SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Beblo, M. and Wolf, E. (2004). ‘Chancengleichheit und Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf: Faktoren des betrieblichen Engagements. WSI-Mitteilungen, 10: 5617.
  • BERR (2007). ‘The Third Work–Life Balance Employer Survey: Main Findings. Employment Relations Research Series 86. London: Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.
  • Bleses, P. and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2004). The Dual Transformation of the German Welfare State. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
  • BMFSFJ (2006). Unternehmensmonitor Familienfreundlichkeit 2006: Wie familienfreundlich ist die deutsche Wirtschaft? Stand, Fortschritte, Bilanz. Berlin: BMFSFJ.
  • Bonoli, G. (2001). ‘The Politics of New Social Risks Coverage’. Paper presented at the APSA Conference, Boston, MA, August/September.
  • Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. (2005). ‘When do benevolent capitalists change their mind? Explaining the retrenchment of defined-benefit pensions in Britain. Social Policy and Administration, 39: 76485.
  • Briefs, G. (1930). ‘Der wirtschaftliche Wert der Sozialpolitik. Schriften der Gesellschaft für Sozialreform, 33: 14470.
  • Budd, J. and Mumford, K. (2004). ‘Trade unions and family-friendly policies in Britain. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57: 20422.
  • Budd, J. and Mumford, K. (2005). ‘Family-Friendly Work Practices in Britain: Availability and Perceived Accessibility’. IZA Discussion Paper No. 1662, Bonn.
  • Clasen, J. (2005). Reforming European Welfare States: Germany and the United Kingdom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Daft, R. L. and Weick, K. E. (1984). ‘Toward a model of organisations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management, 9: 28595.
  • Daly, M. and Rake, K. (2003). Gender and the Welfare State: Care, Work and Welfare in Europe and the USA. Oxford: Polity.
  • Daly, M. and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2008). ‘Investment, Sustainability and Family Policy’. Paper presented at the Bi-Annual Meeting of the Council for European Studies, Chicago, IL, March.
  • Den Dulk, L. (2001). Work–Family Arrangements in Organisations: A Cross-National Study in the Netherlands, Italy, the United Kingdom and Sweden. Amsterdam: Rozenberg.
  • Dex, S. and Smith, C. (2001). ‘Which British Employers Have Family-Friendly Policies? Analysis of the 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey’. Research Papers in Management Studies 17, Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge.
  • DfEE (2001). ‘Work–Life Balance 2000: Results from the Baseline Study’. Department for Education and Employment Research Report 249, London.
  • Dickens, L. (1994). ‘The business case for women's equality. Is the carrot better than the stick? Employee Relations, 16: 518.
  • DTI (2003). ‘The Second Work–Life Balance Study: Results from the Employer Survey (Main Report)’. Employment Relations Research Series 22, Department of Industry and Trade, London.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1985). Politics against Markets. The Social Democratic Road to Power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Estévez-Abe, M. (2005). ‘Gender bias in skills and social policies: the varieties of capitalism perspective on sex segregation. Social Politics, 12: 180215.
  • Estévez-Abe, M., Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2001). ‘Social protection and the formation of skills: a reinterpretation of the welfare state’. In P. A.Hall and D.Soskice (eds.), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 14583.
  • Evans, J. M. (2001). ‘Firms' Contribution to the Reconciliation between Work and Family Life’. OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 48, Paris.
  • Fleckenstein, T., Saunders, A. and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2008). ‘Post-Industrialism, Skills and the Dual Transformation of the Welfare State: Comparing Britain and Germany since the 1990s’. Revised version of a paper presented at the Bi-Annual Meeting of the Council for European Studies, Chicago, IL, March.
  • Freeman, R. and Medoff, J. (1984). What Do Unions Do? New York: Basic Books.
  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Glass, J. and Fujimoto, T. (1995). ‘Employer characteristics and the provision of family responsive policies. Work and Occupation, 22: 380411.
  • Goodstein, J. D. (1994). ‘Institutional pressure and strategic responsiveness: employer involvement in work–family issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 35082.
  • Goodstein, J. D. (1995). ‘Employer involvement in eldercare: an organizational adaptation perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 165771.
  • Gordon, C. (1994). New Deals — Business, Labor, and Politics in America, 1920–1935. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hacker, J. S. (2002). The Divided Welfare State — The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hall, P. A. and Soskice, D. (eds.) (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Iversen, T. (2005). Capitalism, Democracy, and Welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jacoby, S. M. (1997). Modern Manors — Welfare Capitalism since the New Deal. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Keller, B. (2004). ‘Employment relations in Germany’. In G. J.Bamber, R. D.Lansbury and N.Wailes (eds.), International and Comparative Employment Relations. London: Sage, pp. 21153.
