The facts of this widespread discrimination comes via a report by the International Labor Organization–an organization which does some incredible research and advocacy that does not get enough attention in this country because the traditional media has a disdain for actual facts about workers’ lives–as opposed to the traditional media’s incessant trumpeting of the glories of the "free market"–and I imagine a general disdain in the press, and among too many of our elected insiders, for anything remotely associated with the United Nations.

  The report is a bit wonky but here are the things I picked out that I share with you for thought and discussion.

  It’s a fact that women bear the overwhelming burden of unpaid care work. And look at the value of that work:

Estimates show that the value of unpaid care work (also called unpaid household work) can be equivalent to at least half of a country’s GDP. As noted in the ILC report on gender equality in 2009, governments depend on

unpaid care work to reduce the financial burden on the State. It is females that perform most of this work and this reality poses one of the biggest barriers to equality for women.

  In other words, the uncompensated work that falls disproportionately on women is effectively a massive subsidy that women give to society. Our government needs to have a much more aggressive push to value that work and compensate for it (and that is something I am interested in pushing in the Senate). Again, this is about VALUING what exists–and not ignoring the clear economic benefit that uncompensated care contribute to the economy (we have examples all over the economy of the willful ignorance of value–in a negative way, too many businesses never bear the hidden costs of pollution, which contributes, by omission, to profit and the bottom line).

   Second important fact. The bigger picture of the push to lower wages and make work less stable and less full-time–partly oiled by so-called "free trade" which is simply about pushing down wages–has hit women hardest:

Part-time employment

There has been a big increase in part-time employment in developed economies over the last 20 years, with shares much higher for women than men (see section 3.3.5 for more information).

The informal economy

Informal and formal work should not be understood as dichotomous, but as intimately linked and frequently overlapping. The ILC 2009 report on Gender equality at the heart of decent work noted that informal and formal

work exists along a continuum, with informal work lying outside the regulatory framework. The informal economy includes both own-account workers and wage workers and cuts across all sectors. The informal

sector has generally higher shares of females, although the lack of regular statistics on the topic makes it difficult to judge definitively (see section 3.3.4 for more information).

Home work

Home-based work can be a voluntary choice in developed countries. However, it is often a survival strategy in developing countries. Women engage in home work out of economic need and are forced to cope with the accompanying long hours, poor pay, limited access to social protection and associated safety and health problems. With globalization, home work is increasing, especially among women.[emphasis added]

   Third important fact. And alert–here I go praising the Europeans, a political risk of major proportions. Because women still bear the larger responsibility of child-rearing, they are more likely to be forced to seek and accept part-time work. The Dutch saw this trend and rather than just accept that part-time work would mean a complete sacrifice:

A series of laws and collective agreements instituted in the early 1990s have created a situation in which part-time workers are subject to a statutory minimum wage and minimum holiday allowance, equal treatment in wages, overtime payments, bonuses and training. Thus, part-time employment has become not just an "only" option for Dutch women but a "desirable" option that allows them to balance work and family life without sacrificing the benefits that were traditionally a full-timer privilege only.

  In no way should this mean that men should shirk equal sharing of child-rearing. Rather, I view this as a way in which women–as well as men–who actually chose to devote more time to raise families can have a decent protection that is, yes, encouraged by the government.

  Fourth important point. I have been skeptical about the emphasis on education as a salvation for economic injustice. In my opinion, the crisis in work is not that people aren’t smart enough–it’s that we are handcuffed by a system that drains wealth to the very few and encourages wage depression. And this point, then, screams out:

In many countries the female labour force is generally better educated than the male labour force. At the same time, the data show a much greater tendency for the educated woman, at both the tertiary and secondary levels, to face unemployment than men with the same education level. Yes, women are making great progress in gaining access to education and yes, the trend is for more women to become economically active, but in terms of numbers alone, the balance is still strongly in favour of men.

  Translation: women, even as they are BETTER educated than men, still don’t have equality in getting work and being paid equally.

  This might be a place to give peoples’ own examples of the continuing injustice in pay and employment. I’d like to hear those stories (you can post them here or email me at jonathan@jonathantasini.com)