..to be worried that 1/3 of women aren’t in employment and economically vulnerable?

[windygallows]

ONS stats (latest from 2013) state that women of working age (16-64) only 67% are in the labour market, therefore 33% of women not in employment. That’s 1/3! Moreover of the 67% working, 42% of them work part time.

So that means it breaks down like this:
Women 16-64
Not in employment – 33%
Working part time – 28%
Working full time – 39%
Total - 100%

www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/alldatausedinthewomeninthelabourmarketreport

Now I know there are a million reasons for these stats from women’s role as primary childcare provider to challenges women face finding flexible working, the glass ceiling, lower paid roles for women. I get it. And many on MN will inevitably remind me about the beneficial role women obvs make outside the labour market, from voluntary work to caring. And that work is not the be all and end all. And nor am I advocating for a life of constant work either.

But what these stats mean on the most basic, practical level is that the MAJORITY of women probably cannot cover their cost of living (either they don’t have an income or a limited income through pt work) and are probably reliant on someone for their sustenance – a partner, a parent, the government, family savings, their savings. This means the majority of women are economically vulnerable. Wouldn’t you say so?

Of course there will always be anomalies to this rule - the highly paid IT consultant who will say she can survive on her part-time salary or the woman with a trust fund. But these people are outside the norm. These stats tell me that the majority of women need someone else to support them financially. It’s scary!

PS - As an aside In 1959 52.9% of women were in the labour market and it’s now 67% - not a hugely dramatic difference

babdoc returning to work after a long break is not always that easy. The idea to you can just get a job when the kids start school is massively over sold to women considering giving up work.

Apart from the difficulties returning to work after a long break - which can be considerable - the level of flexibility required is greater at this age. It's much easy to negotiate flexible working when you've established yourself within a company than asking for it before you've started.

Yes but it’s their choice to do so. I personally wouldn’t want to not work but I don’t think we should be forcing women into work who don’t want to be there.

True, but we do normalize the idea of women relying on others for their finances and this can be dangerous. I bet you wouldn't apply the same rules to men and childrearing is only one part of women's lives.

I bet you wouldn't apply the same rules to men and childrearing is only one part of women's lives
I would really like to see flexible working and shared responsibility for childcare be the norm for both sexes. Both men and women should be looking a creating a better life and work balance rather than sacrificing everything to the altar of work.

I was a SAHM whilst the children were in their preschool years. Went back to work part time when the youngest was in Reception, full time hours by year 2. I'm in a more senior position now than before I had children.

Yes I was financially reliant on Dh when the kids were young but I chose to put myself in that position, it was tough but working full time would've been tougher. Dh was also reliant on me if I had walked off and left the family he wouldn't have been able to afford childcare and pay the mortgage.

calamity I think there is an element of reliance in every couple/partnership/family. It's just that women tend to be the ones who take the economic hit.

I have a child with moderate SN (ASD, learning difficulties, high anxiety), I am a STAHM as it makes sense, that higher earner dh supports us. It would be stupid for me to go to work (I was a community support worker) on a lower salary, whilst he is a stay at home parent. It is very hard to get appropriate childcare if you have a child with moderate special needs like dd. My ds goes to a mainstream holiday club in the holidays to give me respite, but there is noway dd could cope with it.

I don’t know what I think.

I have a well paid full time job. I’m thinking after my second child next year I will at most go back part time but likely not at all. It’s a choice. I can easily afford childcare on my salary and we can live off one income too - so it just comes down to what is the best for our family and the more I see my first child distraught every morning when I leave I’m starting to realise that me working isn’t it.

windy you are so right. I work with a woman who is due to retire next summer. Despite the fact she earnt £50k a year until she had to reduce her hours due to ill health this summer, she is incredibly financially vulnerable because she has very little pension. She was a SAHP for a significant number of years and prior to that worked in a low paid role. She ended up starting her pension late and is really worried about how she'll cope come retirement

Many are financially vulnerable but I find the lack of ambition is the far more reaching problem. There's still the whole divide between men and woman in the workplace.

It's the children and tax payers that pay the cost for poor decisions.

