Program

Abstract: This presentation examines how indigenous ecological knowledge among first generation Bedouin women in Israel strengthens community solidarity and shared belonging. Based on qualitative research and in-depth interviews with elderly Bedouin women in the Negev, the study reveals how traditional knowledge, acquired through life in the desert, is practical (e.g., reading the land, identifying water sources, predicting seasonal changes) and moral and social. The women describe this knowledge as collective, relational, and deeply embedded in intergenerational and gendered practices. Through shared activities, such as collective herding, food preservation, guest hospitality, and mutual aid, their knowledge builds networks of support, trust, and identity. As one woman described: “When we all check the soil together, there is blessing.” The study highlights that this knowledge is not merely a nostalgic memory of the past but a vital social force that continues to shape communal life and ethical responsibility. Despite its marginalization in modern discourse, this indigenous knowledge, rooted in place, relationships, and female experience, offers critical insights into sustainable living and social cohesion. The presentation contributes to feminist and decolonial discussions of indigenous knowledge by framing Bedouin women as agents of community resilience and cultural continuity. It calls for broader recognition of their knowledge as essential to understanding relational solidarity in traditional and contemporary contexts.

Author: Nuzha Allassad Alhuzail (Sapir Acadmic College, Israel)

Abstract: This presentation discusses the idea of Relational Solidarity in action at the community level. Using the example of a community campaign in South East London organising to have a voice when faced with a global developer destroying their working class community in the pursuit of profit rather than need by providing expensive new housing for outsiders. It explores the meaning of Relational Solidarity in this context as both a form of resistance, collective effort and self-advocacy in undertaking community action. Community campaigns, such as the Voice4Deptford, social movements generally and enduring social change is not the work of single individuals but of organized communities living the narrative of connection, reciprocity, of ethical and caring solidarity. Communities dedicated to the well-being of all. Within this context Relational Solidarity emphasizes the importance of relationships, friendships, trust, and cooperation among members of a community. That individuals, the residents and their supporters, which formed the Voice4Deptford campaign connected through shared values, goals, and a sense of belonging, fostering a supportive community. It leads to collaboration, co-leaning and offering different contributions to help promote common interests and the just allocation of resources of behalf of the community. In addition it provides collective actions and a stronger sense of community well-being highlighting the significance of human connections in building a supportive and resilient community in the face of adversity. It can transcend social boundaries and political borders and is vital in building communities and underpinning solidarity. Drawing on the work of Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist philosopher, and his concepts of ‘war of position’ in Civil Society and building a ‘counter-hegemony’ it demonstrates that Relational Solidarity refers to the bonds and mutual support shared amongst individuals as demonstrated within a community in London when under threat. In conclusion the paper argues that Relational Solidarity at the community level contributes to a radical practice, capable of upending power, hierarchies and producing social change in the face of a profoundly anti-social capitalist system.

Author: Roger Green (Goldsmiths University London, Great Britain)

Abstract: Solidarity refers to individual, collective, and institutional practices that contribute to social cohesion in constructive ways. While these practices of mutual support are often taken to be socially and normatively desirable, their absence – and the destructive social dynamics that can emerge in their place – has received far less systematic attention within scholarship. This paper contributes to filling this gap by examining how relational practices shaped by configurations of power, responsibility, and need can not only enable mutual support but also hinder or preclude it. This, as the presentation will argue, is particularly likely to happen when appeals to solidarity are experienced by those to whom they are addressed as asymmetrical or imposed. To this end, the presentation proposes a definition and typology of absent solidarity in situations where solidarity is needed or expected by people. Against the backdrop of contemporary polycrises, where such unsolidaristic practices are likely to proliferate, the aim is to expose their potentially destructive sociopolitical implications and underscore the enduring relevance of solidarity in fragmented societies. The proposed framework introduces the terms non-solidarity, unsolidarity, and anti-solidarity as three distinct types along a continuum. These types represent potentially escalating degrees of unsolidaristic behaviour—from merely passive lack of solidarity (non-solidarity) to more active and deliberate refusals to act in solidarity (unsolidarity), to the potentially violent sabotage of solidarity through the dehumanization of its potential recipients (anti-solidarity). These types are understood as social practices shaped by disrupted or contested relations – with serious consequences for social cohesion and democratic systems. This contribution positions itself within the field of contemporary solidarity studies and aims to contribute to it by offering a vocabulary for empirical and conceptual research that addresses the absence of solidarity, as well as the grey areas in between – emphasizing the importance of fostering genuine solidaristic practices grounded in relationality.

