Skip to main content

National Association of Women in Construction

Sex Discrimination

Sexually permeated workplaces:
Not working for women

Speech Delivered by Pru Goward,
Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner

15 August 2002

National Association of Women in Construction

Breakfast Seminar Melbourne.


  • Thank you for
    inviting me here this morning. I am delighted to have been asked to
    speak at your breakfast seminar.
  • This morning I
    would like to address two issues:

    1. Work and
    family and

    2. Working in a sexually permeated or sexually hostile work environment.

  • Alone these issues
    are huge - each could be the subject of its own address.
  • The first issue
    is about you as women who work. The second is about you as women who
    work in a male dominated industry.
  • Both however
    are essentially about the same thing - the disadvantage faced by women
    in the workforce today.
  • Why at a time
    when more women are completing school, entering university and embarking
    on careers than ever before are we still talking about the workplace
    disadvantage faced by women? Why are we here this morning?
  • We are talking
    about it because there are still pay inequities; gender gaps in many
    professions; and the existence of a glass ceiling.
  • Women still only
    earn 84 cents to the male dollar; they still only account for 3 per
    cent of senior management positions; and they still only hold 1.3 per
    cent of executive positions.
  • Every year at
    the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission we receive complaints
    of sexual harassment and sex discrimination in the workplace and sexually
    permeated or sexually hostile work environments continue to exist.

    Sexually permeated
    or sexually hostile work environments

  • Working in the
    male dominated construction industry I am sure you are all too familiar
    with this type of work environment - if not through your own first hand
    experience, then through the experiences of your colleagues.
  • This is why we
    find organisations such as women in construction and women in policing.
    You need each other.
  • The display of
    pornographic material, the consistent talk about sex, the crude conversations
    and jokes and sexual innuendos often occur on male dominated work sites
    - that's why they are called sexually hostile workplaces.
  • It's just something
    you don't have to put up with because you are the 'sheila' amongst the
    'blokes'.
  • In a case involving
    the display of pornography on a construction site, which I will discuss
    in more detail later, it was held that one of the conditions of employment
    is quiet enjoyment of it. This concept not only includes freedom from
    physical intrusion or from being harassed, physically molested...but
    extends to not having to work in an unsought sexually permeated work
    environment.
  • For many women
    in male dominated industries quiet enjoyment of employment is not a
    given.
  • In fact, hostile
    work environments often act as a deterrent for women who have, despite
    earlier deterrents still made the decision to enter male dominated industries.

  • The attrition
    rate, for example, of female apprentices with a particular mining company
    in the 1990s was markedly higher than the male rate. Less than half
    of their female apprentices finished the four year apprenticeship (5
    out of 11) in the early 90s.[1] In the mid 90s this
    figure showed no sign of increasing - three out of five female apprentices
    cancelled their apprenticeships before they were finished.
  • The experiences
    of females in male dominated industries - in particular the reality
    of working in a sexually permeated work environment is undoubtedly a
    reason why women remain less inclined to enter these non-traditional
    areas.
  • Let me give you
    some examples of the type of sexually permeated workplaces that were
    deemed unacceptable by courts in recent years.



    Example One:

    Hopper v Mount Isa Mines Ltd and others (1997) EOC 92-87

  • A young woman
    began a diesel fitter mechanic apprenticeship with Mount Isa Mines.
    She hoped to qualify as a diesel fitter mechanic and use that qualification
    to gain entry to an engineering degree at university.
  • Initially there
    was a lot of resistance from the men at the company towards having a
    woman work underground. Objections were raised about the facilities,
    the roughness of the crew. The training foreman even admitted that female
    apprentices have to prove their worth in a way that another apprentice
    would not.
  • No training was
    given to the men, most of whom were working alongside women for the
    first time. The women would have to make all of the adjustments.
  • The female apprentice
    found that said that she got on well at the beginning, although there
    was some good natured joking about the fact that she and the other woman
    employed had got the job that the men in the company wanted.
  • From about six
    months into the apprenticeship, and until she resigned two years later,
    the woman was subject to sexual harassment and discrimination. While
    it was not continuous it was persistent throughout that period.
  • Apart from having
    to deal with personal slurs about her sex life, she had to work in a
    sexually permeated workplace - Playboy, Picture and People magazines
    were regularly strewn across tables in the eating area and there were
    posters of half dressed women throughout the mobile workshop and on
    walls and lockers underground.
  • The pictures
    disturbed the apprentice, but she faced a dilemma about what to do.
    She said that she wasn't offended by them because she didn't want to
    cause any trouble. She did not know how to complain without causing
    huge unrest where she was working.
  • When she was
    transferred to an underground copper mine nothing was done to prepare
    the work area for it's first female apprentice - no new toilet was installed
    and there was no privacy in the very primitive toilets that were there.

