NAFTA and Women
Introduction
Although some would say that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has been successful throughout the years, the NAFTA had not only economic effects, but also social effects, such as deteriorating worker conditions, especially for women. There have been numerous studies that indicate the benefits of NAFTA, including the growth of the economies of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. Mexico has specifically experienced rapid growth of its industries and farming sector as a result of NAFTA, even though subsistence farmers have been negatively impacted by increased competition from foreign companies (Horan, 2001). Americans and Canadians, on the other hand, continue to enjoy low prices for various commodities, which would be more expensive in the absence of free trade. This paper seeks to discuss how these gender inequalities manifest, and explores how the inequity can be acted upon to give women the same chances to succeed as their male counterparts.
Discussion
Despite the adoption of NAFTA, gender inequality continues to be witnessed in terms of employment opportunities available for men and women. New employment opportunities were created in the manufacturing and large-scale agricultural sectors. According to a study by Marceline White (2004), the adoption of NAFTA had created over 1.8 million new agricultural export jobs in Mexico by 2000, of which women occupied 83 %. However, these jobs are precarious. In Mexico and the United States, unionization is yet to be adopted by most workers (Juhn, Ujhelyi & Villegas-Sanchez, 2014). Employees are not protected from termination of employment, and usually, terms are to their disadvantage. Most of the jobs created as a result of NAFTA are not physically demanding, and therefore women are favored employees (White, 2004). Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Even though there has been an increase in the number of employed women in countries adopted NAFTA, there still exists a massive wage gap between men and women. One of the goals of NAFTA is to reduce the cost of production of various goods to make them more affordable for the citizens of member countries (Karemera & Ojah, 1998). This means that institutions need to reduce financial input in production activities. One of the ways many companies have done this is by lowering the wages of workers. This is a bigger problem in countries such as Mexico and the United States, where most workers lack wage protection from unions. In both countries, employers force employees to accept pay cuts to retain their jobs (Juhn, Ujhelyi & Villegas-Sanchez, 2014). In the Mexican agricultural export industry, where women make up the vast majority of workers, women continue to receive low wages, which do not allow them to pull themselves and their families out of poverty (Ensign, 2003). Women in the United States are viewed as secondary workers while their male counterparts are viewed as primary workers, even when their qualifications are similar. What this means is that women receive less pay for the same amount of work compared to men. As employment opportunities for women increase as a result of NAFTA, so does the wage gap.
The number of women experiencing poor working conditions has also increased as a result of NAFTA. Following the adoption of NAFTA in Mexico, there has been a sustained expansion in the agricultural sector, which aims to provide food for both the United States and Canada (Quintero-Ramírez, 2002). Because women are the majority of workers in this sector, they are most vulnerable to the poor working conditions there. Deborah Barndt (2002) describes how women have to leave their homes early in the morning to reach their places of work. In addition, some women have to share the accommodation provided by employers with many other people, which poses a health risk. Since the wages are so little, the women workers have to work for longer hours to make ends meet. They are also denied vacations as companies seek to maximize profits. Not only do women fail to acquire secure jobs, but they also have to endure poor working conditions.
NAFTA has increased the workload of women compared to men. In most cultures, including the United States, Mexico, and Canada, the reproductive work of caring for children is mainly the duty of women. In some cases, the contribution of men to the reproductive work of men. This work is usually not paid and takes up a lot of time, denying women the opportunity to gain new skills or find employment (White, 2004). Following NAFTA’s adoption, governments have removed importation quotas, and subsidies for local goods have been reduced. Many families have been affected by this phenomenon. For instance, income for subsistence farmers in Mexico has drastically reduced, even as the cost of living continues to rise (Dickerson, 2006). Women have had to go to work alongside men to provide for their families since the income of men alone is no longer sufficient. This is despite the role of women as caregivers for their children. In spite of having to go to work, women are burdened with household chores such as cooking and cleaning, which are traditionally considered their roles (White, 2004). This inequality has, therefore, been exacerbated by the economic demands of families created by NAFTA.
