What a study of contrasts this week has been. Sunday marks International Women’s Day, so this week, all around Australia, men and women from different paths – business, not-for-profit and government – have been flocking to events held in its honour.
In many respects this is heartening. It is a week where there is a captive audience not just comprised of the converts who know this stuff back to front, but men and women who might not ordinarily turn their minds to the issue of gender equality. They come, they listen, perhaps they donate.
Do they consider the reason such events, or such an occasion, remains necessary? That it is not merely an opportunity to showcase or celebrate the achievements and talents of women? That it is a bleak reminder that girls and women around the world still do not occupy the same status as boys and men?
When I read yesterday that Australia’s Governor- General Sir Peter Cosgrove had remarked “Long live International Women’s Day” at a large function hosted by UN Women in Melbourne, I really wondered. I rue every day and every year that International Women’s Day remains relevant.
This year, the contrast between the apparent goodwill at events around the country – and indeed the world – and the reality has been particularly stark. Even here in Australia where, admittedly, women are relatively privileged, the objective of gender equality is slipping further away and the relevance of IWD only grows. Why?
Well consider this.
Last Friday we reported that the pay gap had increased to a new high in 20 years.
On Monday we learned from the Diversity Council of Australia CEO Lisa Annese that we are heading “back to the future” in a few ways.
The rate of underemployment for women in 1985 was 5.3% – it is now 11.2%.
In 1985 full time adult ordinary time earnings for women were 17.8% less than men– now they are 18.8% less than men.
In 1985 women graduates earned an average of 95.7% of male graduate starting salaries – now women graduates working full time earn an average of 93.8% of male full time graduate earnings
On Tuesday we reported that Australia had fallen the furthest of any OECD country in PwC’s annual Women at Work index this year.
On Wednesday we reported that the LNP had selected a men-only club for its IWD celebrations and that this was described as “smashing the glass ceiling”.
Yesterday we read that seventeen women have now been killed in 2015 in Australia due to domestic violence. This is double the national average of one a week which is already one a week too many.
Yesterday we reported that one general manager openly explained at an industry event that she hands out condoms to staff as a means of avoiding the hassle of staff getting pregnant.
Yesterday we reported that there are more men called John either running or chairing companies in America than there are women running companies.
Today Conrad Liveris provided us with research that shows women hold 23 positions either chairing or leading a company in the ASX 200. Of the remaining 377 positions 26 positions are held by men with the first name Peter, 23 positions are held by men called Michael and 22 positions are held by men called David.
Today the Australian Financial Review reports that the number of women being appointed to the bench has stalled.
Does any of that make you want to celebrate?
None of these things exist in isolation. Domestic violence does not happen in a vacuum. Workplace discrimination does not happen in a vacuum. The rate of pay men and women receive is not determined in a vacuum. Merit is not decided in a vacuum. All of these factors are caused by and, or contributed to, by a culture that fails to treat men and women equally. In that regard they are inextricably linked.
Is that link being identified? Are business leaders and government leaders considering this when attending International Women’s Day events?
They should be. Even if they’re not swayed by the social or moral imperative of gender equality, they should consider this.
A 2004 study commissioned by the Office for the Status of Women, estimates that the annual cost of domestic violence to the Australian economy was over $8 billion. So aside from the pressing and critical priority of saving women’s lives, there are an additional 8 billion reasons every single one of us – in government, business, or the community sector – ought to consider addressing this problem. Not merely through talk but by funding frontline services. By investing in behavioural change programs. By fostering and modelling a respectful culture. By rejecting sexism.
Arguably the biggest political story this week has been the Treasurer Joe Hockey’s release of the fourth Intergenerational Report. Hockey has said increased work force participation from women and older workers, is the key to maintaining or improving Australians’ standards of living.
The economic potential of increasing Australia’s female workforce participation is not new news, nor is the fact we lag behind other English-speaking nations on this metric. But this fact has been mentioned by Tony Abbott and the Assistant Treasurer Josh Frydenberg in recent weeks.
They have both referred to the Grattan Institute’s 2012 report which showed that increasing Australia’s female workforce participation to Canada’s levels would generate an additional $25 billion in GDP each year.
How do we increase women’s workforce participation? Creating workplaces that adequately facilitate the participation of employees with caring responsibilities – not limited to women with young children – is important. Improving access to affordable and high quality childcare is considered to be one of the most effective levers.
Last week the Productivity Commission’s report said that within the current framework the proposed changes are unlikely to garner much improvement in women’s workforce participation.
The Treasurer has specifically identified the need to increase women’s workforce participation as an economic imperative. Yet this week, it is crystal clear Australia is struggling.
“Gender inequality is bad for women, families, business and communities. It’s as simple as that,” Associate Professor at Sydney University Rae Cooper told Women’s Agenda. “It’s the key economic and social challenge of our time. I am incredulous that in such a complex and important area that the government cannot devote significant firepower just to women.”
Rather than merely celebrating IWD I would ask every single one of you (alas the converted) to demand more – from your employers, your families, your friends, the businesses you frequent, your elected representatives. We deserve better than we’re getting and that is not worth celebrating.