#11 WORKING POOR IN THE CARIBBEAN: WITH A FOCUS ON TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Ewan Scott, Karl Theodore, Althea La Foucade, LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#22 PRESENTATION OUTLINE ● Poverty and the Working Poor • Why the Concern with the working poor? • Methodology: A Brief Overview Who Are They?: Some Findings from the 2006 Study o Conclusions LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#33 POVERTY & THE WORKING POOR o The Poor- Who are they? ● Persons living below some established poverty line/level of expenditure i.e. US$1; US$2 or NPL •The Working Poor??? Who are they???: LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#4THE WORKING POOR? The working poor are those who work and who belong to poor households. More specifically, the working poor are defined as "...individuals engaged in either paid or self employment who belong to households with an adult equivalent per capita household expenditure (or income) that falls below a specified poverty line." LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#55 WHY THE CONCERN WITH THE WORKING POOR? • What's the big deal? We return to this later LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#6a METHODOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW For purposes of our study: o The individual is the basis for establishing the "working" and "not working" classification; and o The household is the basis for establishing the "poor" and "non-poor" classification. Working status: limited to those who were employed during a specific reference period, either in paid, unpaid or self- employment, and excludes the economically inactive and unemployed. ● Poor households: the classification is based on adult equivalent per capita household expenditure that is below the poverty line. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#77 1) 2) METHODOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW ● Procedure used for identifying poor h/hs: 3) Determination of the total consumption expenditure for each household for the period under review; Conversion of total consumption expenditure to daily equivalence (ie per day); Determination of the h/h size in adult equivalence. This was achieved for each h/h by applying the relevant adult equivalence weight to each member of the h/h and then summing. The adult equivalence scale that was applied is that used by the World Bank as follows; adult male (1), adult female (0.83), 10-14 year olds (0.83), 5-9 year olds (0.7), 1-4 years (0.50), children under 4 years old (0.2). LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#88 METHODOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW 4) Estimation of the adult equivalent per capita household expenditure by dividing daily consumption expenditure (from step 2) by the household size (from step 3) 5) Conversion of the adult equivalent per capita household expenditure into constant 2000 US$ using Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs) as currency converters 6) A household was then deemed to be poor if the PPP converted adult equivalent per capita household expenditure (from step 5) was below the poverty line of US$1, US$2, or the National Poverty Line (which was also converted into 2000 constant PPP US$) LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#99 DATASETS USED COUNTRY SURVEY YEAR SAMPLE SIZE Households Individuals Bahamas SLC 2001 Barbadosa LFS 1998, 5582 2001; 6370 2004 4037 Dominica SLC 2002 952 3166 Grenada SLC 1999 1121 4061 Guyana LCS 1999 Jamaicaa SLC; LFS 1999; 2001; 2003 St. Kitts and Nevis SLC Trinidad and SLC Tobago* LFS: labour force survey 1999/2000 900 1997 1787 2762 6571 *: after cleaning a: unless otherwise stated the analyses are based on the 2004 for Barbados and 2003 for Jamaica. * In the case of Trinidad and Tobago, the research was executed using the SLC 1997 dataset. Field work has been completed for a 2005 SLC. However, at the time of writing, the researchers did not have access to the 2005 micro dataset. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1010 INCIDENCE OF POVERTY AMONG HOUSEHOLDS Percentage of Households Poor Non-Poor US$1 US$ 2 NPL US$1 US$ 2 NPL Bahamas Barbados 2.70 100 100 97.30 10.65 n.a n.a 89.35 ... Dominica 0.74 1.37 24.79 99.26 98.63 75.21 Grenada 4.36 8.36 19.93 95.64 91.64 80.07 Jamaica St. Kitts and Nevis Trinidad and Tobago -- -- 24.20 -- 75.80 0.11 8.33 100 99.89 91.67 0.11 11.86 100 99.89 88.14 Percentage of Persons Bahamas na 100 100 na Barbados 10.30 100 100 89.70 Dominica 0.47 1.10 31.35 99.53 98.90 68.65 Grenada 4.63 9.87 25.95 95.37 90.13 74.05 Jamaica na na 19.10 na na 80.90 St. Kitts and Nevis 0.29 17.74 100 99.71 82.26 Trinidad and Tobago 0.30 21.03 100 99.70 78.97 ... NPL: National Poverty Line na: not available/estimated as part of this particular project. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT = zero or negligible#1111 THE WP: MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING? Findings suggest that a significant # of employed persons are poor. Figure 8 Working Poor as a Percentage of All Workers: National Poverty Line 30- 25 O 20- 15- 10- 5- Bahamas Barbados St. Kitts & Nevis 66'71 Trinidad & Tobago 15,35 Jamaica 891 20,26 Grenada 21,5 Don#nica 29 Guyana LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1212 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? o Both Men and Women are Among the Working Poor... o...however, males dominate the working poor in the case countries (exceptions being SKN & Dominica) o The finding of male-dominance among the working poor is particularly striking for Dominica and T&T. Men account for 65.95% of the 21.5% of workers who are poor Dominica. In Trinidad and Tobago, working poor men comprise 11.66% of the employed population compared to their female working poor counterparts who amount to just about 3.69 % of the employed. Perhaps the "carrying factor". LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#13Countries 13 Working Poor Males and Females as % of Employed persons Figure 9 Male/Female Composition of Working Poor: National Poverty Line Trinidad & Tobago St. Kitts & Nevis Jamaica Dominica 3.69 11.66 6.47 5.52 7.95 7.32 Barbados 2.02 1.72 Bahamas 11.14 1.2 0 8.85 14.18 5 10 15 20 25 % Composition Female Male LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1414 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? Men or Women... Perhaps not entirely surprising given that men dominate the employed pop. However, this picture is further reinforced when we delve deeper into the intra-sex composition of the working poor/non-poor. ● In both Dominica and T&T, we observe a higher percentage of employed males who are poor (22.47% and 18.04% respectively) compared to employed females who are poor (19.85% and 10.42% respectively). This may not be entirely surprising given past observations of the changing dynamics including educational attainment—across males and females in T&T. