Women, gender and Work in canada

Women, Gender and Work in Canada

Weight: 40% of your final grade
Length: 2000 words (7–8 pages)
Due: Upon completion of Unit 3
Hint: Think about this assignment before you begin working through Unit 3.
Instructions
This assignment requires you to write a 2000-word research paper that explores a particular topic or issue that is of concern to women, lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people, and/or gender-nonconforming/transgender people and evaluates potential strategies for improving their working lives.
Follow these steps to prepare your paper:
Begin by choosing a topic that you would like to explore in greater depth, such as sexual harassment; employment rights; LGB, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people in the workplace; pay equity and the wage gap; sensitivity training, women at the top, and solidarity; self-employment; child-care policy; women and unions; or greater recognition for women’s unpaid work. You should consult with your tutor about other suitable topics for this assignment.
Next, identify potential sources of information on your topic. You will need to obtain suitable books, articles, and other resource materials. Be sure to look for resources that will help you document concrete, up-to-date strategies that women, LGB people, and/or gender-nonconforming/transgender people may be working on. Useful resources might be obtained from local organizations that are working on the issue, such as various women’s, human rights and workers’ rights groups, or unions. They may be able to provide you with written materials, policy papers, or even someone you could speak with. Regional, national, and international organizations offer relevant resources on their websites, which may also include links to other online resources and organizations. Local, provincial, and federal government offices can also provide information on specific policies and programs and, in some cases, position papers on specific issues.
Use the following questions as guidelines in researching and writing your paper:
What is the general issue you are addressing, and why is it important? What is the current state of the problem? What strategies, if any, have been pursued to date in dealing with it?
Through your reading of the course material, what major insights, theories, and concepts emerge with respect to this issue?
Through your research on this topic or issue, what relevant resources and/or organizations did you identify? What type of work have these organizations done on this issue? How much interest and attention is it receiving? What strategy or strategies are individuals, organizations, or governments pursuing to improve the situation? Describe what is involved in each of these strategies.
Based on your reading and research, how would you evaluate the strategy or strategies that you have described? What are their respective strengths and weaknesses? In your view, do they promise to improve the working lives of women? If not, what other options should be pursued?
Once you have considered these questions, develop your thesis statement. What is the main argument that your paper will be making regarding your topic?
Your paper needs to reference and discuss five of the key concepts from the course in relation to your chosen topic.
Acknowledge all sources through proper APA-style referencing techniques, and include a reference list or bibliography.
Be sure to contact your tutor if you have any difficulty with this assignment.
See the “Resources: General, Research, and Writing” page at the bottom of the course home page for writing assistance and resources.
When you have completed your research paper, ensure that you make or keep a copy for your records. Upload your assignment to the assignment drop box and submit it to your tutor for marking. If for some reason you are unable to do this, contact your tutor about using regular mail.
Your graded assignment will be returned to you via the drop box. When you receive it, review the comments made and, if necessary, contact your tutor to discuss the results.
Grading Rubric for Research Paper
Total: /40
Note: The grade scale for the “Depth of critical analysis” and “Integration of five key course concepts” criteria are different than for the previous assignments.
Criteria Grade Scale Tutor Comments
Thesis statement and main arguments 5 Strong and critical thesis statement; the thesis statement governs the development and organization of the paper and all supporting arguments.
4 Thesis statement is clearly identified and well supported by main arguments.
3 Establishes sense of purpose, either explicitly or implicitly; thesis supported by most of the main arguments.
2 Thesis statement is implicitly discernable but not clearly stated; main arguments are not clearly identified and/or do not support thesis statement.
1 Lacking a thesis statement; no clear point or purpose; no central argument to the paper.
Quality of writing: clarity, organization, grammar, and spelling 5 Paper clear and well organized; no grammatical/spelling issues.
4 Paper clear and organized; few grammatical/spelling issues.
3 Paper generally clear and organized; several grammatical/spelling issues.
2 Paper unclear and disorganized in many points; several grammatical/spelling issues.
1 Paper unclear, disorganized, and many grammatical/spelling issues.
Depth of critical analysis 5 Information and arguments provided with critical analysis—questioned and challenged using theories and ideas from course and own experience/knowledge.
4 Writing clearly demonstrates that the student read and understood the text fully and used own experience/knowledge; however, the critique is underdeveloped, one-sided, or biased.
3 Shows a basic understanding and ability to engage the substance of the text; goes beyond repetition or summary of the text.
2 Repeats or summarizes source text without analyzing or critiquing; shows only spotty understanding of issues; very limited analysis.
1 Does not connect well to the source text; lacks basic understanding of the issue or assignment; little or no analysis.
Integration of five key course concepts 10 Five key concepts well defined and well used in support of essay arguments; concepts thoughtfully applied and critically analyzed.
8 Five key concepts well defined and well used in support of essay arguments.
6 Five key concepts identified; definitions provided; several connections to essay arguments.
4 Two to four key concepts mentioned; no definitions provided; no connections to essay arguments made.
2 One or no key concepts mentioned.
Depth of research
Sources to include:
—Course Study Guide
—Course readings
—Course interviews
—Student research 10 Thoughtful use of course sources and well-chosen resources from source text, demonstrating a profound understanding of the text and its arguments.
8 Course sources and sources based on own research appropriately used to support arguments; very good use of source text, showing an in-depth understanding of its argument and relevance.
6 Course sources and sources based on own research used; mostly good use of source text, showing a general understanding of its argument and relevance.
4 Only course sources used; little support for argument, or misuse of source text (misunderstanding source text, using text in ways that are not relevant to argument).
2 Few or no sources used; no support for argument, misuse of source text (misunderstanding source text, using text in ways that are not relevant to argument).
APA style: in-text and bibliography 5 All sources (information) are accurately documented in the desired format in-text and in bibliography.
4 Most sources (information) are accurately documented in the desired format in-text and in bibliography.
3 Most sources (information) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format in-text and in bibliography.
2 Many sources (information) are not accurately documented in-text or in bibliography.
1 Most/all sources (information) are not accurately documented in-text or in bibliography.

Unit 3 Prevailing Issues and Transformations in Work
References and Supplementary Materials
While you are not required to do further reading for this unit, you may find the following items to be of personal interest or of assistance in preparing your assignments for this course. As well, the sources that were used throughout this unit are listed below.
Consult the Athabasca University Library’s online catalogue and journal databases for these and other pertinent books, articles, and resources. Refer to the list of resources on the course home page for more important links.
Akyeampong, E. B. (2004). The union movement in transition. Perspectives, August, 5–13. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/75-001-x/10804/7011-eng.pdf?st=Rag0s0aE
Albanese, P. (2006). Small town, big benefits: The ripple effect of 7/day child care. Canadian Review of Sociology, 43(2), 125–140.
Anderssen, E. (2017, March 24). Seven things to know about Canada’s new parental leave benefits. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting/mothers-day/federal-budget-2017-maternity-leave/article34414374/
Battersby, S. J. (2017, September 21). “Working for free day” highlights gender pay gap, advocates say. Metro News. Retrieved from http://archive.li/jswbT
Bauer, G., Nussbaum, N., Travers, R., Munro, L., Pyne, J., & Redman, N. (2011). We’ve got work to do: Workplace discrimination and employment challenges for trans people in Ontario. Trans PULSE e-Bulletin, 2(1). Retrieved from http://transpulseproject.ca/research/workplace-discrimination-and-employment-challenges-for-trans-people-in-ontario/
Brewster, M. (2017, June 13). “The decision broke me,” says naval officer asked to choose between career and son.” CBC. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/military-single-moms-1.4157353
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2016). Infographic: 2016 child care fees. Retrieved from https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/facts-infographics/infographic-2016-child-care-fees
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). (2008). Annual report 2007. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services. Retrieved from http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca
Canadian Labour Congress. (2015). History of labour in Canada. Retrieved from http://canadianlabour.ca/why-unions/history-labour-canada#maternity
Canadian Women’s Foundation. (2016). The facts about sexual assault and harassment. Retrieved from http://www.canadianwomen.org/facts-sexual-assault-sexual-harassment
Cantrell, P. (1996). Blue-collar workers: Breaking through the brick ceiling. Ms. Magazine, January/February, 34–38.
