Still Second Best Women's Poverty

Written by: Amabel Davidson

Poverty affects women more than men; historically and up to these modern times. Even after emancipation, the Canada wide women's right to vote in 1940, the women's liberation movement and females now actively involved with the work force, women still remain poorer than men. Canada will be reviewed as a case in point.

Women historically and currently are more subject to poverty than men in Canada. Male poverty level income earners (13% of the population) numbered 1.9 million in 2001 while female poverty level income earners (16% of the population) numbered 2.4 million. Poverty is defined by low income cut off rates determined my Statistics Canada as individuals and families that spend more than 20% of their pretax income than the Canadian average for food, shelter and clothes. Low income before tax includes free market income and government transfers. After tax income is what the public views as disposable income, the money an individual can spend at will.1

Table 1 indicates that Canadian women full time workers on average earned 63% of males in 1978 with a gradual increase to 71% by 2008 in Canadian dollars.

Table 1 Average Earnings of Full-year, Full-time Earners (2008 constant dollars)2 Year 1978 1988 1998 2008 Males 54,400 53,800 56,300 62,600 34,400 35,100 40,500 44,700 Females 0.63 0.65 0.72 0.71 Ratio

Table 2 indicates that Canadian women full time workers by mean average assessment, earned 62% of males in 1978 with an gradual increase to 76% by 2008 in Canadian dollars..

Table 2 Median Earnings of Full-year, Full-time Workers (2008 constant dollars)3 Year 1978 1988 1998 2008 Males 50,600 49,700 49,000 50,600 31,200 32,100 36,300 38,600 Females 0.62 0.65 0.74 0.76 Ratio

2 3

Whether using average or median income statistics, it is clear that woman earn

approximately 28% less than me though the wage gap is narrowing. The reasons are discussed below.

The biggest factor affecting women's income is child rearing. Mothers are pregnant for 9 months and for much of that time are unable to work. After childbirth, women for the near term, stay with the child and out out of the labour market. Females are viewed as the primary caregivers of the young, often subjugating work to deal with child rearing, child illness or family emergency. Consequently woman are more likely to be viewed as part time workers compared to men who generally focus on employment as their primary responsibility.

As a comparison, in the Philippines where I am from, the women are more able to delegate child rearing to relatives as our families are extended with an acceptance of joint family care giving. Also the middle class can afford to hire a child minder/housekeeper as domestic help is cheap.

Workers who lack commitment to full time employment without interruption are naturally less likely to receive employer financed advanced training (increases jobs skills and wages) or advance to higher paying positions. Also, it is often impractical for employers to hold a position open for women during child rearing absences. For example, a when a trained secretary leaves for pregnancy, her position is likely filled by an unfamiliar/untrained substitute, making the company less efficient. Also, the temporary worker must be subsequently dismissed upon return of the full time worker. Note, that the substitute workier is likely female as well, being cast into the role temporary worker. Astute employers prefer workers who can consistently contribute to company productivity and advance their job

performance. As a further example, customers will not wait for product delivery til the pregnant female can return to work in a few months time. Females comprise 60% of minimum wage earners and 70% of part time employees.4 These poorly compensated positions often do not generate enough weeks to qualify for Employment Insurance (EI), company pension plans, Canada Pension, holiday/vacation pay, job security and advanced job skills. As an example, just 39% of unemployed women qualify for EI benefits compared to men at 45%.5

Domestic chores like housekeeping and child minding generate no income, advanced labour skills, EI or pensions.

Single parents, usually woman, are further handicapped. Many end up on welfare for 18 years until the children no longer qualifies for child subsidies. Upon reentering the workforce, the woman has no advanced skills, lost 18 years years of potential job security, has no EI or banked pension contributions. Also her job confidence has eroded by being out of the groove of the working life. Female lone-parent families have by far the lowest average total incomes among families in Canada. 6

Divorce and family breakup are more prevalent than any time in history. Both men and women lose out with family breakdown as combined resources are far superior to a single income. Yes, the men pay child support til the children are 18 but what are the women left with afterwards? Their youth, beauty, marketability and learning skills are on the ebb. The men remain active in the workplace all along; building skills, seniority, pay rates and pension
4 5 6

contributions.

Women live on average 3 years longer than men. Today women live 21 years after the age of 65. These are lower income pension years; another factor contributing to female poverty that is compounded by a lower pension contribution rate during youth. The lowest wage disparity between the sexes is upon entering the work force as youth. This widens substantially in old age as in 2001, 10% of senior men lived in poverty coma pared to a much higher percentage of woman at 21%.7

The income disparity between genders is slowly narrowing. A changing attitude where women expect and educate to be part of the work force are major factors. More woman are graduating high school and proceeding to college. As an example of female scholastic excellence: 75.3% The proportion of young women in Canada who received a high school diploma in 2006/2007. 67.6% The proportion of young men in Canada who received a high school diploma in 2006/2007.8 Improved education has allowed females to advance from the doldrums of the secretarial pool to higher responsibility and income; this is reflected by Table 1 and Table 2 income increases from 1978 through to 2008.

Women earn a higher participation rate in the professions than at any time in history with correspondingly higher incomes. Also some the stigma of male child rearing is easing, allowing more men to stay home to care for children, allowing the female partner to work. In this case, there is an income switch where the woman's earnings exceed the man's; certainly a reversal of fortune. The increased female incomes will accumulate through the years as the additional earnings now will translate into richer pensions in future. Thus the growing
7 8

female income disparity in age old age will diminish.

The wag gap between men and women has narrowed but remains persistent with women living in poverty as second tier wage earners when compared to men. The greatest factors are nature and personal choice; woman want produce and raise their own children as a priority above all else.

APPEDIX FOOTNOTES
1.Womens Income and Poverty in Canada Revisited (2004), Canadian Association of Social Workers. 2. Source: Table prepared by the author using data obtained from Statistics Canada, Distribution of earnings, by sex, 2008 constant dollars, annual, Table 202 0101, CANSIM (database), Using E STAT (distributor), 10 September 2010. 3. Source: Table prepared by the author using data obtained from Statistics Canada, Distribution of earnings, by sex, 2008 constant dollars, annual, Table 202-0101, CANSIM (database), Using E-STAT (distributor), 10 September 2010. 4. Women outnumber men. Thestar.com 5 Sept 2009. 5. Poverty rates still shocking among women. National Union of Public and General Employees. 3 Sept 2009 6. Womens Income and Poverty in Canada Revisited (2004), Canadian Association of Social Workers. 7.Pension gap between females and males in Canada narrows. National Union of Public and General Employees. 9 Sept 2009. 8. Summary Public School Indicators for the Provinces and Territories, 2000/2001 to 2006/2007; Public school indicators, The Daily, Thursday, Aug 27, 2009.