Sri Lanka Human Development Report 2012.pdf

Some of the primary reasons for women’s low labour force
participation include the shortage of ‘good’ jobs and poor
pay. Evidence indicates that women are paid less than men,
a difference not explained by their productive capacity.
Further, this was true in all sectors and irrespective of their
ethnic background. This may be due to the occupational
segregation of females in the private sector, but this is
true even in the public sector where women benefit from
gender-specific policies. 206
In 2010, for women with A-Level education or above,
the unemployment rate was 15.8 percent, compared to
7.9 percent for men with similar qualifications. 207 While
the proportion of women among professionals is higher
than men, women constitute a smaller share at senior
managerial levels. In both the public and private sectors,
61.9 percent of employees are women, mainly the result
of the large number of female school teachers. Among
senior officials and managers, however, only 23.7 percent
are women. 208 The share of women among senior officials
in the public sector is also small. In the state, provincial
public and semi-government sectors, females account for
only around 28 percent of senior officials. 209
Unlike their older male counterparts, women and youth
are more likely to seek flexible working arrangements. For
women, the reasons include the management of work at
home, while youth may still be acquiring an education.
However, opportunities for part-time employment are
extremely limited. Overall, the employment situation is
not helped by the country’s highly protective labour laws,
which hinder job creation in both the public and formal
private sectors. 210
Job Creation and Quality of Jobs
The Sri Lankan economy has created new jobs at the same
rate as the growth of the working age population - an average
annual rate of 1.5 percent from 2000 to 2010. The labour
force, defined as the economically active population, has
grown at a slower pace of only 1.1 percent per year, mainly
because of the ever-increasing outflow of workers seeking
employment in foreign countries. Every year, an estimated
270,000 people depart for foreign employment, compared
to 20,000 who enter the labour market 211 Successive
governments have relied upon outward migration as a
source of both foreign capital and employment. 212
Around 7.4 percent of Sri Lankan households receive
remittances from abroad. 213 Compared to households
with no migrant workers, those with at least one have
significantly higher levels of total expenditure on food
and non-food items, including health and education.
They also receive more income from other sources, such
as properties, and financial and physical assets. But not all
outcomes of migration are positive. A small percentage of
households suffer adverse impacts, such as when children
become unhappy and fall behind in school because their
mothers are abroad. 214
A high proportion of Sri Lankan workers are in the
informal sector, as has been true over time. 215 In 2010, for
example, about 62.6 percent of employed people worked
in the informal sector, which operates outside state
regulation. They include 86.5 percent of the agricultural
labour force and 51 percent of non-agricultural workers.
In all districts, the share of non-agricultural workers in the
informal sector was more than 39 percent.
Around 42 percent of workers were either self-employed
or unpaid family workers, categorized as vulnerable by
the International Labour Organization. 216 It defines
vulnerable workers as those who do not have formal work
arrangements and therefore are less likely to be covered
by social protection schemes. They are also more likely to
have low levels of productivity, low earnings and difficult
working conditions.
Currently, most types of social protection are linked to
employment, so formal sector workers tend to be better
protected. This imbalance has been instrumental in
increasing unemployment rates, as educated workers wait
for better jobs in the formal sector without taking up
available opportunities. 217 The proportion of workers in
vulnerable employment declined only marginally from
2000 to 2010.
Recent data show that 7.5 percent of the employed were
working poor, an improvement on the 2006-2007 figure of
13.7 percent. 218 There are, however, disparities, especially
Chapter 5 Bridging Human Development Gaps: Employment and Livelihoods 83