Ailsa McKay: Cutbacks will hit women hardest

The conclusion drawn from the initial statistics was that the slump appeared to be hurting men more than women. Of jobs lost, 80 per cent were male jobs leading to claims that, if the trend continues, particularly in the US, women in employment could end up outnumbering men.

Such headlines miss an essential point - all recessions tend to be '"mancessions". This is mainly because the initial impact of any economic downturn tends to be borne by the male dominated construction and manufacturing industries.

Other industries, particularly in the public sector, such as health and education, are not as vulnerable to the effects of the economic cycle. For example, in the year March 2008 to March 2009, public sector employment in Scotland grew by 1.4 per cent, whilst private sector employment fell by 1.1 per cent. The distinct feature of this recession is that the recovery process in the UK and other EU countries will entail a significant cut in public spending.

Women workers in Scotland are more likely to work in the public sector - 41 per cent of women, compared with 22 per cent of men, and women remain concentrated in particular occupations - clustered in the five Cs: catering, cleaning, caring, clerical and cashiering. Local government represents 53 per cent of Scotland's total public sector workforce and women make up 67 per cent of that workforce. As employment in the public sector increased in the initial phases of the recession, it appears that women working in Scotland have, until now, been "recession proof".

The size of the public sector in Scotland, accounting for 25 per cent of overall employment, may arguably have shielded the Scottish economy from some of the more immediate employment effects of the recession. Figures show male employment in both the public and private sector has declined. Female employment in the private sector has also declined but has increased by 2.5 per cent in the public sector. Using this evidence to highlight a "mancession" is not only ambiguous but, quite simply, wrong.

There is no doubt that women's increased participation in the formal labour market in recent decades has improved their overall position with regard to economic independence.However, the same period had also been characterised by deregulated labour markets, cutbacks in key areas of welfare spending, the weakening of the trade union movement and increased economic inequalities across advanced capitalist states.

Perversely, women have been afforded greater opportunities to engage in paid work via a range of measures, such as the increased use of casual part-time working arrangements, that have effectively contributed to sustaining existing gender based inequalities or even in creating new ones.

Women's contribution to the Scottish economy, paid and unpaid, continues to be undervalued and overlooked. How else can we explain why women in full time work earn on average 12 per cent less than men; why women make up 89 per cent of the total health and social care sector in Scotland, but only 19 per cent of NHS chief executives/heads are women and why over 60 per cent of individuals undertaking more than 20 hours per week of unpaid care work are women?

At the beginning of this year the Employment Tribunal service in Scotland recorded more than 40,000 local authority, and 12,000 NHS live, equal pay cases. Unison, Scotland's biggest public service union, is handling 500 new equal pay claims on behalf of women members a month and anticipates an overall total in excess of 5,000 cases to be lodged over the next 12 months. Clearly 40 years of equal pay legislation is not working for women employed across Scotland's public services.

The evidence indicates up to 50 per cent of the gender pay gap in Scotland is the result of discrimination, and in particular the systematic undervaluing of women and the work they do. As a result, women remain concentrated in low paid service sector jobs and continue to assume responsibility for the majority of unpaid domestic responsibilities, including child care. Subsequently women throughout their lives are more vulnerable to the risk of poverty. Thus women could be less able to withstand the impact of recession.

Furthermore, there is a body of evidence that women have very different spending preferences than men, for a whole host of reasons. Of particular relevance in this context is that women as "managers" of household budgets prioritise spending needs on a household rather than individual basis. When men lose their jobs individual men will, of course, suffer but women will effectively act as a buffer, via a combination of their own employment and their role within the household economy. But when women lose their jobs, individual women and whole families suffer. Not least in the one in four households that are headed by lone parents, 90 per cent of them women.

This recession is distinct from previous recessions and not just in terms of the cause and severity, but in the reaction of national governments to the initial global financial crisis.The significant sums of public money provided to banks to keep them afloat, coupled with the decline in economic activity resulted in a sharp deterioration in public finances. Government borrowing throughout most of Europe is at an all time high forcing many countries into a period of public spending restraint. The price to pay, therefore, for bailing out the banks has been met by a reduction in public services.

Although the full extent of the reconfiguration of public finances on Scotland's economy will be the subject of debate for some time, what is certain is that the future for the public sector is very bleak indeed. The UK government has made clear its priority to accelerate the reduction of the public sector deficit and the Comprehensive Spending Review, published today, sets out the corresponding spending plans up to 2015. As a consequence, for the first time since devolution, the Scottish Government is facing a prolonged period of constrained public expenditure.

As the Scottish Government seeks to control levels of public spending, the danger is that "mancession" headlines could quickly be replaced by a focus on the devastating impact the cuts will have on women in Scotland's economy. The public spending cuts will have grave effects for women, both as public-sector employees and as service users. If we consider too that the services being targeted may never return, then there is real cause for concern.

The options available to aid economic recovery within the Scottish context may seem limited within a framework of UK determined fiscal and monetary policy. However, any specific action taken by the Scottish Government and relevant state agencies, aimed at mitigating the effects of the recession and supporting economic recovery should be designed and delivered in accordance with an overall agenda of promoting greater gender equality.

Questions relating to gender impact should be at the forefront of debate. The focus on "women and the recession" serves to highlight the possible range of particular consequences of the economic downturn for women and families. The strength of the commitment to equality evident within the Scottish political framework could herald a new approach to thinking about the public sector cuts from a gender perspective.

If we fail to think differently in Scotland, women will pay the price and when women lose out we all suffer - our children suffer, our pensioners suffer, our labour market suffers and our economy suffers. It's simply far too costly a mistake for us all to make.

l Ailsa McKay is professor of economics within the Caledonian Business School at Glasgow Caledonian University. This week she will be chairing the first session in a series of debates and discussions at the university on Women in Scotland's Economy. www.gcu.ac.uk/wise