Q.1: Economic independence for Women
Economic independence for women
- Can you relate to Margaret’s story?
- What stops women from fully participating in the workforce?
- Is financial security a worry for you?
- What could be done to make you feel more financially secure?
- Is retirement income an issue for women? Do you feel confident that you’re going to have enough money in retirement?
Anonymous Said,
November 27, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Financial security, as I face very old age, is quite terrifying. It will not exist for me unless I get very clever about using my only asset - my house. I am nearly 70 and have managed to have part-time jobs over the last 4 years, after running my own small business and doing 10 years of voluntary work. My poverty is really my own fault. I have never provided for myself as I should, but relied on my abilities to earn me money across a range of tasks.
Age discrimination is very alive but the people who discriminate would use language like “out of date”, which I am, “won’t fit in” which I would, and so on. In fact, ageing is, in its negatives, a form of disability. I fall asleep very easily if comfortable and warm, and I can discourage younger people by knowing the impact of apparently good ideas. On the other hand, my knowledge and wisdom are far greater than at any other time, and my people skills, in particular my ability to listen, are quite extraordinary. However, by young people, my knowledge is often taken as a criticism of them, and my people skills utterly assumed as the appropriate behaviour I should exhibit in their company.
These matters need to be addressed by government. I went recently to a large seminar on working although you are old, and most participants were long term unemployed, with an air of hopelessness that was distressing. Yet the message was “write the CV,” “prepare the interview”, with no opportunity to name age discrimination or even admit to its existence.
From my experience, participating in the workforce when old is going to require more changes than any one is at present prepared to admit, and indeed, many of the things said about the old are exactly the same as were said by men about women 35 years ago: they won’t stay, too hard to train, why bother? They can’t absorb it, they will be too much trouble with their physical problems etc.
Yet the imperative to employ old people will be very strong, as there won’t be anybody else. I intend to work until I am 82 and then I may be able to save enough money to keep me out of a nursing home after that.
You have a great opportunity to combine these two grounds, centred on employment. Good luck!
Public Sector Worker Said,
November 29, 2007 @ 9:34 am
Something I have found working in the Education sector is that many women who are now nearing or considering retirement will have little superannuation compared to their male counterparts who have worked the same amount of years they have. At college when completing their diplomas/degrees, men and women were separated for a session. The women were taught something mundane and quite possibly irrelevant while the men were actively encouraged to join up to the lump sum superannuation scheme. When women heard of this and tried to join up they were told they weren’t eligible or it wasn’t necessary as they would leave work to have children and their ‘husband’s super’ would provide for them. A ridiculous notion given the amount of couples who have divorced and separated. The very high percentage of women working in Education without adequate super has considerable consequences. Women will have to work longer than their male counterparts, whether they want to or not. Adding to this conundrum is the incredibly high number of men who have risen to leadership positions compared to women means that actual contributions to super are lower. The systemic work practices that were in place 15 years ago actively precluded women from reaching leadership positions. Although this exclusionary practice occurred prior to SDA, I can’t understand why something has not been done to address this. When you consider the ageing teaching workforce and the amount of possible retirees in the next decade, how can we manage succession planning, while assisting women to be economically independent.
Susan Said,
December 5, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
Financial advice for older women
Many of the baby boomers are now at or approaching retirement age. Some have superannuation and/or savings and/or investment property etc; others have very little.
What would be really valuable and helpful to these women would be a network of government-funded financial advisers who could analyse a woman’s situation and advise her on how to organise her affairs in order to maximise her income in old age.
The advisers would preferably be women with good communication skills (that is, who can put a case in plain English and make sure the client understands it). They would not recommend specific investments as commercial advisers on commissions do; rather, they would list the pros and cons of various alternatives.
Such a system would:
1. inform women of their entitlements to government funding
2. enable them to maximise the return from funds/investments they control so as to obviate the need for government assistance; and
3. could help protect them from financial scams.
I would have raised this at the Sydney talkathon, but I did not know it was on.
Susan
Anonymous Said,
December 18, 2007 @ 9:45 am
As a baby boomer approaching retiring age and having spent most of my years raising children, I have very little hope of retiring and will need to work for as long as possible. I will not be independent financially. Many women I know are the main income earner, sometimes this will be off farm income in order to maintain the family farm and lifestyle due to drought etc.,or because they may have a husband with a disability. The pressure is really on women who have not been high income earners and the outlook for the future is bleak. I see many tired women who are working fulltime, supporting husbands and trying to be a helpful grandparent. None of these things is easy without financial independence. We also have been given financial responsibilty for our “children” until age 25. The need to continue to work for a longer period of one’s life will also impact on the Volunteer sector of the community. The future is not looking good and although many women would choose to be able to remain mentally stimulated through work the choice to only work part time cannot be considered.
