Rhetoric and Reality of EU Gender Policy (Working Paper)

Manasi Sinha 1

ABSTRACT : In spite of Gender equality being one of EU’s core objectives since its inception, EU seems to have fallen short of achieving this goal. There have been many initiatives taken place in order to reduce the gender gap across EU domain. But realization of such objective/ goal could not be possible because the process of ‘gender equality’ is either confined within the periphery of ‘equal opportunity’ or ‘positive action’ for women or co-opted with other priority concern like monetary and security issues. The EU policies also have been framed around dealing with problems of women and their lives focusing more upon facilitating women with supplementary benefits like quality work, maternity leave, child care provisions, etc. and thus deviated from addressing real gender issues. In light of this, this paper attempts to analyze EU gender policy and would study the existing gaps in it. Also it would explore how the objective of gender equality at EU level has been remained largely on documents and treaties throughout, but the realization of it was never made in real sense.

Key Words: Gender equality, Gender policy, Positive action, Equal Opportunity, European Union, Gender gap, Labour Market,

“Bridging the gap between ‘de jure’ and ‘de facto’ equality to achieve real gender equality” Resolution in the 7th Council of Europe Conference 2010, of Ministers Responsible for Equality between men and women. 1. Introduction In May 2010, the European Council adopted the above resolution on the importance of gender equality by recalling the core objective of the Council of Europe which is to preserve and promote human rights and their full employment, democracy and the rule of law. This resolution

1

Auhtor: Manasi Sinha, Ph.D Research Student, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi India. Email: [email protected]

1

was the reverberation of various commitments reflected in the EU policy discourse since beginning. One of the most important factors which made the EU occupied with the issue of gender equality was the prevalent feminist ideas and strategies during 1980s, which created a parallel discourse along with the EU’s economic priorities and sought to introduce and develop new gender equality concepts. This new discourse of gender equality was felt significant by the EU at the backdrop of ongoing demographic deficit, low fertility rate, work-family conflicts, dilemma of welfare state via a vis rights of citizens and the pressure to keep the image of the EU Normative actor in world politics. The feminists aspired to achieve more equality by transforming rooted gender inequality produced by traditionally assigned gender role for women like their caring and domestic tasks. Therefore, these ideas were picked up into the EU policy making for providing similar situation for men and women and to have equal choices over their life and career. Nonetheless, I argue that the claims and commitments to promote and achieve gender equality remain rhetorical in nature as the concepts of gender equality and the policies that were designed to do away with traditional gender role system were often perceived and formulated in a way that did not correspond to the gender discourse desired by feminists’ scholars. The European Union has taken several steps towards achieving gender equality in all its social, political and economic domains. Since its inception it has sought to incorporate the objective of gender equality within its Treaties and policy statements in form of articles, directives, and recommendations. For the first time the equal treatment of men and women has made the fundamental tenet of the European Union in the Treaty of Rome which stipulated the right of equal pay for equal work for men and women and thus the principle of gender equality is being made central to all its activities. However, there has been shift in ideas of gender equality in the equality framework since the Treaty of Rome (1957). The previous provision of equal pay for equal work changes with the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) which goes ahead by declaring the advancement of equality between women and men as a fundamental task of the EU; further changes in ideas came with the incorporation of Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Lisbon Treaty which reinforces the prohibition of discrimination and the obligation to ensure equality between women and men in all areas. Since 1990, European Commission also has adopted the dual approach by implementing gender mainstreaming as a radical strategy to remove rooted 2

gender structure by incorporating gender aspect into all policy areas and at the same time initiating specific measures or positive actions towards women to overcome their disadvantageous position in a gendered society. In addition to the rights stipulated by the Treaty, many directives, strategies, and awareness raising programmes were also in place to ensure the equal treatment of men and women in all spheres of life. However, I argue that the EU’s approach towards gender equality is actually one dominated by rhetoric and symbolism at the expense of action. The reality is that most of the policy measures; directives; programmes or legislative measures, recommendations remain as symbolic measures and vacuous statements of intention which are either limited in scope or effect and are of minimal practical significance. Its approach is rather tended to be in pursuit of aims and values far from the lofty ideals sought by the feminist discourse on gender equality. There is a stark difference between men and women with respect of holding positions in the decision-making; to the quality of work they do; the quality time both spend in the labour market and in the family, and the way they share traditionally assigned gender roles within family. To set my argument in this context, the following section substantiates the feminist perspective and vision on which the analysis of EU gender policy is based. It discusses the continuity and convergence of gender equality aspects in the institutional Treaties, directives, and recommendations at the EU level which create a rhetorical discourse on gender equality on paper/documents; and then analyzes the practice of such discourse in reality with some statistical presentation which depicts a contradictory scenario in the EU. The approach of the EU gender policy is critically discussed in the subsequent sections with the particular focus on the reconciliation policies which reflect this paradox underlying the EU policy discourse. It analyses how an idea of gender equality is twisted and coopted with supplementary benefits and thus failed to transform gender relations within the family. Finally, the paper concludes with identifying reasons for existing gap between rhetoric and reality of the EU gender policy discourse.

