, these figures reflect averages, whereas contributions may

vary by family type, age/generation, ethnicity, sexuality, gender attitudes,

and other factors. Indeed, in Canadian families with very young children, women spend significantly more time than men on housework. But this gap

narrows dramatically as children grow older, suggesting a family life-cycle

effect (Milan, Keown, and Urquijo 2011: 22). Generation and age also matter,

with younger and university-educated couples favouring less traditional

patterns (Marshall 2011). More egalitarian patterns in time use and domestic

responsibility are also found in same-sex households according to studies in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom (Dunne 1996; Nelson

1996; Sullivan 1996). Single parenthood, gender ideologies, and women's

relative earnings also influence time spent on household tasks and how these

are divided. At a more institutional and societal level, research suggests that

countries with high levels of female employment, and childhood exposure to

NEL 225

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

maternal employment, have higher contributions to household work by men (Cunningham 2007; Hook 2006; Gupta 2006).

Family income and resources also play a critical role in shaping how household work is done. Trends in "assortative mating" (where people of similar class backgrounds partner) mean that households are increasingly advantaged or disadvantaged (England 2010). For working-class families, the challenge is juggling household work alongside the demands of precarious, low-paying work, which may have erratic schedules (Presser 2003). In con­ trast, professional dual-career families are often time strapped, as are those in two-person careers (e.g., elite CEOs who are expected to have the unpaid ser­ vices of a wife who can put on dinner parties, plan social events and travel, and organize household moves). Such dynamics often see well-resourced families outsourcing family work an issue we return to shortly.

Childcare, Mothering, and Fathering

Caring for children is one of the most important and time-intensive activi­ ties in family life, involving both instrumental care or caring for (e.g., feeding, dressing, bathing) and expressive care or caring about (e.g., love, support, encouragement). Studies suggest that fathers have taken on an increasingly active role as caregivers, though the extent and nature of this change is debated.10 In a fascinating study, Andrea Doucet (2006) examines a seemingly simple question posed in the title of her book Do Men Mother? showing the complexity of mothering and fathering, and the challenges for stay-at­ home fathers who engage in household and caring work that has strong cultural associations with women. Traditionally, women have carried the responsibility of caring for children, leading scholars to argue that they engage in an "ethic of care," specific maternal practices, and "maternal thinking,"

which is attuned to the needs of children and family life (Ruddick 1995; Tronto 1993; Held 2006). Even today, when women increasingly work for pay, caring for children largely remains their responsibility. Contemporary norms around intensive mothering, where women are expected to devote ever more of their attention, effort, and identity to their children, create sharp contradictions for working mothers who carry far more economic and workplace responsibilities than ever before (Hays 1996; Stone 2007). In her insightful study Competing Devotions Mary Blair-Loy (2003) suggests

226 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

that competing moral schemas "devotion to family" versus "devotion to

work" set up cultural expectations for professional working women that are

impossible to fulfill.

What do recent studies show us with respect to involvement and respon­

sibility for childcare? Studies typically define childcare as feeding, dressing,

helping, reading to, talking or playing with, medical care, and related travel,

such as taking children to school or sports activities (Marshall 2006: 2).

Overall, time-use studies suggest a narrowing of the gap in the time spent by

women and men in caring for children, as mothers have increased their hours

in paid employment, and fathers in many countries have taken a more active role in their children's lives (Beaujot 2000; Beaujot, Liu, and Ravanera 2008;

Bianchi and Milkie 2010; Hook 2006; Marshall 2006, 2011). Despite signs

of change, however, there is still a significant, and persistent, gender gap, with

mothers devoting more time to daily direct care and assuming the bulk of

responsibility for planning and coordinating caring work. Indeed, the analysis

of time use by Kan and colleagues (2011), which considered 16 countries

(including Canada) from the 1960s to the present, suggests low levels of

change in childcare patterns, with women still assuming the bulk of time involved in children's care.

In Canada, data gathered from Statistics Canada's Labour Force Survey

(LFS) and the General Social Survey (GSS) offer further detail on the time spent

caring for children (Marshall 2006). What is striking across all family types is the

enduring, persistent link between women and childcare. On average, mothers

spend roughly twice as much time caring for children than fathers: 2.05 hours

for every hour by men. As shown in Figure 7.1, Canadian mothers spent, on

average, 50.1 hours each week caring for children, compared to 24.4 hours

reported by fathers (Milan et al. 20 11: 20). Since this average mixes different

family types, it is important to look at more specific employment and family

situations. Comparing single-earner, dual-earner, and lone-parent families, for

instance, we see the gender gap is largest in single-earner families, two hours

for women for every hour by men. Yet, interestingly, the gender gap within

dual-earner families is narrower when one partner works part time (1.47 hours

for women for every hour by men) than it is for full-time, dual-earner families

(1.83 hours). Not surprisingly, mothers of young children (four years old or

less) devote the most time to care. Here, the gender gap is largest (2.23 hours

for women for every hour by men), falling notably for older children. Amid

NEL 227

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

FIGURE 7.1 Time Spent on Unpaid Childcare by Working Arrangement and Age of Youngest Child, Canada, 2010