Anonymous Said,
January 2, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
I’m 55 and my husband is a Vietnam Vet with permanent heart problems so he can’t work. Lately his disability has got worse with a current bout of the flu. He gets the TPI and would like to work one day a week but it has been an up down emotional journey with the CSS trying to find work. It’s done him more harm than good with expectations constantly raised to find that the work wasn’t available or only on a voluntary basis.
I would like to stay home so that we can have a better quality of life. I could work part-time.
Its a worry -if he dies and I give up work it would mean I would have to live on super savings to date around $12,000 per year. I’m prepared to work part- time but if I give up my current employment to do this or consider part- time work I’m certain I will not be able to retain current level of skills and knowledge and super would still be inadequate. The future looks bleak!
Jaye Said,
January 21, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
Financial Security.
I am a working 28 year old woman, with a mortgage on a one bedroom flat. I recently finished my university degree, but while studying full time and accessing Youth Allowance I found such an outdated element of means testing, that it made me question how a woman is supposed to maintain financial independence under such a system.
My mortgage, title and loans are all in my own name. My partner and I have no shared accounts. We contribute to bills 50/50, as many couples do these days, in the same manner as housemates.
He pays rent to me, as the landlord, yet according to Centrelink this is irrelevant because we are sleeping together, thus my assets are half his. My part time work deducted from both our payments (he is also a full time student). Without going into how ridiculous a system is that
a) denies a woman the right to individual ownership and/or enterprise
b) labels straight couples defacto regardless, but denies long term live-in committed same sex couples the same (a lesbian couple who are rasing a child together can access single mothers allowance, and non means tested benefits while living under the same roof as her partner, because our ancient system will not recognise them as a couple/family)
c) believes that being in a sexual relationship is the same as a financial dependence (unless you’re gay, as mentioned) magnifies how outdated the system is. More than 50% of uni students are now women, yet the breadwinner mentality still applies.
Then it gets worse in the workforce, where the family tax benefits system discourages women from working after they have children, because women in low-to-middle income families can lose up to half their income in tax, deny the importance of women in the workforce by offering a baby bonus over maternity leave, and ignore realistic solutions such as ‘at work childcare’ or childcare as a salary sacrifice option.
Enough of my ranting! But it seems to me that although I endeavour to create financial security for myself, the emphasis remains on security through family, and in contemporary society, long term relationships and/or nuclear breadwinner families are no longer the norm.
Anonymous Said,
January 31, 2008 @ 7:29 am
I have a couple of points I want to make.
Firstly there is the issue of married/defacto women not being able to get financial assistance when unemployed or ill as it’s assumed that the male partner will support you in those circumstances. However with a friend and I so much of the partner’s income is taken up with child support in her case and in my situation my partner supports his mother, sister and father in law in a separate household. My friend is facing having surgery meaning 7 weeks off work and is wondering how she manage without an income for so long. If I become unemployed for a lengthy period of time I’m in the same boat. I know that some women are forced to illegally draw Centrelink benefits due to lack of partner financial support.
Secondly is the issue about earnings and superannuation and poorer medical treatment provided to women. A few years ago I found that my ongoing fatigue which makes it difficult for me to work full time without flexible hours and perform the now expected unpaid overtime was due to a heart condition. I was happy to find a cause but was shocked when I was refused treatment which is apparently allowed under “doctors being allowed to use their clinical judgement”. This refusal to treat (and I’ve been to a number of doctors since to attempt to gain treatment) has lead to me needing to step out of my field has impacted on my earnings. I also understand women tend to be over diagnosed with mental health conditions with doctors then refusing to look into and treat physical symptoms and conditions which has been partially my situation as my heart condition is not well know and is often mistaken for anxiety.
This has stopped me from using these crucial years in my 40’s to build good strong experience to keep me competitive for my 50 and 60’s when age discrmination kicks in. Of course reduced earnings means reduced superannuation.
Paul Said,
February 1, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
I can’t find the place where men are able to talk about their financial concerns. Can anyone point me to the right section?
