A Masculine Stimulus Package: Where Are the Jobs for Women?

Over the next several weeks, Congress will consider a proposed stimulus package of close to a trillion dollars to help move us toward economic recovery and create or save three million jobs. To do so, the administration will provide money to states for "shovel ready" projects to rebuild roads, highways, and bridges. Among other proposed line items, the package will also provide money to digitize medical records. The problem with these jumpstart efforts is that the number of women who will directly benefit from new jobs created by the package will be microscopic.

Women make up less than 10% of all construction workers and only 20% of Information Technology professionals nationally. And when you subtract the number of women administrative assistants and surveyors, the number of women construction workers plunges to less than 2%.

Digitizing medical records will go a long way to help cut healthcare costs and streamline bureaucratic processes. It will also create jobs for Information Technology specialists that will be needed to develop new systems and train medical professionals on how to use them. However, aside from obvious privacy concerns, it is likely that digitizing medical records will result in a loss of jobs for women as they are most likely to have managed medical records and files by hand in the past.

In attempting to craft a stimulus package that will not only ignite the economy, but help people who are struggling, more consideration should be given to the everyday realities of working people, particularly single women heads of households.

In a vulnerable and weak economy, women and single-women heads of households are hit hardest. They tend to earn less and have fewer assets than their male counterparts. And single mothers and their families are more likely to live in poverty than any other demographic group in the United States.

What should be done? How can we make the stimulus package a little more pink?

As outlined in the current proposal, extending unemployment benefits to part-time workers and making Medicaid available to individuals who become unemployed are good starts. The administration should also provide fiscal support to states to increase childcare subsidies and provide other support services to single women heads of households so that they will be able to survive this downturn. There could also be some additional funding funneled to states for education and training programs for low-income women to help move them out of poverty and into jobs with a future.

Right now, there is a tremendous amount of pressure on the Obama Administration to move quickly to turn the rough economic tide. However, I caution against letting this 750 billion or more dollars burn a hole in our pockets. Instead, I say let us be thoughtful and consider the ways in which this package can truly benefit the most vulnerable and least advantaged in our society. And please no rebate checks; they don't work.

C. Nicole Mason, Ph.D., is a political scientist and the executive director of the Women of Color Policy Network at the Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University. She is also a Senior Research Fellow at the National Council for Research on Women.

Comments

[elizaconnors]

I too have been concerned about this issue. The comments below regarding "women should be able to do anything" are not really relevant in this case. This is a stimulus package and one intended to give relief to the unemployed and underemployed and, unfortunately, it is focused almost entirely on jobs that men currently fill.

Sure, women should be able to do these jobs, but they aren't currently. Obama could have chosen to put this money into new environmental technology, green jobs, higher education, free childcare or other such programs that provide a benefit to the country in the long term and would help out more women.

But, instead he has chosen to upgrade roads and bridges and other infrastructure type projects. Fine, it will probably provide a quick bang for the buck. But, it so happens that these jobs currently are largely done by men.

The Obama administration should address this issue because it appears that they are relying on "trickle down" economics from men to women and that is unacceptable.

[Vindobona]

While it is true that few women are currently in construction jobs, a stimulus package that created more of these jobs would, by definition, create openings. Many of those openings would go to fill the demand for new apprentices, and it is at the apprenticeship level that women could get that proverbial foot in the door. Apprenticeships are PAYING JOBS, which means women could in fact benefit IMMEDIATELY from new infrastructure projects. And face it, America's infrastructure is in desperate need of a repair/upgrade. No sane person could reasonably contest that this would be money wisely spent on our nation's future.

Also, a couple of points about your statement that "Obama could have chosen to put this money into new environmental technology, green jobs, etc." First, as far as I know he still hasn't ruled those out. I mean the man isn't even president yet! Let's give him a chance. Second, "environmental technology" sounds a lot to me like "Engineering and/or Science", and green jobs are likewise going to be predominantly "Engineering and/or Construction", so I fail to see how this would tilt the balance more favorably for women. However, it does lead me to point out that one of the hottest fields right now, in terms of demand for skilled labor, is solar and wind power installations. Again -- interested and willing women could be getting in on the ground floor of these exciting new professions. As. We. Speak.

[Keith52]

Geeze.

Firstly, the idea here is to look for public needs and to fill those needs with jobs. The idea is not to find people and create a job that fills no need just so we can pay them a salary.

Secondly we need bang for the buck. The job that is created and the amount we pay for that job needs to have a high ROI.

By all means, if there are other jobs that can be created that are more "pink" with as good a return on the investment as infrastructure jobs let's hear about them.

[LeeMaher]

The question isn't if women can do the jobs the question is whether women businesses will be at the table when federal contracts are handed down through the states.

[DanniD]

I don't understand the "make it more pink" part. We as women say we want equality yet when something comes along that if we want in, might require us getting down and dirty just like the men, we want to "pink" it up a bit.