Author: Natalia Varabyeu Kancelova (University of Vienna, Austria)

Abstract: Solidarity is a fundamental moral value in modern societies used across every day and political discourse to describe a wide range of supportive and cooperative behaviors – from neighborly help to welfare state arrangements. While the meaning of solidarity often remains vague or context-dependent, there is a shared understanding that solidarity involves acting for the benefit of others and the common good, despite potential personal costs. Crucially, this moral practice rests on a sense of commonality that binds providers and recipients. Yet, solidarity is inherently limited: it applies selectively to certain groups and is constrained by available resources such as time, money, or emotional investment. In this sense, solidarity is Janus-faced – it simultaneously constructs communities and boundaries, mobilizes resources, and excludes those deemed “too different” or “unworthy” due to perceived misconduct. These tensions between inclusion and exclusion are highly contested and manifest in contemporary political debates over refugee support, social welfare, or organ donation. Sociological research traditionally focuses on solidarity either as observable resource transfers or as attitudes toward specific solidarity-related issues. However, focusing solely on actions neglects the moral and normative dimensions that motivate solidarity and explains why people sometimes withhold support despite social expectations. Similarly, concentrating on attitudes toward isolated issues obscures the more general moral orientations shaping solidaristic behavior across contexts. Our approach addresses these gaps by conceptualizing solidarity as a multidimensional normative orientation – what we term “solidarity dispositions” – that reflect individuals’ general evaluative stances toward the challenges of social order, including responsibility for redistribution, the collective good, and the scope of solidarity. Drawing on rational choice theory enriched by socio-phenomenological insights, we argue that individuals subjectively define situations and that these definitions shape their propensity to engage in or refrain from solidarity actions and to support or reject institutionalized forms of solidarity. Using data from the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Religionsmonitor 2023, we apply latent class analysis to identify distinct patterns of solidarity dispositions based on attitudes toward collective goods, redistribution responsibilities, and the radius of solidarity. We then employ regression analyses to explore how these patterns relate to religious identity, denominational affiliation, and individual religiosity. Religion has historically provided moral frameworks underpinning solidarity norms, yet its contemporary role amid secularization trends remains contested. Our study contributes to the sociological debate on solidarity in two key ways. First, by revealing the variance in normative solidarity attitudes that underlie overt solidaristic actions and institutional support, we highlight an often-overlooked dimension of solidarity research. Second, by examining religion’s influence on these normative orientations, we offer insights into the moral resources shaping solidarity in increasingly secular societies. Ultimately, this work aims to deepen our theoretical understanding of solidarity’s normative foundations and inform future empirical investigations into its social dynamics.

Authors: Marcel Müke & Annette Schnabel (Heinrich-Heine University, Germany)

Abstract: Relational solidarity in social work should apply in research, social work education and social work practice. In educating for practice in diverse multicultural contexts, social work students generally have been taught about the importance of building relationships with service users as foundational to understanding their needs and wishes for support in engaging with life issues. We acknowledge that social work is not always a source of support or solidarity. The history of Social work’s histories reveal many examples of oppressive and damaging interventions (Harms-Smith & Turton, 2023; Ioakimidis & Wyllie, 2023) whereby social workers have and continue to exercise power and privilege in relation to most of the individuals, families and communities with whom we work; where power is mostly exercised in private settings with marginalised peoples. And the ‘should’ of professional practice requirements often silences the ‘ought to’ of relational solidarity practice. We often ignore asking respectfully what people themselves think and know about their situations and possible solutions; noticing how structural issues impact on their strengths and capabilities. Should we not be asking: How can we build better relations of solidarity? Thus, mainstreaming interdisciplinarity and relational solidarity is crucial to empower students with the skills to work across disciplines, be cognisant of power imbalance, be intentional about engaging differently with service users, is pertinent. The Call for Papers for this conference emphasises that ‘…following a relational understanding of solidarity, differences in the power and privilege of individuals, groups, institutions, and the significance of these differences, are important…’. One way is through developing a practice of ‘epistemic humility’ (Ali Meghji, 2023) and sharing of understandings and knowledges (Masinga & Sauer, 2025) among and between us and service users, applying thinking that is appropriate to their circumstances. We must look for, recognise and acknowledge existing skills of individuals, families and communities. We argue for the mainstreaming of relational solidarity and interdisciplinarity, particularly exploring how school social workers, could collaborate with teachers, psychologists, parents and learners by developing relations of solidarity, ensuring that all voices are heard, drawing from the Ubuntu philosophy as guided by the Collective Fingers Theory (CFT) ( Molose, Goldman & Thomas, 2018) in alignment with the African-centric thinking (Zvomaya, 2020). Developing different approaches to solidarity in social work practice is explored further in our paper.

