
But what happens when prime directive meets profit motive? Knowing what we know about how powerful and effective women are in the knowledge economy, we look at societies which oppress women and shake our heads. “How primitive!” we say. “What an enormous lost opportunity for that society! They’re writing off 50% of their talent pool – how can they ever hope to compete with us?” But then I look at the maternity policies of the majority of employers and the attitudes those policies espouse in the organisations’ cultures and I think to myself, “At least the Taliban are up-front.”
We, as a society, been playing footsie with this issue since ‘Equality’ legislation hit the statute books; but we’ve never really had the conversation. In Ireland, in my lifetime, women had to give up their jobs when they got married. That was later relaxed to them having to give up their jobs as soon as they had a child. And then in 1973, the Employment Equality Act became the law of the land, precluding discrimination against an employee under nine headings:
- Age
- Gender
- Marital status
- Family status
- Sexual orientation
- Religious beliefs
- Race
- Disability
- Membership of the Traveller community
RSS Readers may need to click through to the post
In Australia, there was legislation that allowed the state to remove Aboriginal children from their families at will – and this legislation was only overturned in the 1960s. In the country that describes itself as having, “The mother of all Parliaments,” they used to send small children up chimney pipes as sweeps. You’re not supposed to be able to get away with that kind of double standard any more. The world is smaller, we’re better-educated and information now moves instantaneously. All this is supposed to close the gap between what we as a society say and what we as a society do.
It’s time to have a grown-up conversation.
Related posts:
The glass ceiling
Motherhood and career?
Children – asset or liability?