Using Ethnographic Evidence to Theorize Work As Problem and Opportunity for Families

Background/Purpose. Since the industrial revolution began in the US in the early 1800s, work and working have increasingly meant labor market venues and wage practices. Even so, until mid-20th century, social programs and policies were informed by somewhat humanistic values and thus were oriented differentially to work and family activities: for example, supporting poor single mothers to care for pre-school children rather than forcing them into wage work. Today, as sociology (Beck), political science (Federici; Weeks), and social work (Garrett) scholars contend, a "work society" valorizes labor market wage work and overwork above all other life activities, despite labor market conditions of insufficient wages, precarity (Kalleberg), and uncompensated work, and despite work's problematic potential for worker exploitation and inequality. In response, scholars suggest considering transformational practices and policies alongside or instead of incremental fixes to the conventional work system. Along these lines, empirical findings from the author's ethnographic research on low-income parents and their work offers a platform from which to consider both conventional solutions and transformational opportunities for today's work and family activities. Parents and their children alike stand to benefit from this broader, more humanistic direction.

 

Methods. In this five-year ethnographic study of families and work in five U.S. cities⁽¹⁾, the research team of nine gathered retrospective and prospective data (to 2006) from twenty-five low-income families and about 1000 auxiliary contacts associated with the parents' work worlds. Observation, in-depth interviews, shadowing, document review, administrative and census data formed the data set. Qualitative software facilitated data management, data analysis and construction of narrative accounts. Triangulation through multiple researchers, respondents and analysts, and "member checking" (Padgett) with the families helped to reduce bias and increase credibility of the findings.

 

Results. Parents created individualized solutions to work and family conflicts in the "work society," such as: "serial parenting" (one parent worked days, the other worked nights); refusing promotion to avoid the stress of a new position and have time for children's needs; and working two or more jobs to make ends meet. Structurally, only one employer out of 74 offered official flextime, which enabled that parent to respond to children's behavior problems in school and keep her job. Although useful in the short run, conventional solutions to the work society did not eliminate these parents' depressive symptoms, their limited or nonexistent advancement possibilities, or the prevalence of physical danger and precarity in many of their jobs.

 

Implications. Accordingly, findings suggest that transformational solutions, in addition to but well beyond conventional adjustments to work conditions, seem indicated. For example, questioning over-valorization of labor market work and moving beyond wage work as a universal requirement could lead social work researchers and advocates toward the reformulation of a guaranteed family income policy. Such questioning could also lead to social policies and social change practices that validate and compensate family care work, volunteer work, and other work outside the boundaries of wage work.

(1) Funded by independent grants from the Annie E. Casey Foundation.