Carr, D. (2000). The entrepreneurial alternative. In D. M. Smith (Ed.), Women at work: Leadership for the next century (pp. 208–225). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cosmopolitan. (2017, April 5). #ThatsHarassment [Video file playlist]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrx4fxhgMUObiys_bKnxZjolXV_bCc2GE
Coulthard, G. (2013, November 6). For our nations to live, capitalism must die. Rabble.ca. Retrieved from http://rabble.ca/news/2013/11/our-nations-to-live-capitalism-must-die
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of anti-discrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and anti-racist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.
DeGagne, A. (2015). “Severely queer” in Western Canada: LGBT2Q activism in Alberta. In M. Tremblay (Ed.), Queer mobilizations: Social movement activism and Canadian public policy. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Ferrao, V. (2010). Paid work. Statistics Canada. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11387-eng.htm
Fraser, N. (2009). Feminism, capitalism, and the cunning of history. New Left Review, 56, 97–117.
Friendly, M., Halfon, S., Beach, J., & Forer, B. (2013). Early childhood education and care in Canada 2012. Toronto: Childcare Resource and Research Unit. Retrieved from http://childcarecanada.org/sites/default/files/CRRU_ECEC_2012_revised_dec2013.pdf
Government of Canada. (2003). The prime minister’s task force on women entrepreneurs: Report and recommendations. Ottawa: Author. Retrieved from http://www.womenable.com/content/userfiles/Canada_Prime_Ministers_Task_Force_Report-en.pdf
Hughes, K. D. (2005). Female enterprise in the new economy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hutt, R. (2017, March 14). It’s now against the law to pay men and women differently in Iceland. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/03/iceland-could-become-the-first-country-to-require-equal-pay-iceland-will-make-employers-prove-they-offer-equal-pay/?utm_content=bufferbaf5b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Irving, D. (2017). Gender transition and job in/security. Atlantis, 38(1), 168–178.
Janusz, B. (2017). Mounting evidence: Discrimination and sexual harassment in the RCMP. Herizons, 21–23. Retrieved from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Mounting+evidence%3A+discrimination+and+sexual+harassment+in+the+RCMP.-a0500824133
Johnson, H. (1994). Work-related sexual harassment. Perspectives on Labour and Income, Winter, 9–12.
Khosla, P. (2014). Labour pride: What our unions have done for us. Toronto: World Pride Committee of the Toronto and York Region Labour Council. Retrieved from http://www.labourcouncil.ca/uploads/8/8/6/1/8861416/labour_pride2014_booklet_web.pdf
Kinsman, G., & Gentile, P. (2010). The Canadian war on queers: National security as sexual regulation. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Klein, N. (1996). Can a McJob provide a living wage? Ms. Magazine, May/June, 32–36, 38.
Krahn, H. J., Lowe, G. S., & Hughes, K. D. (2007). Achieving workplace equality. In Work, industry and Canadian society (5th ed.) (pp. 205–212). Toronto: ITP Nelson.
Lambert, B., & McInturff, K. (2016). Making women count: The unequal economics of women’s work. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and Oxfam Canada.
Lero, D. S. (2015). Current stats on paternity leave and fathers’ use of parental leave and income support in Canada and Quebec. Centre for Families, Work and Well-Being, and the University of Guelph. Retrieved from https://worklifecanada.ca/cms/resources/files/731/CURRENT_STATS_ON_PATERNITY_LEAVE_AND_FATHERS.pdf
Martin, S. E. (1995). Sexual harassment: The link between gender stratification, sexuality, and women’s economic status. In E. D. Nelson and B. W. Robinson (Eds.), Gender in the 1990s: Images, realities and issues, pp. 216–228. Scarborough: Nelson Canada.
May, K. (1998, July 30). Civil servants win pay fight with Ottawa. Edmonton Journal, A1.
Matulewicz, K. (2016). Law’s gendered subtext: The gender order of restaurant work and making sexual harassment normal. Feminist Legal Studies, 24, 127–145.
Miller, C. C. (2014, September 6). The motherhood penalty vs. the fatherhood bonus: A child helps your career, if you’re a man. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/upshot/a-child-helps-your-career-if-youre-a-man.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSum&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&hp&_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1
Mojtehedzadeh, S. (2014, October 26). What does universal child-care mean for working women? The Star. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/26/what_does_universal_childcare_mean_for_working_women.html
Morisette, R., Schellenberg, G., & Johnson, A. (2005). Diverging trends in unionization. Perspectives on Labour and Income, April, 5–12.
Moyser, M. (2017). Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report. Statistics Canada. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2015001/article/14694-eng.htm
Piatote, B. H. (2012). Chapter 17: Beading lesson. In C. Williams (Ed.), Indigenous women and work: From labor to activism (pp. 268–270). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Seatter, E. (2016). Canadian universities failing at diversity: Study. Ricochet. Retrieved from https://ricochet.media/en/1588/canadian-universities-failing-at-diversity-study
Statistics Canada. (2000). Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report. Ottawa: Author. Catalogue 89–503–XPE.
Statistics Canada. (2006, June 15). Study: Changing patterns of women in the Canadian labour force. The Daily. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/060615/dq060615c-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2009). Earnings and incomes of Canadians over the past quarter century, 2006 census: Findings. Ottawa: Author. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-563/index-eng.cfm
Statistics Canada. (2018). Chart 17: Gender pay ratio of workers aged 25 to 54, Canada, 1976 to 2015. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-503-x/2015001/article/14694/c-g/c-g017-eng.htm
Williams, C. (Ed.). (2012). Indigenous women and work: from labor to activism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press
Wolfers, J. (2015, March 3). Fewer women run big companies than men named John. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/upshot/fewer-women-run-big-companies-than-men-named-john.html?mcubz=3

Unit 3 Prevailing Issues and Transformations in Work
Unit 3 Key Concepts
While engaging in the readings, interviews, multimedia, and assignments, refer to these key concepts, and consider where and how the concepts apply to the course’s histories, stories, ideas, and debates. You will be asked to discuss several of these concepts in your final assignment.
affirmative action
bottom-up approach
child-care benefit
cultures of discrimination
customer sexual harassment
direct discrimination
employment equity
indirect discrimination
job share
maternity and parental benefits
self-employment and small business ownership
sensitivity or cultural training
sexual assault
sexual harassment (quid pro quo and as a continuing condition of work)
solidarity/allyship
systemic discrimination/barriers
telecommute
the motherhood penalty and the fatherhood bonus
unions/unionization
universal child care
wage gap
work-family initiatives
UNIT 3 – COURSE READING
Employment Rights
Initiatives such as employment equity seek to expand opportunities for women by targeting systemic discrimination in the workplace. Discrimination has changed over the decades—no longer is it publicly accepted to explicitly discriminate against particular groups of people by, for example, advertising jobs separately for women and men. However, discrimination has not dissipated; it has merely changed forms, becoming more subtle and difficult to prove.
Unlike direct discrimination, which is intentionally aimed at women and/or marginalized people, indirect discrimination results from established work practices and policies that unintentionally discriminate against women. For example, height and weight requirements for specific jobs might discriminate against women even though such discrimination is not intended. The practice of promoting only full-time workers may also discriminate against women, as women are more likely than men to work part time.
