The business case for gender parity is more than compliance. Countries and companies can be competitive only if they develop, attract and retain the best talent, both male and female.

1. Achieving
Gender
Parity
The
impact
of
pregnancy
in
Australia
August
2014

2. Page
2
of
10
The
business
case
–
more
than
compliance
Countries
and
companies
can
be
compe>>ve
only
if
they
develop,
aAract
and
retain
the
best
talent,
both
male
and
female.
Economic
• Governments
have
an
important
role
to
play
in
crea>ng
the
right
policy
framework
for
improving
women’s
access
and
opportuni>es.
Civil
society,
educators
and
media
also
have
an
important
role
to
play
in
both
empowering
women
and
engaging
men
in
the
process.
• Increasing
women’s
workforce
par>cipa>on
in
Australia
by
6%
could
increase
the
na>onal
GDP
by
approximately
$25billion.
GraAan
Ins>tute,
2013)
• The
most
important
determinant
of
a
country’s
compe>>veness
is
its
human
talent
—skills,
educa>on
and
produc>vity
of
its
workforce—and
women
account
for
1/2
the
poten>al
talent
base
throughout
the
world.
Closing
gender
gaps
is
not
only
a
maAer
of
human
rights
and
equity;
it
is
also
one
of
efficiency.
(WEF
Gender
Gap
Report
2013)
• “At
its
core,
the
case
for
diversity
is
the
case
for
civil
society....There
is
no
civil
economy
without
a
civil
society”
(Hannah
Pieterman,
CEDA
2013)
• Increasing
women’s
labour
market
par>cipa>on
and
increasing
women’s
earnings
across
the
lifecycle
is
cri>cal
to
closing
the
gender
gap
in
re>rement
savings.
• Empowering
women
as
economic,
poli>cal
and
social
actors
can
change
policy
choices
and
make
ins>tu>ons
more
representa>ve
of
a
range
of
voices.
• Increasing
female
par>cipa>on
in
the
workforce
can
have
a
direct
and
substan>al
impact
on
organisa>onal
culture
and
opera>ons.
It
generates
tangible
benefits:
beAer
efficiency,
performance
and
innova>ons;
increased
access
to
female
talent
pool;
and
improvements
to
reputa>on.
• Firms
with
the
most
gender
diverse
management
teams
have
10%
beAer
return
on
equity,
48%
beAer
earnings
before
interest
a`er
tax
and
1.7
>mes
beAer
share
price
growth
than
average
companies.”
McKinsey,
2007
• ASX500
companies
with
women
directors
delivered
an
average
ROE
over
3
years
10.7%
higher
(and
over
5
years
11.1%)
than
those
without
women
directors.
Reibey
Ins>tute,
August
2010
• Women
account
for
85%
of
consumer
decisions
(
US
Census
Bureau
&
Bureau
of
Sta>s>cs)
Social
Business
The
Global
Gender
Gap
2013
report
ranks
Australia
24th
overall:
•
Australia
ranks
13th
on
economic
par>cipa>on
and
opportunity
for
women
• Australia
ranks
69th
on
health
and
survivorship
• Australia
ranks
43rd
on
poli>cal
empowerment
• Australia
ranks
1st
on
educa>onal
aAainment
• Domes>c
and
family
violence
is
the
principle
cause
of
homelessness
for
women
and
their
children,
cost
to
the
economy
~$16b
pa
• In>mate
partner
violence
is
the
leading
contributor
to
death,
disability
and
ill-­‐health
in
all
Australian
women
aged
15-­‐44,
with
one
woman,
on
average,
killed
every
week
as
a
result
of
in>mate
domes>c
violence.
• One
in
five
experience
harassment
in
the
workplace
White
Ribbon
Founda>on,
2014
• 1
in
2
women
reported
experiencing
discrimina>on
during
pregnancy,
while
on
parental
leave
or
on
return
to
their
workplace
(AHRC
Repor&ng
Parents
2014)
• Women
comprise
9.2%
of
execu>ves
in
the
ASX
500
• Only
12
ASX
500
companies
have
female
CEOs
• Women
hold
12.3%
of
directorships
in
the
ASX
200,
but
only
9.2%
in
the
ASX
500”
2012
Australian
Census
of
Women
in
Leadership
Scorecard

