[MUSIC PLAYING] Welcome to FEPPS Talks, the podcast series brought to you by the Foundation for European Progressive Studies, where we discuss ideas, challenges, and innovations shaping a progressive Europe. In this episode, I have the great pleasure to be your host. My name is Léthi Ciatisian, and I'm FEPPS Senior Policy Analyst on Gender Quality. And today, we are diving into the transformative potential of care in the context of EU policymaking.
Our guest is Professor Eugenia Carracciolo-Ditoela from the University of Leicester in the UK. Your work emphasizes the intersections between care, legal frameworks, and societal equity, which is a truly innovative approach, and is also noteworthy to mention that you lead pioneering modules such as care, caring, and the law, and gender sexuality, and the law.
You have contributed extensively to EU gender equality discourses, publishing widely in academic journals, and providing influential reports for European institutions. For all these reasons, we are particularly proud to have you as one of the leading experts voicing the need to integrate care policy as part of the EU framework.
And we could not have been able to count on a better place or to contribute to one of the most recent publications led by FEPS together with Jean Jaurès, a new gender equality contract for Europe, Feminism and Progressive Politics, which we have just also here received, which is still oven-fresh, and which is a compelling collective volume gathering 11 authors to reimagine the role of feminism and progressive policies in shaping Europe's future.
Your chapter explores the idea of a new gender equality contract for care, a topic that has taken on greater urgency in recent years. Eugenia, welcome to FEPS Talks. It's a pleasure to have you with us. Well, thank you very much, and thank you for this kind introduction. And I'm really looking forward to it. So perhaps also setting the general and broader scene, Eugenia, your chapter is emphasizing the critical importance of care in the broader framework of gender equality.
The book is aiming to conceptualize a new gender equality contract for Europe, and how does your chapter in particular contribute to the overarching framework? In other words, can you explain why care is central to the idea of a new gender equality contract for Europe? Well, I would start with two considerations. One, the first one is that care is something that we all need that is essential to all of us, us individuals, but also us as a society.
And the second thing is that care has traditionally and disproportionately been performed by women. And this has had an impact on women's ability to participate in paid employment with all the consequences that has disparity in wages, disparity in pensions, and consequences in later life. So I think that this is why care is central to a concept of a new gender equality contract.
And it is essential because a contract would aim to address all the deeply entrenched gender inequalities that exist both in the private and in the public sphere. And this focus was also aligned with the broader EU goals to promote gender equality and also full employment. I would also say another thing that on top of that, as I said in the chapter, care is in crisis. And in recent years, it has constantly been in crisis.
And by that, it means that us, as the developed member state, and us in Europe, that has meant that us in Europe have not been able to provide the quality care we didn't have at the time and the capacity to provide quality care to those almost in need of it, be those children's or adults or be them in need of care for any reason, because they are vulnerable and are vulnerable for any reason.
So I think at this point, it would also be interesting to say, what do I mean by a gender contract for care? A gender contract for care for me would have three main features. So first of all, the starting point that is that it would acknowledge and challenge the gendered impact of care. This is possibly the most important thing that one of the most important things that needs to be done. So a gender contract would move away from the feminizations of care that we have at the moment.
And it would try to redistribute care obligation more effectively across society. And that would allow for greater participation in the workplace. Then the second element is equally-- I mean, all those elements are all important. The reason one is more important than the other, but they all work together. So the second element would be to conceptualize care as a value.
So again, we need to move away from conceptualizing care as a problem as something that hinders participation in the workplace, something that doesn't allow us to work. But we need to try to see it, first of all, and more generally as a value that we need to cherish, but also more specifically as the solutions to the problems we're facing now. And then the third point would be to acknowledge that care is a very broad concept. And these parameters are very fluid.
So what do we mean by that? This is, of course, important for policymakers and for the law, because we need to establish what we're talking about. So when we're talking about care, I was talking about childcare, I'm talking about elder care. I was talking about former care, I was talking about informal care. So there are all these perspectives that needs to be taken into consideration. And also, to address all these perspectives, is it would not be possible to do it just with the law.
We need a variety of instruments. So we need binding law, because binding law is binding, and it gives rights and empowers people. But we also need policies. We also need to raise awareness. We also need to exchange the practices. There are so many things that we can do. And it is with all this concerted effort that we can achieve a result.
I also would like to say that when we have gender conflict in care, that needs to be underpinned by a feminist vision, because it is so much entrenched with equal gender equality, that we need the feminist underpinning. And finally, people may think, why is up to Europe to do to the European Union to develop gender conflict for care? Why couldn't member states do that?
Well, I would say to Winston, and I'm not saying that the member states would not be more than welcome to develop their own gender conflict for care. But Europe should do, first of all, because Europe is in the best position to influence member states and to influence what is going on in the member states and to help them technically and to support them. And the other thing is that care doesn't know boundaries. It moves across boundaries. And we need a concerted effort for that.