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#15Trinidad & Tobago St. Kitts & Nevis Countries Jamaica Dominica 15 Figure 10 % of Employed Males and Employed Females who are Poor 18.04 10.42 10.89 13.14 168 16.93 3.36 Barbados 4.14 Bahamas 2.4 7.49 0 5 10 15 22.47 19.85 20 % Composition Female Male LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT 25#1616 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? o In Which Age Group are they? • WP are clustered in the 25 to 44 age group. In all countries, the largest concentration of working poor is found in the 25 to 44 age group with this group accounting for 55.9 % of the working poor in Dominica, 49.7 % in Trinidad and Tobago and 40.7% in Jamaica. ● However, this is not entirely surprising. This age group dominates the employed pop. as a whole and also accounts for the lion's share of non- poor employed persons. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1717 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? What Jobs do they Hold & In Which Sectors? o The working poor are spread across all industries, but the data suggest that they are mostly found in four sectors—the agriculture, community and social services, construction, and the wholesale/retail sales sectors. o For all the case countries, a larger percentage of the working poor are found in the agricultural sector as compared to the non- poor LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1818 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? Occupation by Gender • A closer look at the occupations of the working poor via gender analysis reveals that working poor males dominate in agricultural occupations while their female counterparts are more dominant in services and shop sales and also in clerical occupations. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#1919 THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? ●Type of Worker o privately paid employees constitute a larger proportion of the working poor compared to the non-poor. The opposite is true for Government employees - they are smaller in proportion in the working poor than in the non-poor How Many Hours are they Working? o the working poor work fewer hours than their non-poor counterparts LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#20Percent 110 8 8 8 70 8 21 8 9 8 20 20 Wookly Hours Worked by Poverty Status by Country 8 5 모 Ε 41 14 % A 9 7 20 11 12 24 5 8 444 LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT Non Poor Poor Non Poor Poor NonPoor Poor Non Poor Poor NonPoor Poor Non Poor Poor Status Bahamas Houra por Wook Dominica Grenada Jamaica St Kitts Trinidad Country 16 17 40+ 17 34 41 50 50+ 11 9#2121 • Education THE WP: WHO ARE THEY? o the working poor have lower levels of education - in all cases the proportion of workers with primary or lower level education is much higher for the working poor than for the non-poor, while only a small proportion of the working poor has tertiary level education. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT/ HEU, CENTRE FOR HEALTH ECONOMICS#22Percent 110 22 Level of Education of the Employed by Poverty Status by Country 10000 Z o 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 100 22 COOL 24 10 COOL ¬ 0 0 0 2 0 Z Bahamas Level of Education 71 31 15 8 83 POOL N Z o caOOL 14 16 000- ZocaOOL N - 0 0 0 3 OZ OOL 46 COOL Z O COO 0 Status Dominica Grenada Guyana St Kitts Trinidad Country Other Secondary Tertiary N Π P ZocaOOL Barbados Primary LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#2323 23 Distribution of Number of Employed Persons in Households (NPL) No of Working The Barbados Dominica Jamaica Bahamas St. Kitts and Nevis Persons Non- Poor Poor Non- Poor Non- Poor Poor Poor Non- Poor Non- Poor Poor Poor 0 6.1 14.5 14.67 61.63 22.63 31.78 21.60 19.50 17.45 16.00 1 28.2 32.4 37.21 28.60 45.67 43.22 45.60 36.40 46.30 20.00 2 23.7 19.5 32.27 7.91 24.02 18.22 23.70 30.80 25.58 36.00 3 16.3 0.7 11.28 1.40 6.01 5.51 6.90 9.60 6.30 14.67 4 12.6 7.6 3.49 0.23 1.12 1.27 1.70 3.00 2.79 5.33 5 7.1 12.7 0.78 0.23 0.42 0.00 0.30 0.30 1.21 4.00 6 2.7 3.8 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.10 0.30 0.24 2.67 7+ 3.3 8.9 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.12 1.33 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT/ HEU, CENTRE FOR HEALTH ECONOMICS#2424 CONCLUSIONS • Working persons living in poor households; o Members of relatively larger households than their non-poor working counterpart; • Members of households with fewer employed persons than their non-poor counterparts. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#2525 CONCLUSIONS • Programmes targeting poor not always sensitive/responsive to the existence of the working poor. o Issue of quality of work and remuneration. Implications for post retirement quality of life. • Having said above need to recognise that, all else being equal, as h/h size ↑ more likely to move into classification of working poor. LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#2626 CONCLUSIONS ●Back to basics: Data. oNeed to have: J'ca since 1988 o From 1991-2007 possibly 2008 LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#2727 OTHANK YOU LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT#2828 28 LABOUR MARKET AND POVERTY STUDIES UNIT/ HEU, CENTRE FOR HEALTH ECONOMICS