PS: the comment in the article about republicans made me smile
There is a study that showed that CEOs who have daughters have tendency to pay women more equally. It only works if the first child is a daughter.
Sadly, it doesn't work very well. For example, in Canada it is extremely difficult for women to enter the construction industry. It is a man's world. The women can be as good or even better qualify than a guy, the guy will be choose. The rare women on the sites are treating very badly, from verbal abuse to treat of physical one.
I would much prefer that nothing should be enforce when it comes to pick an employee, but the reality is that we will still need those rules as long as idiots would still be uneducated on this matter.
I was thinking about this thread while sat at my desk this morning; I'm in a room of about 30 people and I am the only female here. I work in a male dominated industry (IT Engineer) and I would really hate to think that I haven't got where I am and earned the respect of those I work with solely on merit. I would be so disappointed to be sat here today just because I am female and a quota needed to be filled.
I am against quotas for women. The lowered self esteem of women due to the quotas would only provide reasons for more male dominance !
moreover quotas in general do not have any exit plan hence come inthe way of deserving people.
I think mandatory "Quotas" aren't helpful but I think senior management should be forced to actively encourage and hire senior female staff especially when there is no discernible difference in candidates. I recently came back from a senior management offsite (50+ present) and the only women present were the secretaries organizing the conference.
no, gender should not even be factored in at all. because why stop there then? why not select on age, race, religion, sexuality, hair color, weight or freckles?
besides, gender should really be viewed as a spectrum anyway. trans- and intersex is always left out of the picture. not to mention the large differences within men and within women (both psychologically and physically).
selecting people on gender: a gray area on a slippery slope.
The problem is that gender is already used in selection, as is age, race, etc. Birthdate and nationality are written on resumes, and the photo tells plenty about race, gender, age and physcial characteristics.
If you walk into an interview as a woman of a certain age (20s and 30s), you're likely to be asked if you're married, if you have children, and if you're planning on having them.
I worked in construction in Canada with women ,have you ??
i dont think there is any company that officially states it selects on any of those characteristics. the only official (and even proud) discrimination is positive towards people that look like they might have a vagina. the rest is technically just speculation.
im sure people are smart enough to lie (or withhold truth at least) if they want to have kids in the near future and get asked about that at an interview.
I did. It was very sexist, but that's for an other thread.
Sure, if they are comfortable lying to a perspective employer. I also know women who have put the fact that they've had children already in their cover letters, to avoid suspicion that the'd be having them soon (which would be enough to keep them from getting even an interview). And, of course, I know women who have not had their contracts renewed after maternity leave.
I'll try that at my forthcoming interview.
"I have a vagina, you know. I keep it in a bag."
The anonymous CV was tested in several countries in Europe and there are mixed results. The idea is to remove name, address, gender, age , photo, nationality from the CV.
- In France a law was voted to make it mandatory for companies with more than 50 employees. At the end they did not make it mandatory because it wasn't that efficient
- Switzerland and Sweden have had mixed results and it has been binned.
- In Germany I understood from a colleague that it's quite successful (need confirmation for this).
I don't know if it was tested in the UK for example.
Ohhh yes does filthy construction workers. Now go and work in all female work environment .Just one quote "Its only sexual harassment if its not wanted "
Guys and Galls and gender neutral beings, at the end of the day we are all just a bunch of monkeys doing the same monkey stuff monkeys do in the wild.
If you want to understand how society works in this world, go to the zoo.
Agree 134%
Is your question:
A) would affirmative action legislation have prevented that problem?
B) does affirmative action legeslation need to be created, or is existing equality legislation evidentially a success in managing and removing gender-bias discrimination barriers?
C) something else?
It's more option B)
Apes actually; we don't have a tail and can swing from branches. Apart from that, yes.
and me too in nyc for a short bit long enough to know you can't get in the game no matter how smart you are. either too much or not enough, egos bruise easily in construction (and all other fields that have a boys club)
the point of quotas are to get your foot in the door. you still have to prove yourself. quotas can work because getting your foot in the door, in some fields, is the hardest part.