Systemic discrimination refers to embedded biases in workplaces’ environments, cultures, and employment practices (in relation to hiring, pay, promotion, etc.). Such biases and discrimination can be subtle, often because they are normalized within the workplace. For example, a woman and/or a person of colour may be denied a promotion to a leadership position for which they are qualified because their employers consciously or subconsciously assume that they do not possess the qualities of a leader, such as being decisive, strong-willed, and rational. These qualities are, of course, based on the valuing of white, Western masculinity. Thus, multiple systems of oppression function together at this level. Such systemic discrimination can be frustratingly difficult to prove as employers often find other nondiscriminatory reasons to deny hiring and/or promoting a qualified person.
Have you ever thought that you were not hired or promoted because of your gender, race, disability, and/or sexuality?
In consideration of this question, we can think about whether our current systems and policies for discrimination actually result in equal treatment and justice in the workplace. Consider the following scenario:
You interviewed for a position in your field. You possess most of the qualities and qualifications that were listed in the job description. During the interview, you felt uneasy about how you were being treated. The interviewers were a little aggressive and dismissive. They asked you questions unrelated to the job, such as about your relationship status, the gender of your partner, and whether you have children. They made assumptions about your ability to perform certain tasks, including your ability to lead a group of people and your ability to access parts of the building that only have stairs. Although they never said overtly sexist, racist, ableist, or homophobic things, you got the feeling that you were being treated differently because of your gender, race, ability, and/or sexuality. You were told several days later that you were not a “good fit” for the company, and they hired someone else.
Would you address the discrimination? How would you take any action to address the discrimination?
What government resources are available to you in your city and province/state?
Take a few minutes to do an internet search of the human rights commissions in your province/state.
Is it easy to find information on what you can do if you think you have been discriminated against while being considered for a job?
What are the steps to getting government help in a discrimination case and initiating a human rights complaint?
What types of evidence would you have to gather to prove that you were discriminated against?
Does any part of the process cost money; for example, for lawyer fees?
What are the ultimate solutions to the discrimination; for example, is it monetary compensation for you and/or a penalty for or apology from the organization in question?
Do you think these solutions are adequate in addressing subtle, systemic discrimination?
How do you think discrimination of this sort should be addressed?
In Canada, employment equity is legislated through the federal Employment Equity Act. The act addresses four designated groups: women, visible minorities, Indigenous peoples, and people with disabilities. The act, which many liberal feminists support, seeks to eliminate the discrimination against these groups in the areas of hiring, promotion, and training. Under this act, employers are required to design plans that will eliminate systemic barriers and increase the presence of the four designated groups within their workforces. Some provinces have also enacted employment equity legislation, and, to their credit, some employers have adopted programs designed to increase the number of women and other designated groups in their workforces.
Why do you think employment rights are supported by liberal feminists?
Employment equity has played an important role in raising awareness about discrimination and the need for equity in the workplace. In terms of concrete numbers, however, it has not significantly increased women’s and/or minorities’ presence in most sectors. One reason for this poor showing is that the Employment Equity Act only applies to Crown corporations and federally regulated organizations with more than a hundred employees (e.g., banks, telecommunication companies, etc.). In 2007, according to annual report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), the legislation applied to only 608 organizations with a total of 1,023,062 employees—a relatively small portion of the Canadian labour force (CHRC, 2008).

Justice Bertha Wilson (1923–2007), first woman appointed to the Canadian Supreme Court and commissioner on the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (Photo: Michael Bedford, Supreme Court of Canada Collection, Wikimedia Commons)
Another reason for the lack of any apparent change is that, despite common misperceptions, employment equity, unlike affirmative action legislation in the United States, does not set quotas or goals for improving the number of women and/or minorities in the workforce. Moreover, affirmative action has been mischaracterized in many ways. Affirmative action policies were developed to account for systemic discrimination, not to give “unfair” advantages to some groups of people over others. In other words, women and minority candidates are not given jobs for which they are unqualified. When they are qualified for a job or for entry into an educational institution, they may be given the job or entry into the educational institution over a white male candidate of similar or lesser qualifications. Since affirmative action and employment equity policies have been implemented, it is actually straight white women who have most benefited. Due in part to affirmative action and employment equity policies, straight white women have seen an increase in job and education acceptance, especially in the public sector/government employment. Theorists such as Malinda Smith argue that this occurs because employers hire employees who look most like them, and studies show that white people, who occupy the vast majority of senior positions in workplaces, are more likely to hire white people, regardless of gender (Seatter, 2016).
LGB and Transgender Employment Rights
In recent decades LGB and transgender advocates have pushed for more employment rights and protections on the basis of sexual orientation, as well as gender identity and expression. Prior to 1998 homosexuals were not protected from being fired from their jobs, or from being denied a job because of their sexuality/sexual orientation. In fact, beginning in the 1950s until the 1980s, the Canadian government engaged in a program that identified and fired homosexual men and women from the civil service, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), and the military (Kinsman & Gentile, 2010).
During the 1980s and 1990s, LGB activists tried to get sexual orientation included in various provincial human rights acts to protect LGB people from facing discrimination in work. In 1991 Delwin Vriend was fired from King’s College in Alberta because he was a homosexual. In 1994 Court of Queen’s Bench justice Anne Russell ruled in Vriend’s favour, arguing that sexual orientation should be included in Alberta’s Individual Rights Protection Act (IRPA). The Progressive Conservative government of Alberta appealed Justice Russell’s decision, and the case was eventually considered by the Supreme Court of Canada. In April 1998 the Supreme Court ruled that sexual orientation must be “read-in” to the IRPA as prohibited grounds of discrimination (DeGagne, 2015). This meant that all provinces in Canada would have to add sexual orientation to their respective human rights acts and that people could no longer be fired or denied a job because of their sexual orientation.

Capital Pride Parade, Washington, DC, June 9, 2018 (Photo: Ted Eytan, Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)
The fight to have gender identity and expression, and thus transgender rights, included in provincial and federal human rights acts also took decades of activism, only to be realized in the late 2010s. After years of advocacy by transgender people and after the federal New Democratic Party (NDP) put forward many bills to establish transgender rights, the Liberal government introduced Bill C-16, which added both gender identity and gender expression to the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code’s hate crime section. In his interview, Michael discusses his work with other transgender advocates to get workplace rights for transgender people. As Michael also states, while many celebrated the passage of Bill C-16, concerns remain about whether such rights will address the high levels of employment discrimination, unemployment and underemployment, and resulting poverty and homelessness among transgender and gender-nonconforming people in Canada. Trans PULSE found that “while 71% of trans people have at least some college or university education, about half make $15,000 per year or less” (Bauer et al., 2011, p. 1). Trans PULSE also reports:
Of trans Ontarians,18% had been turned down for a job because of their trans identities or histories and another 32% were unsure if they were turned down because they were trans. 13% say they were fired for being trans and another 15% were fired from their jobs, but were unsure if it was because they were trans. For trans Ontarians who transitioned in the workplace, only one in five said that co-workers were always accepting and 38% said they were mostly accepting. Forty-two percent of respondents received co-worker acceptance half or less than half of the time, including the 15% that said that co-workers were never accepting of them. (Bauer et al., 2011, p. 2)
There are many factors that lead to transgender and gender-nonconforming people’s unemployment and underemployment. First, as Trans PULSE states, many people think they were denied a job because of their trans status. Second, if transgender people transition during their time at one job, there is a high rate of nonaccepting work environments, employers, and coworkers, as well as termination of employment. Third, a transgender person may not be allowed to take time off from their job for medical treatments relating to their transition. Fourth, many transgender people report experiencing discrimination while transitioning when in traditionally female or traditionally male occupations because they are seen as violating traditional Western colonial gender roles. Here, consider and compare Michael’s interview and experiences as he negotiated his transgender identity and expression in various work environments.