Maggie Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 9:50 am
re Your ABC Life Matters discussion : one caller mentioned the lack of super held by those of us who are now ready to and able to retire.
A single, age pensioner who does NOT own a home and must pay rent, simply CANNOT live on the pension. However, if you work, you lose 40cents (like a tax) on every dollar you earn above $62 per week.
MY SOLUTION IS: Allow age pensioners to continue to work and earn the equivalent of the age pension - not as a passive income from investments etc but as a productive, intelligent contributor to productivity. (I’ve excluded investments because that’s not possible for a person who’s 65 yrs old now).
Thank you for listening.
Anonymous Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
I am 37 year old single woman with a mortgage on my own.
I find it very heartbreaking to hear stories of women from earlier generations whose husbands denied them access to their (the husband’s) superannuation, at the time of divorce. I am almost unable to comprehend this. I am sure not many men behaved in this way toward their wives or their children.
When I hear and consider the changes to women’s roles since the second world war, I am in total admiration of women who have children. Women’s roles have totally diversified and yet my experience and observation is that men in Australia, are not allowed to participate in the diversification of their roles (I am thinking here of the male primary school teacher who was refused permission to work part time to help raise his children). When I hear of women who are mothers and are working, I am in awe. I think modern women are under enormous pressure to work outside the home and yet simultaneously, do practical and emotional caring of their family networks.
I am in the process of gradually separating myself from the consumerist, materialist ideology that I have unconsciously absorbed over my lifetime in Australia. The fact that our society regards the nurturing of relationships (childrearing, or looking after elderly parents) as empty of value because the activity does not generate money, is a position that now totally disgusts me. And the fact that I once held this position myself is also distressing to me. Australia’s attitude toward child rearing is very evident in the salaries and status it accords to child care workers.
I very much support pressure on government to move away from the dominant model of full time work with 4 weeks annual leave, which seems to me to be based on the 1950s model of working man who has a dependent wife to take care of his children and his mother and anyone else who might need human care and comfort.
I apologise for mixing up two different positions here: support for modifying and updating employment practices for both men and women versus a personal journey I am on, to ensure that my life does not revolve around consuming more and more disposable goods which are un-necessary.
Thank you very much for undertaking the listening tour.
Paul Said,
February 8, 2008 @ 3:17 pm
I have a question. Why are men excluded from the above question re improving economic independence for women? Do no men need help? Of course they do- think of the disabled, or homeless, or low income, or single father men.
That leads to my first suggestion: that the “equal opportunity” commission remove unnecessary gender bias from its target questions.
That suggestion made, I would like to make brief mention of my situation which I believe represents a growing constituency. I am a full-time single dad of two children. I live on the poverty line and rely on parenting payments and part-time work to get food onto the table, pay rent, etc. The primary problem I’m facing is sourcing enough part-time work while my kids are at school, which I’m finding very hard. I presently do about 10hrs a week gardening work, but require more and am finding many employers are preferring to hire childless part-time workers. On top of this Centerlink is pressuring me to get 15hrs a week paid work, which I simply can’t find. So it would be helpful if something was done to give single “parents” more opportunities to access part-time work….. maybe some kind of preferential system?
Please begin considering males in your equal-opportunity questions.
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Paul
PartTimeParent Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 5:49 pm
Work-life balance
————————
I am a very lucky man. I demanded that I share the joy of playing for my kid, instead of just paying my former partner.
Most mothers demand a work-life balance by working part-time or not at all in paid, “work-work”.
Meanwhile, while mum is holding the baby, Dad is left carrying the mortgage! Tragically, most men are forced to INCREASE their working hours when they become fathers. The fact that they put up with the extra hours with little complaint doesn’t make it ‘fair’, or that they want to.
According to the ABS, Australian dads work 5hrs a day longer then mothers in paid “work-work”. Is that fair? 5hrs-a-day is a lot of housework!
Work-life balance?
Dads struggle to maintain a work-sleep balance!
PAY
——
All these extra hours of work, for all these years, mean that dads end up earning more… you have to get the experience before you get the promotion.
For the same work and for the same experience, women get paid MORE than men. For example before most people start a family, young women get paid more per hour than young men.
Women’s hourly pay rates only drop below men’s when woman’s average wage is diluted by those women who work part-time or don’t work at all for many years.