BlaaBlaa poverty in older women is a massive issue which is very rarely discussed.

Many are financially vulnerable but I find the lack of ambition is the far more reaching problem.

What do you mean by that? Do you think women lack ambition (as that's not my experience...)

OP could you summarise the statistics for men please? It may well be that a 25-35% of men are not working at given stages as well?

I am a woman who you would consider extremely “vulnerable” because I have not worked and been reliant on DH’s income for 16 years. We have 3 DC, now 10-16.

What I would say to you is that women in my situation make an informed choice. Yes women can get left high and dry, but fortunately, more women are not in this situation than those who are. If I were to separate from DH, I would be no worse off in terms of wealth / assets than if I had carried on working in what I used to do. In fact, now in my mid-40s, I am about to do an MSc and return to work, but tbh it’s not for reasons of financial security.

Many many women who are working are still vulnerable if their homes / lifestyles are largely determined by the DH’s income. Would they be able to fund the mortgage alone?

How “vulnerable” you are is not as binary as “working / not working”. It depends on marital status; number / ages of any DC; property; ease of returning to the workplace; how much you actually earn and a whole host of other factors.

The problem is that a lot of women actively put themselves in that position. You see the threads on here asking whether they should give up work or not go back and a lot of people say yes of course do what is best for your family. The problem is that the counter arguments of don't put yourself in a vulnerable position or think of the long term gains such as pensions are typically cast aside for the short term benefit. There is also a lot of 'it won't happen to me' thinking as well when someone asks them to consider what might happen if their DH loses their job, leaves etc.

I have always worked FT with no children. I could easily go PT or give up work completely but I won't because despite having no dependants I know that if DH was to die, become ill or leave me I would be in a shitter place financially. I also think of the pension I would lose simply by going PT.

Even if you work full time there's no gaurentee you will still not need some help weather it be by top ups or support from a partner.
And I don't have statistics but I'm pretty sure there are more women working NMW or low paid jobs as a lot of female dominated roles carers and shop work are low paid.

Women are not free to be ambitious in the way that men are since the responsibility of domestic work and childcare /eldercare falls mainly to them

Men typically are able plan their careers without having to factor in these additional burdens

domestic work childcare and elder care is valuable work which adds to society, without it the wheels will stop turning yet it is unwaged, most of the work that women do is unpaid, unsurprisingly men don't seem particularly keen to relieve them of this burden so that they can be free to be ambitious

Do you think women lack ambition

Yes, I think a lot do. If they didn't, we wouldn't have so many that don't work or do just a few hours using the children as an excuse. Men manage to retain their ambition and work ethic, many having no choice as they need to earn as their partners won't.

We are very lucky to live in a country with high employment and a multitude of childcare options. So many make poor decisions that when their relationship breaks down they are left high and dry and usually the impact falls on the children.

The problem is that it isn’t really an informed choice - it’s a choice based around the circumstances at the time. That’s not really a problem if they stay the same but when they don’t the outcome is brutal.

windy it's heartbreaking to see. She's a senior academic at a university yet she's panicking about how she'll survive when she retires.

bats
Exactly this

Increasingly women are choosing a career over having marriage and children
adding the fact that housing costs for men are too high to allow couples to start families what we will see is a sharp decline in the birth rate

Childcare options for all but the very wealthy are limited, precarious, and very expensive

YANBU. I know several women who are trapped in unhappy marriages because they don’t have the financial capability to leave.

word women are free to be as ambitious as men. It's all about choices. If you choose to be in a relationship where the domestic responsibilities fall to you then that will have implications - but that's a choice and is not imposed. It may be impacted my societal expectations but they should be challenged.

I think that's the same for a lot of people BlaBla. There is no way that dh or myself could survive on our pensions. Dh has paid into a pension scheme since he was 20 and it's still not worth very much at all.

Our "pension" is our house we live in an expensive area and will retire someone cheaper. I appreciate that we are lucky to be able to consider that. Of course we could both end up getting made redundant, lose our house and then we won't have that safety net.

Have to agree with another poster some women do use their children as an exscuse not to work even when school age they still prefer to not work think for some it's confidence issues others it's pure laziness.