Finally, there are many risks of being “outed” as transgender in workplaces. Consider all the times you may be required to identify your sex/gender at your work, including on application forms, on medical and benefits forms, and through gender-designated uniforms, washrooms, and changerooms.
Are there legitimate reasons why our workplaces need to know our sex/gender?
Without proper policies protecting privacy or establishing gender-neutral forms, spaces, and uniforms, there are many moments when someone could be intentionally or unintentionally outed as transgender. Being outed can be dangerous because transgender people have faced violence, sexual assault, harassment, and discrimination from employers, coworkers, and clients/customers based on their gender identity/expression. Transgender and gender-nonconforming people have reported being treated differently once outed, including being denied promotions and pay increases, being ostracized and shut out of work discussions and decisions, and being subject to transphobic jokes and comments. All these experiences, as Dan Irving discusses in his reading for this unit, can have a deep psychological and emotional toll—manifesting as depression, anxiety, and fear—on transgender and gender-nonconforming people.
As you listen to the interviews, think about whether LGB, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people felt supported, respected, and safe in their different jobs.
What course of action did many of the interviewees take when faced with sexuality and/or gender-based discrimination?
Why do you think many of the interviewees chose to quit their jobs without addressing the discrimination that they experienced?
Do you think the recent inclusion of gender identity and expression into provincial and federal Human Rights Acts will fully address employment discrimination of transgender and gender-nonconforming people?
In the coming sections, we will discuss several initiatives that have been implemented to address such discrimination in different workplaces.
Sexual Harassment
ignificant resolutions to the problem of sexual harassment have occurred in recent decades. Thirty years ago, the term sexual harassment did not exist, although the behaviour certainly did. Sexual harassment became a priority for feminists because of its pervasiveness in workplaces and its damaging effects on the safety, well-being, rights, and success of women in the workforce. Because of women’s efforts in this area, sexual harassment is now recognized as a significant problem and is addressed by legislation and workplace policies in many countries. However, as we discuss in this section, current sexual harassment policies are often ineffectual and leave many workers feeling unable to report sexual harassment.
Sexual harassment is difficult to define. Most commentators agree that it involves physical or verbal behaviour that is sexual in nature, is unwanted, and forms an implicit or explicit threat to a woman’s job or her ability to perform her job (Martin, 1995, p. 217). Women often experience two types of harassment. The first type, quid pro quo sexual harassment, involves an explicit exchange such as the promise of a promotion in return for sexual favours. The second type, sexual harassment as a continuing condition of work, does not involve outright sexual demands but rather ongoing inappropriate behaviour, such as touching and suggestive jokes or comments. Sexual assault, which involves any form of nonconsensual sexual contact, also occurs in workplaces. Sexual assault, when reported, is predominantly dealt with through the criminal justice system. Sexual harassment, on the other hand, tends to be handled within the human resources departments of workplaces and through provincial human rights commissions or tribunals.
Research shows that sexual harassment occurs in many workplaces. Women in all occupations experience sexual harassment, but it is especially prevalent among women in nontraditional occupations. In recent years, female employees with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have launched a class-action lawsuit against the Canadian federal government over the sexual harassment that they experienced as employees: “60 per cent of female RCMP members reported being the victim of sexual harassment in the workplace” (Janusz, 2017, p. 23). As Barbara Janusz (2017) discusses, sexual harassment in the RCMP is a systemic issue based on the founding colonial, Western, masculine culture of the RCMP; the objectification, demeaning, and silencing of women and marginalized people within the ranks of the RCMP; the geographic isolation of many positions within the organizations; and the lack of policies and practices for reporting and addressing sexual harassment and discrimination. For decades, Janusz (2017) states, the federal government and the RCMP made and broke promises concerning addressing sexual harassment and discrimination. The federal government “finally set aside $100 million in December 2016 to deal with sexual harassment and discrimination claims that are expected to include 1,000 RCMP staff” (p. 23).

A Waiter and a Waitress (Photo: Oszkar Nagy, Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0)
An extensive survey of 12,000 women done by Statistics Canada in 1993 found that one in four Canadian women (23 percent) had been sexually harassed at some point in their working lives. Admittedly, these statistics are over twenty years old, as Statistics Canada has not included questions on workplace sexual harassment in any of its more recent surveys. However, the survey remains the most comprehensive study on this issue. The 1993 survey found that the three most common forms of sexual harassment were
inappropriate comments about a woman’s body or sex life (reported by 77 percent of women);
inappropriate physical behaviour, such as touching or groping, getting unnecessarily close, leaning over, or cornering women (reported by 73 percent of women); and
repeated requests for a date, physical contact, or sex (reported by 50 percent of women).
Emails, texts, and instant messaging are new means of sexual harassment, resulting in faster, at times anonymous, and more widespread sharing of sexually explicit messages and images, including pictures of coworkers.
According to a 2014 national poll, “43% of women have been sexually harassed in their workplace. Women were also more than twice as likely as men to say they had experienced unwanted sexual contact while at work (20% compared to 9%)” (Canadian Women’s Foundation, 2016, p. 5). If we compare the 1993 and 2014 statistics (from 23 percent to 43 percent), it appears sexual harassment has become more pervasive. The change in statistics may be due to more awareness about sexual harassment and to a growing willingness to discuss sexual harassment, at least anonymously. Regardless of the explanation for the increase, sexual harassment remains a systemic issue in Canadian workplaces. Recently, advocates have also highlighted the prevalence of sexual harassment and assault against LGB and transgender people. Gay men, for example, report being subject to sexually explicit and homophobic comments, jokes, and touching. In his interview, Martin discusses the daily jokes and comments that were made about his sexuality. Such harassment and assaults serve to intimidate, humiliate, and ostracize gay men because of their sexuality.
Have you witnessed and/or experienced sexual harassment in any of your jobs?
How did the sexual harassment (of yourself or a coworker) make you feel? How did it make you feel about your safety and desire to be at your workplace?
According to the 1993 survey, nearly one in five women (18 percent) reported threats made concerning their job situation if they refused a sexual relationship. Such threats serve to silence women and prevent them from launching a sexual harassment complaint. Sexual harassment is, at its core, a manipulation of power in a relationship. If we consider recent high-profile cases of sexual harassment—such as in Hollywood, in the 2016 American presidential election, and in the Canadian media—in each of these cases, many people knew that acts of sexual harassment had occurred, but people did not publicly reveal or oppose the sexual harassment for years. In our own work lives, we often hear about, witness, and/or experience sexual harassment, but we may hesitate to speak up. Women have long developed informal ways of defending themselves and each other against harassment and assault, such as warning each other about the actions of certain men and supporting each other emotionally.
Have you ever engaged in these informal ways of defending against sexual harassment?
What other forms of informal defense or resolution have you used when encountering sexual harassment?
Many women have developed these informal ways of dealing with sexual harassment because they do not feel like they can safely report the incidents to their employers. As the Canadian Women’s Foundation explains, “[a] reason women might not speak up about sexual assault or harassment is because the abuser is in a position of authority in their workplace, school, sports team, family, or community. Women may be afraid they won’t be believed and that the voices of men with status will be believed over theirs. Many fear that speaking up will jeopardize their goals, career or reputation” (Canadian Women’s Foundation, 2016, p. 5). The #MeToo Movement—started by Tarana Burke, a woman of colour—is pushing back against these silences as celebrities and people from many communities and occupations are using social media to publicly identify perpetrators of sexual harassment and assault and call for drastic changes in how workplaces address sexual harassment and assault.
