*ETUI-Kalina Arabadjieva 22 results

"Key findings:
• The European social turn following the development of the European Pillar
of Social Rights and continuing through the Covid-19 pandemic and beyond
produced a cluster of directives and policy programmes that were to have
positive impacts on women's labour market position. Nevertheless, this
review finds that much remains to be done and identifies three main risks
to gender equality that call for reinforced policy initiatives. This requires the
European Union (EU) to renew and fully implement its 30-year commitment
to gender mainstreaming.
• The first risk is that there may be further mobilisation of women into work
without a compensating increase in support for unpaid care work and changes
in the household division of care work. This requires full implementation of
the European Care Strategy.
• The second risk arises from a failure to assess the gender equality
implications of the major socioeconomic changes associated with both
the green and the digital transitions. Women face potential exclusion from
new green jobs and risk loss of access to standard equality rights, such as
maternity leave, if the digital revolution further expands gig work.
• The third risk is the threat of a further round of austerity policies. The EU
and its Member States need to learn lessons from the sovereign debt crisis
(Karamessini and Rubery 2014) and protect women against, for example,
major cuts to care services and the devaluation of public sector jobs, in
which women are concentrated.
• Welcome though the social turn was and the support provided for both
gender equality and a fairer labour market, there is an urgent need for a
renewed commitment to gender mainstreaming to guard against negative
impacts from forces for change that are often not considered to be within
the scope of gender equality policies. "

"The European Green Deal (EGD) is a growth strategy that seeks to combine climate action with economic stimuli. Climate action, however, inevitably creates winners and losers, at least in the short term. Zooming in on two examples of such actions—the phase-out of coal in Bulgaria and the mining for lithium (necessary for electric vehicle batteries) in Serbia—we point to the significant social implications of the EGD and how these give rise to conflicts that threaten to undermine the economic transformation envisioned for achieving climate neutrality. We show that the remedies put in place by the EU to deal with the social consequences of climate action are too narrow and fragmented and contain almost no legal obligations to promote a socially ‘just transition' that ‘leaves no-one behind'—the leitmotif of the EGD. We join forces here, as scholars of labour law and environmental law, to identify substantive and procedural legal safeguards that would strengthen the social element of the EU climate agenda and help mitigate some of the emerging conflicts and backlash against climate policies."

"Key findings
- Climate change mitigation policies introduced by the European Green Deal, necessary to reduce carbon emissions, will disproportionately affect people in vulnerable situations, particularly those subject to multiple disadvantages because of factors such as gender, age, disability, racial or ethnic background, migrant or socio-economic status.
- While women in general are likely to face disadvantages in the green transition context, some women are particularly vulnerable due to the cumulative effect of various characteristics. This includes women with disabilities, older women and migrant women.
- Current EU ‘just transition' frameworks and related national plans scarcely contain concrete measures to address the effects of gender and intersecting inequalities, although some positive examples can be found in the national Recovery and Resilience Plans of a few countries.
- A genuine commitment to a just transition instead requires adequate funding and targeted measures that support the most vulnerable, taking into account the cumulative effects of multiple disadvantages. Further research and comparable data are necessary to enable us to understand the factors leading to (intersecting) vulnerabilities, which should feed into the design of such measures."

"Building on the ongoing discussion on the labour–environment nexus in labour law and other areas of scholarship, in this paper we systematically analyse EU legal instruments in the areas of labour law and environmental law, seeking to assess how these normative and policy domains are related to each other. We draw on the explicit and implicit intersections between these two domains when it comes to relevant EU legislation, in order to identify and conceptualise early examples of what we call ‘workers' environmental rights'. These rights include individual and collective rights whose exercise contributes simultaneously to labour and environmental sustainability. Where such ‘workers' environmental rights' are not explicitly set out in legislation, we provide insights into how they could be construed via judicial interpretation, as well as on how they could be integrated in future EU and national legislation through statutory provisions or collective agreements."

