Women show their mettle in crisis

Women show their mettle in crisis

By Mayling Oey-Gardiner

JAKARTA (JP): In Indonesia's predominantly patriarchal
framework, women are all too often seen as the weaker sex. Yet,
the ongoing economic and social crises seem only to be
demonstrating how Indonesian women are, in fact, acting as a real
social safety net for many households.

We are seeing that many women did not just whine about the
bitter consequences of the crisis on their households. They did
not sit and mope. They have had no choice but to take the bull by
the horns to find solutions to their problems and to meet their
dictated responsibilities for the well-being of their families.

That is the story from the recent release of the 1998 national
labor force survey by the Central Board of Statistics (BPS).

The story is particularly poignant given the general lack of
recognition of the important economic role played by women in the
household by policymakers or program designers. Even today, there
are no large-scale social safety net (SSN) programs designed with
women as the focus of intervention to improve the welfare of poor
households. Women have benefited from SSN programs but, as far as
public sector programs are concerned, this has occurred only by
default and not design.

Formal sector job losses and resultant unemployment have been
widely discussed as a key consequence of the crisis. Numbers have
been bandied about (some of them highly exaggerated
guesstimates), but references have been mainly to totals without
differentiation by gender.

Here, the recently released national labor force survey
(SAKERNAS) data clearly show that one year after the crisis hit
the country, the net increase in open unemployment has been much
lower for women than men. Between August 1997 and 1998, the
number of unemployed men rose from 2.3 million to 2.9 million, or
an increase of 27 percent. Among women the rise was from 1.9
million to 2.2 million, or 14 percent. In other words, of a total
net increase of 0.9 million unemployed, only 30 percent were
female. Still, unemployment rates remain higher for females than
males. Female unemployment rose from 5.6 percent to 6.1 percent
while for males the rise was from 4.1 percent to 5.0 percent
between 1997 and 1998.

Thus, we can see that women do react differently from men in
times of crisis. Given their responsibilities for overall family
welfare, they are forced to bear much of the burden when their
husbands lose their jobs and household incomes decline. For the
majority, and poor women in particular, an extended period of
unemployment is a luxury they often simply cannot afford.

Martha Tilaar, owner of well-known cosmetics producer Sari
Ayu, confirmed that assertion during an ASEAN discussion on the
crisis held in October 1998. Although acknowledging she was not a
researcher, she observed around her factory in Pulogadung, North
Jakarta, that many laid-off men dawdled in confusion, not knowing
what to do. Women, on the other hand, came to her with requests
for work, even simply for permission to sell food in her
cooperative.

Statistically the men are unemployed but those women are not.
Instead, women have joined the labor market disproportionately
during the crisis. Between 1997 and 1998, overall female
employment rose by 4.2 percent; among males the increase was much
smaller at only 1.7 percent.

Thus women constituted the majority of new workers during the
first year of the crisis. The working population aged 15-plus
rose from 85.4 million to 87.7 million, an increase of 2.3
million. Of this number 61 percent were female, indicating just
how the "weaker sex" is more prepared to face hardship in the
labor market. These stark gender differentials in crisis response
occurred at a cost of more women having to both take care of
their households and also join the labor market.

During good times of steady economic growth, Indonesia
witnessed a steady expansion of the middle class. Particularly in
lower middle-class households, as incomes increased the
opportunity cost for women to remain in the labor market became
less tenable. With the support of their husbands who saw
increased status in keeping their wives at home, many of these
women withdrew from the labor market and focused on housekeeping.

It is evident in the statistics. During the good times of
rapid economic growth from the mid-1980s to the beginning of the
crisis, the share of women as housekeepers steadily rose from 33
percent in 1986 to 37 percent in 1997. However, the crisis led to
a sudden reversal in the trend so that in 1998 only 35 percent of
women aged 15-plus were classified as simply housekeepers. The
absolute change in the number of women classified as housekeepers
declined from 25.4 million to 24.7 million between 1997 and 1998.
But this was in the face of a rise of more than 1.5 million in
the female working age population.

The crisis has thus forced more women out of the house and
into the dismal labor market. But even if their classification
has changed, it is certain that for the great majority of these
women participation in the labor market has not brought relief
from their housekeeping responsibilities.

The media has widely reported on layoffs as an impact of the
crisis on the formal sector, especially on employees. This is
confirmed by the SAKERNAS showing a decline of roughly 1.5
million in the number of workers classified as employees between
1997 and 1998. Even more striking here is that almost all, 98
percent, of this decline is accounted for by males.

These numbers are amazing considering that not only men were
laid off, but also large numbers of women lost their jobs as
factories slowed down production or closed their operations
altogether. In fact, the sectoral data from SAKERNAS support a
view of relatively proportional gender impact. The combined
masculine sectors of mining and quarrying, utilities,
construction and transportation lost 921,000 jobs, 8 percent of
which were accounted for by women. But other sectors absorbing
substantial numbers of women (e.g. manufacturing, trade, finance,
and services) showed a loss of about 1.4 million jobs, with 38
percent of those held by women. The latter percentage is actually
quite close to one reflecting women's representation in the
overall workforce.

The reduction of 1.5 million employees, almost all male, could
well lead to the conclusion that the impact of the crisis is
essentially a man's problem. In a way, such a conclusion is
certainly warranted. Men are more likely to be able to "enjoy"
the luxury of being unemployed, not accepting other employment
which offers worse conditions. When struck by the unthinkable --
being laid off -- the macro data indicate that men are more
likely than women to lose initiative. As noted by Tilaar, and
others as well, such men either go out wandering around or stay
home frustrated, further burdening their wives.

The combination of the relative gender balance in layoffs,
coupled with the extreme male domination of reduction of those
classified as employees, provides support for our assertion
above. It also tells us that it is women who have responded
through a more concerted effort to find work wherever it may be
available. Women cannot and do not simply sit around bemoaning
their fate. Instead, they have had to find alternatives, even
when they involve options that are difficult and often much worse
than the conditions they faced during the boom times.

Regrettably these facts on gender differential responses to
the crisis are not being considered in SSN program design or by
policymakers in general. Not one of the main SSN programs --
supposedly designed to help poor households -- has women as the
focus of intervention. What can the reason be? Does it lie with
the extreme paternalism of Indonesian decision-makers, driven by
stereotypical images of men being the ones who are suffering the
consequences and burdens of the crisis, and therefore in most
need of assistance? When will policymakers awaken to the facts of
life that women are the engines of their households, picking up
the pieces when necessary?

It is time that program designers and policymakers realize the
benefits and efficiency of focusing SSN intervention on women.
Providing assistance to women and empowering them to take control
of their and their family's needs are better investments for the
nation to pull out of the abyss of the crisis.

The writer is director of Insan Hitawasana Sejahtera and a
labor market observer.