Unions foster group solidarity, training individuals to think and act for the collective rather than for purely individual gain. In this article, I study the extent to which union membership is associated with men’s participation in unpaid social reproduction. Descriptive models using American Time Use Surveys indicate that, on average, men with union coverage dedicate more time to unpaid care of household members compared to men without. I offer theoretical explanations for this relationship and explore how union membership has shaped men’s participation in unpaid social reproduction through the lens of community solidarity.
AlesinaAlbertoGlaeserEdwardSacerdote.Bruce2005. Work and leisure in the United States and Europe: Why so different?NBER Macroeconomics Annual20: 1–64.
2.
ArrighiBarbara A.MaumeDavid J.Jr. 2000. Workplace subordination and men’s avoidance of housework. Journal of Family Issues21 (4): 464–87.
3.
BanksNina. 2020. Black women in the United States and unpaid collective work: Theorizing the community as a site of production. The Review of Black Political Economy47 (4): 343–62.
4.
BauerGerrit. 2016. Gender roles, comparative advantages, and the life course: The division of domestic labor in same-sex and different-sex couples. European Journal of Population32: 99–128.
5.
BeckerGary S.1985. Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor. Journal of Labor Economics3 (1, part 2): S33–58.
6.
BélandDaniel. 2001. Does labor matter? Institutions, labor unions and pension reform in France and the United States. Journal of Public Policy21 (2): 153–72.
7.
BergPeterErnst KossekEllenMisraKaumudiBelmanDale. 2014. Work-life flexibility policies: Do unions affect employee access and use?ILR Review67 (1): 111–37.
8.
BertrandMarianneKamenicaEmirPanJessica. 2015. Gender identity and relative income within households. The Quarterly Journal of Economics130 (2): 571–614.
BraunsteinElissa. 2008. The feminist political economy of the rent-seeking society: An investigation of gender inequality and economic growth. Journal of Economic Issues42 (4): 959–79.
11.
BrysonAlexDale-OlsenHaraldNergaardKristine. 2020. Gender differences in the union wage premium? A comparative case study. European Journal of Industrial Relations26 (2): 173–90.
12.
BuddJohn W.BreyAngela M.2003. Unions and family leave: Early experience under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Labor Studies Journal28 (3): 85–105.
13.
BuddJohn W.MumfordKaren. 2004. Trade unions and family-friendly policies in Britain. ILR Review57 (2): 204–22.
14.
ConnellRaewyn. 2000. The Men and The Boys. Oakland: University of California Press.
15.
CraigLynBrownJudith E.2017. Feeling rushed: Gendered time quality, work hours, nonstandard work schedules, and spousal crossover. Journal of Marriage and Family79 (1): 225–42.
16.
CranfordCynthia J.2007. It’s time to leave machismo behind! Challenging gender inequality in an immigrant union. Gender & Society21 (3): 409–38.
17.
CrockerJillianClawsonDan. 2012. Buying time: Gendered patterns in union contracts. Social Problems59 (4): 459–80.
18.
FioritoJack. 2007. The state of unions in the United States. Journal of Labor Research28 (1): 43–68.
19.
FischerJocelyn. 2024. Housework among same-sex and different-sex couples: The roles of time and earnings. Journal of Marriage and Family86 (4): 867–86.
20.
FloodSarahSayerLiana C.BackmanDaniel. 2022. American Time Use Survey Data Extract Builder, Version 3.1 [dataset]. College Park and Minneapolis, MN: University of Maryland and IPUMS.
21.
FraserNancy. 2017. Crisis of care? On the social-reproductive contradictions of contemporary capitalism. In Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression, ed. TithiBhattacharya, 21–36. London: Pluto.
22.
FreemanRichard B.HanEunice S.2013. Public Sector Unionism Without Collective Bargaining. Paper presented at the AEA Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, January 6. Accessed at: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12553710.
23.
GregoryAbigailMilnerSusan. 2009. Trade unions and work-life balance: Changing times in France and the UK?British Journal of Industrial Relations47 (1): 122–46.
24.
HaasLindaHwangC. Philip. 2013. Trade union support for fathers’ use of work-family benefits: Lessons from Sweden. Community, Work, and Family16 (1): 46–67.
25.
HanEunice S.2022. What did unions do for union workers during the COVID-19 pandemic?British Journal of Industrial Relations61 (3): 623–52.
26.
HanEunice S.KeefeJeffrey. 2023. What teachers’ unions do for teachers when collective bargaining is prohibited. Labor Studies Journal48 (2): 183–212.
27.
HartmannHeidi I.1979.The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital & Class3 (2): 1–33.
28.
HolgateJane. 2021. Trade unions in the community: Building broad spaces of solidarity. Economic and Industrial Democracy42 (2): 226–47.
29.
