The Netherlands: Social Democrat Principles
The most spectacular increase in part time employment has occurred in the Netherlands. Around 20 per cent of Dutch women workers held part time jobs in the early 1970’s, and a decade later nearly 50 per cent were part timers. This trend continued during the 1980’s so that in the early 1990’s 60 per cent of Dutch female workers were part timers and of all the OECD countries, part time employment as a percentage of total employment was highest in the Netherlands (Statistical Yearbook, 1982 in Sainsbury, 1996). The Netherlands is a welfare regime based on social democrat principles of social redistribution was combined with a rather traditional gender policy in favour of the housewife-male breadwinner family model until the beginning of the 1980’s. Further, the policies of the Dutch welfare state were based on a concept of social citizenship with universal rights. The Dutch welfare system is considered to be the one of the most generous of all western industrial countries (Heiligers, 1992). In 1980 only one third of Dutch women were economically active and around half of them were in part time employment. Nor did labour market status always enhance married women’s social rights; however, women workers- irrespective of marital status-were potentially eligible for benefits in the employee insurance schemes covering sickness, disability, and short-term unemployment. The qualifying conditions for benefits in the employee insurance schemes appear to be modest, especially compared to those in the UK. In 1980, the minimum requirements for employees to qualify was that they have worked at least two days (sixteen hours) per week for a period longer than a month and as a rule earned 40 per cent of the minimum wage. This represents a low hurdle with regard to duration of employment and because of the relatively good hourly earnings of part timers, they probably would have qualified. Turning to occupational welfare, we find that larger proportions of both employees in general and part time workers were part of an occupational pension scheme in the Netherlands compared to the US and UK (Daily and Turner, 1992 in Sainsbury, 1996).
Tax and Benefits Effects
Although a combination of factors is responsible for the striking growth in part-time employment, one potentially important factor- changes in the tax and benefit system- has been barely studied to date. Most part time jobs have been taken by married or cohabiting women. Thus, the traditional male breadwinner/female carer stereotype that was assumed to be the dominant division of work and family responsibilities is increasingly giving way to dual earner/dual carer households Fagan and Rubery, 1996). In these households, part time is often sought as a means of combining paid work with care responsibilities. There are also financial incentives for employers to use part time labour to reduce wage costs, such as lower social security contributions or minimum wage exceptions. Therefore, two or three part-timers may be cheaper than one full-time employee doing the same amount of work (Fagan and Rubery, 1996)
The tax and benefit system has an impact on the decision to work part-time for two main reasons, which Doudejins (1998) says have received little attention in the literature. First, there is little financial incentive for someone with an unemployed partner to work part-time. The partner of an employed person can realise increases in net household income over nearly the whole range of earnings from part-time work, whereas the partner of an unemployed person can increase net household income only if their part-time earnings exceeds about 70 per cent of the full-time average earnings level. Part time often does not pay more than the benefit level once income tax, social security contributions and work-related costs are taken into account. The disincentive to take a part time job increases drastically when the initial unemployment benefit is exhausted and the household has to rely upon assistance type benefits.
The second influence of the tax and benefit system is that part time workers can be “trapped” in their job for three reasons. First, employers are exempted in some countries from paying social security contributions for employees on low wages or in part time jobs with few hours worked. This creates a strong incentive for employers to offer part time jobs with only a small number of hours. Second, in some countries benefit entitlements end when the recipients spends more than two or three days in paid employment. Moreover, high clawback rates cause so-called “poverty traps” that beneficiaries can only exist at high earnings levels. Third, in an attempt to alleviate these problems, some countries have introduced “in-work” benefits conditional on the number of hours worked. These benefits, however, give rise to poverty traps in that they have to be withdrawn at a certain income level (Doudeijns, 1998).
Four main elements in the tax and benefits system trap people into unemployment and removes the incentive to work part time these are; income tax and social security contributions, unemployment benefits, assistance and other welfare benefits and employment-conditional benefits. Disincentives from income and social security taxes occur in one main way, if social security contributions are only payable above a certain hours or earnings threshold, this can influence the decision to work part time. Unemployment benefits are paid to unemployed workers who are insured against unemployment and who fulfil certain eligibility conditions. The benefit unit and the resource unit of unemployment benefits are the insured individual: benefit entitlements are not influenced by the other partners’ income from work. If the beneficiary him or herself starts working, however, the benefit is withdrawn. The system of benefit withdrawal may mean that there is little or no financial gain from a part time wage, thus reducing work incentives. Unemployment Assistance benefits are paid to people who do not qualify for unemployment benefits or have exhausted their entitlements. The source of this income, wages or benefits, or from which spouse is not relevant (Doudeijns, 1998).
This illustrates how Doudeijns claims to illustrate how taxes and benefits alter incentives to work part time. Correlations suggest that incentive structures may have an actual impact or part time decisions. In countries where the disincentives to work part time tend to be low, the incidence of part time work tends to be low (and vice-versa). In countries with low disincentives to work part time, the number of two earner households is high. The number of households without any partner in work is higher in countries where disincentives to work part time are high.