Many women lost their jobs as a result of NAFTA’s cost reduction policies. A great example is the textile industry in Canada, where women made up close to 80% of the workforce (Borowy et al. 1993). While the industry grew between the 1970s and 1980s, it declined towards the end of the 80s. This was because it was unable to compete with transnational companies operating outside favorably and within the country, enabled by NAFTA. Companies had to reduce their expenditure on salaries, and many women, the majority of whom were women, were laid off (Juhn, Ujhelyi & Villegas-Sanchez, 2014). This was especially devastating for immigrant women whose immigration statuses were uncertain. These women had to resort to even lower-paying jobs, which further widened the income gap that existed between men and women and continues to exist today. Workers who remained had to endure more precarious working conditions.
Cost-cutting measures adopted by various companies have also been linked to increased discrimination of women at the workplace. In Mexican maquiladoras, unions have allowed some women to enjoy social benefits as they work, such as paid maternity leave (Ensign, 2003). Maquiladoras were established to facilitate low-cost manufacturing processes and have been associated with poor working conditions and disregard for the welfare of workers. However, most workers in these maquiladoras are yet to unionize, exposing them to the risk of exploitation by their employers. Women in their reproductive years are discriminated against by being forced to take pregnancy tests (Ensign, 2003). This is because employers want to avoid granting employees paid maternity leave in efforts to cut production costs. Some companies even refuse to hire women who are in their reproductive years. This undue rampant discrimination of women at the workplace can thus be attributed to NAFTA.
Women, who make up close to 70% of workers in the handicrafts industry, have also been negatively impacted by NAFTA (White, 2004). Analysis of the legal implications of NAFTA indicates that corporations are allowed to indigenous patent patterns that handicraft workers use on their ceramics, woven, and sewn items in Mexico. Even more disconcerting is that these companies are not required to compensate the indigenous people to whom these belong (Blakeney, 2005). What this means is that corporations can begin to produce their products, which incorporate these patterns in their designs at much lower prices. Women who work in this industry are most affected because they make up the majority of workers. Competition from these cheaper goods pushes them out of business or severely reduces their earnings. They rely on this income to supplement their families’ income. This increases inequality because the income of women is greatly reduced.
Conclusion
Gender inequality being presently encountered in the wake of NAFTA adoption by the North American countries is due to laxity in the implementation of labor laws. For example, Mexico has the most elaborate labor rights in North America. However, there is little or no enforcement of laws to protect employees, especially women. Governments should realize the impact of the growing gender inequality, and handle the situation with the seriousness it deserves. Because unions are an avenue for workers to demand their rights, workers should be encouraged to unionize in order to air their grievances better.
Countries need to establish and enforce international regulations to prevent the exploitation of women. For example, managers who refuse to hire women because they want to avoid paying for maternity leave should face penalties. Companies that discriminate against women should also face sanctions and trade restrictions until they comply with regulations that protect women. Governments also need to strengthen industries where women make up the majority of the workforce to reduce the income inequality that exists between men and women. There is also a need for social security systems to be strengthened alongside trade agreements to reduce the burden on employers.
If governments had carried out studies to investigate the impact of the agreement on women, it is possible that these problems might have been averted. Women deserve to be treated equally and earn a decent living without having to endure the problems posed by growing inequality. Policymakers and society, in general, need to wake up from the slumber and fight the indifference that continues to be expressed towards the plight of women in the workforce. Future trade agreements should be inclusive and promote the economic development of both men and women, and current agreements should also be adjusted to fix this defect.
Annotated Bibliography
Ensign, P. (2003). The Impact of North American Free Trade Agreement on Women In The United States, Canada, And Mexico. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 13(2), 1-28.
This paper shows how the North American Free Trade Agreement overlooked women’s role in the economies of their home countries. It also explains how, in the future, such a lack of consideration for women’s welfare is likely to cause even more inequality than already exists. This study focuses on the low and middle-income women in the three countries and explores how the trade agreement has negatively impacted them so far. In an even more in-depth analysis, the study shows how women from different races in each country experience the effects of inequality differently, with minorities having the worst of it. The paper also shows how the trade agreement threatens some government programs that many women rely on, such as social security benefits, which low-income single moms in Canada rely on. The paper, therefore, serves as a warning for policymakers to seriously consider the impact of trade agreements on gender inequality, and to devise ways of being inclusive to avoid putting women through undue discrimination.
