Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Doğu ve Güney Avrupa Refah Rejimlerinde Ebeveyn İzni: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz

Year 2019, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 1 - 17, 20.12.2019

Zeki Parlak , Yüsra Ak

Abstract

Yirminci yüzyılın son çeyreğinden
itibaren gelişmiş ülkelerde imalat sektörünün küçülmesi ve hizmet sektörünün ön
plana çıkmasıyla istihdamın kalitesi ve cinsiyet yapısında köklü bir değişim
gerçekleşmiştir. Hizmet sektöründe genel olarak ücretlerin düşük ve işin iğreti
olması, bir aileyi geçindirmek için erkeğin kazandığı gelirin yetersiz kalması
nedeniyle daha fazla kadın emek piyasalarına girmek zorunda kalmıştır. Bu durum
literatürde emek piyasalarının kadınlaşması olarak isimlendirilmektedir.
Kadının emek piyasalarında daha etkin hale gelmesi çekirdek aile yapısını ve
yaşamını da olumsuz etkilemektedir. Kadının bir işte çalışmasına ek olarak aile
yaşamın sürdürülmesi açısından hayati öneme sahip olan bakım ve ev işleri gibi
yükümlülükleri de yerine getirmek zorunda olması aile yaşamını olumsuz
etkimekte ve iş ve aile yaşamı arasında bir denge kurmayı zorunlu hale
getirmektedir. İş aile yaşamı hayatı arasında denge kurma arayışları, AB’de iş
yaşam dengesi kavramı ve politikalarının geliştirilmesi ile sonuçlanmıştır. Bunlar,
ebeveyn izini, bakım ve esnek çalışma politikalarını içermektedir.



Ebeveyn izni, yeni doğan çocuğun
bakımı konusunda, kadın ve erkeğin rollerini az da olsa değiştirmeyi hedefleyen
bir AB iş yaşam dengesi politikasıdır. Bu çalışmada, Doğu ve Güney Avrupa refah
rejimlerinde ebeveyn izinleri karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilmektedir.  Doğu Avrupa’da ebeveyn izinlerin genellikle
aile hakkı olarak verildiği, büyük oranda kadınlar tarafından kullanıldığı ve
eşitsizliği beslediği ileri sürülmektedir. Güney Avrupa’da ise izin genellikle
bireysel ve devredilemez bir hak niteliğinde olmasına karşın izin kullanımının
ve ödeme oranlarının Doğu Avrupa ülkelerinin gerisindedir.  

Keywords

İş Yaşam Dengesi Refah Rejimleri Doğu Avrupa Refah Rejimi Güney Avrupa Refah Rejimi Ebeveyn İzni