We cannot have a situation where somebody is regarded as a care, a care in a member state, or is entitled to certain benefit in a member state, but then because it was the borders, then he's no longer entitled to that. And we have many family members, for example, that move from one member state to the other to support families that is in another member state. So this must be a concerted effort.
And actually, what you just shared ties into another, an important aspect that you develop in your chapter of our book. And that is precisely the EU legal tools. Because you argue that the EU already has some legal tools, edit support to support care reforms. So could you perhaps also elaborate on how these tools could be mobilized and explain how we can use this to create a fair care economy?
Well, when we talk about the legal tools, obviously, it's difficult when we talk about care, because if we talk about a broader aspect of care, which is work-life balance, we do have some very specific tweak provision that can support the actions of the European Union actions. So for example, the directors, they do the work-life balance directive, does have a legal base. When we're talking about care, it's a little bit more. It's not as clear cut.
So when I talk about legal tools, I am talking about how to put you, I'm sorry, on the tweak of the European Union. And these are the articles about the values, the tools about the values of the European Union, article 3 is about the goals of the European Union. And they use some very, very powerful concepts and principles that apart from the necessity to achieve general quality, obviously general quality is one of the aim and goals of the European Union.
But we're also talking about human dignity, we're talking about solidarity, we're talking about well-being. And these are very powerful tools to develop a discourse on care. And I can wait if I'm wrong, but human dignity has been developed by the European Court in particular, the European Court of Justice.
As far as I know, the only case that deals with care in the context of human dignity is the Conman case, where the advocate general developed the concept of discrimination by association, which is kind of powerful tools, because you not only discriminate on the person who needs care, in this case was a disabled child, but you also discriminate on the cares. So this is a way to see how one of these principles has been used to develop further actions.
And I also think that solidarity and well-being, we should work a little bit more on that, because I think they do have a great potential. And of course, if you'd be up to me, I would put care right in both those articles, but obviously it's not up to me. But apart from Article 2 and 3, I also talk about the legal and policy landscape that exists at the moment. To start with, the growing body of the existing body of gender equality legislation that we have.
And also my main criticism to that body of equality legislation is that it's very much linked to the market, it's very much based in economic considerations. But nevertheless, us helped a lot of people, a lot of women, a lot of cares. One recent example is the Workly Balance Directive that was recently, well, five years ago now, in Acton 2019, just before the pandemic stroke. And this is the first directive that uses the concept of care and put it black on white, put it on paper.
And of course, I read at the definition curve that the directive gives, and I don't think it's really as comprehensive as I would like it to be, but it's a start to form. So it's the first time that we see care, it's the first time that we see carelessly, even if it is only five unpaid days, but it's the first time that we see that. And of course, apart from the directives, we also have the chat of Fundamental Rights.
I'm talking in particular about articles, second paragraph of article 33, the article about the reconciliation of work and family life. Yeah, the reconciliation of work and family life that is not specifically care, doesn't mention care, but is a broader aspect. We can say that implicit care is incorporated in the reconciliation of work and family life. And this article is the first one that gives, if I can say so, a fundamental right.
It gives an element of fundamental right, also an element of almost the constitution of rights, if you could say so, to this principle. It has been further developed, I would say, in the European pillar of social rights, enacted in 2017, whether the idea of care is clearly coming out.
We have at least three articles that are specifically relevant to this topic, article 9 on work-life balance, that it goes further than article 33, paragraph 2 of the chat of Fundamental Rights, because it talks about care, it talks about access to care services for parents and carers. Then we have principle 11 on childcare and principle 18 on long-term care. Obviously, the pillar is not binding, but nevertheless, it has had an impact.
For example, as led to the work-life balance directive and as led to the care strategy. Talking about care strategies is the last tool I wanted to mention. I'm sure we'll discuss it later. This was launched nearly two years ago now, and it's the most comprehensive injury on care. All together, these tools give us the starting point to build a comprehensive response to the need of carers and to the importance of value care.
Since you mentioned this and immediately following up on this very last policy development, when it comes to reinforcing care within the EU policy framework, we've had the care strategy, which is a significant step forward, in order to recognise the importance of care. How do you see this strategy aligning with the ideas that you present in your chapter? What are the additional steps that would be needed in order to ensure efficient implementation?
Well, I was... It's not the right verb, because I still am a big fan of the care strategy. But as I said, the first time I read it, I was very enthusiastic and very positive about that. And the longer it passes and the more, I think, we really should not lose momentum. But the care strategy is certainly a very significant step, and it's the very first time we are actually talking about care in this way.
