Log in

View Full Version : New Venezuelan law gives wages to full-time mothers.



Sidagma
21st May 2013, 08:07
Here is some news that the conservative critics of Venezuela's leftist government will not publicize. The Chavistas announced that a new labour law, part of which will grant recognition to non-salaried work traditionally done by women, will come into effect this week. Full-time mothers will now be able to collect a pension.

While there are a number of criticisms to be made of the Venezuelan government, the genius of the Bolivarian process is that it combines numerous forms of struggle against inequality. The most obvious lies in its commitment to economic redistribution, and measured by the Gini co-efficient, Venezuela has the lowest rate of inequality in Latin America. An equally significant form of struggle against inequality, however, lies in its pursuit of gender equity.

One of the major theoretical criticisms of the economic redistribution model in more general terms, often advanced by post-modern and post-developmental theorists, has been from the vantage point of questions of identity. Theorists like the anthropologist Arturo Escobar have noted that economic growth does not necessarily transform status relations such as those oriented around gender, race, ethnicity, or sexuality; therefore some have contended that attempts at social change should place primacy, or at least equal emphasis, on the politics of difference. The question of difference: how can everyone in society be able to intervene with equal capacity when there is such significant variation in the recognition that we allot to diverse identities in society? Critics of traditional development have argued that the emphasis on economic redistribution, by either advocates of the market or the state, has ignored the crucial role that identity and diversity play in society. Economic re-allocation does not end the identity hierarchies that place women at a lower rung of the status ladder than men throughout Latin America.

The political philosopher Nancy Fraser has contended that advocates of cultural diversity implicitly start with the proposition that our identity is developed in interaction with others. Our self-esteem is constructed in relation to receiving acknowledgement from others and providing recognition to them; if a group is regularly presented with negative images of themselves, their self-esteem suffers. Non-recognition produces psychological injury: one's self-perception becomes distorted. Therefore in order for groups to achieve full recognition from others, civil society actors maintain that there is a need to establish a system in which all actors can be full partners in social life. Feminists, both inside and outside the Bolivarian process, have advocated for social policies that encourage equal participation in all social institutions.

The Venezuelan government has made many progressive gains, with the most prominent example being the explicitly anti-sexist 1999 Constitution. This set of principles was the result of co-operation amongst members of the constitutional assembly's Committee on Family and Women, the National Women's Council and women's civil society organizations. The constitutional assembly's committee consulted women from every type of political campaign: legal rights, international agencies, academics, labour unions and small business leaders. The Constitution guaranteed women's right to work, to health services, to social security and pensions. Most innovatively it recognized the monetary value of housework by, in principle, supporting housewives' right to pensions. This week that principle has become a reality. Progressives around the world looking for ways to advance gender rights still have much to learn from Venezuela's continuing social revolution.

[x (http://rabble.ca/columnists/2013/05/venezuelas-new-labour-law-best-mothers-day-gift)]

Excellent news. Is this the first time this has happened?

Anglo-Saxon Philistine
21st May 2013, 08:12
This is, of course, an improvement over situation, ubiquitous in most of the world, where women work to raise children while receiving no compensation and being financially dependent on their male relatives or husbands, but I find the focus on mothers worrying. Unpaid housework is still not being compensated unless the woman has given birth, which seems to rather reinforce patriarchal notions of the "proper place" of women.

RebelDog
21st May 2013, 08:43
We live in a world where work is only recognised as work if a capitalist can exploit it. Its a progressive step, a million miles from austerity crazed Europe.

blake 3:17
22nd May 2013, 06:31
[x (http://rabble.ca/columnists/2013/05/venezuelas-new-labour-law-best-mothers-day-gift)]

Excellent news. Is this the first time this has happened?

I believe so, but not sure.

In parts of Europe with strong Left and Left Social Democratic traditions there have been very enlightened approaches to reproductive labour.

Vladimir Innit Lenin
22nd May 2013, 12:44
This is a very progressive measure indeed. It is in many ways post-capitalist, or at least 'heterodox', in that it separates work and income from the extraction of surplus value, which is something that rarely happens under the capitalist social system.