What do you think about the strategy to publicly name people who have engaged in sexual harassment and assault in workplaces?
Sexual harassment comes from many different sources. It is important to note that gender, sexuality, race, and disability complicate hierarchies and power relations in workplaces. For example, women and marginalized people have reported experiencing sexual harassment from people in lower positions within the workplace. In such cases, patriarchal, racist, and ableist power relations contravene the hierarchies of different occupational positions in the workplace. According to the 1993 survey, 55 percent of women have been harassed by coworkers, 38 percent by a boss, and 13 percent by clients or customers (Johnson, 1994). This last type of harassment—customer sexual harassment—is a growing problem for women in the service sector who deal with customers on a daily basis. See Kaitlyn Matulewicz’s article in this unit on customer sexual harassment restaurants in British Columbia. Cosmopolitan recently produced a series of videos called #ThatsHarassment. Take a look at the videos, noting that they are predominantly based on heterosexual and cisgender power dynamics.
How did the videos make you feel?
Were the videos accurate portrayals of sexual harassment and assault in workplaces?
Did the videos change your perception of what sexual harassment and assault in workplaces can look like?
Women have succeeded in identifying sexual harassment as a problem and have demanded changes be made in the workplace. Most workplaces now have sexual harassment policies that aim to eliminate inappropriate behaviour and provide a complaint process when it does occur. These processes, however, vary within workplaces: some have clear processes for filing complaints, using mediation to address the issue and disciplining the offender; others have spotty, poorly enforced policies and procedures that do not hold offenders or workplaces accountable. Federal and provincial human rights legislation in Canada also offers legal avenues that people can follow. Unfortunately, these formal processes are often slow, cumbersome, and ineffective and come with the risks we discussed above. Therefore, many women, gay people, and transgender people choose to deal with workplace sexual harassment informally or not at all, rather than pursue formal measures.
Have incidences of sexual harassment been addressed by your employers? If so, do you think the situation was adequately addressed?
How could companies, government bodies, and workers’ organizations create better sexual harassment policies and procedures?
Sensitivity Training, Women at the Top, and Solidarity
The establishment of employment rights and sexual harassment legislation have been dominant liberal feminist employment goals. Critics, including socialist feminists, black feminists, and people with disabilities, Indigenous, LGB, and transgender advocates argue that there are limitations to depending on liberal rights and laws as a means of creating safe, respectful, and equal workplaces. First, recall the complicated and frustrating process of trying to access human rights protections against employment discrimination, as we discussed in the “Employment Rights” section of this unit. Second, it is argued, antidiscrimination and anti–sexual harassment policies focus on the individual, case-by-case level, rather than on systemic discrimination. Solutions usually target a single person as opposed to questioning and challenging how the workplace culture, environment, practices, and policies facilitate discrimination and/or harassment.
Third, it is argued that it is difficult to make a case for discrimination on the basis of intersectional identities or multiple systems of oppression. Consider the reading by Kimberlé W. Crenshaw (1989) in this unit. Crenshaw examines the case of DeGraffenreid v. General Motors, in which five African American women sued General Motors for discriminating against black women in their hiring and firing practices. As Crenshaw discusses, during the case it was argued that since General Motors had hired women in the past, the case could not be made that discrimination was occurring against the black women on the basis of gender. The court effectively tried to separate the intersectional discrimination that was experienced by black women. In Canada it is also difficult to make a case for intersectional discrimination because human rights commissions and courts prefer to focus on one identity at a time.
In response to such criticisms, worker advocates have pushed for changes in the workplace that address multiple systemic incidents of discrimination and oppression. One such change is the introduction of sensitivity or cultural training. Sensitivity training usually consists of an external organization offering a few sessions on the workplace’s discrimination and sexual harassment policies and on racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality, religious, and ability differences. There are sensitivity training programs that are more involved and intensive, such as the program discussed in the interview with Kristy from the Pride Centre of Edmonton, which focuses on creating long-term changes to organizations’ policies for respecting all workers, as well as workspace accommodations (e.g., physically accessible and gender neutral).
Have you participated in sensitivity training in your workplace? Do you think the sensitivity training was effective in mediating discrimination and sexual harassment in your workplace?
Some argue, like Andy in her interview, that sensitivity training does not change workplace cultures of discrimination because training is usually offered once a year, and changing people’s ingrained prejudices takes dedicated time, self-reflection, and behavioural transformation. Cultures of discrimination refer to accepted and promoted ways of interacting between coworkers, the different valuation of people and their work, and the different treatment of people based on ingrained systems of oppression. You may have heard recent news stories about sexist cultures in the computer and technology industries, and the women, LGB people, transgender people, Indigenous people, and people of colour who are speaking openly in protest. People in the computer and technology industries have reported experiencing overt sexual harassment and assault and subtle actions that silence, degrade, and undercut them. Women, LGB and transgender people, Indigenous people, and people of colour have told stories of being mistaken for the administrative, cleaning, or maintenance staff; being shut out of important conversations and decisions; being assigned the worst tasks and shifts; being passed up for opportunities; and being sexually harassed—for dates, nude photos, and sexual contact—on a daily basis. In her interview, Darcy discusses these issues in the computer and technology industry. Moreover, women who do speak up are often called shrill, bitchy, and emotional. Such reactions serve to further silence and undermine women.
Have you had similar experiences in your workplace? Did you think these experiences were connected to your gender, sexuality, race, or ability?
What was it about the particular kind of treatment that made you think the actions were discriminatory?

Women of colour in technology (WOCinTech Chat, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
As a result of such cultures of discrimination, it has been found that women and marginalized people speak up less in meetings and discussions, lack confidence in their expertise, quit jobs silently, and do not apply for jobs for which they are qualified. Therefore, it is argued, work organizations need to change in many foundational ways in order to enable women, racialized people, Indigenous people, LGB people, transgender people, and people with disabilities to work in safe, respectful, fulfilling, and flexible jobs for fair compensation.
To challenge such sexism in workplaces, liberal feminists have pushed to have more women in executive and leadership positions to break the highest glass ceiling. As the New York Times reported, in 2015 “fewer large companies are run by women than by men named John” (Wolfers, 2015, n.p.). Thus, despite decades of advocacy for women’s advancement in workplaces, women have not reached top work positions. Liberal feminists, therefore, have argued that concerted efforts need to be made to bring women into executive and leadership positions in order to change the culture of workplaces from the top, since that is where workplace decisions are made.
In a similar vein, you may have heard of recent government efforts—from your provincial government and from the federal governments in Canada and the United States—to push for companies to promote more women to top positions. Critics of these initiatives argue that such changes are “easy wins” for governments because they can point to the promotion of a few dozen women as progress. Other shortcomings of such strategies include, first, that straight white women are usually promoted; second, that the women who are promoted are saddled with substantial responsibility to change the entire culture of a workplace; and third, that in order to reach the top, women often need to fulfill Western masculine traits of competitiveness and selfishness.
How can women change the workplace culture if they reinforced such workplace culture in order to reach positions of power?
Instead of focusing on the individual-level or top-down solutions, how do we work together and support each other in our workplaces?
Socialist and black feminists have suggested that instead of trying to get more women in top executive positions, workplaces need to be less hierarchal and more democratic. To these ends, all employees should be given opportunities to have their voices heard and their concerns addressed, and all employees should share in the decision-making responsibilities as well as the profits of the organization. This is called a bottom-up approach, wherein workers at the lowest ranks are empowered within the organization. A nonhierarchal, democratic workforce could help address the power imbalances that often lead to discrimination and sexual harassment. If all workers have been empowered to voice their concerns and to take responsibility for the well-being of the organization, they may work to build a more inclusive and respectful work culture.
