163
is making no or reduced superannuation contributions during this period. Moreover,
when this is considered in conjunction with the wage penalty or the decreased earning capacity faced by women who take parental leave, it amplifies the absent superannuation contributions made during a period in which a woman takes unpaid care
leave. Saint-Martin and Venn (2010) highlight that when women take leave to care
for a newborn child, they are subject to a wage penalty, which in a deleterious manner translates into a reduced earning capacity. They point out that ‘long periods of
part-time work could damage individuals’ career prospects and increase their
(women’s) risk of poverty in retirement’ (Saint-Martin and Venn 2010). In a similar
vein, Baker (2011a) highlights that following maternity leave, women often return
to work in a reduced capacity, with more than eight in ten (82%) of women returning to work on a part-time basis after the birth of a child, however, this results in a
wage penalty: ‘women returning to work within 12 months of taking leave suffered
a wage penalty during the first year back at work of almost 7%, this increases to
12% in the following year’. Critically, decreased superannuation contributions during maternity or unpaid care leave have a powerful augmented effect over later
superannuation balances, as the power of compounding returns magnifies into larger
retirement pots over time (Feng et al. 2019). Finally, societal stigma towards working mothers and stay at home fathers and the assumption that the decision to work
in a more reduced or flexible capacity is considered an individual choice further
contribute towards the insidious barriers that prevent women from achieving financial security in retirement. As the Human Rights Commission report into gender and
workplace stigmatisation emphatically encapsulates: ‘[a] women’s decisions to take
time out of paid work, to trade salary for flexibility or to work in a low paid job are
often viewed as a matter of individual choice and responsibility. Yet, these choices
are very often constrained by a range of external factors such as inflexible workplace structures, family dynamics, cultural pressures and gendered stereotypes…the
sum of these factors could leave her in a financially improvised retirement’ (A. H.
R. Commission 2017, pp. 9–10). This quote saliently emphasises the central crux of
female financial insecurity in retirement that financial vulnerability is the result of
multifaceted variables, and in this regard, it can be described as a wicked problem
(Hetherington and Smith 2017). This conclusion leads into the subsequent section
of this chapter, which addresses SDG 10 within the context of the gender gap in
super. The following section will use SDG 10 – reducing inequalities – to highlight
that mitigating or alleviating female financial insecurity in retirement requires a
multilevel and multifaceted approach.
11.4 Utilising the Methodological Understanding of SDG 10:
Reducing Inequalities and the Gender Gap in Super
It is undeniable that the superannuation system is not working for women (Trust
2015). Considering this conclusion, it is both pertinent and necessary to interrogate
the role of SDG 10 in alleviating the burden of female financial insecurity in retirement. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10 is concerned with the reduction in
11 SDG 10 Reducing Inequalities
is making no or reduced superannuation contributions during this period. Moreover,
when this is considered in conjunction with the wage penalty or the decreased earning capacity faced by women who take parental leave, it amplifies the absent superannuation contributions made during a period in which a woman takes unpaid care
leave. Saint-Martin and Venn (2010) highlight that when women take leave to care
for a newborn child, they are subject to a wage penalty, which in a deleterious manner translates into a reduced earning capacity. They point out that ‘long periods of
part-time work could damage individuals’ career prospects and increase their
(women’s) risk of poverty in retirement’ (Saint-Martin and Venn 2010). In a similar
vein, Baker (2011a) highlights that following maternity leave, women often return
to work in a reduced capacity, with more than eight in ten (82%) of women returning to work on a part-time basis after the birth of a child, however, this results in a
wage penalty: ‘women returning to work within 12 months of taking leave suffered
a wage penalty during the first year back at work of almost 7%, this increases to
12% in the following year’. Critically, decreased superannuation contributions during maternity or unpaid care leave have a powerful augmented effect over later
superannuation balances, as the power of compounding returns magnifies into larger
retirement pots over time (Feng et al. 2019). Finally, societal stigma towards working mothers and stay at home fathers and the assumption that the decision to work
in a more reduced or flexible capacity is considered an individual choice further
contribute towards the insidious barriers that prevent women from achieving financial security in retirement. As the Human Rights Commission report into gender and
workplace stigmatisation emphatically encapsulates: ‘[a] women’s decisions to take
time out of paid work, to trade salary for flexibility or to work in a low paid job are
often viewed as a matter of individual choice and responsibility. Yet, these choices
are very often constrained by a range of external factors such as inflexible workplace structures, family dynamics, cultural pressures and gendered stereotypes…the
sum of these factors could leave her in a financially improvised retirement’ (A. H.
R. Commission 2017, pp. 9–10). This quote saliently emphasises the central crux of
female financial insecurity in retirement that financial vulnerability is the result of
multifaceted variables, and in this regard, it can be described as a wicked problem
(Hetherington and Smith 2017). This conclusion leads into the subsequent section
of this chapter, which addresses SDG 10 within the context of the gender gap in
super. The following section will use SDG 10 – reducing inequalities – to highlight
that mitigating or alleviating female financial insecurity in retirement requires a
multilevel and multifaceted approach.
11.4 Utilising the Methodological Understanding of SDG 10:
Reducing Inequalities and the Gender Gap in Super
It is undeniable that the superannuation system is not working for women (Trust
2015). Considering this conclusion, it is both pertinent and necessary to interrogate
the role of SDG 10 in alleviating the burden of female financial insecurity in retirement. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10 is concerned with the reduction in
11 SDG 10 Reducing Inequalities