Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67910
|
| Title: | 勞工育兒責任之研究
A Study of Labour Parental Responsibilities |
| Authors: | 孫薔
Sun, Chian |
| Contributors: | 張其恆
Chang, Chyi Herng
孫薔
Sun, Chian |
| Keywords: | 育兒責任分擔
工作－家庭調和
兒童照顧體系
parental responsibilities sharing
work and family reconciling
childcare systems |
| Date: | 2013 |
| Issue Date: | 2014-07-29 16:13:07 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 隨著時代演進以及經濟社會環境的改變，勞工工作與家庭衝突問題逐漸受到重視，尤其養兒育女的責任在基礎上雖然由家庭直接承擔，但是考量現代社會的變遷和勞動型態之轉變，就業中的父母因而擔負起「勞動者」與「持家者」的雙重角色，因此反思育兒責任是否應為家庭或女性單方面承受的議題開始受到關注，育兒責任分擔也成為國家重要政策課題。
從歷史脈絡觀察勞工與育兒責任的互動發展和演變過程，以及當時社會學家的紀錄和批判，得以證實這樣的矛盾衝突已經存於整個資本主義社會體系許久。本研究先透過了解勞工育兒責任概念起源與歷史演變之觀察，和國際組織的勞動基準、保護規範與協定條約，接著以歐洲目前兩項能夠代表育兒責任分擔差異的主要模式：北歐模式與南歐模式，觀察整理其歷史發展和代表國家的政策特色與內容，並且以國際組織相關之數據資料為輔，針對北歐和南歐模式於育兒責任分擔的國家政策安排、雇主責任分擔方式和兩性於家庭中責任分配情形，進行比較分析。
本研究之研究發現得出三項重點，第一點是育兒責任分擔立基點的不同：北歐模式是以兩性平權為出發點，南歐模式則以兒童權利為出發點；第二點是公共托嬰體系的差異，北歐模式的公共托育制度包含托嬰，而南歐模式的公共托育制度則傾向將未滿三歲之嬰幼兒交由家庭育嬰；第三點則是發現北歐模式和南歐模式的比較之下，家庭政策若能給予兩性鄉黨之責任義務規範，和給予女性生育與育兒較完備之支持，較能使得國家在推動勞動政策各個面向時更得以發揮。
結論的部分也歸結整理出形塑出育兒責任分擔不同模式的背景因素，北歐和南歐模式的差異和特色，主要是因為地理位置、政治政黨環境、國家歷史、福利體制和社會文化價值觀等因素互相影響而產生之結果，此外，本研究最後也針對勞工育兒責任分擔之觀念進行釐清和辯證，從而得知，要將育嬰和育兒責任分擔和職責分配，平等地落實於國家與家庭、勞資雙方、兩性關係、母親與兒童之間，必須於社會安全制度、勞動政策和家庭政策中全方位考量和互相配合，以人民最大利益為優先，並將可能之損害降至最低，方能達成解決現代勞工面臨家庭生育養育和工作之間難題的目標。
Along with the evolution of the times and the changing of the economic and social environment, employment parents assume the dual role of “breadwinner” and “care-giver”. Therefore, it should considered that whether parental responsibilities unilaterally bear on families or women. And reconciling work and family responsibilities is a major concern for many of the world’s adults wherever the live, and has become an important national policy issue in both industrialized and developing countries.
Through the observing from the history and the record and criticism from sociologist, was able to confirm the conflict has been kept in the entire capitalist social system for a long time. People are struggling to try to earn a living for the family while coping with the care needs of their children.
The objective of this study is to sort out the labor parental responsibilities sharing mode of governments, employers, and genders in families. First, by clarifying and sorting the documents of international organizations to understand their position. Then, through the Nordic model and Southern Europe model, this study observed and clarified their features and content of their policies. Finally, this study focused on the comparative analysis of the labor parental responsibilities practical ideas between Nordic model and South Europe model experiences. |
| Reference: | 外文文獻
Broberg, Anders and Hwang, C. Philip (1991). Day care for young children in Sweden. In Edward C. Melhuish and Peter Moss (eds), Day care for young children: International perspectives. London and New York: Tavistock/Routledge.
