Page 289 - The ISA Handbook in Contemporary Sociology
P. 289

9781412934633-Chap-17  1/10/09  10:19 AM  Page 260





                   260               THE ISA HANDBOOK IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY


                   of the care relationship.  Where caregiving  a ‘long apprenticeship’ (James, 1989: 37)
                   takes the form of wage labour in a formal or  which predisposes them both to enter into
                   institutional setting (hospital, long-term care  open-ended relations of giving and to under-
                   facility, community care), the care relation-  take the emotional and physical labour of
                   ship is subordinate to,  and limited by, the  care, then gender mediates giving and
                   employment relationship.  This means that  exchange, and hence mediates the class rela-
                   the institutional goals may come into conflict  tion between employer and employee. In
                   with the right to care (both to give and to  Twigg’s words, care is seen as stemming
                   receive care) and the development of care as  from women’s nature: ‘It is not what they do
                   reciprocity. It also means that when such  but who they are. Extras thus represent work
                   relations of reciprocity develop, they may  that is extracted on the basis of the traditional
                   either be regarded as a nuisance by the  gender contract, but not officially recognized
                   employer or as a source of profit in the form  or recompensed in the formal one’ (Twigg,
                   of work done for free by the employees,  2000: 171). In the picture presented here, the
                   which might otherwise need to be remuner-  ‘traditional gender contract’ is not so much a
                   ated. The caregiver’s gifts to the person for  contract as a particular form of habitus.
                   whom she is caring may end up constituting  A Marxist analysis would suggest that the
                   a gift to the employer, work done for free.  workers perform both ‘necessary’ and ‘sur-
                   Thus relations of giving mediate relations of  plus’ labour even when they work to rule,
                   exchange, making it possible for managers in  because the value of their labour power is
                   the public and private sectors to get more  less than the value that their labour produces.
                   work out of the workers than they need to  It would also recall that the problem does not
                   pay for.  Workers are owed debts for their  reside in the gift relationship as such, but in
                   labour which are never repaid, because the  the division of labour which separates out
                   existence of these debts is concealed and  men’s from women’s work, wage relations
                   denied. The gift relationship functions as a  from gift relations, formal from informal
                   mediation of workers’ exploitation in the  work, and so on, giving rise to the reification
                   health care system. 4                   of specific social practices and relationships
                     From the standpoint of those who have  as women’s nature, as superfluous and so on.
                   designed the labour process, the separation
                   between formal, rational and visible care on
                   the one hand, and informal, ‘irrational’ and
                   invisible care on the other, is in a sense a dis-  CONCLUSION
                   tinction between  necessary and  surplus
                   labour, understood respectively as work that  To sum up, a trend in the institutional and
                   must be accomplished because it is mandated  professional side of health care today is to
                   by the employment contract and additional  compress the time of work in formal health
                   work that the workers may do on their own  services, reducing the possibility of building
                   time and out of their own will. From the stand-  the relations of care. Meanwhile, the work of
                   point of the gift relationship, this so-called  forging deeper, more open-ended relation-
                   ‘surplus’ is in fact necessary, the indispensable  ships of reciprocity is increasingly trans-
                   giving back and creation of debt.       ferred to volunteers and family members,
                     A feminist analysis would reject the notion  because paid health care workers do not have
                   that giving this ‘surplus’ is a matter of indi-  time for such work (except in the form of
                   vidual choice, and would point to the habitus  ‘extras’) or because it is no longer considered
                   shaped by patriarchal relations of oppression,  appropriate for them to do it – except in
                   as well as the pressures to which caregivers  the context of high-priced private services.
                   are subject in precarious, low-wage employ-  One result of this trend has been the grow-
                   ment. To the extent that women pass through  ing exploitation by private entrepreneurs and
   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294