Skip to content

office of women banner

Review of the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 – Submission

James Cook University - Dr Lesley Clark

Introduction

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the review of the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 and Agency.

James Cook University has promoted equal opportunity for women since the introduction of the Affirmative Action legislation in 1986, and even before. For example, JCU was in the vanguard of Australian employers in introducing paid maternity leave during the mid 1970s. Several years after the introduction of the Affirmative Action (Equal Opportunity for Women)Act 1986, James Cook University's statutory annual reports on Affirmative Action were chosen by the Affirmative Action Agency as the model for reports for small to medium size organizations. The University has consistently been granted the maximum period of waived status from reporting in recognition of the quality of its programs of equal employment opportunity for women - the current period endures until 2010.

The University Plan People and Culture Goal PC4 is Leadership and Management – To recognise that the University requires good leadership at

all levels and a strong management culture to be an employer of choice. One of the KPI’s for this objective is % of Female Staff in senior positions. Strategies in the University Plan include “Provide opportunities and an inclusive organisational culture for more women and minority group members to be in leadership roles. The university requires compliance with its Equal Opportunity policy to implement this strategy.

James Cook University's programs for female staff have resulted in increases in the numbers of female staff employed at higher levels. In 1986, there was only one female Professor and one female Associate Professor. In 2009, there are 12 female Professors and 22 female Associate Professors, and a female Vice-Chancellor.

Response to Issues paper

The numbers below correspond with the numbers in the Issues Paper. Please note that comments have not been submitted on all themes and questions

[ top ]

1. The value and impact of equal employment opportunity for women

1.1 The factors and measures that have contributed to improving employment opportunities for women

1.2 Obstacles that may impede further progress towards eeo within organizations and in Australia generally

1.4 Government’s regulatory role in achieving EEO for women

[ top ]

2. Objects and coverage of the EOWW Act

2.1 Relevance of EOWW Act’s Objectives to today’s workplace

It would be difficult to argue that employment on the basis of merit, the elimination of discrimination, and the facilitation of workplace consultation are not relevant, or that they do not contribute to eeo, or that they have been achieved already. Objective measures - for example, the statistics on the employment of women - would not support a contention that the Act is no longer relevant.

2.2 Effectiveness of the EOWW Act in meeting its objects

Success has been variable. It would be difficult to argue that all meritorious women now have an equal chance of being employed and of succeeding within employment, or that unfair discrimination has been eliminated, or even that workplace consultation is as commonplace or as effective as it should be. This may be no more than to say that the Act’s work is not yet complete. If the current employment situation is compared with that of 1986 or even of 1999, certain improvements are evident, both statistically and in the rejection of unacceptable values and practices.

2.3 Contribution of EOWW Act to improvement of women’s employment opportunities

The EOWW Act has played a major part in improving Australian women’s employment opportunities. Many of the major changes of the last ten years have come about through the Act’s requirements for compliance, sometimes directly, sometimes through a ripple or trickle down effect. Examples include:

2.5 Coverage of the Act

Coverage in terms of size of organization is about right in terms of available resources. Decreasing the eligibility for coverage to some lesser number – say 50 - employees has great attraction, as so many women work in these smaller organizations, but may well be unrealistic. Despite comments made under 1.2 above, unless EOWA were given vastly increased resources, such a change may have the effect of undermining the areas where the Act is currently effective by spreading EOWA’s resources beyond breaking point. The coverage of categories of employment presents difficulties for organizations which have large numbers of casual employees, particularly when the term “casual” embraces not only people who work regularly for only a few hours, some who work only for designated periods of the year, and some who work on only a one-off or “guest” basis. EOWA’s requirements in the composition of staff seem to be in excess of the requirements of the Act.

[ top ]

3. Workplace programs, reporting and compliance

3.1 Organizational response to barriers to women’s employment

A major breakthrough was the recognition that there were and are barriers. In 1986, many organizations and their CEOs were vociferous in denial re this. Then there was a period (around 2004 – 2005) when the recognition that barriers had existed changed to a denial that they existed any longer. In terms of effectiveness, human resource practice and workplace relations seem most far-reaching in breaking down barriers, in that changes driven by senior management have the greatest likelihood of implementation. Among the most important requirement is a change in organizational culture, but this is successfully achieved only by modeling and example, not by preaching to the converted. The introduction of internal KPIs and benchmarks can be useful in bringing about behavioural change which sometimes brings much-needed attitudinal change in its wake.

3.2 Value of Act’s workplace program requirements

Given that it is necessary for the legislation to have a “one size fits all” approach to cater for various industries and types of workplaces, the requirements are acceptable. EOWA has shown some flexibility in taking account of these variations in assessing compliance.

