Silent Shifts in a Historic Migration Stream: European Au Pairs in The Netherlands
MA Thesis
Sociology: Migration and Ethnic Studies Callum Mitchel Grant Walker
11225432
University of Amsterdam
Supervised by: Professor Jan Willem Duyvendak Second reader: Professor Evelyn Baillergeau
July 2017
Abstract:
This thesis focuses on the diverse, complex and complicated life of the modern
European au pair working in the Netherlands. This dissertation begins with a reflexive look at the researcher, research and representation in the social sciences, a key theme that is repeatedly returned to throughout the dissertation with the aim of exposing the inner workings of the research process. The research was conducted using active interviewing and aimed to represent the diverse situations and motivations of au pairs. Motivation is analysed with reference to nationality and the home situation of the au pair. The paper also refers to the relationships formed between the au pair and the host family in both home life and recruitment. The paper seeks to contrast these different situations with the uniformity that is typically associated with the au pair profession in a historical, legal and social context. Therefore in essence this paper wishes to dispel some of the myths that have surrounded the au pair profession and provide a greater insight into the lives of the young men and women working in family homes in the Netherlands.
Contents
Introduction 4
The Au Pair Problem – An Introduction to the Au Pair Industry 5
Constructing the Au Pair - History, Identity and Positionality 8
A Case of Class 11
A Discussion of Research Methods 14
The Life and Times of the European Au Pair 19
Nationality and Economics: the Southern European Au Pair 21 Nationality and Economics: the Western European Au Pair 23
Recruitment, Work and Relationships 27
False Kin and Relationships With the Children 33
Reflexive Thinking and the Limitations of Studying the Au Pair Experience 35
A Final Few Words 38
Appendix 40
“Freedom without opportunity is a devil’s gift” ---- Noam Chomsky 1998 ---
“I- I didn’t thought it was that exhausting (.) haha I really thought oh I had so much time I can do that- I can do that- I can do that (.) no you are too tired (.7) you are tired”
--- Interview with ‘cc’ 2017 --- Introduction
Au pairing is a historic, gendered, ageist and largely academically neglected
migration trend, which gives many young people their first taste of living and working in a foreign country. Only a few researchers have been working in this field trying to give au pairs an outlet for their voice. This is a shame as the au pair industry is very diverse with au pairs having a vastly different experience dependent on various factors such as personal identity, elements such as nationality, age and experience and how well they can navigate the complicated and unique boundaries of au pair life. Before proceeding with this dissertation I wish to briefly step into the personal realm in the interest of openness and reflexivity; and briefly outline my motivations. I also wish to explain how I came across this subject, an important reflexive practice that should be more widespread within the social sciences. Initially my plan was to find a topic that focused on my interests of transnational migration patterns and Asia. However during my studies I stuck up a friendship with an au pair ‘bb’, who would later become an interviewee, and my initial gatekeeper to the field. During many conversations with her I gradually began to see the unique boundaries, complexities and difficulties of au pair work. Inspired by her experiences I began looking into both the research and popular representations of au pairs. Although of high quality, I considered the quantity of attention devoted to the au pair experience to be
insufficient. With the enthusiastic blessings of my supervisor Dr Duyvendak I decided to undertake this research.
Au pairs link in with a number of my interests including, work, class, hierarchy, the family and gender. However I do feel the need to justify my presence within in this field. The question of representation, essentially whether, and how, social scientists should study those who belong to a different ethnicity/gender/class has long been a key theoretical debate in the social sciences (for examples of the politics of
representation see Claude Lévi-Strauss’ (1955) discussions on the study of indigenous people, Edward Said’s (1978) comments on orientalism and Simone de Beauvoir’s (1949) descriptions of male representation, the othering of women and the “myth of woman” (Ibid 1949:174). There is no escaping the fact that this research has been written by a white, male, European, middle class researcher and will inevitably contain some of the biases inherent with that positionality. However I reject that this should prevent any researcher from entering the field as long as they enter with the correct intentions and a reflexive lens. People are incredibly complex, multifaceted beings and any research of an actor external to the self will have to navigate
difference in one way or another. The situation of only minorities studying minorities would take the social sciences another step towards farce, isolation and ghettoisation. My intention in writing this paper is that it will add to the small body of literature dealing with the au pair industry and help challenge some of the contradictory
narratives that surround au pairing in the public consciousness. Additionally all the au pairs involved in the study, and a few who weren’t, were sent copies of the draft version of this thesis and were allowed to respond to it. Their unedited comments are included near the end of this piece of work. The more sociological attention that is placed upon the less academically glamorous aspects of society the better for all the actors involved in the research process. Therefore I hope to revive some interest in this ignored field of work, bring sociologists back to the study of the seemingly mundane elements of society and that discussion of the “daily drudgery” (Greer 1999:119) of life can encourage analysis of the overlooked ‘natural’ elements of society.
The Au Pair Problem – An Introduction to the Au Pair Industry
This paper aims to explore the diverse experiences of European ‘au pairs’. ‘Au pair’ is a concept that has a long history and will probably conjure vivid images in the mind of the reader, however ‘au pair’ is a label that covers a wide range of different experiences, work and ways of living. This thesis will focus on the diverse outcomes of au pairs and to what extent this is impacted by elements such as nationality and class. This great variety of outcomes is known to the au pairs but has been largely missing from the literature:
“Z: I would say it is also the- one of the most popular culture exchanges yeah- (.) in the world: like I met so many au pairs from different countries all over the world and every family- every au pair is different and every au pair family is different”
(see appendix item 1 for a transcription key and item 2 for detailed information about the au pairs)
The modern au pair is typically a young girl who joins a household and exchanges care and/or domestic labour for integration into the family unit. Essentially it is the exchange of labour for shelter, food and a small amount of ‘pocket money’. The girls are portrayed by society and the industry as care-free adventurous travellers setting out to temporarily join a household to engage with an exciting new culture and enjoy the opportunity to work and care for cute children. However this depiction hides the true complexity of au pair life, experience and the wide range of potential motivations and outcomes for both the au pair and the families involved.
This study is focused specifically on European au pairs working in The Netherlands. This group was chosen because it is possible to group au pairs by region and create a usable unit of analysis whereas that would be too broad in a study of global au pair flows. In addition to this wide variance of positionality the experience of non-european au pairs is significantly impacted by closer government supervision, visa dependency and the possibility of deportation. Work focused on European au pairs working in the EU is relatively rare, whereas there is a plethora of journalistic and academic research on au pairs from outside the EU. There are also numerous case studies on the nanny, au pair and domestic servant migration streams and
infrastructure from labour exporting nations (Cox 2015, Hochschild 2002, Lee and Leong 2016, Parrenas 2002, Stubberud 2015a and Vachani 1996). This area of
research is extensive and covers a broad range of theories and processes including the global care chain, the brain drain and remittances.
