Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Body....................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Impact Analysis.............................................................................................................................................. 3
Critical Evaluation........................................................................................................................................ 5
Recommendations............................................................................................................................................ 6
Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................... 8
References........................................................................................................................................................... 9
1
Executive Summary
This report critically examines the gendered effects of the three most significant Australian
Government policies over COVID-19: JobKeeper, JobSeeker, and early superannuation
access. It discovers that while these economic interventions were supposed to be making
wide-ranging support, they largely did not tackle women's unique weaknesses in the labor
market. Women were disproportionately represented in industries that were not covered by
JobKeeper and suffered long-term financial detriment as a result of early superannuation
extracts. The report contends that policies inadvertently perpetuated pre-existing gender
inequalities. Alternative approaches, such as gender-responsive budgeting, permanent
childcare reform, and investment in employment targeting feminized industries, are advocated
to foster gender equality in the long term.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic was not only a worldwide health emergency but also a strong
economic shock, impacting millions of employees globally. In Australia, the disruption unveiled
and aggravated existing gender inequalities, especially in labour and income security. Women,
who tend to work in casual, part-time, and service-sector jobs, lost jobs at a faster rate than
men during lockdowns (Foley & Williamson, 2021).
In response, the Australian Government brought in a number of economic support measures,
such as the JobKeeper wage subsidy, JobSeeker income supplement, and early access to
superannuation. Although these schemes were designed to stabilise the economy, their design
frequently failed to assist those most vulnerable—most notably women.
This analysis critically assesses how each of these three policies affected women's work and
economic security throughout the pandemic. Basing its arguments on HRM theories and
frameworks of gender policies, the critique assesses whether these measures are sufficient
and locates where and how they potentially worsened gender inequalities unintentionally. The
analysis ends with policy suggestions aimed at ensuring inclusive recovery and advancing
sustained gender equality at work.
2
Body
Impact Analysis
Women’s Employment During the Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic had a devastating impact on Australia's labour market, with women
experiencing a more significant reduction in work than men. Women's employment decreased
by 7.6% and men's employment decreased by 5.9% between March and May 2020 (ABS,
2020). Between the same months, women saw a 10.8% decrease in working hours compared
to 7.4% for men. This was partly because women were disproportionately represented in
heavily impacted industries like hospitality, retail, education, and healthcare—sectors
dominated by casual and part-time work (Cooper & Mosseri, 2020).
These statistics are symptomatic of deeper structural problems in Australia's labor market.
Women are disproportionately concentrated in insecure, low-paid, and part-time work, which
placed them particularly at risk throughout the pandemic (Craig & Churchill, 2020). Many
women were also primary carers and were forced to absorb further unpaid work at home as
schools and childcare facilities closed, further compromising their capacity to remain in paid
work.
JobKeeper: Limited Support for Casual Women Workers
JobKeeper was implemented to safeguard jobs through a fortnightly wage subsidy of $1,500.
But casual workers who had not been continuously employed by the same employer for 12
months were left out—disproportionately women working in retail, hospitality, aged care, and
cleaning jobs (Cassells & Duncan, 2020). Around 950,000 casual workers, including a high
proportion of women, were excluded from this critical support (Foley & Williamson, 2021).
While more than their regular earnings went to some part-time workers under the scheme,
excluding short-tenure casuals sabotaged the fair principle in crisis management. Under
Equity Theory (Adams, 1965), employees expect reward fairness corresponding to their
inputs. JobKeeper, in this case, made distinctions between equally dedicated employees,
which brought feelings of inequity and resentment.
3
From the HRM point of view, the policy was inflexible and did not harmonize with inclusive
compensation practice, which helps to accommodate a diverse workforce irrespective of
employment status
JobSeeker: Temporary Relief, Missed Opportunities
The JobSeeker allowance and a transient $550 COVID-19 supplement gave much-needed
respite by doubling the fortnightly unemployment benefit to $1,100. This in particular benefited
women who were pushed out of work by casualisation or childcare obligations. Yet the
supplement was tapered out by March 2021, leaving many beneficiaries in financial hardship
(NFAW, 2020).