One of my dearest friends, is a master electrician. SHE is very excited about Obama's plans to rebuild this country's infrastructure.

Quite frankly, I'm sick of the what is Obama going to do for this group or for that group. I thought we were ALL Americans, unfortunately we're not acting like it!

[Emily623]

I'm glad this issue was brought up. I've been thinking about this ever since Obama started talking about the big push to improve infrastructure. I'm glad he's pushing for it; it needs to be done. But, I'm thinking, "This'll be great for the men (and maybe a few women) that can do physical labor. But, what about those of us who can't?" I hope there will be new jobs for women and people that can't do physically­-strenuous work.

[timm553]

I don't think that IT jobs are physically strenuous.

Whatever happened to the notion that women could do anything that a man could? Is that still not the case?

[SJBrown]

Women are in contracting, billing, HR, engineering, planning, project management, records management, oversight/­accountabi­lity.... The list goes on. The "traditional" job is changing and there will be opportunities for woman with specific skills. Thanks for putting it on the radar.

[LeeMaher]

President Obama needs to specifically engage women small business owners in regards to the stimulus package. Thankfully Sen. Mary Landrieu, (D-LA) is now the leading voice for the SBA and she has already started to bang the drums for women. Hopefully more congressional leaders and states will take a proactive role in work force development for women in non traditional job training, green technology and affordable childcare.

Lee Maher Salzman
Director, Women's Business Development
State of Illinois

[ATL78]

When those shovel ready school projects are done, who will teach the students? The same women that will see an increase in school funding under the stimulus package.

[obamagirl1968]

You are right, not just in education but in several administrative and managerial areas. Besides, women should be encouraged to pursue the more STEM oriented jobs anyway. Traditional 'pink-collar' jobs will come with economic recovery.

I am a little concerned with the rash of articles and blogs focusing on a myriad of interest groups trying to 'get theirs'. Obama will be president of ALL of the citizens not just the special interests, something he has repeatedly demonstrated throughout the election and transition.

[RealHRCFansVoteObama]

When I was working in a healthcare facility that went digital, I remember the time spent documenting procedures, meds, and patient evals INCREASED. I worried about patient privacy, and I did not see a real value in the records being digital (aside fro the portability).

[M1]

Great article...I was thinking the same thing but also wondering about how disabled workers will make out as well.

It would make more sense to just give the American people 750,000 each at 305,186 Americans is way cheaper than all this other bailout bull at a 750 Billion not to mention 150 billion already given AIG and automakers. Giving money directly to the American people would only cost about 3 billion....compared to the hundreds of Billions that went to the banks and did no good. Foreclosures would stop, the bad investment portfollios plaguing the market would be solved and people could pay for health care, food, education, buy cars and stimulate the economy.

Strings could be attached like requiring green cars be purchased, mortages paid ect..

[Dave01]

I think you mean 305 million not thousand. If we were to give every American $750,000 it would cost $228 Trillion. How is that "cheaper" than $750 billion.

[redhot200822]

How old are you?

[genxlib]

I see that an investment in math education should be prioritized

[schatsie]

If digitizing medical records was a good idea, the AMA would have implemented it a long time ago.. this is just a red herring and will do nothing for healthcare.

[ThePeacemakers]

I expect more women will need to pick up shovels then.

[CalexenderJ]

At this point in time Obama needs to look at what will have the most "bang for the buck" and what can be done quickly. If there indeed are "pink" projects that are ready to go and will help the economy in the short term as well as the long term, then by all means Obama should invest in them. If there are not, then Obama should not dole out equal money to "women work" under the guise of equality. Yes in the long term, the economy should be structured that it works best for everybody (which definitely includes women and families), but the situation we find ourselves in now requires quick and drastic action. Obama needs to work of averting the crisis and not on ensuring that nobody's feelings get hurt.

[TheKidd]

i understand and agree with your overall point but it's not about more than "feelings getting hurt" this stuff gets real pretty quickly for A LOT of these women. for these women it's not about wetter or not they feel good about it. it's about wetter or not their children can eat so we shouldn't try to reduce their struggle to feelings. but i agree that these are tough decisions and that actions should be taken for the greater good. and maybe the "pink" projects aren't possible at the moment.

[Mnemanth]

How can we make it more pink? Or more black? Or more brown? Or...
Knock it off. You're perpetuating a problem by given breath to it. If there is language that presents a barrier, or directly favors a group, then insist it be changed. But don't reverse it- make it all inclusive.
Make something more pink? How about making "it" more "it", period!

[sherbug]

This has already been covered by another woman who did not take time to read the details of the stimulus plan. It also includes money to schools and increases in pay for teachers. Women are more apt to be teachers than construction workers.

However, I don't understand why women would stay away from construction. Construction generally pays well, so why should we limit ourselves. We've come a long way baby.