References

  • Addabbo, T., Cardinali, V., Giovannini, D., & Mazzucchelli, S. (2018). Italy Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 223–240).
  • Briggs, A. (1961). The Welfare State at Historical Perspective. Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 2(2), 221–258.
  • Bütün, M. (2010). Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği Perspektifinden Çocuk Bakım Hizmetleri: Farklı Ülke Uygulamaları. T.C. Başbakanlık Kadının Statüsü Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Cerami, A., & Vanhuysse, P. (2009). Introduction: Social Policy Pathways, Twenty Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. A. Cerami & P. Vanhuysse (Ed.), Post-Communist Welfare Pathways: Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe (ss. 1–17). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Dimitrova, E., Kotzeva, T., & Ilieva, K. (2018). Bulgaria Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 81–89).
  • EASPD (2019). Social Welfare Systems across Europe. 29 Mart 2019, https://www.easpd.eu/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/SensAge/d4social_welfare_systems_across_europe.pdf
  • Ebbinghaus B. (2012), Comparing Welfare State Regimes: Are Typologies an Ideal or Realistic Strategy?, Edinburgh: ESPAnet Conference.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Eurostat. (2019). Labour Force Surveys. 1 Mayıs 2018 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/lfs/data/database
  • Fenger, H. J. M. (2007). Welfare Regimes in Central and Eastern Europe: Incorporating Post-Communist Countries in A Welfare Regime Typology. Contemporary Issues and Ideas in Social Sciences, 2(3), 1–30.
  • Ferrera, M. (1996). The “Southern Model” of Welfare in Social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(17), 17–37.
  • Furniss, N., & Tilton, T. (1977). The Case for the Welfare State: From Social Security to Social Equality. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  • Gerbery, D. (2018). Slovak Republic Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 373–378).
  • Hatzivarnava-Kazassi, E., & Karamessini, M. (2018). Greece Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 188–197).
  • Kağnıcıoğlu, D. (2013). İş Yaşam Çatışması ve İş Yaşam Dengesi Politikaları. Çimento Endüstrisi İşverenleri Sendikası, 27(1), 22–39.
  • Kaufmann, F. (2012). European Foundations of the Welfare State. New York: Berghahn Books.
  • Kocourková, J. (2018). Czech Republic Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 127–132).
  • Kotowska, I. E., Matysiak, A., & Styrc, M. (2010). Family Life and Work Second European Quality of Life Survey. Dublin: European Foundation for The Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
  • Kul Parlak, N. (2016a). Avrupa Birliği’nde İş-Yaşam Dengesine Yönelik Uyumlaştırma Politikaları: Ebeveyn İzni. Bilgi, Yaz(32), 56–91.
  • Kul Parlak, N. (2016b). Refah Devletinin Yeniden Yapılanması ve AB Ülkelerinde İş-Yaşam Dengesi. Ankara: Türk Metal Sendikası Araştırma ve Eğitim Merkezi Yayınları.
  • Kurowska, A., Michoń, P., & Godlewska-Bujok, B. (2018). Poland Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 323–331).
  • Leibfried, S. (1993). Towards a European Welfare State? C. Jones (Ed.), New Perspectives on the Welfare State in Europe (ss. 120–143). London: Routledge.
  • Lockwood, N. R. (2003). Work/Life Balance: Challenges and Solutions. Society For Human Resource Management.
  • Meil, G., Lapuerta, I., & Escobedo, A. (2018). Spain Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 387–400).
  • Özdemir, S. (2005). Sosyal Gelişim Düzeyleri Farklı Refah Devletlerinin Sınıflandırılması Üzerine Bir İnceleme. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, (49), 231–266.
  • Özdemir, S. (2007). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Refah Devleti (2. Baskı). İstanbul: İstanbul Ticaret Odası Yayınları.
  • Plantenga, J., & Remery, C. (2005). Reconciliation of Work and Private Life: A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries. Luxemburg: European Commission Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
  • Rhodes, M. (1996). Southern European Welfare States: Identity, Problems and Prospects for Reform. South European Society and Politics, 1(3), 1–22.
  • Saraceno, C. (2017). Southern European Welfare Regimes: From Differentiation to Reconvergence? P. Kennett & N. Lendvai-Bainton (Ed.), Handbook of European Social Policy (ss. 218–229). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Standing, G. (1997). The Folly of Social Safety Nets: Why Basic Income Is Needed in Eastern Europe. Social Research, 64(4), 1339–1379.
  • Szikra, D., & Tomka, B. (2009). Social Policy in East Central Europe: Major Trends in the Twentieth Century. A. Cerami & P. Vanhuysse (Ed.), Post-Communist Welfare Pathways: Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe (ss. 17–34). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Thévenon, O., & Solaz, A. (2013). Labour Market Effects of Parental Leave Policies in OECD Countries (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. No. 141). Paris.
  • Titmuss, R. M. (1958). Essays on the Welfare State. London: Allen & Unwin.
  • Wall, K., & Leitão, M. (2018). Portugal Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies an Research 2018 (ss. 332–344).
  • Wilensky, H., & Lebeaux, C. (1958). Industrial Society and Social Welfare. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Y.y. (2011). Avrupa Birliği’nde Sosyal Güvenlik Hukuku El Kitabı. 14 Ocak 2018, https://www.avrupa.info.tr/fileadmin/Content/Files/Images/haber_arsivi/2012/Sosyal_Guvenlik_Hukuku_El_Kitabı_EN-TR.pdf
  • Yorgun, S. (2010). Sömürü, Koruma ve Pozitif Ayrımcılıktan Çalışma Hayatının Egemen Gücü Olmaya Doğru Kadınar: 21. Yüzyıl ve Pembeleşen Çalışma Hayatı. Sosyoekonomi, 1(Ocak-Haziran), 167–190.