Denise, L. Whitehead (2008). Historical trends in work-family: the evolution of earning and caring. In Karen Korabik, Donna S, Lero& Denise L. Whitehead (eds), Handbook of Work-Family Integration: Research, Theory, and Best Practices (pp.13-35). Burlington: Academic Press.
Dora L. Costa (2000). From Mill Town to Board Room: The Rise of Women’s Paid Labor. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14:4, 101-122.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1992). The making of a social democratic welfare state. In K. Misgeld (Ed.), Creating social democracy: A century of the social democratic labor party in Sweden (pp. 35-66 ). University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies. US: Oxford University Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The incomplete revolution: Adapting welfare states to women’s new roles. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
European Commission (2008). MISSOC Analysis 2008—Social Protection: Aspects of Flexicurity and Active Inclusion. Luxembourg: Euroepan Communities.
Evans, Peter. (October, 1997). “The Eclipse of the State? Reflections on Stateness in an Era of Globalization”. World Politics, 50, 1: 62-87.
Ferrera, M. (1996). ‘The “southern model” of welfare in social Europe’, Journal of European Social Policy, 6 (1) : 17-37.
Flaquer, L. (2000). Family policy and welfare state in Southern Europe. Barcelona: Institut De Cie"ncices Politiques I Socials.
Flaquer, L. (2002). “Political Intervention and Family Policy in Europe & the USA: Family Policy & the Maintenance of the traditional Family in Spain”. In A. Carling, S. Duncan & R. Edwars (eds.). Analysing Families: Morality and Rationality in Policy and Practise. London: Routledge, pp 84-92.
Försäkringskassan (2012). Parental benefit. Svensk Försäkringskassan.
Försäkringskassan (2012). Sick benefit. Svensk Försäkringskassan.
Försäkringskassan (2013). Child allowance and large family supplement. Svensk Försäkringskassan.
Fraser, Nancy. (1994). “After the Family Wage. Gender Equity and the Welfare State.” Political Theory, 22, 591-618.
Gandini, L. and Edwrds, Carolyn P. (2001). “Introduction”. In Gandini, L. and Edwrds, Carolyn P (eds.). Bambini: The Italian Approach to Infant/toddler Care. New York: Teachers College Press, pp 1-13.
Ghedini, P. (2001). “Change in Italian Policy for Children 0-3 Years Old and Their Families: Advocacy and Responsibility”. In Gandini, L. and Edwrds, Carolyn P (eds.). Bambini: The Italian Approach to Infant/toddler Care. New York: Teachers College Press, pp 38-47.
Greenhaus, J. H.& Singh, L. (2003, February 25). Work-Family Linkages, A Sloan Work and Family Encyclopedia Entry. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Greenhaus, J. H.&Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
Guillen, A. and Petmesidou, M. (2007, Sep). Dynamics of the Welfare Mix in South Europe. The RC19 Sociology Conference. Florence, Italy.
Harding, L.F. (1997). Perspectives in child care policy (2nd edn). London: Londgman
Hasan, Abrar & Martin-Korpi, Barbara & Neuman, Michelle J. & New, Rebecca S. & Woodhead, Martin. (2001). OECD country note: Early childhood education and care policy in Italy. OECD Publishing.
Hein, C. (2005). Reconciling work and family responsibilities: Practical ideas from global experiences. Geneva: ILO.
Hernes, H. M. (1987). The welfare state citizenship of Scandinavian women. Welfare state and woman power: Essays in state feminism (pp. 134 -163 ). Oslo: Norwegian University Press.
International Labour Organization (2010). Maternity at work: A review of national legislation. Findings from the ILO’s Conditions of Work and Employment Database. Geneva: ILO.
International Labour Organization (2012). Maternity Protection Resource Package: From Aspiration to Reality for All. Geneva: ILO.
Ipsen, C. (1996). Dictating demography: The problem of population in Fascist Italy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jurado Guerrero T. and M. Naldini (1997). “Is the South so Different? Italian and Spanish Families in Comparative Perspective” in M. Rhodes (ed.), Southern European Welfare States. Between Crisis and Reform. London: Frank Cass.
