[Forum for the presidential election agendas; Let Us Overcome Misogyny and Remodel Women's Work and Life ⑤]"If We Work Too Hard, We Will Only Run Ourselves to Death" – Our lives should be centered on our personal lives, not our paid­work

※ On Feb. 23, 2017, a forum titled "Let Us Overcome Misogyny and Remodel Women's Work and Life" was held in the National Assembly of South Korea. It was jointly held by Korean Women Workers Association and Korean Women's Trade Union, along with six members of the National Assembly (Insoon Nam, Chairman at Gender Equality and Family Committee / Mihyuk Kwon and Okjoo Song, Democratic Party of Korea / Samhwa Kim and Yonghyeon Shin, People's Party / Jeongmi Lee, Justice Party). Through the five articles on OhmyNews, an online news website in South Korea, we Korean Women Workers Association will report on this forum. In this article, we will summarize our suggestions for the 19th presidential election agendas, as a wrap­up of this series.

 

'Is this a government?'; with this chant last winter in 2016, the people in South Korean society were not only asking to reform their government filled with injustice and corruption, but also crying in despair of difficulties of their lives. It's now or never. Before our lives get further broken, we desperately need policy making and enforcement based on a philosophy which cares about lives of each member of the people. Our new government's major task should be to make society where everyone's labor could be respected regardless of her/his gender. In this sense, we suggest the main philosophies of labor policy for our new government.

 

Korean Women Workers Association's suggestion for the 19th presidential election agendas

 

 

Labor policy for gender equality, Not for the utilization of women resources

In the 1970s, South Korean women workers suffered from low wages and terrible long working hours, under the name of 'a pillar of industry' to lay foundation for the nation's economic growth. Now, they are suffering from poor working conditions of part­time jobs, which were rashly made by the government to raise employment rate. South Korean women workers have never been the real subject in the government policy. South Korea's policy of women labor has never aimed for society where every single person can happily work regardless of her/his gender. All it has cared about is making policy to utilize women resources, as a means to enhance national competitiveness.

 

The problem is a philosophy. The false goal of policy makes impossible to aim for the happiness of each member of the people, which is the ideal goal of policy. New government's women's labor policy should be different from the previous 'utilization policy for women resources.' It should be clearly enacted as the 'labor policy for gender equality', as to realize gender equality at work. It must depart from outdated patriarchal ideology, which disparages women's paid labor as the 'sildeline' and justifies women workers' low wages based on beliefs in gendered division of labor. Also, the scale of policy should be expanded to abolish gender discrimination at the more structural and integrated level, not at the fragmented level only targeting women. This is because gender equality is an issue for everyone, and it takes everyone's efforts for its realization.

 

Starting point is the everyday lives of the most marginalized, non­regular women workers

 

Women workers are, in general, placed in the vulnerable position in the labor market. The problem gets even worse with discrimination against the non­regular workers. 53.8% of South Korean women workers work as non­regular workers, and their average monthly income is 1,230,000 won (approximately 1,100 US dollars), which is below the minimum wage and comprises merely 35.8% of regular men workers' average monthly income (as of August, 2016). Also, women make up 62.7% of 2,660,000 workers paid below the minimum wage.

 

 

Would it have been possible for these non­regular women workers to join the demonstrations against former president Park's government last winter? For those who are deprived of basic human rights, would it be possible to think of other than their own survival? Like walking on the edge, too precarious are their everyday lives. In 2014, one old mother and two daughters in Seoul took their own lives at the moment when their basic rights of survival could not be guaranteed any more as non­regular women workers. Policy making should start from concern for the most marginalized. The most critical task for the government is to guarantee rights of survival, and furthermore, rights of living a decent life.

 

We need solutions to employment disruption, not to career disruption

 

'Career disruption' means the situation in which married women's careers are interrupted due to their voluntary or involuntary exit from the labor market regarding their responsibility of childbirth or child­rearing. Behind its definition is hidden its complex background. Their low income even lower than their cost of childcare as well as their secondary position at work, which they would give up at any time without much regret. In South Korea, there are not many jobs for women that are decent enough to keep with their responsibility of housework and child­rearing, which is mainly attributed to the gender discrimination in the labor market.

