Sunday, 21 November 2010

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

Saturday, 20 November 2010

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.


Pieter De Vriendt

Friday, 19 November 2010

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

Thursday, 18 November 2010

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.


Pieter De Vriendt


Wednesday, 17 November 2010

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.