It’s about time! Feminist demands and the neoliberal turn in the EU 1974-1989

To understand the subtle dismantling of EU gender equality policies in the recent years, feminist scholars have turned to the past to trace its very conditions of emergence. This paper aims at contributing to this picture through an analysis of which power configurations and technologies that has operated in this policy field. Informed by Foucault’s method of problematization, I combine a genealogical approach with some analytical tools from discourse theory. The intention is to trace agreements, conflicts, resignifications and erasures in the past in order to understand contemporary formations and definitions of gender equality in the EU. The analysis consists of a careful reading of the policy-making process around adopted and rejected directives related to gender equality such as equal pay, equal treatment, parental leave and part-time in the Commission, the European Parliament (EP), and the Economic and Social Committee (EESC). The Council decisions are also considered although the preparatory work of the Member States has not been included. The debates in the EP and in the EESC were important sources as they revealed central conflicts that were hidden in the Commission’s proposals. However, through the reading some policy issues that not necessarily were associated with gender equality have appeared to be crucial, such as the quest for a reduction and reorganization of working hours. In the mid 1970s this question was considered as one of the most important political initiatives to support gender equality and a more equal distribution of paid and unpaid labour between women and men. Hence, a decade later this gender equality incentive was dropped and replaced by a demand for deregulation. A staring point in my analytical approach has been to abstain from applying a gender perspective in advance onto the arguments or proposals debated, based on whether or not they problematize the distribution of power between the sexes. I consider this important since the application of axiomatic feminist assumptions tends to produce a forecast ‘critical’ analysis based on predetermined feminist ideal. According to this strategy I have tried to be open to other power relationships that operate in the field of gender equality and to see how a struggle that seems to be secondary can suddenly be revealed as primary. The results of the study shows for instance that the debate on part-time and reorganization of working time consisted of a struggle between attempts to either improve working and living conditions or to introduce more flexibility and deregulation. In the case of the equal pay directive the conflict between different systems of labour law (systems of job classifications or collective agreements) appeared to be central. It also shows how the agenda by the second-wave feminism coincided with both neoliberal and conservative forces, which is discussed in line with the work of Wendy Brown and Nancy Fraser. Moreover, the study shows that the use of primary and secondary law in the policy-making process in order to request more generous interpretations or suggests delimitations of the political mandate forms an important power technology.