Email newsletter

HR news and jobs direct to your inbox

Recruitment Marketing Awards

The 2012 Recruitment Marketing Awards launch in February – check out last year’s winners

Jobs - HR job search

International HR jobs
HR manager jobs
HR director jobs

Site map

Search and Subject Links

Quick links to subjects:

Search People Management

This site is the online magazine for the CIPD Opens in a new window

Vogue editor has got it wrong – working rights needs to be more level, not less

Comment

Comment on the blogs

Become a member

Jill Evans

11 Nov 2009 | 16:01

Forward to a colleague

Colleague’s email address

Your name

Your email address

Personal message
(Maximum of 120 characters)

Articles more than one month old can be viewed only by CIPD members or PM Subscribers.

Isn’t it incredible? When times are tough, people run right back to their deeply held prejudices.

Vogue editor Alexandra Shulman, writing in the Daily Mail, recently suggested that legislation extending maternity and parental rights at work might be “harming women’s chances of employment”. Only with employers struggling to get out of the dark ages.

Companies in the know about the “war for talent” are only too well aware why women need to be given a level playing field at work. Take Cisco, for example. That company is working to remove sexual stereotyping. It sees equality as a “business imperative”, driving innovation and promoting customer understanding. There are numerous other examples of successful companies thinking along exactly the same lines.

It’s true that employers have mixed feelings about the legislative rules mooted by the EU and the government to create a more equal society - wrangling over the forthcoming equality bill is proof of this. But take away the advancement of employment protection and we return to child labour and the exploitation of the weakest.

Legislation can’t achieve equality on its own. Society needs to want to make women the equal of men at work. And we don’t want levelling down – Shulman’s preferred model seems to hark back to the days when men and women had to pretend their jobs took precedence over their families.

There are advantages for all of us in men taking a greater share of the responsibility of child rearing. And this won’t happen until all organisations, and the cultures within which they operate, appreciate that a proportion of the population, both men and women, need understanding – and legal protection – while they care for the young and the old among their family members.

We may feel sorry for Alexandra Shulman as she is faced with her “stream of women into my office to discuss their futures, their maternity leaves, four-day working weeks” and so on – but surely all she needs is the advice and support of a good HR manager?

To post your comment you have to login

Username

Password

Forgotten your log in details?

Not registered on PM or CIPD?

To post a comments you need to be a CIPD member of PM subscriber
Registration will be on the CIPD site

Bookmark and share

What are these?

HR blogs delivered to you by RSS
What is RSS

Links open in new window

Get listed: To include your own link here contact the PM advertising team.

About the editors

Apprenticeships that work

New guidance to help you in developing high-quality apprenticeships

HRD Conference 2012

Add value to your business with practical L&D solutions from HRD

Links open in new window

People Management neither recommends, nor is responsible for, the content of external sites listed here.

Your link here: contact the PM sales team.

It’s untenable to have a normal retirement age in public-sector schemes that is significantly different from the state retirement age

Brian Bailey, Director of pensions, West Midlands Pension Fund and member of High Pay Commission