Barriers to women at work

A survey of 2000 mothers shows 49 per cent experienced discrimination at least once, as did 27 per cent of 1000 fathers.

Sandra Dann says there needs to be a change in the workplace psyche that penalises women for having children.

IN 1996, Sex Discrimination Com­missioner Elizabeth Broderick was a partner managing eight lawyers at then law firm Blake Dawson (now Ashurst), when all pregnancy broke loose.

The first lawyer in Broderick’s team announced her pregnancy one morning, followed by a second in the afternoon.

When the third lawyer announced her pregnancy the next day, Broderick decided to come clean with her own news.

“Suddenly 50 per cent of our team would soon be on paid parental leave. The babies were eventually born on consecutive working days Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday,’’ Broderick says.

“For me I had to understand how I could meet the needs of the organisation and run a profitable business. We took a business proposal based on our workplace to the upper echelons of the firm and they came on board.

“We redesigned it so we could work remotely, include job sharing and working from home. I didn’t wait until I was 36 or 37 to have my first child to then rush back to work.”

Their children are now adults ready to venture into the workforce, seemingly at odds with their own experience and where discrimination is alarmingly high.

In fact, Broderick’s recently released national review on behalf of the Australian Human Rights Commission, entitled Supporting Working Parents: Pregnancy and Return to Work, shows “pervasive and systemic’’ discrimination against pregnant workers, parents on leave and those returning to work.

A survey of 2000 mothers shows 49 per cent experienced discrimination at least once, as did 27 per cent of 1000 fathers surveyed. Most common issues were threats of or actual dismissal, contracts not renewed, cuts to pay, changes in conditions and duties and being made redundant while away on parental leave.

Many said pregnancy made them feel powerless, vulnerable and fearful about job security.

“It’s systemic, it’s across every sector from the most junior to the most senior, from the factory floor to the professional services,’’ Broderick says. Most striking is the fact that only 8 per cent of those experiencing discrimination made a formal complaint. This was despite discrimination laws being “quite extensive”.

“You can have the best policies and processes in the world but if they’re not implemented, discrimination will still occur. Something’s got to change,’’ she says.

The combination of employers and employees not knowing rights and responsibilities, new parents being too busy to complain, the cost of taking legal action and the fear of damaging future employment prospects are all reasons, says South Australian Working Women’s Centre director Sandra Dann.

Dann says there is a range of legislation covering pregnancy and parental discrimination through the Fair Work Ombudsman and various state government laws.

However, formal complaints need to have witnessed or written evidence of discrimination before allowing a compensation settlement between employer and employee, but for many it is just about an apology.

“Most women want to live with some dignity and most women actually want someone to acknowledge that what was said was not okay,’’ Dann says. “But women don’t want to lose their job at a time when they need to be income dependent. They don’t want to lose their job while caring for young children. It’s not a lifetime sentence,’’ she says.

What surprises Dann most is that discrimination is just as prevalent in the “caring” professions.

There were some more pleasant surprises, such as smaller organisations showing lower levels of discrimination, possibly because of closer and better communication between employer and employee.

Dann believes there needs to be a change in the Australian workplace psyche which penalises women for having children.

Deakin University Business and Law school senior lecturer Dominique Allen says employers and employees would benefit from some harmonisation of current legislation. However, the most recent moves during the Labor Rudd government to combine discrimination laws for age, sex, race and disability into the one Act have been shelved.

The low level of formal complaints in the national review reflects the prohibitive nature of taking action through the courts, says Allen. If a case does go to federal court it can cost a plaintiff hundreds of thousands of dollars, and in some cases more than the compensation.

“Given that it is challenging enough to use anti-discrimination laws for reasons such as the burden of proof on the employee, low damages claims and high legal costs, it is not surprising that women who are pregnant or returning to work with a young family are choosing not to pursue legal action,’’ Allen says.

“But that presumes they’re aware of their rights. Under ­federal industrial relations legislation, employers must give all new employees an information sheet outlining their minimum entitlements. There’s no reason information about unlawful ­discrimination couldn’t be distributed at the same time.”

Meanwhile, Broderick says she will closely watch the results from Telstra’s initiative, which began in March, to include flexibility provisions in all new advertised positions. The move includes provisions to encourage more women to apply and it supports family-friendly practices.

Telstra chief executive David Thodey is among Broderick’s Male Champions of Change.

Early data shows a 9 per cent increase in women applying for flexible roles to 37 per cent, and 30 per cent of applicants have said they are attracted by the flexibility.

“While my experience of pregnancy and work was a positive one it doesn’t have to be unique. We want to profile leading practices. Small business are doing it well thanks to good communication. At the heart of it is treating people with dignity,’’ Broderick says.

“What I learned from my experiences is that a well-designed, flexible workplace can accommodate anyone.”