Kahn, R, L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D. & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Karamessini, Maria (2007). The Southern European social model: Changes and continuities in recent decades. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
Ketola, Outi, Thomsen, Kare & Nielsen, H, W. (1997). From poor relief to social rights and social care services` clienthood. In Jorma Sipila (ed), Social Care Services: The Key to the Scandinavian Welfare Model (pp. 77-94). Adershot: Ashgate.
Kopelman, R.E., Greenhaus, J. H. & Connolly, T. F. (1983). A model of work, family, and interrole conflict: A conflict validations study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32, 198-215.
Lally, J. Ronald (2001). “Infant Care in the United States and How the Italian Experience Can Help”. In Gandini, L. and Edwrds, Carolyn P (eds.). Bambini: The Italian Approach to Infant/toddler Care. New York: Teachers College Press, pp 15-22.
Landau, Sarah (2011, Sep, 25). Renaissance (1300s-1600s). Department of Fine Arts New York University. Web.
Lebfried, S. (1993). Towards a European Welfare State? In C. Jones(ed.) New Perspectives on the Welfare State in Europe. London: Routledge, pp. 133-156.
Leslie, Robert. (1997). A History of Belize: Nation in the Making. Belize: Cubola Productions.
Lewis, J. (1992). “Gender and development of welfare regimes”, Journal of European social Policy, 2 (3), pp. 159-173.
Lewis, L. (2004). “Emerging gender regimes and policies for gender equity in a wider Europe”, Journal of Social Policy, 33, 3, pp 373-394.
Mantovani, S. (2001). “Infant-Toddler Centers in Italy Today: Tradition and Innovation”. In Gandini, L. and Edwrds, Carolyn P (eds.). Bambini: The Italian Approach to Infant/toddler Care. New York: Teachers College Press, pp 23-37.
McDonald, P. (2002). Sustaining fertility through public policy: the range of options. Population 57(3), 471-446.
Milner, H. (1994). Social democracy and rational choice: The Scandinavian experience and beyond. London: Routledge.
Minquez, M.A. (2004). The persistence of male breadwinner model in southern European countries in a compared perspective: familism, employment and family policies, http://www.mariecurie.org/annals/volume4/soc1.pdf
Moss, P. (2011). International Review of leave Policies and related research. Institute of Education University.
Naldini, M. (2003). The Family in the Mediterranean Welfare States. London: Frank Cass.
Neyer, G. (2006). Family policies and fertility in Europe: fertility policies at the intersection of gender policies, employment policies and care policies. MPIDER Working Paper, Konrad-Zuse-Strasse (Germany): Max Planck Institute for Demography Research.
Nordic Council of Ministers (1994). Women and men in the Nordic countries. Facts and figures 1994.
Oberhuemer, P., & Ulich, M. (1997). Working with young children in Europe. London: Paul Chapman.
OECD. (2007). Babies and Bosses: Reconciling Work and Family Life－A Synthesis of Findings for OECD Countries. US: OECD Publishing.
Ohlander, A. (1992). The invisible child? The struggle over social democratic family policy. In K. Molin, K. Amark, and K. Misgeld (Eds.), Creating social democracy: A century of the social democratic labor party in Sweden (pp. 213-236). Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Rhodes, M. (1997a). Southern European Welfare State: Why they succeed, how they fail. NY: Pantheon.
Rhodes, M. (1997b). “Southern European Welfare States: Identity, Problems and Prospects for Reform”, en Rhodes, M. (ed.), Southern European Welfare States: Between Crisis & Reform, London, Frank Cass, pp 1-22.
Sainsbury, D. (1999). Gender, policy regimes, and politics, In D. Sainsbury (Ed.), Gender and welfare regimes, pp. 245-275. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, V. A. (2000). Values and discourse in the politics of adjustment. In Fritz W. Scharpf/Vivien A. Schmidt(ed.), Welfare and Work in the Open Economy Volume I: From Vulnerability to Competitiveness (pp. 229-309). Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Sipila, J. (1997). Social care services: the key to the Scandinavian welfare model. Adershot: Ashgate.
Sobotka, Tomáš. (2004). Is Lowest-Low Fertility in Europe Explained by the Postponement of Childbearing? Population and development review, 30(2), 195-220.
Socail Security Administration (2012). Socail Security Programs Thoughout the World: Europe, 2012. USA: SSA Publication.