3. Page
3
of
10
The
gap
-­‐
female
middle
management
The
status
quo
con6nues
to
impose
a
work
penalty
for
women
by
failing
to
acknowledge
the
need
for
support
during
pregnancy
transi6ons,
to
accommodate
flexibility
and
to
address
discrimina6on.
Women
are
therefore
underrepresented
in
the
workforce.
25%
57%
67%
53%
58%
53%
44%
70%
86%
89%
88%
80%
15-­‐19
years
20-­‐24
years
25-­‐34
years
35-­‐44
years
45-­‐54
years
55-­‐64
years
Female
Male
75%
43%
33%
47%
42%
47%
56%
30%
14%
11%
12%
20%
15-­‐19
years
20-­‐24
years
25-­‐34
years
35-­‐44
years
45-­‐54
years
55-­‐64
years
61%
58%
56%
53%
50%
39%
42%
44%
47%
50%
15-­‐19
years
20-­‐24
years
25-­‐34
years
35-­‐44
years
45-­‐54
years
55-­‐64
years
Exhibit
2
|
There
is
a
significant
par6cipa6on
gap
on
a
full-­‐6me
basis
even
though
women
aHain
higher
levels
of
educa6on
Full
6me
employment
by
age
and
sex
Part-­‐6me
6me
employment
by
age
and
sex
Level
of
educa6on
by
age
and
sex
(bachelor,
grad
dip
and
post
grad)
The
average
female
labour
force
par>cipa>on
(FLFP)
remains
low
around
56%
with
levels
and
trends
varying
across
the
age
brackets.
• Women’s
underemployment
rate
is
almost
twice
that
of
men’s
(7.4%
versus
4.1%)
and
women’s
labour
force
underu>lisa>on
rate
is
considerably
higher
than
men’s
(13.4%
versus
9.8%).
• Much
of
women’s
employment
growth
has
been
in
part-­‐>me
work
where
career
advancement
opportuni>es
are
limited,
where
wages
growth
is
below
average,
and
where
a
small
but
growing
propor>on
of
women
are
in
fact
underemployed
(that
is,
they
want
to
work
more
hours
and
in
job
classifica>ons
where
they
are
more
challenged
and
where
wages
and
salaries
are
higher)
.
• Occupa>onal
and
industry
segrega>on
by
gender
persists,
with
women
concentrated
in
a
narrow
band
of
occupa>ons
in
the
service
sector.
• At
the
point
when
men
and
women
are
entering
junior
to
middle
management
years
(25-­‐34
years)
86%
of
men
work
on
a
full-­‐>me
basis
compared
with
67%
of
women
with
the
gap
widening
as
they
age
with
men
maintaining
88%
full-­‐>me
employment
and
women
reducing
to
53%
-­‐58%.
• Nega>ve
correla>on
between
part
>me
and
leadership:
only
[5%]
of
managers
work
part-­‐>me
and
less
than
[3%]
of
more
senior
execu>ves
work
part-­‐>me.

4. Page
4
of
10
The
real
reason
women
opt
out
For
Australia,
the
Human
Rights
Commission’s
report:
Suppor>ng
Working
Parents,
revealed
that
discrimina>on
against
working
parents
is
where
it
starts.
• 32%
of
all
mothers
who
were
discriminated
against
at
some
point
went
to
look
for
another
job
or
resigned
• One
in
five
(18%)
mothers
reported
that
they
were
made
redundant,
restructured,
dismissed
or
their
contract
was
not
renewed
either
during
their
pregnancy,
when
they
requested
or
took
parental
leave
or
when
they
returned
to
work
• 91%
of
mothers
who
experience
discrimina6on
do
not
make
a
formal
complaint
(either
within
their
organisa6on
or
to
a
government
agency)
• Mothers
who
reported
that
their
employer
was
suppor>ve
during
their
pregnancy
were
less
likely
to
report
that
they
experienced
discrimina>on.
They
were
also
more
likely
to
return
to
work
for
that
employer
• Regardless
of
size,
sector,
industry
or
loca>on
of
the
workplace,
discrimina>on
can
manifest
itself
in
all
types
of
workplaces.
Discrimina>on
was
more
likely
to
be
reported
by
respondents
in
large
workplaces,
and
in
male
dominated
industries
• Experiencing
discrimina>on
on
return
to
work
was
more
likely
to
be
reported
by
those
who
returned
to
work
in
a
large
organisa>on
(40%)
than
those
who
returned
to
work
in
small
(22%)
and
medium
(31%)
organisa>ons.
‘Gender
asbestos’
refers
to
the
discriminatory
aRtudes,
stereotypes
and
toxins
that
are
hidden
and
embedded
in
the
walls,
cultures
and
mindsets
of
many
organisa6ons.