Year 2019, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 1 - 17, 20.12.2019

Zeki Parlak , Yüsra Ak

Abstract

References

  • Addabbo, T., Cardinali, V., Giovannini, D., & Mazzucchelli, S. (2018). Italy Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 223–240).
  • Briggs, A. (1961). The Welfare State at Historical Perspective. Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 2(2), 221–258.
  • Bütün, M. (2010). Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği Perspektifinden Çocuk Bakım Hizmetleri: Farklı Ülke Uygulamaları. T.C. Başbakanlık Kadının Statüsü Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Cerami, A., & Vanhuysse, P. (2009). Introduction: Social Policy Pathways, Twenty Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. A. Cerami & P. Vanhuysse (Ed.), Post-Communist Welfare Pathways: Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe (ss. 1–17). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Dimitrova, E., Kotzeva, T., & Ilieva, K. (2018). Bulgaria Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 81–89).
  • EASPD (2019). Social Welfare Systems across Europe. 29 Mart 2019, https://www.easpd.eu/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/SensAge/d4social_welfare_systems_across_europe.pdf
  • Ebbinghaus B. (2012), Comparing Welfare State Regimes: Are Typologies an Ideal or Realistic Strategy?, Edinburgh: ESPAnet Conference.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Eurostat. (2019). Labour Force Surveys. 1 Mayıs 2018 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/lfs/data/database
  • Fenger, H. J. M. (2007). Welfare Regimes in Central and Eastern Europe: Incorporating Post-Communist Countries in A Welfare Regime Typology. Contemporary Issues and Ideas in Social Sciences, 2(3), 1–30.
  • Ferrera, M. (1996). The “Southern Model” of Welfare in Social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(17), 17–37.
  • Furniss, N., & Tilton, T. (1977). The Case for the Welfare State: From Social Security to Social Equality. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  • Gerbery, D. (2018). Slovak Republic Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 373–378).
  • Hatzivarnava-Kazassi, E., & Karamessini, M. (2018). Greece Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 188–197).
  • Kağnıcıoğlu, D. (2013). İş Yaşam Çatışması ve İş Yaşam Dengesi Politikaları. Çimento Endüstrisi İşverenleri Sendikası, 27(1), 22–39.
  • Kaufmann, F. (2012). European Foundations of the Welfare State. New York: Berghahn Books.
  • Kocourková, J. (2018). Czech Republic Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 127–132).
  • Kotowska, I. E., Matysiak, A., & Styrc, M. (2010). Family Life and Work Second European Quality of Life Survey. Dublin: European Foundation for The Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
  • Kul Parlak, N. (2016a). Avrupa Birliği’nde İş-Yaşam Dengesine Yönelik Uyumlaştırma Politikaları: Ebeveyn İzni. Bilgi, Yaz(32), 56–91.
  • Kul Parlak, N. (2016b). Refah Devletinin Yeniden Yapılanması ve AB Ülkelerinde İş-Yaşam Dengesi. Ankara: Türk Metal Sendikası Araştırma ve Eğitim Merkezi Yayınları.
  • Kurowska, A., Michoń, P., & Godlewska-Bujok, B. (2018). Poland Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 323–331).
  • Leibfried, S. (1993). Towards a European Welfare State? C. Jones (Ed.), New Perspectives on the Welfare State in Europe (ss. 120–143). London: Routledge.
  • Lockwood, N. R. (2003). Work/Life Balance: Challenges and Solutions. Society For Human Resource Management.
  • Meil, G., Lapuerta, I., & Escobedo, A. (2018). Spain Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies and Research 2018 (ss. 387–400).
  • Özdemir, S. (2005). Sosyal Gelişim Düzeyleri Farklı Refah Devletlerinin Sınıflandırılması Üzerine Bir İnceleme. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, (49), 231–266.
  • Özdemir, S. (2007). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Refah Devleti (2. Baskı). İstanbul: İstanbul Ticaret Odası Yayınları.
  • Plantenga, J., & Remery, C. (2005). Reconciliation of Work and Private Life: A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries. Luxemburg: European Commission Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
  • Rhodes, M. (1996). Southern European Welfare States: Identity, Problems and Prospects for Reform. South European Society and Politics, 1(3), 1–22.
  • Saraceno, C. (2017). Southern European Welfare Regimes: From Differentiation to Reconvergence? P. Kennett & N. Lendvai-Bainton (Ed.), Handbook of European Social Policy (ss. 218–229). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Standing, G. (1997). The Folly of Social Safety Nets: Why Basic Income Is Needed in Eastern Europe. Social Research, 64(4), 1339–1379.
  • Szikra, D., & Tomka, B. (2009). Social Policy in East Central Europe: Major Trends in the Twentieth Century. A. Cerami & P. Vanhuysse (Ed.), Post-Communist Welfare Pathways: Theorizing Social Policy Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe (ss. 17–34). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Thévenon, O., & Solaz, A. (2013). Labour Market Effects of Parental Leave Policies in OECD Countries (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. No. 141). Paris.
  • Titmuss, R. M. (1958). Essays on the Welfare State. London: Allen & Unwin.
  • Wall, K., & Leitão, M. (2018). Portugal Country Note. S. Blum, A. Koslowski, A. Macht, & P. Moss (Ed.), International Review of Leave Policies an Research 2018 (ss. 332–344).
  • Wilensky, H., & Lebeaux, C. (1958). Industrial Society and Social Welfare. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Y.y. (2011). Avrupa Birliği’nde Sosyal Güvenlik Hukuku El Kitabı. 14 Ocak 2018, https://www.avrupa.info.tr/fileadmin/Content/Files/Images/haber_arsivi/2012/Sosyal_Guvenlik_Hukuku_El_Kitabı_EN-TR.pdf
  • Yorgun, S. (2010). Sömürü, Koruma ve Pozitif Ayrımcılıktan Çalışma Hayatının Egemen Gücü Olmaya Doğru Kadınar: 21. Yüzyıl ve Pembeleşen Çalışma Hayatı. Sosyoekonomi, 1(Ocak-Haziran), 167–190.
There are 37 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2
Authors