This paper will reflect on the following research questions: 

How the concept of gender equality is being perceived at the EU level?

3



What are the reasons for the gap between rhetoric and reality of the EU gender equality policy?



How the EU gender policy is coopted with other equality measures?

As the aim of this paper is to investigate the gap between rhetoric and reality in the EU gender equality policy discourse and practice, it has followed various EU Treaty documents and statement of the EU leaders to set the context. Various database like Euro Stat, European value Survey, Labour Force Survey, along with various documents, reports, have been referred to describe how equality is being perceived at the EU level. I have also taken reference from Maria Stratigaki’s concept of Co-optation to interpret how gender equality has been rendered with multiple meanings in the EU and how it has been narrowed down and co-opted to keep the EU´s economic interest intact. 2. Gender Equality- The ‘Core’?

Since its inception, although European Community (now European Union) has designed its ‘inner core’ mostly around economic objectives and interests, it had to reason out its existential necessity to be based on the democratic aspects and humanitarian values as well. The market driven ethos of the EU which united all the nation states through the integration process, came under the fire because of multifarious reasons like economic recession, demographic deficit, low fertility rate and many more- the situation what Joseph Weiler rightly termed as ‘crisis of ideals’ a conclusion reached from the “disconcerting realisation that Europe has become an end in itselfno longer a means for higher human ends.2” For Larry Sidentorp, the ‘crisis’ has been fuelled by an ‘economism’ which is pervasive in the activities of the EU with the consequence that the legitimacy of the European project is at risk without a ‘moral consensus’ that can fuel a substantive political philosophy3. At the same time the feminism was also exerting an influence on Community policy and there was also a growing concern for citizens’ rights under the EU as welfare state. All these led to the ‘re-launching’ of the Community and the development of a ‘Social face’ of the EU. And this could be no more so than in the area of gender equality with its focus on integrating women into the labour market.

4

To perceive the concept of gender equality within EU policy framework, a thorough analysis of EU Treaties, Directives and Communications, Recommendation and various other key official reports and documents should be looked at. ‘Equality between women and men is enshrined in the EU Treaties and in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as a fundamental principle of the European Union (EU). Ensuring this is one of the EU's main objectives and tasks’ (EIGE, 2013)4. The Treaty of Rome5 for the first time incorporated this provision of equality in form of equal pay between women and men which became the hallmark in later years for future legislations and policies to come to address gender equality. Over the years, gender equality emerged as an indispensable component of the EU political discourse making it as a ‘community goal’, and ‘fundamental tasks’ in the EU policy areas and activities. It is also recognised as ‘vital to economic growth, prosperity and competitiveness, as exemplified by the Council’s recent commitment to fulfil EU ambitions on gender equality through the adoption of the European Pact for Gender Equality (2011–2020) (7349/11) and the European Commission’s Strategy for Equality between Women and Men (2010–2015) (COM(2010) 491 final).

Gender equality

also became a necessary condition for the

achievement of the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy– the EU’s growth strategy, which leans on knowledge, competences and innovation’ (European Commission, 2013). The prime importance of gender equality has been recently being indicated by Viviane Rending6 as more than a slogan and to be a social and economic responsibility of the European Union. On the eve of international women’s day (8th March) this year, i,e 2014, the Vice President Viviane Rending expressed in jubilant mode, the progress EU has made so far in achieving gender equality. She said: “Five decades of European Union action have advanced gender equality on our continent. We have put in place laws guaranteeing equal pay for equal work, equality in the workplace and minimum rights to maternity leave. We have made the EU's founding principles a tangible reality in Europeans' everyday lives. This is something we can and should be proud of: gender equality is a European achievement” (Viviane Rending, Brussels, 7th March 2014) In light of the increasing impetus for gender equality and in order to fulfil these gender equality ambitions, the European Commission and other EU institutions have developed several strategic

5

and/or legislative documents. Since 1996 the European Commission has followed a dual approach to gender equality by both implementing gender mainstreaming along with initiating specific measures for women. Besides, the European Union has designed a comprehensive framework ‘the Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015’ which sought to promote gender equality into all its policies for (i) equal economic independence for women and men; (ii) equal pay for work of equal value; (iii) equality in decision-making; (iv) dignity, integrity and ending gender –based violence; (v) promoting gender equality beyond the EU and (vi) in horizontal issues like gender roles, including the role of men, legislation and government tools.

