Tag Archives: feminist economics

Quel salaire pour les mères au foyer ? How Much is Your Mom Worth?

Quel salaire pour les mères au foyer ?

ELLE.frELLE.fr – 

Si mère au foyer était une qualification reconnue, les Américaines gagneraient très bien leur vie. Le site américain ” Salary ” a estimé, après avoir effectué un sondage auprès de 6 000 mères en 2013, que les tàches qu’elles accomplissent devraient leur rapporter 6 917 euros par mois. Soit un salaire non négligeable de 83 006 E par an. Selon ” Salary “, une mère au foyer américaine travaille en effet environ 94 heures chaque semaine et fait appel à une multitude de compétences : taxi, femme de ménage, psychologue, cuisinière, ou encore professeure. Plus généralement, le site permet à chaque femme de calculer son salaire virtuel, en indiquant combien d’enfants elle a, si elle a un travail, où elle vit, et combien de temps elle consacre à chaque tàche.Les femmes seraient mieux payées que les hommesSi le travail domestique était reconnu, les hommes auraient pour la première fois un salaire inférieur à celui des femmes. Les pères ne passent en effet que 55,7 heures par semaine à s’occuper des tàches ménagères, selon ” Salary “. ” Cette étude est faite simplement pour s’amuser et n’est en aucun cas purement scientifique “, a toutefois précisé le site dans son article. Il n’empêche : une fois de plus, les inégalités femmes/hommes restent frappantes.

From: http://fr.pourelles.yahoo.com/salaire-m%C3%A8res-au-foyer-144257731.html

Salary.com’s 13th Annual Mom Salary Survey

How Much is Your Mom Worth?

Moms. We love them and for good reason. After all, they brought us into the world, raised us, taught us right from wrong and supported us in just about everything we’ve ever done. Biological? Adopted? It doesn’t matter. We owe our mothers everything. And even though they’re too selfless to collect, Salary.com is giving you the chance to hand your mom a check on Mother’s Day by going to our Mom Salary Wizard and finding out what your mom would be paid if moms were – you know – actually compensated.

So that’s why, for the 13th consecutive year, Salary.com surveyed more than 6,000 moms to find out what their top 10 most time-consuming jobs are and how much time per week they spend on each. Then we applied our extensive salary data to each job, factored in the number of hours worked including overtime, crunched all the numbers and POOF – we get an estimate of what mothers would make if they were paid an annual salary.

 

For more details go to:

http://www.salary.com/mom-paycheck/

Advertisements

Unpaid work in France: 3h17 per day, 32% of GDP

Le travail non rémunéré en France, 3h17 par jour, 32% du PIB

– Publié le 12/04/2011 à 23:42 –

PARIS (Reuters) – Cuisiner, garder les enfants, faire les courses, promener le chien: le travail non rémunéré accapare en moyenne 3h17 du temps des Français chaque jour, soit une heure de plus qu’en Corée du Sud et une heure de moins qu’au Mexique, montre le “Panorama de la société” 2011 publié mardi par l’OCDE.

Ces tâches sont classées comme “travail” par l’Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques tout simplement parce qu’elles pourraient être effectuées par quelqu’un d’autre, à la différence, par exemple, de la toilette, du sommeil ou des loisirs.

Et leur poids économique est loin d’être négligeable: valorisées à leur “coût de remplacement”, c’est à dire au prix que représenterait leur réalisation par un professionnel, elles pèsent 32% du produit intérieur brut (PIB) en France, un chiffre très proche de la moyenne de l’OCDE.

Sur les 29 pays suivis par l’organisation internationale, le travail non rémunéré représente 3 heures et 27 minutes par jour. Les données s’échelonnent de 2h16 pour la Corée du Sud à 4h13 pour les Mexicains.

En additionnant travaux rémunérés et non rémunérés, les Mexicains sont occupés près de dix heures par jour, contre 8h04 en moyenne dans l’OCDE et 7h28 en France. Les Belges ferment la marche avec un temps de travail moyen de 7h07.

Les chiffres de l’OCDE montrent que les populations des pays asiatiques consacrent moins de temps aux travaux non rémunérés que les pays européens, qu’ils soient latins ou nordiques. Ce qui s’explique notamment par un temps de travail rémunéré bien supérieur.

