futurework  

Re: FW The power of women

Keith Hudson
Wed, 20 Oct 1999 00:05:50 -0700

I'd like to refer to Ed Weick's interesting statistics on women working in
the Canadian economy.

Much the same phenomenon is happening in the UK and in the Scandinavian
countries, though it's not yet pronounced in mainland Europe. But there is
another recent statistic from the UK, albeit cruder than Ed's, which might
also be of interest.

A recent survey in the Daily Telegraph suggested that the number of single
women is growing so fast that the UK will need 5 million extra homes by
some nearish date (2005, I think it was). Given that the replacement build
of homes in the UK is of the order of one third of a million, that's a lot
of new homes.  The survey said that there were three associated factors:
(a) women were more able to cope with the new types of jobs in the service
economy; (b) women were much more able to live alone and look after
themselves; (c) women will probably continue to have much smaller families
and at a later date than at any time in the past.

Now Ed finished his piece by saying that there is still a large gap between
women's and men's pay, and that parity is still a long way away.  There is
little doubt in my mind that men are still fighting a rearguard action in
all sorts of ways, but there is equally little doubt in my mind that women
will definitely break through to equality of pay in the coming years when a
certain threshold pressure is reached and there are enough women in high
positions. This threshold will have to be reached in every work area, of
course, and is thus much higher than it would be if there were a unified
working force. Sooner or later, though, it is bound to happen -- and I
would imagine it can't be too far away. I think we'll see some rapid
catching up in a few years.

It will be a matter of conjecture as to what will happen then.  Will
women's pay rise above men's?  It could do: (a) a reversal of  the same
macho reasons that men have held women in subservience for most of history;
(b) because of the continuing trends of service jobs.

I think reason (a) is out. Men are going to be treated by women much more
kindly than we have treated women throughout the ages but,because of (b),
it is probable that women will become the new economic elite in the coming
century (as they became close to being in Tudor times in the UK) . From
this will follow political power and then all sorts of other consequences
will follow.

Among these, mankind thus has the chance of outlawing warfare permanently.
The number of wars (40 going on at present), refugees and general suffering
has been rising all through this century, pretty well all due fundamentally
to the male need for status and power, and I'll be glad to see a decline.
We're already seeing a decline of jingoism in advanced countries.  There is
already no possibility of mothers allowing politicians to recruit their
sons to fight in old-fashioned nationalistic wars. 

Populations in advanced countries are on the point of steep decline, too.
As far as jobs are concerned, I think we will see a significant advance in
working from home in the coming years. Technically, a far higher percentage
of jobs could already be done from home. It's about 10-15% at present but
it easily by 30%. My own business, for example, small as it is, employs
people from five different countries and could be situated almost anywhere.
However, employers and managers (usually male so far) have been reluctant
to let their staffs out of sight for the usual macho reasons.  But the
technical facilities will soon be overwhelming, this will force more jobs
to be done at home for economic reasons (significiant savings of overheads)
and then I think another important threshold will be reached where women
working at home will start to decide where they live. 

I think we'll see a continuing work-led trend to new communities in much
pleasanter environments than cities. While the underdeveloped world is
still gravitating towards cities, I think we are going to see populations
in advanced countries dispersing to the countryside again.

I rather think that the continuing emancipation of women will have far more
significiant effects than we can possibly imagine at the present time. 

Keith    

>>>>>>>>>
At 17:12 19/10/99 -0400, Ed Weick wrote:

I've recently had occasion to dig through the past three Canadian censuses.
 In 1986, average family income in Canada was $37,827.  By 1991, this had
grown to $51,342 in nominal terms, an increase of 35.7%.  Between 1991 and
1996, nominal income growth had slowed, growing by only 6.3% to $54,583. 
  
It would seem that, for the 1986 to 1996 decade, income grew considerably,
but if one deflates nominal income by the consumers price index (1986=100),
one finds that this is not really the case.  During the 1986 to 1991
period, real family income did grow considerably, from $37,827 to $40,683,
or by 7.5%, about 1.5% per year.  However, during the following five year
period, it actually shrank by slightly more than one percentage point, from
$40,683 to $40,253.
  
It probably would have fallen much further if it had not been for two
factors, a substantial increase in female labour force participation during
the 1986 to 1996 decade and a rapid rise in the income of women.  In real
terms, women's average income rose by 10.4% between 1986 and 1991 and by
1.7% between 1991 and 1996.  In marked contrast, men's income rose by
slightly under 3% between 1986 and 1991 and actually fell by over four
percentage points between 1991 and 1996.  While increasing labour force
participation was significant, rising real female income may have been the
most important factor in maintaining real family income at approximately
its 1991 level.
  
This should not be taken to mean that, on average, women now earn as much
or more than men.  Though it may be closing, a very large gap remains.  In
nominal terms, men, on average, earned $31,117 in 1996, whereas women
earned only $19,208, less than two-thirds as much.  It would seem that we
are still a long way from achieving pay equity.
  
Ed Weick

________________________________________________________________________

Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel: +44 1225 312622;  Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________