Violence free or gender inclusive workplace, what difference does it make?

Before the Covid pandemic struck, and work from home became the norm I conducted a few workshops with corporate sector staff on men and gender equality. In most cases my sessions would follow sessions on sexual harassment in the workplace and the POSH law. By this time most men in the group would be apprehensive and justifying in their heads how their work place situations were not as described in the sessions earlier. In these circumstances it would be difficult for me to draw them into a discussion on creating a gender friendly workplace. This led me to think whether from the point of view of workplace productivity or even a more congenial workplace does it make sense to have stand alone sessions on men, masculinity and gender equality in the workplace for the corporate sector.

I have been working on men, masculinity and gender equality in the non-profit and development sector for over two decades now. We have looked at why it is important to involve men to improve women’s health outcomes, for increase in contraceptive use, for violence prevention and improved childcare practices, but much of this work has been with poor or rural people. There have been many changes among men and in the family that we have documented and written about. But the bigger question that has bothered me is whether gender equality, men and masculinity is inevitably intertwined with poverty? From my own life experiences as a middle class, upper caste professional and as a son, father of a daughter and male partner in a hetersexual couple I know it is not.

Homes and workplaces have been changing rapidly over the last couple of decades. Technology has changed the nature of many domestic ‘chores’. The mixie-foodprocessor, the washing machine and similar devices have made the work of even the ‘bai’ easier and among young professionals food-delivery services have made the daily grind of cooking redundant. Fathers are now more involved in childcare than their father’s were and daughters are often getting many more opportunities than their mother’s had. This would indicate that changes in gender related roles are underway at home, but what about the workplace?

Even though economists tell us that most women are part of the informal workforce, today there are many more women in the formal workplace than before. More than 40% of the STEM graduates, over a third in the IT sector, and a fourth of all banking employees are women. Even though many women drop out from the workforce due to family reasons, the reality is that men are encountering many more female colleagues, team members, supervisors, bosses and clients than ever before. In many cases they are spending many more hours every day in the presence of women in the professional space than they do with women in the personal space. This is a major departure from earlier norms. Are men in the workpkace adequately equipped to deal with this changing reality?   

Gender, as most people know by now is related to socially determined and desirable traits that are considered appropriate for boys and men and for girls and women. While it is often confused with sex, it is increasingly clear that sex is biological while gender is social. Thus breasts or facial hair are markers of sex while being demur or aggressive are markers of gender. Gender differences between boys and girls are created by the family, school and society at large, from childhood onward. They are a set of guidances and expectations and children are made to follow these often through coercive measures or ridicule. Gender traits are socially determined, and so are different across times, cultures and even across social and economic classes. One gender difference between boys and girls earlier was that boys studied certain subjects, and girls some others. Often science subjects were not available in girls colleges and boys couldn’t learn home science. Similarly women if they did work, were expected to be school teachers or be at the front desk in offices. But these are changing, and very fast. But are the gendered expectation of men in the workplace from women in the workplace changing as rapidly? Are men socially trained to manage relationships of equality or of being the subordinate with women? The only women who they have been subordinate as boys have been their mothers, who have considered them their darlings, and probably their school teachers. I remember the aggressive reactions that we boys in an all-boys school had to the one female teacher in senior school. That was many years ago and I hope the situation has changed today. 

Many men are uncomfortable with female peers and supervisors or bosses because of their preconceived notions about what are appropriate female (feminine) abilities and traits. This prejudice may not necessarily manifest as explicit violence but as everyday sexism and men may try to pass these off as jokes. Often women, who also have many similar gender notions, also find these jokes harmless leading to a cycle of reinforcement, till a boundary is crossed and the environment in the workplace becomes tense.  All of us must be familiar with sexist jokes, but how many of us have ever tried to tell our colleague not to crack these? If you are not sure whether you are sexist or not there are several tests available online that you could take.

Sexism in the workplace can take several forms. One of the commonest forms of sexism is to crack jokes based on someone’s gender. Jokes or even comments or opinions referring to a woman’s bodily appearance or dress can also be sexist, depending upon the existing level of friendship between colleagues.   Another way is to devalue women’s contributions in a meeting or similar occasion. Some men, even when they agree to a woman’s contribution assume they can explain that better or more explicitly. They often end up confusing the issue. This is also referred to as ‘mansplaining’. Role stereotyping often takes place in the workplace, especially if it is a task beyond the officially assigned duty. If there is an office picnic, women end up making the food, and men make the purchases. Sometimes these biases also come in during the hiring process.

   

Having a zero tolerance to violence, harassment and sexism does not automatically make a workplace gender inclusive. Several years ago I was conducting a gender training with mostly  male managers in a very large non-profit organisation in the South Asian region. The organisation had conducted a gender audit of its workforce distribution and had noted some anomalies and they wanted this training to address that. Those who worked with the education programme were concerned that female workers were not opting for promotions and chose to remain teachers. The senior management was concerned that workforce gender segregated data was skewed while the middle management were faced with refusal to take promotions by the women themselves. On further discussions with the managers it emerged that the roles of the teacher and supervisor were vastly different. Teachers jobs were located at one place and had predictable timings. Supervisors had to constantly be on the move. On some ocassions they had to stay overnight at institutional guesthouses. Even though the salary, perks and career pathway of supervisors was much better than that of teachers, very few women opted for it.                                                                                                            

The managers of the office based teams had a different problem. They were faced with a situation where women and men who had been recruited at the same time had different speeds of career progression. The organisation had a very progressive maternity leave policy but was unable to understand why more women would not make ‘manager’ grade. A couple of concerns emerged after discussion that seemed to explain the situation. First the non-manager grade office workers had more predictable office hours. They could come in and leave according to office hours. Managers were expected to be available for longer hours when strategic planning and decision-making was done. This upset women’s ability to fulfil many of their domestic and childcare roles, and they did not opt for promotions. For women who wanted promotions, I was told that women would face some de-skilling due to their long maternity leaves and because they didn’t stay back longer hours they often were not considered as committed as the men. 

It is not surprising that there is a ‘glass-ceiling’ for many women, and this cannot be addressed without addressing male perspectives and actions both at home and in the workplace. To illustrate, during the lull in the Covid-19 pandemic I come across a tweet from the chairperson of a very prominent business house who shared that a wife of a male worker had written to him urging him to open the office as soon as possible. Her husband would sit in front of the computer, working from home, making demands for endless cups of coffee. The business leader expressed his helplessness in his tweet for what he felt was a request beyond his remit. In my opinion it is not.

Today POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment in the Workplace) training has become mandatory, as it should. With the changes in law and social norms around sexual diversity the workplace promises to become even more gender diverse. Many old prejudices can surface. Gender inclusive workspaces require all workers to be respectful for each other and office policies to become cognisant of the strengths of all. It can promote congenial and efficient workspaces, and it can promote productivity as well career progression of many workers. The POSH trainings alone cannot be seen as a measure for creating gender inclusive workspaces. They are a necessary preventive measure but gender training especially of men goes way beyond and can become a tool for enhanced productivity.

Also posted on - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/violence-free-gender-inclusive-workplace-what-difference-abhijit-das/