Dirty, Dangerous and Remote
——————————————
Should a brick layer be paid more than a secretary? Working in insecure, contract hours (no leave), outdoors in dirty and dangerous conditions? Yes, he should be paid more.
What about a miner in remote WA? Or a garbage collector? Pub security ‘bouncer’ struggling with brawling drunks?
Here’s a test, next time you are up at 3am, look around and see who is working? Male security, male taxi drivers, male road wokers, male long-dstance truckies, and prostitutes. All equally dreadfull jobs, all well paid - and nearly all men’s jobs.
That’s why men earn more - they work harder, longer, sacrifice themselves by long hours and in dirty, dangerous or remote jobs…
If you control for lifetime total hours worked, and industry (eg mining vs hospitality), women earn more than men. That’s discrimination against men!
www.fathers4equality-australia.org
Paul Said,
February 11, 2008 @ 6:41 pm
PS. I also don’t have a single dollar in retirement funds, savings, or superanuation. I’m penniless partly because I’m a full-time parent and so can’t see how I could squeeze in a career-studies with my child-care and present part-time work load. So I’m very concerned as a “man” about how I’m going to remain financially independent in my retirement years.
Single dads need help for creating a retirement fund, and I hope we can be considered equally with needy women on this count.
Thank you
Paul.
Anonymous Said,
February 18, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
I’d encourage PartTimeParent to have a look at the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ nationally representative data on Average Weekly Earnings. It shows that women get paid on average only 84 per cent of every male dollar - and this is for exactly the same work and exactly the same hours. Here’s the link:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0/
Anonymous Said,
February 19, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
To the above poster, regarding this lower pay for women for “exactly the same amount of hours”, it is crucial to look at what men and women are doing in these hours: i.e. if men are working unsavory hours which gather penalty rates, then naturally he will earn more for the same number of hors in the same occupation. Also, higher hourly rates of pay are attracted when men take remote postings or dangerous/difficult tasks, which means that here men also might achieve a higher weekly pay-packet for the same amount of hours and qualifications.
The truth of the pay gap is in the detail, which is why it is notoriously rare to find cases of prosecuted wage discrimination based on gender.
Anonymous Said,
February 26, 2008 @ 3:29 am
I think the problems of Economic Independance for Women, Sex discrimination, Harrassment and Violence are
all issues that have occurred because of one attitude that society will not let go of. Women are traditionally expected to be caring, nurturing and sensitive whereas people expect men to be logical and analytical. It is also traditional for men to have power and society sees men having power as a good thing whereas for women to have it, it’s seen as “unattractive” or “unfeminine”. Once people let go of these unfair ideals of men and women and discover and be at peace with the fact that its ok for the distribution of power to be even in all facets of life and more importantly necessary as we need diversity (because there is a reason we havn’t evolved so that men and women think in the same way), then these issues will naturally dissipate. Its all about society’s view and expectations of each gender. People need to be able to expect the same from everyone and not automatically make judgements of how men and women should be.
I agree with the comment Jaye said about nuclear breadwinner families no longer being accepted so much but people still have an attitude that is centuries old. I’m not of course saying people can’t have their own beliefs but human rights and needs should always come first.
These needs are survival, safety-security, social belonging, esteem, and self-actualisation.
1. SURVIVAL—The survival level consists of the basics we need to sustain life itself; for example, oxygen, food, water, sleep, and relief from pain.
2. SAFETY-SECURITY—The safety-security level involves the need for protection from possible threats, such as violence, disease, or poverty. It also includes the need for the security of an adequate job and money in the bank.
3. SOCIAL-BELONGING—The social, or belonging, level concerns the need to be liked and wanted by family, friends, coworkers, and others with whom we associate.
4. ESTEEM—The esteem level involves our feelings of importance. To satisfy our esteem needs, we must get a feeling of importance from two sources. First, we must have a feeling of importance that comes from within; this feeling is self-esteem. Second, since self-esteem alone will not satisfy our esteem needs, we must feel that other people believe we are important.
5. SELF-ACTUALIZATION—Self-actualization is the full realization of our own potential. Simply stated, that means we know our limits and try to perform, within those limits, to our full potential. These five levels of needs are acted out in behaviors. You, as a leader, with an understanding of these needs, can help your people satisfy their needs and be more successful..
With the way our current society is, for women it’s obvious the safety-security need isn’t being met enough and so as a result the needs that follow that one also suffer. So why isn’t the government doing enough? The government needs to
meet human needs FIRST before bringing a religion into it.