(European Commission,

2011). This strategy highlights the contribution of gender

equality to economic growth and sustainable development, and support the implementation of the gender equality dimension in the ‘Europe 2020 Strategy’- the European Union’s 10­year growth strategy, Europe 2020 (IP/10/225) , which, although does not refer specifically to gender equality, emphasises the need to foster growth which is smart, sustainable and inclusive. . It builds on the priorities of the ‘Women’s Charter’ and on the experience of the ‘Roadmap for Equality between women and men’.’7

The European Commission also had developed the

Roadmap for Equality between Women and Men (2006–2010) (COM(2006) 92 final), outlining six priority areas, each with specific key objectives and actions, and therefore marking a clear advance in terms of providing measures and targets. To measure progress, the roadmap calls for the development of comparable sex-disaggregated statistics; gender sensitive indicators to monitor progress towards gender equality; and the creation of a Gender Equality Index. Its priority areas consist of: equal economic independence for women and men; the reconciliation of private and professional life; equal representation in decision- making; the eradication of all forms of gender-based violence; the elimination of gender stereotypes; and the promotion of gender equality in developing countries. In addition, in 2010, on the occasion of International Women’s Day, the European Commission unveiled the Women’s Charter (COM(2010) 78 final), which aims at strengthening the European Commission’s commitment to ‘making equality between women and men a reality’. This includes strengthening gender perspectives in all policy work undertaken by the Commission and dedicating the necessary resources to its realisation.

6

European Union has also adopted various tools to monitor and evaluate the progress on gender equality throughout. The council of the EU has adopted, since 1999, a series of indicators as a follow up of the world conference on women in Beijing in 1995. The rotating council presidents have produced reports in most critical areas of concern and gave their conclusions. The Commission also supports the development of specific statistics to follow up the evolution of some critical indicators (the gender pay gap, childcare coverage, share of women and men in decision-making positions). Besides institutional entities within the EU like the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE); European Network of Legal Experts also is engaged in supporting and monitoring the EU gender equality objectives. In the last decade, there has also been an increasing acknowledgement of the crucial role of men in building gender equality as equal partners with women. Men and masculinities have increasingly become subjects of studies and part of gender equality policies in the EU. In 2006, the Council of the European Union held 'men and gender equality’ important noting that “in order to improve the status of women and promote gender equality, more attention should be paid to how men are involved in the achievement of gender equality, as well as to the positive impact of gender equality for men and for the well-being of society as a whole.” From its side, the European Commission’s Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015 also stresses the need for an active contribution and participation of men in order to advance gender equality: “Gender equality needs the active contribution, support and participation of men and policies should also address gender-related inequalities that affect boys/men such as literacy rates, early school-leaving and occupational health.”8 Apart from all these, the EU also has gone beyond its social-political periphery to exporting values of gender equality with its development plans; humanitarian actions; its neibourhood and enlargement policies. 3. Rhetoric and Reality? However, all these exuberant speeches, commitments and programmes remain by and large rhetorical as it comes sharply in contrast with the reality when deeply looked at. The focus and shift to a broader gender equality framework along with most of the developments and

7

regulations seem to be taking sides for a contradictory approach rather than a complementary one to what the EU propagates for gender equality as a human rights value.

While looking closely at EU Treaties, regulations and commitments on gender equality, it becomes noticeable that the background of such provisions regarding gender equality has been always economic because of EU’s birth as an economic community. Many researchers agree that most EU regulations regarding gender relates to the economy, particularly to equality in the workplace (Bergmann 1999, Ostner 1992, Watson 2000)9. The principle of gender equality as an objective was not on the agenda of European leaders while forming the provisions in the Treaty of Rome. That Article 11910 was inserted had to do with the insistence of the French government that it may disadvantage its economy if this policy-a domestic requirement in France-was not to be uniform across Europe (Young, 2000). As Article 119 became significant in the years to come as a spring-board to promote equal opportunity, the social dimension of the Treaty of Rome became constitutionally limited to labour market creation, with the main purpose of social policy being to remove barriers to cross-border mobility among workers (Ibid, p:84). Thus the foundation of the principle of equality was tied to the labour market and employment concerns. That women have children and are traditionally tied to family care activities that interrupt or even hinder their integration into the labour market was not addressed in the EU’s nondiscriminatory policy and the need for engaging men into transforming the existing gender bias, was placed as a passing reference in most of the EU policy documents. The surge of new social movements that pushed the European community to be more active engagement with women’s policy, for which so many directives were put forth to address issues related to better employment, gender equality in the workplace, improvement of worker health and safety conditions could not yield much outcome because all the directives remain true to the spirit of the Treaty of Rome’s focus on negative integration. They have not been used to promote positive integration, i,e to further equality. They have served the purpose of eliminating national barriers that have ‘protected’ women from certain occupations. Thus primary objective of these directives seem to have been to free the market from unwanted regulation. (Young, 2000)