  • In fact there
    were no separate toilets in any of the mining areas she worked. The
    toilets were not very private so she was forced to go in the dark. She
    left her miner's light on outside to let people know she was in there.
    There were no doors to the toilets, merely a low wall in front of them
    separating them from the main tunnel. There were two toilets side by
    side in this manner. Modification would have been simple but it was
    not even thought about.
  • She was subject
    to assessment comments which were based on her gender - rather than
    her ability. For example, one assessor wrote of her performance, "unfortunately
    square pegs do not fit in round holes and a petite girl is way out of
    her depth in an underground environment. She is very pleasant to have
    around but a waste as far as being a useful tradesperson".
  • The apprentice
    quit after two years (the whole apprenticeship was for four years).
    She found herself unable to work in her chosen field. As a result she
    had to dramatically alter her career aspirations. She took the company
    to the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Tribunal.
  • The company was
    found liable for acts of sexual harassment committed against the female
    apprentice by various male employers over a period of several months.

  • She was awarded
    $48,742 in damages including compensation for hurt and humiliation and
    loss of income.
  • The company never
    ensured that supervisors passed on information about sexual harassment
    and sex discrimination to employees nor did it develop any system to
    educate employees about anti-discrimination and sexual harassment.
  • The tribunal also
    found that mining crews were not prepared for the induction of women
    into a previously all male workplace, a situation that was likely to
    cause problems if not managed properly.

    Example 2:


    Horne & McIntosh v Press Clough Joint Venture (1994) EOC 92-556

  • Two female construction
    workers were employed as trades assistants in 1990 to clean amenities
    and 'crib rooms' (recreation rooms) on a building site which employed
    nearly 3000 men. The women complained about a sexually explicit poster
    in a supervisor's office.
  • As a result, more
    posters and ones of an increasingly pornographic nature were placed
    around the building site. Clearly with the intention of angering, frightening
    and harassing the two women. The women were also subjected to verbal
    abuse and intimidation.
  • When the women
    sought assistance from the union organiser of the Metals and Engineering
    Workers' Union (MEWU), their complaints weren't taken seriously and
    more explicit nude posters were then displayed in the union office.

  • The women successfully
    brought a complaint of sexual harassment before the WA Equal Opportunity
    Tribunal against the Employer and the Union. The women were awarded
    $92,000 in damages.
  • This case was
    not about the censorship of pornographic images. It was about the right
    of women to work in a respectful environment where they are treated
    as equals.
  • Women, like all
    workers, deserve the right to work in respectful environments. They
    will not work in environments where they are not respected. They will
    not work sexually permeated work environments.
  • Most women do
    not complain. They express this dissent by not working in these fields
    or getting out. Low numbers of women in male dominated fields reflect
    this.
  • The construction
    industry for example, remains an area where women are poorly represented.

  • In fact, women
    in construction suffer more gender bias than women employed in any other
    industry in Australia.
  • The industry
    is also one of the poorest performing in Affirmative Action and Equal
    Employment Opportunity.
  • It is no wonder
    then that in May 2002 it was reported in the Royal Commission into the
    Building and Construction Industry that women, who make up 44 per cent
    of the overall workforce in Australia today, make up only 13 per cent
    of employees in this industry.
  • In 1998 the then
    Affirmative Action Agency found that the majority of women employed
    in the construction industry were in para-professional positions; the
    smallest group were those working in trades or as labourers.
  • Whether this figure
    is increasing or declining is debatable. In 1998 the then Affirmative
    Action Agency reported that 12 per cent of those employed in construction
    and building were women. We have then in 5 years a one per cent increase.

  • Alternatively,
    Victorian statistics show that since 1994 women's share of enrolments
    in the Building & Construction industry vocational education and
    training has declined from 5.9 percent to 4.3 percent in 2000.
  • This decline
    occurs at a time when women are steadily making inroads into other male
    dominated careers. The number of women studying engineering for example
    continues to increase annually. It also occurs as the proportion of
    female enrolments in vocational education and training (VET) in Victoria
    continues to gradually increase - from 45.6% in 1994 to 48.2% in 2000.

  • Why is this?

  • According to a
    study undertaken by a student at the University of Newcastle one of
    the reasons is because parents aren't encouraging their daughters to
    go into construction.
  • Lack of encouragement
    for young women to enter non traditional roles has always been a problem
    - and it is not just by parents.
  • Gender stereotypes
    prevail throughout society and influence the choices we all make.
  • School career
    advisors need to be educated on the opportunities for women in the construction
    industry and establishing effective promotional frameworks to challenge
    the stereotypes.
  • Women who have
    succeeded in the industry should act as mentors for other women and
    mentoring programs should be established for women while they are studying
    a career in construction.
  • How often do
    you hear how women are good communicators, best in people oriented jobs
    and caring professionsÂ…they are not good with numbers or operating
    machinery or in more technical jobs. Maybe it's been said about you.