Elizabeth Said,
March 18, 2008 @ 2:23 am
I attended the listening tour today in Perth. This is my story. I relate to Margaret’s story.
As a ‘refugee’ from an alcoholic marriage I rescued myself and my three children nine years ago. My eldest has since gained a degree and a post-grad qualification and has a good public sector position; my middle child is currently in Europe traveling and working, and my youngest is now completing Year 12. I have healthy meaningful relationships with all my children, now, thank God. In the madness of an alcoholic marriage it was not always so.
I had to take out a Violence Restraining Order against my husband in 1999, a most traumatic experience, but it served to protect us from that day. At my wits end as a migrant coping alone, I had given up paid work to work on my marriage – not reciprocated by a partner who was alcohol dependent. So after things came to a head and he was ejected from the family home I managed to obtain part-time work and continued paying the mortgage alone to avoid foreclosure. But that was an unsustainable position and the house had to be sold once settlement was reached, within the year.
I was able to buy a small townhouse nearby so that the children could maintain their education. The eldest was now in 2nd year uni, 2nd child in TAFE and youngest still in primary school. However with 4 in a 3 bedroom home it was untenable. I had by this time gained a full-time job but the salary was mediocre to say the least. My youngest was in private school and I knew the benefits of his remaining there so I made sacrifices.
In the end I had to sell the house – for many reasons. Freeing the finance meant that I could gain a qualification while maintaining a reasonable standard of living for all of us. I could afford school fees and with study and part-time work I could better my own prospects.
I achieved all that I expected. I gained a degree and a secure public sector job with prospects; two children living independently and the last well on his way with clear goals in sight. The down side is that now that I have achieved meaningful employment I am still in rented accommodation with no visible means of regaining a foothold in the property market, especially in Perth.
What irks me most is that, having done the best that I can for my children, having saved society the cost of educating/supporting my children and me, there is no recompense, no assistance. Not only do I not have a home of my own but I am doubly disadvantaged by the system. I do not qualify for the any assistance and to make matters worse, if my eldest joined me in purchasing a property she would lose entitlement to the first home owners grant. Individually neither of us is able to raise funds, together we can, but the system favours couples, not mothers and daughters, not women.
Unless either of us finds a male partner we are sunk – at this moment in time. How awful that in the 21st century we should still be dependent women; its soul destroying to say the least. Where is this Australian egalitarian spirit? Is mateship just for the blokes? Why is institutional/authoritative thinking so restricted that it does not consider ‘other’ (that there are more than two categories of home ownership, first homeowner and other). Is it in a bid to have us conform? How dare we as women think that we can go it alone, without men. Ouch.
Tamara Said,
March 21, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
I’m a mother who has been out of the paid workforce for two years and will probably be for the next 4 years, until my children are ready for pre-school. My return to work will probably be on a part-time basis and I will probably have to re-start my career after so many years out so I don’t expect that I will earn very much.
I never thought this would be the case - I studied for many years, earned a higher degree, worked overseas and then started my family. It was then that I realised that my children need full-time care and their parents are the best ones to provide it. While breastfeeding, mothers are obviously the best care-providers for their children.
I can’t see how, after this time out of the workforce, my earnings will ever come close to my partner’s. I dread to think of how I will ever manage if I have to rely upon my meagre superannuation contributions in retirement.
Jane Said,
April 4, 2008 @ 10:49 am
I admire working women today more than I can say. My comment is about adequate child care.
I began work in the 1950s on unequal pay and worked for 42 years, picking up a university education on the way. I have enough to live on in retirement.
I married but had no children as my husband would not guarantee to stay around to help me with a family. Being the eldest of seven I knew how hard life was with not enough money and with children to look after. I could not even contemplate bringing up children on my own as well as working.
At that time the feminist movement begged for child care in work places. I wrote submissions pointing out that, while developers always ensured there was space for parking in any new building, there was no provision for child care.
While child care has improved, women continue to struggle with family and work and look ahead to a threadbare retirement income. All workplaces over a certain number should provide child care to take pressure off all parents. People would want to work there.
I believe that the Federal Parliament, which should be setting an example to all employers, and which sits in a building where over three thousand people work is still without child care facilities.
All the women I know who have young children are exhausted most of the time. Feminism wasn’t about producing overworked women who are expected to bear children and to work as many hours as they can fit in so the family can survive.