And I think it does incorporate the three principles, the three features of the gender content prepared. I was discussing before, because certainly, it does acknowledge at the very least the feminizations of care. It also talks about care as well as as a value. That is actually the first sentence of the communication. And it also has this variety of tools that are used and a variety of measures that consider the fact that we're talking about different situations.
So it's not all binding, but there is a clear reference to the work life bonus directives. Work life bonus directives there, but we also have recommendations and other policy considerations. Now, why I'm less enthusiastic as I go ahead, as I go on. Just because this strategy is not legally binding.
And I know that this may be, you may think, well, you're contradicting yourself because you just said, we need to have a variety of instruments, but there is no doubt that to have legally enforceable rights would empower people and would go a long way, a much longer way than what is happening at the moment. So I think that the UCAS strategy makes a very volume content and incorporate a binding element.
But this binding element is linked very much to parents and to the so just one kind of one type of care and to the to the employment market. You know, it also talks about care. So there are also provisions like article six and article seven. And I know that this can be applied to any type of care, but they're not as powerful as the article on parental leave and paternity leave.
Then this strategy, rather than being binding, it just leaves the member states to do we have lifting essentially. And so it kind of give the member state a roadmap of what they should be doing, but it doesn't really offer as much technical support as I would like to see that the EU in this area does not have legal competences that would have in other areas. I would like to see more adequate funding that are allocated to the care sector, so more support for the member states.
And I would also see, I would like to see that the requirement to monitor and to have that collection of different situations, different situations with care, rather than just being advised, merely advised and encouraged, I would like that to be binding. I would like that, you know, to become a reality, because if we don't have data, if we don't monitor what is going on, you know, we really don't have the instruments to take this further.
Also, when we look at this data, then we have to consider whether status are coming from because different places in Europe, different realities, or have different issues. And so the data may tell a different story. The other things I am a little bit disappointed with care strategy is, yes, I have said before that it challenged the feminizations of care, but rather than actually challenging this, it acknowledged this.
It acknowledged that it is more than 80% of women that perform care, both paid and paid, both formula and formula, but it doesn't do very much about that. You know, yes, we know is that, but what do we do apart from paternity leave and parental leave? What do we do apart from the general principle to encourage and not very much? So I think we need something stronger there.
And the finally, and this is something I've only recently thought about is, when we're talking about carers, there is at the very least the acknowledgement that there are different type of carers, because not all the carers are the same. We have young carers, we have middle-aged carers, and we have all the carers, and they all face different problems, isn't it? Because the EU mainly focuses on the middle-aged carers because those are the ones who work. But what about the young carers?
I mean, they have difficulties going to school and having an education then contribute later on to, you know, to sustainable society. And what about the older carers? That they no longer have an income, maybe they live on their pensions, but you know, sometimes they are in the position that, you know, they have to care. I'd like a little bit more on that. And equally on the carers, they're not all the same. We have children, we have adults, but not all children are the same.
Not all adults are the same. Not all adults are in need of care for the same reasons. And we have very different outputs. We may have migrants, you know, we may have, you know, people vulnerable for different reasons. So I don't really think it's fair to just put all of them in a box and talk about the care and care for. I think we need a little bit more nuance there. Yes, indeed. And it's also nicely ties in with the importance of addressing intersecting.
It is speaking, or what this is yet another challenge also for the EU legislative frameworks to address this, particularly in order to tap into the difficulties that people at intersecting forms of inequalities are facing. So I'm, you know, like you already touched a little bit about that, but how can you policies also address this intersection interconnected dimensions more effectively?
Well, you know, as well as you just said, the reason why we have this intersectionality issues because the vast majority of carers and we have that in particular as far as carers are concerned, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist for the care for. But for the carers, why do we have this because the vast majority of carers are women and often they are migrant women or often they are in a position of vulnerability, which is, you know, financial vulnerability, you know, for any reasons.
And when you have all of this, you know, put together, you have quite an explosive mixture. You have a problem. So how do you address that? Well, first of all, with fair wages is the whole idea of equal pay for decent work, more investing in quality public care services that, you know, are accessible to everyone in terms of the carers, but most in terms of the carer for.
And more in general quality, you know, that we're going back to the same principles and to also address not just the issues of general quality, but also the specific needs of marginalized carers. So that would mean to ensure access to training, social security benefits, service, to very specific circumstances.
And so now as you also look at the new EU legislative term with the new commission just having been endorsed, what are the concrete steps that you would recommend integrating for integrating the principles of care centered gender contract into the new agenda. And how can policymakers ensure that care remains a central focus in the years to come as well.
Well, I would, in a nutshell, I would say, very simply just build on the car strategy, just do not let it be just worth the work and do not lose momentum. And I am afraid, I think we have lost a little bit the momentum. And this is also why I was very happy to do this chapter, because I think that, you know, after the pandering and after the pandemic, everybody was talking about chaos, but now is a little bit of lip service, what is going on.