En terme de poids du travail non rémunéré dans l’économie, la France se situe dans la moyenne de l’ensemble de l’OCDE et tout près de la plupart de ses voisins européens. Mais la fourchette est large puisqu’elle va de 19% du PIB seulement en Corée du Sud à 53% au Portugal.

LE CLIVAGE HOMME-FEMME PERSISTE

Les différences sont dans les détails: les parents français consacrent ainsi moins d’une heure par jour à leurs enfants, contre 1h51 en moyenne dans l’OCDE et près de quatre heures, par exemple, en Irlande.

Pour ce qui est de la cuisine et de la vaisselle, l’étude montre que 63% des adultes y participent en France alors que ce taux avoisine 80% dans les pays scandinaves et qu’il dépasse tout juste 50% aux Etats-Unis.

Le panorama de l’OCDE met aussi en évidence la persistance d’un certain nombre de stéréotypes solidement ancrés sur le partage des tâches entre hommes et femmes, du moins en France.

En caricaturant à peine, les femmes cuisinent, font le ménage et prennent soin des enfants pendant que les hommes bricolent. Le contraste est parfois très marqué: les hommes consacrent en moyenne 21 minutes par jour à la cuisine et à la vaisselle… contre 83 minutes pour les femmes.

Un rapport du simple au quadruple qui vaut aussi pour le ménage tandis qu’il est d’un pour trois pour le temps consacré aux enfants (12 minutes quotidiennes pour les hommes, 35 pour les femmes) et qu’il s’inverse pour le bricolage (13 minutes pour les hommes, trois minutes pour les femmes).

Au total, les femmes françaises consacrent 4h18 par jour à des travaux non rémunérés, contre 2h16 pour les hommes, un écart un peu inférieur à la moyenne OCDE (4h39 contre 2h11).

Le temps nettement supérieur consacré par les femmes au travail non rémunéré et son poids global dans l’économie incitent à conclure qu’un taux de féminisation accru de la population active pourrait favoriser la croissance, en “réintégrant” dans le PIB une partie des tâches qui en sont aujourd’hui exclues.

Un pas que l’OCDE ne franchit pas, tout en notant que “les données nationales croisées suggèrent que ce processus se produit”.

Marc Angrand, édité par Jean-Baptiste Vey

From: http://www.lepoint.fr/fil-info-reuters/le-travail-non-remunere-en-france-3h17-par-jour-32-du-pib-12-04-2011-1318604_240.php

Complément au PIB : IndicateursTravail rémunéré et non rémunéré – Travail non rémunéré

Complément au PIB – IndicateursTravail rémunéré et non rémunéré – Travail non rémunéré

L’indicateur « Volume de travail non rémunéré » montre l‘importance du travail non rémunéré et de ses composantes en Suisse, la contribution des femmes et des hommes ainsi que l’évolution entre 1997 et 2010.
La combinaison de résultats au niveau des personnes et des ménages (temps consacré au travail non rémunéré selon la situation familiale et le sexe) avec une perspective macroéconomique ainsi que la présentation d’indicateurs monétaires et non monétaires (volume de travail non rémunéré par an, évaluation monétaire du travail non rémunéré) forment la base d’une meilleure appréhension des relations entre travail rémunéré et travail non rémunéré à tous les niveaux de la société.
Le compte satellite de la production des ménages, qui calcule une valeur ajoutée du travail non rémunéré sous la forme d’un modèle, permet une comparaison directe avec les agrégats de la statistique macroéconomique (PIB, consommation, investissements, etc.).
L’engagement bénévole de la population peut en outre servir d’indicateur de la cohésion sociale. On peut citer ici comme exemple une analyse sur les prestations non rémunérées des aînés (cf. publication Démos 1/2010, page 11ss :
http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/news/publikationen.html?publicationID=3865 Site externe. La page s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre.). Parmi ces prestations figurent notamment les soins non rémunérés prodigués au ou à la partenaire dans le propre ménage et les aides informelles pour d’autres ménages telles que la prise en charge des petits-enfants : le temps investi par les personnes de 65 ans et plus dans de telles activités atteint environ 363 millions d’heures (en 2007), soit la durée normale de travail de 53’000 postes à plein temps.

