Economics and care work - Essay Example

?Economics and care work The dynamics of care work have changed from the care work practices provided in the Victorian period. Economic conditions during the Victorian era were quite harsh. Middle-class men worked like machine to earn livelihood and their desire to return home after hard labor was fructified by the comforting home environment provided with the home care efforts and artful handling of the home sphere by the ladies working whole day providing needed care to all members of the family. Relationship between the middle class spouses was based on mutual trust of exchanging and sharing gifts unlike the “crass” (Nelson, 2006). The Victorian ideology was not a totally correct presentation of the economic life; the lower class underwent all the harshness of economic reasoning of working as labor in shops along with their children over time without any additional wages. Thus, in the Victorian times, the ideology of “angel in the house” put curtains on the job of running a home and exploitation of the poor women and children by increasing industrialization (Nelson, 2006). Nuns used to perform care work out of religious bonding or until they got married. Theme of charity was behind most of care provided to the needy and under-privileged by nuns, single women and married women with earning husbands. It was assumed that nurses, healthcare workers, foster parents, and child care providers felt emotionally charged and motivated in Victorian times but the same legacy has led to believe in the wrong notions that people either work for money or freely out of love and compassion (Nelson, 2006). Care work is perceived by society to be done with the profit motive only, as is evident from the reference to the foster care provided by Rosa Fernandez who takes care of two foster children besides her own two children. Irony of the care providing mother is that she develops kinship with the foster children and her attachment while nurturing them creates a bonding although she is being paid for the care work she is providing but she will miss the children when taken away by the lawyers and the case workers for adoption. There are not only emotional but financial constraints if the children are taken out of the foster care. Difference between a foster parent and a case worker and lawyer, as told by Rosa Fernandez to the sociologist, Teresa Toguchi Swartz, is that money is the leading motive of the case workers and lawyers irrespective of the welfare interest of the children (Nelson, 2006). This case shows that Rosa and her family is related and attached to the children under her foster care because of economic and at the same time ethical considerations. The social service providers overlook the love angle between the foster children and Rosa and assume that money is the only motive of the foster care provided by Rosa. They are least caring about the financial compulsions of the working-class people who would bear the pangs of separation from the child as their love is reciprocal; the child would also feel the loss of separation likewise Rosa and her family (Nelson, 2006). The crucial question that arises here is that is it possible to be inspired by love and money both. Some care workers acceptance of monetary help does not mean that they are not kind-hearted because they have accepted money and “commodified” the transaction. Here, the issue of motivation and care becomes crucial not only to be decided in care work but in any job taken to earn money (Nelson, 2006). Motivation being the significant factor in providing free care in the Victorian era, it could be either intrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivation. Both these are crucial and basic elements of motivation theory, which says that it is non-spatial irrespective of the rewards accruing from intrinsic motivation elements or extrinsic elements although the issue of motivation is quite personal and difficult (The Happy Manager, 2011). When care work provides intangible rewards, it is because they are inspired from within and, therefore, highly appreciated than extrinsic motivation. Care workers feel satisfied, capable, self-respecting, performing in challenging circumstances, and enjoy the attention and work experience. This intrinsic motivation can be inspired by acknowledging and appreciating the work (The Happy Manager, 2011). Extrinsic motivation is felt by care workers when they receive external or tangible returns. These come from outside such as increase in the pay of care workers, fringe benefits, promotion, work security, and the improvement in the work conditions. The continuum of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the care work needs to be taken by the society overall and the government through its policy decisions in the right spirit, not assuming that because care workers are paid for their work that’s why they are intrinsically or extrinsically motivated (The Happy Manager, 2011). In the case of Rosa, she and her husband were getting motivated both ways and both are valuable instincts. With the change in time from Victorian period to current times, importance of both types of care work should be acknowledged for care services providers and receivers’ benefit equally. They seem to be at the extreme corners of the continuum but they are not opposites; they can go along, as some people we see in our society who are moved by both elements because of other social and economic reasons like age and family ranking (The Happy Manager, 2011). While analyzing the economy, there are four types of economic functions: Business, Household, Public, and Non-profit. Generally, we only consider that the business sector creates any wealth, and the rest of the three sectors fulfill the needs of the business sector. The fact is that all four sectors of the economy create wealth, and that wealth transfers to other sectors of the economy as well. Part of the reason of ignoring greatly the stakes of unpaid care work is the notion that the household work functions do not create wealth. Actually, the household work function grooms children for the other sectors of the economy, and without household sectors, none of the other sectors would grow (Wikipedia, 2011). There are many