"Women
drive on roads. They will benefit from our infrastructure spend"
[in
Budget 2020-21]. [Senator
Michaelia
Cash,
Channel 10 clip in
The
Project
program,
8 October 2020]
The
Guardian,
8 October 2020:
The
prime minister, Scott Morrison, is angry with women. Not all of us,
just those making a fuss about the woeful lack of attention to
women’s workforce participation, economic security and safety in
the budget his treasurer handed down on Tuesday night.
After
early childhood education advocate and journalist Georgie Dent
published an article in Women’s Agenda pointing out that the
biggest-spending budget in history had allocated roughly a third of
1% of its funds for women’s economic security (citing a figure I
tweeted from the Per Capita account during the budget presentation on
Tuesday night), she received a call from the PM’s office to
complain that “no one credible” was making such a complaint, and
that “nothing in the budget is gendered”.
To
quote one famous working woman: big mistake. Big. Huge.
Within
a couple of hours, the hashtag #CredibleWomen was born, and soon
trending in Australia. Twenty-four hours later, more than 1,000 very
angry, and highly credible, women and men had joined the fray,
including prominent journalists and commentators, business leaders,
former federal politicians, economists and sociologists, and even the
family members of former prime ministers, both Labor and Liberal. So
much for no one credible.
As
for the claim that nothing in the budget was gendered – that’s
the point. Proudly declaring that no gender analysis was done on the
budget reveals a disturbing ignorance of the inherent bias in our
economic system, and a fundamental confusion between the concepts of
equality and equity. A budget that treats everyone equally, ignoring
the fact that women start from a place of significant disadvantage on
almost every meaningful economic measure, simply entrenches gender
inequality and, in light of the disproportionate impact of the
current recession on women, actually risks sending us backwards.
The
fact is, the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent economic collapse have
hit women particularly hard. While previous recessions were typified
by declining aggregate demand for manufactured goods and services,
the current downturn is marked by a partial or total shutdown of many
service industries, which are dominated by female workers.
Social
distancing restrictions have resulted in an unparalleled collapse in
demand, which has had an immediate impact on sectors of the market
unused to bearing the brunt of economic shocks, with widespread jobs
losses in retail, entertainment and hospitality. Universities, too,
are shedding jobs at an alarming rate, and many of the jobs in
research, teaching and administration that have been lost will not
return even if and when international students do.
As
a result, unemployment for women in this Covid-induced economic
collapse is double that of the 1990s recession. While women suffered
roughly 25% of all job losses in the early 1990s, they account for
more than 50% of the newly unemployed today.
“A
budget that treats everyone equally ... simply entrenches gender
inequality”
Yet
the Morrison government seems to have failed to come to grips with
the different nature of this recession compared to previous
downturns, or to have grasped the significant changes in our labour
market over the three decades since Australia last faced the task of
rebuilding a shattered economy. The budget released on Tuesday night
was a fine plan for recovery from the recession of the early 1990s,
but not so much for the one we face today…..
The
full article can be read here.
BACKGROUND
According
to Australian
Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Labor Force original data,
in December 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic had entered the country, the female workforce participation rate was 61.6 per cent and total
number of unemployed females was 295,100 individuals.
A Parliamentary Budget Report found that 56 per cent of those unemployed females were women aged 45 years and older.
By
end of August 2020 the female workforce participation rate was 59.7 per
cent - a 3 per cent participation fall. While the unemployment figure had grown to 418,600 females of
working force age – a 29 per cent increase in unemployment.
In
December 2019 the male workforce participation rate was 71.4 per cent and the total number of unemployed males was 371,600 individuals.
Of these unemployed males 45 per cent were men aged 45 years and older.
By
end of August 2020 male workforce participation rate was 69.4 per
cent – a 3 per cent participation fall. While the unemployment figure has risen to 503,000 males of working force
age - a 26 per cent increase in unemployment.
Comparing total females and males who considered themselves underemployed between December 2019 and August 2020:
- Underemployed females totalled 690,200 workers in December 2019 and 753,200 workers in August 2020 - an est. 9 per cent increase in underemployment over the 9 month period; and
- Underemployed males totalled 503,000 workers in December 2019 and 723,300 workers in August 2020 - an est. 31 per cent increase in underemployment.
Females in employment worked a combined total of 736,643,500 hours in December 2019 and a total of 702,547,200 hours in August 2020 - an est. 5 per cent fall in hours worked.
Males in employment worked a combined total of 1,044,184,200 hours in December 2019 and a total of 980,844,400 hours in August 2020 - an est. 6 per cent fall.
When breaking that down further by looking at the percentage of females who had between 35-44 hours paid work a week it was 32.1% of all employed females, with another 19.8 per cent working less than 20 hours. While for males receiving 34-44 hours of paid work a week it was 42.1 per cent of all employed males, with another 11.1 per cent working under 20 hours a week.
Overall since the impact of the COVID-19 begun to be felt both males and females experienced swings and roundabouts when it came to employment.
However, compared with men, over the last decade a higher proportion of unemployed women are now either older women, have a reduced capacity to work, are carers or sole parents.
While the bottom line is that despite the JobKeeper subsidised wage program, at the end of the last 9 months there are still more females out of work than there are males in the same predicament and more employed females than males with less than a full week's work.
When it came to ABS records for industry sectors with the highest job losses year-to-year it was clear highest losses occurred in sectors with traditionally high female employment levels:
JUNE 2019 to JUNE 2020
Accommodation - jobs down 25.5 per cent
Cafes, restaurants and takeaway food services - jobs down 15.6 per cent
Clubs, pubs, taverns and bars - jobs down 15.6 per cent
Tourism - jobs down 15.1 per cent
Travel agency and information centre services - 17.9 per cent
Retail Trade - jobs down 9.0 per cent.
Tourism jobs peaked at 748,200 in December 2019 and in June 2020 were at the lowest level (611,700) since June 2014. More females work in tourism than males so there were more jobs lost by females with a reduction of 88,100 (-21.5%) jobs compared to a fall of 48,300 (-14.3%) for males.
The Australian Treasury is reportedly predicting that unemployment will remain high for several years, but that it will peak at 8% in the December quarter of 2020. However, indications are that unemployment will not fall below 5 per cent until sometime after 2024.
It is statistics such as these which have led to political commentators dubbing the current economic recession In Australia, the "pink recession" or "shecession".
Terms with which Scott Morrison appears to take great exception. Women it seems are never to speak up on economic matters unless it is to agree with his world view.
According to Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries' research, by 29 August 2020 in the Clarence Valley the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was rated "Medium" for most of the valley but at the upper end of "High" was Maclean-Iluka-Yamba which are heavily dependent on tourism.
As it is for Byron Bay where the impact was also rated at the upper limit of "High", while the remainder of the Northern Rivers region was at the lower limit of "High" with the exception of Kyogle and Casino which were rated "Medium".
In 2019 the NSW Northern Rivers region had a resident population of est. 304,325 people with a high number of older residents. In fact at the last Census around 133,332 were aged between 50 and 100 years of age.
In 2020 the Northern New South Wales Local Health District data indicated that females made up 49.22 per cent of the regional population - with est. 30 per cent of that regional population being females of workforce age.
That's an awful lot of Northern Rivers women Scott Morrison & his Cabinet have chosen to brush aside in the worst recession in 30 years.