Sources: OFS, Enquête suisse sur la population

Etat avril 2012

En 2010, la population résidante permanente de 15 ans et plus a consacré quelque 8,2 milliards d’heures aux tâches domestiques et familiales et au travail bénévole. Cela correspond à 22 heures en moyenne par personne pour une semaine. Près de deux tiers de ces heures ont été accomplies par des femmes (63%).
Les tâches domestiques ont représenté 6,3 milliards d’heures au total, soit les trois quarts du volume global du travail non rémunéré exprimé en heures. Les tâches de prise en charge d’enfants ou d’adultes nécessitant des soins dans le ménage ont totalisé 1,3 milliard d’heures par an (16% du volume global). 640 millions d’heures ont été investies dans le travail bénévole (8% du volume global).
Le temps consacré au travail non rémunéré a augmenté de 5% environ entre 1997 et 2010. Le volume du travail non rémunéré accompli par les hommes s’est accru de 4 points depuis 1997 pour atteindre 37% du volume global.
Selon les estimations pour 2010, la production des ménages contribue à raison de 44% environ à l’économie nationale élargie des prestations non rémunérées. Cette part fluctue entre 44% et 47% depuis 1997.

Contexte
En Suisse, le travail non rémunéré représente un volume plus important que celui du travail rémunéré. La statistique du volume du travail de l’OFS fait état pour l’année 2010 d’un volume effectif de travail de 7,5 milliards d’heures payées. Entre 1997 et 2010, ce volume s’est accru de quelque 14% (d’environ 22% pour les femmes et d’environ 10% pour les hommes).
Avec la forte hausse du nombre de ménages dit « à double revenu » au cours des 20 dernières années, on peut se demander qui va assurer à l’avenir les travaux domestiques et la prise en charge des enfants, comment va-t-on concilier vie active et vie familiale et quelles en seront les conséquences. De plus, on peut supposer qu’une partie importante de l’accroissement du revenu de ces ménages est engloutie dans des dépenses supplémentaires (par ex. pour la prise en charge des enfants).
Pour pouvoir évaluer l’évolution du bien-être et de la qualité de la vie, il est donc nécessaire d’avoir des connaissances approfondies sur l’organisation de la production non rémunérée des ménages. L’augmentation de la charge totale des parents montre que même si les mères exercent plus souvent une activité professionnelle, le temps qu’elles consacrent en particulier aux tâches familiales n’a que très peu diminué (voir aussi l’analyse: Temps consacré au travail domestique et familial: évolutions de 1997 à 2007. OFS, Neuchâtel 2009 Site externe. La page s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre.). Les pères et les mères investissent aujourd’hui nettement plus de temps à la prise en charge des enfants qu’en 1997.
Le volume de temps consacré au travail non rémunéré est en outre lié à l’évolution démographique. Le nombre de ménages privés Site externe. La page s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre. a progressé d’un peu plus de 10% entre 2000 et 2010, alors que celui des ménages d’une personne et des ménages formés d’un couple sans enfant s’est dans le même temps accru de respectivement 15% et 16% environ. Si le nombre de couples avec enfant(s) est resté au même niveau qu’en 2000, celui des familles monoparentales a parallèlement augmenté de plus de 14%.

Comparaison internationale
Il n’est pas encore possible d’établir des comparaisons internationales. Différents groupes de travail de l’OCDE et d’Eurostat travaillent à une harmonisation des définitions.

From: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/themen/00/09/blank/ind42.indicator.420009.420002.html

Women’s invisible work: Public strategies that are explicitly oriented towards reducing and redistributing unpaid work will do more than just help the women in the economy.

Invisible work

JAYATI GHOSH

Public strategies that are explicitly oriented towards reducing and redistributing unpaid work will do more than just help the women in the economy.

LINGARAJ PANDA

A woman and her daughters collecting firewood on the outskirts of Berhampur in Orissa. Subsistence work done by women is not counted as an economic activity.  

WORK defines the conditions of human existence in many ways. This may be even more relevant for women than for men because the responsibility for social reproduction – which largely devolves upon women in most societies – ensures that the vast majority of women are inevitably involved in some kind of productive and/or reproductive activity.