8

In reality, gender inequality still persists across Europe; it pervades across all levels in the EU from the institutions to the labour market and to the family. Women continue to be outnumbered by men in all areas of life in Europe. In the decision making at institutional level, they are lagging far behind men in leadership positions in the EU whether in business, politics or other fields. There is a huge gap in gender balance in the Boardrooms across the EU: While women account for 46% of people in employment across the EU and on average they have a higher level of education than their male colleague ( in 2012, 40% of young women had completed tertiary education compared with 32% of men)11, yet at the top levels of business women remain underrepresented. The most recent figures show that women in European member states only account for an average of 18%

of the members of boards of directors in the largest pubilcly listed

companis, and 3% of the CEO’s. Till October 2013 women accounted for only 17.8% of board members of large publicly listed companies in the in the EU-27 (Figure 1). The highest levels of female representation on boards occurs in Finland (29.1%) and Latvia (29%), closely followed by France (26.8%) and Sweden (26.5%). The Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Slovenia are the only other EU Member States to have at least 20% women on boards. Nearly one in four large listed companies still has no female representatives at board level and the rate of change is way below that required to reach a target of at least 40% of each gender by 2020 (European Commission, 2014 follow the reference list). Figure 1: Representation of women and men on the boards of large listed companies, April 2013

Source: European Commission, database on Women and men in decision-making.

9

Figure: The evolution of the proportion of women on boards of large listed companies in the EU since 2010

Source: European Commission, database on women and men in decision-making.

Although the EU has been monitoring over such gender gap in decision-making since 2010, but the progrees has been very slow. In September 2010, the European Commission published its ‘Strategy for Equality between Women and Men’ (2010-2015) focusing on ‘targeted initiatives to improve the gender balance in decision-making’. (Justice, 2013). Nevertheless, in reality not one EU Member State is close to the EU’s 40% objective and that more than two thirds are not even half-way to meeting it.12 Even in the European Commission, there has been a male dominance since 1958. The female representation since 2009 has been improved to 33% only. Figure: Representation of women in European Commission over the last 25 years

Sources: European Commission. Figures show the situation immediately after Commission selected. The Santer Commission resigned en masse in March 1999. The interim President prior to the Prodi Commission was Manuel Marín

10

The scenario in the labour market is also bleak. Women’s employment rate in the EU stands at 63%-that of men at 75%. While this gap between employments levels shrank over the years with an employment rate increasing from 58% in 2002 to 63% in 2008, it has been a direct consequence of financial and economic crisis which had particularly affected the male dominated sectors in the labour market (European Commission, 2014). Female and male employment rates (in %) people aged 20-64

Source: Eurostat, LFS (data from 3rd quarter of 2013) In addition, Male employment rates have been consistently higher than those for women across all of the EU-28 Member States in 2012 with Greece, Malta showing very low in female employment rate (41.9 % and 44.2% respectively in 20102). Besides, the proportion of women in employment working part-time in the EU-28 in 2012 was 31.9% compared with 8.4% for men. The largest differences between women and men working part-time were registered in the Netherlands (76.9% for women and 24.9% for men), Audtria (44.4% and 7.8%), Germany (45.0% and 9.1%) and Belgium (43.5% and 9.0% and the smallest in Bulgaria (2.5% and 2.0%), Romania (9.7% and 8.6%) and Slovakia (5.5% and 2.8%).13 The gender gap also exists in terms of wages between male and their female counterpart. “Women are still paid on average around

11

16% less than men per hour of work across the entire economy (down from 17% three years ago). Women do not only face lower wages, but they are also more likely to work part-time and interrupt their careers to care for others. As a direct consequence, women receive an average 39% less in pensions than men” (European commission, 2014). Average time spent by workers on paid and unpaid work

Sources: European Working Condition Survey 2010, Euro found.

