Unemployment rises across genders

In aggregate terms, unemployment rate rose 0.2 percentage points during 2009-10 to 2011-12 (July to June)

 

For the two years ended June 30, 2012, unemployment rose across genders. In aggregate terms, it rose 0.2 percentage points during the period. Unemployment for women was higher than that for men, according to data released in the 68th round of the National Sample Survey.

If primary work alone is taken into account, unemployment for women rose 0.4 percentage points to 37 per 1,000 people willing to work (3.7 per cent) in 2011-12, against 33 per 1,000  in 2009-10. In the case of men, unemployment rose 0.2 percentage points to 2.4 per cent, against 2.2 per cent in 2009-10. During the period, overall unemployment rose from 2.5 per cent to 2.7 per cent.



However, if the work under other schemes (for instance, work under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme) is also considered, the rise in overall unemployment works out to 0.1 percentage points. For men, unemployment rose from two per cent to 2.1 per cent, while for women, it rose from 2.3 per cent to 2.4 per cent.

Unemployment in urban areas, for both men and women, was higher than in rural areas. In rural areas, unemployment rose from 2.1 per cent in 2009-10 to 2.4 per cent in 2011-12, if primary work alone is considered; in urban areas, it rose from 3.7 per cent to 3.8 per cent. If other work is also taken into account, the rise in unemployment in rural areas works out to 1.7 per cent, against 1.6 per cent in 2009-10. For urban areas, it remained flat at 3.4 per cent.

Between 2004-05 and 2009-10 (a period roughly coinciding with the first term of the United Progressive Alliance government), unemployment had declined. However, according to the 12th Plan document, unemployment in the manufacturing sector rose by five million during this period. National Statistical Commission Chairman and former chief statistician Pronab Sen said between 2009-10 and 2011-12, layoffs hadn’t been reported. However, the job market might not be recording employment in sufficient numbers, he added.