Authors: Poppy Masinga¹ & Pat Cox², ¹(The South African College of Applied Psychology SACAP, Republic of South Africa) ²(University of Central Lancashire, Great Britain)

Abstract: When examining contemporary forms of solidarity, it can be fruitful to look back to the 1970s and 1980s, when the call for solidarity with the Sandinista Revolution in Nicaragua mobilized an entire international movement. From West Germany numerous initiatives, brigades and individuals traveled to Nicaragua in the 1980s to support the revolution through political, material, and symbolic contributions. From today’s perspective, this movement appears not only as a political project but also as a dense, social experience of international relational practice. The aim of this presentation is to explore, on the basis of empirical material, how solidarity functions as a relational practice and under which conditions it is perceived, experienced, or refused. My analysis is based on semi-structured interviews with former supporters from West Germany who engaged in Nicaragua in the 1980s through brigades, partnership projects, or political campaigns. Drawing on Grounded Theory methodology, initial coding and thematic clustering serve as the foundation for the conceptual claims developed in this paper. Preliminary findings suggest that “solidarity” appears both as a normative orientation for motivating action, and as a relational practice shaped by concrete interaction. For example, participants describe on one side a normative understanding of solidarity such as a moral obligation toward the “Third World” or political commitment to a utopian ideal. At the same time, it becomes clear that solidarity was only experienced as meaningful and effective when it was grounded in concrete interpersonal relationships. In situations where such relational dynamics were absent, due to isolated tasks, language barriers, or lack of exchange, participants often perceived their work as pointless or alienating. A second analytical focus lies in how internal tensions and contradictions were handled. The interviews reveal that some supporters noticed troubling developments within the revolutionary context, for example the silencing of gender-based violence among political leaders, but did not address them for various reasons. This silence was often justified by referring to their own Western backgrounds or to the ongoing armed conflict on the ground. Criticism, they, as well as the political revolutionary party, feared, might weaken the movement. This raises the question of whether such restraint was part of an essentialist understanding of solidarity, one that leaves existing asymmetrical power relations untouched, or whether it instead reveals a deeper dilemma: to whom does solidarity apply, and under what conditions? The presentation seeks to illuminate the double structure of “Nicaragua solidarity”: on the one hand, the normative framing of struggles for a more just world; on the other, the lived experience of solidarity as a situated, contradictory relational process.

Author: Julia Hartleb (Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany)

Abstract: There is no doubt that the worldwide migration of refugees represents a challenge, if not a crisis, for the global West. Regardless of how nationally constituted welfare states approach the problem of limiting or managing immigration, the phenomenon itself has significant consequences for the question of how solidarity can be organised globally. In particular, this also has consequences for the professional understanding of social work, more specifically for the way in which social work can help shape and moderate the appearance of refugees at the place of arrival and the encounter of immigrants with a local population. In our contribution, we want to ask how an understanding of solidarity can be developed within the framework of social work that can do justice to the multiple relational references of refugee migration. We observe that such an understanding is influenced by different traditions and perspectives of solidarity: The first one would be the classical social idea of the 19th and early 20th century of detaching individuals from their families and communities, even isolating them, and therefore practising individualizing solidarity. It can be associated with liberal ideas of its time. Secondly, the communitarian idea that the individual could only experience protection through relational solidarity in functioning communities goes back to (other) social, political and religious (church) movements. Thirdly, in recent decades, this has been linked with a neoliberal-individualist understanding that appeals to the (civil society) responsibility of citizens as individuals. And at least, fourthly, even more neo-institutionalist interpretations have been discussed, which derive the role of social work in the welfare state from its status as a (semi-)profession. On the basis of a qualitative study of around 60 expert interviews in three different regions of Germany (again differentiated into rural and urban areas), we will reconstruct in a more explorative way how institutionally significant actors position themselves in relation to such solidarity discourses at the intersection of refugee migration, civic society and social work. The explanations provided by social work experts show that the understanding of solidarity in the context of the refugee debate varies greatly depending on the position of the interviewees in the field, but also that the institutional framework of social work can be interpreted very differently depending on the field context. Our findings will enable us to determine more precisely which of the four perspectives on social work dominate the discourse on solidarity in which areas of migration policy.