Most significantly, the government did not couple income support with upskilling or
employment programs that were specifically designed to meet women's needs. This was an
opportunity to enhance long-term employability through strategic HRM activities such as
career development and training streams. Facilitating re-entry into the workforce—particularly
in industries such as aged care or education—would have promoted economic resilience for
women.
Early Access to Superannuation: Short-Term Gain, Long-Term Risk
To assist individuals during the crisis, the government permitted early release of
superannuation—up to $10,000 in both the 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 financial years.
Numerous women took up this option due to necessity. Nevertheless, as women tend to have
lower super balances, the withdrawals exacerbated an already large retirement savings gap
(HESTA, 2020). Women retire with 42% less superannuation on average compared to men
(Clare, 2017), and the COVID-19 withdrawals widened that gap.
From an HRM perspective, this policy neglected the value of money wellbeing programs in
employee assistance. Promoting super withdrawals over alternatives such as wage
supplements or government top-ups put a more significant financial cost on women's futures. It
necessitated a short-term survival vs. longer-term security trade-off.
4
Critical Evaluation
Did These Policies Address Women’s Needs?
Although the JobKeeper, JobSeeker, and superannuation plans were aimed at steadying the
economy, they were not planned from a gender perspective. The absence of gender-oriented
planning left a majority of women inadvertently left behind or disadvantaged. These schemes
relied on a "one-size-fits-all" labour force without considering how care work, precarious
employment, and part-time jobs disproportionately burden women (Foley & Williamson, 2021).
This violates fundamental HRM principles like fairness, diversity, and inclusion. HRM
frameworks inspire organisations, and through them governments, to develop responsive
policies catering to the interests of every worker, including marginal groups like women. Non-
observance of these is responsible for creating policy lacunas that aggravate inequality.
Missed Opportunities: Childcare and Industry Investment
Perhaps most egregious was the temporary basis of childcare support. Free childcare was
provided from April through to July 2020, but support was subsequently withdrawn and
childcare workers cut from JobKeeper—despite the industry being 96% female (Hill, 2020).
The impact had two significant effects: it forced many mothers back into domestic unpaid care,
and destabilized the very workforce upon which to draw in order to provide childcare services.
By comparison, economic stimulus packages concentrated predominantly on male industries
such as construction and gas, with few women's jobs being created. As Richardson and
Denniss (2020) stated, for each $1 million invested in education, 14.9 jobs were created (10.6
for women), whereas construction produced only 1.2 jobs (only 0.2 for women). Allocating
money to industries in which women are employed would have delivered short-term
employment and longer-term economic gain.
This is a failure of strategic HR planning, which would have steered investment into more
highly employment-multiplier sectors—particularly in a time of crisis. Feminised industries such
5
as health, aged care, and education are not only high in labour but critical to the wider
economy's recovery.
Systemic Impact on Gender Equity
The crisis reinforced existing gender disparities in the labour market of Australia. More unpaid
domestic work was undertaken by women, more likely to drop paid work, and fewer economic
buffers to support them through the shocks (Craig & Churchill, 2020). Without directed,
sustained policy intervention, the impacts are likely to continue for many years beyond the
crisis.
The government's reaction failed to take an opportunity to institutionalize gender equity
initiatives such as gender-responsive budgeting, continued childcare investment, and
female-targeted employment schemes. These policies are consistent with HRM practices
for workforce sustainability, employee well-being, and inclusive growth.
The lack of a comprehensive gender equality strategy demonstrates a structural flaw in crisis
preparation. Incorporating a gender perspective into future policy development is crucial to
allow all Australians to have equal access to the economy, irrespective of gender or caregiving
status.
Recommendations
Closing the gender gaps revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic requires future economic
policies to consider women's distinct workforce experiences. The following measures are
designed to facilitate gender equity based on HRM theories and policy practices.
1. Adopt Gender-Responsive Budgeting (GRB)
Governments need to use a gender perspective to each budgeting step to ensure that
public resources benefit men and women equally. GRB is already practiced in nations
such as Canada and Sweden and assists in tackling structural gender disparities
(Downes & Nicol, 2021). Government and big organizations' HR departments must
6
collaborate with finance teams to examine how budget decisions affect women's jobs,
earnings, and long-term security.