5. Page
5
of
10
Support
for
female
middle
management
Achieving
gender
parity
has
proved
to
be
a
difficult
and
complex
issue
to
tackle
and
good
inten6ons
have
not
translated
into
beHer
outcomes
for
women.
Change
Management
Effort
Required
Low
High
Individual
Company
Culture
Inadequate
management
of
leadership
pipeline
Lack
of
gender
diversity
awareness
among
management
Work
Family
Incompa>bility
Culture
of
office
presence
Lack
of
on
and
off
ramping
Frequent
men>on
Repeated
men>on
Rare
men>on
1)
Boston
Consul>ng
Group,
2012
ShaAering
the
glass
ceiling
2)
Bain
2013Gender
equality
in
the
UK
3)
Bain
2013
Crea>ng
a
posi>ve
cycle:
cri>cal
steps
to
achieving
gender
parity
in
Australia
4)
McKinsey
2011
Women
in
the
economy:
selected
exhibits
5)
McKinsey
2014
Why
gender
diversity
at
the
top
s>ll
remains
a
challenge
Missing
Technical
know-­‐how
Lack
of
competence
Lack
of
asser>veness
Not
figh>ng
for
power
Lack
of
support
Work-­‐life
balance
Miscommunica>on
Lack
of
CEO
backing
Lack
of
apprecia>on
Lack
of
flexibility
Lack
of
career
mindedness
Male
oriented
selec>on
criteria
Exhibit
1
|
Corporate
Culture
and
Lack
of
Diversity
Management
are
driving
the
underrepresenta6on
of
women1
Boston
Consul>ng
Group
(BCG)
found
several
factors
that
act
as
big
barriers
to
women
becoming
top
leaders
(see
exhibit
1
opposite
–
“large
circle
represents
big
barriers”)
Research
consistently
reveals
that
women
seek
suppor>ve
employers
and
flexible
work
schemes
acknowledge
the
valuable
contribu>on
women
make
both
to
the
workforce
and
in
the
family
unit.
A
key
barrier
is
adequate
off
and
on
ramping
support
through
pregnancy
transi>ons,
a
>me
when
women
are
o`en
in
mid-­‐management
–
“the
issue
is
par+cularly
acute
at
the
transi+on
from
middle
manager
to
senior
manager,
a
point
when
women
have
proven
themselves
professionally
yet
they
dispropor+onately
leave
their
corporate
careers”
(McKinsey
&
Co.,
2011)
Bain
iden>fied
two
barriers2
–
structure
and
style
–
that
make
advancement
difficult.
Whereas
it
is
presumed
that
women
do
not
seek
advancement
because
they
have
family,
Bain’s
research
indicates
that
it
is
more
commonly
because
they
lack
support
or
encouragement
from
their
companies.
As
one
report
said:
“mothers
retain
their
overall
career
ambi>on
but
seAle
in
due
to
the
embedded
ins>tu>onal
mindset
of
corporates”.
Discussion
Relevant
Lever
Relevant
Lever
Less
relevant
lever
Significant
Lever
Lack
of
role
models

6. Page
6
of
10
Social
Infrastructure
Policy
Framework
The
social
infrastructure
plauorm
that
supports
pregnant
women
in
the
workplace
is
a
combina>on
of
interna>onal
and
na>onal
legisla>ve
policy
and
the
ins>tu>onal
arrangements
and
best-­‐prac>ce
across
organisa>ons.
Interna>onal
Human
Rights
Obliga>ons
Legisla>ve
Framework
Compliance
Framework
Ins>tu>onal
Arrangements
Best
Prac>ce
• Interna>onal
Declara>on
of
human
rights
• Sex
Discrimina>on
Act
1984
(Cth)
• The
Fair
Work
Act
2009
(Cth)
• Paid
Parental
Leave
Act
(Cth)
• Work
Health
and
Safety
Act
2011
(Cth)
• Workplace
Gender
Equality
Act
2010
(2th)
• ASX
Corporate
Governance
Principles
• WGEA
Employer
of
Choice
Cita>on
• Global
Repor>ng
Ini>a>ve
• Gender
and
Inclusion
Policy
• Workplace
policies
and
procedures
• Talent
mapping
• Flexibility
• WGEA
Employer
of
Choice
Cita>on
• Leadership
• Business
case
• Diverse
&
inclusive
culture
Recent
developments:
• Proposed
changes
to
Paid
Parental
Leave
Act
• Review
of
legisla>ve
framework
in
place
to
protect
working
parents
against
workplace
discrimina>on

