Latest news with #workplaceequality
Irish Times
22-05-2025
- Irish Times
Spilt Milk employee says she suffered months of sexual harassment
An ex-employee of popular Dublin ice cream parlour Spilt Milk has told a tribunal that she quit after suffering months of sexual harassment from a colleague a decade her senior, who she said questioned her about her sexual experience, pestered her for dates, and told her: 'You really need to stop saying no to me'. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) was told that within a month of starting work together, the older man had told her they had 'sexual chemistry', asked her out, and told her that he 'thought that sex with me would be electric'. The claimant, Leni Shanahan, said a key factor that prompted her to quit was when she found out that her boss, company director and health food entrepreneur Dave Meehan, had, while talking to another employee, referred to her alleged harasser making a remark about becoming 'physically aroused' by the complainant's 'flirting'. Ms Shanahan was a 21-year-old student at Trinity College Dublin when she was among the first five workers hired for the opening of the shop in March 2024 under the joint branding of Spilt Milk and Roots Acai on Drury Street in Dublin 2. READ MORE Her complaint under the Employment Equality Act 1998, alleges her former employer, LN Ice Cream Ltd, trading as Spilt Milk, is liable for discrimination by way of sexual harassment. The company denies liability. Its representative told the tribunal the alleged harasser had denied any impropriety, and no longer works for the business or lives in Ireland. Representing herself before the WRC on Tuesday, Ms Shanahan said that she primarily had contact with Mr A, her alleged harasser, a colleague aged in his early 30s, when they were rostered to work together in the shop's basement production kitchen, where there was no CCTV. In the first week of April 2024, she said, Mr A asked her to 'go out with him for a drink' in the course of what she called a 'very inappropriate conversation'. The following week, Mr A 'initiated a conversation about sexual experiences with her'. 'He stated that we had sexual chemistry and he thought that sex with me would be electric,' Ms Shanahan said. In late May, Mr A 'made comments about my physical appearance and commented on my white skin, my light eyes, my hair, my lips and my body, my weight and what I wore – and continued the conversation like that, after I expressed discomfort', she said. 'Stop saying no' 'During early July, he insisted I go on a date with him to a museum. After I refused, he insisted. After I brought up his partner, his girlfriend, he still insisted,' she said. By mid-July, she had asked for a roster change to avoid Mr A, but did not explain her reasoning to the member of management responsible for scheduling, the tribunal heard. During a shift midway through the month, she said, Mr A was going out to a supermarket to buy ingredients and asked her if she 'needed anything'. 'I said: 'No thank you. He replied to me: 'You really need to stop saying no to me.' The way it was delivered was not playful, it was not joking, it had intent,' Ms Shanahan said. On another shift later that month, Mr A 'came upstairs looking for a coffee and, while I was making his coffee, in Spanish, he said: 'Don't look at me like that. Don't look at me with those eyes''. 'I hadn't even looked at him, because I was busy making coffee. I asked: 'What?' she said. She said his next words were: 'You know what that does to me,' before he winked and walked away. On her last shift before leaving to take holidays in August 2024, she said Mr A gave her a hug and asked her when she was due back, before telling her: 'I hope next time I see you, you won't be here,' before winking at her. She said she could see 'confusion' in the face of another worker who witnessed this exchange who 'heard the tone of that comment' and 'how uncomfortable and embarrassed I was'. The tribunal heard Ms Shanahan did not return to work as planned and resigned on 10 September that year – before writing to her employer complaining of sexual harassment and then filing her WRC complaint. 'Physically aroused' Ms Shanahan said a key factor in her decision to quit and pursue a claim at the WRC was hearing that her alleged harasser had made a remark about becoming 'physically aroused' by her 'flirting' months earlier to Mr Meehan, which she said Mr Meehan went on to refer to in September 2024 while talking to another employee, Mr B. 'As it was relayed to me, a comment was made [by Mr Meehan] about how [Mr A] would 'get hard' in conversations with me,' Ms Shanahan said, as she cross-examined her former employer. Her earlier evidence had been that what she heard about that conversation while she was away on leave 'confirmed to me that if I returned to Roots that I would not be protected or safe'. Mr Meehan said it had been a 'passing remark' by the alleged harasser in April or May that year. He told the hearing what he repeated in the later conversation to Mr B was that Mr A had told him Ms Shanahan and Mr B were 'flirting' and 'nearly short of making [Mr A] sexually aroused, physically aroused'. Mr Meehan said he thought nothing of the original remark by the alleged harasser and that 'frustration and emotions' got the better of him in the September conversation with Mr B. Mr Meehan said that since her complaint, he had taken training in human resources. 