All women and men

Dual earner couple, respondent working full time

Dual earner couple, respondent working part time

Single earner couple, respondent working

Lone parents, respondent working

Youngest child, aged 0-4

Youngest child, aged rr 14

Men

12.0

Women

24.4

212

25.5

26.9

30.2

19.7 37.7

50.1

49.8

59.4

50.8

615

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Average number of hours per week

Source: Adapted from Milan, Anne, Leslie-Anne Keown, and Covadonga Robles Urquijo (2011 ). "Families, Living Arrangements, and Unpaid Work," Women in Canada: A Gender-Based Statistical Report. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. Catalogue No. 89-503-X, 2011, p. 20.

women's continued responsibility for children, especially at a young age, there

is a growing trend toward more "involved fathering" a pattern documented in

qualitative studies, as well (Doucet 2006; Ball and Daly 2012).

Eldercare

Caring for elderly parents and relatives is another important part of house­

hold work. Population aging (discussed in Chapter 3) has significant implica­

tions for the future, especially for women who often carry responsibility for

eldercare. From a policy standpoint, eldercare is seen as a pressing issue in Canada and many other industrialized countries, and there are predictions

of a "caregiving crunch'' as fewer women can meet such demands because of

their own jobs.11 The 2007 General Social Survey (GSS) showed that roughly

2. 7 million or one in five Canadians 45 years old and over provided care

228 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

to a senior, most typically a parent. Many of these caregivers were part of the

"sandwich generation," juggling eldercare with caring for their own children.

In 2007, three out of four caregivers were married, and nearly half were young

enough (ages 45-54) to still be caring for their own children. Well over half (57o/o) also worked in a paid job.

What is involved in providing eldercare? According to the 2012 General

Social Survey (GSS), those helping an elderly parent or in-law spent between

three and four hours, on average, each week. Of note, a small minority (about

7o/o) put in the equivalent of a full-time job with 30 hours or more of care­

giving each week. Typically, the main reason for providing care to a parent, parent-in-law, or grandparent was aging and frailty, followed by specific

medical conditions, such as dementia, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. The

most common forms of care involved phoning and visiting (reported by 99o/o) and offering emotional support (reported by 92o/o), followed by transportation

(reported by 41 o/o) and meals and cleaning (reported by 37o/o). Women were slightly more likely than men to provide care to aging family members and

were also at greater risk of reporting psychological distress or health impacts as

a result. 12 Overall, about 60 percent of those caring for parents felt worried or

distressed by their responsibilities, and about one-third had an elevated level

of psychological distress (Turcotte 20 13: 6-12). Recognizing the growing demands of eldercare, the federal government

introduced Compassionate Care benefits in January 2004, which provides eight

weeks of paid leave to care for a gravely ill family member. This develop­

ment is important but, similar to other employment-related benefits, many

individuals are ineligible due to the types of caregiver relationships involved

or insufficient employment-related hours and earnings. Since introducing this leave, the federal government has expanded the eligibility criteria to

recognize a wider range of situations and caregivers (HRSDC 2007). Recent

evaluations, however, suggest additional changes are needed (see, for example, Williams et al. 20 1 0).

Kin and Volunteer/Community Work

Two other important types of household work occur across and beyond households.

Kin work describes a wide range of work that goes into building and

maintaining family ties, through communication, ritual celebrations, and

NEL 229

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

the exchange of resources (di Leonardo 1987). Examples of kin work include

regular or periodic phone calls, cards, and visits, as well as e-mails, texts, or

Facebook posts, to share family news. Special celebrations such as birthdays,

Thanksgiving, or other seasonal, religious, and secular holidays are also

important, creating shared family bonds, traditions, and memories. Exchanging

resources is also a part of kin work for example, sharing children's clothing,

toys, tools, recipes, photos, and family history.

Kin work, like domestic work, involves not only the doing but also the

mental work of conceiving, initiating, and organizing such work. It may

involve pleasant tasks, such as organizing a family reunion or birthday, or

difficult work, such as helping family members patch up a dispute. Studies

suggest kin work is important because it fulfills deeply held cultural expecta­

tions of a satisfying family life (di Leonardo 1987). Typically, it falls to women,

even when it does not involve their side of the family (e.g., in-laws or distant

relatives on their partner's side). In her study of kin work, di Leonardo (1987)

found it involved extensive knowledge and skill, and thus was not easily "out­

sourced" or passed along to others. Given this, women may often cut back on

kin work during times of competing demands or stress.

