For the past 18 months, the COVID-19 pandemic has transformed virtually every aspect of our lives. With the onset of stay-at-home orders and the closures of schools and office buildings, millions of employees shifted to remote work, which has quickly become a fixture of modern life. However, the transition to remote work for parents and online learning for children has placed new burdens on families. At the same time, the increasing numbers of mothers and fathers working at home may open new possibilities for the division of household labour. Has the value of housework changed in the wake of increasing numbers of at-home workers?
For decades now, feminists have asserted the importance of challenging the gendered division of labour within families, as it often places undue burdens on women. Many argue that the household labour of women, including childcare, laundry, cooking and cleaning, is a key economic contribution whose value has gone without compensation for far too long. In the wake of a massive shift to at-home work, one might expect patterns in the gendered division of labour to also shift. However, many recent studies have found that pre-pandemic patterns of gendered division of household labour remain largely intact and, in some cases, have been exacerbated, with mothers taking on even greater responsibilities during the pandemic.
Housework Through the Pandemic
A Pew Research Centre study found for instance, that gender gaps in sharing household responsibilities persisted throughout the pandemic. Pew’s analysis of an October 2020 survey of American families found that partner dynamics have changed little. They reported the majority of women claimed to do more household chores than their spouse or partner. Additionally, women saw themselves as carrying a heavier burden than men in terms of child-rearing. Interestingly, the study found that men were more likely than women to say the responsibilities were evenly shared.
A similar study found evidence that the pandemic reinforced and even widened gender disparities. While both parents reported spending more time on childcare, mothers were more likely to state having increased their housework time (55%) with fathers (only 45%). More strikingly, among all partnered parents, 79% of mothers said they are primarily responsible for housework during the pandemic, compared with 28% of fathers. Similarly, more mothers reported spending more time on home education and childcare. It is also important to note that the study found that being employed did not reduce mothers’ share of responsibility for housework, childcare or home learning within couples.
However, not only have mothers taken on additional household burdens, many mothers (particularly those of young children) are more likely to transition out of employment and often face greater psychological distress. This same study also found that mothers were taking on a greater share of childcare, making them more likely to reduce their hours or even transition out of employment entirely. Furthermore, a McKinsey report found women’s jobs to be 1.8 times more vulnerable to the crisis than men’s jobs. Their report suggested that one reason was the increased burden of unpaid care which is disproportionately carried by women.
Persisting Gendered Divisions
Why does the gendered division of labour in the household appear to be so stubborn? One response is simply that gendered attitudes are far more entrenched than expected. Another study conducted by the American Sociological Association found that the pandemic caused a shift towards more conventional gender parenting attitudes. It is also notable that much of the data emerging from these studies is very recent, often focusing on a period of a few months in 2020. As a result, the data may only indicate the immediate effect of the pandemic on gendered parenting and may yet leave room for more radical long-term change.
Moreover, there is a strong case to be made that despite the efforts of feminist campaigns for the recognition of female domestic labour, economic anxiety may push people to become more conservative in their attitude towards gender. In the face of an economic crisis, there appears to be an increased importance of a parent’s income and a decrease of importance of their role in child development. Furthermore, feminist activism can only go so far if it lack institutional support. In other words, it is not enough to wage a campaign to merely change people’s hearts and minds regarding gendered family roles. Rather, there needs to be in addition institutional incentives such as childcare support and paid family leave.
However, one can raise an objection that the rise of remote work represents a positive change for parents, as it allows greater flexibility and more time for childcare. There may be room for “cautious optimism” as the pandemic may prompt new policy discussions regarding the deep inequalities of caregiving and the lack of institutional support from employers and caregiving institutions. Furthermore, it has been that in families where both parents worked remotely, there was greater egalitarian sharing across partners in some cases.
Nonetheless, the studies previously discussed still reported that in most cases remote work increases mothers’ housework and childcare and reduces their leisure time relative to fathers. In addition, while remote work may help some families achieve a greater egalitarian split of household tasks, this is not necessarily a widespread outcome. In fact, the shift to remote work does not affect many low-income families where the parents’ work is unable to be conducted remotely. As a result, one cannot conclude that remote work alone solves the issue of gendered division of household labour. Simply put, we need to use the opportunity presented by the pandemic and the rise of remote work to put in place even greater institutional incentives to create a more egalitarian division of labour in families.
Looking to the Future of Families
One example of such policy is the child tax credit that was part of the economic stimulus package passed by the United States Congress in March 2021. According to a New York Times report, the program is expected to provide funds to approximately 39 million households, lifting nearly 5 million children out of poverty this year. Most American families are eligible to receive payments of up to $300 per month per child. This type of direct deposit of cash into people’s hands represents a huge rethinking of government welfare in the United States. The child tax credit has no strings attached and involves zero filing of paperwork. For a welfare system that has long been encumbered by administrative red tape, work requirements, and the stigma of shame for recipients, this policy represents an enormous shift in attitude.
While the primary goal of the credit is to lift children out of poverty, the credit is also a clear recognition of the high cost of childcare. The policy was intentionally not branded as a universal basic income or some kind of compensation for domestic labour of parents, even if it may in practice function as such. Perhaps it is too early to determine the impact of the child tax credit, but it nonetheless provides a necessary cushion for families who are being burdened by increased care responsibilities with the closure of schools and childcare centres. It may also act as a de facto recognition of the household labour of parents, particularly mothers, which some feminists have long advocated. Simply put, this policy represents an enormously important first step in recognising the true cost of domestic labour, and childcare in particular.
But, what does this legislation mean for the gendered division of labour in the family? Once again, it is perhaps too early to tell. Nevertheless, it is an admirable example of seizing the opportunity created by the pandemic to rethink the value of domestic labour and childcare. But it remains merely a first step. There needs to be further institutional action. The U.S. must continue to pursue policies of paid parental leave and subsidised childcare. In addition, the language used must be more intentional. All too often, the conversation regarding domestic labour and childcare centres on mothers, instead of parents. At the same time, however, we must remain wary of gender-blind language that may implicitly reinforce assumptions that the burden of childcare and housework still falls on women.
Ultimately, it is not a question of how to support mothers who bear the burden, but of how to encourage greater egalitarian split of labour and to support both parents in the process. Once we value household labour as the economic contribution it is and view it as the responsibility of both parents, the way we work can begin to fundamentally change. With the onset of remote work during the pandemic, there is no better opportunity to radically rethink how our society provides childcare.
Darcey Bowling is a third-year History and Politics student at the University of Oxford.