{"id":1346,"date":"2025-08-06T22:13:55","date_gmt":"2025-08-06T12:13:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/?p=1346"},"modified":"2026-03-07T23:00:57","modified_gmt":"2026-03-07T12:00:57","slug":"gender-inequality-in-australian-workplaces-are-you-tired-of-hearing-we-need-to-do-more-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/2025\/08\/06\/gender-inequality-in-australian-workplaces-are-you-tired-of-hearing-we-need-to-do-more-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Gender inequality in Australian workplaces – are you tired of hearing we need to do more? (Part 2)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Roman Ru\u017eback\u00fd<\/a><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March 8, 2016<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the eve of International Women\u2019s Day, I began to hear once again the familiar sounds of CEOs and politicians responding to the calls for action in tackling gender inequality in Australian workplaces, with the following familiar catch phrases, \u201cThere\u2019s more to do\u2026. We must do more \u2026..We have a long way to go\u2026.Everyone needs to play a role here\u2026 We need to work together\u2026\u2026We have to ensure that all women have\u2026.. It\u2019s the right thing to do\u2026\u201d It appears to be a reoccurring theme.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is this humility, an apology, laziness or complacency? Are these throw away lines that feed our hopelessness about the situation? Stagnation? Statistics that won\u2019t improve? I can\u2019t use \u2018glacial movement\u2019 anymore because even our glaciers are melting away faster than our pay gap. I\u2019d prefer to hear .. \u201cWe have thrown everything at it\u2026. We are doing everything we can\u2026 We have left no stone unturned\u2026..\u201d This narrative would give me more hope.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau was asked by a reporter why he decided to put 15 men and 15 women in his Cabinet. His answer was a short one: \u201cBecause it\u2019s 2015,\u201d he said, to cheers and applause from the audience. I applauded at my laptop when I first read the article on-line. Underneath this statement lays a deeper understanding of the issues that lead to this magnificent outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When we talk about gender inequity, we usually find ourselves engaging in deficit language. This is because the evidence shows that it is not an even playing field between men and women in Australian workplaces (WGEA, researchers, et al..). And, if I were to look through an organisation\u2019s gender compliance report, of which most are available to the public, I will most certainly find some gaps. I haven\u2019t seen an ASX 500 publish a zero percent pay gap to date, not to be confused with in-band pay gaps, as one CEO did on Q&A.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, how do I engage in a conversation about gender equality in my workplace and make someone care enough about it? Does the layperson need some basic proficiency in the science\/evidence of gender inequity? Just enough to know what is going on? I look at my partner\u2019s superannuation statements and they tell me enough. To work in gender equity, I had to first eliminate my own self-interest, understand my own privilege and get a better appreciation of my own gender blindness, such as the value of unpaid and invisible work. My skills sets have been further developed since I became a stay at home dad for the past five months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So you have a supportive and inclusive culture (and you believe it) .\u2026what next? Gender inequity needs to be explained with more rigour starting with the Stupid Curve (representation) and explanation of the pay gap between men and women. Employees should know their organisation’s pay gap and what it actually means? Most organisations are secretive about their pay gap. However, if I were to do some math based on workplace profile data, it would be too difficult to estimate.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lack of representation women in executive positions is more obvious. Look on enough company websites to see homogeneity alive and well in Australian workplaces as well as a lack of visible difference. Organisations need to get better at explaining why gender inequity exists in their organisation and perhaps be more transparent about the parts they may perceive as contentious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A combination of complex variables come into play when examining how gender equity operates in Australian workplaces. Establishing a longitudinal evidence base, drilling into aggregate organisational data (which can mask what is happening layers down an organisation), critically interpreting the data and understanding the complexity and connections between different evidence (data sets), prior to having the conversation with an executive about their gender KPIs, would prepare you for a conversation about effective strategy. And before I open my mouth to speak about gender equity, I usually anticipate with great certainty that I will be told, \u201cWe\u2019re all about merit based selection\u201d, \u201cWe don\u2019t have the pool of women\u201d or \u201cWe had 100 men apply for that engineering job, no women\u201d. This has changed from the old \u201cI don\u2019t see discrimination here\u201d (we hope).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here are a few points that I hope will to add to your evidence based discussion, familiar to those who work in gender equity and useful for those who are new to the area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. The\u00a0“Stupid Curve”<\/strong>\u00a0demonstrates that Australian companies are wasting a significant amount of the internal talent. Whilst the percentage of women graduating from universities has been over 55% for the past 15 years (AFR – Alan Olsen), the transition into executive, director and CEO level is low. Organisations select nearly 90% of their leaders from only 50% of the workforce (the male half). As a result, the other 50% (the female half) of the workforce is overlooked and underutilised. Longitudinal data may also show a slower rate of transition of women in senior positions than men. I usually bring a copy of the graph when speaking with executives about their gender KPIs.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    When overlaying your organisation\u2019s workplace profile data on this curve you will be able to quickly establish if your organisation has a similar curve. You will also be able to identify if there is a pool shortage (for example in STEM disciplines) or whether this is a myth that needs debunking. You can also establish the rate the pool of women and men move into senior leadership positions via promotion, exit and recruitment. You can also drill into the different portfolios and make comparisons with the organisation\u2019s or industry\u2019s aggregate data. Different areas will have different challenges which then allows for the design of tailored gender equity plans, further measurement, then further redesign and implementation. You could also overlay your graph with women from CALD backgrounds, Indigenous women, parents, non-parents, lgbtiq, disability, and apologies if I left anyone out. You may be able to pinpoint the glass escalator, glass ceiling and glass cliff in your graph.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What you\u2019re also trying to demonstrate is the potential limitations of homogenous leadership, the lack of multiple perspectives in decision making, not utilising the pool of talent available to you and potentially not being reflective of the customers or community you serve. After a few years of helping to run a gender summit for a STEM university faculty, I heard a senior male leader say, \u201cIf we had gender parity, we would double our enrolments\u201d. I use this quote often.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    2. In exploring factors that contribute to the Stupid Curve<\/strong>, you will find some that may be beyond an organisation\u2019s control, for example, child care availability, affordability and the lower participation rate of women in the workforce (59% in 2015), compared to 71% for men (WGEA). The participation rate of men with children between 0 and 5 was 94%. Women experience higher under-employment and are usually over-represented in the casual pool.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    3. Another factor that contributes to the Stupid Curve is the impact of career breaks on women, the intersection of potential age and sex discrimination around the ages of 25 to 45 (potential pregnancy, pregnancy, maternity leave and return from maternity leave), gaps in parents\u2019 employment history and being too expensive to employ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

