Positive discrimination

When there's a discussion going on about gender discrimination, we all have our own opinion on how it's a bad thing that must be avoided at all times. However, many people don't realise that gender discrimination might also impact a company in a positive way.

Imagine a company that heavily recruits men. When they decide to hire more women instead of men, this might bring in creative ideas and a fresh approach to the work floor. The same can be said about a company hiring men instead of women. Each gender – and each individual – brings certain qualities to the table wich will benefit the company greatly.

On the flip side, gender discrimination can really affect your company in a negative way. If your company's policies and procedures manual doesn't contain a section regarding gender discrimination, lawsuits can occur and ultimately bring down your company.

I agree with this point of view: men and women each bring in their own qualities and it's always good to have 2 different points of view to solve an issue. I do disagree with the choice of words in the first two paragraphs. I think the term 'gender discrimination' is not in place, it has too much of a negative ring to it. 'Gender preference' might be more fit in this case, but those are just my two cents...

source: http://www.ehow.co.uk/video_4951256_can-gender-discrimination-impact-company_.html

Mike De Ridder

Dealing with the gender bias

Imagine, a young couple, in the prime of their lives who start working for a big company. They both have the same opportunities to make promotion within a few months. But what do young people do? They get married and start having kids. So, after a small year the baby finally arrives. The woman goes on maternity leave while the father keeps on doing his job. After a few weeks she returns to the labour market. But does she still have the same opportunities to promote and become a top manager?

A recent survey has shown that women who return from maternity leave don’t have the same compensation structures and equal opportunities compared with their male counterparts.

This kind of discrimination against young mothers prevents them from climbing the career ladder. Only a few women will actually arrive at the top management layer of a big company.

I believe that this kind of discrimination can’t be tolerated. Women must have the same opportunities and must receive the same treatment compared with their male colleagues. It’s not logic to presume that women get less skilled when they haven’t worked for a couple of months. Give those women the chance to shine and we will all be astonished.

http://ayushveda.com/blogs/business/talent-management-in-business-dealing-with-the-gender-bias/

Pieter De Vriendt

Cracks In The Norwegian Glass Ceiling

Norwegian companies are confronted with the government policy which obliges them to elevate women’s contribution in boardrooms until 40 pct. This quota needs to be achieved within 2 years otherwise the company is threatened with closure.

The near-equality in Norway gives women the opportunity to break through the glass-ceiling not only in businesses but also in politics. However, this implies that new companies who don’t respect the quota won’t be able to register. Furthermore, existing companies will have two years time to change their image and find women for their boards.

In addition, research has shown that mixed teams perform better than homogeneous teams. So diversity creates wealth and therefore board members shouldn’t be picked from the same near circle. However, not everybody embraces this interruption of the status quo.

Some people aren't in favour of the government's approach and opt for a more flexible one such as organising happenings. During these happenings potential candidates may present themselves and companies can meet.

We can conclude that companies are doing an effort in achieving the 40 pct and aren't risking to be shut down. (Guardian)

Nathalie De Smet

Empowering The Resentful

The pay gap has fallen and women are outperforming men, even girls are doing better at school than their male peers. These improvements aren’t expressed by the wages because women working full-time are earning 17 pct less than men. This implies a systematic bias against women and therefore stronger government interference is required.

A lot of women are postponing children or want fewer of them because motherhood is a barrier to wage equality.This results from the fact that women are eager to improve their relative earning power. However, not every difference between men and women can be explained that easily. Married men have higher wages than their spouses, although single men earn the same or even less than single women. Furthermore, gay men are slightly more paid than straight men. In the end, it all comes down to the education and the job people have.

Men have higher wages because they take risks and are more likely to lose their jobs or suffer a major injury at work. They also work more flexible hours and are more likely to work outside. Unlike men, women want fixed hours and are less likely to move jobs in attempt of higher pay.

Moreover, the government policies to reduce the gender pay gap may result in a new one. It is a gap between work-rich and work-poor households. This implies that if women would have an increased wage, the work-rich households would earn more. Unlike them, the work-poor households have no income. Thus the difference will be enlarged. (Times)

In my opinion, the gender pay gap should be reduced but not to the prejudice of the work-poor households.

Nathalie De Smet

‘Sticky floors’ hold back women’s careers

Would you go to a pub with your boss after a long week working? Would you take your supervisor out to see a football game, and become “friends” in a certain way? No? Too bad, because spending more time with your supervisor outside the work floor can help you to climb higher on the career ladder.