Equally, volunteer work is an important form of work often overlooked if

we rely only on official labour force statistics. According to the 2010 Canada

Survey on Giving, Volunteering and Participation (CSGVP), 47 percent of

Canadians ages 15 and over (or 13.2 million individuals) contributed time

and energy to volunteer activities in 2010 (Vezina and Crompton 2012). This

rate of volunteering was up just slightly, from 45 percent in 2004. Canadians

volunteered about 2.1 billion hours in 2010, equivalent to nearly 1.1 million

full-time jobs. Between 2004 and 2010, the average number of hours that

each volunteer contributed declined slightly (168 hours to 156 hours, respec­

tively). A minority of volunteers account for most of these volunteer hours,

with the top 10 percent of volunteers contributing 53 percent of total hours.

Participation in volunteer work rises with education and income level, and

with the presence of children in the household. 13

Volunteer workers are found in a wide variety of clubs and associations, as

well as in religious and political organizations. However, a very large number

work in the publicly funded service industries, assisting in the provision of

health, social, recreational, educational, environmental, and other types of

services. In recent years, as governments at all levels have cut costs, volunteers

230 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

have increasingly replaced paid employees in schools, for instance, where parent-volunteers play a growing role, helping in libraries, in classrooms, and on field trips. As this trend continues, volunteer work will become an ever greater part of the unpaid work performed by Canadians. In her study, Opting Out?, Pamela Stone (2007) found that women forced to exit demanding pro­ fessions, in order to raise their families, often pursued volunteer work in order to maintain adult connections, overcome isolation at home, and retain a sense of professional identity.

BALANCING WORK AND FAMILY

Over 25 years ago in her classic study, The Second Shift, U.S. sociologist Arlie Hochschild observed:

Work has changed. Women have changed .... But most workplaces have remained inflexible in the face of the family demands of their workers and at home, most men have yet to really adapt to the changes in women. This strain between the change in women and the absence of change in much else leads me to speak of a "stalled revolution." 14

Today researchers continue to puzzle over the "stalled revolution" (England 2010; Doucet 2006), trying to understand why there has been such a slow pace of change in efforts to reconcile work and family life (Correll et al. 2014; Pocock 2003; J. Williams 2010; Williams and Dempsey 2014).

Work-Family Conflict

One consequence of the stalled revolution is the rise of work-family conflict and role overload. Work-family conflict involves mutually incompatible demands arising from work and family domains ( Greenhaus and Beutel! 1985: 77). Role overload involves having more role demands than one can possibly fulfill (Coverman 1989). While some researchers use these terms interchangeably, others view them as distinct, noting that overload leads to conflict only when there are no mechanisms (e.g., resources or time flex­ ibility) to help people meet their responsibilities. For example, having extra income allows families to buy in household help or time-saving conveniences.

NEL 231

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

Researchers also make distinctions based on the directionality of conflict.15

Work-to-family conflict occurs when workplace demands interfere with family

needs for instance, a parent missing a family birthday because of a meeting

or an evening shift. Family-to-work conflict occurs when family interferes with

work for example, a child's illness preventing a parent from being at work.

Distinctions can also be made by the perceived nature of conflict. Time­ based conflict is by far the most commonly studied type of conflict, arising

when it is physically impossible to meet the time demands of different roles

(e.g., official work hours prevent a parent from dropping off or picking up a

child at school). Strain-based conflict focuses on the physical, mental, and emo­

tional fatigue attached to meeting competing work and family demands for

example, lacking the energy to play with one's children, or help with home­

work, when one gets home from work. Finally, behaviour-based conflict occurs

when work and family behaviours are incompatible. For instance, managers

and supervisors who act in an authoritarian, commanding manner at work

may experience difficulties at home in caring for young children who need

emotional warmth, connection, and flexibility.

How common is work-family conflict? Empirical studies suggest that it

affects a significant proportion of the workforce in Canada, the United States,

and other industrialized countries. Prevalence rates vary, however, depending

on occupational roles, workplace demands, and family composition.16 In

Canada, three large-scale surveys conducted by Duxbury and Higgins The

National Study on Balancing Work and Caregiving in Canada track trends

in 1991, 2001, and 2011.17 Overall, the Duxbury and Higgins studies confirm

that role overload and work-family conflict are significant issues for the working

population in Canada. In 1991, nearly one-half of respondents (47o/o)

reported high levels of role overload, while over one-quarter (28o/o) reported

high levels of work-to-family conflict. Rates of high family-to-work conflict

were much lower, with just 5 percent of respondents reporting this (Duxbury

and Higgins 2001: 14). In 2001, there was a notable jump in rates, with

59 percent of respondents reporting high role overload, 31 percent reporting

high levels of work-to-family conflict, and 10 percent reporting high family­

to-work conflict.