Despite this, in mainstream discussion, the importance of women’s work generally receives marginal treatment simply because so much of the work they regularly perform is “invisible” in terms of market criteria or even in terms of socially dominant perceptions of what constitutes “work”. This leads to the social underestimation of women’s productive contribution and also means that inadequate attention is typically devoted to the conditions of women’s work and their implications for the general material conditions and well-being of women.

This is particularly true in developing countries, where patterns of market integration and the relatively high proportion of goods and services that are not marketed have implied that women’s contributions to productive activity extend well beyond those that are socially recognised and that the conditions under which many of these contributions are made entail significant pressure on women in a variety of ways.

In almost all societies, and particularly in developing countries, there remain essential but usually unpaid activities (such as housework and child care and community-based activities) that are seen as the responsibility of the women of the household. This social allocation tends to operate regardless of other work that women may perform.

For working women in lower-income groups, it is particularly difficult to find outside labour to substitute for household-based tasks, which therefore tend to devolve upon the young girls and aged women within the household or to put further pressure on the workload of the women workers themselves. In fact, it is wrong to assume that unpaid tasks by women would continue regardless of the way resources and incomes are allocated. “Gender neutral” economic policies may thus result in possible breaking points within the household or the collapse of women’s capacity.

Social provision for at least a significant part of such services and tasks or changes in the gender-wise division of labour with respect to household tasks, therefore, become important considerations when women are otherwise employed.

The relative invisibility of much of women’s work is now more widely recognised. Since many of the activities associated with household maintenance, provisioning and reproduction are not subject to explicit market relations, there is an inherent tendency to ignore the actual productive contribution of these activities. Similarly, social norms, values and perceptions also operate to render most household-based activity “invisible”. This invisibility gets directly transferred to data inadequacies, making officially generated data in most countries (and particularly in developing countries) very rough and imprecise indicators of the actual productive contribution of women.

Inaccurate data

RITU RAJ KONWAR

CHILDREN IN A Khasi village in Meghalaya helping to grind paddy. The Khasis are matriarchal, and apart from other outside work, all the household work is done by women.  

This means that the data on the participation of women in the labour force are notoriously inaccurate. Not only are the problems of undercounting and invisibility rife, but there are often substantial variations in data across countries, which may not reflect actual differences but may simply be a result of distinct methods of estimation. Further, even statistics over time for the same country may alter dramatically as a result of changed definitions of what constitutes “economically active” or because of more probing questions put to women or simply because of greater sensitivity on the part of the investigators.

The impact of social structures is reflected not merely in the data but in the actual determination of explicit labour market participation by women. Thus, in certain regions of India, social norms determine the choice between participation in production and involvement in reproduction and consequently inhibit the freedom of women to participate in the job market or engage in other forms of overt self-employment. The limitations on such freedom can take many forms. While the explicit social rules of some societies limit women’s access to many areas of public life, the implicit pressures in other supposedly more emancipated societies may operate no less forcefully to direct women into certain prescribed occupational channels.

All this is why the new book on unpaid work, Unpaid Work and the Economy: Gender, Time-use and Poverty in Developing Countries (edited by Rania Antonopoulos and Indira Hirway; Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), is so important.

The book combines methodological, theoretical, technical, empirical and policy-oriented discussion on this issue, which has been so understudied by economists and other social scientists. It raises two critical sets of questions: How does unpaid work affect the outcomes of the economy, and how does the paid economy impact the unpaid economy? How can the recognition of unpaid work be used to integrate it with development strategy? The first chapter, by the editors, provides an excellent introduction to the conceptual and empirical issues involved and shows the link to macroeconomic processes. Unpaid work can be seen as a subsidy to state provisioning or to private agents operating in markets, and either of these “externalities” are actually manifestations of a structural system that uses gender constructions to be exploitative and generate significant inequalities in time-use.

Vicious circle

Several other chapters in the book provide evidence based on time-use studies in various countries, ranging from Bolivia and South Africa to India and the Philippines. The evidence provided suggests clearly that most unpaid work is performed by women who are trapped in a vicious circle of drudgery and poverty and is driven not only by economic circumstances but by the availability of physical and social infrastructure. This underscores the importance of providing quality public services (especially in health, sanitation, child care, and so on) and infrastructure, of technological advances in typically unpaid activities that are time consuming and demanding, and of greater attention to the management and regeneration of natural resources.

