Women In The Workplace Case Study

Participation by women in the workforce has increase since the historical “equal pay for work of equal value” decision of 1972, however despite this decision and other legislation and policies enacted in many workplaces, women remain under represented, paid less than male colleagues and retire with less superannuation. This essay will investigate the historical disadvantage felt by women in paid employment by reviewing legislation enacted to protect women in the workplace. It will argue that women are still disadvantaged and that a number of small changes to the workplace can reduce the inequity.

The journey began back in 1951 when the United Nations recommended equal pay for men and women for work of equal value. The vision of the United

The most significant piece of federal legislation protecting rights in to workplace is Work Choices. This compliance model legislation provides rights, and procedure to follow when these rights have been breached. Where this model of legislation fall shorts is that there is no obligation for an employer to identify discrimination in the workplace, to educate employees or provide workplace policy (Smith 2006 cited by Bray et al. 2014). The weakest people in society have the most to gain from collective action therefore it is assumed women have the most to lose from the introduction of Work choices as they are more likely to be reliant on awards (Peetz 2007). Peetz argues that women have less bargaining power than men and so will be worse off under Work Choices than men. Data shows that women’s position has deteriorated in the labour market since 2001 with the female to male hourly earnings ratio falling from 91.1 % in 2001 to 88.7% in 2004 (Peetz 2007). Men are four times more likely to initiate salary negotiations than women, and when negotiation are initiated by women they are much less productive (Babcock & Laschever, 2003). Men are also more likely to reward other men with promotion (Kanter, 1977 cited by Peetz 2007). As power is taken away from women they are more vulnerable to workplace harassment and discrimination. A disproportionate 75 percent of people who experience physical sexual harassment are women (Peetz 2007). Protection in the workplace has been removed by exemptions to the Australia 's Sex Discrimination Act 1984. Exemptions for religious institutions, enable unfair and unreasonable discrimination against women. Protection from discrimination against women in the workforce remains inadequate, particularly in the