Why Do Women Need To Be Given A Leg Up?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43065660
Surely if they are good enough they will attain these positions naturally.

[sp1814]

TTT

You posted:

//Surely if they are good enough they will attain these positions naturally.//

I spent many years working in the City, before leaving banking for IT.

Parts of the City were (and still is very much are) a Boys’ Club.

If the City were a meritocracy, then all well and good.

It really isn’t.

However, the answer isn’t to give women a leg up, the answer is to get rid of those who are unable or unwilling to see past their prejudices, who actively seek to ensure that everyone in the upper echelons of the City is in possession of a penis and testicles.

[sp1814]

naomi24

You wrote:

//I don't need a leg up. I'd hate to be patronised. If I can't do it on my own merits then I don't deserve the job.//

What do you do when you can do the job, but you see other less capable men promoted ahead of you?

What do you do, when you find out that because you’re a woman, those above you are loathe to promote you because you might go off and have a baby?

What do you do in that situation?

Do you leave to find a more enlightened company?

[sp1814]

spathiphyllum

Unfortunately, that’s true.

Incidentally, cards on the table...when the situation warrants it, I definitely would offer a job to a woman with the equivalent skills, education and experience of a prospective male job applicant. I can say that for sure, because I’ve done it.

[sp1814]

spathiphyllum

In the City, most of the large companies would be publicly listed, so it’s not really a single owner who can make those decisions.

More likely to be shareholders.

[bhg481]

I spent my entire working life in the scientific civil service, the last years in a privatised area. In all that time I only came across one situation where it was considered that promotion was preferred to one gender over the other. There were very few females working in our discipline but they were always treated and promoted fairly compared with the males, except in one section. In one area, run by a woman, the men complained that preference was given to the women; that was computer operations staff. In the scientific/mathematical area where I worked there were few women but it was considered that promotion was independent of gender.

[Garaman]

The solution to a problem where women who were the best qualified for promotion were overlooked, shouldn't be to promote women who aren't best qualified.

[woofgang]

Garaman has anybody seen the charter being discussed and does it suggest women should be promoted if they are not the best person for the job?

[Garaman]

How could I know if anyone has seen the charter, they wouldn't all tell me. I am answering the OP as to whether women need a leg up. There have for sure been selections made on the basis of including more women, rather than on the basis of who is best suited for the job.

[woofgang]

where and when?

[Garaman]

At least half of Tony Blair's class of 97 for a start.

[woofgang]

now there you and I can agree!

[woofgang]

....but were the blokes any better?

[sp1814]

The City of London, together with the New York Stock Exchange - two of the biggest financial districts in the world, are choc-full of companies with boards that are overwhelmingly male.

And they have all done a marvellous job over the past decade. Their brilliant minds have not plunged the world into greatest financial crisis since the Depression.

Their ideas of collaterising toxic debt, packaging up sub-prime mortgages was a great idea...especially on the verge of the US economy turning down, which meant that those holding the debt would go under.

The boards of Lehman brothers were the best people (cough, men) for the job.

As too were the boards of Merrill Lynch, AIG, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, HBOS, Royal Bank of Scotland, Bradford & Bingley, Fortis, Hypo and Alliance & Leicester.

All these blokes were definitely better than any woman could possibly be in the same role. There's absolutely no reason to change the status quo.

[woofgang]

sp hahahahaha

[Garaman]

//There's absolutely no reason to change the status quo.//

I think we are all saying that we should change the status quo and allow everyone equal opportunity. However, we shouldn't 'give a leg up' to anyone, but promote on merit.

[Islay]

There is a comment on page 1 about women not being included in conscription - that is wrong!
Conscription of women

In December 1941 Parliament passed a second National Service Act. It widened the scope of conscription still further by making all unmarried women and all childless widows between the ages of 20 and 30 liable to call-up.