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.