Reply With QuoteHave you tried gender reassignment?
Bet you thought this would be about how women are unfairly treated in industry and suffer gender pay gap.
Well, no.
I’m finding the opposite at the moment. In the desperation to quickly rebalance the industry I work in (natural resources), if you ain’t got a skirt on, you ain’t getting promoted to senior positions. Every advertised internal position has to have a female application. Full stop.
Even the female co-workers joke that now you need a vag to get on in the company.
Have you tried gender reassignment?
It's just a matter of time...
I’ll try the skirt option first, thanks.Originally Posted by Omegamanic
My moobs are a good start.
Last edited by noTAGlove; 4th April 2018 at 22:51.
Make sure to hide your hands,they are always a giveaway
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
If you're a proud man, flop John Thomas out on the desk and take it from there.....
This doesn't address the gender pay gap, it exacerbates it. What seems to have happened in a lot of areas is that for given roles, a majority of older men at the top of a salary scale is being eroded by a growing minority of younger women at the bottom. For a number of reasons, some tied up with the recent climate of austerity, those women don't move up the scale as quickly as men.
Last edited by raysablade; 5th April 2018 at 19:50.
I guess you now know how generations of capable women have felt forever!
Why would you say that? It sounds more like revenge rather than equality.
Despite massive efforts at my work they still struggle to attract female applicants for senior positions. One of our HR ladies told me that it’s a real issue and she believes its because women still shoulder so much responsibility at home that they don’t want the hassle that also comes with a senior role at work. She said she’s been given this reasoning many times when approaching internal famale candidates to suggest they should apply for senior positions. I can’t see the situation changing very quickly to be honest.
Yeah. Rebalancing an industry definitely = vengeance.
Erm... Not what I meant. The tone of what I quoted sounded personal, bitter and with a hint of "women have had it for years, see how you like it..." about it.
Last edited by Ventura; 5th April 2018 at 21:54. Reason: Grammar
In fairness, they have.
Great interview on R4 yesterday with a social statistician. His view the current stats are meaningless. Slewed by a few high earning positions (working 80+ hrs a week at CEO, CFO, COO levels). Not many sensible woman prepared to do that. So testosterone driven males tend to make the whole workplace look misogynistic!
Not saying there isn’t discrimination. Just that the governments current approach is too simplistic to prove anything.
Sent from TZ-UK app on an iPhone
Whatever happened to employing the best ‘person’ for the job.
I hear exactly what the OP is saying. I too work for a natural resources organisation and we are now verging on positive descrimination. The right person for the job now is definitely skewed. We 'joke' saying if you're male, pale or stale your days are numbered....
Try academia...
This was from discussion pursuant to the election held for a very eminent professorship in my field. From the mouth of one of the electors during closed discussion:
'He's the greatest living scholar in the discipline, yes, and we can all agree on that, but he's also a white man... and it's our duty to take that into account'.
He didn't get the job.
The old boys network, glass ceilings, generations of gender inequality, rampant sexism and discrimination and a general lack of transparency in recruitment and selection processes generally combine to ensure that the best person rarely gets the job.
SWMBO is an HR BP and just went through the pay gap reporting. She works part-time (Basically not on a Monday) since going back from maternity with our second child, 2 years ago. Last night she told me she was putting together a case for a pay rise for herself as she’s taken on most of an outgoing Director’s role.
In the same breath she told me how an informal offer for the step up had been made.
She doesn’t want to do it because it would mean being away more from us. I am fine with both the extra disposable and the time she would spend away...
As much as I wish she was for the sake of mankind, my wife is not unique.
If by ‘best’ you mean the best fit of capabilities, when has that ever been the case for senior roles?
Guess I got lucky then, in the business I worked in if you didn’t cut it then you wouldn’t last long
no matter what level that was at.
I don't know what the fuss is all about, in almost 20 years working in banking and finance all but 1 of my bosses or heads of department have been female. Gender inequality my ring, theyve been hoovering up all the juicy roles for decades.
There is some fatuous nonsense written about this topic.
There is non such thing as 'positive' discrimination; if you think there is you are either bitter and vengeful or a moron.
People with influence will always do their best to get there kids into the best jobs - whether that's in terms of pay or simply being a fulfilling career. Get over it, if you were a parent and your kid wanted to do something difficult to get into and you had influence you'd try to make it happen for them. And if you didn't use your influence, frankly you're a crap parent. And FYI parents love their daughters too which is why fashion and other cool jobs that are hard to get into are dominated by privately educated women.
You can't fix perceived problems with actual discrimination. Even the average child knows that two wrongs don't make a right.
