Back in November I wrote about a report in the DomPost describing the falling level of employment amongst women. It said women were bearing the brunt of unemployment as "10,000 lost their jobs".
I pointed out that as those women hadn't joined the ranks of the unemployed they had most probably decided to leave the workforce as they had two other sources of income - a partner and Working for families.
Today the coverage of the latest HLFS results says, Women especially moved out of jobs in the last six months of the year (note the change from "lost their jobs" to "moved out of"), possibly reflecting the introduction of Working for Families government assistance package in April.
Women were moving out of the workforce in big numbers, by 13,000 in the last three months of the year, driving down the overall "participation rate" - the number of people working as a percentage of the population.
So in a country that needs to lift its production the government has enticed women out of the workforce. That's no surprise. Means-tested benefits have always produced disincentives to work. The family benefit caused just this problem in the 40s.
And here's another thing. Where are all the women who moved off the DPB and supposedly into jobs? Perhaps they aren't showing up because most of them simply changed from being on a partial DPB to being on the In Work payment without changing the hours they work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Would your arguement not be one saying that unemployment was higher in the past, when only one parent worked, than it is today?
I would have thought it optimum, if there were more families where at least one parent worked.
Thus I support any impact of the In Work paytment enabling those on the DPB to regard their future as more secure by going off the DPB and into a partnership with someone working (whereas earlier they have been faced with an economic disincentive).
And I also support women in employment via necessity having the option of not working (where they have a working partner). This frees up a position for those looking for work - including those on the DPB.
Thus it is no surprise that numbers on the DPB have fallen of late.
As to increasing production by having more people working - I would prefer us to focus on increasing our productivy and wage levels (not more and more of us working longer and longer hours to increase production). One improves our quality of life and is sustainable, the other is the way of the coolie ...
My mistake. I had intended to write 'productivity'.
Can you expand on your second paragraph?
I'm suggesting (but waiting for the factual evidence) that women who worked part-time and were still on the DPB have now moved off it and onto the In Work payment without upping their hours.
Hence no surprise the numbers on the DPB have dropped.
Post a Comment