4. Co-optation of Gender Equality The paradox underscoring the rhetoric of the EU gender policy can be explored by problematising the EU gender policy at three levels: First, conceptual understanding of gender equality; Second: Co-optation of Equality Policies; Third: Ineffectiveness of gender equality measures at the ground level. 4.1 Conceptualising EU Gender Equality “The Discursive Politics of Gender Equality” (Emanuela Meier and Mieke Verloo, 2009) is a remarkable book in explaining how the concept of gender equality has been hotly contested within European Union because of the way it has acquired different meanings and expressions. Meier and Verloo rightly termed gender equality as a “travelling concept in this global process”.

12

According to them, gender equality alters its meanings14 as it journeys through times and places. They explain that gender equality as a political and policy concept is frequently linked to other political and policy goals, adding yet another layer of meaning. Similarly, in the context of European Union, “in the 1960s, the EU linked gender equality to unfair competition, in the 1970s and 1980s to combating unemployment, in the 1990s to the Lisbon Criteria of full employment and the knowledge economy and most recently to fighting discrimination and promoting diversity” (Ibid.) In this sense, the adaptation of gender equality in different directions by the EU have served the need to face the changing dynamics socio-political and economic changes and not something to do with gender. Under the pretext of an acclaimed gender equality prospect, gender equality remains a target oriented goal rather than a value oriented one. A usual visit to the official webpage15 of the European Union can quickly holds the mind of a gender research scholar by surprise, as it contains all the priority areas which the EU has been dealing within its institutional framework and surprisingly gender equality does not place there as a prime topic or area to be highlighted. One really has to search through all these areas exploring the link for gender equality. This ambiguity may happen because of the way gender equality as a policy issue has been intersected across the EU policy lines and also the way it has been intertwined with the policy of employment and social rights. Such a placement opens spaces for various interpretations of the term gender equality and thus questions the real intension of it. In her another book, ‘Multiple Meanings of Gender Equality: A

Critical Frame Analysis of Gender Policies in Europe’, Mieke Verloo (2007) talks about how the EU policy documents mainly reflect upon demographic concerns or the need to replace the population and questions of employment and of economic growth or competitiveness. Maria Stratigaki (2004) reiterated the same concern as she suggests ‘the shifts in concepts of the EU gender policy are not accidental, but rather part of the ongoing struggles over the meaning of gender (in)equality in which political actors are involved’. She underlines that while the initial concern was to promote gender equality, the discussions on work were preceded by mentions of the unequal sharing of tasks within the family, and the need to share was a condition to create equal opportunities for women in the labor market. These later became incorporated in the European employment strategies of the 1990s, and here they shifted meaning gradually.

13

In her book ‘what Is the problem of gender’ Doloros Calvo (2013) also has identified different discourses of gender equality, namely the efficiency discourse16 of gender equality; the economic independence17-labour market gender equality; a human rights discourse of gender equality; and a feminist discourse of gender equality. She says that the discourse of gender equality in the EU parlance is considered as human rights issue. However, the wordings18 and the discourse are used particularly when women are defined as ‘in need’ or as victims; mainly in relation to issues of gender based violence, gender-based persecution, trafficking, and labour exploitation. Thus the gender equality becomes a women issue only and not as gender issue at the EU level. Therefore, the ‘understanding’ of gender at the EU level is complicated with various definition and also with labelling gender as synonymous with women-this leads finally to a women-centred approach. Also as the EU is mostly concerned with the economic aspects of equality, it ignores the structural causes of this gender inequality which further reinforces stereotypes and role expectations in the system. The table below describes these discourse and their corresponding arguments: Discourses of gender equality

Representation

of

the Arguments and Understandings

‘problem’ of gender inequality Women’s lack of participation Gender equality as an instrument-as a

Efficiency

in labour market, education means to economic growth and training.

Gender inequality as a problem for the economy.

Economic

Independence-Labour Women’s lack of economic Gender equality as an instrument-as a

Market

independence/women’s of

participation

market.

in

lack means to economic indepence. labour Gender inequality as a problem of economic

dependence

and

subordination of women. Human Rights

Women’s lack of participation Gender

equality as

a value,

as

in social/political life and in substance. education.