Before trying to make sense of the diverse outcomes of contemporary au pairs it is necessary to define the current legal framework the au pair industry works within, explore how the concept of the au pair developed through history and identify how it links with the broader care and domestic work industries. The European agreement on au pair placement (Council of Europe 1969) is seen as the founding legislation for the au pair program. As of 2017 only six countries have ratified the agreement, however this piece of legislation has served as the legal basis for almost all the countries that host au pairs. This is also true of The Netherlands where the regulations listed by the IND (Immigration and Naturalisation Service 2016:3) are almost identical to those outlined in the agreement. Essentially these documents define an au pair as a young person, who temporarily migrates to another country to live with a host family with the aim of learning about the host country’s culture. In exchange for shelter the au pairs are obligated to undertake light domestic and/or care work. They are specifically not referred to as students, employees or workers, an intention of the legislators of the original agreement (Council of Europe 1972:15). Instead of fitting into these well defined categories they are left in an obscure no mans land where the impetus is put on the au pair and the host family to come to an acceptable agreement concerning work and living conditions. The agreement speaks of ‘pocket money’ rather than ‘wages’ and leaves many key concepts, such as what constitutes light domestic work, open to interpretation by the host families. The vague nature of these rules was, again, intentional with the legislators aiming to get as many signatories as possible for their agreement (Ibid 1972:7). This lack of regulation has enabled the continuation of an au pair industry where negotiation is a difficult, complex game and unwritten rules dominate. The absence of overt protections for the au pair has made au pairing into a fertile ground for exploitation and abuse, as au pairs rarely know their rights
(Burikova 2015).
The European agreement might be the first time au pairs were specifically legislated for but the occupation has a long history linked to the development of care and domestic work in Western Europe. Au pairs are closely linked to the broader
domestic/care industry and much early domestic work resembled the au pair scheme. Live-in domestic/care workers have been present in Western Europe since at least the late 15th century (Sarti 2008:77). The aims and supposed justifications of the au pair scheme are reflected in the treatment of young people before the advent of schooling and formal education. Being a domestic worker in a household far from their parents was historically a rite of passage for young boys and girls. Sarti (2007) notes how before schooling became common practice, domestic service was “a major channel for the transmission of knowledge and expertise from one generation to the other”. Boys were typically taught a trade of some sort alongside their domestic duties. The most famous example is the childhood of Jean Jacques Rousseau, as detailed in his confessions (Rousseau 1783). Girls were sent away with the aim of learning the household skills necessary to become housewives and would join a large family household typical of the time before the rise of the nuclear family (Sarti 2007, Firestone 1970:77). The Netherlands participated in this domestic and international migration stream as shown by Sølvi Sogner’s study of Norwegian girls working in The Netherlands (in Sarti 2008:78). It is worth mentioning that during this time The Netherlands was a migration hub with it being both a departure and destination
country, especially for young people (Lucassen 1994:161). The strength of the Dutch economy and demand for labour in the colonies led to the coastal regions being described as a “transit camp for tens of thousands of Europeans” (Bailyn 1994:2). As the concept of schooling grew domestic/care workers were still seen as an important way to transmit cultural norms with French governesses especially sought after in Europe, the Near East and eventually the colonies. This movement of young women from wealthy households temporarily working as domestic workers, and being treated as class peers, was popular until the turn of the 20th century. Numerous scholars working in the late 1800s described the coming care crisis and decline of domestic workers due to the increase in educational and welfare reforms (Sarti 2006). The traditions of sending children to work in another household started to disappear with the appearance of the “age of childhood”, the rise of the nuclear family and the growth of modern popular schooling (Firestone 1970:86).
Since the start of the 20th century in most European nations there has been a higher demand for domestic/care workers than supply, the only exception to this being the 1930s (Liarou 2015). This is also true of The Netherlands, which has been
characterised by a shortage in domestic workers with the government taking numerous steps to increase supply, the most notable being the ‘white maid’ plan drafted in the mid-90s (Ruijter 2004:223). This has been exacerbated in The Netherlands by the spread of women in employment (not necessarily full time employment, part time employment has also enabled women to leave the household) (Ruijter 2004:219, Yodanis and Laurer 2005:42). In addition to this was the slow growth in childcare facilities and state policies aimed at encouraging home based care (Lister et al 2007:115). Busch (2015: 56) distinguishes between two European
attitudes towards care work. In the southern model, employment of mothers is less common and they are expected to deal with both domestic and care labour. Whereas in The Netherlands and other Northern European countries (excluding Scandinavia) care outside of school hours is the family’s responsibility and it is not taken into consideration if the mother works or not. Therefore the au pair scheme is a useful way to help satisfy this demand for cheap domestic and care labour in Northern Europe. This seems to align with the aims of the host families who tend to be looking for cheap, flexible labour (Øien 2009). Therefore although codified with the European agreement on au pair placement the phenomenon is rooted in over 500 years of history and closely linked with the development and demand of domestic work in Western Europe. This history laid the foundations of what later became the au pair industry and examining this history is an important step in attempting to define the au pair industry.
Finally it is important to outline the reasons this study has been conducted in The Netherlands besides convenience. The Netherlands is an interesting host nation as it has historically been the recipient of European migrant labour and has been at the forefront of changing employment, domestic and family practices. The Netherlands has had an important influence on European culture and although, like many former colonial powers it is dealing with a lack of contemporary international relations clout, it still plays an important role in Europe and is not the small, inconsequential ‘cold froggy’ country (‘de koud kikkerland’ (Godutch.com)) many of its inhabitants portray it as. The situation in The Netherlands is particularly interesting as European au pairs working in The Netherlands are effectively invisible; they do not need a visa or a residency permit and the spread of informal internet recruitment means many may not
be registered (Calleman 2010). There has also been little to no public debate about the merits and disadvantages of the program in The Netherlands unlike Norway where there was a very high profile media debate about the efficacy of the program (Øien 2009:22). Due to this invisibility there is no data on the number of European au pairs moving between European states or currently residing in The Netherlands. In personal correspondence with the researcher the IND were reluctant to give an estimate of the number of European au pairs currently working in The Netherlands. However the number of au pairs working in The Netherlands is definitely significant. Figures shared with the researcher by AuPairWorld, the largest online au pair recruitment site, suggests that in 2016 The Netherlands was in the top ten host countries globally. AuPairWorld does not collect exact numbers but did state in personal correspondence that last year 23,496 au pairs who had found a host family through AuPairWorld had placed The Netherlands on their list of desirable countries (au pairs can add 5
countries to that list) and of those 1,627 had said they solely wanted to au pair in The Netherlands. Of course this is only one small part of the picture but shows that the number of European au pairs living and working in The Netherlands is significant. Constructing the Au Pair - History, Identity and Positionality
Work on au pairs who originate from Europe is less common than research on
domestic workers from labour exporting nations. Of the research conducted most of it focuses specifically on Scandinavian and German au pairs (Bikova 2008, Geserick 2012, Mellini et al 2007, Nagy 2008). There has also been some literature written about the conditions faced by women from Eastern Europe, however most of the literature was written before EU expansion and is from a time when Eastern European girls were inevitably more at risk of exploitation due to their reliance on visas and their employers (Hess and Puckhaber 2004). Additionally, to the best of my knowledge, there is no research written in English focusing on au pairs working in The Netherlands. Furthermore the PIIGS (the term used to describe the most unstable economies during the 2008 financial crisis: Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain (Lybeck 2011)) countries have been studied as recipients of domestic labour in the global care chain but not as contemporary providers of domestic labour after the financial crash (Williams and Gavanas 2008). Finally there has been no discussion as to the possibility of economic instability in the PIIGS countries being a factor in au pair recruitment from these locations.
