Advertisement

The Leave Provisions

  • Eugenia Caracciolo di Torella
  • Annick Masselot
Chapter
  • 63 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter explores the leave provisions, namely continuous periods of leave — weeks or even months — granted to working parents and, more generally, to workers with caring responsibilities. Leave provisions represent the traditional cornerstone of reconciliation policies, especially when young children are involved. Indeed, as they are currently structured, these provisions are geared towards, and are mostly used by, parents of very young children. However, the various national employment law systems provide further examples of leave for other reasons such as compassionate leave or career breaks which can be used by employees with more general family responsibilities. At the time of writing, the EU has a well-developed system of leave available to (mainly biological) working parents, but very scarce provisions to cater for the needs of employees with wider family responsibilities.219 Indeed, as this book goes to press, the only binding provision which goes somewhat beyond addressing the need to care for young children is the form of emergency leave for ‘force majeure’ provided by the parental leave.220 Thus employees with wider family needs might find it more useful to rely on the time provisions.221

Keywords

Family Life Gender Equality Council Directive Parental Leave Equal Treatment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 226.
    Case C-136/95 Thibault [1998] ECR 1–2011 at paragraph 26; Case C-207/98 Mahlburg [2000] ECR 1–549 at paragraph 26; Case C-342/01 Merino Gomez v. Continental Industrias del Caucho SA [2004] ECR 1–2601 at paragraph 37. Also see generally S. Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos, ‘The Amended Equal Treatment Directive (2002/73): An Expression of Constitutional Principles/Fundamental Rights’, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 12(4) (2005), 327–367Google Scholar
  2. 230.
    for example, H. Fenwick, ‘Special Protection for Women in European Union Law’, in T. Hervey and D. O’Keeffe (eds). Sex Equality in the European Union (Chichester: Wiley, 1996), p. 63.Google Scholar
  3. 231.
    See the extensive national and European case law on pregnancy and maternity in E. Caracciolo di Torella and A. Masselot, ‘The ECJ Case Law on Issues Related to Pregnancy, Maternity and the Organisation of Family Life: An Attempt at Classification’, European Law Review, 26 (2001), 239–260.Google Scholar
  4. 233.
    Article 4(2) Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 imple-menting the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services, OJ [2004] L373/37; see further E. Caracciolo di Torella, ‘The Goods and Services Directive: Limitations and Opportunities’, Feminist Legal Studies, 13(3) (2005), 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 234.
    Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast), OJ [2006] L204/23. See also A. Masselot, ‘The New Equal Treatment Directive: Plus Ça Change…’, Feminist Legal Studies, 12(1) (2004), 93–104.Google Scholar
  6. 235.
    A. Masselot, ‘The State of Gender Equality Law in the European Union’, European Law Journal, 13(2) (2007), 152–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. N. Burrows and M. Robinson, ‘An Assessment of the Recast of Community Equality Laws’, European Law Journal, 13(2) (2007), 186–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 242.
    For example, Case C-394/96 Rentokil [1998] ECR 1–4185; see M. Wynn, ‘Pregnancy Discrimination: Equality, Protection or Reconciliation?’, Modern Law Review, 62 (1999), 435–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 243.
    H. Collins, The EU Pregnancy Directive: A Guide for Human Resource Managers (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994), p. 5.Google Scholar
  10. R. Guerrina, Mothering the Union (Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 2005)Google Scholar
  11. 248.
    H. Fenwick, ‘Special Protection for Women in European Union Law’, in T. Hervey and D. O’Keeffe (eds). Sex Equality in the European Union (Chichester: Wiley, 1996), 63–80Google Scholar
  12. 252.
    N. Burrows and M. Robison, An Assessment of the Recast of Community Equality Laws’, European Law Journal, 13(2) (2007), 186–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 254.
    J. Jacqmain, ‘Pregnancy as Grounds for Dismissal’, Industrial Law Journal, 23 (1994), 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 258.
    J. Shaw, ‘Pregnancy Discrimination in Sex Discrimination’, European Law Review, 16 (1991), p. 430.Google Scholar
  15. 298.
    S. Ruddick, ‘The Idea of Fatherhood’, in H. Lindemann Nelson (ed.). Feminism and Families (London: Routledge, 1997), p. 205.Google Scholar
  16. 307.
    See for example E. Caracciolo di Torella, ‘New Labour, New Dads — the Impact of Family Friendly Legislation on Fathers’, Industrial Law Journal, 36 (2007), 316–326.Google Scholar
  17. 310.
    European Commission, Reconciliation of Work and Private Life: A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries (Brussels: European Commission, 2005)Google Scholar