7. Page
7
of
10
Market
update
Increasing
female
par>cipa>on
in
the
workplace
and
gevng
more
women
into
senior
posi>ons
is
on
the
agenda
of
the
Produc>vity
Commission,
Human
Rights
Commission,
Parliament,
Australia’s
peak
Gender
Equality
Agency
and
every
listed
company
in
Australia
and
more.
Human
Rights
Commission
report
into
pregnancy
related
discrimina6on
The
AHRC
has
conducted
a
na>onal
review
on
the
prevalence,
nature
and
consequences
of
discrimina>on
in
rela>on
to
pregnancy
at
work
and
return
to
work
a`er
parental
leave.
The
Discrimina>on
in
the
workplace
against
mothers
is
pervasive
with
49%
of
mothers
experiencing
discrimina>on
at
some
point
during
pregnancy,
parental
leave
or
on
return
to
work
Commission
Reports
Background
Implica6on
for
corporate
Australia
Produc6vity
Commission
report
into
Early
Learning
and
Childcare
The
government
is
seeking
to
establishing
a
sustainable
future
for
a
more
flexible,
affordable
and
accessible
child
care
and
early
childhood
learning
market
that
helps
underpin
the
na>onal
economy
and
supports
the
community,
especially
parent’s
choices
to
par>cipate
in
work
and
learning
and
children’s
growth,
welfare,
learning
and
development.
Paid
Parental
Leave
legisla6on
Publicly
financed
parental
leave
schemes
can
help
parents
reconcile
work
and
family
life
and
maintain
their
connec>on
to
the
workforce
through
a
guaranteed
return
to
their
jobs.
The
PPL
proposes
full
pay
for
26
weeks
capped
at
$100,000
and
includes
superannua>on
contribu>on
which
will
go
some
way
to
reducing
the
reliance
on
government
pensions
for
re>red
Australian
women.
1
2
3
Family
Payment
Reforms
–
Limit
family
Tax
benefit
B
to
families
with
children
under
6
years
of
age
This
is
a
policy
ini>a>ve
designed
to
return
mothers
to
the
workforce
4
Legisla>on
Background
Implica6on
for
Corporate
Australia
Pregnancy
related
discrimina>on
nega>vely
impacts
business
efficiency
&
performance,
staff
reten>on
–
par>cularly
where
60%
of
graduates
are
women
–
and
reputa>on.
“The
AHRI
has
es>mated
the
cost
of
turnover
to
Australian
business
to
be
at
$20billion
annually”
Likely
to
incen>vise
stay-­‐at-­‐home
mothers
consider
returning
to
work.
Workplace
Gender
Equality
-­‐ Procurement
Procedures
and
User
Guide
-­‐ Employer
of
Choice
Cita6on
All
suppliers
tendering
for
Australian
Government
work
will
need
to
comply
with
the
obliga>ons
imposed
by
the
WGE
Act
(2012)
as
part
of
the
governments
effort
to
ensure
women
receive
social
and
financial
recogni>on
for
the
work
they
do
and
the
contribu>on
they
make
to
Australian
society.
This
came
into
effect
on
1
August
2013.
125
Australian
organisa>ons
are
currently
WGEA
employers
of
choice
for
women.
New
accredita>on
requirements
require
organisa>ons
to
have
on-­‐boarding
programs
for
women
through
pregnancy
transi>ons.
5
Changes
to
make
compliance
with
WGE
Act
more
onerous
comes
into
effect
as
of
1
July
2014.
Employer
of
Choice
Cita>on
requires
employers
to
exhibit
best
prac>ce
across
all
areas
of
business.
It
will
provide
a
significant
advantage
from
a
reputa>on
perspec>ve
if
aAained.
Dra`
report
released
by
Produc>vity
commission.
It
recommends:
Government
should
remove
eligibility
for
FBT
concessions
for
employer
provided
ECEC
services
and
retain
right
for
businesses
to
purchase
access
rights
for
children
of
employees
without
this
being
considered
an
expenditure
subject
to
the
FBT
Employers
required
to
pay
1.5%
levy
to
fund
PPL
scheme,
if
passed,
need
to
revisit
their
exis>ng
schemes
and
consider
impact
of
addi>onal
corporate
payment
on
a
working
mother’s
return
to
the
workplace

8. Page
8
of
10
Recent
Developments
-­‐
PPL
A
federally
funded
and
managed
scheme
serves
to
address
the
causes
of
discrimina>on
because
these
schemes
are
perceived
as
a
cost
to
business
and
mostly
paid
to
mothers
Current
Scheme
Proposed
Scheme
Length
of
payment
18
weeks
26
weeks
Amount
of
payment
Na>onal
minimum
wage
(NMW)
Higher
of
replacement
or
NMW
capped
at
$100k
Superannua>on
No
9.25%
Eligibility
Worked
at
least
10
of
13
months
prior
to
birth
or
330
hours
Same
Paternity
Leave
2
weeks,
NMW
Up
to
2
weeks
at
the
greater
of
actual
or
NMW
Employer
Impact
Employer
paid
PPL
is
tax
deduc>ble
1.5%
on
taxable
income
for
companies
>
$5m
income

9. Page
9
of
10
Addressing
Discrimina>on
Transforma>ve
change
strategy
to
achieve
gender
parity
Create
a
posi>ve
vision
of
possibility
Empower
individuals
to
grow
through
par>cipa>on
in
the
transforma>ve
change
strategy
Implement
the
change
strategy
through
social
diffusion
Create
a
support
system
for
individuals
par>cipa>ng
in
the
transforma>ve
change
ini>a>ve
What
we
place
our
aAen>on
on
grows
Social
science
research
tells
us
that
the
most
effec>ve
way
to
further
social
change
is
to
iden>fy
those
recep>ve
to
this
change,
known
as
“early
adopters”
and
help
them
to
spread
it
Program
1
|
Leadership:
Cra`ing
a
transforma>ve
vision
Program
2
|
Empowering
working
mothers
Gender
parity
strategies
are
social
change
ini>a>ves:
more
than
a
change
management
program
***Audit
your
organisa>on
to
appreciate
avtudes
and
prevalence
of
pregnancy
discrimina>on***

10. Page
10
of
10
About
us
We
provide
consul&ng
&
coaching
solu&ons
to
achieve
gender
parity
Prue
brings
over
15
years'
experience
in
compliance,
senior
business
leadership
and
strategy,
specifically
in
the
disciplines
of
diversity
compliance,
gender
equity,
reputa>on
and
risk,
and
discrimina>on.
In
2010,
Prue
founded
Prue
Gilbert
Consul>ng
to
advise
CEOs
and
Boards
on
gender
balance
strategies.
Leveraging
her
unique
skill
set
as
a
compliance
and
diversity
prac>>oner,
she
empowers
organisa>ons
to
create
working
environments
that
are
fair
and
flexible,
promote
personal
and
professional
growth,
capitalise
on
the
capabili>es
and
leadership
of
a
gender
diverse
and
inclusive
culture
which
necessarily
enhance
the
boAom
line.
Prue
is
a
member
of
Jesuit
Mission
board,
and
has
held
non-­‐execu>ve
posi>ons
on
other
not-­‐for-­‐profit
boards.
She
is
a
member
of
key
professional
bodies,
including
Governance
Ins>tute
Australia
and
Law
Ins>tute,
Victoria.
Prue
has
a
Bachelor
of
Arts
&
Law,
a
Graduate
Diploma
in
Applied
Corporate
Governance,
and
is
a
qualified
Execu>ve
Coach
with
IECL.
Her
MBA
with
AGSM
was
interrupted
to
welcome
3
small
children.
Ben
has
over
20
years
experience
in
corporate
finance
and
strategy
roles,
gained
from
previous
posi>ons
within
public
and
private
companies
across
regulated
and
deregulated
industries,
including
most
recently
at
global
engineering
services
company
Sinclair
Knight
Merz
(SKM).
Ben's
strengths
lie
in
developing
and
implemen>ng
strategy,
building
and
developing
profitable
businesses
across
different
markets
and
sectors
leveraging
his
extensive
management
experience
across
commercial
management,
strategy
and
business
development,
business
evalua>on,
M&A
and
joint
ventures.
Ben
joined
Grace
Papers
in
February
2014
a`er
7
years
with
SKM
where
he
was
most
recently
in
the
role
of
Group
Manager,
Strategy,
with
responsibility
for
building
strategies
across
markets
within
the
global
business,
engaging
stakeholders
to
buy-­‐in
and
working
with
them
to
execute
the
strategy.
Prior
experience
has
been
gained
working
in
the
telecommunica>ons
and
u>li>es
industries
across
a
sales,
marke>ng,
commercial
and
strategy
roles.
Addi>onal
roles
within
industry
have
provided
a
thorough
knowledge
of
the
technologies
and
opera>onal
issues
facing
large
telecommunica>on
companies
in
areas
such
as
sales,
marke>ng,
engineering
and
IT.
Ben
holds
a
Bachelor
in
Arts
(B.A.),
Masters
in
Business
Administra>on
(MBA)
and
Masters
in
Applied
Finance
(MAppFin)
Prue
Gilbert,
CEO
&
Co-­‐founder
Prue.gilbert@pgconsul6ng.net.au
or
+61
413
886
688
Ben
Gilbert,
COO
&
Co-­‐founder
Ben.gilbert@pgconsul6ng.net.au
or
+61
4
11
022
744