GILLIAN MacLELLAN
From a medical perspective, it appears women have been less susceptible to the effects of Covid-19. The same cannot be said of the effect on women in the workplace. We are starting to understand that women have been disproportionately affected by this pandemic across a range of issues. For example, studies are highlighting that women are more likely to have lost their job or been placed on furlough. Female dominated workplaces have been the hardest hit during the crisis; cleaning, catering, retail, hairdressing to name but a few. Studies are also highlighting the imbalance in homelife during the pandemic, with mothers being more likely than fathers to be spending their working hours simultaneously trying to care for children, home schooling and carrying out domestic tasks.
As we move into the next phase of pandemic planning, it is important that employers are aware of this broader landscape. As employers, particularly those with office-based staff, start to sketch out their plans for a return to the workplace, they need to think about the potential gender impact of their plans and in particular ask themselves what impact does their future work place model have on gender equality?
As we start to move out of lockdown, many employers are sending out return to work questionnaires to employees. This is being done with the best of intentions to try to accommodate individual circumstances; for example, their caring obligations, travel situation and any health concerns. These are obviously important considerations. But employers need to be aware that facilitating personal preferences in this way may have unintended consequences. For many parents, part-time schooling, no childcare and no grandparents means one parent will have to stay at home. If recent history is anything to go by, in the majority of cases that is going to be the woman.
We don’t yet know how long this “new normal” arrangement will be in place. As the saying goes, plan for the worst, but hope for the best. Let’s hope that we are not starting a long term era of social distancing, where remote working and part time schooling is the norm. But if we are, we need to think about the long term impact of who returns to the office, as decisions made now may shape the future of the workplace. On our current trajectory, the future could see vast numbers of women with caring responsibilities working from home and men returning to the office. No progressive employer wants their workplaces to morph into (for some back into) “men dens”; especially when many employers have worked for years to move away from this sort of male dominated culture.
So what can employers do? It is a tricky one. Some of the issues surrounding which parent returns to the office are very personal - dictated by job roles, career choices and earning power within a family - and not something within the employer’s control. But there are steps employers can take. They must ensure that within their organisation, there is an awareness of the potential unintended consequences of decisions made about who comes back to the workplace. They should audit the gender balance of those asking to return to the workplace so they understand the picture within their own organisation; this will allow them to assess if they have a potential issue. From there, employers can at least start conversations about the gender impact and start to do some creative thinking around how to mitigate any detrimental effects.
Gillian MacLellan is a partner at international law firm CMS.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel