Gender Stereotypes In The Childcare Industry

Childcare is still considered to be the primary responsibility of women and therefore, a “non-essential service” because women are ‘dispensible’ to the workforce and supposedly consistent with outdated traditions are better utilised in this capacity (Corr & Carey, 2017). I acknowledge, this is a very complex and multidimensional argument, but why do we as women allow to be stereotyped and disadvantaged in this manner? Unsurprisingly, Chesters and Baxter (2011), state that childcare educators are intrinsically drawn to the occupation because of the great job satisfaction they receive, however, because of this, the industry is a predominately a female workforce and as a result is now heavily affected by the consequences of gender segregation (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017).

To compare, full time working men currently earn an average of 22.4% or $27,000.00 more than women per year, across every industry and occupation in Australia (Workplace Gender Equality Agency, 2018).

However, a significant amount of women are either part-time or casually employed within the childcare industry because of their own caring responsibilities, therefore, perpetuating the gender-based pay gap, adding to the pressures of job instability and therefore facilitating the uncertainty of economic security for females in the workforce (Kaine, 2017). Essentially, the implications of a casualised and part-time workforce on a low wage like that of childcare educator affects not only a women's short-term finances but also her superannuation contributions, therefore, negatively impacting upon her retirement and increasing her reliance upon the state (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017). These workers who care and educate our children whilst we chase our careers are the very employees whose work continues to be undervalued and whose wages fail to reflect that importance of the job they are tasked with (Jovanovic, 2013; Chesters & Baxter,

2011). Yet, somehow we as a society are accepting that an unskilled male labourer with less than three months experience can earn up to $143,199.00 (Chung, 2017) as an annual salary, seriously?!?! How discouraging it is to be a woman. Thus, why would you bother to study a certificate three in early childhood education and care to earn $19.07 in a job that is vying for professionalism status (Andrew, 2015)? No wonder the turnover rates are so high, as child care educators do not see an incentive to stay within the industry, resulting in a decrease in the consistency and quality of the service provided to our children (Jovanovic, 2013). If that is not inequitable then I don’t know what is, so yes Michael Crosby knows exactly what he is talking about and this inequity needs to change.
On a personal note, as a part-time working mother of two children, child care for me is a necessity, especially so as my husband and I do not have the luxury of closely situated family members to assist us. I value the work that the child care educators put in with my son and I am supportive of them being paid equally and fairly, however, not at the expense of parents. Childcare is expensive as it is and in my household, is the second largest cost after our mortgage. Lastly, I think it is important that educators not play on the femininity of the job and instead focus on professionalising their occupation to demand a higher wage.