Archives

Out of Focus by Nimanthi Perera Rajasingham

Recently, newspapers have marked the fact that private banks in Sri Lanka seem more and more reluctant to hire women employees. The conditions under which women will be hired is if they promise not 'to become pregnant' for a number of years after employment. The supposed logic of such arguments is that women tend to leave once they have children, they cannot work late shifts, and that they take maternity leave, and extra leave because of family obligations.

Ironically, men seem to have no ties regarding family life and are therefore infinitely more hireable. The skewed logic and sexist nature of such arguments are ignored by banks that persist in such hiring practises.

It is important to remember that women have not obtained their right to better conditions of work and better pay without a struggle. During the first wave of feminism, in Sri Lanka, women like Dr. Mary Rutnam, Agnes De Silva and many more agitated for franchise rights and Leftist women like Doreen Wickremesinghe endured in their efforts to obtain better work conditions for women.

Many of these women were themselves some of the first generation women to have earned degrees in professions such as medicine and law that were long considered beyond the pale of female intellect. Such pioneering women did more than agitate; they set up schools to promote female education, helped women learn about health and hygiene, and further joined in nationalist struggles to end imperialism.

Working-class women such as Isabella Hamy of Wanathamulla were forced to labour for very little money, with very little facilities provided for them. Isabella Hamy joined unions when it was illegal to do so, protested against the dehumainzing treatment of labourers and participated in the famous 1929 tramcar strike.

At the turn of the last century, during the lifetime of these first feminists, opportunities for women to earn a living, be independent and be valued for their work were more than limited.

In 1911, 234,000 out of 500,000 workers in the tea estates were women though they were paid only 25 cents while men earned 33 cents for their work. This is in an industry where women do most of the back-breaking work. (See Kumari Jayawardena 'Feminism and Nationalism in the Third World') The beginning of the century also saw many women working as domestics in homes of middle-class families without compensation beyond board and lodging.

These comments are from the turn of the last century, but in some aspects things are no better today. Here I refer to women working in the Free-Trade Zones. Often, they are told that they must resign if they marry.

They are discouraged from forming unions because this may mean they will demand basic standards. In an industry where 80% of the employees are women, their rights are limited and highly monitored, pay very low. Often the argument used to discourage unions is that if demands are made then foreign companies would move to other countries that have lower wages. As a result of this women in the Free Trade Zone are treated with very little professional respect. For example, even when women sustain injuries due to work, only 14% of those were attended to by the respective companies.

Policies to reduce the number of women employed in any firm is illegal under national laws and international labour commitments under the International Labour Organization (ILO). It is also illegal under the Sri Lankan constitution, and the CEDAW convention to which Sri Lanka is a signatory. Companies must realize that if women find it necessary to take more leave and cannot work long shifts, it is because within the family unit men do not share in the labour involved.

Often women take leave because society has consigned them to a role of carer and nurturer. If they are not at work, they are probably taking care of the husband or child. The repayment for such services is not to penalize women for this free-labour. Women provide free-labour at home, where they do much of the work of running the household, and looking after the children. If such responsibilities are shared by the spouses, then women would be freer to concentrate on their work as well. The solution to this is not to reduce the number of women in the work place.

Employment and proper conditions of employment are essential for women.

Women can only obtain a sense of self-worth and pride in themselves if they are financially independent and not dependent on their husbands or fathers for their maintenance. Furthermore, a woman's function in society is not always to be a mother and wife. She is an independent human being who has many kinds of potential. This move to reduce the number of women in establishments under the pretence that they marry, become pregnant, and so a liability to the firm is an age old, sexist and unacceptable argument.

It has been criticized over and over, and it is disheartening to have to address this again in the 21st century.

Such policies will lead women to not only picket outside these banks, but also to close their accounts in such banks. If they do not want women employees, then by the same logic they should also not want women's accounts? Hence, it is preferable that such banks or institutions rethink their sexist age-old decisions of limiting female employment.

www.crescat.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager