Gender equality has recently been a controversial topic in federal politics. In mid-June, Prime Minister Julia Gillard ignited debate between men and women – and amongst feminists – when she implied that many of the achievements women have made in recent years would be eroded if ?men in blue ties? were to return as policy makers after the September election. In the same week, the offensive humour of Perth radio personality Howard Sattler and a Brisbane restauranteur at a political party fundraiser, both about the PM?s personal life and body image, added further divisiveness to a sensitive issue. The basis for a rational debate about gender equality was lost in accusations of sexism and gender bias.
A fortnight earlier, the Australian Human Rights Commission provided a more articulate platform for debate when it launched a toolkit to encourage Australian businesses to formulate new strategies to recruit more women to the workforce. The AHRC stated that traditional male industries are not doing enough to attract female employees to non-traditional roles. Although they account for 46 per cent of Australian workers, the AHRC estimates that women constitute 12 per cent of construction, 15 per cent of mining and 23 per cent of utilities.
Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick and Goldman Sachs supported the AHRC?s message. Broderick argued that recruiting women to traditional male industries will improve gender equality and raise industry performance. Goldman Sachs concluded from its own data that narrowing male and female employment rates in traditional male industries could boost Australia?s GDP by 11 per cent.
It will take decades to truly redress the gender balance in workforce participation rates for traditional male industries. The finger shouldn?t be pointed solely at quarrying, mining and construction. Having worked across numerous industries, I?ve seen first hand the disparity in gender representation. The medical profession has historically been shaped along gender lines (male doctors, female nurses). Office administration has usually been the province of women while my own stomping ground of communications has been habitually male.
It?s pleasing, though, to see that all of these industries are undergoing gradual transformations, some faster than others. Female doctors, male nurses, male secretaries and female journalists are now the ?norm? (indeed, men are becoming a ?minority? in the communications fields). The graduates coming into these sectors are 50 per cent men and 50 per cent women. I believe this trend is occurring in quarrying and mining.
In his Quarry editorial last October, IQA President Wayne Scott acknowledged that while women may constitute five per cent of the Institute?s membership, the positive is that the influx of younger members has raised the percentage of female members. This trend is consistent amongst the other industries I?ve mentioned and if it continues, young women ? and young men ? have cause for optimism about their future careers.
In the last five years, I?ve met many women in the quarrying industry, from marketing professionals to geologists to operators to company directors; all were effusive about the industry. One of them is Ngaire Baker, a marketing professional who earlier this year was named on a list of the ten most influential women in mining. She was buoyant about her 25 years in the industry, saying that women are now in more prominent roles on mining sites than ever before. She also previously worked for Orica, which she praised as a company at the forefront of promoting diversity in mining and for employing women in non-traditional roles.
While some businesses today lag in promoting equal opportunity environments for women and men and there are still outdated notions about whether women can ?cut it? in traditional male industries, the indications are that most businesses are adapting to social and technological change and seek the best applicants for jobs. And that?s critical. From the discussions I?ve had with quarrying women, the last thing a woman wants – from the Prime Minister down – is to be appointed to a specific role because she is a woman. She wants to be there on her own merits and to be judged solely on her performance.
DAMIAN CHRISTIE
Editor
POSTSCRIPT
This editorial was printed shortly before the political overhaul of Wednesday 26 June, 2013, which saw Kevin Rudd (a man who has never shied away from wearing blue ties) succeed Julia Gillard as Prime Minister of Australia.