Duxbury and Higgins attribute rising levels of work-family conflict

in 1991-2001 to changing work demands, in particular, downsizing and

increased workloads; organizational norms requiring long hours; and the

232 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

growing use of email, cellphones, and mobile technologies that blur bound­

aries between work and home (Duxbury and Higgins 2001: 14). With respect

to rising family-to-work conflict, the authors point to population aging and

the increased prevalence of juggling both child-care and elder-care responsibil­ ities. More recent 2011 survey results suggest reduced, though still high, levels

of conflict and overload. Overall, 40 percent of Canadians reported high role

overload, and 30 percent reported high levels of work-to-family conflict. Of

note, rising proportion of respondents (15o/o) reported high levels of family­

to-work conflict up from 5 percent in 1991 (Duxbury and Higgins 2012: 13).

Consequences of Work-Family Conflict

Work-family conflict has many negative outcomes for individuals and their

families.18 In Canada, Duxbury and Higgins (2001) compared employees with high and low work-to-family conflict, finding a 40 percent gap in job

satisfaction, with just 20 percent of those with high work-to-family conflict

reporting high job satisfaction, compared to 60 percent of those where work­

to family conflict was low. Outcomes for job stress were especially striking,

with 57 percent of those with high work-to-family conflict reporting high job

stress, compared to just 9 percent of employees where work-to-family conflict was low. Looking at a range of countries, Kossek and Ozeki (1998) reviewed

50 studies that examined job satisfaction and/ or life satisfaction, concluding

there was clear evidence of a "negative relationship between all types of work­

family conflict and job and life satisfaction" (145). In their meta-analysis of

67 studies, Allen and colleagues (2000) also found strong links between high

work-family conflict and reduced job satisfaction, reduced life satisfaction, and higher stress.

Pressures created by work-family imbalance have costs not only for

employees and families, but for employers too. As Linda Duxbury and Higgins

(200 1) found, employees with high work-family conflict have lower levels of

organizational commitment and higher rates of absenteeism. Indeed, absen­

teeism is a significant source of lost productivity for employers. According to Statistics Canada, female rates of absenteeism have risen steadily since the late

1970s, mainly due to family or personal obligations as growing numbers of

mothers with preschool children sought employment. For example, in 2011,

employed women lost an average of 11.4 days, compared to 7.7 for men, due

NEL 233

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

to illness, disability, or personal and family responsibilities (Dabboussy and

Uppal 2012). While some employers are working to support family-friendly

work environments, firms in the most dynamic sectors of the economy are

often defined by heavy workloads and long hours. This culture is not sustain­

able, however. It may suit younger, single workers who have no dependents,

but lack of attention to work-life balance issues will cause problems (e.g., high

turnover) as workers move into their 30s, find life partners, and begin raising

children. Not surprisingly, studies are increasingly exploring the problems gen­

erated by "greedy organizations" (Coser 1967) and the culture of long work

hours (Burke and Cooper 2008; Correll et al. 2014; J. Williams 2010).

Policies Supporting Work-Family Reconciliation

What types of policies and supports help individuals reconcile their work,

family, and personal responsibilities? Research suggests that flexible work hours

and schedules, generous personal and family-related leave, the ability to

refuse overtime, and the presence of supportive managers are all important

(Duxbury and Higgins 2001; Duxbury, Higgins, and Schroder 2009; Lowe

2007; Hill et al. 2006). Slowly, in part due to studies such as these, height­

ened awareness of the economic and individual costs of work-family conflict

is challenging employers to reconsider some long-standing policies. Yet many

employers remain locked into a traditional 9 to 5, five-days-a-week schedule

(Correll et al. 2014). Many workers do not have flexibility in the hours and

location of their work. Many also lack extended employer-sponsored coverage

for paid parental or elder-care leave (beyond standard government-provisioned

leaves), or may be unable to take full advantage of such policies due to insuf­

ficient earnings or hours.19

All in all, we have documented what Hochschild called a "stalled revolu­

tion." Well over two decades ago, the Conference Board predicted that more

employers would respond to these needs as the drain on productivity became

more visible and employee pressure for such policies mounted (Paris 1989).

Unfortunately for many working parents, there is little tangible sign of this hap­

pening, something Duxbury and Higgins (2012) show in the key findings for

their most recent study. As Figure 7.2 shows, many employees (both women and

men) still have quite limited flexibility, finding it difficult to work from home for

part of the day, or to be home to meet their children, or to pick them up after

234 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

FIGURE 7.2 Flexible Workplace Options, Canada, 2011

Spend some of the day working from home

Be home when children get home from school

Vary work hours (arrival/departure)

Arrange work schedule to meet family responsibilities

Interrupt workday to deal with personal/family needs

Take paid day off when needed by elderly relative

Take holidays at time desired

Take paid day off when child is sick

Men Women

20 22

36 38

36 38

30 35

29 34

26 31

63 62

69 71

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% who find it difficult to ...