"This special issue is the result of a scholarly dialogue in which the guest-editors and the article contributors engaged in the context of the international symposium ‘The Labour-Environment Nexus: Legal Perspectives and Beyond'. The special issue contributes to the existing labour law literature on the labour-environment nexus by charting new territory and populating this emerging field of inquiry within labour law – a field which provides fertile ground for reexamining established concepts and boundaries within our area, exploring its relationship to and interaction with other disciplines, and its transformative potential. After presenting the background to this special issue, and setting out some key research questions for the debate, the guesteditors provide an overview of the main issues addressed in the articles, concluding with an outline for a future research agenda in the field of the labour-environment nexus."

"Le genre et le sexe sont importants lorsqu'il s'agit de santé et de sécurité au travail (SST). Pour mieux protéger les droits des femmes au travail, nous devons comprendre les risques particuliers auxquels elles sont exposées et prendre des mesures correctives appropriées. Cependant, la manière dont nous nous y prenons peut se révéler complexe et délicate. Cette problématique est au cœur de l'ouvrage de Karen Messing, Bent Out of Shape, un livre incontournable pour quiconque s'intéresse à la SST, à l'égalité des sexes au travail et à la santé des femmes.
Karen Messing, professeure de biologie spécialisée en génétique et en ergonomie, a consacré sa carrière à l'amélioration de la santé des femmes au travail, en collaboration avec les syndicats, tant dans son pays natal, le Canada, qu'à l'étranger. Dans cet ouvrage, elle présente un compte rendu captivant et accessible des défis auxquels sont confrontées les travailleuses, en s'appuyant sur des études de cas qu'elle a menées avec ses étudiants et d'autres chercheurs sur unlarge éventail de lieux de travail et d'emplois. Il s'agit d'un compte rendu, à la fois rigoureux et profondément personnel et honnête, des succès et des échecs, de la déception et de la frustration face au manque d'action, voire à l'hostilité manifeste à l'égard de ces questions. L'autrice évoque également la solidarité et le soutien entre les femmes, et rend hommage aux chercheurs, hommes et femmes, brillants et dévoués, qui aspirent au changement.
Compte tenu de la formation en biologie de Karen Messing, le livre explore les risques liés à la SST principalement par le biais du corps. Elle s'attache néanmoins à mettre en lumière la manière dont cette dimension physique est liée aux rôles sociaux de genre, aux pressions et aux exigences émotionnelles imposées aux femmes, aux conséquences psychologiques de ces exigences et, plus généralement, aux risques psychosociaux. À cet égard, l'ouvrage souligne la distinction entre le sexe, qui fait référence à certaines différences biologiques, et le genre, qui fait référence à une construction sociale liée à certaines normes et attentes.