One of the most common ways that the au pair experience has been analysed is through a gendered lens. Au pairing is primarily a female occupation. It is
hypothesised that this is due to care work being portrayed as something that comes naturally to all women. This means care work isn’t seen as skilled labour and doesn’t need to be professionalised, so young women who have just left school are seen as perfectly suitable care givers and surrogate mothers (Yodanis and Laurer 2005: 46). The idea of domestic work being a woman’s domain was explicitly stated by the legislators of the European agreement on au pair placement who wrote that men would be better advised becoming “trainees” than joining the scheme (Council of Europe 1972:9). Indeed some countries actually banned men from participating in the au pair scheme, for example men were only allowed to join the scheme after 1993 in the UK (Cox 2007:282). Men seeking employment as an au pair have the additional obstacle of not being trusted in a domestic setting (where a long time in the company of the mother may be inevitable and considered scandalous in some societies) and
caring for young children (Bikova 2008:48). The gendered nature of the work is furthered by the historic sexualisation of domestic workers as represented by the “French maids outfit” and the naughty nanny (Cox 2007:285). The study of the au pair’s body has been given attention, citing the necessity to be read as both the “Madonna and the Whore” (Ibid 288). This indicates the importance of the au pair being able to play both the role of the Madonna, a sexless pure entity that can look after the children and prevent them from experiencing the ‘adult’ world, and the whore who is seemingly sexually available to the host father if he wishes. An
interesting example of the stereotype of the au pair as whore is featured in a comedic newspaper column where the author assumes that if he looked like the actor Jude Law he might have a chance with his “gorgeous” au pair (Young 2005). The au pair’s body can even enter the recruitment process, for example Toby Young poses the rhetorical question that “[surely it is] better for our children to be looked after by a sunny, optimistic goddess than a bitter and disappointed heffalump?” (Ibid). This gendered identity is even occasionally played out in the cultural sphere where au pairs are characterised as lazy, materialistic and sexually available (Guest 1972, Liarou 2015:31).
Researchers looking at European au pairs haven’t focused on ethnicity and national stereotypes and there is a possibility that they may play a role in the recruitment process. As part of a broader work on South American au pairs in France, Durin (2015:160) noted a preference for “high energy” Spanish au pairs, typically those who can be classified as ‘ethnic white’. It is unknown how this plays into hiring decisions and familial relations in a European context. There does seem to be a racialized expectation of the au pair, Cox (2007:289) conducted a discourse analysis of the images found on au pair recruitment websites. The images generally pictured girls of a white Northwestern European appearance, mostly pale, blue eyed and blonde. This is interesting when the global nature of the modern au pair industry is taken into account. Additionally anecdotally reported shifting demographic patterns of European au pairs would also seem to show this representation as greatly distorted.
One of the most popular ways of analysing au pairs has been looking at the type of work, enjoyment and identity as an adult (Cox and Narula 2003, Nagy 2008 and Bikova 2008). Unsurprisingly au pairs are typically viewed as akin to domestic servants, segregated and treated as children, or worse, negating the stated aim of au pair work, that of being a cross-cultural exchange. Cox and Narula (2003) focused on the rules and use of space within the house and detailed how this cemented their place as workers, not family members. This is interesting as if we are to cast the au pair as a worker then it is clear there has been a concerted effort to circumvent traditional rules regarding the employment of care workers and domestic workers. This subversion of the status of au pair ‘work’ is aided by the development of “false kinship relations” (Ibid 2003:335). False kinship relations are common in the domestic labour sector, especially amongst care workers who live with the family (Topali 2009:96). False kinship relations are the creation of false feelings of ‘family’ with the intention of negating the labour of the au pair and making it more difficult for them to negotiate and access their legally enshrined working rights. This is facilitated by the widespread societal view of the nuclear family as a natural, healthy and benign institution, which ignores the feminist critique of the family as a socially constructed, modern site of hierarchy, negotiation and abuse. My interviewees could also relate to a number of these points:
‘M’ describes how the host family were using false kin relations to try and extract additional labour from her:
“M: and er- and they recently also had a thing where they wanted me to cook on Saturdays Sundays as well because er: to make me feel more like family (.) but I don’t see the point in that cos actually- in Latvia we don’t have dinner we have lunch… and they wanted me to make dinner on my free days… so that was kind of bizarre for me”
‘L’ an Estonian au pair who only stayed with her host family for three weeks shows how au pairs typically associate the family as a place of safety:
“L: being an au pair it’s a pretty safe way (.) you go to a really safe environment you don’t have to start from zero (.) you are already with a family they give you allowance they give you food they give you er: accommodation so- (.) and usually you don’t end up in sort of drug addicts family because you know that’s probably not comfortable I: probably
L: haha yeah (.) I feel its er really safe and erm nice way”
‘P’ shows how negotiation is difficult when emotional considerations are taken into account.:
“P: quite often in the evenings (.) I dunno when the dad is off
travelling for work and the mom will have to work late then I will have to babysit the girls
I: I assume you get extra money for that P: no
I: no?
P: no no: but I never ask for tips because they are so nice and er::”
The work of an au pair can be considered emotional labour in the same way as the flight attendants in Arlie Hochschild’s seminal work The Managed Heart (1983). Au pairs have to conduct both domestic and emotional labour but are also required to navigate boundaries to keep the families emotional state positive. Many ‘female’ occupations necessitate emotional labour and helps explain why the majority of au pairs do not feel comfortable in the host families house as they are still performing labour even when it is not their official working hours.
Two examples of how the host families house is seen as a place of labour where it isn’t comfortable to spend leisure time:
“W: [yeah kind of weird] you’re living with your boss so of course it is kind of like you cannot be totally yourself because: I mean they are still your employers”
“Q: yeah I’m trying to avoid the- you know the common rooms (.) I like to spend time in my own room because that’s the only place that I feel completely comfortable at”
The only place au pairs can ‘be themselves’ is their bedrooms, which is why it is very difficult for them when their privacy is encroached upon. This inability to truly be themselves in the household and the simultaneous denial of their labour and emotions ensures that most au pairs can’t test their newfound independence. This infantilisation of the au pair ensures they sit on a narrow boundary between their childhood and an ‘independent’ adult life.