Source: Adapted from Duxbury, Linda, and Christopher Higgins (2012) Key Findings: Revisiting Work-Life Issues in Canada'­ The 2011-12 National Study on Balancing Work and Caregiving in Canada, p. 17. <http://newsroom.carleton.ca/wp-contenV files/2012-Nationai-Work-Key-Findings.pdf>

school. Roughly one-third of workers have little control over their work sched­

ules, being unable to vary arrival and departure times, control the time of their

specific shifts or overtime, interrupt and return to work in the case of family

emergencies, or take a paid day off to help sick children or elderly relatives.

Moreover, employees who have flexible work arrangements, and make

use of them, may still find these arrangements do not always help to reduce

the stresses of balancing job and family. Mter examining a variety of alterna­

tive work arrangements, Janet Fast and Judith Frederick (1996) concluded

that self-employment, flex-place (working some hours at home), and shift

work had no effect on workers' perceived time stress. Both women and men

in part-time jobs were less stressed about time than full-timers, however,

although far more women than men chose part-time work for family-related

reasons. Flextime (employees choosing when their work day starts and stops)

helped to reduce time pressures, but was less available to women than to men.

NEL 235

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

Compressed workweeks (fewer days per week with longer hours each day) seemed to increase women's level of time stress, likely because they interfered with family routines. Job sharing was not examined by Fast and Frederick (1996), but other studies suggest it may contribute to reduced time pressure and better integration of work and family (Marshall 1997).

More recent research also confirms the benefits of limiting hours. For instance, in a study of the "60-hour dual-earner workweek" (where both part­

ners limit employment to 30 hours), Hill and his colleagues (2006) found that individuals experienced lower levels of work-family conflict and enhanced family satisfaction and work-family fit. 20

Barriers to achieving work-family balance, however, are numerous and complex. Arlie Hochschild's (1997) research suggests that even in organiza­ tions that provide family-friendly policies and programs, employees may experience difficulties finding enough time for their families. One of the largest barriers is the fact that society places great value, and confers rewards, on people who are successful in their careers. The result, especially among professionals and managers, is that employees spend more, not less, time at work. As Hochschild (1997: 198-99) suggests, "in a cultural contest between work and home, working parents are voting with their feet, and the workplace is winning." Research by Williams, Blair-Loy, and Berdahl (2013) suggests reasons why this may be the case. In taking advantage of flexible workplace arrangements, mothers and fathers appear to experience a "flexibility stigma'' that has an impact on their careers and future opportunities. Given this, many are understandably reluctant to take advantage of such options.

Yet, emerging legal decisions on "family accommodation" in Canada and the United States suggest that employers may increasingly need to consider how their working hours and traditional practices affect working parents. In their article "Will Working Mothers Take Your Company to Court?" U.S. legal scholar Joan Williams and Amy Cuddy (2012) outline recent U.S. rulings that require companies to consider the impact of their work hours and location on parents, and make accommodations where possible. Likewise, in Canada, the case of Johnstone v. Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) saw the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal rule that the CBSA had engaged in "family status" discrimination when it refused Fiona Johnstone's request for a static schedule rather than an irregular day/ night schedule that changed every six weeks, making it impossible for her to find reliable childcare. 21 Evidence presented showed the CBSA could have easily accommodated Johnstone's

236 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

request, as they had done for other employees, and Johnstone was therefore

awarded damages. If emerging legal decisions support this direction of change,

then employers will need to ensure reasonable working hours, shifts, and

schedules for working parents where feasible.

Early Childhood Education and Care

Of all types of support, quality childcare is perhaps the most pressing need.

According to the 2008 report, Early Childhood Education and Care in Canada (Beach et al. 2009), child-care arrangements present an ongoing problem

for many parents in Canada although preferences for different forms of

childcare (e.g., family, informal, formal) vary widely (Beaujot 1997; Statistics

Canada 2004a). Despite past promises by Canadian governments to improve

child-care availability, the number of licensed child-care spaces by no means

fills the need. By 2008, for example, there were 876,194 regulated child-care spaces (for children up to 12 years old) across Canada, up from 373,741 in

1992 (Friendly and Beach 2005; Beach et al. 2009). This figure represents

a near tripling of available spaces, a positive change given the historical heel

dragging that has accompanied the promise of a national daycare program

(Timpson 2001). But even with this increase, regulated child-care spaces still

only accommodate a small fraction of what is needed. Several challenges are commonly identified in empirical studies of child­

care with respect to availability, cost, and quality. With respect to availability, in Canada the Childcare Resource and Research Unit (CRRU) has produced

regular reports on provincial trends in childcare provision. Their most recent

reports, analyzing trends to 2012, highlight ongoing shortages of child-care

spots (Friendly et al. 2013). Nationally, in 2012, regulated full-time or part­ time child-care spaces were available for just 22.5 percent of children five

and under who required care because their parents were working. Though

up from 14.9 percent in 2001, this percentage still falls well short of what is

needed, given that nearly three-quarters of mothers with preschool children

are employed. Care shortages are equally pronounced for older, school-aged children, with regulated spaces available for just 20.5 percent of children up

to age 12. With respect to cost, average full-time fees vary widely, from a high

in Ontario of $1,150/month (for infants) and $925/month (for toddlers),

to a low of $152 per month for infant and toddler care in Quebec's publicly

subsidized system.