Authors: Michael Corsten & Patrick Kahle (Hildesheim University, Germany)

Abstract: Appeals to solidarity are common in international relations, but solidarity is rarely addressed in international relations research. In this paper, we theorize the concept, propose a strategy of operationalization, and map empirical manifestations in a most-likely case: natural disasters. Solidarity arises when adversity befalls an innocent victim, prompting expressions of compassion that identify the victim’s struggle as a collective concern, and sharing to help the victim recover. Solidarity is neither rare, nor a given: We find that while over 40 percent of large natural disasters between 1995 and 2018 resulted in minimal or no international solidarity, more often than not some form of mutual support occurred. Solidarity emerges most consistently when it is needed most, to address very deadly disasters. Yet, its limited forms – with strong identification or high sharing, but not the other – are more common. Our theoretical framework offers new insight into the correlates of different solidarity outcomes.

Authors: Marco Binetti, Philipp Genschel & Katren Rogers (University of Bremen, Germany)

Abstract: This study is situated within a growing body of scholarship that examines how systemically advantaged parents (SAPs)—often white, middle- to upper-middle-class, and highly educated—can act in alignment with social justice values to disrupt patterns of educational inequity that they are otherwise positioned to sustain. These inequities are perpetuated by what may be described as an infinity loop of structural reproduction: a mutually reinforcing cycle of de jure policies (e.g., funding formulas, zoning laws) and de facto practices (e.g., informal networking, school labeling, exclusionary parent involvement) that systematically advantage some families while disadvantaging others (Lewis & Diamond, 2015; Posey-Maddox, 2014; Cucchiara & Horvat, 2009). This study explores what it looks like when SAPs actively choose to disrupt this loop—not only by withdrawing from inequitable practices but also by working to transform them. To examine these actions, the study develops a layered framework of solidaristic engagement among SAPs. The outermost layers may include relatively low-risk actions such as questioning dominant narratives about school quality or attending equity-focused meetings. Moving inward, some SAPs may choose to enroll their children in under-resourced or racially diverse schools, redistribute material resources, or amplify the voices of systemically disadvantaged families (Reay, 2008; Holme, 2002). At the deepest levels, solidaristic action may involve relational shifts—relinquishing power, ceding decision-making space, and actively working to transform power dynamics within diversifying schools. Importantly, this framework draws on contemporary theories of solidarity that emphasize action, transformation, and interdependence. Rather than solidarity rooted merely in shared goals or collective action, María Lugones (2003) emphasizes the necessity of “world-traveling” and loving perception in cross-difference coalition work, urging those in positions of power to engage relationally with others without dominance or erasure. Similarly, Iris Marion Young (1997) frames solidarity through the lens of “asymmetrical reciprocity,” where solidarity across difference entails responsibility without the expectation of sameness. Avery Kolers (2016) expands this view by underscoring the role of trust, accountability, and context-sensitive communication in building solidarity—not as a static alignment, but as a relational process. For Prainsack and Buyx (2011), solidarity is manifested when individuals with more resources “carry costs” to support others in shared vulnerability—a particularly relevant concept for examining how SAPs use their capital not to accumulate advantage, but to redistribute opportunity. This layered solidarity framework, therefore, provides a structure for tracing how SAPs’ solidaristic actions vary in form, intensity, and consequence, while also illuminating the moral and political tensions they navigate. It allows for the examination of incremental shifts and identifies varying levels of engagement, helping to theorize what it means to act in solidarity from within privilege in a context where equity work often challenges familial loyalty, identity, and deeply embedded social hierarchies. Following an overview of the model’s four layers, the framework will be applied to illustrative case studies to highlight the complex, often socially fraught nature of social justice-oriented actions taken from within systems of privilege.

