Search Results

This chapter examines the case studies presented in this book and begins by assessing active social policies in the EU in general, and in the six countries that were involved in the INPART research in particular. Next, it expounds the two types of activation programmes — subsidised employment programmes for unemployed people (secondary labour market), and education and training schemes. It then explains the types of work under investigation in the case studies. The results of the case studies are then presented, followed by analysing what these findings tell about the inclusionary and exclusionary potentials of various types of work.

This chapter begins by identifying the main goal of the research project Inclusion through Participation (INPART) which was to explain the inclusionary and exclusionary potentials of various types of work. It notes that this objective was formulated against the background of a growing concern in social policy debates and social policy practices with the issue of ‘activation’. It enumerates the six EU countries involved in the project INPART — Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the UK. It discusses that the countries involved in INPART reveal significant differences with respect to the ‘activation’ characteristics of their social policies. Thus, the role of the state in making social policies more active differs according to each country involved in the project. It explores the themes of integration/differentiation and inclusion/exclusion across policy debate and scientific discourse.

Chapter 3 addresses the types of work that women performed during the Civil War for the federal government and how they were received and regulated as employees by male coworkers and supervisors. Women’s labor in the federal government is examined over three broad categories: the types of jobs women performed (including manual and clerical), how supervisors regulated and viewed female employees, and women’s relationships with their coworkers and workspaces. Because supervisors enjoyed great autonomy and because clerical work in the 1860s was largely undifferentiated, supervisors, male coworkers, and female clerks had choices to make as to how to incorporate women into the federal bureaucracy. While some women were able to secure positions that were worthy of their abilities, traditional conceptions of gender ultimately hamstrung female clerks’ efforts to achieve the respect and advancement potential available to men.