Finally an anecdote: I work in a very male industry (investment management). I know that very few women who want to to do it, so it's not sexism. Over the past few years, going back probably 15, whenever we've had a graduate program (wherever I've worked), we'd be lucky to get 1 female application for every 20 male applications. Despite that, everywhere I've worked has gone out of their way to employ as many of the female applicants as possible. One place I worked had 4 places and about 70 applicants. Two of them were female, both of which got the job and I've seen this pattern several times now. Our industry is desperate to attract more women (I'd guess purely for PR). The result is that if you apply and yore a woman it's almost a guaranteed job as long as you don't cock up the interview too bad, if you're male and trying, your odds of getting a job are pretty much halved.
Instead of getting rid of the old boys network, this whole thing entrenches it. I'm at a small company now but say we had these ludicrous quotas. There 6 people including me doing my job. All men, 4 went to Eton, 1 went to Ampleforth and i went to a comp. Guess who'd be first on the chopping block to get canned if we decided increase balance based on some utterly arbitrary characteristic like genitalia? It aint gonna be the old Etonians that's for sure. So excuse me if I don't jump on bored with the 'let's screw over the pale male workers' brigade.
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
Not such an off the wall idea!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/.../#693374b56199
Have you ever wondered why so few women apply for roles in your industry? Presumably you enjoy it and it is generally very well paid. Is there something about men in general that means investment management appeals and something about women in general that puts them off?
As they use the median and not the mean I don't know how a few high earning positions can slew the results. I work in one of the 14% with a pay gap that favours women. A distribution curve would be more useful but not so good for headines.
We've probably all seen examples of utter idiots employed in 'senior' roles, I can think of at least a handful over the years, people that turn up one day as managers with sod all experience, strange thing is when they inevitably fail they always seem to get another decent post.
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
Yes and my conclusion is that men and women are different. Damn near the same as holocaust denial in 2018 but there we go. Whenever I speak to women about my job, invariably they aren't interested but a fair few men are.
Radically altering human interactions in order to bring about some utopian idea of equality is going to achieve nothing good.
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
Its social evolution. There is an equality imbalance that is being addressed, lets not dress it up in pejorative terms, such as "reverse discrimination". Nonsense.
No doubt there are plenty here that fondly remember the "No dogs, no blacks, no Irish" sign, whose corners curled on the door of their local boozer.
Before you beat me with your well fingered copy of the Daily Mail, guess what, the best person very rarely gets the job, for a variety of reasons. Deal with it. Best to throw the door to applicants as wide open as possible and try to get as close to the 'best' person for the job.
Now that we have dealt with racism, disability, age and sex as basis' for discrimination, lets tackle the so called 'old boys' networks and the Freemasons, both poisonous, suppurating blights on commercial equality.
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
Fairly certain that 'no Irish...' thing is a myth
https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...-dogs-no-proof
Also saying people no doubt fondly remember them is a pretty crappy way of implying people who don't agree with you are morally deficient.
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
It’s not just women who don’t want to work 80+ hrs per week.
Has that ever been the case?! Genuine question because I do t think it has...I agree the best person should be recruited but that doesn’t seem to be the way it works, certainly the higher you go in any organisation!
I guess what you have to look at is whether women are put off by something intrinsic to investment management, or something about the way the job is generally done. I also work in a male dominated profession, IT, and some years ago I made myself take a hard look at the same thing.
It turns out that plenty of women enjoy problem solving, design, managing teams, working with different groups of people across a business, learning new skills and having to stay ahead of new developments.
Not so many enjoy late night pizza and beer sessions to get a project finished, especially if they have kids to get home to (generally women do the lion’s share of that even if both partners work). They might prefer to work harder during the day. Blokey meetings dominated by banter and point scoring don’t generally appeal, whereas relationship building does. I could go on.
I hired a women recently who I had worked with before, so I know she is the best in her field I have ever worked with. She is a small woman with a quiet voice. In her first few weeks in the new job a few other senior execs interpreted that as meekness and timidity because their model of ‘leadership’ is a shouty man making ‘bold’ statements (ie BS).
Equality doesn’t mean making everyone the same, just allowing people to be personally different and still do a good job.
That's never really been true because bias exists everywhere. How else can you explain Alan Pardew ;)
Well, there used to be a publican in Dalston that would show you that exact sign, which he used to have on his door. So he said.
Regardless, the implication was that there are members on the forum that engage in casual discrimination, and it is their disagreement I was anticipating.
Society is premised on inequality. The gender pay gap is just another distraction.
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
Posting Permissions