Finally as already briefly mentioned earlier empirical studies have highlighted various contradictory narratives and elements of au pair labour. When looking at motivations there is an acknowledged split between au pairs dependent on their nationality. Traditionally au pairs originating from Eastern Europe have been characterized as wanting to become au pairs in order to earn a wage, which is higher than that typical of their country of origin (Hess and Puckhaber 2004:66 and Durin 2015:156). On the other hand au pairs from Western Europe have been characterised as taking a gap year to explore a new culture and have their first tastes of independence (Cagna 2016). Geserick (2012:50) also observes this trend on a global level distinguishing between the privileged travellers who could fit into labels such as the ‘global nomad’; and the ‘post-industrial’ ‘global women’ migrants who are trying to escape negative economic circumstances. The journalist Rosie Muarry-West (2012) seems to have uncovered a new phenomenon reporting anecdotal evidence from employment agencies and her own experience as a host parent. She noticed the rise of prospective au pair workers from Western European and Southern European countries hit hardest by the economic slowdown and restructuring in their economies. This would indicate a shift in the au pair migration stream and a change in the motivations of some Western European au pairs. She reports that applicants from southern Europe have generally been more mature and often “comically” overqualified, forcing her to ask the question “Do I want a pastry chef, a swimming instructor or a primary schoolteacher?” (Ibid). A Case of Class
Historically the element of au pair life that has been explored in the greatest detail is class. Class is a very difficult classification to operationalise, as it is relational and has been theorised in many different ways through the development of the social sciences. The writings of Pierre Bourdieu helped to revitalise the way class was theorized in the social sciences. Bourdieu moved away from the strict Marxian guidelines that
associated class purely with the relationship to the means of production (as detailed in Communist Manifesto which was obviously simplified, as it is a piece of propaganda designed for public consumption, but is the cornerstone of this key tenant of Marxian thought (Marx and Engels 1847)). However Bourdieu’s work on class gave the social scientist a slightly more usable tool than having to rely on just relations and
perceptions. Bourdieu (1986) moved capital beyond a pure economic focus. With the introduction of ‘social’ (who you know) and ‘cultural’ (what you know) capital he gave us a very usable tool to consider class. Due to their age we can hypothesize that au pairs all have a low level of personal economic capital, however variance in social and cultural capital will ensure a variance in outcome. Therefore young girls with higher cultural capital (for example through professional skills, a high level of English (or other desirable language) or exposure to ‘high’ culture) or social capital (able to find hosts through their own social networks and their nationality (and associated stereotypes)) could be hypothesised as being in a more positive situation than those
who can’t afford to be so choosy regarding the household they join. This analysis will be furthered by the addition of Guy Standing’s (2011) work on the Precariat but first the impact of class on the au pair industry will be expanded upon.
It is alleged that au pairs have usually been considered class peers, literally on par, with their hosts, young members of a similar class level (Mellini et al 2007), an idea rooted in aforementioned historical domestic service migration patterns. There are a number of explanations as to why parents would wish to recruit class peers. Cox (2011) suggests that the most significant reason is rooted in competitive mothering and the cult of childhood, that it is necessary to give your children the best possible start in life passing the parents’ capital down to their offspring. For the parents it is important that the care giver of the child has the highest forms of cultural and social capital possible, therefore it is essential that au pairs “feel at home in museums and [encourage the children to] mix with the ‘right’ kind of children on playdates” (Ibid 2011:8). There are a number of other reasons why host families may want au pairs with a lot of capital, Bikova (2008:47) hypothesised that au pairs with high levels of capital may assimilate into the family structure faster and communication would be easier. In ‘The Managed Heart’ Arlie Hochschild (1983:159) also spent time observing the emotional labour of care workers, she claimed that parents found the ability of care workers to teach the children control and utilization of emotion was a great bonus. Finally and probably very apt to the situation in The Netherlands employing a class peer has been seen as a way to subvert the servant-master
relationship (Liarou 2015:19). This idea holds that many liberally minded households are uncomfortable with such brazen displays of hierarchy in the household and prefer to try to mask the relationship (through false kin or friendship relations). This can be not only true of the au pairs but also other domestic workers, for example ‘G’ recalls this example of a host family trying to overcome the employer/employee relationship with their cleaners through a friendly act:
“I: so do you see the cleaner how often do they come? G: its like a husband and wife they come once a week I: ok-
G: on Thursday
I: do you speak with them do you have any interaction with them? G: yeah yeah I say hi and- but my family invited them over for drinks and then we all had drinks haha”
‘P’ explains why her host family wouldn’t want to employ an Asian au pair: “P: yeah and now they are looking for a new au pair and they would kind of prefer that they don’t want an au pair from like er (.5) Indonesia or something because they feel like if like a lot of people come there just to be like oh we will do anything for you (.) that will feel like not a family member and someone who would feel like just a worker for the kid and they don’t want that so that’s why they are kind of preferring European”
It should be noted that studies of the host families themselves have found that they usually articulate the benefits of the au pair scheme in terms of flexibility and work. Finally it is worth noting that Cox (2015:236) describes how researchers must be
wary of constructing a “golden age” of on par au pair work that may not have existed. This paper will try to avoid ever assuming that au pair labour was ever ‘pure’, that the average au pair life has got worse. Instead it is necessary to explore the great variety in the industry and how changing economic conditions may have pushed more young people into an industry that is hungry for domestic and care workers. The reader should also keep in mind that these accounts of the au pair golden age are typically based on research on au pairs from nations that have been insulated from the
economic crash and economic restructuring (generally the most prosperous nations in North-West Europe).
As previously mentioned this paper will expand upon the class pressures au pairs face by fitting them into a narrative focused on Guy Standing’s work. Standing’s (2011) work on the precariat and the diffusion of the class structure identifies seven
categories, which expand upon and can coincide with a Marxian construction of class. Au pairs from some of the richer nations in Europe could be seen as being part of the upper classes, probably children of the Salariat or Profician with a support network of social and economic capital temporarily taking a year out before starting to climb a career ladder or starting their studies. This appears to have changed in countries that have experienced economic problems. Economic insecurity has caused a rise in precarious labour, especially in countries hit hardest by the economic crisis of 2008 (Ibid), the same countries that Muarry-West (2012) reports young people being desperate to be recruited as au pairs from. There is also the additional problem of high youth unemployment in many of the PIIGS countries, adding more impetus for young people to attempt to emigrate by any means possible (Lybeck 2011). Using OECD data Standing (2011:35) estimates that 85% of the jobs lost during the financial crash in Spain were precarious temporary labour. He also indicates that the spread of precarity and the ‘precariat’ as an economic class is a serious problem for Europe’s youth. Many countries face the issue of boomerang children, those who have no option but to return home and rely on their parents after finishing further education (Ibid 2011:64).