Recent policy changes have focused on the disincentives for recipients of initial unemployment benefits. Some countries are looking to reduce disincentives to start work, several others to decrease effective marginal tax rates. Reforms are generally focused on unemployment benefits, either to restrict excessive use, as in the case of Austria, Denmark or Sweden, or to tighten eligibility criteria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Luxembourg, Norway and the United Kingdom being examples. (Walwei, 1998)
Other Influences: Culture or Structure?
However, there is also an argument that limits the effect that welfare state has on part time work and considers other factors that affect employment patterns. Employers decisions about whether to organise employment on a full time or part time basis depends upon the legal, social and economic environments in which they find themselves. These different environments influence the scope for manoeuvring and managerial prerogative (Maier 1994 in Smith, Fagan and Rubery, 1998). Thus, while certain sections and occupations have greater requirements than others for flexible working time practises to meet the variable demands of the production system, there is a variety of ways in which employers can achieve full flexibility. For example, working time flexibility can be provided by full timers on shift work or overtime or by part timers employed specifically to cover additional or antisocial hours. Thus, there are a number of factors that influence the decision to create part time jobs over full time work. Most of the increase in part time employment in the EU over the 1980’s resulted from a diffusion in the use of part time workers within sectors and occupations and not simply because of changes in the structural composition of the economy due to the expansion of service activities which already make high use of part timers (Smith, Fagan and Rubery, 1998).
An alternative perspective on what affects part time work patterns and one that heavily differs from institutional factors is the view that culture, as opposed to structure, accounts for differences in part time work. Explanations for the differentiated growth of part time work usually focus on the effects of welfare state policies to facilitate full-time employment, or on the strategies of employers to divide and segment the labour market, by offering secondary sector marginalised part time jobs to women. Nevertheless, explanations that stress these institutional factors can become too one-sided. This results in a neglect of the way that women’s social practices also reflect deep-rooted differences in cultural ideas, norms and values concerning childhood and the gendered division of labour within the family (Pfau-Effinger, 1998).
Germany, Finland and the Netherlands are used to study the effects of culture on part time working. As we have seen in the post-war period, the basic characteristics of the gender culture already differed significantly between these countries, exemplified by the rates of female activity. In the following decades, in all three countries, processes of re-negotiation of the gender arrangement between societal actors and a change in cultural ideals took place which was primarily initiated by women and in which men participated to a different degree. The new ideals are, more than before, based on the cultural construction of the ‘employed mother’. In those countries where the tradition of the male breadwinner/female care family prevailed, the idea of privatised childhood survived in part. As a consequence, part time work was a substantial element of the modernisation of the male breadwinner family model. Though in parts precarious, part time work turned out to be a new form of employment for women in the biographical phases of active motherhood. This is even truer for the Netherlands than for West Germany. These differences can be explained by the fact that the tradition of the “home-caring society” and the housewife marriage was deeper rooted in the Netherlands. Institutional regulation has in part reinforced the orientation of women towards part time work in these countries. In contrast, in Finland, where the male breadwinner/female carer model was never dominant, the tradition of women’s full time participation in the production sphere was maintained during the modernisation process and change in the gender process. The policies of the welfare state, the conditions of the labour market and the gendered division of labour within family, as well as policies and alliances of collective actors, are important factors to explain how fast social practice has adapted to the increase in the orientation of women towards part time work in the Netherlands and West Germany. In the Netherlands, a social democrat welfare state and a fairly unified feminist movement, integrated into the decision making process of the welfare state, promoted new patterns of employment orientation in favour of part time work in the phases of active motherhood. In West Germany a more corporatist-conservative welfare regime and a divided protest feminist movement has not integrated itself into welfare state institutions, with the consequences that part time is less well developed and less well protected (adapted from Pfau-Effinger, 1998). However, what is not considered in Pfau-Effinger’s argument is that culture is not an easily measured variable. It is a very subjective topic and sufficient detail on the methodology is not provided. It cannot be used as a basis for comparison as easily as policies or trends in working.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it seems we have found that the complex nature of part time employment cannot be attributed to a single factor. Part time working is a complex topic; such a phenomenon is likely to result from a variety of factors, which will include legal, social and economic factors. A number of factors influence the work practices and flexibility strategies developed, including labour regulations, government and trade union working time policies and conditions vary across the countries, influencing the extent and quality of part time work which has been developed. However, it seems fair to say that the welfare policies if a state are greatly likely to influence these, hence perhaps not entirely, but to a large extent part time working is affected by welfare policies. The debate on factors affecting part time working is likely to continue, and further research required to draw conclusions. The culture dimension may provide a strong argument and valid explanations, yet more conclusive, detailed research is required.