Gender

inequality

as

a

problem

14

because it hinders human rights. Feminist

Women’s lack of participation Gender in all the above fields/spheres.

equality

as

value

and

instrument; as a value in terms of women’s rights and an instrument in terms of women’s autonomy. Gender

inequality

as

a

problem

because it hinders democracy and women’s rights. Source: Doloros Calvo, 2013 4.2 Co-optation of Equality Policies According to the existing literature, the discourse of gender equality policy in the EU is mostly dominated by three different approaches over the years: equal treatment, positive action, and mainstreaming (Rees 1998, 2000, 2002). These three approaches have been connected to each other in an evolutionary logic with each successive phase developing on the basis of its predecessor. Much feminist writing on equal opportunities at the European level has commented on the narrowness of the way in which all these approaches were formulated and the way these approaches get co-opted; and twisted with economic interest of the EU. First time, the idea of equal treatment was appeared (Article 119; Treaty of Rome, 1957) in form of ‘equal pay for men and women which became the founding principle for the European Community at that time. This equal treatment was based on the sameness approach: the idea that women and men should be treated the same (Rees 2002). This approach was however, criticized by many thinkers on the ground that, here, the emphasis is on women becoming equal to men by entering into previously male domains, and thus male norm remains the standard (Walby, 2005). According to Bacchi, it is further problematic in that it may place women in a position of defensiveness, to be explained and justified, as well as falsely constructs men as belonging to one homogenous category (Bacchi, 1996). Therefore, this equal treatment framework cannot be seen as addressing genuine gender inequality as encouraging women to become more like men does not tackle the need to re-examine and re-evaluate social roles and values including ‘caring roles’ and care itself (Maddock, 1999); rather it implies that men were taken as the norm ( Rees 2002: 2). According to Rees, equal treatment legislation does not cope with the causes of 15

inequality but only attempts to moderate are symptoms. Since it does not analyze the causes of inequality, equal treatment fails to produce equal outcomes (1998). This definition of gender equality in terms of the same treatment of men and women in the workplace was replaced during 1980s with a new approach called positive action or affirmative action for women. Considering women’s unequal position in society, positive action approach seeks to create conditions to overcome their disadvantages in society. It is rooted in the idea that even if there are similarities between women and men, there are also differences. However, ‘Positive action measures do not challenge the culture and practice of mainstream: they simply assist women to fit it. (Ibid; p.3). Thus, this approach also confronted with a number of criticisms- First, it reinforces the existing stereotypes and the current organization of labour and care (Fraser, 1997). Second, it provides limited possibilities for change (Cockburn, 1991); and divert the attention to other problems such as the problem of caring for children and the elderly (Bacchi, 1999). The definition of gender equality shifted again with the idea of ‘gender-mainstreaming’ that followed the Beijing Women’s Conference in 1995. It carries the idea that policies in pursuit of gender equality will no longer be confined to an equal opportunities ‘ghetto’, but will rather be integrated across all fields of policymaking. However, as Woorward (2003) has pointed out, it is difficult to insert gender into what feminists have often referred to as the ‘male stream’. In reality, this strategy remains rhetorical as it entails elements that are mostly co-opted with previous equality measures. According to Rees although gender mainstreaming has a long transformative goals but it relies on concrete positive action measures. ‘The problem, lies in the failure to ‘get the incentives right,’ mobilizing sufficient interest among crucial actors, beginning within the bureaucracy. Organizations like the European Commission are more successful in achieving their objectives when they provide ‘hard’ incentives for bureaucrats to implement reforms, and are less successful when they depend exclusively on ‘soft’ incentives such as persuasion and socialization. This has been the case within the Commission, which has relied exclusively on soft incentives in its implementation of gender mainstreaming, with highly variable results after over a decade (Pollack, Mark A., and Emile Hafner-Burton.2000).

16

Different Approaches to Gender Equality at EU level Strategy/ Paradigm Equal Treatment 1957-1980

Positive Action 1981-199019

Mainstreaming 1991-Present

Problem Definition Inequality in law. Women and men are not treated the same but are differently represented in and protected by law, women being worse off. Individual disadvantage. Unequal starting positions for women and men. Women are disadvantaged as a group. Group disadvantage. Gender inequality is caused by male centered systems and structures. Structural inequality: institutions and structures constitute the root of individual and group disadvantage.

Solution Responsibility Change the laws to Legislators. secure formal equal rights for women and men.

Specific measures to address specific problems caused by disadvantages starting positions.

Gender experts, specialist, gender equality units and agencies.

Transform the All actors involved in gender hierarchy by the policy-making incorporating a gender process. perspective into al systems and structures, policies, programmes, processes and projects, and into ways of seeing and doing and into cultures and their organizations.

Source: Doloros Calvo, 2013 Therefore, it can be argued that the gender policy discourse at the EU level have been strategically framed into the dominant frame (Mazey, 2000) of ongoing socio-economic challenges. Therefore, it is almost a distant possibility fitting into dominant policy interests, thus the gender equality goal is subsumed, or as Stratigaki (2004) has argued in respect of work/family reconciliation policies, ‘co-opted’.