 

Women workers' experience at work is hardly recognized as a career. Unlike aged men workers who are more likely recognized as professionally mature, aged women workers are often seen as those who are obsolete and no longer playing the 'eye candy' role at work. As women workers get older and experienced at work, they are supposed to be promoted to the managerial positions. However, once they experience such strong glass ceiling, they are kicked out of their career. These risks are faced by many women workers in their late 30s or early 40s, regardless of their career disruption related to childbirth and child­rearing. In this sense, it would be more correct to call these risks 'employment disruption' rather than 'career interruption.'

 

The previous solutions to career disruption are merely centered on reemployment, through such channels as part­time jobs, job training, or job placement. To this problem of 'employment disruption', we need more fundamental solutions.

 

Labor policy for individual independent workers, not for male breadwinners

 

In South Korea, family structures become more diverse than ever before, and the number of single households has dramatically increased. Far from this reality, most policies in South Korea are designed for the traditional family structure, which is composed of parents and two unmarried children. Policies are still based on the outdated 'male­breadwinner model', in which men are supporting their family's living while women are doing housework and child­rearing as homemakers. This model can be used to justify gender discrimination in the labor market. The model which would not recognize women workers as breadwinners, has helped to justify their low wages and exclusion from various types of benefits and pensions. These days in South Korea, it is not always possible for only men to support their family's living. Although women are always working, through paid or unpaid labor, given the male­breadwinner model, they have been just seen as the secondary workers.

 

It is just an outdated dream that all the adult women and men get married and have children. We should recognize that a variety of life choices and ways of life are also possible. This recognition would be possible only based on the policy model in which every single member of the people is seen as an independent individual. This model should be the foundation of the overall government policy, which includes not only labor, but also housing and welfare policy.

 

Life should be centered on individual living, not on paid work

 

In South Korea, most people's lives center around paid work. Get-togethers as well as overtime work at night or over the weekend, which all are common in Korean companies, make South Korea ranked third for working hours among the OECD countries. Long working hours take up time for each individual's living. Unless given enough time to take a rest, cook and eat healthy food, look after our family members, and care social and political issues around ourselves, we will be easily exhausted physically, mentally, and socially.

 

Behind South Korea's long working hours, there exists its outdated working culture, which makes it possible that companies employ only two for the job for three, or that workers are expected to join their get­together until dawn. All of this is based on Korean companies' disrespect for their employees' individual living and delusion that with an employment contract they bought employee's 24 hours. Sometimes, such long working hours are made possible by the workers themselves, as to compensate for their low wages. However, 'if we work too hard, we will only run ourselves to death.' Before too late, workers need to get back their own individual living. Paid work, the means of our life should be no longer confounded with its end. Life should center around each individual's living, not around paid work or companies. South Korea's new government needs to design its labor policy as to return to workers their individual life. We need a fundamental change in our working conditions as to make society where workers can live a decent life without overwork and can be no longer forced to work overtime.

 

Men are also responsible for housework and childcare

 

The biggest problem of South Korean work­family balance policy is that it is only targeted at women and concerned about supporting their childcare. And this leads South Korean government to promote women's part­time work, given its idea that women's paid work can be supported only when it does not hinder their childcare.

 

The problem is men do not see themselves as caretakers for housework and childcare. On the contrary, with their unequal burden of housework and childcare, woman are expected to be a superwoman; when they come home from work, they start their second shift. All of this makes a great gap in hours for housework and childcare between genders. Companies favor men employees as those who would work overtime at night or over the weekend, which justifies their gender discrimination. However, it should be recognized at the social as well as individual level that men are also responsible for housework and childcare.

 

We need to change our ways of thinking. We need to relieve women's unequal burden of housework and childcare, which would not be made possible only through policy change. Based on the model of double­caregivers, we need to design policy and change family and working culture, as a way to make sure that it is all family members who are responsible for their housework and childcare.