NEL 237

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

So far, Quebec is the only jurisdiction in Canada to make a concerted

effort to address these issues: in 1997, it introduced a comprehensive pro­

gram of universal subsidized daycare and early childhood education (Albanese

2006). Despite further change to existing programs (including an increase in cost from $5 per day to $7 per day for childcare), Quebec remains a leader in

child-care access, offering regulated spaces to over 37 percent of children up to

age 12 (Friendly et al. 2013: 55).22 Still, even with such changes, finding high­

quality, accessible childcare remains a significant challenge for most working

parents. Given the high costs and low availability of spaces, many children of working parents are looked after informally by sitters, neighbours, nannies, or

relatives (Statistics Canada 2004a: 55).

MARKETIZATION OF CARE AND THE ''OUTSOURCED FAMILY''

Discussions of childcare illustrate how women's increased participation in the

labour market has sparked a growing market for household and caring ser­

vices in the formal economy. These services include childcare, house-cleaning,

restaurant meals, and prepared deli and grocery food. Such developments

respond to growing time pressures and "care deficits" within the home, which increasingly led families to buy in services and in the words of Robert Reich (2000) and Arlie Hochschild (2012) "outsource" family life. In a study

on the rising marketization of caregiving in Canada, Nickela Anderson and

Karen Hughes (2010) note estimates from Statistics Canada that value the

domestic market for childcare at more than $3.5 billion in the early 2000s.

Of note, nearly one-third of dual-earner families purchased childcare and one in 10 families purchased some type of house-cleaning service. Consumption

was heavily tied to income, but even among low-income, female-headed

households (typically the most financially strapped), more than one quarter

purchased childcare.

Examining this phenomenon in a recent study The Outsourced Self­ Arlie Hochschild catalogues a wide array of family and household work that was once done in the home but is now being purchased in local, regional,

and national markets in North America. Childcare is certainly common. But

Hochschild also shows there is an ever-expanding range of services. Beyond

basic domestic assistance, such as Molly Maid, other businesses with names

238 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

such as Rent-A-Husband and 1.877.99HUBBY cover household repairs,

outdoor work, snow shovelling, and lawn mowing. Special celebrations and "kin work" can also be purchased, with children's birthdays, anniversaries,

and family reunions now falling under the purview of birthday planners. Other services, such as Kids in Motion and Driving Miss Daisy, Inc., help get

children and elderly family members safely to school, activities, and medical

and other appointments. Cooking services, which stockpile fridges and freezers

with day-to-day and special meals, as well as personal shoppers, who purchase

gifts or run time-consuming errands, are also increasingly in demand.

Developments such as these illustrate how some families are adapting to workplace demands and also highlight the fluid, ever-changing boundary

between market and household work. At the same time, the marketization of

household and caring work draws attention to the ways in which hierarchies

based on class, race, and citizenship are reproduced. As Canadians increasingly

outsource family life, they come to rely on systems of transnational caregiving and stratified hierarchies of reproduction hiring working-class women and

women from countries in the global south to provide paid care as nannies or

as child- and elder-care workers, or to cook, clean, and work as housekeepers

and domestic cleaners (Ehrenreich and Hochschild 2002; Duffy 2011).23 Such

arrangements may solve care deficits in their own homes, but they create new sets of problems, worsening inequalities and care deficits in the families of paid

caregivers, both within and outside Canada.

CONCLUSION

We began this chapter by noting the often invisible nature of household and

caring work, and the persistence of women's responsibility for family life. We

also questioned whether gendered patterns of household caring work have

shifted in recent decades as more women work as earners and breadwinners

than ever before. Certainly, many people have expected to see men play a

growing role in the household as women's labour force participation has soared since the 1970s. Yet, accumulating evidence shows small degrees of

change for example, greater sharing of household work among younger

generations and in same-sex households. Overall, the pace of change is excep­

tionally slow. Reductions in the gender gap in family work stem as much, if

not more, from women reducing the time they devote to certain tasks than to

NEL 239

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

men dramatically expanding their contributions. Increasingly, one way North

American families appear to be reconciling work and family life is through

outsourcing a trend that has fuelled the growth of low-paid caring work in

the formal economy, and the reproduction of gender-, race-, and class-based inequalities, given that such work is typically done by women, immigrants,

and those with little education. Another response has been to limit family size

or simply not have children thus fuelling trends toward population aging in

Canada, as we discussed in Chapter 3.