Devrim
22nd May 2013, 14:08
This is a very progressive measure indeed.

I think it is very difficult to determine anything like that. The article has no detail about it at all such as how do you qualify and how much do you get. Many states make some sort of payments to mothers. Without details it is pretty difficult to compare.

Devrim

Luís Henrique
22nd May 2013, 14:44
In principle, this should reduce competition between workers, and so allow for increased union activity and wage rises. On the other hand, it obviously tends to reinforce the patriarchal sexual division of labour. Which of these two aspects is determinant is difficult to assess without more details about both the legislation and the actual situation of class struggle and labour market in Venezuela.

Luís Henrique

Die Neue Zeit
22nd May 2013, 14:51
This is a very progressive measure indeed. It is in many ways post-capitalist, or at least 'heterodox', in that it separates work and income from the extraction of surplus value, which is something that rarely happens under the capitalist social system.

Isn't this old news already? Some unemployment insurance programs in other countries already provide benefits for pregnant women and new mothers.

hatzel
22nd May 2013, 15:06
Isn't this old news already? Some unemployment insurance programs in other countries already provide benefits for pregnant women and new mothers.

I think that's the pertinent issue, actually. Until I get evidence otherwise, I will assume that this is no different from the welfare state systems of other countries that give child benefit payments to mothers. In that case, the significance isn't that they give money to full-time mothers, but that they 'brand' it in this way, calling it a wage for their work, rather than calling it a grant given in spite of these women (supposedly) not doing any work. In such case we should analyse it on those terms; what impact or conceptual shift or whatever else is this particular approach aiming for? Yes, it maybe stresses that the category of 'work' is wider than it is generally considered to be according to capitalist ideology, but on the other hand, it might actually reinforce the idea that people should only get money for their labour, rather than getting money simply because they need it. The former might contribute to the decolonisation of women, but the latter doesn't exactly challenge the logic of proletarian labour, being wholly consistent with a process of conceptual proletarianisation, actually...

Clarksist
22nd May 2013, 15:20
This is, of course, an improvement over situation, ubiquitous in most of the world, where women work to raise children while receiving no compensation and being financially dependent on their male relatives or husbands, but I find the focus on mothers worrying. Unpaid housework is still not being compensated unless the woman has given birth, which seems to rather reinforce patriarchal notions of the "proper place" of women.

This is a good point. It seems to benefit women who stay at home to have children and not necessarily to benefit all women (or, in some small amount of cases I'm sure, men) who do unpaid "third shift" housework.

However, I think that if you have to limit pensions due to budgeting, other factors have to determine which reforms you take first. In this case, mothers have many more moment-to-moment unforeseen expenses which the economic freedom allowed for by pensions no doubt helps. Also, if the father leaves or dies or a divorce occurs and the mother keeps the child she can support herself when she may not otherwise be able to because of the time she has taken to raise a child instead of seeking a job.

I think that what you point out is that this is not the end of the issue, but I think we can all agree that this is a step in the right direction and not an insignificant one.

It is good news that does a red heart good.

Rafiq
22nd May 2013, 16:28
Good. It finally recognizes the role of mothers in the bourgeois family: essentially slave labor. This law opens the space to combat it as suchm

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

Sinister Cultural Marxist
23rd May 2013, 16:44
I like how they're not only getting some kind of immediate financial compensation for their activity, they're also receiving a pension for their reproductive labor.


Here is some news that the conservative critics of Venezuela's leftist government will not publicize. The Chavistas announced that a new labour law, part of which will grant recognition to non-salaried work traditionally done by women, will come into effect this week. Full-time mothers will now be able to collect a pension.That helps to liberate housewives not only in the short term but in the long term. It solves so many fundamental problems which stem from being a stay-at-home mother. For instance in most places, the lack of such protections ensure that mothers (especially abused ones) must think twice before leaving their significant other for the financial security of themselves and their children.