'It's my first time having a shop in the city centre with such responsibility. I'd like to think for the most part I've led with love and care, and I've made mistakes along the way like any other human being. Now I'm better equipped to deal with situations like this. That's all I can say – again, I've apologised, and I really do mean it,' he said. Fiona O'Connor, the company's representative before the WRC, said its position was that this aspect of Ms Shanahan's complaint was dealt with separately by way of an apology to Ms Shanahan. The complainant confirmed to the tribunal that she was not alleging sexual harassment on the part of Mr Meehan personally. A company investigation did not uphold any of the complaints she made about Mr A, the tribunal was told. Ms Shanahan said she did not complain before quitting because she had 'no idea' there was a complaints process for harassment, as she was 'never shown a policy'. Ms O'Connor had told the WRC earlier that while the company's management believed Ms Shanahan had signed copies of the relevant policies, it had been unable to locate the documents after an office refit. 'Feeling of fear' Steven Murphy, another director of the firm, told the WRC he conducted a company investigation into Ms Shanahan's complaint following her resignation, for which Ms Shanahan had declined to be interviewed, he said. Mr Murphy said there was 'no factual evidence we could find to uphold the complaint' and that Mr A 'refuted' her allegations. 'It was a tough situation, something I've never done before. Leni said one thing, [Mr A] said the other,' he said. Ms O'Connor said the company 'acted promptly and with care, carried out an investigation and offered support services' to Ms Shanahan after she wrote in with her complaint. 'These are not the actions of an indifferent or negligent employer. Our position is that the respondent took all steps reasonably practicable for it to take,' she said. She added that if the WRC did find the company in breach, liability ought to be capped at €13,000 on the basis that Ms Shanahan had left the employment by the time she brought her case to the WRC. Ms Shanahan said she had proven that she was sexually harassed at work and consequently discriminated against. She said that no policy for the prevention of sexual harassment was ever communicated to her, nor any training on the subject given during her employment, and that she never signed any contract referring to such a policy. 'As a result, I did not feel like I could make a complaint,' she said. Closing the hearing, adjudication officer Pat Brady thanked the parties, said he would reflect on the evidence and submissions, and proceed to issue his decision in due course.
News.com.au
20-05-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
New data reveals men earn more than women in public sector but gender pay gap narrower than private employers
A bombshell report on Australia's public sector has exposed a shocking gap between how much men are earning compared to women. The report, released by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA), shows men earn on average $8200 more than women who work across Commonwealth government agencies, departments and businesses. For every $1 a man earned, a woman made 94 cents. The report found 45 per cent of public sector employers have a median pay gap within five per cent of the target range, compared to 31 per cent of private sector employers. A similar report released in March found men earned on average$28,425 more than women in the private sector. Public sector employers include Australia Post, the ABC, SBS, Australian Federal Police, NBN, Reserve Bank, CSIRO, Snowy Hydro, Red Energy as well as Federal Government departments and agencies. Half of public sector employers have a median total remuneration gender pay gap lower than 4.8 per cent, compared to 8.9 per cent in the private sector. WGEA chief executive officer Mary Wooldridge said the results showed progress could be achieved when employers addressed gender equality. 'The Commonwealth public sector has achieved gender-balance in the composition of the workforce, at managerial level and in the upper quartile of remuneration,' she said. 'This is a critical driver of the lower gender pay gaps reported today.' Ms Wooldridge said the results also showed employers were taking action to improve equality in their workplaces, with 51 per cent of employers improving their median total remuneration gender pay gap in the past year. 'Pleasingly we have also seen large rises in the number of employers conducting a gender pay gap analysis, acting on the results and consulting with employees to understand their experience at work,' she said. 'These actions are crucial steps to help employers gain greater understanding of the drivers of their individual gender pay gaps and to implement relevant and evidence-informed actions to address them.' Ms Wooldridge said while progress had been made there were some areas that needed improvement with only 11 per cent of men accounting for all carers leave taken, and 49 per cent of employers having a gender pay gap that favoured men. 'Workplace gender equality benefits everyone, so it is important that barriers for men are also addressed,' Ms Wooldridge said. 'With changes in access to parental leave now enacted, Commonwealth public sector employers need to work deliberately and strategically to drive cultural change that removes real or perceived penalties for taking time out for caring roles and ensure more men have confidence to take primary carer's leave.'
