Skip to main content

The Globe and Mail

Are we nearing ‘peak women’ in employment?

As is well known, the proportion of women who are active in the paid work force has grown rapidly since the 1970s, transforming the workplace and society as a whole in the process. The rising participation rate of women was a major economic force over the past three decades in that it kept real family incomes afloat despite stagnant, if not falling, male wages.

The labour force participation rate of women age 25 to 54 rose above 50 per cent in the early 1970s, grew rapidly and reached 75 per cent by 1990, and then rose more slowly to a peak of 82.5 per cent last year in 2013. Over that same period, the labour force participation rate of men in the same age group fell slightly to 90.7 per cent from 94.5 per cent.

The eight-percentage-point gap between the participation rates of so-called core-age women and men is mainly a function of the continuing division of household labour. The great majority of new mothers take maternity leaves with support from the Employment Insurance program, while very few men take paternity leaves.

Story continues below advertisement

About one in three mothers of preschool children stay at home on a temporary basis to provide care, and women assume most of the burden of care for elderly parents. These differences between women and men in terms of combining paid work and unpaid caring work mean that it is unlikely that the gap in participation rates will ever be eliminated, though how we choose to fund and provide caring services can make a difference.

The participation rate gap between women and men may also reflect the fact that women still earn significantly less than men and are more likely to work in temporary, seasonal and part-time jobs. In other words, part of the gap may reflect the fact that women still have much more trouble finding decent jobs than do men.

The option of not working is likely to be most relevant when a woman has a well-paid (usually male) partner. In that light it is interesting to note that the labour force participation rates of core-age women is slightly below the national average of 82.5 per cent in the "have" provinces of Alberta (80.0 per cent) and British Columbia (80.0 per cent) while the highest participation rates of over 84 per cent are to be found in the Maritime provinces where many women work in seasonal jobs.

It is interesting to speculate whether the labour force participation rate of women might have peaked and, if so, what might be done about it. The question is of some significance given widespread expectations that Canada may face labour shortages in a few years as the large baby boomer cohort finally retires. (In the here and now, both older men and, especially, women are retiring significantly later than was the case before the recession.)

One straw in the wind might be the fact that, over the past year, between March, 2013, and March, 2014, the participation rate of core working-age women fell to 82.3 per cent from 82.7 per cent. One can only speculate but this could reflect a soft job market, cuts to jobs held by women in public services or, perhaps, an increase in births as the echo baby boom generation choose to have children.

The evidence is clear that the provision of high-quality, affordable child care has a significant impact upon the labour force participation rate of women. If one looks at the the participation rate of women age 25 to 44, the age group most likely to have young children, the rate in Quebec was 85.4 per cent in 2013, well above the national average of 82.7 per cent and a low of 79.9 per cent in Alberta.

Quebec, of course, stands out among the provinces in terms of proving affordable, high-quality, not-for-profit child care services.

Story continues below advertisement

One might have thought that a government concerned about labour shortages would choose to expand affordable child care choices for families that boost participation rates. Instead, the federal government seems to favour family income splitting that would significantly reduce the after tax-cost of having one partner stay at home full time to look after children.

Income splitting would provide little benefit to most middle-class working couples since they need two incomes, and are in the same or adjacent tax brackets. But the savings would be significant – up to $6,400 a year – for families in the highest tax bracket who choose to adopt the traditional family model with a stay-at-home spouse.

If income splitting for families with children was in place, a female stay-at-home spouse who was considering returning to work would face a marginal tax rate equal to her partner's rate, which would impose a significant disincentive to work.

To conclude, we may well have reached a peak labour force participation rate for women. If we want to increase that rate to deal with future labour shortages, we should support affordable child care as opposed to tax subsidies for affluent families with a stay-at-home spouse.

Andrew Jackson is the Packer Professor of Social Justice at York University and senior policy adviser to the Broadbent Institute.

Report an error
About the Author

Andrew Jackson is the Packer Professor of Social Justice at York University and Senior Policy Adviser to the Broadbent Institute. More

Comments

The Globe invites you to share your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful to everyone. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.

We’ve made some technical updates to our commenting software. If you are experiencing any issues posting comments, simply log out and log back in.

Discussion loading… ✨