  18. European Commission, Gender Mainstreaming of Employment Policies: A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries (Brussels: European Commission, 2007)Google Scholar
  19. 314.
    See United Nation General Assembly, Social Development, Including Questions Relating to the World Social Situation and to Youth, Ageing, Disabled Persons and The Family, 6 January 1997, A/52/57, E/1997/4; G. Van Bueren, The International Protection of Family Members’ Rights as the 21st Century Approaches’, Human Rights Quarterly, 17(4) (1995), 732–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 316.
    D. Muffat-Jandet, ‘Protection of Pregnancy and Maternity’, Industrial Law Journal, 20 (1991), 76–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 317.
    D. Muffat-Jandet, ‘Protection of Pregnancy and Maternity’, Industrial Law Journal, 20 (1991), 76–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 331.
    M. Schmidt, ‘Parental Leave: Contested Procedure, Creditable Results’, International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 13 (1997), 113–126.Google Scholar
  23. 333.
    B. Brandth and E. Kvande, ‘Care Politics for Fathers in a Flexible Time Culture’, in D. Perrons, C. Fagan, L. McDowell, K. Ray and K. Ward (eds). Gender Divisions and Working Time in the New Economy (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006), p. 148Google Scholar
  24. A. Leira, ‘Combining Work and Family’ in A. Leira and T. Boje (eds). Gender, Welfare State and the Market (London: Routledge, 2000), p. 157Google Scholar
  25. A. Leira, Working Parents and the Welfare State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
  26. 340.
    J. Plantenga and C. Remery, Reconciliation of Work and Private Life. A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries (Brussels: European Commission, 2005).Google Scholar
  27. 341.
    J. Plantenga and C. Remery, Reconciliation of Work and Private Life. A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries (Brussels: European Commission, 2005).Google Scholar
  28. 353.
    Inter alia, G. Brüning and J. Plantenga, ‘Parental Leave and Equal Opportunities; Experiences in Eight European Countries’, Journal of European Social Policy 9(3) (1999), 195–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 354.
    F. Deven, ‘Assessing the Use of Parental Leave by Fathers; Towards a Conceptual Framework’, in B. Peper, A. Doorne-Huiskes, and L. Dulk (eds), Flexible Working and Organisational Change: The Organisation of Working and Personal Life (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2005), p. 263.Google Scholar
  30. 355.
    R. Reeves, Dad’s Army: The Case for Father-Friendly Workplaces (London: The Work Foundation, 2003).Google Scholar
  31. 356.
    See further F. Devan, Assessing the Use of Parental Leave by Fathers: Towards a Conceptual Framework’, in B. Peper, A. Doorne-Huiskes, and L. Dulk (eds). Flexible Working and Organisational Change: The Integration of Working arid Personal Life (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2005), p. 258.Google Scholar
  32. 358.
    OECD, Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life — A Synthesis of Findings for the OECD Countries (Paris: OECD, 2007), p. 115Google Scholar
  33. E. Dermott, ‘Time and Labour: Fathers’ Perceptions of Employment and Childcare’, The Sociological Review, 53(2) (2005), 89–103Google Scholar
  34. E. Dermott, ‘What’s Parenthood Got to Do With It?: Men’s Hours of Paid Work’, The British Journal of Sociology, 57(4) (2006), 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 373.
    M. Bell, ‘We are Family? Same-Sex Partners and EU Migration Law’, The Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Labour Law, 9 (2002), 335–355.Google Scholar
  36. 375.
    Although focusing on the Danish system, for an excellent discussion on this point see K. Ketscher, ‘Tern prinsipper om lonarbejde og omsorgsarbejde’, in Liv, arbejde og forvaltning (Copenhagen: Gad Jura, 1995), 291–301.Google Scholar
  37. 380.
    K. J. Morgan and K. Zippel, ‘Paid to Care: The Origins and Effects of Care Leave Policies in Western Europe’, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 10 (2003), 49–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 381.
    K. J. Morgan and K. Zippel, ‘Paid to Care: The Origins and Effects of Care Leave Policies in Western Europe’, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 10 (2003), 49–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 382.
    See generally L. Hantrais, Family Policy Matters — Responding to Family Change in Europe (Bristol: Policy Press, 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Eugenia Caracciolo di Torella and Annick Masselot 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eugenia Caracciolo di Torella
    • 1
  • Annick Masselot
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.University of LeicesterUK
  2. 2.University of LeedsUK
  3. 3.University of CanterburyNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations