The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
Submission - Tiffany Hall
As requested in the JEP article, I've got some feedback -
- it's very evident without a study of statistical data that women are hugely underrepresented in the workplace, & in politics. The sexism underpinning all of this is part of wider radical societal change in attitude. It's not down to "the best person always gets the job" because we know this isn't true. A study recently found that men apply for jobs even if they only meet 60% of the requirements, whereas women are only really likely to apply if they meet 100% (https://hbr.org/2014/08/why-women-dont-apply-for-jobs-unless-theyre-100-qualified)
- this consistent imbalance, will equate to women NEVER being fully represented in boardrooms, needless to say, the poor maternity rights (& paternity rights) fuel this even further, the view that women pre-menopause are negligible in the workplace needs to be eradicated, this only comes with real legislative change whereby the states government makes truly family centric policies, that ensures a sustainable life of working parents. To do this
1)men must be entitled to similar benefits to women to enable shared childcare
- businesses need to be held accountable & demonstrate that if their senior managers & boards are made up of mostly men, why is that? Is the best person getting the job, or are women being shunned because "sexism" reasons, to enact real change, the very real world situation of having "cartels of men" running businesses needs to be broken down & challenged, it feels like some companies are run like Eaton Boys Clubs, with no one to hold them to account.
- small businesses need tobe supported to ensure that their income & cash flow is protected so they CAN employ women who may or may not then go on to have a child.
- why is big corporate taxes not utilised in some way to subsidise the extra financial burden on small businesses of maternity/paternity leave? If these great big financial institutions wish to set up business here, they must ensure that they are contributing to the cost of nurturing a functioning society where workers are treated fairly regardless of sex, race, ability or age.
- Swedish family-centric attitudes are at the heart of what their politics, whilst their tax rate is exceedingly high, there's no reason why inspiration cannot be taken from another country where the rate of happiness is significantly higher than places like the UK. Dismissing the needs of mothers & fathers in a climate where everything costs more (the likelihood of young families getting on the housing ladder is the lowest it's ever been) is dangerous & leaves the island open to becoming void of diversity & innovation in future generations. Jersey is categorically NOT investing in the future whilst it still seemingly protects the interests of the few over the welfare of the many. Greed fuels the decisions behind legislation, and this needs to change.
I'm happy to talk about any of the above further, as I feel passionately about this topic & want to see genuine change.
Many thanks Tiffany Hall