L'autrice montre, à l'aide de nombreuses études, comment le sexe et le genre jouent tous deux un rôle dans la SST. Par exemple, elle explique que le corps des femmes étant en moyenne plus petit, celles qui occupent des emplois traditionnellement masculins peuvent être exposées à un risque d'accident ou de maladie sur le lieu de travail en raison d'un équipement mal ajusté conçu pour le corps masculin moyen. Il peut s'agir, par exemple, d'une ceinture porte-outils ou d'un masque médical trop larges pour s'ajuster correctement. Les femmes et les hommes peuvent également être soumis à des exigences physiques et à des facteurs environnementaux différents sur les mêmes lieux de travail, et même lorsqu'ils occupent techniquement les mêmes emplois. L'un des exemples abordés est celui des chaînes de montage divisées en fonction du genre, avec des hommes qui travaillent avec de grosses machines et des charges lourdes, tandis que les femmes emballent manuellement des articles individuels en effectuant des mouvements répétitifs – ces tâches différentes entraînent des risques différents. Les études nous rappellent que le harcèlement et la violence sexuels, ainsi que les stéréotypes liés au genre et aux problèmes d'équilibre entre vie professionnelle et vie familiale, restent de graves préoccupations pour de nombreuses femmes sur le lieu de travail.
Trois points sont particulièrement frappants. Le premier est le silence des femmes sur les problèmes qu'elles rencontrent sur leurs lieux de travail en tant que femmes,qu'il s'agisse de violence et de harcèlement, d'équipements inappropriés ou de salaires inférieurs à celui des hommes. Il n'est pas rare de nier que ces questions soient liées à la discrimination fondée sur le genre et d'avoir l'impression que c'est "de leur faute" et que "de toute façon, personne ne les croirait". Souvent les travailleuses ne veulent pas être perçues comme ayant des capacités et des besoins différents de ceux de leurs collègues masculins. Deuxièmement, dans la plupart des études de cas décrites dans l'ouvrage, les conclusions des analyses scientifiques se heurtent au déni, à l'inaction ou à l'hostilité. La plupart du temps, ces réactions proviennent des employeurs, mais parfois aussi d'agences gouvernementales, de collègues scientifiques ou même de syndicalistes.
Cela nous amène au troisième point, à savoir le dilemme entre le fait d'indiquer explicitement les différences de genre/sexe en matière de risques professionnels afin de mieux protéger la santé des femmes, et l'envie d'éviter d'autres stéréotypes et désavantages liés au genre sur le lieu de travail, y compris la réticence des employeurs à embaucher des femmes. Dans un esprit d'honnêteté intellectuelle, l'auteur admet que le fait de formuler ses conclusions et ses recommandations en termes de genre n'a pas toujours conduit, en pratique, aux meilleurs résultats pour les travailleuses, pour toutes les raisons susmentionnées.
Le récit de Karen Messing sur ses expériences et celles d'autres chercheurs et syndicats montre à quel point cette question est complexe, tant sur le plan technique que politique. Selon elle, "il est difficile d'aborder les questions de genre sur le lieu de travail, et cela nous met mal à l'aise". Elle souligne que nous devons acquérir une meilleure compréhension de la manière dont le genre et le sexe sont pertinents pour la santé au travail dans un emploi ou un lieu de travail particuliers, y compris le rôle des différences biologiques entre les sexes ainsi que les normes et les attentes de la société en matière de genre. En même temps, les chercheurs doivent réfléchir sérieusement à la meilleure approche à adopter pour aider les femmes sans encourager d'autres stéréotypes. Ce livre est un appel aux travailleuses à se rassembler et à lutter pour l'égalité de genre et la santé sur le lieu de travail – une lutte qui, comme nous l'a montré la pandémie de Covid-19, est loin d'être terminée. - Kalina Arabadjieva."