Juhn, C., Ujhelyi, G., & Villegas-Sanchez, C. (2014). Men, women, and machines: How trade impacts gender inequality. Journal of Development Economics, 106, 179-193.
This paper focuses on the inequalities that exist between the wages earned by men and women. It compares the salaries of men and women working in similar positions with similar qualifications and highlights the disparities. To accomplish this, the authors differentiate workers by skill and compare their productivity in their companies. The paper discusses the impact of free trade agreements in North America and how they have caused companies to strive to increase productivity. This has inevitably resulted in increased mechanization and consequent lay-offs. The paper then explains how women have been affected by these changes. The researchers indicate that women in blue-collar jobs have increased wage improvement, but those in white-collar jobs have been negatively impacted by these changes. As companies in Mexico seek to take advantage of the reduced tariffs, males in blue-collar jobs have been replaced with females. Sadly, the salaries of women in these positions tend to be lower than those of men in similar positions, which reflects gender inequalities, which are reinforced by social, cultural, and historical issues.
Quintero-Ramírez, C. (2002). The North American Free Trade Agreement and Women. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 4(2), 240-259.
In this paper, Quintero-Ramírez discusses the role impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement on the plight of women in Canada and Mexico. The paper manages to show the input of capitalist philosophies in the implementation of the trade agreement, by showing how profit has been prioritized at the expense of workers employed in various industries, especially blue-collar jobs. The author analyzes the conditions of the labor market in both Canada and Mexico. Through this analysis, the paper shows how industrialized nations like Canada are becoming de-industrialized, resulting in deterioration of working conditions. The researcher shows how companies seeking to make a profit ignore the welfare of workers but instead take advantage of social differences and historical conditions to maximize profit across the trading zones. The study shines a light on the suffering of women in industries that have been affected by aggressive cost-cutting measures such as the textile industry where women form the majority of workers
White, M. (2004). Look FIRST from a gender perspective: NAFTA and the FTAA. Gender & Development, 12(2), 44-52.
This article focuses on the implications of trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Free Trade Area of the Americas. White discusses the impact of the trade agreements on agriculture, healthcare, education, water, and trade-related areas such as intellectual property rights, government purchasing, and foreign investment. Specifically, the article shows how these effects of trade agreements on the economies of member countries have deepened the inequality that exists between men and women, both socially and economically. The paper emphasizes the importance of carrying out impact assessments before the implementation of trade agreements. The paper is based on the Trade Impact Review, which was carried out by the Women’s Edge Coalition in 2002. It also mentions the ‘Look First’ campaign, which was pressured the United States government to carry out trade impact reviews before implementing trade agreements, and enact legislation that requires policymakers to meet this requirement.
References
Barndt, D. (2002). “Fruits of Injustice”: Women in the Post-NAFTA Food System. Canadian Woman Studies, 21(4).
Blakeney, M. (2005). Communal Intellectual Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Cultural Expressions. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 1(6), 985-1002.
Briones, J. (1999). Paying the Price for NAFTA: NAFTA’s Effect on Women and Children Laborers in Mexico. UCLA Women’s Law Journal, 9(2).
Dickerson, M. (2006). Placing blame for Mexico’s ills. Los Angeles Times, 1.
Ensign, P. (2003). The Impact of North American Free Trade Agreement on Women in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 13(2), 1-28.
Horan, S. (2001). The Impact of NAFTA on the United States. CFA Digest, 31(4), 95-96.
Juhn, C., Ujhelyi, G., & Villegas-Sanchez, C. (2014). Men, women, and machines: How trade impacts gender inequality. Journal of Development Economics, 106, 179-193.
Karemera, D., & Ojah, K. (1998). An Industrial Analysis of Trade Creation and Diversion Effects of NAFTA. Journal of Economic Integration, 13(3), 400-425.
White, M. (2004). Look FIRST from a gender perspective: NAFTA and the FTAA. Gender & Development, 12(2), 44-52.
Quintero-Ramírez, C. (2002). The North American Free Trade Agreement and Women. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 4(2), 240-259.