Most people who think critically about gender equality realise that there’s more to gain than there is to lose. It seems there is growing acceptance that the pursuit of gender equality isn’t in women’s interests alone; it is in the national interest. It explains why Australia’s Sex Discrimination Commissioner Liz Broderick has been so successful in enlisting high profile male champions of change to promote gender equality. They know it’s not merely a social or moral imperative; the commercial and economic imperative is persuasive.
Earlier this week Broderick voiced her views on the importance of maintaining reporting on gender by organisations with over 100 employees. This is in response to rumours that the employment minister Eric Abetz is being lobbied to re-evaluate that threshold to a higher number.
Some employers are required to share knowledge on the gender breakdown of job applicants and promotions. It might seem burdensome but organisations and the economy are gaining far too much to miss out on any opportunity to increase women’s workforce participation.
The gender pay gap is costly, with some estimating it costs the economy $93 billion a year. Inidvidual businesses need to be conscious of having more women in their senior ranks because better diversity, particularly at the senior level, creates better results. Companies that reduce their own gender pay gap can get their share of the $93billion dollars — because it is still there for the taking.
For shareholders, demanding explanations for the lack of women in executive and board positions is important — and well within their gambit. Shareholders are entitled to expect companies to be as profitable as they can be, and dismissing gender equality isn’t conducive to that.
Most concerning though, is what happens when regressive measures are taken on gender reporting. When the University of Queensland stopped interviews for medical applications the number of female medical students fell.
Reporting on gender diversity has benefits for the wider community too. Women, especially older women, are more likely to volunteer and be involved in unpaid roles.
Knowledge is power and the data derived from gender reporting provides a valuable roadmap: it gives us benchmarks to improve from and enables us to measure progress. Taking a backward step in this regard will cost us in lost opportunities.
Last year I met with 2020 Women on Boards, in Boston, and the group consensus was clear: the more aware executives and boards are about gender equality the more likely they are to support women and gender diversity. Limiting empirical evidence in the area obviously limits that.
Without accurate and reliable data on gender diversity, we compromise our ability to improve, and therefore we compromise our future economic prosperity. Some commentators now view women’s progress as a national development indicator and it is an issue that Asia is taking an increased interest in because of the opportunities it presents for growth.
The employment minister Eric Abetz, who is also the leader of the government in the Senate, has previously criticised quotas and hasn’t, to date, expressed interest in boosting women’s workforce participation. At this point in time the government should be seeking to gain more knowledge on the state of play for women at work, not less. Because having the right data will help boost the workforce participation rates of women, which will help overcome some of the real economic challenges that Australia faces. Surely the government agrees that is in the nation’s best interests?