Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
40 — village July - August 2012
Öʽ®ã®Ý
41
I
RELAND has been consumed by the eco-
nomic crisis for nearly four years and we
are grinding our way through the terms of
the bailout deal agreed with the ‘troika’. The
focus has remained firmly on dealing with the
banking crisis and on reducing the gap between
revenue and expenditure. The crisis and the policy
responses to it are having a profound effect on the
structure of our economy and on society. The fact
that these responses are not informed by a gender
analysis is problematic in both the short and the
long term for women.
Economic inequality between women and men
remains entrenched in Ireland. Women work fewer
hours, earn less (17 per cent), own less and are
more likely to live in poverty than men. This not
only limits women’s financial power and freedom,
but also hinders their full participation in public
life. It diminishes their ability to attain positions
of power and influence and it’s those who are in
positions of power and influence who determine
the choices made in response to the crisis.
Unemployment now stands at 14.8 per cent
(309,000 people). 338,000 jobs have been
lost over the last four years. Men represent two-
thirds of those who are unemployed, reflecting
the collapse in the construction and related indus-
tries. Women have been to some extent protected
by the gender segregation in the labour mar-
ket. However, in the last year there has been an
acceleration in the number of women becoming
unemployed. Women represent three-quarters
of those who have been made unemployed over
the last 12 months. This reflects the collapse in
domestic demand, which has a direct impact on
the retail and services sectors where women are
concentrated.
The employment rate for women and men con-
tinues to fall and now stands at 54.9 per cent for
women and 62.4 per cent for men. Both are well
below the EU average. Changes in employment
have generated new gender patterns including
a narrowing of the gender gap in employment
rates.
There has been some degree of ‘levelling down’
of gender gaps in employment and unemploy-
ment. This is due to lower rates of employment,
higher rates of unemployment and reduced earn-
ings for both women and men. This should not
be confused with gender equality which requires
a ‘levelling up’, by increasing employment par-
ticipation rates, reducing unemployment and
addressing the income gap between women and
men.
Research from the Resolution Foundation in
the UK shows how vital women’s work is to house-
hold income: in 1968, women provided 11 per
cent of household income while men provided
70 per cent; in 2009, women provided 24 per
cent of household income and men provided 40
per cent. The contribution of women’s income to
the household is likely to have increased since
2009, reflecting the dominant trend towards
dual-earner couples.
Unlike in previous crises the labour-market
choices being made by women over this crisis can
be seen as remarkably similar to men’s. There has
not been the withdrawal of women from the labour
market that was evident in previous crises. This
is reflected in a small decrease across Europe in
dual-earner couples and this decrease has been in
favour of female-breadwinner couples.
TASC’s research into the gender impacts of
budgetary measures, which included an analysis of
the income distribution between women and men,
illustrates the extent to which women are con-
centrated in lower-income groups. Consequently,
tax and benefit changes that disproportionately
damage low-income groups have hit women the
hardest.
The research found that lone-parent house-
holds had the lowest average income of all
households examined, and that they lost pro-
portionately more of their income as a result of
budgetary measures. Lone-parent households
are predominantly headed by women and are least
able to absorb a reduction in their income.
In terms of public policy, it is not only budg-
etary measures which have disproportionately
impacted on women. Women are also particularly
vulnerable to any moves to ‘increase labour mar-
ket flexibility’ - to dilute the regulations designed
to protect vulnerable workers.
Women have been affected by the growth of
the so-called ‘precariat’. Precarious workers tend
to be underemployed and low-paid. Their hours of
work are often unsocial and unpredictable. Their
employment patterns may be such that they are
unable to build up sufficient social insurance enti-
tlements. The ‘precariat’ are disproportionately
likely to be women, working in areas such as clean-
ing, retail and hospitality.
The income reductions suffered by low-income
groups in general, and women in particular, have
been compounded by cuts in the public services
on which such groups disproportionately depend.
Such cuts, and cuts in state-provided facilities
such as those offered by Community Employment
schemes, have affected women in multiple ways.
Cuts to community-childcare schemes, for exam-
ple, have affected the women working in such
schemes as well as the women who depend on
them to participate in the labour market.
The current economic strategy is generating
unemployment, income inequality, and poverty.
This has given rise to a false narrowing of the
gender gaps – a false equality in that it is based
on growing deprivation and disadvantage. It is
clear that this narrowing of gender gaps could be a
temporary phenomenon as the initial protections
that resulted from labour-market segregation are
undermined as the areas where women are con-
centrated come under pressure.
Closing the equality gap – in the first instance
by protecting those on
low incomes – will not
only enhance the well-
being of individuals and
in particular women,
but will also help boost
demand in the economy.
That’s one reason why
it is important to keep
the issue of equal-
ity – including gender
equality – on the policy
agenda.
There needs to
be a comprehen-
sive, gendered and
equality-proofed
approach across all
policies including
social-welfare policies. The budget needs to be
equality-proofed and budgetary measures to be
audited for their impact on gender equality. This
needs to acknowledge the changed reality of a pre-
dominance of dual-earner couples. There needs
to be a particular focus on policies that impact on
caring. While women continue to be in charge of
the economy of care, it is going to be very difficult
for women to realise their full potential.
Sinéad Pentony is Head of Policy with TASC, an
independent think-tank dedicated to addressing
Ireland’s high level of economic inequality
The
complex
gender
economy
Basically, tax, labour-
market and benefit
changes that hit low-
income groups damage
women hardest
Women are
vulnerable
to moves
to ‘increase
labour market
flexibility’ -
dilute the
regulations
designed
to protect
workers
¨
Ý®ÄÖÄãÊÄù