When you are a man, you don’t have to worry, because men are more likely  to go to a pub with their boss on a Friday evening. But why should you do that? First of all, you always have a good time when you go to a bar. On the other hand, your boss can now make a real judgment about your informal, inter personal skills and abilities.

A woman (let’s call her Suzy) is less likely to spend some social time with her boss, so she will miss some great opportunities to show her abilities. And that’s a major problem. The boss doesn’t know that Suzy possesses those abilities and when he has to make a choice between the well-known man and the unknown Suzy, his choice will be in favour of the man. So women don’t get off the first rung of the career ladder.

It isn’t really the glass ceiling but the sticky floor that prevents women from rising above a certain level.

I think it’s a little bit of both. As well ‘sticky floor’ as ‘glass ceiling’. In the article they speak about a mentoring program to help women to evolve in their career. I believe that’s one solution but there still have to change a lot so that women and men become equal once and for all.

http://www.res.org.uk/society/mediabriefings/pdfs/2008/0808/Bjerk.pdf

Pieter De Vriendt

Discrimination's loop-hole

Gender discrimination in hiring decisions is against the law. It's as simple as that, right?

Wrong!

If you feel like you are being discriminated at work (based on your gender), think twice before you start screaming blue murder – you might actually be wrong for once...

Although there is in fact a law that says it's illegal to discriminate anyone based on race or sex, there are also certain circumstances in which it is allowed.

Some employers deliberately hire applicants of a certain gender to meet fixed quota or as a result of an affirmative action program. Affirmative action is a program, obligated by the government. If a government contractor notices that there is a huge imbalance in the hiring of a specific gender , a company may be obligated by law to exclusively hire people from that group to boost the male-female ratio to an equilibrium.

For example: if your company is rather male-dominated, affirmative action will force you to hire a lot of women, and almost no men. In circumstances like this one, 'discrimination' in hiring may in fact be warranted.

In any other situations however, discrimination remains 100 % prohibited!

source: http://www.entrepreneur.com/humanresources/employmentlaw/article54796.html

Mike De Ridder

Another Ceiling? Can males compete for traditionally female jobs?

When we look at the last few years, we can determine that the female workers among us are having greater access to the mid-level management jobs in the big business world. But has it always been that way? Is it possible for women to get higher on the corporate ladder? And is it possible that women nowadays can and will do jobs that can be considered as pro-male? The answers:

Women who got stuck on the mid-management jobs, this group of desperate housewives is rising very quickly. Their progressive moves are limited by what they call “ the glass ceiling ”. It prevents women from entering the top management positions.

The reasons and causes for that glass ceiling are very widespread. Some persons claim that there aren’t enough women who are interested or qualified to do those jobs, others say management is a male domain, but there is one opinion that attracts attention, the so called “ same sex preference “ opinion. This means that people prefer working with people of the same sex.

To explain the second part of our question, we can see that the work floor can be divided in 2 groups: the traditionally female jobs and the traditionally male jobs. To see what the problem really is about, we will create a fictive person, called; Suzy. When Suzy wants to apply for a female job, we can see that the bias against Suzy are in favour of her, she will get the job. On the other hand, when Suzy wants to apply for a typical male job – management – we see that the bias against her turns out very bad, so she can forget the male job. This scenario can be seen by many who want to get higher or do an intellectual, high professional, male job.

http://www.browsearticle.com/article/8840-Another_ceiling__Can_males_compete_.html

Pieter De Vriendt

Female minority at universities

Women are doing quite well in hiring and tenure processes at major research universities, however they are still underrepresented in the number of aspirants.

A survey was made to make out how women were faring compared to men at key points in their respective carreers. The study examines the hiring process as well as the application for tenure at universities who stress the importance of math, science and engineering.

The results tell us that -when it comes to being considered for tenure or a job – women are not prejudiced, yet they represent just a fraction of all the people who apply for such job or tenure.

Hence, institutions are succeeding at lowering the gender gap but they are still dealing with a persistent underrepresentation of women in the application pool.

The report says that the only effective strategy to deal with the aforementioned issue is to have a search committee with lots of women and a female chair.

In my opinion, the institutions (as well as all the other companies) must also make an effort to provide a women friendly environment at the work floor. When a company makes you feel at home, you'll be more likely to apply there than anywhere else.

source: http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12062

Mike De Ridder

Women In Boardrooms

Women are being out-numbered by men in boardrooms. Research has shown that only 5 pct of boardroom seats are taken by women, who mostly occupy part-time roles as non-executive directors.