Author: Emily Gasoi (University of Vienna, Austria)

Abstract: Following on from considerations by Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone) and Bell Hooks (Teaching to Transgress), in my contribution I examine the reciprocal relationships between processes of solidarity, trust and community building. The starting point of the argumentation is a conception of the concept of community as a relationship of whole persons to each other in contrast to the concept of society, in which contractually bound role bearers tend to face each other. In this conception, the concept of community is not limited to close personal relationships, but also refers to the social relationships of people in large social groups. I will also try to show that it is advantageous for concepts of solidarity and trust if the terms are placed in the context of communitisation. This allows deficits or problems in the conceptualisations to be remedied. In a third step, I show the mutual interconnectedness of processes of solidarity, trust and community building and develop some conclusions for educational practice in schools and in social work.

Author: Roland Becker-Lenz (University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland FHNW, Switzerland)

Abstract: The submitted paper deals with the erosion of the principle of solidarity through neoliberal-inspired school reforms in Germany as a (post-)migration society. The starting point is the observation that the so called New Educational Governance – based on the two pillars of deregulation and privatization of (formerly) welfare state responsibility for education and, at the same time, stronger central control via quantitative (output) indicators – has profoundly changed educational policies and systems in normative and structural-organisational terms in many countries. In Germany, a phase of deregulation in the 1990s was followed by the implementation of a new national overall strategy for the development and assurance of the quality of teaching and schools, employing performance studies, national educational standards, competence-oriented instruction, indicator-based education reporting and the quest for evidence-based education (KMK 2015). Especially in the initial phase, the improvement of the edu-cational success of children and young people with a migration history and/or from socioeconomically de-prived family background has been declared a priority and education as a main field of “integration work” (KMK 2006: 2). By means of a document analysis, it is investigated how and with which consequences educational require-ments of the (post-)migration society are incorporated into new output-oriented and data-based school gov-ernance – and thereby (re-)conceptualized, distorted or excluded. It is shown that current initiatives to re-duce educational inequality are counteracted by complex mechanisms of depoliticizing the discourse. Pupils and parents with migration history are positioned in a new way as deficit carriers vis-à-vis the school by recourse to ethnicizing and culturalizing attributions, while transformational educational and school develop-ment processes tend to be blocked. Here, the dissolution of boundaries between research and politics as a dimension of the New Governance as well as the positivism of school effectiveness research form a central hinge.

Author: Mechtild Gomolla (University of Education Karlsruhe, Germany)

Abstract: Xenophobic violence is a recurrent feature in South Africa’s response to international immigration, underscoring deep-seated socio-economic tensions and historical inequalities. This violence manifests in attacks on immigrants, destruction of property and systemic exclusion which perpetuates a cycle of fear and instability for immigrant communities. Drawing on qualitative data gathered from twelve (12) immigrant adolescents from three schools in the Mthatha Township, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa (SA); this paper explores how experiences of marginalisation, discrimination, and resilience can inform alternative approaches to social work practice grounded in relational solidarity. The findings reveal how young migrants navigate complex social terrains shaped by historical inequities, intergenerational trauma, post-apartheid identity politics, and everyday microaggressions. The narrative by immigrant adolescents reveal the fragility and resilience of social ties under conditions of crisis, offering critical insights into how new forms of relational solidarity can be fostered through ethical and radical social work interventions. Therefore, this paper argues that social work must move beyond individualised or culturally essentialist frameworks and instead embrace a relational ethics of care that recognise differential power, shared vulnerability and collective responsibility.

Author: Agrippa Mabvira (University of the Witwatersrand, Republic of South Africa)

Abstract: Intergenerational solidarity, as a key form of familial and social cohesion, becomes increasingly relevant in the context of forced migration and return mobility. This proposed study investigates how intergenerational solidarity is (re)configured in times of crisis by analyzing two distinct yet complementary empirical cases: Ukrainian refugees in Romania and return migrants in the Republic of Moldova. The first case draws on the project “Transnational Family (Re)Configurations in a Context of Crisis Migration: The Case of Ukrainian Forced Migrants in Romania and Switzerland”, with a specific focus on the role of women in sustaining and reorganizing intergenerational family solidarity. Within these refugee families, women — mothers, daughters, grandmothers — emerge as central actors in networks of care and support, taking on multiple responsibilities: caring for children and the elderly, while navigating unfamiliar social protection and education systems. The study explores how these caregiving roles both reflect and reshape new forms of solidarity in exile. The second case builds on the project “Investigating the Dynamics of Return Migration in the Republic of Moldova: A Qualitative Analysis” (ReMiRem), which analyzes the complex process of reintegration among returning migrants. Here, intergenerational solidarity is tested by expectations and tensions related to redistributing family resources and responsibilities, as well as the negotiation of age and gender roles within extended families. The study aligns with the objectives of the Solidarity Research Network (SRN), exploring how intergenerational solidarities take shape within the family — a key social space for practices of care, recognition, and belonging. Using a qualitative and comparative approach, the research aims to highlight both the potential of solidarity to mediate familial transitions and crises, and its limitations in the face of structural, cultural, and institutional inequalities. This inquiry offers a deeper understanding of intergenerational solidarity in migration as both a resource for resilience and a site of negotiation within emerging transnational family configurations.

