Gender gap narrows but push towards science has lowered wages

By Paul Karp 

Analysis of graduate earnings in Australia shows benefit of a university degree is diminishing

Policies to boost female participation have helped narrow the gender gap in career earnings but pushing students to study science has resulted in smaller pay packets.

Those are the results of a Grattan Institute analysis of graduate earnings and employment outcomes, released on Monday, which found the benefit of having a university degree is actually shrinking.

Female university graduates still earn about $14,000 a year more than women whose highest qualification is year 12, while for men the premium is about $12,500. But the report found that the average earnings premium of an early career graduate aged 25 to 34 had shrunk by 8% for women from 2006 to 2016 and by 6% for men.

The report by Grattan Institute higher education director, Andrew Norton, and fellow Ittima Cherastidtham found that Australia’s immigration – skewed towards skilled migrants – and the uncapping of student places between 2009 and 2015 meant “many more people are chasing the jobs that graduates aspire to hold”.

“Growth in the number of professional jobs has not kept up with demand,” the report said. New professional jobs had “dropped significantly” after the global financial crisis in 2009 and at the end of the mining boom in 2013.

The chief executive of Universities Australia, Catriona Jackson, said there was still a “sizeable wage benefit” for graduates and the premium had only fallen slightly despite the significant expansion of access to higher education.

Male graduates saw their earnings fall by 3% from 2006 to 2016, owing to a decline in full-time work and professional or managerial jobs.

Female graduates saw their earnings rise 4% from 2006 to 2016, outstripped by a 10% increase in pay for women with year 12 as their highest qualification.

The increase in earnings was triggered by an increase in workforce participation by women with children, from less than 70% to more than 75%. The report credited additional paid parental leave and improved childcare subsidies since 2008.

The career earnings gap between the male and female median-earning graduate fell from 30% in 2006 to 27% in 2016. Women narrowed the gap by earning the equivalent of one and a half years’ of pay more across their careers.

“Progress is slow, but as successive cohorts of young graduates have careers that are less disrupted by motherhood, the gender earnings gap will continue to decline,” the report said.

For female graduates big increases in average annual earnings were recorded in nursing (+10%), education (8%), medicine (6%) and engineering (3%) – with pay increases in industries dominated by public sector employment leading the way.

Pay went backwards for female graduates in the humanities, science, information technology and law, all down 2%.

For male graduates, only those with education degrees saw a significant pay rise (+7%), while big declines were recorded in law and commerce (-7%), science (-6%) and information technology (-3%).

Engineering, law and medicine graduates remain the highest paid.

Both male and female science graduates face difficulties finding managerial/professional jobs. In 2016 more than 40% of science graduates were employed as labourers, in sales, administration and services or trades, which are less likely to use their qualification.

Only those with humanities qualifications have equivalently low rates of employment in managerial/professional jobs. Nursing, education and medicine all had rates of 90% or more employed in managerial/professional jobs.

The report said the rate of unemployment or under-employment four months after graduation grew from 15% before the global financial crisis in early 2008 to its highest-recorded level of 31% in 2014.

Evidence from previous economic downturns showed there “will be a long-lasting impact on the earnings prospects of early-career graduates”.

But it predicted that the “worst has passed” – because although “new graduates are still less likely to get a full-time job than a decade ago … their prospects are improving”.

Source of the article: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/sep/16/gender-gap-narrows-but-push-towards-science-has-lowered-wages

Comparte este contenido:

EEUU:I Disapprove of School Vouchers. Can I Still Apply for Them?

Por: nytimes.com/Kwame Anthony Appiah/ 11-04-2018

My son attends preschool part time at a private Montessori school, which goes up to middle school. I like the school, and he is very happy there, but I can’t afford to keep him there when he starts kindergarten full time.

I believe that free public education is an important aspect of our society. Our local public elementary school is generally considered a decent option, but I worry about how standardized testing has changed the public-school landscape in recent decades. My son is thriving in his current environment, and the approach of traditional public schools is significantly different from Montessori’s. If money were no object, I would strongly consider keeping him at his current school.

