所有人的工作与生活平衡?评估欧盟指令2019/1158的包容性

IF 0.8 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations Pub Date : 2020-03-01 DOI:10.54648/ijcl2020004
Elisa Chieregato
{"title":"所有人的工作与生活平衡?评估欧盟指令2019/1158的包容性","authors":"Elisa Chieregato","doi":"10.54648/ijcl2020004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Along with the growing interest in Work–Life Balance (WLB) in academic debates, policymaking, corporate discourse and everyday life, critical scholars have called for an enquiry into the conceptual and practical ambiguities inherent in WLB discourse and policies. This article aims to contribute to this scholarship by exploring the evolution and the limitations of WLB provisions and policies, with specific reference to the European Union (EU) legal framework. The article provides an account of the evolution of the EU legal framework and explores the regulatory innovations introduced by Directive EU 2019/1158 on Work-Life Balance for Parents and Carers, adopted in June 2019. Drawing on the insights provided in the critical literature, in particular the objections to the focus on work–family balance of professionals at the expense of workers in lower income groups, this article assesses the new Directive against the background of increasing family diversity and the rise of non-standard employment. While some progress has been made towards the recognition of ‘non-standard’ families, many non-standard workers may still fall outside the scope of the Directive, or may not meet the eligibility criteria to access WLB measures, with detrimental effects in terms of equality. The article concludes by presenting the rationale for adopting an intersectional-sensitive approach to WLB.\nWork–Life Balance, European Pillar of Social Rights, Family-related Leave, Nonstandard Employment, Domestic Work, Intersectional analysis","PeriodicalId":44213,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Work–Life Balance for All? Assessing the Inclusiveness of EU Directive 2019/1158\",\"authors\":\"Elisa Chieregato\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ijcl2020004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Along with the growing interest in Work–Life Balance (WLB) in academic debates, policymaking, corporate discourse and everyday life, critical scholars have called for an enquiry into the conceptual and practical ambiguities inherent in WLB discourse and policies. This article aims to contribute to this scholarship by exploring the evolution and the limitations of WLB provisions and policies, with specific reference to the European Union (EU) legal framework. The article provides an account of the evolution of the EU legal framework and explores the regulatory innovations introduced by Directive EU 2019/1158 on Work-Life Balance for Parents and Carers, adopted in June 2019. Drawing on the insights provided in the critical literature, in particular the objections to the focus on work–family balance of professionals at the expense of workers in lower income groups, this article assesses the new Directive against the background of increasing family diversity and the rise of non-standard employment. While some progress has been made towards the recognition of ‘non-standard’ families, many non-standard workers may still fall outside the scope of the Directive, or may not meet the eligibility criteria to access WLB measures, with detrimental effects in terms of equality. The article concludes by presenting the rationale for adopting an intersectional-sensitive approach to WLB.\\nWork–Life Balance, European Pillar of Social Rights, Family-related Leave, Nonstandard Employment, Domestic Work, Intersectional analysis\",\"PeriodicalId\":44213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2020004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2020004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

随着学术辩论、政策制定、企业话语和日常生活中对工作与生活平衡(WLB)的兴趣日益浓厚,批判性学者呼吁对工作与生活平衡话语和政策中固有的概念和实践模糊性进行调查。本文旨在通过探讨WLB条款和政策的演变和局限性,并特别参考欧盟(EU)的法律框架,为这一学术研究做出贡献。本文介绍了欧盟法律框架的演变,并探讨了2019年6月通过的关于父母和照顾者工作与生活平衡的指令EU 2019/1158引入的监管创新。借鉴批判性文献中提供的见解,特别是反对以牺牲低收入群体工人为代价关注专业人员的工作家庭平衡,本文在家庭多样性增加和非标准就业增加的背景下评估新指令。虽然在承认“非标准”家庭方面取得了一些进展,但许多非标准工人可能仍然不在该指令的范围内,或者可能不符合获得WLB措施的资格标准,在平等方面产生不利影响。文章最后提出了采用交叉敏感方法研究WLB的基本原理。工作与生活的平衡,社会权利的欧洲支柱,与家庭有关的假期,非标准就业,家务劳动,交叉分析
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Work–Life Balance for All? Assessing the Inclusiveness of EU Directive 2019/1158
Along with the growing interest in Work–Life Balance (WLB) in academic debates, policymaking, corporate discourse and everyday life, critical scholars have called for an enquiry into the conceptual and practical ambiguities inherent in WLB discourse and policies. This article aims to contribute to this scholarship by exploring the evolution and the limitations of WLB provisions and policies, with specific reference to the European Union (EU) legal framework. The article provides an account of the evolution of the EU legal framework and explores the regulatory innovations introduced by Directive EU 2019/1158 on Work-Life Balance for Parents and Carers, adopted in June 2019. Drawing on the insights provided in the critical literature, in particular the objections to the focus on work–family balance of professionals at the expense of workers in lower income groups, this article assesses the new Directive against the background of increasing family diversity and the rise of non-standard employment. While some progress has been made towards the recognition of ‘non-standard’ families, many non-standard workers may still fall outside the scope of the Directive, or may not meet the eligibility criteria to access WLB measures, with detrimental effects in terms of equality. The article concludes by presenting the rationale for adopting an intersectional-sensitive approach to WLB. Work–Life Balance, European Pillar of Social Rights, Family-related Leave, Nonstandard Employment, Domestic Work, Intersectional analysis
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Published four times a year, the International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations is an essential source of information and analysis for labour lawyers, academics, judges, policymakers and others. The Journal publishes original articles in the domains of labour law (broadly understood) and industrial relations. Articles cover comparative and international (or regional) analysis of topical issues, major developments and innovative practices, as well as discussions of theoretical and methodological approaches. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. A distinguished editorial team, with the support of an International Advisory Board of eminent scholars from around the world, ensures a continuing high standard of scientific research dealing with a range of important issues.
期刊最新文献
Litigating the Algorithmic Boss in the EU: A (Legally) Feasible and (Strategically) Attractive Option for Trade Unions? Modern Slavery in Liner Shipping: An Empirical Analysis of Corporate Statements The Requirement of Fair Negotiation (Gebot des fairen Verhandelns) and the Principle of Undue Influence in German and US Employment Law Regulating Platform Work in the UK and Italy: Politics, Law and Political Economy Regulating Algorithmic Management at Work in the European Union: Data Protection, Non-discrimination and Collective Rights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1