     4. Job design is another critical issue that contributes to the Stupid Curve that can\u2019t be fixed by flexible working arrangements alone. Drilling into your workplace profile data and checking the number of part time women and men occupying senior positions will give an indication if this figure is low. If it is, does this suggest that your organisation\u2019s management positions can\u2019t be done part time or by job share arrangement? Do your part time employees try to fit five days work into three? What is their reality?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

     5. In relation to unconscious bias, I often feel that this the new buzz word used to hide the fact that you may have been discriminating. However, unconscious bias training should help to raise your gender consciousness and gain a better understanding of your own power, privilege and affinity bias, with the result of you making conscious decisions to be more inclusive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

     6. The pay gap<\/strong> between men and women, which reached its highest point of 18.8% in November 2014 and hasn\u2019t improved in 25 years, seems like the immovable mountain. The gender pay gap is largely structural and caused by the over-representation of men at senior levels with a corresponding over-representation of women at the junior classifications. The best way I can explain the structural issue in lay person\u2019s terms, is that if you had 10 men and 10 women earning $10 a day; that\u2019s $100 paid to your all of your women and $100 paid to all of your men. The average total remuneration for your men and women would be $10 respectively, resulting in a 0% gap. If you were to then introduce an additional 10 women into your organisation and pay them $2 a day, then your total number of women in your organisation would be 20 and the total amount paid to your women would be $120. $120\/20 women equates to $6 a day for your women whilst your men are paid $10 a day. There\u2019s your 40% pay gap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The pay gap between men and women at executive level is also a contributing factor to the organisation\u2019s overall gender pay gap where bonuses and incentives are awarded\/eared by executives. Usually the level of responsibility and complexity of their portfolio results in a higher total remuneration than other employees in their portfolio. When drilling down into your organisational data, presenting the data with and without your executive\u2019s remuneration helps to get a more accurate reflection of the portfolio\u2019s pay gap. In band pay gaps, usually at each classification level, are different to the organisation\u2019s overall pay gap and many of these gaps may be close to 0% because of fixed pay rates. Care needs to be taken that your ongoing and fixed term employee pay equity data is separated from your causal employee pay equity data as the casual data will dilute your overall pay gap and make your overall gap much lower, usually due to the higher number of women in your causal cohort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    However, a hidden pay gap which is very difficult to measure, and I saw live and well in a HR department, was women at lower classification levels working above their classification level and being paid less than their male counterparts. In order to secure a reclassification, they had to demonstrate working at a higher level for a sustained period. This is where the equal pay for work of equal value is truly tested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    7. Finally, one factor that may be a real contributor to gender inequity and other forms of inequity is workloads<\/strong>. The Australian workplace has changed since my parent\u2019s day to the point where it is unrecognizable. Research by the Australia Institute, The Hard to Get a Break Report (2013), showed that \u201cMore than half of Australia’s workers were unhappy with their working hours and an estimated 2.9 million lost sleep because of work stress. The amount of unpaid overtime Australian workers donated to employers has also jumped from an estimated $72 billion in 2009 to $110 billion. Rhetoric around flexible workplaces and the advantages of new technology often did not match reality. The current labour environment was creating high levels of stress, depression and poor sleep patterns for many Australians, with adverse effects on their health, family life and relationships\u201d. So whilst I agree that flexible working arrangements have a part to play in addressing gender inequity, organisations need to also address workloads and other blockages, for example, email traffic and our freeways becoming car parks, that impact our quality of life and add significant stress to all employees, in particular those who do unpaid work, or need to juggle parental and carer responsibilities, people with disability, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    So as I look ahead and see how I can personally contribute to gender equality in my personal and professional life, I\u2019m going to steer clear from the usual \u2018We need to do more’ catchcries and work on building the evidence base and my \u201cIt\u2019s 2016\u201d mantra.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Roman Ruzbacky<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Roman Ru\u017eback\u00fd March 8, 2016 On the eve of International Women\u2019s Day, I began to hear once again the familiar sounds of CEOs and politicians responding to the calls for action in tackling gender inequality in Australian workplaces, with the following familiar catch phrases, \u201cThere\u2019s more to do\u2026. We must do more \u2026..We have a long … <\/p>\n

    Continue reading “Gender inequality in Australian workplaces – are you tired of hearing we need to do more? (Part 2)”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1346","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1346"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1347,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346\/revisions\/1347"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.romanruzbacky.com.au\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}