So generally speaking is build on the car strategy. If we have to be more specific, first of all, continue challenging gender impact of care, you know, never, never lose sight of that. Recognize care as a value. As I said before, I would love to see an article two and also an article three of the treaty, but this is, is, it would be rather complex.
You know, you cannot do it overnight. And then support this idea that not just by the time, by volume care, I would beat myself, but it's just don't see this problem but ask the solutions to what is going on at the moment and then support this mixed approach, you know, where
you have legislation, you have policy and you consider the, let me rephrase that support the support that acknowledge all the different aspects of care and tailor specific instruments to each situation so we will have legislation but we also have policies, and we will also have based awareness on specific programs and funding.
And then very, very important is to improve the quality, the availability and the ability of care services. And I know that this is not something for the commission because this is, but the commission can set standards can set goals and I think this is again is something that we should not lose sight of. And you know, you can improve the not improve but you know, in power, send the people through whites, you know, do the most as you can with the whites you have.
And you know, paternity leave, parental leave, we need to encourage men, women to take them to to partake in that. And also very importantly, don't just encourage and the monitoring and the, and the collection of data, but to ensure accountability and that to make it binding and ensure accountability and that we need the data because if you do not have the data and not have the instruments to to move forward.
What do you see also as the consequences if Europe fails to address care inequalities and does not integrate care into its broad agenda and economic policies. What would be the damage, what would be the impact if we're not doing anything. The impact is not doing anything. We're talking about quality there is we will further entwines inequalities in Europe, further entwines gender inequalities in Europe.
But also the other things more importantly is the fact that if we don't develop a sustainable system of care, we will not be ready to meet the challenges that we are already facing is not they're not knocking at the door, they were waiting there. And the first one is the aging populations, the population is, is aging at the end at the very fast way. And we need to find a way to support that.
And the other things links with climate change. You know, we have more and more episode extreme episode episode of climate change and disaster. There are consequences to this disaster. There are more people that need care because of that. There are more, more migrations more, we need more and more people we see more and more people that are that they that they become care recipients, a recipient because of that.
Not addressing care to me is not an option. So I think I really, I really hope that these conditions will have care at heart. And perhaps also to to finish on a positive note. What can we, according to you, learn from academia and civil society collaborations in order to push for progressive care agenda across Europe precisely also not to lose that momentum as as we mentioned earlier.
But what can we learn from each other? Well, a lot, I think, and we're all important players, I think, because academia is the one who can provide the studies, can provide the solutions, but then policymakers are the one which can ground in data and can take it further. And that is also important to involve civil societies. And it is important to hear the voice of the people from the grounds. It's important to realize what we leave the experiences of people are both care and care for.
And I think, you know, we cannot have any of them in isolation, but we need all of them together. And after we had these conversations, what we need is also, you know, to learn something from these conversations and to share the practices. Well, Eugenia, this has been such an enlightening conversation. I think your insight make it really clear that care is not just a personal or family matter. It is a foundational principle for building equitable, sustainable and inclusive societies.
In fact, as you already multiple times already highlighted, care lies at the heart of a new gender gender equality contract, because it didn't in a way it forces us also to rethink the very structure of our economies, our workplaces and even our democracies. It's about recognizing that the unpaid and underpaid labor that is traditionally carried by women is not just a social issue, but a matter of economic resilience and societal well-being.
Absolutely. And as I say, and also we have to think that we all need care. We all need to care at some point in our lives. We need it as infant, as children. And the chances are that we will need it later on in life, because being young, well-enabled is only temporary. It doesn't last forever. So your chances to need care are very high, and the odds are that the chances of being a care are also very high.
So we need to support those people to keep functions, contribute to the economy. As I say, it's all a circle. It all goes in circles. We can't have a plan B. There is only the plan A in this. I'm afraid.
And I think also as we leave this conversation, I think it could not be clear from your arguments that the future of Europe clearly depends on its ability to foster policies that support its citizens at every stage of their life, be it child care, equitable parental leave, as you were mentioning, and sustainable long-term care.
And so in that sense, we also hope that the UK strategy will only mark an important step in this direction, but that much more will be done in this new EU term that we are looking at. And so with this, I would like to thank you wholeheartedly, Eugenia, for your thoughtful contribution to this book, but also to sharing your insights as part of this podcast.
We are really delighted to count on your expertise. Your work is truly an inspiration call for all policymakers, academics and citizens alike. Thank you very much. It has been a pleasure. And to our listeners, you can explore, of course, a genius chapter and much more in our book, A New Gender Equality Contract for Europe, Feminism and Progressive Politics, which is available now.
As we move towards this new EU legislative term, let's remember that gender equality is not just a policy issue, but it's key to building a better Europe for everyone. So thank you for tuning in to FAPStore and we'll see you next time. Until then, take care and stay engaged. [Music]