HughesKaren D.2003. Pushed or pulled? Women’s entry into self-employment and small business ownership. Gender, Work & Organization10 (4): 433–54.
30.
KerrisseyJasmineSchoferEvan. 2013. Union membership and political participation in the United States. Social Forces91 (3): 895–928.
31.
KramerAmit. 2008. Unions as facilitators of employment rights: An analysis of individuals’ awareness of parental leave in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society47 (4): 651–58.
32.
LoscoccoKarynBirdSharon R.2012. Gendered paths: Why women lag behind men in small business success. Work and Occupations39 (2): 183–219.
33.
LuhrSigridSchneiderDanielHarknettKristen. 2022. Parenting without predictability: Precarious schedules, parental strain, and work-life conflict. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences8 (5): 24–44.
34.
LurieLilach. 2014. Do unions promote gender equality?Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy22: 89–109.
35.
LynessKaren S.GornickJanet C.StonePamelaGrottoAngela R.2012. It’s all about control: Worker control over schedule and hours in cross-national context. American Sociological Review77 (6): 1023–49.
36.
MarksGary Wolfe. 2014. Unions In Politics: Britain, Germany, and the United States in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
37.
MartellMichael E.RoncolatoLeanne. 2020. Share of household earnings and time use of women in same-sex and different-sex households. Eastern Economic Journal46: 414–37.
38.
MuchombaFelix M.KaushalNeeraj. 2022. Gender differences in immigrant assimilation activities in the US: Evidence from time-use data. Feminist Economics28 (2): 189–216.
39.
MüllerMirjam. 2021. Who cares? Market socialism and social reproduction. Review of Social Economy79 (3): 454–75.
40.
NelsonJulie A.2016. Husbandry: A (feminist) reclamation of masculine responsibility for care. Cambridge Journal of Economics40 (1): 1–15.
41.
ParryDiana C.FullagarSimone. 2013. Feminist leisure research in the contemporary era: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Leisure Research45 (5): 571–82.
42.
PetachLukeWyantDavid K.2023. The union advantage: Union membership, access to care, and the Affordable Care Act. International Journal of Health Economics and Management23 (1): 1–26.
43.
PilarzAlejandra RosSandstromHeatherHenlyJulia R.2022. Making sense of childcare instability among families with low incomes: (Un)desired and (un)planned reasons for changing childcare arrangements. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences8 (5): 120–42.
44.
QuickPaddy. 2008. Unpaid, reproductive, caring labor? The production of labor power? Theoretical and practical implications of terms used for women’s work. Review of Radical Political Economics40 (3): 308–14.
45.
———. 2023. Capitalism and household production: A Marxist-feminist critique of social reproduction theory. Science & Society87 (4): 447–74.
46.
ReevesRichard V.2022. Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male Is Struggling, Why It Matters, and What to Do about It. Washington, DC:Brookings Institution Press.
47.
ReynoldsJeremy. 2004. When too much is not enough: Actual and preferred work hours in the United States and abroad. Sociological Forum19 (1): 89–120.
48.
SayerLiana C.FineLeigh. 2011. Racial-ethnic differences in US married women’s and men’s housework. Social Indicators Research101: 259–65.
49.
SchneiderDaniel. 2011. Market earnings and household work: New tests of gender performance theory. Journal of Marriage and Family73 (4): 845–60.
50.
ScottNicholas A.SiltanenJanet. 2017. Intersectionality and quantitative methods: Assessing regression from a feminist perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology20 (4): 373–85.
51.
Sigle-RushtonWendy. 2014. Essentially quantified? Towards a more feminist modeling strategy. In The Sage Handbook of Feminist Theory, eds. MaryEvansHemmingsClareHenryMarshaJohnstoneHazelMadhokSumiPlomienAniaWearingSadie, 431–45. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
SimisterJohn. 2013. Is men’s share of housework reduced by “gender deviance neutralization”? Evidence from seven countries. Journal of Comparative Family Studies44 (3): 311–25.
53.
SmallSarah F.2023a. The political economy of hegemonic masculinity: Race, income, and housework in the United States. Review of Radical Political Economics55 (1): 26–46.
54.
SmallSarah F.2023b. Patriarchal rent seeking in entrepreneurial households: An examination of business ownership and housework burdens in Black and White US couples. Feminist Economics29 (4): 65–102.
55.
SmallSarah F. Forthcoming. What is a feminist quantitative method? Opportunities for feminist econometrics. Feminist Economics. Available in preprint on SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4859326.
56.
StanczykAlexandra B.HenlyJulia R.LambertSusan J.2017. Enough time for housework? Low-wage work and desired housework time adjustments. Journal of Marriage and Family79 (1): 243–60.
57.
StewartJay. 2013. Tobit or not Tobit?Journal of Economic and Social Measurement38 (3): 263–90.