Telegraph
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Civil servants threaten to strike over trans ban in women's lavatories
Civil servants are threatening strikes and legal action against guidance prohibiting trans women from using female toilets and changing rooms in Government buildings. Members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) have claimed that such rules would be 'segregating our trans and non-binary members in the workplace'. Their threats come after the Supreme Court ruled last month that transgender women are not legally women, and that 'sex' in equality law refers to biological sex. The equalities watchdog said trans women should not be allowed to use female lavatories, and employers, shops and hospitals should act in line with the judgment. But activists from PCS will put forward a motion at the union's annual conference later this month calling for 'possible, legal and human rights challenges' to guidance that would enforce the ruling in government toilets and changing rooms. The motion, first reported by the Daily Mail, states: 'Conference rejects biological essentialism and reductionism. 'Conference believes LGBT+ and women's liberation are interlinked and that our bodies do not define who we are, who we love or what we are capable of.' It added: 'Conference believes any Cabinet Office guidance which prevents trans and gender non-conforming workers from fully accessing their workplace should be opposed in coordination with other civil service unions.' 'Impossible to implement' The newspaper reported that the motion also stated its opposition to what it called the 'segregation' of trans women in sport. PCS previously said that interim advice issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on gender was 'not fit for purpose'. Fran Heathcote, its general secretary, and Martin Cavanagh, its president, said the watchdog's guidance was 'damaging' and 'impossible to implement'. The motion was reportedly tabled by the Sheffield branch of the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), led by Saorsa-Amatheia Tweedale, the head of the union's LGBT section. Another DWP branch in Edinburgh tabled a motion that stated 'trans and non-binary people should have equal access to all services and facilities according to their gender identity'. It also said that people should be able to 'determine their own legal gender without having to endure any costs, invasive medical processes or bureaucratic hurdles'. Helen Joyce, of the organisation Sex Matters, said: 'If PCS members pass a motion that denies the biological fact there are two sexes, it will indicate the union has descended into the depths of extreme gender ideology. 'Describing single-sex facilities as segregation is grossly offensive, suggesting women's need for safety and privacy from men is comparable to the horrors of apartheid.'
Telegraph
14-05-2025
- Telegraph
‘This is a man's world' comment was sexual harassment by boss
A female executive has won a sexual harassment case after a male manager told her that 'you don't belong here, this is a man's world'. Angela Piromalli was subjected to a string of other sexist comments from Ian Jolliffe, who also slapped her on the bottom with a ruler, a tribunal heard. She has now won a claim of sexual harassment and harassment related to sex after a judge found that she was subject to 'unwanted conduct of a sexual nature'. The employment tribunal, held in Southampton, was told that Ms Piromalli started working as head of people and culture at Charles Trent, a vehicle recycling company, in January 2022. In her first month of joining, Ms Piromalli was allegedly told that 'you don't belong here, this is a man's world' in a conversation with Mr Jolliffe, the site operations manager. It was alleged that he went on to tell her: 'The only reason people are talking to you is because you are a woman, they are around s--- like flies.' Ms Piromalli said he added: 'Also you wear tight jeans, are you trying to get attention?' and: 'You know the only reason you got the job is because of the way you look?' 'Shocked and intimidated' She told the tribunal that the following month, she was working with Mr Jolliffe in an office when he hit her on the bottom with a ruler in front of two colleagues, who both 'gasped'. It was heard that Mr Jolliffe then said: 'F---, that's not on CCTV is it? Whatever you do, don't tell Marc [Trent, chief executive], f--- me or that really is my job over.' In another incident while the pair were working together in Poole, she informed Mr Jolliffe in his office that a candidate for a job was female. He allegedly stood up and 'clenched his fists' before saying that he didn't want women working on the yard because they are a 'f---ing nightmare'. Ms Piromalli said he grew more aggressive and said: 'I told you this is a man's world. You only got the job because of how you look, you don't f---ing know anything.' He then told the employee that he did not mean to offend her and said 'it must be so hard being so beautiful', before grabbing her and hugging her, the tribunal heard. Ms Piromalli described feeling both 'shocked and intimidated'. 'Blind rage' In another incident, Mr Jolliffe went into a 'blind rage' with Ms Piromalli on the phone, and called her a 'stupid little bitch' before shouting 'f--- you' and hanging up. Mr Jolliffe was later suspended but bosses decided not to dismiss him because he was 'deeply apologetic' and 'accepted full responsibility for his actions', the tribunal was told. He was made redundant in October 2022 but the business later started working with him while he was employed elsewhere, it was said. After being informed of this, Ms Piromalli, who had been promoted to the role of head of people, handed in her resignation and submitted a grievance owing to Mr Jolliffe's 'return'. Employment Judge Jonathan Gray upheld her claims of sexual harassment and harassment related to sex in relation to the various comments made by Mr Jolliffe. Other claims made by Ms Piromalli, who now runs an Italian delicatessen in Dorset, were dismissed.
