Section B explored a range of things that can go wrong despite the existence of EO policy and objective HR systems, as well as different ways to manage, and pre-empt the negative human factors that can compromise or fully negate promotion, transfer and termination decisions.

Take a positive approach to eliminating sex discrimination and gender bias by determining what processes need to be introduced or tightened-up in your workplace, to eliminate the negative impact of the human factors highlighted.

Consider this checklist below and grow your awareness of the many guises human bias can take, for example:

• the redundancy process that lacks transparency with respect to how and why certain jobs are selected, with certain people rather than jobs potentially being targeted
• decisions about what individuals should be entitled to, or what options they should be permitted to access, are gender bias due to the personal views and mindset of the decision maker
• treatment that appears fair and neutral due to the stringent application of a rule, in the end one group is treated less favourably than another
• the emergence of a stigma associated with older workers, inadvertently fostered by management views about youth
• the assumed personal circumstances of an individual factored into the process that determines who is to be offered redundancy
• misuse of the terminology “flexible” providing a picture that what is being offered is above and beyond a woman’s legal entitlement, when in fact its mandatory and there is no requirement to trade off terms and conditions
• management inability to move beyond basic EO and make the connection between what is offered to women, what is denied of women and what is asked of women, and gender bias
• the undermining of a woman professional when a manager doesn’t like the answer he is getting and goes to her boss, a more senior man, to get things sorted out
• a mindset that evidences the need to, or that it’s appropriate to, placate those who don’t approve of practices that protect the legal rights of pregnant workers
• some people actually do have the power to bend the rules or move away from standard procedure when it comes to promotion, perks and candidate preferences
• when individual line managers and non-specialists are responsible for designing and managing cut backs, risking inequitable outcomes across the company and decisions or interpretations that conflict with EO policy and industrial
• pregnancy and family responsibility are used as a mechanism to alter permanent employment arrangements, with no option to return to original arrangements
• EO policy is clearly documented, but you can’t guarantee others with external networks will not be granted more favourable treatment
• staff who are put under pressure to go along with questionable promotion practices, are not willing to formalise their concerns due to the risk of negative impact on their own terms, conditions or possible access to redundancy
• sex discrimination is fueled by executives, who despite EO policy and law, progress decisions that are not necessarily merit based, and then require HR to ‘fix it’ by making the decisions appear reasonable or merit based, not that the request or need to do so would ever appear in writing

Go to Section D
or
Back to EM2 Solution Home