Can we stop with this sexist office feature?
There’s a hidden workplace occurrence making women less productive – and it’s all because of a formula created 60 years ago.
COMMENT
It’s 9:00am, and I’m filling my Keep Cup with boiling water in the office kitchen.
Sure, I could have a cuppa, but you see, I’m not here for the taste of a hot beverage – I’m here for the warmth it will give my cold, shivering soul when I get back to my desk.
Behind me, a co-worker waits patiently in line to fill her two hot water bottles she’s BYO’d to work.
“One is for my stomach and one is for my legs,” she tells me.
I nod knowingly.
Back at my chair, I see my colleague cocooned in a makeshift blanket, made of her scarf and jumper.
Meanwhile, Jason from the sports team is sitting in a T-shirt and jeans behind us, fanning himself.
For the best lifestyle coverage in Australia — download the news.com.au app direct to your phone.
MORE: Are you happy at work?
I brave the rest of the day cold, only to commute home in the cold to my cold apartment, which has kindly been pre-chilled by my husband, who works from home and clearly misses the frigid office temperature.
Come bedtime, the aircon is set to 18 degrees, no more, no less, every night, because some podcast bro, probably Andrew Huberman, told him that’s “optimal” for sleep.
I stealthily bump it up by about three degrees the moment he isn’t looking, and he, without fail, lowers it the second he notices.
Having tried fighting that battle for many years, I tuck myself into bed with a heat pack and call it a night.
But as I doze off, blankets up to my ears, I can’t help but wonder, Carrie Bradshaw style, am I destined to be cold forever?
The gender temperature gap
If you’re a man and are completely oblivious to what I’m talking about, welcome to the eternal battle of indoor climate control.
You see, standard office temperatures are set according to a formula developed in the 1960s by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and airconditioning Engineers.
The guidelines, known as ASHRAE 55, were created by looking at the comfort levels of a group of office workers under the conditions of temperature, humidity, wind, and speed.
However, the study, wait for it … only included men.
40 year old men weighing 70kg and wearing a suit, to be precise.
The “standard” office worker, apparently.
MORE: A guide to business casual attire (with examples)
It’s a model that doesn’t account for women’s different metabolic rates, hormonal variations, or typical workplace attire.
Women’s metabolic rates are up to 32 per cent lower than men’s, meaning office settings are often 5–6°C too cold for women.
“Men typically have more muscle mass and a faster metabolism, generating more internal heat. Women produce less, so they feel cooler in the same environment,” says Dr Zac, a leading GP.
“Women’s hands and feet are also often a few degrees cooler than men’s. Since we register temperature most through our skin, especially at the extremities, that ‘cold hands’ feeling translates into ‘I’m freezing!’”
He explains that oestrogen dilates blood vessels, which increases heat loss through the skin.
Meanwhile, progesterone raises core body temperature but reduces blood flow to the hands and feet, making women feel colder.
I feel thermally oppressed
While you might roll your eyes thinking this is just a trivial complaint, let’s be clear what this is actually about.
This isn’t just the grumblings of a few slightly cold women who need to ‘rug up more’.
It’s a serious issue we need to address ASAP if we want true gender equality.
According to Dr Zac, being perpetually cold has effects on our health, productivity, mood and sleep.
How are we meant to break the glass ceiling if we’re too tired to even climb the stairs?
Who knows, maybe I would have won a Walkley by now if I didn’t have perpetually frozen fingers (unlikely, but can we put it down to that?).
‘Built by men, for men’
While the patriarchy might have thermostatic control for now, it’s time we change that.
Tanya Finnie, a global culture strategist who advises on inclusive design, calls freezing office temps a symptom of ‘systemic design neglect’.
“When environments don’t work for half the population, we have to ask: who are we designing for, and who gets left out?” she tells news.com.au. “This is infrastructure that’s built by men, for men”.
She also believes this issue is part of a broader problem – society prioritising male bodies, from home building standards, urban planning, crash test dummies, PPE and healthcare.
“For example, until 1993, the US National Institutes of Health didn’t require women to be included in clinical trials, meaning decades of medical research were based on male physiology,” she notes.
“That gap has real-world consequences – from misdiagnosed heart attacks in women to medication dosages not accounting for sex-based differences.”
So where do we go from here?
I hope it doesn't come to this, but must I invest in one of those heated Kmart throws that look like they’d start a fire under my desk?
Or is it time buildings update their internally biased temperature standards and come to some kind of sweet middle ground that’s good for both men and women?
It’s a small adjustment in the grand scheme of things, but as with so much of the push for gender equality, it matters.