Forbes
14-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
What's Holding Back Working Women? Same Obstacles, More Anxiety
'Net worth', 'husband', and 'LinkedIn': a recent study found that these three terms were the most common Google searches regarding female CEOs. In fact, queries about a female CEO's spouse and family were 216% and 130% more common, respectively, than those same queries for a male CEO. In contrast, searches for a male CEO's salary and education were 169% and 61% more common, respectively, than those same searchers for a female CEO. The study, conducted by the Movchan Agency, thus concluded that individual searchers, on average, cared more about male CEO's professional traits (such as education and compensation) and about female CEO's personal characteristics (such as husbands and families). But these gender biases don't apply only to female CEOs. From hiring to promoting to mentoring, working women have faced - and continue to face - headwinds that their male peers don't necessarily experience. While many of these challenges have existed for years, women recently have also internalized new levels of uncertainty which leads to additional mental distress and which only complicates their ability to push forward in their workplaces. Parenthood, while not the only cause of a gender division in the workforce, is one of the most significant, obvious, and age-old. As of 2020, the United States was one of only three countries in the world not to offer statutory paid maternity leave, according to analysis by the International Labour Organization. The U.S Department of Labour additionally found that only 17% of women actually have access to this paid leave. (The Family and Medical Leave Act - or FMLA - guarantees 12 weeks of unpaid leave for new parents, but it doesn't actually require employers nationwide to provide paid leave; that choice is left to individual states, cities, and even companies.) After childbirth, mothers and fathers continue to see deviating career paths. Understanding Society, the largest longitudinal household panel study of its kind, focused on the U.K. and found that, three years after childbirth, 90% of new fathers were in full-time work or self-employment compared to 27.8% of new mothers. In the five years following childbirth, 26% of fathers had been promoted or had moved to a better job compared to only 13% of mothers. By that time, 4% of fathers had left employment completely compared to 17% of mothers. According to Deloitte's Women @ Work 2024 report, 50% of women who live with a partner and children additionally bear the most responsibility for caregiving, and nearly 60% of women bear the most responsibility for providing care to another adult (such as a parent or in-law). But there are other and often less obvious challenges beyond family-planning, family-starting, and caregiving that hinder women's professional careers. Hiring: A 2024 study by the Muse job board revealed that 41% of women have felt discriminated against based on their gender during a job interview, and 42% said they had encountered gender-biased or inappropriate questions during an interview. 38% of women have hesitated even to apply for a job due to perceived gender bias. That gender bias continues after a woman is hired. Once in the workforce, 82% of American women 'code-switch' – or adjust their appearances, behaviors, expressions, mannerisms, and/or style of speech. 76% of respondents in a recent Preply survey shared that they code-switch to 'be more professional in general' while about 17% have been told to change their tone or communication style at work. That is, they have been ordered to code-switch. Code-switching is especially prominent for Black women – as are the adverse consequences of not doing so. Mental Health: Like hiring and code-switching, mental health has been an issue that affects women disproportionately. Women, after all, are about two times more likely to have depression and/or anxiety than men are. But Deloitte's Women @ Work 2024 report found that mental health among working women specifically has deteriorated year over year. 50% of its 1,000 survey respondents reported that their stress levels are higher now than they were a year ago: a number that increases to 60% for ethnic minorities. Mental health is now one of working women's top concerns, second only to women's rights, and 33% of respondents have taken time off in the past year because of their mental health. And yet, 66% of those same respondents revealed they're not comfortable revealing mental health as a reason for their absence. Unsurprisingly, like women who are primarily responsible for caregiving, women who regularly work overtime rate their mental wellbeing and other aspects of their lives lower than women who don't work overtime or who share caregiving responsibilities, respectively. Mentorship: Regardless of whether they're working overtime, providing care, or neither, professional women in general don't usually have other women as resources or guides. HiBob's 4th annual U.S. Women Professionals in the Workplace survey found that only 7% of women reported having a formal mentor at work compared to 15% of men. (Ironically, 12% of women expressed a desire for a mentor while only 9% of men said the same.) Similarly, the Muse job board survey found that 55% of its respondents felt as though there wasn't enough female representation in their organization's leadership. 