Authors: Viorela Ducu & Aron Telegdi Csetri (CASTLE Centre for the Study of Transnational Families, Babeș-Bolyai University, Romania)

Abstract: The SoliThur research project focuses on studying and encouraging solidarity-based action in the municipalities of the canton of Thurgau, Switzerland. Starting point and objectives: SoliThur assumes that various forms of solidarity-based action are already present in many municipalities. However, little is known about these practices in detail, how they are organised, or the structural conditions that favour or inhibit them. The aim is to shed light on the social implications of solidarity practices within regional interdependencies, gain new insights into their organisation, and further develop solidarity-based action by sharing knowledge. Solidarity understood as a dynamic, relational process that manifests itself in various forms in different local contexts. Research approach: The ‘in-between’ of science and practice At the heart of the project lies a participatory, reflective research approach that deliberately breaks down the traditional barriers between science and practice. Around 40 municipal sub-projects are carried out in real-life, laboratory-like settings. Researchers from OST-Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences and practitioners from benevol Thurgau work in tandem. They accompany local solidarity initiatives not only as observers, but also as active co-creators. The participants’ roles remain deliberately fluid in order to overcome the dichotomy between ‘researchers’ and ‘practitioners’. This allows for a relational approach that views social reality as a process, something that emerges and is dependent on context. It also allows for a deep understanding of the interplay between individual and collective dynamics within solidarity contexts. Methodology: Reflexivity as an instrument of knowledge SoliThur’s methodology combines qualitative surveys and project evaluations with an innovative, reflexive logbook process. This process allows for joint learning and reflection by scrutinising one’s own positioning, framework conditions and epistemological challenges. Thus, the research process itself becomes the object of analysis, inspired by concepts such as the Third Place and participatory reflexive research (Bär&Reutlinger, 2021, Reutlinger 2020). The resulting ambiguities and role diffusions are not viewed as disruptions, but as productive resources. Research questions: How can solidarity be empirically recorded beyond normative or institutional attributions? What methodological challenges arise when research and practice cooperate in the ‘in-between’ mode? How can ambiguities and institutional uncertainties be utilised as resources for developing solidarity practices? These questions structure the empirical work and guide reflection on how cognitive processes can be organised in solidarity. Contribution and social added value: SoliThur’s added value lies in its methodological openness and its commitment to addressing all aspects of solidarity-based action. SoliThur understands solidarity research as both an observational and an actively co-creative endeavour. It provides important impulses for reflexive and transformative solidarity research, aiming to advance theoretical and methodological innovations and to utilize the potential of interstices for practical application.

Authors: Steve Stiehler¹, Christian Reutlinger² & Marisa Arn¹; ¹(Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences OST, Switzerland) ²(University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland FHNW, Switzerland)

Abstract: Workers in low-skilled jobs such as street cleaning, laundry, delivery services, domestic help and cleaning received brief media attention during the Covid pandemic, but since then they have often remained again in the background. Their jobs can be physically and mentally stressful, pay tends to be low, working hours are often irregular and working conditions range from stable to precarious. This has an impact on their social network, which for some is rather small and mainly limited to family members, while others have an extensive network of family, work, friends and colleagues. This presentation deals with the question of how employees in low-skilled jobs socially embedded and which solidarity practices are visible in their social networks. To this end, results from a study with employment biographical interviews and interviews on the social network of employees in low-skilled work are included, which were analyzed using the documentary method, as well as egocentric network maps, which were evaluated using qualitative structural analysis. This revealed different orientations in the shaping of social network as well as in practices of solidarity that influence everyday working life and the employment biography in the past as well as in the future

Author: Lea Widmer (University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland FHNW, Switzerland)

Abstract:

