Based on the world bank indicators, especially the data of 2017 yeay, I callected data related to vulnerable employment, wages of male and female, and unemployement of male and female. Using regression model, I find that to reduce vulnerable emplyoyment, governements should increase wages of male and female. They sould also reduce unemployement rate.I find a strong interaction effect of wages female and wages male.
This problem has to do with different levels of employees in Ukraine. If you want to research more data about such problem in Ukraine you'll be shocked by
Hi Niyungeko Antoine
When talking about employment vulnerability, I believe we need to address the issue of formal/informal employment. Informal workers tend to be more vulnerable in every aspects of the employment. Basically, informal workers do not have protection against exploitation. Accordingly, governments work very hard to turn informal employment into formal employment in order to protect the workers. You may find the definition of informal employment through the link below:
https://ilo.org/public/english/bureau/stat/download/papers/def.pdf
Sorry, conclusions make little sense to me. There could be a negative relationship between vulnerable employment and wages. However, how the government can "increase wages of male and female"??? (wages are determined by labour productivity in the private sector).
It seems similar to a fallacy "in order to raise income level, wages should be increased". While being correct, this statement does not add any added value.
Dear Dr. Olegs, thank you for your ideas and point of you. I can tell you that in all countries there are gender pay gap. Inequality in pay between male and female is observed in all countries when you read reports from International Labor Organization. In additon this inequality in gender pay gap has been used as competitive advantage as paying less reduces the producion cost. Do you think wages increase at the same rate as the productivity increases? Finally paying small wages maintain employees in poverty. but, increasing wages will lead to the increase in domestic consumption. You can check some reseach related to gender gap pay.
True, there exists a gender pay gap. It, however, at least partly can be explained by factors such as education, work experience, sector, occupation etc. gender differences. Thus, gender pay gap does not point to a discrimination per se.
As for vulnerable employment, I understood it as employment in bad conditions / temporary contracts, which in this definition is not related to gender pay gap (gender pay gap would be observed even without temporary contracts).
Dear Dr Olegs, there is a discrimination in wages whenever the difference can not be explained by education, experience, and position. That may justify why objective 5 of the sustainable development goals is relateted to gender equality. Discrimination between gender is prohibited by Universal Human Right Declaration, look on article 23. You can have a fully or permanent contract and obseverve such kind of discriminanation. The fact that there is a minimum salary that is regonozed by states is to avoid such kind of exploitation. Vulnerable employment can be found everywehere.
Hi Niyungeko Antoine could you please elaborate more on your work and the regression analysis results? Is the analysis any country-specific or sector-specific. Wage disparity is a major problem that you could see worldover, which is why, SDG on gender equality becomes very important. I have done some research on gender disparity in wages and earnings across plantations in India.
Olegs Krasnopjorovs ,
I am sorry to say, but education differences between men and women have nothing to do with lower wages for women (in some countries, fortunately - my country has fewer issues on this front), as women are often better educated then men, have extensive experience, are better organised, have an eye for detail, do more frequent checks on their work (to avoid errors and keep up the standards), work harder (as they often do the work men chose not/ do not want to do).
It has everything to do with women's life giving capability and the notion that they will be taking time off from work to give birth and/ or deal with children issues in the next 15 years, at least.
Some employers (primarily in the private sector) are not willing to temporarily fill such time gaps with temps (that they need to teach how to do things), or partially pay for child rearing, when women in maternity leave are not producing anything of worth to them.
It also has to do with the generally non-confrontational nature of women. Most speak in indignation when injustice is perpetrated against them, but do not follow with effective action, like men do. So, some employers think that they can suppress women more easily.
To top it off, women are not happy with sexual harassment (very frequent in some countries) and complain about it. Men working in a firm must always be on their guard as to how do they speak, where do they look, what do they "joke" about, what do they touch. Most private employers do not like to have potential problems of this kind.
Consequently, women are often isolated from working at the same positions as men. Wages are lower.
The only way to bridge the gender gap is for the state to intervene and eliminiate these problems from the top down.
Beyond gender, the state should also stimulate employers to hire workers for the longer-run, for example by lowering taxation by a small percentage at particular time points, if a worker has remained with the same company for 5+ years.
:)
Dear Dr. Valeria, thank you for your clear explanation. Let call it as it must be called, there injustice, there is gender discrimination. We must fight it. No use denying it.
The World Economic Forum (2018) indicated that if current rates were to be maintained in the future, the overall global gender gap will close in 61 years in Western Europe, 70 years in South Asia, 74 years in Latin America and the Caribbean, 135 years in Sub-Saharan Africa, 124 years in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, 153 years in the Middle East and North Africa, 171 years in East Asia and the Pacific, and 165 years in North America. While these estimates reflect the pace observed to date towards achieving gender parity, policy-makers and other stakeholders can fast forward this process and should take stronger actions in the years to come.