79% of women added that, when looking for a new job, they are more likely to seek out companies that have equal representation of men and women in managerial/leadership positions than companies with fewer women than men in those roles. In short, although working women are looking for it, female representation - and, thus, mentorship - is lacking. Pain: The lack of female leadership can have consequences beyond just mentorship; it can also affect policies that, in turn, help an upcoming group of women rise and succeed. One of those potential policies is around menstrual health. Deloitte's research reveals that more than 40% of women who experience high levels of pain during menstruation simply work through it. 16% of Deloitte's survey respondents have taken time off due to menstruation or menopause but haven't shared their reason for that absence with their employer, 13% reported that they don't feel comfortable discussing menstruation's impact on them with their manager, and 9% said they cited menstruation as the reason for taking time off and their career was adversely affected. 6% also reported that they had previously discussed menstruation's impact on them, and their employer's lack of support actually was a factor in their subsequent decisions to leave their entire organization entirely. Women who are experiencing or who are approaching menopause, meanwhile, compose about 20% of the current workforce, In 2024, 39% said they've experienced pain or discomfort at work due to menopause: more than double the percent who said the same the prior year. The number of U.S companies offering menopause-specific benefits, though, is only about 5%. Multiple studies have shown that women in government leadership positions implement policies that are supportive of women and children alike, such as contraception access and menstrual health policies. The same can be true for the private sector - but only 40% of managers, 29% of C-suite executives, and 10.4% of Fortune 500 CEOs were female as of 2024. Performance & Promotion: Even if women are able to show up and perform well in their workplaces, their confidence around their performance remains lower than men's. Hibob's Women Professionals research found that 65% of women strongly agreed they regularly do a good job compared to 69% of men, 56% of women believe their managers and coworkers value their work compared to 60% of men, and 51% of women believe their coworkers value their contributions compared to 58% of men. Even if women do have both the skills and confidence, McKinsey & Company's 'Women in the Workplace 2024' report noted that 81 women were promoted for every 100 men last year. That reality doesn't escape women's notice either; the Muse job board study revealed that 66% of respondents believe women in their industry have a 'hard time getting promoted'. Merit-based reward systems actually increase these gender inequalities – not decrease them. Multiple studies, in healthcare and other industries, have uncovered this 'paradox of meritocracy'. One study in particular had 445 M.B.A. students assume the role of a manager. The 'managers' who were told that they were in a company that emphasized meritocracy awarded male employees, on average, a $46 higher bonus than they gave to equally-performing female employees. On the contrary, those who were told that they were in a company that emphasized managerial discretion awarded female employees, on average, a $51 higher bonus than they gave to equally-performing male employees. Based on these results, the study authors speculated that the second group of 'managers' may have been trying to over-correct; that is, to make up for the bias against women they believed would exist when rewards are dependent only upon managerial discretion. Looking Forward These challenges – across hiring, mental health, mentorship, pain, performance, and promotion – have remained the same for women year after year. The significant and recent political changes though have added a new layer of uncertainty and subsequent stress for working women. For example, in a 'Women in the Workplace' survey from Fairygodboss, 79% of the 428 female respondents believe that the removal of DEI initiatives will negatively affect opportunities for women in the workplace. 52% are concerned about job security or new job opportunities because of the changes (such as funding cuts and policy changes) by the federal government. Similarly, 50% reported that anxiety over the current political climate is influencing their own career plans while 40% said that anxiety is affecting their behavior at their current role. Hibob's Women Professionals research came to a similar conclusion: all-in-all, women have more anxiety around their futures than men do. Looking forward, 57% of women anticipated improvements in their work-life balance compared to 62% of men, 26% of women anticipated a promotion compared to 34% of men, 58% of women felt confident about financial recognition in the year ahead compared to 66% of men, and 5% of women anticipated worsening conditions compared to 4% of men. This list of gender-based challenges that working women face is not all inclusive. Rather, it means to illustrate that the same barriers continue to hold women back - and now women are also facing additional anxiety due to the federal politics around them. Like the rest of these obstacles, this stress affects women more than men. And even female CEOs are not completely immune from gender-based divisions in the workplace. As the Movchan Agency found, the public's interest is not in these leaders' accolades, their accomplishments, or even their successful navigation of gender biases in their professional worlds but rather, remains largely in their husbands.