Therefore it can be hypothesized that a number of those who choose to become au pairs are not carefree travellers seeking independence and thrills, but young people with few options escaping a competitive labour market that has little to offer them. A number of au pairs are expected to be graduates and trained in a professional field experiencing status discord by working as an au pair, something the legislators of the European agreement never intended as their upper age limits were intended only to incorporate those who remained students for a long time and not to be used by those who had already completed their education (Council of Europe 1972:11).
It is worth mentioning how this relates to an earlier paper by Castles and Kosack (1972) where they showed how class, migration and labour were linked, with migration filling the role of a reserve pool of labour. This process has been
exacerbated by the new economic and opportunity disparities in Europe. Additionally in states with a weak economy migration can be an effective tool to release pressure on the government and services and help prevent the development of status discord and an angry highly educated populace (Standing 2011:2). Therefore au pairs are faced with the choice of unemployment and precarious work at home or staffing a role that has been assigned little economic value in a foreign country. This process
preventing au pairs being classed as workers, and ensuring they can’t demand better conditions or higher wages, as the program is supposedly a cultural exchange.
Therefore it can be hypothesized that to avoid, or prolong, becoming a member of the precariat young people have been turning to the au pair scheme as an alternative to facing the job market in their home countries. This adds a new layer of applicants to the au pair scheme, highly qualified au pairs who have turned to the scheme out of necessity and status frustration rather than as an opportunity to travel and experience culture. These au pairs are highly marketable, as host families have been shown to be looking for flexible work and favour cultural capital over formal qualifications (Cox 2011:8). This position assumes that the relationship between the host family and au pairs from some nations is a working relationship, one of employers and employees, rather than class peers.
To sum up I wish to provide the reader with a number of research areas I have focused on. I have attempted to explore some of the great diversity within European au pairs. I looked at how class and the economic situation have affected the au pairs motivations and role. The motivations and the work of au pairs have both been explored with the intention of understanding some of the diversity, pressures and commonalities of European au pairs.
A Discussion of Research Methods
When researching the diverse number of outcomes in the au pair industry I originally wished to use a mixed methods approach. However there is no usable data set related to European au pairs working in The Netherlands that would satisfy the reliability and validity demands of social research. As previously mentioned the Dutch immigration services don’t have a reliable figure of the number of European au pairs living and working in The Netherlands. The only solution would have been to gather my own quantitative data however I believe it is well beyond the scope of a MA thesis paper to gather enough usable quantitative data to be able to make any substantial claims. Therefore I decided on a qualitative approach to my own research
Over 2 months 23 one to one interviews and 2 focus groups (with pre-existing friendship groups) were conducted totalling 28 European au pairs. One of the interviews was with my initial gatekeeper, ‘bb’, with who I had a pre-existing relationship with and one was with a woman working as a nanny, ‘Y’, and who had previously worked as an au pair in Austria. All the other interviews were with current or former au pairs who were working in The Netherlands within the last year. Due to my sampling methods these were split into two batches, the first batch contained the two focus groups (with 3 and 4 au pairs respectively) and 10 individual interviews (including individual interviews with two au pairs who had been in a focus group) and the second batch contained 13 individual interviews (including the nanny, ‘Y’ and the gatekeeper, ‘bb’). Initially it was hoped that the au pairs interviewed would grant access to host families however gaining permission from them proved to be too difficult, a matter of which I will elaborate on later in the thesis. For more detailed information about the au pairs including age, nationality and time in The Netherlands please see item 2 in the appendix. The setting of an interview is inevitably important with making the respondent feel at ease and preventing them from self-censorship, which may occur if they feel like strangers are observing them. The majority of the interviews were conducted in cafes where the neutral ground, informal atmosphere
and structured social routine of ordering drinks and talking in a café helped the interviewer feel comfortable and hopefully also allowed the au pairs to feel at ease. Other locations included bars (for au pairs who were only available in the evenings), the park and a fast food restaurant. One focus group was conducted in an au pair’s home, however the host family were not in the house and the presence of beer and other au pairs from the local area ensured a pleasant atmosphere to engage in matters close to the au pair’s heart.
All the interviews were semi-structured, as I had an interview guide that constantly evolved through the research process. However there was no set order (except a desire to deal with their experience in chronological order). This led to a variance in style dependent on the au pair’s desires, some interviews maintained a classic style with the interviewee adopting the role of the classic interviewee, waiting patiently for
questions whilst others were a more one sided narrative where the au pair was
confident just to speak without the interviewers prompts or support. Topics generally covered involved motivations, work, privacy, aspirations and relationships with the family. Generally interviews lasted around 40 minutes to one hour and afterwards there was always the opportunity to add more information to their accounts of au pair life if they wished.
The interviews were conducted within the guidelines set out by Holstein and Gubrium (1997: 114) for “active interviewing”. Active interviewing challenges the positivist narrative that respondents are “repositories of knowledge” (Ibid) waiting to be tapped and that meaning is instead constructed between both an active interviewer and respondent. Therefore the interviewee must be helped to articulate and construct meaning in a context of deep disclosure. Active interviewing also helps to circumvent the hierarchical power relationship between interviewer and interviewee and although it will never be able to put the actors on par with each other it should significantly reduce the impact such a relationship might have on the research. Operationalizing the technique did prove challenging however it resulted in a more interesting set of data. Rather than being a passive question giver the interviewer attempted to help the au pairs structure their thoughts and move closer to mutual understanding and took an active role in knowledge production. I was seeking to try to challenge the traditional interviewer and interviewee roles, something that is difficult in our “interview
society” (Silverman 1993:22). I didn’t want the au pairs to think they were forced into the role and neutrality of the professional interviewee. I wanted to ensure they felt at ease and had the chance to express themselves in the way they felt comfortable. This subversion was attempted with a few different techniques. Of course the main way was by ensuring I, the interviewer, was playing an ‘active’ role in the construction and organisation of data in cooperation with the interviewee. Additionally I used elements of deep disclosure (Holstein and Gubrium 1997:119) to engage with the au pairs on various topics such as my own thoughts and feelings or experience. I also shared the structure of the interview with the au pairs telling them throughout the interview where it was heading, why certain questions were asked and often how their experiences related to other au pairs. Humour is another way the interviews were subverted utilized in the hopes of dissipating the stifling atmosphere of academic neutrality that can strangle any sense of rapport an interview may contain. Finally swearing was also used to try and reduce the impact of formal interview hierarchies. In the aforementioned ‘interview society’ swearing is one of the great taboos for media interviews (see for example the infamous interview of the Sex Pistols by Bill
Grundy (Hornby 2007)). Therefore swearing can be a great tool to help break the restrictive interviewer/interviewee relationship. A discussion of the effectiveness of my approach will be held at the end of this thesis.