theories on care work. “Love and Money theory” is one such leading theory to test care work in the market context. This theory strives to settle down on the visible divide between the work performed for internal motivation and work done for wage. As per the theory, the male and female workers are viewed as against each other and because gender bias is so much inherent in our thought process, we create a two-fold view that women, love, family, and unselfishness are group patterns associated with women only; men are outside its preview, as they possess selfish rationality. This viewpoint has given the notion that care work should be done by women who provide free care service, as wages under-rate the intrinsic motivation for care work although research indicates that these differences may not be so great (Wikipedia, 2011). On the other hand, it has been noticed that recognition through rewards sends the positive signal that the receiver is faithful, revered, and praiseworthy. Such a scenario indicates that greater the wages are linked with faith and appreciation, the less it drives away true intrinsic motivation, particularly related to care work. Therefore, the outcome of the Love and Money theory is that the leading issue with care work is under-demand and that care work should be better rewarded by the market (Wikipedia, 2011). People who consider that money pushes away care and feelings of compassion need to study philosophy and other social sciences to support their opinion. Jurgen Habermas study on “Life World” versus “System” is supportive of the fact that money “drives” the economy. Whenever outside money, according to Jurgen Habermas, enters the system, functions become “technicized” and deficient in human and social aspects (Nelson, 2006). According to Jurgen Habermas, money has a power of its own It is supported by the “gold” or means of enforcement,” and therefore, it does not need permission of the society. It remains there as an objective fact, outside the preview of social life, observing norms that are least related to social relations (Nelson, 2006). Let’s test this statement. Money is viewed by people as a dollar bill, a certificate representing gold but in current scenario, money is a social creation. The global gold standard failed in the 1930s and the whole concept of changing dollar into gold was rejected in 1971 (Nelson, 2006). Economists know the importance of money as it plays a part in transferring from one person to another in exact settled value. National currencies are not regulated by external forces. It is one of the responsibilities of the central banks to legitimize currency for its users. They provide assurance and guarantee to their countries’ citizens that trading can be done in the national currency and it can be kept safe. The central point is to reinforce the fact that money has got social context and it is a social reaction (Nelson, 2006). As the context of money depends on social values, Haberman’s statement that money defeats social relevancy is irrelevant and irrational but research in social sciences links money with motivation that can drive out care (Nelson, 2006). Nelson (2006) has quoted the example of Richard Titmuss’s comparative analysis of blood supply made by the US and the UK to prove that monetary considerations and caring motivations are at logger heads with each other. Britain depended on voluntary blood donation for its needs while the US welcomed both – the voluntary donors as well as paid donors. The US quality of blood was not as good as was that of the UK, and the US spent more than the UK for supply of blood. It was noted by Titmuss that commercial supply of blood affected peoples’ eagerness to donate blood out of sheer will. When charitable feelings are put besides monetary exchanges, the function or transaction gets devalued and becomes commodified. Titmuss’s finding proves that “gift” relationships based on emotional attachment are in stark contrast to “exchange” relationships based on monetary considerations. In simple terms, it is attempted to prove by Titmuss that monetary motivations “crowd out” caring motivations (Nelson, 2006). Another policy issue is care work wage parity in the care work environment. Supporters of this policy think that workers who adhere to and fulfill norms of care work are seen as losers in the competitive economic environment if earning does not appreciate. Due to this dogma, some economists state that there may be a slow cut in the supply of unpaid care services in the system. That is why supporters of this policy favor care work and higher payments for care work but not all feminist economists think that higher earning would be right for care work. For instance, those who sponsor the notion of commoditization of motivation mechanism argue that increased salaries may distance away genuine caring motivations among care workers (Wikipedia, 2011). At macroeconomic level, a revaluation of the activities of households needs to be made. Feminist economists view the assumption that supply of workers in the business sector for earning wages does not provide a complete view of the picture because households are also a part of the economy, as they provide services via unpaid work. Not including unpaid workers in the economy is more questionable as their market functions are quite small part of their economy in developing countries. Three perspectives are important in this context (a) the truth that GDP of unpaid work should be included as adding value; (b) connecting unpaid work to the market part of the economy; and (c) connecting unpaid work to state provisioning of public goods and services (Antonopoulos, 2008). Revaluing care work is an important feminist strategy for re-strategizing those who perform the care work and for those who employ care workers. Monetization of care work has added to the care workers’ issues. It can be a fruitful activity in the context of ‘reproductive bargain’ to acknowledge to the policy makers how much work is done for the ‘efficient’ functioning of the economy but the significance of working for the families and exchanging in communities can not be underscored by lowering and not recognizing its rewards. Showing consideration and care is a socially and culturally