This study analyses 17 care economies using 2016 Luxembourg Income Study data to contribute to extant debate regarding the ongoing utility of care regimes as a classificatory schema for cross-national comparison. Examining similarities and differences in the provision of low-status work in health, education, social work, and domestic services - the 'care economy' - the data reveal devaluation of the labour done by immigrant women care workers, net of national and regime-level variation. In addition, numerous similarities across liberal, corporatist, social democratic, and central and eastern European care regimes emerge, in terms of the overrepresentation of immigrant women in low status care work, and the disproportionate financial penalties these workers incur. Together, findings suggest that notwithstanding national and policy-specific differences, there has been considerable convergence across economies of care towards a 'migrant in the market' model of employment. Such large-scale evidence of this trend calls into question the ongoing efficacy of care regimes for national comparisons of migrant care work under conditions of neoliberal globalization.

A short health workers' strike held in early 2020 in Hong Kong at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic demonstrates the importance of democratic framing of social movement unionism. A trade union was established during a period of massive civil unrest against the local government in 2019 and then proceeded to organise a strike within 2 months of formation to pressure both their employer and the government to enhance citizen and health workers' safety as the pandemic entered Hong Kong. The paper explains the organisation, progress and reaction to the strike by different stakeholders. The case exemplifies mobilisation through strong democratic trade unionism and provides an example of social movement framing that combined membership and societal interests. The strike represents the last instance of successful independent union mobilisation in Hong Kong as governance shifted from laisse-faire industrial relations that favoured the local capitalist elite to state authoritarianism focussed on obedience to the national political elite.

Using feminist political economy, this article argues that companions hired privately by families to care for residents in publicly funded long-term care facilities (nursing homes) are a liminal and invisible labour force. A care gap, created by public sector austerity, has resulted in insufficient staff to meet residents' health and social care needs. Families pay to fill this care gap in public funding with companion care, which limits demands on the state to collectively bear the costs of care for older adults. We assess companions' work in light of Vosko's (2015) and Rodgers and Rodgers' (1989) dimensions for precariousness. We discuss how to classify paid care work that overlaps with paid formal and unpaid informal care. Our findings illuminate how companions' labour is simultaneously autonomous and precarious; it fills a care gap and creates one, and can be relational compared with staffs' task-oriented work.