I believe it is a strength of this research that I was able to engage with au pairs individually in interviews and with au pair friendship groups in focus groups. Both types of interview can be useful tools in researching how au pairs construct their identities. Whereas individual interviews are a construction between an outsider (the interviewer) and an insider (the au pair) focus groups allow the researcher to observe a group of insiders. This is particularly useful as it allows the interviewer to see how they cooperatively construct identity and define boundaries differently. It is also a way to lessen the impact of an au pairs affective work. Focus groups can also prompt the individual insider to new thoughts and constructions as they construct meaning in collaboration with their peers. Additionally research has shown that small research groups composed of women (the dominant gender amongst au pairs) can be quite effective as it is a familiar setting due to the social experience many women have in small friendship groups (Bloor et al 2001:27). Additionally all the focus groups were composed of friendship groups which allowed the au pairs to feel more comfortable and help each other if the language barrier arose. Two notable examples:
“I: ((what is)) a good host family?
J: because it’s like (1) [for me it’s like a family] H: [do you mean what family is a good one?] I: what [like:::]
O: [((translates question to Spanish))] H: ah ok”
“T: and then it’s also interesting you- you’re studying psychology I: Sociology (.)
T: so- so- soc- sociology- X: (Sociology) ((in German)) All: haha”
Although it should be noted that the language barrier in the one to one interviews was never a significant issue and could normally be overcome with a bit of teamwork, for example:
“T: do you know the robots that cut the grass? I: the rabbits?
T: rabbits? robots? I: the animals? T: robots I: rabbits
T: like er er er ((T makes robot noises)) I: robots
T: robots I: robots
T: robots (.) you know the robots for vacuuming but also for cutting the grass outside
T: how do you call that
I: I don’t know: like a lawnmower T: lawnmower
I: A robot lawnmower”
Both the focus groups were composed of au pairs from the same nation (Spain or Germany) that allowed me to add some legitimacy to the discussion on nationality as both groups exhibited quite different behaviour.
In the individual interviews I included a technique known as social mapping, which originates in participatory research in development studies (Beazley and Ennew 2006:194). I asked au pairs to draw the floor plan of their host family’s house and describe the areas they were drawing. This evolved into me having a number of questions dedicated to space, work and privacy and allowed me a thorough oversight of how their integration into the family and ordinary au pair duties. They reacted to this in a number of different ways and maps were produced with different levels of care and quality, for example:
“I: I would like to get you to do some drawing (.) you’re gonna make a map for me
V: crikey …
V: yeah (.) I like it it’s a very different approach” “I: so: what I get people to do is to draw
D: oh no haha”
“I: I’m gonna get you (.) to (.) do some drawing U: ok I like drawing
I: er how big is your host families house? U: you want me to ((starts to draw))
I: yeah yeah yeah but one moment (.) answer my question first U: haha
I: you are so eager so like >let me draw let me draw> U: I like drawing”
“I: so I am going to get you to draw bb: why?
I: erm bb: what
I: this is my technique you are going to draw a map of your house” “Q: argh so hard”
The mapping technique was useful to provide an innovative way for au pairs to outline their work in detail and allowed me to conceptualise space in a way that is normally difficult in interviews (as this is one of the significant advantages of ethnographic work, something which is extremely difficult to do in the familial setting). This method also helped me to further subvert the interview and challenge the au pairs traditional views on what an interview should be.
Turning to sampling, I used snowball sampling to gain access to au pairs. Obviously there are a number of disadvantages that come with using snowball sampling and these will be discussed in the section dealing with the limitations of my thesis. Starting with my gatekeeper I used the au pairs generosity and social networks to expand my contact list. This proved rather easy as the au pairs generally have a close community with most au pairs using social media to connect to another au pairs. ‘Q’ explains the connectivity of the au pair community:
Q: [we have] a big Whatsapp group that I was added to as soon as I came and a Facebook group (.) so if I want to spend time with
someone then I am like hey is everybody- is anybody going out tonight In total I ended up with 25 face to face interviews, I had to reject a few au pairs who I considered too far away. I didn’t want to use phone or video call technology as it makes it more difficult to conduct ‘active’ interviews and places an additional obstacle (a phone or computer, for example) between the interviewer and the interviewee. 25 may seem like a number that was planned, however it is entirely coincidental that I ended with that many. At the outset of my research I specifically rejected the idea of response saturation (Harry Wolcott in Baker and Edwards 2012:5) and planned to interview as many au pairs as possible until I ran out of time. The rejection of response saturation is due to the fact I am conducting an analysis inspired by interpretive epistemology, which gives room for expression rather than social facts. Audio from the interviews was transcribed using a transcription key found in the
appendix of Silverman’s (1997:254) Qualitative Research handbook. I then performed an analysis’ of the data using the Atlas.ti software. I used a typical content driven categorical approach looking at how research subjects are defining their own
experiences and positions in society and the household. I created a bank of statements that were used to look for common themes. This technique is also useful as it is easily comparable to similar data generated in other studies of au pairs and allows the au pairs to express an interpretation of their own social reality. Throughout the process I also paid attention to the way language is used. I looked at how au pairs relate to things such as the host family, each other and objects so as to see how power dynamics and hierarchies are manifested in the way they express themselves. This focus on the linguistic techniques and constructions by the au pairs ensured that I prevented myself from falling into the trap of what Silverman (1993:34) describes as “anecdotalism”. My approach constituted a middle way between positivist and social constructionist criticisms of social research. I was not searching for social facts but I also think interview data can relate to social structures beyond the confines of the interview. I was particularly interested in exploring how au pairs are attributing meaning to both the social world and their own life narratives and show how diverse the au pair experience really is.
All the respondent’s names and identifying features of the host family were removed from the transcriptions. The au pairs names were replaced with a letter and the
interviewer is known as “I”. As previously mentioned as a male researcher studying a predominantly female occupation I needed to be cautious and reflexive. There has been a historical tendency for male researchers to be rather overbearing when
conducting interviews and not giving their female interviewees much space to construct and elaborate (Fontana 2003:58). This combined with the style of active interviewing meant I had to keep a delicate balance between being an active interviewer and not being too domineering. I attempted to use reflexive methods to prevent this as much as possible. Immediately after the interview I reviewed the tape and noted down my thoughts on my role as the interviewer in a personal interview journal in the hopes that reflecting on my role would allow me to develop as an ‘active’ interviewer and prevent me from falling into the same traps as other
researchers. Various feminist researchers have fought against a one-sided relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee. Reinharz and Chase (2003), invoking the arguments of Anne Oakley, write about how it is essential for social research to be undertaken upon the lines of a mutually beneficial relationship. They claim this can be achieved by the simple act of listening to women, who were ignored and subdued throughout much of history (Ibid 2003:77). I added to this by providing coffee, leaving my contact details with the interviewees and an opportunity for the au pairs to see my work and add a comment before it is submitted. The au pairs were given consent forms and were told that they could leave the interview at any time and any comments they made could be removed from the transcripts if they wished.
