Great reductions in job inequality
Among younger generations of Malaysians, there is a higher proportion of Malays who have received the Malaysian Certificate of Education (MCE/SPM) than Chinese and Indians. In this column, I examine the trend in ethnic inequality in occupational attainment.
Charles Hirschman, NST
In a prior column, I reported that the historic divide in educational attainment between Malays and non-Malays in Peninsular Malaysia was reversed in the 1980s and 1990s.
Among younger generations of Malaysians, there is a higher proportion of Malays who have received the Malaysian Certificate of Education (MCE/SPM) than Chinese and Indians. In this column, I examine the trend in ethnic inequality in occupational attainment.
The second aim of the New Economic Policy (NEP) was to “eliminate the identification of race with economic function.”
Although much of popular and policy attention has been focused on income and wealth, occupational roles most clearly capture the idea of economic function.
Occupations are the day-to-day activities and routines that define participation in the economy. Moreover, occupational knowledge and skills, along with education, represent “human capital” that allows individuals to earn an income and other job related rewards.
Income and wealth that are not earned can be easily lost through poor judgment while human capital will always be a resource for employment and productivity in a competitive capitalist economy.
In this brief note, I summarise some of the key findings of a larger study of occupational change and ethnic inequality in Peninsular Malaysia from 1970 to 2000.
In response to census questions, individuals report the nature of their employment, for example, primary school teacher, fisherman, lorry driver, insurance salesman and similar detailed job titles.
These descriptions are coded into a very detailed occupational classification and published in census reports by the Malaysian Department of Statistics.
Drawing up the International Socioeconomic Index of Occupations, each occupational category is assigned a two-digit numeric score.
The highest rated occupation was judges at 90 and the lowest rated occupation was farmers at 16. The index of Occupational Status does not describe the exact standing of every person in an occupation in Malaysia, but it is a metric based on the “average education and income” of all persons in different occupations across many countries.
This study is limited to Peninsular Malaysia to focus on the historic economic divide between Malays, Chinese and Indians.
Younger workers, aged 25-34, have generally entered the workforce in the last decade and, therefore, are the group whose occupational standing is most likely to be affected by recent conditions and policies.
In 1970, young Malay men and women were employed in occupations that were, on average, about 5 and 9 points behind their Chinese peers. Indian men were about halfway between Chinese and Malay men, while Indian women were even further behind Chinese women than were Malay women.
Even further behind were “Other Bumiputera”, which includes the Orang Asli and a very small population of Indonesian origin (only in 1970 and 1980).
These ethnic and gender differences in occupational status are primarily due to agricultural employment. Malays, and especially Malay women, were much more likely to be employed in the rice and rubber smallholding sector, while Indian women were largely working in the rubber estate sector.
The generations of Malaysians that came of age in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, were much less likely to follow their families into the agricultural sector.
With greatly expanded educational opportunities and rapid growth in manufacturing and the public sector employment, younger workers found new jobs in almost every occupation except agriculture. This was particularly true for women.
The average occupational status of young employed Malay women jumped by 20 points from 1970 to 1990. The gap between Malay and Chinese men narrowed, and the ethnic gap between Malay and Chinese women all but disappeared.
The one group that remained behind was Other Bumiputera. Orang Asli men and women are at a high risk of becoming an economic underclass in the rapidly modernising Malaysian economy. Malay men are now on par with Indian men, and Indian women are behind all groups except the Orang Asli.
There remains a small, but significant, advantage of Chinese men relative to Malay men of about 3 points on the occupational status scale.
More detailed study has shown that ethnic parity (between Chinese and Malay men) was evident in the late 1990s in all white collar occupations that have educational requirements, such as professional, associate professional (including technicians), and clerical positions.
Chinese men are, however, slightly more likely than Malay men to be employed in managerial and craftsmen occupations. The occupations are disproportionately in small firms that hire through kinship networks.
Malaysia has made enormous economic strides in the last four decades.
A favourable international climate, an insatiable demand for manufactured goods from Western countries, and huge government investments in education and infrastructure (largely fueled by oil revenues) have created a full employment economy and remarkable reductions in the Malay-Chinese gaps in occupational inequality.
These patterns are most evident for young women. However, some goals of the NEP have not been realised. The Orang Asli community, tragically, is as far behind today was it was in 1970.
The NEP assumed, perhaps too optimistically, that ethnic equality would lead to greater integration and mutual understanding.
The future challenge for Malaysians of all ethnic communities is to create a more integrated and compassionate society where ethnic diversity can be celebrated as a national resource and not as a point of division.