This book makes the important point that while better statistics and data collection methods are essential they are not enough, and the recognition of unpaid work should not remain confined to giving it greater visibility by “counting” it. Rather, the point is, through knowing and interpreting the reality, one has to change it. So first of all, one must recognise the various categories of unpaid work in relation to production processes and daily fulfilment of basic needs. Four categories are defined in the book: unpaid work of family workers in family enterprises; subsistence work (such as collection of fuelwood and water for the household); unpaid household work such as cleaning and washing; and care of the other members of the household, including children, the old and the sick.

This then allows for a better understanding of how the conditions under which this work is performed hinders the integration of people’s labouring capabilities with desired development strategies. It is obvious that unpaid work requires both reduction overall (through more and better public provision, better infrastructure and technological changes) and redistribution to ensure more equitable burden, especially across gender. But the different categories of unpaid work may need to be addressed differently in terms of required policy responses. Thus, some forms of subsistence unpaid work would definitely be reduced through more and better public provision, especially of basic utilities and services. But reductions in unpaid care activities require a more careful and sensitive approach, such that public provision is made with sufficient resources and in a way that does not impede early childhood development or the adequate care of the aged and the sick.

The issue of unpaid work is often seen as a “gender” issue, and indeed, because of the way that it is distributed in most societies, it is certainly so. But the contribution of this book is to show that it is much more than that and is actually fundamentally a development issue. Public strategies that are explicitly oriented towards reducing and redistributing unpaid work will do more than help the women in the economy; they will make economic processes overall more stable, sustainable and productive.

From: http://www.frontline.in/navigation/?type=static&page=flonnet&rdurl=fl2703/stories/20100212270308100.htm

FRONTLINE
Volume 27 – Issue 03 :: Jan. 30-Feb. 12, 2010
INDIA’S NATIONAL MAGAZINE

For married mothers, breadsharing is much more common than breadwinning

For married mothers, breadsharing is much more common than breadwinning

The other day when the Pew report on mothers who are breadwinners came out, I complained about calling wives “breadwinners” if they earn $1 more than their husbands:

A wife who earns $1 more than her husband for one year is not the “breadwinner” of the family. That’s not what made “traditional” men the breadwinners of their families — that image is of a long-term pattern in which the husband/father earns all or almost all of the money, which implies a more entrenched economic domination.

To elaborate a little, there are two issues here. One is empirical: today’s female breadwinners are much less economically dominant than the classical male breadwinner – and even than the contemporary male breadwinner, as I will show. And second, conceptually breadwinner not a majority-share concept determined by a fixed percentage of income, but an ideologically specific construction of family provision.

Let’s go back to the Pew data setup: heterogamously married couples with children under age 18 in the year 2011 (from Census data provided by IPUMS). In 23% of those couples the wife’s personal income is greater than her husband’s — that’s the big news, since it’s an increase from 4% half a century ago. This, to the Pew authors and media everywhere, makes her the “primary breadwinner,” or, in shortened form (as in their title), “breadwinner moms.” (That’s completely reasonable with single mothers, by the way; I’m just working on the married-couple side of the issue — just a short chasm away.)

The 50%+1 standard conceals that these male “breadwinners” are winning a greater share of the bread than are their female counterparts. Specifically, the average father-earning-more-than-his-wife earns 81% of the couple’s income; the average mother-earning-more-than-her-husband earns 69% of the couple’s income. Here is the distribution in more detail:

breadwinner-distributions

This shows that by far the most common situation for a female “breadwinner” is to be earning between 50% and 60% of the couple’s income — the case for 38% of such women. For the father “breadwinners,” though, the most common situation — for 28% of them — is to be earning all of the income, a situation that is three-times more common than the reverse.

Collapsing data into categories is essential for understanding the world. But putting these two groups into the same category and speaking as if they are equal is misleading.