2. Reform JobKeeper Eligibility Criteria
Future wage subsidy schemes should cover all workers, particularly casuals and short-
term contract employees. During COVID-19, numerous women were left out of
JobKeeper because they hadn't worked for 12 months with the same employer—
although they had continuous work records (Cassells & Duncan, 2020). This omission
was at odds with the HRM principle of Equity Theory, which emphasizes fairness in
reward (Adams, 1965). Broadening entitlements will mean no one gets left behind
during subsequent crises.
3. Invest Permanently in Affordable Childcare
Childcare should be regarded as a crucial economic infrastructure. Making it low-cost
assists women in remaining in or re-entering the workforce, particularly after childbirth.
HRM's Work-Life Balance model indicates that workers with access to stable childcare
have higher job satisfaction and productivity (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011). Government
subsidies should be elevated to decrease out-of-pocket expenses and eliminate
hindrances for low- and middle-income families.
4. Strengthen Superannuation Support for Women
Women retire with significantly lower superannuation compared to men, in part due to
unpaid caring. The government can make co-contributions in times of caregiving,
and employers should incentivise offering voluntary super top-ups. These benefits
can be marketed through HR-initiated financial wellness programs, enhancing long-
term economic security for women employees (HESTA, 2020).
5. Redirect Stimulus Spending to Feminised Sectors
Employment generation should target industries in which women are most engaged—
healthcare, education, and community services. These industries generate far more
employment opportunities for each $1 million invested than construction, and a higher
percentage of these positions are filled by women (Richardson & Denniss, 2020). HR
7
departments can spearhead reskilling women into high-needs occupations within these
industries.
6. Enhance Paid Parental Leave
Paid parental leave must also include superannuation payments and incentivize both
parents to share care. This minimizes the career cost for mothers and furthers HRM's
diversity and inclusion aims. Shared leave arrangements in nations such as Norway
have enhanced men's involvement in caring and narrowed gender differentials in career
advancement (OECD, 2021)
7. Create a National Gender Equality Strategy
Australia requires a unified national plan to tackle workplace gender disparities. A
special task force with HRM professionals must monitor gender outcomes, establish
equity targets, and incorporate gender considerations into future crisis management.
This is in accordance with strategic HRM practices emphasizing long-term workforce
inclusion and resilience (Foley & Williamson, 2021).
Conclusion
The COVID-19 pandemic also exposed severe loopholes in Australia's economic response,
mainly eliminating gender inequality. JobKeeper, JobSeeker, and early release of
superannuation assisted a few but disadvantaged several women because of structural
oversight (Foley & Williamson, 2021). The inability to take into account women's employment
strategies and caregiving roles led to long-term financial loss. In the future, economic planning
needs to incorporate a gender perspective to construct a just and resilient workforce. By
synchronizing public policy with HRM values like equity, inclusion, and work-life support,
Australia can establish lasting approaches toward gender equality (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011).
8
References
Downes, R., & Nicol, S. (2021). Designing and implementing gender budgeting: A path to
action. OECD.
OECD. (2021). Parental leave systems across OECD countries. https://www.oecd.org
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). Academic Press.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2020). Labour Force, Australia, May 2020.
https://www.abs.gov.au
Cassells, R., & Duncan, A. (2020). Short-term gains but long-term pain? Bankwest Curtin
Economics Centre.
Clare, R. (2017). Superannuation account balances by age and gender. ASFA Research.
Cooper, R., & Mosseri, S. (2020). Women and COVID-19: Labour market impacts and policy
responses. BroadAgenda.
Craig, L., & Churchill, B. (2020). Dual-earner parent couples’ work and care during COVID-19.
Gender, Work & Organization, 28(S1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12497
Foley, M., & Williamson, S. (2021). Women, work and industrial relations in Australia in 2020.
Journal of Industrial Relations, 63(3), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185621996407
Greenhaus, J. H., & Allen, T. D. (2011). Work-family balance: A review. Journal of
Management, 37(1), 17–38.
HESTA. (2020). Superannuation withdrawals and the gender divide. https://www.hesta.com.au
Hill, E. (2020). Why we need to invest in child care as infrastructure. BroadAgenda.
National Foundation for Australian Women. (2020). Gender lens on the budget 2020–21.
https://nfaw.org
Richardson, D., & Denniss, R. (2020). Gender experiences during the COVID-19 lockdown.
The Australia Institute.
