northsamardzic-commitmentor-2011.pdf (2.25 MB)
Commitment or even compliance? an Australian university's approach to equal employment opportunity
journal contribution
posted on 2011-06-01, 00:00 authored by Andrea North-SamardzicAndrea North-Samardzic, S GregsonThis paper presents empirical evidence to illustrate how one Australian complies with the nation's federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) ry framework. The aim of this paper is to provide insight into the extent organizational practices deviate from articulated policy and how this gap on the perceived career trajectories of female academics. While the disadvantaged status of female academics has been recognized worldwide, a deeper examination of how employees experience the policies and practices designed to support advancement is required, especially in light of the increasing corporate-ties of Australian universities which have deprioritized EEO. A case study of an Australian university is used to explore these phenomena. mentary evidence of its EEO policies was compared with interviewee content downloaded from 220.237.125.9 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 03:50:16 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMITMENT OR EVEN COMPLIANCE? AN AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY'S APPROACH TO EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 299
of employees, including both female academics and members of general staff in
volved in policy development. This allowed female employees to be heard, in par
ticular where they sensed contradictions between espoused company policy and
their real experiences. Hearing what they have to say is an important Contribution,
given that Australia's EEO regulatory framework allows organizations to waive
reporting on their gender equity "achievements."
This case study highlights employee concerns about the efficacy of the University's
policies and practices designed to support women's career trajectories and
demonstrates that, particularly in light of the increasing corporatization of the
University, some women questioned whether drawing support from such policies
would harm their careers. The most significant concern focused on the criteria for
promotion, which interviewees perceived to be based on a masculine model of
merit, in contrast to the ostensible gender-neutrality of the promotions policies.
A related concern was how carer responsibilities impacted on opportunities for
advancement, particularly the ability to engage in research work that was prized
more highly than teaching activities by promotions committees. These examples
illustrate that, while the University may be upholding the law at face-value, the
actual experiences of women in the organization suggest that EEO compliance is
merely skin-deep.
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMITMENT OR EVEN COMPLIANCE? AN AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY'S APPROACH TO EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 299
of employees, including both female academics and members of general staff in
volved in policy development. This allowed female employees to be heard, in par
ticular where they sensed contradictions between espoused company policy and
their real experiences. Hearing what they have to say is an important Contribution,
given that Australia's EEO regulatory framework allows organizations to waive
reporting on their gender equity "achievements."
This case study highlights employee concerns about the efficacy of the University's
policies and practices designed to support women's career trajectories and
demonstrates that, particularly in light of the increasing corporatization of the
University, some women questioned whether drawing support from such policies
would harm their careers. The most significant concern focused on the criteria for
promotion, which interviewees perceived to be based on a masculine model of
merit, in contrast to the ostensible gender-neutrality of the promotions policies.
A related concern was how carer responsibilities impacted on opportunities for
advancement, particularly the ability to engage in research work that was prized
more highly than teaching activities by promotions committees. These examples
illustrate that, while the University may be upholding the law at face-value, the
actual experiences of women in the organization suggest that EEO compliance is
merely skin-deep.