  • Although not specifically
    sexual, these type of gender-related comments and stereotypes exist
    not only for young women, but for those women who, despite their 'unsuitable
    predisposition' decide that they do want to work in the construction
    industry.
  • According to the
    CFMEU complaints of overt sexual harassment in the construction industry
    have declined. What women do commonly experience however is an unwanted
    paternalism from their male colleagues - who seem to believe they need
    to be looked after and protected on construction sites.
  • This 'caring'
    behaviour is unwarranted and detrimental to women. It fosters the attitude
    that their position on a construction site is out of the ordinary, and
    not quite up to it. This makes it increasingly difficult for women to
    progress in this industry.
  • The impact of
    a sexually permeated environment on a women's career progress cannot
    be underestimated - if a work environment is unable to accommodate women's
    sanitary needs, it is unlikely that it will be able to accommodate the
    greater needs of women in the workforce - primarily the need to balance
    work and family.
  • It is so difficult
    for women in traditional areas of employment to achieve this balance.
    The problem is exacerbated for women in non-traditional areas of employment
    - where there are less women and more sexually hostile work environments.



    Workplace disadvantage as a result of having to balance work and
    family

  • I would like
    to use my remaining time to consider this broader issue, which is the
    root cause of the workplace and career disadvantage that women experience
    today whether working in traditional or non traditional areas of employment
    - the need to balance work and family.
  • How is it that
    men and women, who start out on their life journeys much the same end
    up in such vastly different circumstances in the workforce?
  • One reason dominates
    over all others.
  • Motherhood.
  • Between the ages
    of 20 and 24 for example, full time female employees earn about 92 per
    cent of what their male counterparts earn. [2]
  • This gap - although
    not enormous, should surprise us given the high numbers of female graduates
    and the almost 50-50 participation in all forms of post-secondary education.

  • It gets worse.

  • The average age
    at which women have their first child is now 29.8.
  • For men and women
    in full time work, after the age of thirty, overall that ratio is 84
    per cent.
  • Some of this is
    because the paid work women do is "undervalued", or women
    do not bargain as hard for wage increases as men, or even that women
    may be more contented on lower wages than men, but mostly it is because
    women choose jobs, even full time jobs, that enable them to put their
    families first.
  • These jobs pay
    less.
  • They do not take
    those periods of "acting manager" at the store on the far
    side of town, because it makes it harder to drop kids at school or pick
    them up afterwards.
  • They do not take
    the "acting promotion" interstate for two months because they
    cannot leave their children.
  • They try to leave
    the office on time because they have children to collect and care for.

  • Occasionally
    they ask for lunch hours at times that fit in with children's after-school
    needs, earning them the resentment of colleagues and the disapproval
    of their boss.
  • In the past women
    streamed themselves into careers that suited families, such as teaching
    and nursing, and got stuck in jobs that were undervalued precisely because
    they were done by women.
  • Apart from students
    and trainees, the largest group of part time and casual workers are
    mothers.
  • Part time and
    casual work, ironically, gives women the opportunity to fit around their
    families.
  • Sure, it is difficult
    to find well paid part time or casual work (the bulk is in hospitality
    and retail) and extremely difficult to find it at the professional or
    managerial end of the labour market, but it remains the preferred form
    of work for women with families.
  • It is a great
    pity that part time work is not better developed in Australia; although
    we have one of the most casualised work-forces in the world, and one
    of the highest proportions of part time workers, we do not have a systemic
    approach to part time work.
  • That is, it is
    very difficult to get part time work at a middle, let alone senior,
    level, while formal child care on a part-time or shift basis is almost
    impossible.
  • For this reason
    many women sit unhappily in full time jobs or leave the work force altogether,
    venturing back only as a casual nurse doing weekend night shifts when
    her partner can mind the kids, or doing a bit of evening waitressing
    or weekend work in a shop, again, when hubby can mind the kids.
  • This all occurs
    because not only are women the bearers of children, but they usually
    bear the major responsibility for the subsequent care of children.

Addressing female
workplace disadvantage

  • Highlighting the
    workplace disadvantage faced by women today does not need to be a frustrating
    experience. Rather it can be seen as setting the parameters of our challenge
    - ensuring we have a workforce that works for women.
  • It is not a challenge
    that we can address alone. There needs to be commitment from employers,
    all employees and all of society to making the workforce work for women.
  • As women who work
    we know how the workforce will work for us.
  • We can guide these
    changes so that the workforce fosters our needs and is a place where
    we are respected and not harassed.
  • As women in a
    male dominated industry do not tolerate sexually permeated workplaces.
    The outcome of the two cases I raised today send a message, loud and
    clear, that you do not have to.
  • Women in male
    dominated industries often have little contact with other women in their
    industries. Establish and foster contacts, generate discussion on issues
    relevant to you and don't keep it on the sidelines. Introduce mentoring
    programmes for women entering the construction industry.
  • You need to be
    proactive. We all do.
  • We need to work
    together to ensure that a suite of measures is introduced to adequately
    address the need to balance work and family. Paid maternity leave is
    part of this. But there is a bigger picture - we need to create a workforce
    that is more flexible in it's work practices and attitudes towards women
    - because we work, and we have children.

1.
See discussion in Hopper v Mount Isa Mines Ltd and others (1997) EOC 92-87.

2. ABS 6310.0 Employee Earnings and Benefits Catalogue
August 2001, 25.

Last
updated 16 August 2002