Starting point
Solidarity describes a form of mutual support. Following Bayertz (1998), a distinction can be made between two forms of solidarity: solidarity in struggle and community solidarity. While soli-darity in struggle involves articulating needs and those affected joining forces to demand recog-nition and support, community solidarity involves implementing existing forms of support and commitment. Both forms of solidarity can be important in a work context. Employees develop solidarity in struggle, for example, in relation to demands made on employers, while community solidarity can relate to already codified forms of solidarity between employers and employees, e.g. in connection with collective labour agreements, or forms of mutual support in relation to teamwork. However, little is known about forms of solidarity in the context of dealing with exter-nal challenges of employees, which exist outside the working sphere, such as those faced by employees in connection with care and caring of elderly relatives (Geisen et al. 2023). However, existing studies show that employees who care for elderly relatives face particular challenges in their working lives and are therefore often dependent on company support so that they can combine their employment with the care tasks for their elderly relatives. The results of the COMBECA study (2021-2025) show that, in addition to the demand for more support from em-ployers, there is also a need to strengthen solidarity among employees. This is because care often cannot be planned, which means that those affected are dependent on their colleagues’ willingness to step in and take on tasks for them. Against this background, the following ques-tions arise: How much solidarity can employees with informal care obligations expect in the workplace? Who is addressed with this new request for solidarity in the company? What condi-tions promote solidarity among employees? These questions are examined based on the results of a standardized online survey on the combining of employment and caring for relatives (COMBECA) of 1,219 employees in 13 companies in Switzerland and Austria.

Method
Solidarity is a complex concept and encompasses several levels and dimensions (Kneuer et al. 2022). It can only be captured empirically via other constructs, such as ‘sense of community’, helpfulness, prosocial behaviour, trust and cohesion. Against this background, network capital according to Badura (2013) was used as an indicator of solidarity in the COMBECA study. This includes social support, social fit, trust, communication and a sense of togetherness among em-ployees. Questions were also asked about support from colleagues, for example in emergen-cies, and the perceived burden that can arise from colleagues who care for relatives. The cross-sectional study in 8 Swiss and 5 Austrian companies lasted a total of 11 months. Employees were recruited via key persons in the companies (HR, case managers or supervisors). The analysis was carried out using SPSS 29.0 using descriptive and inferential statistical methods (T-test, chi-square test, hierarchical regression analysis).

Results
A total of 1,219 employees were surveyed, 62.4% of whom were women and 36.8% men. The median age of the respondents was 38 years (IQR=17, 15 to 73 years). The mean length of ser-vice was 9 years (IQR=16.5, 6 months to 45 years). Around 38% of employees cared for elderly relatives at the time of the survey and 21.0% currently had no caring responsibilities but had cared for elderly relatives in the past 3 years. The mean values for the variables measuring net-work capital were ‘high’ to ‘very high’. However, there were no significant differences in the as-sessment between employees with and without relatives to be cared for. More than 80% of all employees can count on a colleague to stand in for them in emergencies. Here too, there were no differences between employees with and without caring responsibilities for older relatives. The interviewees hardly felt burdened by colleagues with older relatives to care for (M=5.68, SD=2.93, 4-20). The hierarchical regression analysis showed that high work-related quality awareness (Beta=0.15, p<0.001) have a positive effect on network capital, regardless of gender, age, in-come or seniority. The proportion of explained variance is 43% (p<0.001).

Conclusion
The employees surveyed had strong network capital and were very willing to step in or take on tasks of their colleagues in emergencies. They hardly felt disadvantaged or burdened by col-leagues caring for relatives. These results indicate a high level of solidarity among employees in the companies surveyed, particularly regarding balancing work and caring for relatives. Solidarity was even more pronounced the higher the level of identification with the company, quality aware-ness and employee participation was. To strengthen solidarity within companies, employers should take targeted measures to encourage employees to identify with the company. This can be achieved through increased transparency, recognition, and the involvement of employees in decision-making processes. Clear quality standards and a culture of continuous improvement contribute to a high level of quality awareness. Companies can create a culture of support and understanding to promote solidarity towards employees combining care for older relatives. The combining of employment and caring for relatives should be recognized as an important issue and appropriate framework in companies. Therefore, companies should introduce and improve conditions and services to enable and further strengthen this compatibility.

Authors: Thomas Geisen¹, Sibylle Nideröst¹ & Karl Krajic², ¹(University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland FHNW, Switzerland) ²(University of Vienna, Austria)