17

4.3 Ineffectiveness of gender equality measures at the ground level. Another problem has been with the effectiveness of policies at the ground level. With the realisation of existing gender gap in the labout market and the conflicts arising out of workfamily situation, policies like ‘Reconciliation of paid work and family life’ introduced many initiatives like Protection of mothers in the workplace, Flexible working, Leave arrangements, Services provision etc. However, in reality these policies underpinned the ways through which women could maintain both work-family responsibilities and reflect more of a gesture towards reinforcing traditional gender roles again. The following section captures some elements of this agenda which reveals a stark reality of gender hierarchy and discrimination which it implicitly proposes. The policy on ‘Reconciliation of Paid Work and Family Life’ has been the core part of the EU social policy since its inception and has been widely used within employment policy as a means to tackling work-family conflicts. Reconciliation moved up the political agenda to play an important role in the EU key policy innovation of the late 1990s in the employment policy. New action programmes were designed to put emphasis on reconciliation. For example ‘ the third action programme stated that one its key objective was reconciliation, the implementation of which was intended to reduce the barriers to access to and participation in the labour market by women.” Following such commitments, the EU had formulated four important legislative measures namely the Recommendation on child care, the Pregnancy and Maternity Directive, the Parental leave Directive and the Part-time Workers Directive. However, all these initiatives were problematic with respect to ensuring gender equality because; the EU’s preoccupation was more likely to focus on women’s access to the labour markets. “Reconciliation is promoted as part of removal of obstacles to access to the labout market and hence also concern with child care services and hence promoted for child care services” (Clare, McGlynn. (2001). One example of the existing gap here is evident in the adoption of the pregnancy and maternity directive. This right apparently brought enormous improvements in the rights of pregnant women in many member states, it was not meant for transforming gender relations but to reproduce traditional approaches to pregnancy and parenting. As Melissa Benn has argued “while maternity leave it essential, if it is not complemented by changes in the role of men, it cements women’s relationship to the home”(Ibid.). The directive on parental leave also proved rhetorical as it was 18

granted three month leave period to mothers and fathers, with no provision for pay. ‘Thus although the directive provided that the rights should be in principle, non-transferable between parents, the lack of remuneration hindered the take up of leave. Moreover, not many men were convinced that they should use such leave arrangement for care work; so they mostly use it for vacation around. It was also practically impossible for the highest earner in the family- which in most cases are men-to cut off his salary on such leave; the reason lies in the existing male breadwinner family which still is prevalent is many countries in Europe (except Nordic countries where dual earner model is the norm now and there is parental non-transferable leave for both the parents. This has been made possible with the individual tax system which allows for wider base of earning thus making it affordable to both the partners). Therefore, the majority of women need to continue with their care work and housing responsibilities. Thus, although the general objective of reconciliation policy was to increase the workforce participation of women, this real agenda gets undervalued as women’s problem. Without substantial changes in the structure of family and household work, women’s labour market entry simply adds to women’s existing responsibilities, leading to a double shift in women’s lives. A genuine gender concern thus evades most of these social policies/family policies in most of the European countries and has been undermined by shifting the meaning of the original concepts to fit into the prevailing political and economic priorities in the European Union. This paper concludes with locating the underlying paradox between rhetoric and reality of the EU in the following five reasons: 1. Co-optation in the concept of gender equality and gender policy discourse at the EU level 2. Predominance of economic issues within the EU. 3. Gender equality being target oriented goal and not value oriented goal 4. Labour market policies and family policies being designed to increase economic growth and sustainable future for the European society by addressing demographic deficit, declining fertility, etc. which makes the economic aspect more important than genuine gender concern. 5. The constant pressure of the EU to create an image Normative actor and a Value entrepreneur’ for itself in the global politics which necessitate itself to be aligned with democracy, human rights, social justice and gender equality and also to maintain its 19

expansion and integration process, it requires a huge economic base which can provide a back up for such visionary ambition.