Zeki Parlak

Yüsra Ak

Publication Date December 20, 2019
Submission Date October 31, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 2 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Parlak, Z., & Ak, Y. (2019). Doğu ve Güney Avrupa Refah Rejimlerinde Ebeveyn İzni: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz. Ünye İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 1-17.

Publication Principles
1. Manuscripts submitted to The Journal of Ünye Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences must not have been published anywhere before and should not have been submitted for publication.
2. Articles written in either Turkish or English languages are published in the journal. The scientific and linguistic responsibility of the studies published in the journal belongs to the author(s).
3. In our journal, not only studies coming from academicians but also studies coming from researchers will be evaluated.
4. Studies that had been presented at conferences before and have not been published in full text, only had been published abstracts, can be accepted into the publication evaluation process provided that it is stated in the study.
5. Articles should be submitted to our journal electronically. To submissions of articles online through the website and follow the stage of the article in the referee evaluation process, it is necessary to be a member and log in to the Journal. The personal information entered on the journal's website will only be used for the stated purposes of the journal and will not be accessible for any other purpose or to any party.
6. The authors are informed about the refereeing process of the articles submitted to The Journal of Ünye Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences through the system and the evaluation reports can be easily followed by them via the system.
7. When applying, an article file without author information will be uploaded to the system.
8. The journal is based on the blind peer-review process. In the articles to be sent to the referee, the confidentiality of the information regarding the author's identity is ensured.
9. The articles submitted to the journal are sent to at least two referees after the preliminary examination in terms of form and content. Manuscripts that receive positive feedback from the referees are included in the publication process. If one positive and one negative report is received from the referees, the study is sent to a third referee by the Journal Editor.
10. It is aimed that the articles submitted to the journal will complete the referee process within two months. However, the authors of the articles for which corrections are requested must make the relevant corrections within one month and send them to the editorial board.
11. In line with the reports from the referees, it is decided to publish the article, to request revisions, additional information and abbreviations from the authors within the framework of the report, or not to publish it, and this decision is announced to the authors through the system. The authors are answerable for making all changes requested by the referees. Studies will not be published without constructing the desired changes.
12. The articles whose evaluation process is completed are queued by the journal editorial office and published in the relevant issue of the journal.
13. Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's subject, spelling or grammar rules are returned to the authors after the preliminary review without being sent to the referees. All kinds of changes in form and content may be requested from the authors of the manuscripts received for preliminary evaluation.
14. All publication rights of the articles accepted and published in the journal in written and electronic media belong to The Journal of Ünye Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences.
15. No royalties are paid to the authors for the works published in the journal and the author does not have any claim rights.
16. The opinions in the articles published in the journal are subject to the responsibility of the corresponding authors.
17. In line with the reports received from the referees, it is decided to publish the article, to request corrections, additional information and abbreviations from the authors within the framework of the report, or not to publish the article, and this decision is notified to the authors via the system. Authors are obliged to make all changes requested by the referees. The manuscripts are not published until the requested changes are made.
18. All publication rights of the articles accepted and published in the journal in written and electronic media belong to The Journal of Ünye Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences.
19. No royalties are paid to the authors for the works published in the journal and the author does not have any claim rights.
20. The opinions in the articles published in the journal are subject to the responsibility of the relevant authors.
21. Articles accepted for publication cannot be reproduced and published in any way without the written permission of The Journal of Ünye Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences. However, it can be quoted provided that the source is cited.
22. If a research study has been supported by any institution or produced from the thesis, this should be indicated as a footnote on the same page by placing (*) on the last word of the title of the work.