3.3 Usefulness of developing workplace programs

Workplace programs, based on the workplace profile, give a helpful means of measuring progress and success, particularly for organizations starting analysis. Many higher education institutions have moved well beyond this basic level.

3.4 Nexus of workplace programs to improved employment opportunities

The nexus is strong. For example, the review of Academic Promotion at JCU has led to improved policies and practices that have been of benefit to women and to increased application and success rates among female staff.

3.5 EOWW Act’s requirements for report contents

The Act says little about report content. Most of the requirements are dictated by EOWA. A report is a public document. Therefore organizations are going to be intent upon showing themselves in the best possible light. The Act and EOWA’s requirements do not address effectively the problems increased casualization brings. The full picture of the slowness of the culture change in particular areas can be masked by institution-wide numbers.

3.6 Frequency of reporting and waiving requirements.

Annual reporting is too frequent for all but recalcitrant employers who have been shown to be avoiding their obligations. Reporting every two years allows an appropriate time in which to evaluate trends, but not so long as to lose momentum. If a biennial process were to be introduced, it may be possible to eliminate waiving, which would free up some resources in EOWA for facilitative work. It must be pointed out that, to maintain momentum in a program, regular internal monitoring of the staff profile is essential.

3.7 Resource intensity of reporting requirements

The answer to this question must vary from industry to industry. Experience in the Higher Education sector has shown that approximately six (6) weeks is required for preparation of a compliance report that also satisfies the waiving requirements. This includes the onerous though valuable gathering and analysis of necessary statistical information. According to EOWA’s previous rubrics, for some industries or small to medium size businesses , a report of only a few pages is considered sufficient for compliance. This would not be acceptable from a university.

3.8 Usefulness of reporting requirements

Despite comments of section 3.7 above, it must be admitted that the report is a most useful document and one of the most effective ways of drawing attention to deficiencies as well as achievements. The quantitative data give greater force than qualitative arguments.

3.9 Effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms

Naming in Parliament applies only to entirely recalcitrant employers who have failed to submit a report and rejected the offers of assistance of EOWA to assist them. Ineligibility for government contracts will affect only a proportion of employers.

3.11 Analysis of costs and benefits of reporting

No quantitative analysis has been undertaken, except for calculation of salary costs. See paragraph 3.8 for a qualitative comment.

[ top ]

4. Role and activities of EOWA

4.1 Value of EOWA’s functions

EOWA’s educational and research functions are the most effective in that they generally fill a role not otherwise addressed, but some are more effective than others. For example, the pay equity tool is at best problematic. It will obtain information at the lower levels, but does not prevent the masking of higher level differentials. Its value is doubtful.

4.2 EOWA’s role in promoting public discussion of eeo for women

Along with a very few large high-profile private companies, universities have been in the vanguard of promoting equal opportunity measures. Greater recognition of this role by EOWA would be appreciated, and could be used internally to good effect. Any knowledge of EOWA and its functions within organizations is likely to be the result of work by eo practitioners rather than EOWA itself.

[ top ]

5. Relationship with other legislation and institutions

5.1 Nexus of EOWW Act with other legislation

The EOWW Act complements the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, and certain state laws, all of which contribute to prevention of discrimination as well as to understanding of its operation. The SDA provides a reactive provision for sexual harassment. The EOWW Act is facilitative – it requires employers to establish a culture which inhibits the occurrence of sexual harassment so that there should be no need for a reaction. There appears to be some overlap in program and reporting requirements between the EOWW Act and certain state legislation – for example, in NSW and WA. This should be examined and unnecessary duplication eliminated.

5.3 Independence of EOWA

Any entity which has the authority to make public statements about a public body, such as a university, requires independence, in that the statements should be based on expert assessment. Combination with any other authority presents the risk that potentially damaging statements may be issued on a basis other than that of experience and expertise.

[ top ]

6. Measuring the success of the EOWW Act and EOWA

6.1 Measurement Mechanisms

There are some difficulties in the definition of the word ‘Manager”. EOWA has used the same definition used by the former AVCC (HEWL 10 and above and Academic Level C and above). In fact, appointment at or promotion to Level C denotes achievement of a standard primarily in research and teaching. Many Academics at that level have few responsibilities that fit with the commonly understood meaning of “management”.

6.2 Adequacy of EOWA measures

The figures for Higher Education and school education (non-government primary and secondary) are conflated. This skews the higher education statistics and gives a distorted view of the progress of women in higher education. The figures need to be separated.


[ top ]