This is especially problematic, I think, because of the historical connotation of the term breadwinner. The term dates back to 1821, says the Oxford English Dictionary. That’s from the heyday of America’s separate spheres ideology, which elevated to reverential status the woman-home/man-work ideal. Breadwinners in that Industrial Revolution era were not defined by earning 1% more than their wives. They earned all of the money, ideally (meaning, if their earnings were sufficient), but just as importantly they were the only one permanently working for pay outside the home. (JSTOR has references going back to the 1860s which confirm this usage.)

Modifying “breadwinner” with “primary” is better than not, but that subtlety has been completely lost in the media coverage. Consider these headlines from a Google news search just now:

Further down there are some references to “primary breadwinners,” but that’s rare.

Maybe we should call those 100%ers breadwinners, and call the ones closer to 50% breadsharers.

Philip N. Cohen

Welcome to FamilyInequality.com. I’m a sociologist at the University of Maryland, College Park.

From: http://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/breadsharer-breadwinner/

 

Workshop on Women’s Invisible Work: Taking Steps Forward in Egypt

 

 

Around 30 participants coming from various Egyptian organisations gathered on the 25th and 26th of June at the Association of  Upper Egypt for Education and Development (AUEED) to reflect on women’s invisible work at the global, regional and national level and strengthen their communications and social media capacity, within the framework of the Collective for Research and Training on Development – Action led project Sustainable Economic Opportunities for Women, currently being implemented in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Morocco.

Participants came from all over Egypt from the Future Eve association, the New Woman Foundation, the Association of  Upper Egypt for Education and Development, the Badia Foundation, the Egyptian Association for Sustainable Development, the Forum of Women in Development and the Evangelical Association for Comprehensive Development.

During two days, participants worked on the meanings of women’s work amidst political changes in Egypt. The first day of the workshop was dedicated to a short summary of what has been achieved so far in terms of research and round tables on the  topic of women’s work in the informal sector and of domestic work. Papers prepared by CRTD.A consultants Ms Rabea Naciri and Tina Wallace, dealing with women’s informal work in the MENA region and in Lebanon, were briefly presented, along with the debates that have been organised in Lebanon on mainstream indicators and the ideologies underlying them and on women’s informal work in Lebanon. The glaring results of these studies so far have been that women’s work at home and in the informal sector, while being absolutely crucial to household economics and society as a whole, is rarely recognized, let alone valued and accounted for. This is particularly oppressive to women as in the MENA region, the overwhelming majority of women work in the informal sector and/or at home, carrying the bulk of society’s reproduction, while official indicators still estimate the female activity rate at around 20%, one of the lowest in the world.

The issue of accounting for and accurately measuring women’s participation to the economy has been extensively tackled afterwards by the resource person coming from the WIDE Network, Ms Bénédicte Allaert who questioned in her presentation mainstream indicators that we usually take for granted, such as the GDP or what constitutes work under the ILO definition. Ms Allaert went on to demonstrate that these indicators indeed did not paint an accurate picture of economic realities, globally and in the region. Participants were then invited to break into groups and work on the concepts of women’s informal work, women’s work in the household, gender stereotypes pertaining to what is perceived as “women’s work” and the three roles women have to play (productive, reproductive and in the community) paid work/unpaid work, and women in the formal sector. The outcome of the group work was the very purpose of it: participants had different understandings of the concepts, highlighting that what is being measured and studied in the economy is only the tip of the iceberg, with most of economic relationships happening unnoticed and invisible.  This knowledge and research will serve as a basis to inform and influence future and global public policies in order to improve the protection, respect and fulfilment of women’s economic rights.

The role of neo-liberal policies and their impact coupled with the impact of the economic crisis on Egyptian women were also discussed. In Egypt, lack of employment opportunities and long-standing weak social protection and work conditions systems were only worsened by the decrease in foreign investment brought about by the economic crisis, as well as the decrease in tourism. The impact of that depression in the economy was first and foremost borne by women who had to endure massive losses of jobs, and carry on the majority of the housework load.

The second day was articulated around social media and on how can Facebook Twitter and blogs help raise awareness on this topic and allow for partner to stay in touch in between physical meetings. The workshop ended with participants drafting action plans to carry the project forward, with the ultimate aim to change not only policies and laws, but also mentalities.

Stay in touch as we will soon publish interviews with Egyptian women on their points of view on why the issue of women’s work is important and relevant!