Susan Lewis. (1996). Rethinking Employment: An Organizational Culture Change Framework. In Susan Lewis and Jeremy Lewis (eds), The Work-Family Challenge: Rethinking Employment (pp.1-19). SAGE Publications.
中文文獻
王玉民 (1994)，《社會科學研究方法原理》，台北：洪葉文化。
吳來信、廖榮利、郭瓈灩編著 (2005)，《家庭政策》，臺北縣蘆洲市：空中大學。
易永嘉 (2008)，OECD國家對育兒父母推行友善家庭與職場政策、作法及借鏡。《台灣勞工季刊》，第14期，頁118-131。
林萬億 (1994)，《福利國家—歷史比較分析》，台北：巨流出版社。
林萬億 (2002)，台灣的家庭變遷與家庭政策。《臺大社會工作學刊》，第6期，頁35-88。
林萬億 (2006)，《臺灣的社會福利：歷史經驗與制度分析》，台北：五南出版社。
邵芬主編 (2003)，《歐盟諸國社會保障制度研究》，雲南：雲南大學出版社。
唐文慧、楊佳羚 (2006)，瑞典育嬰休假制度之研究：共同照顧的價值。《政大勞動學報》，第19期，頁75-117。
國立編譯館主編 (2000)，《教育史》，台北：正中書局。
常欣怡 (2003)，瑞典兒童照顧制度對臺灣相關政策之啟示。《社區發展季刊》，第101期，頁463-473。
傅立葉 (2010)，從性別觀點看台灣的國家福利體制。《台灣社會研究季刊》，第80期，頁207-236。
黃志隆 (2012)，臺灣家庭政策的形成：家計承擔與兒童照顧的整合。《人文及社會科學集刊》，第24卷第3期，頁331-336。
黃志隆(2013, 6)，兒童照顧政策與福利體制的路徑變遷：瑞典、德國與美國之比較。《東吳社會工作學報》，第25期，頁1-34。
黃曉薇、劉一龍 (2009)，生育、女性就業與兒童照顧支持方案—以南歐模式為例。《台灣社會福利學刊》，第8卷第1期，頁149-194。
楊瑩 (1996)，瑞典的兩性工作平等制度。焦興鎧主編《歐美兩性工作平等制度之比較研究》，頁1-39，台北：中央研究院歐美研究所。
楊瑩、陳鳳至 (1994)，瑞典的婦女與家庭政策。《社會建設》，第87期，頁73-82。
鄒道序 (1959)，義大利的家庭津貼制度。《勞工之友》，第106期，頁8-9。
廖瑞銘主編 (1987)，《新編大不列顛百科全書中文版(9)》。台北：丹青。
劉毓秀 (1997)，女性、國家、公民身份：歐美模式、斯堪地那維亞模式與台灣現況的比較。劉毓秀編《女性、國家、照顧工作》，頁15-55，台北：女書店。
劉毓秀 (2006)，北歐托育制度。《兒童及少年福利期刊》，第10期，頁7-22。
劉毓秀 (2011)，北歐普及照顧與充分就業政策及其台灣轉化。《女學學誌》，第29期，頁1-77。
劉毓秀 (2012)，北歐普及照顧制度的實踐與變革—從女性主義觀點回顧及批判。《女學學誌：婦女與性別研究》，第31期，頁75-122。
鄭清霞 (2007)，育兒責任分擔的探討與推估－國家vs.家庭。《東吳社會工作學報》，第17期，頁95-135。
薛理桂主編 (1994)，《比較圖書館學導論》，台北：台灣學生。
網路資料庫文獻
Eurofound (2009). EQUAL TREATMENT FOR MEN AND WOMEN: Italy. Retrieved June 11, 2014, from http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emire/ITALY/EQUALTREATMENTFORMENANDWOMEN-IT.htm
EuroStat. (2014). Expenditure on social protection. Retrieved June 11, 2014, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tps00098
OECD (2014a). OECD Family Database. Retrieved June 11, 2014, from www.oecd.org/social/family/database
OECD (2014b). Key employment statistics. Retrieved June 11, 2014, from www.oecd.org/employment/keystatistics |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
勞工研究所
100262021
102 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1002620211 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [勞工研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 021101.pdf | 2675Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 243 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