With many employers offering still fairly limited options for effectively

balancing work and family life despite public concern about the need for more family-friendly workplaces these patterns are perhaps not surprising.

Further, they reflect Canada's failure to develop a system of affordable, acces­

sible, quality childcare. Within this context, families struggle to juggle work

and household demands, with high rates of work-family conflict the result.

Those who can afford to do so may opt out of paid work to nurture young children (typically the mother, though stay-at-home dads are a growing trend).

Such choices, however, carry high costs for individual caregivers, reducing

future earnings and job prospects, and creating risks of poverty and finan­

cial insecurity in cases of family breakdown. Sociologists, especially feminist

analysts, have long noted that the costs of raising families are borne largely

by individuals (mainly women), while the wider benefits flow to the society as a whole. Shifting from a universal breadwinner model (which assumes that

workers are endlessly available and free of caring responsibilities) to a universal caregiver model (which recognizes the caring responsibilities of all workers)24

would go a long way to recognizing the economic value of care, while also reducing gender and other social inequalities, and resolving persistent social

problems of work-family conflict.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Discuss the changing relationship between household work and market work in the course of Canada's economic development. How has the

work in each domain changed in the transition from a pre-industrial, to

an industrial, to a postindustrial society?

2. What is meant by the terms household work and social reproduction? What

types of activities do these terms refer to?

240 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

3. Discuss key trends in women's and men's contributions to housework,

childcare, and eldercare. How much change has taken place? How do we

explain these patterns?

4. What is work-family conflict, and how does it affect working women and

men? How might employers and governments assist in reducing work­

family conflict?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

WORK AT THE MOVIES

• No Time to Stop: Stories of Immigrant \%men (directed by Helene

Klodawsky, 1990, 29.05 minutes). This NFB documentary tells the

story of immigrant women of colour in Canada and their struggles at

home and at work. It is available through the National Film Board of

Canada: http:/ /www3.nfb.ca/ acrosscultures/theme_ vis. php?id=2004&

mediaid=660690&full.

• The Motherload (directed by Cornelia Principe, 2014, 45:10 minutes).

Focusing on working women in Canada, this documentary examines the

challenges they face as they struggle to balance work and family. It is available

through CBC Doc Zone: http:/ /www.cbc.ca/ doczone/ episodes/ motherload.

• When Strangers Re-Unite (directed by Florchita Bautista and Marie Boti,

1999, 52 minutes). This NFB documentary explores the challenges faced

by foreign domestic workers in Canada navigating through the immigra­

tion process, dealing with being separated from their families back home,

and reuniting with family as they eventually come to Canada. It is avail­

able through the National Film Board of Canada: http:/ /www3.nfb.ca/

acrosscultures/toutvoir_vis.php?mediaid=665737&mc=102&full.

• Baby Mama (directed by Michael McCullers, 2008, 99 minutes). A

successful single businesswoman hires a working-class woman to be her

surrogate child-bearer.

SOUNDS OF WORK

• "The Scaffolder's Wife" (Mark Knopfler). Knopfler's song describes the

struggles of the wife of a scaffolder whose hard work, keeping company

books, has helped their business stay afloat.

NEL 241

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

• "Nice Work If You Can Get It" (George Gershwin). The song champions care work, family, and human connections over paid work.

• "One's on the Way" (Loretta Lynn). Lynn describes the unpaid work

that often falls to women. Her song highlights the various kinds of work women perform for the home and as caregivers.

• "Somebody's Hero" Qamie O'Neal). Here is an ode to the women who

forgo paid work to perform essential housework and carework. O'Neal's heroes work as cooks, waiters, and taxi drivers, only for no pay.

NOTES

1. Details of the strike were covered in articles in the Globe and Mail and the

National Post. A personal account is provided by Stilwell at http://strikingmom.

blogspot.ca/. 2. For discussions of patriarchy, see Hartmann (1976), Lerner (1986), and Walby

(1990).

3. This post-WWII pattern is described in Ostry (1968). See also Canada,

Department of Labour (1958). On the concept of breadwinning, see Warren (2007).

4. For a discussion of how married and pregnant women were expected to exit paid

jobs, see Sangster (1995). For a personal account of a woman who transgressed

cultural norms by working throughout her pregnancies, see Rebel Daughter by Doris Anderson (1996).

5. Calculations are from Statistics Canada, CANSIM, Table 111-0020, "Family

Characteristics, Single-Earner and Dual-Earner Families by Number of Children."

For additional information on families, living arrangements, and unpaid work in Canada, see Milan et al. (2011).

6. Hochschild (1989). See Pupa (1997), Marshall (2006b, 2009), and Beaujot and Anderson (2007) for recent trends in Canadian families. For studies of house­

hold divisions of labour, see Luxton (1980) and Duffy and Pupa (1992). For valuable conceptual discussions of household work, see Eichler and Albanese

(2007), Luxton (1997), and Warren (2011). For poems on household work, see

Treathaway (2000).