"Gender and sex matter when it comes to occupational health and safety (OSH). To better protect women's rights at work, we need to understand the particular risks to which they are exposed and take appropriate remedial measures. How exactly we go about this, however, can be a complex and sensitive question. It is the question at the heart of Karen Messing's Bent Out of Shape, a mustread for anyone interested in OSH, gender equality at work, and women's health.
Messing, a professor of biology specialising in genetics and ergonomics, has dedicated her career to improving women's occupational health, working together with trade unions both in her native Canada and elsewhere. In this book, she provides an engaging and accessible account of the challenges faced by women workers, drawing on case studies that she, her students and other researchers have conducted in a wide range of workplaces and jobs. It is both a scholarly rigorous and deeply personal and honest account – of successes and failures, of disappointment and frustration at the lack of action or even overt hostility regarding these questions, but also of solidarity and support between women, and of brilliant and dedicated researchers who want to see change.
Given Messing's background in biology, the book explores OSH risks primarily through the medium of the body. She is nevertheless intent on illuminating how this physical dimension relates to societal gender roles, to the pressures and emotional demands placed on women, to the psychological consequences of these demands, and more broadly to psychosocial risks. In this regard, the book highlights the distinction between sex, which refers to certain biological differences, and gender, which refers to a social construct linked to certain norms and expectations.
Messing shows, though numerous studies, how both sex and gender play a role in OSH. For instance, she explains that because women's bodies tend on average to be smaller, those in jobs traditionally occupied by men can be exposed to a risk of workplace injury or illness as a result of ill-fitting equipment designed for the average male body. An example might be a tool belt or medical mask that is too wide to fit properly. Women and men can also be subject to different physical demands and environmental factors in the same workplaces, and even when they technically occupy the same jobs. One example discussed is that of assembly lines divided along gender lines, with men working with big machines and heavy loads, and women manually wrapping individual items with repetitive movements – these different tasks entail different risks.
At the same time, the studies remind us that sexual harassment and violence, as well as gender stereotyping, remain serious workplace concerns for many women. Worklife balance issues also disproportionately put pressure on women, who continue to perform a greater share of unpaid care work on top of their paid job. Jobs and sectors traditionally considered female, such as care or cleaning, are often undervalued and underpaid, and workers are particularly exposed to repetitive movement and uncomfortable contorted positions, as well as emotional demands. But the requirements of these jobs are underestimated, and health and safety issues are often not taken seriously. This point comes up throughout the book: occupational health issues that particularly affect women are not only poorly studied, but often also not acted upon.
Three points are particularly striking in Messing's narrative. The first is women's silence about problems they face at theworkplace as women, from violence and harassment, to inappropriate equipment and lower pay. Not infrequently, there is a denial that these issues are related to gender discrimination, as well as a perception (often leading to a sense of shame) that this is ‘their own fault' and that ‘nobody would believe them anyway.' Women workers often do not want to be perceived as having different abilities and needs from their male colleagues. Second, in most case studies described in the book, the findings of scientific analyses are met with denial, inaction or hostility. Mostly this has come from employers, but at times also from government agencies, fellow scientists or even trade unionists. Messing notes that, in general, mentioning gender explicitly has a tendency to create controversy, backlash from employers and at times even division among workers.
This brings us to the third point, which is the dilemma between explicitly pointing to gender/sex differences when it comes to occupational risks in order to better protect women's health, and the desire to avoid further gender stereotyping and disadvantages at the workplace, including employers' unwillingness to hire women. In a spirit of intellectual honesty, the author admits that framing her findings and recommendations in terms of gender has not always led to the best results for workers in practice, for all of the abovementioned reasons.
Messing's account of her experiences and those of other researchers and unions seeking to improve women's health at work shows how complex it is to navigate this field, in both technical and political terms. In her words, ‘it is hard to take on gender issues at the workplace, and it makes us feel uncomfortable.' To move forward, she stresses that we need to acquire a better understanding of the ways in which gender and sex are relevant to occupational health in a particular job or workplace, including the role of any biological differences between the sexes as well as societal gender norms and expectations. At the same time, researchers need to think carefully about the best approach to take in order to help women without encouraging further stereotyping.
Perhaps the most important message is that little progress can be achieved if workers stand alone. Solidarity, mutual support and the collective voice of women workers – through women's committees within unions, amongst other ways – are essential. The book is thus also a call for women workers to come together and fight for gender equality and health at the workplace – a fight that, as the Covid-19 pandemic has shown us, is far from over. - Kalina Arabadjieva."

"This edited volume explores the need for a transformative approach to envisioning a just social and economic model. A cross-disciplinary team of academic experts was formed to develop this approach, with the aim of proposing concrete policy ideas that are both transformative and original. While these ideas should not be contingent on a revolutionary reconfiguration of the current relationship between capital and labour, they may lead to a radical rebalancing of power structures within societies. Crises are becoming an almost permanent feature of our societies, occurring ever more closely together and increasing uncertainty. The recent crises had and are having profound effects on key institutional arrangements underpinning our societies, such as labour markets and welfare states. This has forced societies to reassess the role of the state in regulating markets, as well as the level of control to which private individuals can be subjected, either by the state or by corporate actors. The post-pandemic period offers a unique opportunity to transform the global economic system, making it more resilient to future shocks, while ensuring environmental sustainability, intergenerational fairness and a dignified existence. It is a time to cast a new social-ecological contract for the future, ensuring a just share of progress for all."