Making Manufacturing Work for Women research launch event

Thursday 25 June 9.45 am – 11.50 am
Radisson Blu, 80 High Street, Royal Mile, Edinburgh, EH1 1TH

Close the Gap commissioned University of Strathclyde to undertake research into women and manufacturing. This event will present and discuss the findings of new research which maps women’s participation in the manufacturing cluster labour market in Scotland to identify patterns of occupational segregation, gendered skills pipelines, and gender difference in participation in related Modern Apprenticeship frameworks. The research also examines the impact of women’s participation on pay, and on the gender pay gap within the sector.

Speakers:

Annabelle Ewing, Minister for Youth and Women's Employment
Dr Pauline Anderson and Professor Patricia Findlay, University of Strathclyde
Anna Ritchie Allan, Close the Gap

The full agenda and details on how to book a place are here

The real root of women's inequality in retirement

Research has revealed that Scotland has the second-worst gender pensions gap in the UK. A report by Prudential has found that women in Scotland can expect to receive more than one-third less than men when they retire, with an average annual income of £10,029 compared with £17,539 for their male counterparts.

The media has largely focused on the fact that the gender pensions gap has narrowed, although this is because men’s income has fallen as opposed to an increase in the amount women are saving.   

Vince Smith-Hughes, Prudential’s retirement income expert, has advised ‘practical steps that women can take to improve their retirement income’ which includes maintaining pensions contributions during career breaks and making voluntary National Insurance contributions after returning to work.

However, such ‘practical steps’ are simply not an option for many women and do not address the real root of women’s inequality in retirement. Women are less likely to be in work and have access to an occupational pension scheme and when they are in work, they experience lower rates of pay and so are less able to contribute a pension. Research by Scottish Widows found that 71 per cent of women (compared with 60 per cent of men) cannot afford to save long-term while 23 per cent of women (compared with 17 per cent of men) are saving nothing for their retirement.

Women earn less over their lifetimes, have less savings, and less of a pension compared with men of equivalent age. As primary carers, many women have taken career breaks that have resulted in vast holes in their pension pots.   

At a time when women’s incomes are being squeezed by not only the UK Government’s extensive public sector spending cuts but also the rising costs of childcare, food and energy bills, it is not surprising that many women are unable to save for their retirement.     

Research reveals the majority of women can't afford to save for retirement 

Government U-turn on women's pension age but millions still to lose out 

Government pushes ahead with plans to raise state pension age for women

The Childcare Problem

An increasing number of women are being forced to give up their jobs or reduce their hours because of the high cost of childcare, with long term effects on women’s career prospects. The average cost of full-time childcare is currently £385 a month but this rises to £729 for children under the age of two. Child tax credits are being cut while the cost of childcare increases, and those trying to buy childcare find provision patchy in both availability and quality.

Among those casting about for solutions to this seemingly intractable problem is the Social Market Foundation, which has proposed the introduction of a ‘use now, pay later’ childcare scheme. Under this National Childcare Contribution Scheme (NCCS), the government would provide upfront financial support for formal childcare, which parents would pay for later through the tax system.

NCCS is based on the student loan finance system. Parents would be able to access up to £10,000 from the government using a voucher scheme, paying back contributions once the income of the ‘main earner’ in a family hit a certain level. Parents would stop monthly repayments once they had paid back the amount in full, or after 20 years. Low-earning parents would not pay in full what they had initially received, but this underpayment by some parents would be recovered through a 3% above inflation interest rate on the amount borrowed.

The design of NCCS makes a number of assumptions. It assumes that parents do not object to expensive childcare and are happy to borrow money to pay for it. It assumes, presumably, that childcare providers will be willing or able to meet the infrastructure costs, like installing smart card facilities and administering aspects of the scheme. It assumes that the childcare sector, which has low margins and is characterised by unstable, low-paid employment, is sustainable.

Solutions such as NCCS, which tinker with the demand-side, do not address the fundamental problem. Childcare is extremely expensive from the perspective of the purchasing parents, and represents a significant allocation from family budgets. It is, however, very difficult to run a good quality childcare service funded only by what parents are willing and able to pay.

There is overwhelming evidence that more radical, less individualised solutions to the childcare conundrum are worth considering. A recent cost-benefit analysis by IPPR has shown that universal childcare for pre-school aged children pays a net return to the government of £20,050 (over four years) in terms of tax revenue minus the cost of childcare for every woman who returns to full-time employment after one year of maternity leave.

Affordable, universal childcare is associated with higher female employment rates, particularly for mothers. Increasing maternal employment maintains a woman’s link to the labour market, increases family income and also increases the tax base which, in turn, generates a positive cost-benefit return to the government. Wage equality within families even reduces other consequences of women’s inequality, like domestic abuse. Countries with higher maternal employment rates, such as Scandinavian countries, tend to have affordable and high-quality childcare provision alongside comprehensive, shared parental leave policies.

A universal childcare system might also offer the possibility of addressing the undervaluation of caring work. 99 per cent of those working in the early years and education sector are women. In 2009, the average pay for a qualified nursery nurse was £6.65 per hour, with this rising to £8.82 per hour for managers. Still seen as ‘women’s work’, the undervaluing of the role and the consequent low pay is a major contributing factor to the high turnover of staff and, in turn, undermining the supply of a high-quality service.

The challenge of how good quality childcare should be funded is unlikely to be resolved in the immediate future. Welfare reform by the UK Government has placed families’ ability to pay for childcare on an even more precarious footing. It’s vital for the economy, for women, and for children that any solution implemented in Scotland tackles the inequalities women face when trying to combine a career with parenthood, and in working within the childcare sector itself.

GUEST POST: Women in Scotland's Economy Research Centre: A WiSER approach

I am very pleased to introduce the Women in Scotland’s Economy (WiSE) Research Centre at Glasgow Caledonian University. This newly created centre aims to promote and make visible women’s contribution to Scotland’s economy through high quality research and other knowledge transfer activities. Closing the gap between men and women will improve Scotland’s economic position. However, traditional economic approaches often fail to fully recognise women’s economic contribution and their productive potential.

The WiSE Research Centre brings an alternative perspective to the analysis of women’s economic position in Scotland, with analysis and commentary based on feminist economics. Followers of the Close the Gap blog will be interested in WiSE outputs; research briefings, academic commentary and analysis across a range of issues in Scotland’s economy which will be available in a variety of formats.

Issues of equal pay and occupational segregation have long been a focus for WiSE staff who have worked closely with Close the Gap to promote the business/economic efficiency case for gender equality and to deliver ‘Economics for Equality’. We hope to continue to work with Close the Gap on these and other issues for the benefit of women in Scotland and Scotland’s economy.

To keep up to date with WiSE activities, events and research please check our website regularly or better yet, join our mailing list by emailing Alison Lockhart, Senior Research Officer with WiSE .

Emily Thomson is Co-Director of the Women in Scotland’s Economy (WiSE) Research Centre, and Lecturer in the Glasgow School for Business and Society at Glasgow Caledonian University.