Our state has a school-voucher program, which uses public money to help low-income families pay for private-school tuition. My family would probably qualify. But I believe that taxpayer dollars would be better spent to fortify public-school systems and should not be funneled to private schools. Given my beliefs, may I apply for a school voucher? Name Withheld

Looking after your son’s interests is a special obligation you have as a parent. “Special obligation” is a philosopher’s term, but it simply means that you have duties to him, arising out of your relationship, that you don’t have to other children. You’re not merely entitled to put his education first; you’re obliged to do so. You should feel free to use whatever legal means there are to get him a great education, including vouchers — unless you think they are so wicked that your participation in them would amount to condoning evil. If you just think the voucher program is bad policy, then join the campaign against it. That’s the right way to voice your judgments about the merits of educational policy. You don’t want to sacrifice your son’s education to abstract principle, especially given that you’re not going to end the voucher program by failing to make use of it. Our roles as parents, friends, employees and citizens can make conflicting calls on us.

But be sure you’re right about what’s in your child’s best interests. You should take a closer look at your local public elementary school, and not content yourself with the general skepticism you express about the “public-school landscape” and the effects of “standardized testing.” If it turns out that the private option isn’t obviously better, you can bring your beliefs as a citizen into a more natural alignment with your duties as a parent.

My children are currently in private school, although both were in public school for many years, and my younger one may switch back to public school for high school. I’m a big supporter of public education, so I was already feeling guilty about my choice — and then the federal tax bill passed in December. New tax rules allow pretax 529 savings accounts to be used not just for higher education but also for private precollege education. What should I do, if I want to do all I can to be a public-school ally? It seems there are three options: 1) Not take the tax deduction; 2) Take the deduction and give the money I save to the P.T.A. of a local underresourced public school or an organization working to improve public education; or 3) Take the deduction, figuring that as an N.Y.C. resident it will help offset the huge increase I expect to see in my taxes.Name Withheld

 Under the new federal tax act, you can withdraw up to $10,000 a year from a 529 savings account to pay for a student’s private precollege education. Vouchers lite! Previously, these accounts could be used only for higher education. But the way that the relevant “deduction” works hasn’t changed. When you pay into these accounts in New York State, your state income-tax liability is reduced up to a limit of $5,000 for a single person or $10,000 for a couple. Once in the fund, your money grows federal- and state-tax-deferred; but you don’t have to pay taxes when you take the money out, if it’s for a qualified educational expense. (The details here, as with much tax law, get complicated, but this is the basic picture.) You may well be paying into one of these funds already for your child’s college education and getting the maximum state-tax deduction. If so, this particular change in the tax law should not affect your income taxes very much.

Of course, any money you take out in the next few years won’t be available later for college expenses and won’t have compounded for long. Still, the new federal law does encourage you to save for private school as well as college in one of these funds. If things remain as they are, the federal provision that increases the use of these funds threatens to reduce state income-tax revenue. Then again, a “preliminary report” from New York’s tax department suggests that K-12 payments may not be considered qualified educational expenses and that the state could recapture any associated tax benefits. And, as you’re aware, this new use for 529 funds may do little to offset the loss to you that comes from no longer being able to deduct more than $10,000 in state property and income taxes from your federally taxable income.

None of that is ethics, though. My ethical view is you should take all the tax deductions you’re legally entitled to. Many features of our tax system are ridiculous; many are the product of lobbying without much regard for the public good. But you don’t have a duty to pay more than you are required to by law just because you and people like you are benefiting from bad policies, any more than you have the right to pay less than you’re required to when you take a hit from bad policies. The right thing to aim for is tax reform that makes the system fairer. (We will all have our own views about whether the recent tax reforms did that. Count me a skeptic.)

You’re already helping to pay for New York’s public schools through your taxes. Your choice to give your children a private education doesn’t lessen your financial support for public schools. If you want to lend additional assistance to public schools without sending your kids to them, you can, as you say, support the local P.T.A. You can also pay attention when voting for candidates for public office and vote for those who will do their best for those schools. And you could lobby your state to make sure that it excludes deductions related to 529 funds used for K-12 expenses — deductions that encourage people with your sort of income to leave the public schools. With more people like you as parents, those schools might provide better education for all our children.

*Fuente: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/magazine/i-disapprove-of-school-vouchers-can-i-still-apply-for-them.html

Comparte este contenido: