In most Western societies, it has become widely accepted that the combination of demographic ageing and pressure to reduce public spending should necessarily result in the delaying of retirement, usually along with reforms to existing pension schemes. Largely promoted by international bodies such as the OECD throughout the 1st decade of the 21st Century, this vision of extending working lives (EWL) as a universal solution to a number of social ills has been actively challenged by social mobilisations and is being increasingly questioned by inter-disciplinary, comparative academic research projects (e.g. COST Action IS1409 Gender & Health Impacts of Policies Extending Working Life in Western Countries http://genderewl.com/).

In line with the overall objectives of the Congress, this Workshop addresses the Future of work by inviting participants to critically assess the importance and the social consequences of such challenges to the Fordist (androcentric) life-course tryptic “education – employment – [early] retirement”.

Fin août 2018, lorsque le Prof. Dominique Joye avait pris sa retraite*, Eléonore Lépinard, Caroline Roberts, Guy Elcherot et Dario Spini avaient résumé le parcours et les apports de ce chercheur au cours des douze années passées alors à l'Université de Lausanne. Notamment en rappellant que "Dominique Joye y a été successivement professeur associé, puis professeur ordinaire à l’Institut des sciences sociales. Son travail a profondément marqué le développement des sciences sociales à l’Université de Lausanne, et celui de l'ISS."

Dès 2008, il avait joué un rôle prépondérant dans l’accueil du centre national FORS au sein de l’Unil et dans la création du Centre MISC (pour Méthodes, Inégalités et Changement Social), en accord parfait avec ses préoccupations en matière de recherche: la volonté de toujours lier les questions méthodologiques, qui soulèvent des défis parfois très techniques, aux enjeux sociétaux liés au pouvoir et aux inégalités. 

De PAVIE au PRN LIVES

Quatre ans plus tard, Dominique Joye a fortement contribué à la fusion harmonieuse entre MISC et le laboratoire PAVIE, pour la création du Centre de recherche sur les parcours de vie et les inégalités, LINES. "Directeur de l’ISS puis, Vice-Doyen à la recherche de la Faculté des SSP, il s’est investi à tous les échelons pour le développement des sciences sociales au sein de notre Faculté, et leur rayonnement bien au-delà." Et c'est suite à l’arrivée de FORS à Lausanne, que le chercheur a pu développer et approfondir une série de recherches sur les inégalités en Suisse dans une perspective temporelle, encore accentuée par sa participation au PRN LIVES, établi en 2011. Dans ce cadre il a notamment dirigé l’IP14.

Hommage à un collègue attentif

Le message d'août dernier reste bien sûr valable, dont le vibrant hommage à celui que nous connaissons comme un "collègue attentif, engagé et enthousiaste", qui "a supervisé de nombreuses thèses de doctorat et accompagné de nombreux chercheurs et chercheuses post-doctoraux dans leurs débuts de carrière. Toujours ouvert et positif, il a agi, aussi bien comme directeur que comme mentor, pour soutenir le développement professionnel et encourager le potentiel de nombreux jeunes collègues qui se souviennent de ses innombrables conseils, de son goût pour la nuance, de sa méfiance pour les solutions simples et de ses encouragements constants à changer de point de vue quand les phénomènes semblent trop évidents. Plein d’énergie, grand voyageur, il a marqué ses collaborateurs et collaboratrices par son énergie et son don d’ubiquité, souvent dans plusieurs pays ou plusieurs réunions presque en même temps."

Tous les membres du PRN LIVES lui souhaitent une belle et longue retraite!

*Source: Dominique Joye nommé professeur honoraire de la Faculté des SSP (unil.ch)
>> Voir la leçon d'honneur (©Unil)

The study based on the Swiss Household Panel reveals that heterosexual couples’ homogamy has increased in Switzerland since the 1990’s. High-earning men are now more frequently in relationships with high-earning women, and that low earners more frequently have partners in the same income bracket. With regard to education, individuals with a low level of education in particular are more likely to form relationships together than was the case twenty years ago. These conclusions were found by the three authors of the article issued in the last edition (n° 17) of the journal Social Change in Switzerland, published by the University of Lausanne by FORS, LINES and the National Centre of Competence in Research LIVES.

This new study shows how the educational levels and household incomes of heterosexual couples in Switzerland are changing. Between 1992 and 2014, the proportion of couples where both partners were university graduates rose from 3% to 13% of all households. During the same period, the proportion of homogamous couples who had completed their upper secondary education (apprenticeship or sixth form-level college) fell from 36% to 27%. The proportion of couples where both partners had only completed compulsory education remained stable at 8%. Since this population group is decreasing, this stable figure reveals a choice of partner that is becoming increasingly selective.

The role of women

The increase of homogamy could partially be explained by the fact that young women in Switzerland are educated to the same level as men could in part explain the increase in homogamy. Indeed, the proportion of households where men have a higher level of education than their female partners fell from 28% in 1992 to 20% in 2014. At the same time, couples where the female partner is educated to a higher level than the male partner today account for 12% of all households, compared to 7% in 1992.

Unlike homogamy of education, which remains largely static throughout life, homogamy of income depends on the choice of partner and the way in which partners in a relationship decide to share the paid work and work in the home. Mothers reduce or interrupt their careers, and therefore their incomes, more often than men. Despite this, the research team showed that the earnings of both partners within couples are increasingly converging. Therefore, couples where the partners have similar incomes are those where the female partner has a higher level of education than the male partner.

Education is decisive as soon as couples meet

Alongside the essentially visible characteristics of a potential partner (finances, physical appearance, social status, etc.), the place where couples meet is unwittingly a decisive factor. The majority of couples are actually formed between pupils at school, colleagues in the workplace or from circles of mutual friends. In addition, the increase in homogamous couples can also be explained by the fact that society is in general becoming more inclined to pursue education to a higher level than in the past. The combined effect of raising the level of education and greater educational equality between the sexes has automatically led to a higher proportion of homogamous couples where both partners are well educated.

Gender-based differences for people living alone

This research also highlights that the probability of living alone is associated with income and level of education, but in ways which differ according to gender. It shows that the categories most likely to live alone are men earning a low income and women with a high level of education. Overall, the proportion of men and women living alone has remained constant at approximately one fifth of all households (people aged 25-64 years).

Could homogamy be a cause of inequality?

Although it appears that choosing a similar partner leads to more stable relationships, this homogamy could at the same time be damaging for society as a whole. Researchers note this is because a society where the wealthy marry each other is more unequal than one where wealthy individuals marry low earners. Given that couples with a low level of education are increasing in number, they are now more segregated than during the 1990s. If we accept the premise that incomes increase as educational attainment rises, these less educated couples may represent a vulnerable group in Swiss society.