Do you think the bottom-up approach could fundamentally change workplace cultures of discrimination?
As Laura and Jeanette discuss in their interviews, it can be taxing and dangerous to constantly advocate for yourself in the workplace. Speaking out about discrimination and sexual harassment may come with retribution from the accused and employers in the forms of continued harassment and abuse and/or job termination. Moreover, advocacy itself is work—it takes time and emotional commitments that can distract from paid and unpaid work responsibilities. Therefore, acting as an ally—supporting someone experiencing discrimination—can help alleviate the burden of advocacy for an individual worker and can help create solidarity among many coworkers.
Have you ever acted as an ally in the workplace and worked with a coworker to address discrimination or sexual harassment? If so, what was the outcome of your help as an ally? If not, why did you choose not to act as an ally?
Allyship can take many forms, including supporting a coworker’s disclosure of discrimination or sexual harassment, supporting the implementation of new antidiscrimination policies, and confronting discriminatory behaviour, be it causal or in hiring practices. Allyship can be complex and requires conscious contemplation and engagement. Feminist advocates state that allies should be cautious about speaking on someone else’s behalf and should instead seek to listen, only engaging when asked by those who are affected by the culture of discrimination. Otherwise, allies risk silencing the people they are trying to help.
Do you follow other guidelines for allyship in the workplace?
What do you think other guidelines for allyship in the workplace should be?
After considering the sensitivity training, top-down, bottom-up, and allyship strategies, which solution or combination of solutions do you think would best change workplace cultures of discrimination?
Economic Inequality: The Wage Gap and Pay Equity
While the difference between women’s and men’s income has narrowed somewhat as women have increased their education and labour force participation, the wage gap remains a persistent concern. According to Statistics Canada, in 1967 the wage gap between women and men working full time was 58.4 percent, which meant that women were earning 58.5 cents for every dollar earned by men. In the late 1960s, employment ads in newspapers listed women’s and men’s jobs separately, and different wages paid to women and men holding the same job was common. This was the situation that existed before the 1971 report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, which brought the issue of gender-based wage discrimination to public attention.
Despite the narrowing of the wage gap, differences persist. Figure 3.1 shows how the long-term trend has shifted from 1976 to 2015. For instance, in 1976 women earned 59.4 percent of men’s wages, but by 2017 the gap had narrowed to 88 percent, which meant that women were earning roughly 88 cents for every dollar men earned. Advocates for pay equity started the campaign Working for Free Day, which commemorates the day every year on which women begin working for free for the remainder of the year. In 2017 that date was September 22: “Ontario women earn two-thirds what their male peers do. With a third of the year remaining, from Sept. 22 onward it’s as if they’re working for free” (Battersby, 2017).
What do you think of the Working for Free Day campaign? Do you think it effectively raises awareness about the gender wage gap in Canada?

Figure 3.1—Gender Pay Ratio of Workers Aged 25 to 54, Canada, 1976 to 2015
(Adapted from Moyser, 2017)
It is important to note that the previous graph masks important differences among women—differences that depend on indigeneity, race, and immigration status:
Working full-time, Aboriginal women earn 10% less than Aboriginal men and 26% less than non-Aboriginal men. Racialized women earn 21% less than racialized men and 32% less than non-racialized men. Immigrant women earn 25% less than immigrant men and 28% less than non-immigrant men. (Lambert & McInturff, 2016, p. 6)
How do we explain the wage gap? Is it pure discrimination, or are other factors involved? Statistics Canada’s 2006 Workplace and Employee Survey (WES) helps answer this question. Consistent with other studies, the WES found that about one-quarter (24 percent) of the wage gap is accounted for by the differences in women’s and men’s “human capital,” which includes differences in the education/training, skills, and work experience both groups bring to the workplace. Yet, as we discussed in Unit 2, higher education levels do not guarantee higher labour force participation or equal pay:
The wage gap actually increases for Aboriginal, racialized and immigrant women with university degrees. Aboriginal women with a university degree earn 24% less than Aboriginal men with a university degree and 33% less than non-Aboriginal men with a university degree. This clearly demonstrates the limits of education as a tool to address the discriminatory distribution of wages and employment. Discriminatory hiring and wage setting practices are undermining the benefits of education for these groups. (Lambert & McInturff, 2016, p. 6)
The clustering of women in “low-wage industries” accounts for another 20 percent of the wage gap. In some cases, low pay may be appropriate for the job; however, studies also show that female-dominated occupations (e.g., health care and child care) are often undervalued and underpaid. As Statistics Canada reports, “Female dominated occupations tend to be compensated at lower wage rates than male dominated occupations—even when they involve the same skill level” (Moyser, 2017, n.p.).
What advocacy strategies could workers use to fight for equal pay in female-dominated occupations?

March to Close the Gaps, Minneapolis, MN, August 24, 2013
(Photo: Fibonacci Blue, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
A tendency for women to work in industries with high numbers of part-time workers because of their unpaid domestic labour duties accounts for about 10 percent of the wage gap. These workplaces generally offer lower hourly wages, which contributes to the wage gap as well.
Socialist feminists have argued that we need to establish a system to pay people for heretofore unpaid domestic work. Do you think this would help equalize the wage gap?
Canadian women have a long history of fighting for better pay (see Box 3.1.). Legislation on this issue has gone through several distinct stages. The first stage of legislation—which sought equal pay for equal work—had only a limited impact because women tend to work in different jobs than men. The second stage of legislation—equal pay for similar or substantially similar work—was also limited in its impact for much the same reason. The third stage of legislation—equal pay for work of equal value, or pay equity—allowed various jobs to be compared and thus overcame the segregation of women and men into different types of work. Men’s and women’s jobs were scored according to the effort, skill, working conditions, and responsibility they involved. Wages for jobs with similar scores were compared and adjustments were made in cases where women were being underpaid.
Despite its merits, pay equity legislation has generated controversy. There are many vocal critics of the assertion that there is a gendered wage gap (you may see them trolling every online article about the wage gap). Such critics misconstrue the above statistics and argue that women are simply choosing part-time, lower-paying, and unskilled jobs and are paid less accordingly. Yet statistics demonstrate two major counterpoints. First, as we discussed, when women enter traditionally male occupations in substantial numbers, the average pay for these jobs decreases. Second, when women have the same education, experience, and skills as their male counterparts and are in the same or very similar occupation as men, they are still paid less (Lambert & McInturff, 2016). Critics also feel that equal pay legislation interferes with free-market processes for wage setting. But supporters note that the market is not a neutral playing field, that wages have been shaped by intersectional discrimination, and that pay equity redresses these historical and ongoing biases.
Thus, and perhaps of the most interest, is the fact that more than one-third (38 percent) of the wage gap remains unexplained, even after taking all other factors into consideration (Statistics Canada, 2009). Here, we can see how many of the concepts and theories that we have been considering throughout the course manifest: based on multiple systems of oppression and on cultures of discrimination, employers consciously and subconsciously value women’s and Indigenous, racialized, LGB, and transgender people’s work, education, experiences, and capabilities differently than their white heterosexual male counterparts’, and accordingly such employers pay their employees less.
To date, settlements based on this legislation have reduced the wage gap significantly, but the legal process is often long and difficult (see Box 3.1). Legislation also varies by jurisdiction, creating patchwork coverage for women according to province, industry, and size of employer. Despite these limitations, pay equity legislation is an important attempt to revalue many kinds of women’s work, and it has helped numerous women who work in low-paying, traditional jobs. Western colonial society is quite secretive about people’s pay, raises, bonuses, and financial statuses, serving in part to hide systemic inequalities in pay.