Companies encourage women to apply for top jobs through a FTSE 100 cross-mentoring programme. This implies that a woman is being mentored by a chairman or chief executive from a rival company. The woman’s boss on the other hand has to mentor a female co-worker from the other company.

A recent study has shown that the presence of women in the boardroom has an impact on corporate governance, while it doesn’t have a significant influence on the company’s profits. Another study found that in times of crisis, the chance of a bankruptcy lowers by a staggering 20 pct when there is at least one female executive. (Guardian)

I believe that the cross-mentoring programme can really make a difference in breaking the glass ceiling. It helps women to overcome barriers, but it especially teaches the male co-workers to appreciate women in their working environment.

Furthermore, I find it remarkable to see that in times of crisis, women play an important role in maintaining the company's going concern. This could be resulting from the women's nature to create a risk-free environment.

Nathalie De Smet

"Glass escalator"-effect

The "glass escalator" or "glass ceiling"-effect can be explained easily. It refers to situations where someone, male or female, applies for a job in the hierarchy of an organization and isn't aloud to practice it because of discrimination, like sexism or racism. 

Young and James (2001) and O'Lynn (2004) describe how men are more likely to be promoted up to more "legitimate" positions when they work in female-dominated professions. 

For example, in a hospital, under the nursing staff, when they have a population of 30 nurses, and 5 of them are male, it is most likely these men will be occupied with the management.

Look at daycares. All the women take care of the children, while the men (if there are any men in the first place!) take care of the administration. And perhaps one of the female workers is better at administration, but it fades away next to the fact the is a man...

It is a phenomenon I can only agree with. Nowadays, it is normal if men are prefered for more "men-like" jobs. I think it is a shame this still happens. We live in 2010, and women have the same rights like men. 

Glass ceiling occurs very often, and should be broken through.

Justine Fieuw

Public Opinion

The public opinion about giving all people equal employment opportunities can be divided in two groups: the people who follow the theory of Tougas and those who follow the survey of Fletcher and Chalmers.

Fletcher and Chalmers are the opposition and in their eyes everything revolves around one thing: qualifications. They say that people with more and higher qualifications should receive the employment opportunities.

The opposition’s theory can also be given by the term “reverse discrimination” which indicates that employment equity  can stand in the way of the non-beneficiaries to be successful in their job.

Tougas and his followers are leaning towards the goal of employment equity, which means equal opportunities for everybody, male or female. So it won’t be a surprise that they will take action to prevent such gender inequalities.

I prefer the theory of Tougas because I think everybody, male or female, rich or poor, unskilled or high qualified, should be treated the same way. After all, we are all human.

Pieter De Vriendt

Wage Equality

Men and women aren’t equally paid, although the gender pay gap is narrowing. Nowadays women earn 81 pct of what men make, compared to 62 pct in the late 1970s.

At the beginning of their career, men and women are evenly paid for the same job, but after a few years men are out-earning their female counterparts. According to a study the key reason for this disparity is motherhood. Research has shown that childless women are more likely to move to jobs with more responsibility than those who have children.

On the other hand, there are workers under the age of 29 who want jobs with more authority. They are men as well as women, who are called ‘millennials’. In comparison with 1992, where 80 pct of men and 72 pct of women wanted high positions, men’s ambitions have dropped and women’s have risen these days. (Moneywatch)

In my opinion, women shouldn’t be prejudiced when they are pregnant or have children because starting a family still is a decision made with your partner. Although, I can agree with the fact that women who have children aren’t eager to take risks, or move to jobs with more responsibility due to the children.

Nathalie De Smet

Male nurses and female police officers

Gender-role stereotyping occurs when people link a certain occupation to a gender. It's wrong to do so, but yet almost everybody does it unknowingly. When you think of a police officer or a fire marshall, you think of a muscular man who can conquer every obstacle he stumbles upon. When you think of a nurse, you think of a kind women with a soothing voice who takes gentle care of you.

To limit the effect of stereotyping in the process of hiring someone, 'employment equity intervention' was introduced – of which the effect was studied by Oppenheimer and Wiesner. Research shows us that when employment equity intervention was brough out, men were preferred for 'female jobs' (like nursing) and women were chosen for the 'male jobs' (police officer). However, women chose a female candidate for both jobs.

These results might tell us that gender-role stereotyping is much more common among women than among men. It might also suggest that we are more focused on fighting women stereotyping than general gender stereotyping.

Mike De Ridder

source: http://www.springerlink.com/content/k5r501005g564434/fulltext.pdf   (article from Minerva)