Notes: 2

Cited in Clare, McGlynn (2001) ‘Reclaiming of Paid Work and Family Life in European Union Law and Policy’, Columbia Journal of European Law, 7th Colum 3 Ibid. 4 EIGE, (2013)‘Gender Equality Index Report’, Euopean Institute of Gender Equality, Italy. 5 In 1975, the principle of equal pay for equal work was successfully invoked to defend Gabrielle Defrenne, who as an air hostess working for the Belgian national airline, and the rights stemming from the Defrenne cases are an unshakable legacy for women in the European Union. The case led to the adoption of the first European directives on gender equality 6 The current Vice-President of the European Commission/Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship) 7 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/index_en.htm 8 See more at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/events/role-of-men/index_en.htm 9 Cited in Jürgen Gerhards, (2008) Sylvia Kämpfer & Mike S. Schäfer, in “European Union’s idea of gender equality and its support among citizens of 27 European countries”, , Institute for Sociology, Berlin 10 Stated that “men and women should receive equal pay for equal work (European Union 1957: Art 119)”. 11. Eurostat News Release on 7th March 2014 12 The only two that have achieved gender balanced boards are Iceland and Norway, both of which have adopted legislative quotas. The European Commission although has been monitoring the gender balance on company boards since 2003 and the trend of increasing the gender balance is positive but unacceptably slow. 13 http://www.flickr.com/photos/eu eurostast/12947560963 14 The concept of gender equality acquires different meanings because of its inherent binary meanings attached with it: gender equality consists of two concepts;- gender and equality-which have acquired meanings related to aspects of gender-for instance, division of labour, sexual difference, reproductive relations ; but also related to aspects of equality-for example, class, race/ethnicity-in this sense, gender equality is a concept that is part of the multidimensional reality of equality, and is open to contestation of its meaning 15 See more at http://europa.eu/pol/index_en.htm 16 Efficiency discourse is looked as a means to economic growth, market competitiveness, and social cohesion. The discrimination against and exclusion of women in/from the labour market, especially of those who are highly qualified, is a waste of human resources that the EU cannot afford. 17 Economic independence argues that women’s economic condition is a precondition for gender equality. To guarantee their inclusion in the labour market is therefore key to gender equality. 18 Key words in this discourse are human rights, fundamental rights, women’s rights, value, and principle.

References: Bacchi, Carol Lee “Women, Policy and Politics: The Construction of Policy Problems”, London:Sage.

20

Bustelo, Maria and Mieke Verloo ( 2009) ‘Grounding Policy Evaluation in a Discursive Understanding of Politics’, pp. 153-68 in E. Lombardo, P. Meier and M. Verloo (eds) The Discursive Politics of Gender Equality: Stretching, Bending and Policymaking. London: Routledge. Calvo, Doloros. (2013), “What is the Problem of Gender: Mainstreaming Gender in Migration and Development in the European Union”, pp, 264, University of Gothenburh, Sweden. Clare, McGlynn. (2001) ‘Reclaiming of Paid Work and Family Life in European Union Law and Policy’, Columbia Journal of European Law, 7th Colum. Cockburn, Cynthia. (1991) “In the way of women: Men’s resistance to sex equality in organizations”, Ithaca, NY. Fraser, Nancy (1997) “From Redistribution to Recognition?: Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Postsocialist’ Age. In Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition”. Pp. 11-40. New York; and London: Routledge. ILR Press. Justice, European Commission-Directorate-General (2013), “Women and Men in Leadership Positions in the European Union”, European Union, Belgium. Maddock, Sue. (1999), “Challenging Women: Gender, Culture and Organization”, Sage Publication, USA. Mazey, Sonia.(2000) “Integrating Gender: Intellectual and “Real World” Mainstreaming’, Journal of European Public Policy, 7(3):333-345. Pollack, Mark A., and Emile Hafner-Burton.2000. “Mainstreaming Gender in the European Union”, Journal of Public Policy, 7(3):432-56. Rees, Teresa. (1998) “Mainstreaming Equality in the Euorpean Union: Education, Training and Labour Market policies. London: Routeledge. ____________(2002), “Gender Mainstreaming: Misappropriated and Misunderstood? Paper Presented Department of sociology, Stockholm University, 21 st February 2002.

to the

______________(2000), ‘Mainstreaming Gender Equality in Science in the European Union: The “ETAN Report”, paper prepared for the Mainstreaming Gender in the European Public Policy Workshop, University of WisconsinMadison, 14-15 October 2000. Stratigaki, Maria. 2004, ‘The Co-optation of Gender Concepts in EU Policies: The Case of Reconciliationof work and family”,Social Politics, 11(1): 30-56. Verloo, Mieke (2007), “Multiple Meanings of Gender Equality: A Critical Frame Analysis of Gender Policies in Europe”, Central European University Press, New York. Walby, Sylvia. (1989) “Gender Mianstreaming: Prodcutive Tensions in Theory and Practice’. Social Politics, 12(3):321-343. Woodward, Alison E. (2003) “Building Velvet Triangles: gender and Informal Governance’. In Thomas Christiasen and Simona Piattoni(eds). Informal Governance int eh European Union. Northahampton, MA:Edward Elgar.

21

Young, Brigitte (2000), “Disciplinary Neoliberalism in the European Union and Gender Politics”, New Political Economy, pp: 77-98.

22