encouraging and effort consuming work. It is at the same time a source of feminine strength although such an encouraging response to unpaid care is never given in traditional societies (Harcourt, 2010). Taking the example of a developed country like Canada where expertise involved in caring and care work is ignored and under-rated as that of mothers’ expertise, which is highly devalued because they are doing what has been traditionally done by men such as economist, performing creative arts, becoming diplomats, and doing repair work mostly done by male members of society to recall some of the job functions done by men. Other traits of women are totally ignored because they are accomplished with intangible abilities and can not be easily outlined. At micro-level care work is not given due importance and observed as a non-monetary function. At the macro level, it is under-rated by not recognized for including in the computations related to gross national products of countries (Valiani, 2011). Importance of care needs to be recognized by getting distanced from the ignorant behavior that care work provided by females to the family and paid work as well is unproductive. Capabilities can not be developed until the raw material of care is not used. Development of capabilities is central to human endurance. Besides food, care is the cause and reason to physical and mental fitness. Care helps in imbibing skills of eating food, growth in children, curing of ill, and attention to the old people. Care is the medium by which traits important for the self and others are imbibed and taught like showing respect to elders, living through co-existence, feeling of empathy, showing regard, discipline, and care itself for self and others (Valiani, 2011). The notion of care-work, according to Abel and Nelson (1990, p. 9), focuses to show the difficulty of work taken out mostly but not only by women, both paid and unpaid. Care work requires “a distinctive pattern of thought that can be learned and practiced, but which differs sharply with scientific rationality” (as cited by Valiani, 2011). Although care work is observed as effortlessly done by care workers but it is a difficult function and process accomplished through art, effort, time, and skill. For analysis purpose, care work can be divided into such functions requiring hard work. Various types of care is provided to human beings, so wide range of expertise is required for different care providing roles, each role demanding different ratios of practical and theoretical skills. Other than care providing roles of mother and father, there are profiles of registered nurse, personal help worker, grandmother, cook, cleaner, registered practical nurse and child care worker, among other roles (Valiani, 2011). There is a general practice of care penalty, which is the continuum under-rating the continuum of care. It is practiced in nations wherein paid workers are treated biased, irrespective of the fact whether they are men or women, by paid less than workers in other professions. For example, in the USA the care workers are penalized by five to six percent in their earning for doing care work irrespective of their sex, race, or job features (Valiani, 2011). So, the question is simply not a difference between the paid and unpaid care workers and discrimination with women care workers by not recognizing their contribution in the economic growth of the country but going a level further, the profession of care workers is getting discriminated treatment from their respective governments (Valiani, 2011). Views of various academicians and researchers stress on the need to understand that care work should be observed as an important economic function irrespective of the fact that it is done in free or it is paid care work. Academicians have taken a dualistic approach on Love and Money theory in the context of care workers doing work for motivation purpose or earning purpose. We have seen how Nelson has made the concept clear that both objectives could be working if as shown in the case of Rosa and her husband, they were doing the role of foster parents for love as well as money because they belonged to lower earning bracket. It is stressed that whatever the motive of the care work, it is the responsibility of concerned developed countries as given in the Canadian example of Ontario to implement such policies where there is no gender bias and workers should be paid as per their expertise parallel to workers in other industries. Pays of care workers should motivate them to remain in the industry of their choice in stead of moving towards greener pastures. Sufficient incentives should be offered to care work professionals of high caliber irrespective of the reason whether they are doing care work for love or money so that society avails and benefits from their services. There should be no doubt that care work is essentially an economic function whose performance should be computed in the economic growth of nations. Care work industry has expanded beyond national boundaries wherein migration of care workers happens on the large scale to developed countries. Civil and social rights of migrated care workers need to be ensured for prompt availability of care workers. References Antonopoulos, Rania. (2008). The unpaid care work–paid work connection. Retrieved from http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_541.pdf Harcourt, Dr Wendy. (2010). Rethinking the economics of care: migrant women’s work and the global care chain. Retrieved from http://www.neweconomicthinking.org/downloads/28Jan09_Presentations/Harcourt%20%28paper%29.pdf Nelson, Julie A. (2006). Love and money: Economics for Humans. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=It-0WD5gsNUC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false The Happy Manager. (2011). Intrinsic extrinsic motivation – the basics. Retrieved from http://www.the-happy-manager.com/intrinsic-extrinsic-motivation.html Valiani, Salimah. (2011). Valuing the invaluable: rethinking and respecting caring work in Canada. Retrieved from http://www.ona.org/documents/File/pdf/ONAResearchSeries_ValuetheInvaluable_05052011.pdf Wikipedia. (2011). Care work. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Care_work Read More