Do you think, as Andy argues in her interview, that pay scales should be public? Do you think that if you knew how much your coworkers were making you would feel empowered to ask for equal pay?
In an effort to close the wage gap by 2022, the government of Iceland plans to make it illegal to pay people differently based on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, or nationality: “Under the proposed legislation—announced on International Women’s Day—companies with 25 or more employees would have to get certification to prove that they offer equal pay for work of equal value” (Hutt, 2017, n.p.).
Do you think that Iceland’s plan could be an effective strategy for lowering the wage gap in Canada? Why or why not?
Box 3.1—Civil Servants Win Pay Fight with Ottawa
The 14-year fight by thousands of federal public servants for pay equity paid off Wednesday in a landmark decision that could cost the federal government up to $4 billion in back pay and interest.
A Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the federal government owes nearly 200,000 of its former and current workers up to 13 years of back pay to wipe out the wage gap between female- and male-dominated jobs in the public service. The case, led by the Public Service Alliance of Canada, is the longest running and largest human rights case in North America. Its implications will be far reaching . . .
The decision affects about 54,000 clerks, secretaries, librarians, data processors, hospital workers, and education support staff now working for the federal government. More than 85 per cent of those are women and most earn less than $20,000 a year.
It also affects another 140,000 former public servants. Workers who retired or have taken the buyout since 1985 would also get wage adjustments, increasing their pensions and buyout packages.
(May, 1998)
Unions
Women are also challenged to strengthen their presence and influence within unions. Historically, women’s membership in unions has been very low, but since the 1960s their numbers have grown dramatically.
In 1976, 22.3% of women were in unionized jobs; by 2009, this had increased to 32.6%. Men’s unionization has decreased, from 39% in 1976 to 30.3% in 2009. As a result, unionization rates were slightly higher among women than men in 2009. (Ferrao, 2010, p. 19)
This increase is due, in part, to the growing presence of women in the paid labour force overall and an increase in the number of women entering occupations, such as those in the public sector, that have high rates of unionization (Statistics Canada, 2000, p. 106). The unionization of part-time and nonpermanent jobs, many of which are held by women, account for a further percentage of union workers (Akeampong, 2004).

Figure 3.2—Percentage of Female and Male Workers Unionized, 1976 to 2009 (Adapted from Ferrao, 2010)
Socialist feminists have long pushed for unions to accept women, for women to join unions, and for unions to support female members’ specific needs. Women fought for representation within unions by calling out sexism within unions, running for and gaining positions of leadership within unions, and forming women’s committees and caucuses, all of which channeled women’s collective power into changing union policies and advocating for women’s labour issues. Unionization has helped women achieve important gains. As the Canadian Labour Congress recounts:
The labour movement pushed for changes to make maternity leave more accessible, not only in legislation, but also by bargaining better paid maternity leave for its members. And they didn’t stop at just maternity leave. As early as 1979, Quebec’s Common Front, representing government, education and health workers, negotiated 20 weeks of fully paid maternity, 10 weeks leave when parents adopted a child, and five days of paternity leave! In 1981 after a 42-day strike, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers won postal workers across Canada 17 weeks of paid maternity leave. The concept of longer periods of paid maternity leave than was available through unemployment insurance benefits soon became mainstream and expanded across the country. Unions didn’t stop at maternity leave. Adoption leave, paternity leave, and parental leave—available to either parent—were routinely negotiated with employers. Today, we advocate for better access to quality and affordable child care for all workers—so families can better balance their work and family lives. Access to childcare and early childhood education provide economic benefits to the country, and help boost productivity. (Canadian Labour Congress, 2015)
Overall, women who belong to unions receive higher wages and better benefits (pensions, sick leave, health and life insurance, etc.) than those who work outside of unions (Cantrell, 1996). The wage gap between female and male union workers is also smaller, and the growing presence of women in unions has forced union leaders to pay more attention to issues such as pay equity, sexual harassment, work-family balance, parental leave, and child care. As you listen to the interview with Marie, consider the following questions:
How important was unionizing for nurses in Calgary in terms of their wages and benefits, but also in terms of the respect for their profession, their changing roles and power among doctors, and their ability to fight for their own workers’ rights?
What was the public response to the Calgary nurses’ strike? Why do you think the public supported or did not support the strike?

Margaret Peggy Askin with the Calgary and District Labour Council counterprotests against the neo-Nazi group Aryan Guard at city hall in Calgary, AB, October 14, 2007 (Photo: user:Thivierr, Wikimedia Commons, GFDL, CC BY-SA 2.0)
Despite the advantages of unionization, however, nearly two-thirds of the female workers in Canada do not belong to a union (Morisette, Schellenberg, & Johnson, 2005). These women often hold precarious part-time jobs in the retail and fast food sectors, where rates of unionization are low. Organizing workers in these sectors is difficult because of high job turnover and the small size of the workplace. However, unions are paying more attention to these workers, given their growing numbers and the fact that they are an important source of future union members.
Workers have also engaged with their unions, with varying degrees of success, to advocate for their rights on the basis of sexuality.
As workers, activists, and staff of unions, [LGBTQ people] worked hard and pushed their unions, but did not always succeed. Many of them tried to get elected, but were not elected. Many tried again and again to raise their voices but were ridiculed and marginalized. Many eventually quit their jobs, went elsewhere, “played straight” or gave up on the union movement. Although unrecorded in history, their defeats were no doubt a passage to later victories, and we honour their visibility, voice and courage. (Khosla, 2014, p. 3)
Through the 1990s and 2000s, victories were attained as unions pushed for changes to antidiscrimination legislation protecting LGB workers in hiring and promotion; the inclusion of LGB and queer families in parental, bereavement, and family leave policies; same-sex marriage employment benefits; and workplace policies that addressed harassment on the basis of sexuality (Khosla, 2014). LGB and queer workers often used their unions to compel changes in labour laws:
Unions negotiate new provisions that eventually become enshrined in law, and laws become integrated into the reading of collective agreements. Gay and lesbian workers first organized for their rights in their locals, at the bargaining table, winning new rights in their collective agreements. Once same-sex rights, protections and benefits began to be included in collective agreements, the grievance procedures then provided a mechanism to challenge discrimination against gays and lesbians. If a case was not resolved at the workplace, it went to arbitration at a Labour Relations Board. (Khosla, 2014, p. 9)
Various unions have begun to support transgender people’s labour rights, including the addition of gender identity and expression to harassment and discrimination policies. York University’s CUPE Local 3903 advocated for many vital issues for transgender workers:
In terms of actual rights for trans[gender] workers in bargaining and contracts, in 2001 CUPE Local 3903 representing teaching assistants and part-time faculty at York University in Toronto negotiated a historical first, Transsexual Transition Leave. Workers are entitled to up to eight paid weeks off for their transition leave. Additionally, they bargained and amended harassment and discrimination language to include trans[gender] transition status, gender expression and gender identity as the basis of discrimination. Also, included in this ground-breaking agreement was an increased allotment to the Ways and Means Fund, dedicated to supporting transitioning members. This paved the way for the creation of a Transition Fund, the first ever of its kind, in subsequent rounds of bargaining. (Khosla, 2014, p. 22)
As CUPE Local 3903 showed, unions can advocate for robust policies in support of transgender workers’ specific needs.
Demonstrating the intersectional solidarity, workers have formed alliances among different union advocacy committees and caucuses as they recognized that many workers’ issues, such as nondiscrimination, pay equity, and sexual harassment, affected women and racialized, LGB, queer, and transgender people.