The Life and Times of the European Au Pair
Au pair life is diverse with many different experiences for different au pairs. I hope to be able to illustrate some of the diversity present in the institution known as ‘au pairing’ and some of the important commonalities and elements of au pair life. The interviews with the au pairs all took different paths and included different subjects. But they all started with the same initial question, some variant of ‘why do you think I want to speak with au pairs?’. This was partly a methodological concern, I wished to engage the au pairs and make them start thinking critically about what could be interesting about them and their life, making them ‘active’. It was partly to assist with my wish to subvert expected interview norms by making the au pairs question their representation and partly to offer a glimpse into what the au pairs themselves believe is significant, or not, about their job and why it might have attracted my interest. Some au pairs were instantly dismissive of their job and believed it could hold little interest to the social researcher:
“I: why do you think I want to speak with au pairs (.) why are they interesting?
bb: because you are so boring er I don’t really have a reason why (.4) I told you its really boring
I: so you don’t think au pairs are interesting
bb: absolutely not (.) I mean they can do very much to make the children- to travel around- its not- (.) it’s a shitty job”
“I: why do you think that I want to speak with au pairs (.) what makes them interesting?
aa: to be honest I have no idea I heard about it like: X texted me and asked about it and I was like interview:: like ok (.) its university and stuff but still (.) its not that interesting we are just taking care of kids”
However most au pairs were able to identify reasons why their job was interesting, often using narratives constructed by the au pair placement agencies and other popular representations of au pair life, typically narratives of change, cultural exchange and working with kids:
“R: haha (2) erm (4) I don’t know if they are interesting like if people would think that I don’t know the answer to this actually haha (.) yeah maybe because they decided to go to another country to work and live in with a family”
“Y: er I dunno ha there are so many aspects of this thing of being an au pair of being a nanny or everything with children erm
I: what do you think are the most important aspects?
Y: Most important I would think the culture is one of the most
important part: what culture you bring in the family and what do they give you that’s also one aspect to see”
“I: Why do you think I want to talk with au pairs why do you think they are maybe interesting?
W: well we are maybe experiencing the culture of a country like very I dunno (.) intimately because we live with a family who is from here or at least in my case half is from here so yeah it’s a (.) cool way to experience the culture and someone’s way of life other than yourself so you see how other people live- live their life and since you’re there all the time its er: much different than being a guest at someone’s house rather than living there so maybe that’s why”
Additionally a few au pairs considered the negative stories and the ‘horror stories’ to be especially noteworthy:
“T: because au pairs often no- family is used to use au pairs and it’s a problem sometimes: (.) maybe its interesting for you to (.) use in a negative [way]
X: [yeah] like slaves” “H: I have two theories I: hahah
H: one >no I’m so- I- I’m completely serious> one is cos you in the UK have a bad reputation with your au pairs and maybe you want to see the repercussion in: (.) I dunno er (.4) how a British family treats the au pair and the impact that they have to the (.6) those girls and boys and: the second ones maybe more people are getting into the au pair thing so maybe:: that’s why (.) we are like how- em- er- no- maybe
there’s too- every year there’s more and more people who do the au pair experience”
This range of responses shows that the dominant discourse of au pair life have framed the way au pairs view their position and how they choose to linguistically represent their job to a stranger. However this is not always the case as both of the focus groups instantly mentioned the abuses that some au pairs have faced. This is notable as it may represent that the au pairs are willing to speak more frankly in a group setting where they outnumber the interviewer compared to the individual and more hierarchical setting of the one to one interview (especially as this was the ‘first’ question). There are also au pairs who have adopted a very negative view of the importance of domestic and care work. These follow the societal patterns of the devaluation of traditional woman’s work so that au pairs are repeating the narratives of ‘just’ looking after children or performing domestic labour is very insightful as a reflection of societal values. It is possible that all of these narratives are contained within the image of the modern au pair and is great evidence of the complexity of the role of the au pair.
Nationality and Economics: the Southern European Au Pair
Nationality and the impact of economic insecurity upon the au pair industry was a primary focus of this study in the early days of its development. Nationality is an important unit of analysis when analysing au pairs. Although there are no definite rules there are different general trends in the self—stated motivations of European au pairs dependent on region. Generally the aims and motivations of au pairs who originate from North West Europe (in The Netherlands Germans and Scandinavians are the most common) are different from those originating from Southern Europe (generally Spanish and Italian au pairs who are found in The Netherlands). It needs to be restated again that these are not definitive rules but general trends.
The economic situation in Southern Europe, especially the growth of precarious labour and youth unemployment, has driven many young people into the au pair industry. This is evident in their stated motivations for leaving, becoming an au pair and in discussions about their home countries. Many of the Western European au pairs found the question ‘why would you leave your home country’ an odd question as they hadn’t considered their reasons for leaving their country, however au pairs from the South of Europe instantly knew the conditions that had driven them out. These motives and reasons for leaving go against the stated aims of the au pair
industry and the representation in popular media however they are a big reason for the flow of Southern European au pairs into the rest of Europe.
The key reason many Southern European au pairs decide to come to The Netherlands is the lack of opportunities for them in their home country. This lack of opportunities has forced them to search for alternatives and migration is usually one of the better choices:
“I: so how did you become an au pair?
N: it was after high school I didn’t want to stay in Italy because its er: really hard to get a job and er:: if you have got a job it is not so good paid >how you say> yeah (.)”
“H: Yeah maybe in Spain because we really need to like go abroad and see the countries because we don’t have many opportunities in Spain for jobs and (.) [anything]
J: [now]
H: [now] in [the 2017]
O: [and 2016 2014 from 2008] *rabble*
H: [yeah haha]
A: [yeah it has since 2007] H: [its been a long time]”
“E: I think more or less the whole of Italy say to guys like me- >my age-> I would like that you stay here but I have not possibility for you because everything is (.5) broke everything works in the right way you know you have always to do a sacrifice to arrive in your goal so: its not because I want to leave its – it’s a choose that I did maybe to be- to maybe have a real possibility for my work and to live in a good way I have to change my country it’s a choice that I did with my mind n- not with my heart because its obviously
I: your heart is still [in Naples haha]” “B: I love Spain
I: everyone loves Spain B: yeah yeah
I: but everyone leaves Spain
B: uhuh (.) no- I like Spain (.) ok the opportunities are not good you know about the crisis and everything but my family is there my boyfriend is there I really like the country and I really like the culture weather food I think its like a good place to live uhuh even with the opportunities are not good”
This has resulted in many au pairs from Southern Europe being older and better qualified than their Western European counterparts, of course there are still a number of younger au pairs from Southern Europe using the scheme for reasons similar to the Westerners. However it is clear that many Southern Europeans are joining the scheme when they are nearing the upper age limit. Professionals in fields unrelated to
childcare are using the scheme and it is now possible to find engineers, archaeologists and other masters’ students amongst the ranks of prospective au pairs. They are becoming au pairs in The Netherlands with the hope of improving their English (and becoming more employable), or just to be able to provide for themselves:
“J; [and because] it’s a really nice job if you have a er:: you want to work with kids ah: you have a lot of time and you can learn [ foreign language and the most important for the] Spanish people is to improve their English
A: [this is the most important (?)]”
