Tesis Magíster
Universal Daycare Policy in Chile: Gender Analysis of Current Proposals
Autor
Reichhard Tornvall, Clarisa
Institución
Resumen
This dissertation analyses the Daycare policy proposed by the government of Sebastián Piñera. This bill aims to eliminate Article 203 of the Labour Code, which establishes that any workplace with more than 20 female employees should guarantee nursery provision for their children. This norm contributes to female employment discrimination and gender pay gaps. The Daycare policy would provide free daycare in public and private nurseries for children aged from six months to two years whose mothers are employed. The main goal of the policy is to increase the female labour force participation rate in Chile (48.5%), one of the lowest in Latin America.
Although eliminating Article 203 is a positive and necessary step, the Daycare policy presents several problems. It only entitles working mothers to the daycare benefit, thereby transforming this policy to a maternalist policy, which does not challenge gender roles and the gender division of domestic labour. The implications are that working mothers will still face increased labour burdens. Not challenging gender domestic dynamics also has implications in the labour sphere, where mothers will still be penalised with other child penalties, as a result of still being perceived as the main or sole carers. These implications might negatively affect the goal of female employment. Furthermore, despite being maternalist, the policy does not consider mothers’ preferences and the ways in which culture and their own maternal drivers influence their choices regarding childcare and work. Chilean mothers have showed a preference pattern of child care of explicit familialism, where care at home is the preferred option. The government, however, has designed a policy that only offers a defamilialising option: daycare in nurseries. This, despite the fact that nursery use rates are as low as 18.3% and evidence for Chile shows that nursery provision has not led to increased female employment, even while being free for the 60% most vulnerable population in Chile. Ignoring mothers’ preferences might also backfire in terms of achieving the goal of female employment.
I argue that the policy, despite eliminating one specific child penalty (Article 203), still perpetuates childcare as a female responsibility; at the same time, as it does not offer mothers other alternatives regarding care, it will be unsuccessful in increasing female employment. A feminist policy regarding childcare would both acknowledge mothers’ preferences and challenge the very foundations of the division of domestic labour that assigns childcare explicitly to women. PFCHA-Becas PFCHA-Becas