If not for Lanka’s suffering women …
View(s):If not for Sri Lanka’s hard working women, where would the country’s economy be? Where would the foreign exchange needed to pay for our imports, for the rich and famous to run in BMWs and Mercs come from? Where would foreign exchange to send Sri Lankan students abroad come from?
Consider these numbers. The country’s economy is, without any doubt, driven by three sectors: migrant workers, garment and tea exports – all of which are dominated by women.
The total earnings from these three sectors (including rubber exports) account for more than 75 per cent of what is spent on total imports (in 2013).
Even though nearly 1.8 million women are employed in these sectors, they are all invariably doing low paid, low-dignity jobs except in some exceptional circumstances and exceptional companies that pay them a ‘living (reasonable) wage’. Female plantation workers are the worst hit of the lot with a lot of discrimination, in many ways, including benefits. For example while public and private sector workers are entitled to 3+months of paid maternity leave (more than 90 days inclusive of holidays), plantation workers are entitled to 72 days, according to unions.
Likewise garment sector workers and migrant workers have their own problems and issues which doesn’t seem to receive the attention it deserves from the authorities, given their enormous contribution to the economy, far more than any other sector or individual. Among migrant workers, there are at least a million Sri Lankan women working overseas (there is a substantially higher number of women working in Sri Lankan homes as domestics who also don’t have rights). In the garments sector, more than 85 per cent of the 350,000-400,000 workers (organised and unorganised) are women while more than 60 per cent of the approximately 400,000 workers in the tea sector (company-owned estates and smallholdings) are women.
Now consider the earnings (in 2013) that these female-dominated sectors represent: migrant workers’ remittances – US$6.8 billion; garments – $4.5 billion; tea – $1.5 billion; and rubber (also a large component of women) – $887 million, which works out to $13.7 billion. Earnings from the three sectors alone represent 76 per cent of Sri Lanka’s import bill last year of $18 billion. To take the argument further (and reflect the female dominance in the economy), the revenue of $13.7 billion is almost double the country’s gross official reserves of $7.2 billion by end December 2013, and that too, much of the reserves are borrowed (bond sales).
In the labour force, women account for 30 per cent according to 2012 statistics but the ratio in terms of unemployment is higher at 6.2 per cent (women) and 2.8 per cent (men). Numbers-wise, females accounted for 51.5 per cent in the total population while males accounted for 48.5 per cent.
All these figures have been illustrated for a reason and in view of the impending arrival in May of a top UN official – Prof. François Crépeau, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants.
This high-profile official will review the conditions of the employment of migrant workers (include local domestic workers) here and abroad, recruitment procedures and safeguards.
What is abundantly clear is that, migrant workers not only in Sri Lanka but from across the world, get a raw deal. They are in low paid jobs, subject to harassment (in homes of sponsors and large work sites despite safeguards and bilateral agreements), long working hours and payment disputes. Working in homes without access to the rest of the world (often-except for one off day), these jobs are often described as modern slavery and in the case of garment factories or large work sites (modern slave camps).
In the Sri Lankan context, the woes and pleas of workers in all three female-dominated sectors have fallen on deaf ears except for cosmetic arrangements to look after their welfare (government politicians and officials would be quick to disagree). A good example of the inability to understand, for example, the root causes of women seeking overseas jobs as domestics is the latest rule where permission of the spouse (husband) must be obtained to go abroad for employment. Rural women sacrifice a lot in leaving their families behind to work abroad. It is not a joyride or a holiday. Simply put, the household income (from the husband’s job or some self-employment) is insufficient to meet their requirements. The ban on women going abroad without the permission of the spouse (in a recent case the husband and wife were also separated) is a ‘putting the cart before the horse’ type of situation.
Jobs, jobs, jobs … or reduce the cost of living! That’s what these women clamour for. In most cases, they handle the family budget, accounts and needs of the children and know exactly how much money is required per month. Stopping them go abroad with insensitive regulations (rather than finding another way of ensuring their children are looked after in their absence) is unjust and discriminatory. In that case, the Government must provide more jobs to rural women to compensate for jobs overseas.
Prof. Crépeau must be provided an opportunity to interact with local rights and welfare groups involved in migrant worker issues, returning migrants and even groups from other sectors – garments and tea – where there is a flow of workers seeking overseas jobs. He needs to be provided a clear and objective perspective of the migrant sector and the migration trail.
The Business Times has been rooting for these desperate women for years and will not rest its case until true justice prevails for them to live in dignity and equality. After all without them, where would the foreign exchange come to buy nice clothes; go to the best of schools; eat in fancy restaurants; or drive fuel-guzzling cars?