“I: so again (.) why did you want to be an au pair in The Netherlands? bb: I couldn’t find a job”
Additionally many Southern Europeans have been using the au pair year as a way to easily come to The Netherlands and hunt for a job in their own field of expertise or begin studying. This hope for a permanent move is expressed as something they were aiming for before they joined the scheme. Engagement with the culture of The
Netherlands is typically through a prism of utility, assessed as to whether it will help them settle in The Netherlands permanently. Therefore the au pair scheme is being used as a stepping stone to facilitate a permanent migration to The Netherlands and improve their life opportunities:
“S:[yah so] I see (0.4) how the (1) how the au pair thing works (.4) but I took it just as a first step to move here”
“E: to find later another kind of job and so: this is just a start you know going to another country with a family so I have a roof I have pay I have company I have a family and I have my free time: and I have the possibility to study another language cos the p- the family pay for me a Dutch course and maybe after a period I can try to live here with the language knowledge with: my CV with my skills I don’t know I can try my fingers crossed haha”
This is reminiscent of the stereotype of non-european au pairs choosing to become an au pair to go husband hunting in the hopes of permanent migration. Therefore in order to escape from economic situations in their home countries many au pairs are using the scheme as a way to improve their life chances through migration, subverting the official justification of the scheme, that of a temporary cultural experience.
Nationality and Economics: the Western European Au Pair
The way Western au pairs use the scheme is closer to the original aims of the scheme although there is some interesting variance. Au pairs originating from area such as Germany and Scandinavia are usually younger and less experienced than their
Southern European counterparts. They typically express their desires and motivations in terms of travel and taking a break from their studies:
“I: why out of all the things you could have done did you choose to be an au pair?
D: because you get to its like such a big experience you get to travel see the world and er yeah (2) learn to- you are more like independent you learn to be independent er yeah
I: so its not about the work its about travelling [and having fun yeah I see I see]
D: [yeah ha it is haha] nothing about work [haha]”
“T:: er we used to have au pairs when I was little an- and I wanted to do something and I didn’t want to work no so er:: I was thinking about world travelling but I don’t wanna to do this alone because it isn’t nice and:: so I decided to become an au pair yep but I was also not brave enough to go too far
There is also an interesting number of au pairs who are focused on the work side of the scheme. They desire to gain professional experience with children and aiming to end up working with children full time:
“aa: erm I- I graduated from high school and I wanted to take a gap year because I was done with studies for a while and I always loved kids and that’s what I want to do in the future so::”
“V: well before I finished while I was writing my dissertation I was like aw what am I gonna do la la la: I could go straight into teaching but I kind of wanted a break but do something within the same field so that’s how I found au pairing”
Some au pairs who originate from Western Europe also end up wishing to settle in The Netherlands. However it is rare that they expressed this as a motivation for originally leaving their country via the au pair scheme, often they have made the decision to try and work or study in The Netherlands after they have been in the country for a period of time. Therefore they are inadvertently using the scheme as a stepping stone but it differs from the majority of Southern European au pairs who decided on permanent settlement prior to their arrival in The Netherlands:
The divide between West and South is further illustrated by their attitude towards the cultural aims of the program. Typically those from Western nations engage in Dutch language courses whereas those from the South are tempted to The Netherlands by the high quality of spoken English and the availability of English courses. This is a clear example of differing attitudes towards integration in Dutch society and the aims of the au pairs. Of course it should be noted there are exceptions and some Southern au pairs may end up attempting to learn Dutch as another path to settlement in The
Netherlands. Therefore clearly both groups of au pairs are active agents challenging the limited nature of the au pair program and utilizing it for their own means. The perceptive reader may so far have noted that the experiences of au pairs from Eastern Europe are currently missing, this is due to the difficulty the researcher found accessing these groups and that the majority of the ‘Eastern’ Europeans spoken to originated from Baltic countries and had similar motivations as the Scandinavians. The Netherlands also has a considerable number of au pairs who originate from the UK. These au pairs are particularly interesting as it is difficult to fit them into one of the existing regional narratives. They tended to be searching for the same kind of cultural experiences as the au pairs from Western Europe but tended to be slightly older participating on the program after already studying or working. There were a number of different motivations expressed by the British au pairs, which highlights the flaws of using nation states as a unit of analysis, especially when considering economies and opportunity. There were notable regional variations as au pairs from poorer areas in the North of England noted the lack of opportunity in their hometown:
“U: yeah haha erm I don’t know I feel like people- the people have a different mindset to me I think- I always felt like different from my friends there was something- especially when you come from- like Burnley is more like a poorer area in the UK (.) there is not much
opportunities its not a good quality of living unless you are extremely rich (.) so I think for me it was more like a better life or something here and I really really want to be in Holland”
This was highlighted by the au pairs themselves however it is probable that this type of regional variance occurs in other nations, however since the researcher has less experience with those areas it wasn’t fully constructed in the interviews.
The final aspect of nationality that needs to be addressed is that of dual-nationals. A number of dual nationals were using the au pair scheme as a way into Europe or with the knowledge that the money they earnt in The Netherlands had a very high
purchasing power in their home country:
“S: [so] there’s a lot and one euro is like I think 15- 5000 bolivars (.4) so it’s a lot
I: yeah
S: and we use 1 – 2 so 1000-2000 so 5000 for one euro is: a lot (.)”
Additionally some of the au pairs working in The Netherlands had Dutch nationality. They saw the au pair scheme as a way to come and experience living in The
Netherlands and attempt to reconnect with their Dutch ancestry, being close to family members or re-learning the language:
“cc: (2) I feel very Dutch because a lot of people say ah how long have you been here because your Dutch is so good and then I say ah a few months (.) wow you speak so good and because I have family here and friends here I know how to be Dutch haha so: yes part of Dutch I think I am yeah my nationality I am really half Dutch half German” “dd: now I really know that I am half Dutch because when I lived in Germany I was half Dutch because of my father but not really because I (.)
I: didn’t really know it dd: yeah
I: so its nice that you have been able to connect to your: dd: roots”
Therefore it is clear that nationality, or at least the economics of certain geo-political regions have an impact upon the diverse au pair industry. However there is one motivation which transcends these barriers of nationality, that of romantic partners. Partners are often the motivation for entry into au pair work and the desire to move or remain in The Netherlands. A large part of this may be down to gendered notions of romance and partnership, typically dating and the importance of having a partner has been socialized into women from a young age through a “culture of romance”
(Firestone 1970:146) therefore it seems somewhat natural that in a female dominated occupation such as au pairing it should play a significant role. This can manifest in two ways, the first is the effect of repulsion. Au pairs may be pushed into the program by wanting to leave a certain location, this can mean they either desire to leave their home country after a break up
