Sexism isn’t dead.
Many would argue women now have equal opportunity and discussions of gender discrimination are completely useless. But the past week has been a mixed bag in terms of gender discrimination case outcomes, with Ellen Pao losing her gender discrimination suit and the Supreme Court ruling in Young v. UPS Inc. that employers must provide accommodations for pregnant women.
Laws and court decisions can play key roles in helping to end discrimination in the workplace, but in the U.S. they have not gone far enough. The U.S. government has an opportunity to play a much more active role in the fight for gender equality, if they decide to take it on.
While legislation and court decisions have helped gender equality, there is still a long way to go. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 extended the time period for reporting pay discrimination, which was a much needed improvement, but it does not account for the problems that exist higher up in a company that could contribute to pay inequality.
A lot of issues relating to sexism in the workplace stem from the fact that there are few women at the helm. The European Union recently passed legislation requiring a gender balance on corporate boards, something that the U.S. can and should emulate. Why are we surprised that a corporate board full of men will not come up with women-friendly corporate policies? Waiting for things to get better rarely results in any beneficial change, and the old boys’ club of corporate America has no reason to change the status quo.
As of 2014, there were about 3,000 more female undergraduate students than male undergraduate students enrolled at UF, according to Niche. Women, in general, are more likely to attend college. And while a lot of them won’t go into corporate jobs, these prospects make job possibilities look bleak for women currently in college. What are we really working toward if we know the system is stacked against us? This means women must be hired in such small numbers for some reason other than their qualifications.
Even if women do get these jobs, the pay gap is still wide. At many workplaces, discussing salary is prohibited, so they have no way of finding out. Increasing the number of women on corporate boards would ultimately lead to more women-friendly policies at companies, especially since many women still fear being penalized or set back by the decision to have children.
Making a work environment hostile to women does not have to be overt. It can result from unconscious biases, which are much harder to police. That doesn’t mean Congress shouldn’t try.
Of course, as the saying goes, the fish rots from the head down. Congress ultimately decides what standard workplaces will be held to; and it is still predominantly white, male and heterosexual. Any standards of gender equality it imposes will come off as the pot calling the kettle black. It’s hard to understand issues you’ve never seen happen. Simply having a sister, mother or wife does not make someone well-versed in women’s issues.
Obviously, having a female CEO is probably not going to fix all of a company’s problems with these issues. But I hope one day we will live in a world where the announcement of a female CEO is not newsworthy, and a company that accommodates pregnancy is not lauded as exceptional.
Nicole Dan is a UF political science freshman.
[A version of this story ran on page 7 on 3/30/2015 under the headline “Sexism in the workplace still exists”]