  • Klammer, U. (2000). ‘Handlungsoptionen von Betriebs- und Personalräten im Rahmen der betrieblichen Sozialpolitik’. In B.Frick, R.Neubäumer and W.Sesselmeier (eds.), Betriebliche und staatliche Sozialpolitik: Komplementär oder substitutiv? München: Rainer Hampp Verlag, pp. 14771.
  • Korpi, W. (2006). ‘Power resources and employer-centered approaches in explanations of welfare states and varieties of capitalism: protagonists, consenters, and antagonists. World Politics, 58: 167206.
  • Lewis, J. (1992). ‘Gender and the development of welfare states. Journal of European Social Policy, 2: 15973.
  • Lewis, J. (2001). ‘The decline of the male breadwinner model: implications for work and care. Social Politics, 8: 15269.
  • Lewis, J. (2006). ‘Gender and welfare in modern Europe. Past and Present, 1 (Suppl. 1): 3954.
  • Lewis, J. and Campbell, M. (2007). ‘Work/family balance policies in the UK since 1997: a new departure? Journal of Social Policy, 36: 36581.
  • Lewis, S. (2001). ‘Restructuring workplace cultures: the ultimate work–family challenge? Women in Management Review, 16: 219.
  • Lindecke, C. (2005). ‘Geschlechterpolitik im Betrieb. WSI-Mitteilungen, 6: 3228.
  • Marchington, M., Goodman, J. and Berridge, J. (2004). ‘Employment relations in Britain’. In G. J.Bamber, R. D.Lansbury and N.Wailes (eds.), International and Comparative Employment Relations. London: Sage, pp. 3666.
  • Marshall, T. H. (1963). Sociology at the Crossroads and other Essays. London: Heinemann.
  • Martin, C. J. (2000). Stuck in Neutral: Business and the Politics of Human Capital Investment Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Milliken, F. J., Dutton, J. E. and Beyer, J. M. (1990). ‘Understanding organizational adaptation to change: the case of work–family issues. Human Resource Planning, 13: 91107.
  • Morgan, H. and Milliken, F. J. (1992). ‘Keys to action: understanding differences in organizations' responsiveness to work-and-family issues. Human Resource Management, 31: 22748.
  • Müller-Jentsch, W. (1995). ‘Germany: from collective voice to co-management’. In J.Rogers and W.Streeck (eds.), Works Councils: Consultation, Representation, and Cooperation in Industrial Relations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 5378.
  • Nadeem, S. and Metcalf, H. (2007). ‘Work–Life Policies in Great Britain: What Works, Where and How?’ Employment Relations Research Series 77, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, London.
  • Osterman, P. (1995). ‘Work/family programs and the employment relationship. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 681700.
  • Pearson, R. and Seyfang, G. (2001). ‘New hope or false dawn? Voluntary codes of conduct, labour regulation and social policy in a globalizing world. Global Social Policy, 1: 4978.
  • Peters, B. G. (2005). ‘I'm OK, you're (not) OK: the private welfare state in the United States. Social Policy and Administration, 39: 16680.
  • Ragin, C. (2000). Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Ragin, C. and Sonnett, J. (2005). ‘Between complexity and parsimony: limited diversity, counterfactual cases, and comparative analysis’. In S.Kropp and M.Minkenberg (eds.), Vergleichen in der Politikwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 18097.
  • Rein, M. and Schmähl, W. (eds.) (2004). Rethinking the Welfare State — The Political Economy of Pension Reform. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Root, L. S. (1982). Fringe Benefits. Social Insurance in the Steel Industry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (ed.) (2008). Welfare State Transformations — Comparative Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Shalev, M. (ed.) (1996). The Privatization of Social Policy? Occupational Welfare and the Welfare State in America, Scandinavia and Japan. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
  • Swenson, P. (2002). Capitalists against Markets: The Making of Labor Markets and Welfare States in the United States and Sweden. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Taylor-Gooby, P. (ed.) (2004). New Risks, New Welfare: The Transformation of the European Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Vobruba, G. (1991). Jenseits der sozialen Frage. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
  • Vogel, D. (2005). The Market of Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
  • Whitehouse, G., Haynes, M., MacDonald, F. and Arts, D. (2007). ‘Reassessing the “Family-Friendly Workplace”: Trends and Influences, 1998–2004’. Employment Relations Research Series 76, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, London.
  • Wood, S. J., De Menezes, L. M. and Lasaosa, A. (2003). ‘Family-friendly management in Great Britain: testing various perspectives. Industrial Relations, 42: 22150.