A few months ago, I was going to China. In my flight, all three member of the pilot team were male, but air-hostesses were female. Before that, I had conducted a research on female infanticide in Kathmandu valley. I found that most the senior doctors and directors of hospitals were male, and those in assisting positions, like nurses, were female. Similarly, in corporate houses, I was shocked that most major executives were male, but positions such as office assistant, personal secretary, and receptionist were generally filled by females. I then realized that though the number of direct sex discriminations has declined to some extent in urban areas, indirect sex-discrimination continues to exist in the corners of corporate houses.
Examples in the 21st century have made it clear that women can perform any endeavor with equal skill and success as men. They have made enormous progress towards the goal of achieving equality and respect in their careers. But still, corporate houses do not prefer to hire female employees as long as they can find male applicants. Why is that so? To find the answer, we most look at the issue from the perspective of the corporate houses. Any corporate house must invest a certain amount for employee training and development. If they hire married female employees of child bearing age, then they should also provide maternity benefits if she becomes pregnant, which is an added expense. Nepal Labor Act 1992 clearly provides for 52 days of paid maternity leave for a maximum of two terms during the entire period of employment. So how can we expect entrepreneurs to encourage hiring female employees when the motive of any business is to earn profit?
PHOTO: BLACKSTILLETOES.COM
Nepal is not alone in discriminating against female employees. In an attempt to avoid maternity benefits, many corporate houses in the west sign a contract with female employees forbidding them to get pregnant during their employment. But in United States there is an act called Pregnancy Discrimination Act where an employer cannot refuse to hire a woman because of her pregnancy, as long as she is able to perform the major functions of her job. If an employer discriminates because of a pregnancy or pregnancy related medical condition, then the employee can even file charges against their employer.
Unequal pay is another burning issue of gender based employment discrimination. Let us not talk about female employees of corporate houses, but of common female laborers hired by a contractor to build houses. I asked a contractor how much he paid the laborers. “I give Rs.500 to male laborers and Rs. 350 to Rs. 400 to female laborers per day.” Shocked, I asked why he paid the female employees less. He gave me the simple answer that it was the general trend. If we compare this pay scale to that of United States, then again there is an act called Equal Pay Act (EPA) of 1963 which prohibits pay discrimination on the basis of gender where both males and females perform a job requiring similar skills, effort and responsibility for the same employee under similar working condition. Nepal also has such laws and provisions, but we lack its proper implementation on a grass-roots level.
According to a survey done by World Economic Forum (WEF), unequal pay is rampant even in our neighboring countries of India and China. In India, there is a vast difference in the salary structure of men and women. Statistics show that the average annual income of women is $1,185, which is three times less than the average male income of $3,698 per year. And things are much worse in China. China has extensive laws and provisions that prohibit discrimination against woman, including laws for equal remuneration, maternity rights and protection from any sort of harassment. But still, gender based discrimination in China’s workforce continues virtually unchecked.
Another hindrance that female employees are facing in work places is harassment. Harassment is very frequent in Arab countries where 58% of Arab women with college degrees are unemployed, in fear of facing sexual harassment at work place. According to one freelance research in Kathmandu, one out of every five female employees faces some sort of sexual harassment at work place. The research goes on to say that such victims of harassment generally remain silent in order to protect their reputation and job.
According to the Global Gender Gap Report 2011 prepared by World Economic Forum, USA is the country with the highest percentage of female employees (52%) followed by Spain (48%), Canada(46%) and Finland(44%). India has the lowest percentage of female employees (23%) followed by Japan (24%), Turkey (26%) and Austria (29%). The same survey has ranked us 126th out of 135 countries, which is no doubt a shameful figure. Even the survey of Nepal Labor Force (2008) indicates that only 26% of paid employees are female.
In order to balance the gender gap in our country, some activists propose reservation, where all employers must hire a certain percent of female employees in their company. However, I don’t believe that reservation really works in our context. Even personally I don’t prefer it, as I think it is a biased practice where all competitors do not start their race from square one. Thus, I don’t think such unsystematic practices can give us sustainable results. It can have only one solution: proper implementation of our legal provisions, and a new, strong strategy from the government to fill the gender gap. It is also imperative to hold some round table discussions and proper dialogue with all major stakeholders in an attempt to make our work places more female-friendly.
The author is executive director at Grassroots Movement for Justice
Sumesh1993@gmail.com
Related story
13-year-old girl gives birth to a son in Morang
-1200x560-1773818828.webp)
-1773673205.webp)