7. For Canadian and U.S. surveys of this literature, see Coltrane (2000), Bianchi

and Milkie (2010), Doucet (2006), Beaujot (2000), and Kan et al. (2011). For

recent studies of factors shaping fathers' contributions to housework and caring, see Cunningham (2007), Gupta (2006), Hook (2006), and Halrynjo (2009).

242 NEL

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring "UJ'Ork

8. Marshall (1993: 12). Data are from the 1990 General Social Survey (GSS).

A note of caution: There is some bias in how the survey measures housework

because it is based on the perceptions of only one respondent per household

(either male or female).

9. See Marshall (2006: 10-13) for more details. Doucet (2006), Coltrane (2000),

and McFarlane, Beaujot, and Haddad (2000) provide excellent overviews of

research in this area.

10. There are many insightful studies on this issue. On fathering, see Doucet (2006),

Ball and Daly (2012), and Fox, Pascali, and Warren (2009). On mothering,

see Blair-Loy (2003), Hays (1996), McMahon (2005), and Stone (2007). On

parenting, see Ranson (2010), Nelson (1996), and Fox (1997).

11. For valuable discussions and overviews of recent trends in Canada, see Cranswick

and Dosman (2008), Cranswick (2003), Turcotte (2013), Stonebridge (2013),

and Sinha (2013).

12. While Turcotte (2013) does not examine gender patterns in detail, analysis of the

2010 General Social Survey by Milan et al. (2011: 24) shows that women typi­

cally provide more hours of care to seniors. While women and men are equally

likely to provide care to a senior living in the same household, nearly half of the

women (48.9o/o) report providing 10 hours or more of care, compared to just

one-quarter of men. Women are also more likely to report longer hours of care

(10 hours or more) for seniors not living in the same household.

13. For more information about the voluntary sector, visit the websites of the

Voluntary Sector Initiative (http:/ /www.vsi-isbc.org) and Imagine Canada, which

represents voluntary and nonprofit organizations (http:/ /www.imaginecanada.

ca). For a more theoretical analysis of volunteer work, based on trends in the

United States, see Wilson (2000). An interesting discussion of community work

is provided by Uttal (2009).

14. Hochschild, Arlie. (1989). The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home. New York: Viking Penguin, p. 12.

15. Concepts and measurement are discussed in Bellavia and Frane (2005), Carlson

and Grzywacz (2008), and Greenhaus and Beutell (1985).

16. For valuable reviews and discussions, see Bellavia and Frane (2005), Bianchi and

Milkie (2010), Byron (2005), Kelly, Murphy, and Kaskubar (2008), and Korabik,

Lero, and Whitehead (2008).

17. See Duxbury and Higgins (2001), Duxbury (2004), and Duxbury and Higgins

(2012). The 1991 study surveyed 37,000 employees across Canada, while

the 2001 study surveyed close to 33,000 employees in 100 medium to large

Canadian organizations: for details, see Duxbury (2004: 1-2). The third survey,

NEL 243

Chapter 7: Household, Family, and Caring U70rk

conducted in 2011, surveyed more than 25,000 Canadians working in 71 public,

private, and non-profit organizations (Duxbury and Higgins 2012).

18. For excellent reviews and meta-analysis on such outcomes, see Kossek and Ozeki

(1998), Allen et al. (2000), Bellavia and Frane (2005), Dorio, Bryant, and Allen

(2008), Mullen, Kelley, and Kelloway (2008), and Amstad (2011).

19. For a review of work and family policies in Canada, see Skrypnek and Fast

(1996). For a discussion of U.S. policies, see Blau and Ehrenberg (2000) and

Bianchi and Milkie (2010). For the United Kingdom, see Lewis (2009).

20. For valuable discussions of the impact of work-family policies on women's

employment, see Hedgewisch and Gornick (2011) and Gornick and Meyers

(2009).

21. For an overview and discussion of Johnstone v. CBSA, see the Legal Education

and Action Fund (LEAF) website at http://lea£ca/2014/02/leaf-intervening-in­

j ohnsto ne-v -canada-border -services-agency-at-the-federal-court-of-appeal/.

22. For a comparison of family-related policies and programs in Canada and other

countries, see Beach et al. (2009) and Mahon (2002). For a valuable discussion

of childcare in Quebec, see Albanese (2006).

23. For additional discussions of global care deficits, see Isaksen, Devi, and Hochschild

(2008), Spitzer et al. (2003), and Zimmerman, Litt, and Bose (2006).

24. These ideas have been developed in a wide body of writing by feminist scholars,

but are well articulated by Nancy Fraser (1997) in her article ''After the Family

Wage: A Post-Industrial Thought Experiment."

244 NEL