We analyze the dynamic interaction of state institutions and organizational policies through an analysis of leave benefits in U.S. organizations. Following the Pregnancy Leave Act of 1978 and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, organizations have been required by law to allow workers to take time off from work for childbearing and childrearing. Yet organizations vary on whether they offer full-time employees benefits that actually facilitate leave for family responsibilities. We analyze the determinants of the organizational decision to offer paid maternity leave to full-time employees. We compare these findings to the determinants of the organizational decision to offer paid sick leave to full-time employees. Our analysis suggests that organizations have taken an activist approach to their institutional environments: In the face of federal definitions of the law that mandated gender-neutral policies in the workplace and linked pregnancy to disability, those organizations that most often deal with maternity issues (e.g., those located in female-dominated industries) have institutionalized sick leave policies (often instead ofmaternity leave) to accommodate pregnant employees. The analysis examines specific aspects of the institutional environment at the state and federal levels to illuminate these trends.

The State, Courts, and Maternity Policies in U.S. Organizations: Specifying Institutional Mechanisms

This chapter discusses developments in feminist state theory through a comparison of feminist interventions into jurisprudence, criminology, and welfare state theory. Early feminist work on the state analyzed how women were subordinated by a centralized state. More recently, feminist scholars unearthed how states are differentiated entities, comprised of multiple gender arrangements. This discovery of state variation surfaced differently in these three branches of scholarship. Feminist legal theorists concentrated on multiple legal discourses, feminist criminologists on the diverse sites of case processing, and feminist welfare theorists on the varied dimensions of welfare stratification. Because of their different approaches to state gender regimes, these scholars have much to offer, and to gain from, one another. Thus, this chapter argues for the importance of an interdisciplinary feminist dialogue on the state. It also suggests ways to promote such a dialogue and to insert a sociological perspective in...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/223460.pdf

Feminist State Theory: Applications to Jurisprudence, Criminology, and the Welfare State

How do Family and Medical Leave Act rights operate in practice in the courts and in the workplace? This empirical study examines how institutions and social practices transform the meaning of these rights to recreate inequality. Workplace rules and norms built around the family wage ideal, the assumption that disability and work are mutually exclusive, and management's historical control over time all constrain opportunities for social change. Yet workers can also mobilize rights as a cultural discourse to change the social meaning of family and medical leave. Drawing on theoretical frameworks from social constructivism and new institutionalism, this study explains how institutions transform rights to recreate systems of power and inequality but at the same time also provide opportunities for law to change social structure. It provides a fresh look at the perennial debate about law and social change by examining how institutions shape the process of rights mobilization.

Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act: Rights on Leave

The purposes of this article are to analyze the claims, advanced by feminists, that international law disfavors women's interests and viewpoints conceptually, procedurally, and substantively; to identify the obstacles to international law recognizing women's voices and protecting their interests; and to suggest possible solutions.This article argues that international law is gendered neither conceptually nor procedurally, and that most of its substance exhibits no gender bias. International law does formally account for most (but not all) of the human rights concerns that are unique to women and, moreover, has increasingly accounted for women's experiences in its creation and administration, even if it does not perform this function perfectly. While feminist legal scholars offer several interesting insights into the suffering and under representation of women internationally, their criticism really applies to the overwhelming economic, political, and social gender inequality in states, not in the international law system. Rather, compared to the legal systems of states, international law is sensitive to the concerns of women and is a progressive force for advancing women's interests. Hence, it has increasingly addressed the substantive concerns of women and procedurally adopted an arguably more feminine "ethic of care." However, in two areas, international law has not lived up to the legitimate expectations of women: in its disproportionate concentration on economic issues, and in its failure to provide for systemic support for the enforcement of women's human rights.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1404884_code1195389.pdf?abstractid=1404884&mirid=1

Feminism and International Law: Theory, Methodology, and Substantive Reform

In 1997, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a policy statement strongly supporting the physiological benefits conferred by human milk. It recommended that infants be breastfed for 12 months and called for employers to support breastfeeding. The following year, federal legislation was formulated to facilitate breastfeeding among women in paid work. Although both these events represented significant developments in the U.S. context, they nevertheless posed potential gender equity concerns. This article explores the National Organization for Women's response to these developments. In doing so, it also examines the way in which the issue of breastfeeding and women's labor market involvement was addressed in equal-treatment/special-treatment debates in the previous decade. The article concludes by arguing that “equality and difference” discussions need to be extended to provide a new theoretical and practical framework for achieving equity in the workplace that would also accommodate the needs of ...

EXTENDING THE “BRIGHT LINE” Feminism, Breastfeeding, and the Workplace in the United States

In the summer of 1979, Tamara Buley was hired as a sales clerk by the Miller-Wohl company in Great Falls, Montana. Shortly after she started working Ms. Buley discovered that she was pregnant, and in the weeks that followed, missed a few days of work because of morning sickness. Pursuant to Miller-Wohl's policy of denying any sick leave to employees during their first year with the company, Tamara Buley was fired. She felt that she had been fired because of her pregnancy. Knowing this to be illegal, she filed a discrimination complaint with the Montana Human Rights Commission.2

Linda J. Krieger

Papers

The Miller-Wohl Controversy: Equal Treatment, Positive Action and the Meaning of Women's Equality