Work-Family Initiatives
Another way women have sought to transform their work is through work-family initiatives. Many of these work-family initiatives were proposed by the 1970 Royal Commission on the Status of Women. While these initiatives involve many different arrangements, most strive to combine women’s paid work with their household and child-care responsibilities. Women often pursue such arrangements on an individual basis by asking their employers to reduce their hours or to allow them to telecommute (work from home) or job share. A job share is an arrangement where two or more employees share the hours and tasks of a full-time job. It is hoped that job shares can enable employees to have more hours of other work, be it paid or unpaid, without losing the permanence, benefits, or title of a full-time job.
Do you reduce your hours, telecommute, and/or job share to make time for your unpaid work? What are the benefits and challenges of each arrangement?
These solutions, however, come with drawbacks. Typically, when you reduce your hours, your pay is reduced. As well, studies have shown that taking time off for pregnancy, child care, and/or elder care has significant effects on women’s pay, career trajectories, and opportunities over their working lives. Consider the story of Acting Sub-Lt. Laura Nash, reported by the CBC:
Acting Sub-Lt. Laura Nash is on her way out of the military after being given what she says is an utterly impossible, unfair choice. The single mother says she was called into a meeting with two superior officers, both of them women, in late 2013 and claims she was told she had too many “family issues.” She faced a training deadline to go to sea and was given six weeks to decide between her child and her career as a warship navigator. (Brewster, 2017)
The CBC article states that in 2017 the federal Liberal government “released its defence policy which set goals of increasing the representation of women in uniform, more respectful treatment and greater career flexibility” (Brewster, 2017).
What specific changes would Canada’s defence institutions need to make to increase “greater career flexibility” for women?
Maternity and Parental Leave
In other cases, initiatives come from the collective efforts of unions or women’s groups or at the request of the employers themselves. Governments also influence work-family initiatives. For example, in 2000 the federal (Liberal) government’s extension of maternity and parental benefits effectively doubled women’s paid leave time; in 2008 the federal (Conservative) government extended maternity and parental benefits to include self-employed workers as well; and in 2017 the federal (Liberal) government extended the time allowance for mothers and fathers who qualify to receive government benefits. For most Canadians, parental leave and benefits are accessed through the Employment Insurance system. The Globe and Mail published an article that provides an analysis of the benefits and constraints of the 2017 changes.
According to Donna S. Lero, “Outside of Québec only 12.2 per cent of recent fathers took or intended to claim parental leave in 2013, either on their own or by sharing some of the leave and benefits with their spouse/partner” (Lero, 2015, p. 2). Quebec’s parental leave system functions differently than the rest of Canada’s by offering more substantial and flexible financial benefits and benefits specifically for fathers, resulting in more fathers taking parental leave. Critics of the 2017 federal government changes argue that the policies may not address the issue of fathers’ low rates of use of parental leave because there are no specific changes or incentives for fathers.
Why do you think fathers in heterosexual relationships tend not to take parental leave? Have you had to make the choice about which parent would take leave? How did you come to a decision?
Liberal feminists have argued that workplaces need to equalize parental leave benefits for mothers and fathers. Once the benefits are equalized, liberal feminists argue, men will feel compelled to take the leave and responsibility for unpaid domestic work. Yet feminist analysists have argued that when men in heterosexual relationships are given equal access to parental leave, many do not take it for several reasons. First, it is argued that social norms still dictate that women should stay at home to care for newborn and young children. Second, men tend to earn more than their female partners, and taking parental leave would be financially challenging. Third, many men report that they fear that their employers and coworkers would perceive them as being disloyal and uncommitted to their jobs if they took parental leave. Recognizing these persistent inequalities, socialist feminists argue that the parental leave system needs to be overhauled and that mothers should get a guaranteed income, regardless of their employment status, for taking care of newborn children and for contributing to social reproduction.

Strollers in front of Junibacken (Photo: Andriy Baranskyy, Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
While men have reported that they avoid taking parental leave to protect their careers, studies have shown that women’s careers are negatively impacted when they have children, while men’s careers are positively impacted by having children. The concepts of the motherhood penalty and the fatherhood bonus have been used to explain these gendered trends. As reported in the New York Times, Dr. Michelle Budig explains:
Employers read fathers as more stable and committed to their work; they have a family to provide for, so they’re less likely to be flaky. . . . That is the opposite of how parenthood by women is interpreted by employers. The conventional story is they work less and they’re more distractible when on the job. (Miller, 2014, n.p.)
Thus, fathers get a bonus for having children but are punished for taking parental leave to care for their children. Women, on the other hand, are penalized in career advancement and pay if they have children and take time off work to care for them. The motherhood penalty and the fatherhood bonus demonstrate that the economy and market are not equal playing fields for men and women. Rather, there remain deep-seated gendered valuations of women’s and men’s work and family commitments and contributions to society.
Child-Care Initiatives
eminist advocates have consequently argued that we need more systemic work-family initiatives, such as universal child care. Once parental leave is over, working parents often struggle to find child-care solutions. While child care is more widely available than in the past, sufficient child care to accommodate all preschool children in Canada is still lacking. In 1996, for instance, Canada had just over 300,000 child-care spaces available for preschoolers, while 900,000 families had at least one preschool child (Statistics Canada, 2000, p. 101). By 2012, 986,842 regulated child-care spaces were available across Canada, which accommodated only 20.5 percent of children aged 0–12 (Friendly, Halfon, Beach, & Forer, 2013). Statistics Canada has created an interactive table showing the employment rates by sex, province, and metro area, as well as the median monthly child-care fees for selected cities in 2015.
There have been formative feminist advocacy efforts to have universal child care across the country. Universal child care can take many forms but generally includes federally or provincially funded, licensed, not-for-profit facilities. Through universal child-care programs, governments also regulate facility quality and safety, training standards and pay levels, and the costs or fees of child care. In some jurisdictions, universal child care is free, while in others, such as Quebec, there is a low standardized rate per child per day.
Indeed, the availability of affordable child care is an important factor in women’s ability to participate in the labour force (Statistics Canada, 2006). Many women opt to stay out of the labour force because child care is too expensive and their wages do not offset the costs of child care. Iceland, Slovenia, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands have the highest percentage of working mothers, and each of those countries has a comprehensive national child-care program (Mojtehedzadeh, 2014). A Statistics Canada report shows that there is a correlation between the women’s labour force participation and the cost of child care (Moyser, 2017).
Have you had to decide about whether to use child care? What factors influenced your decision to use child care?

Daycare services for children of military personnel, Morale Welfare and Recreation Child Development Center, Naval Support Activity Mid-South, Millington, TN (US Navy photo by Photographer’s Mate 3rd Class Joseph M. Buliavac, ID 050114-N-3659B-091, Wikimedia Commons)
There are discrepancies in the quality and flexibility of child care across Canadian provinces and cities. As the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (2016) reports, in 2016 families in Toronto paid $1150 per child per month for child care, compared to families in Montreal, who paid $164 per child per month. The province of Quebec has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of women in its labour force since it introduced a low-cost universal daycare system for the province (Statistics Canada, 2006).
Feminist advocates have argued that the absence of a national universal child-care program has made it difficult to regulate the quality of child care and the training of the staff. Moreover, feminist advocates argue that child-care workers and foreign domestic care workers, who are predominantly women of colour, are underpaid, further undervaluing care work and traditionally female occupations.
Still, the hope for a national universal child-care program seems ill-fated as successive governments (Conservative and Liberal) have opted to give families a child-care benefit, which is a tax-free monthly payment to use for the child care of their choice, if indeed child-care spaces are available. Feminist advocates argue that the child-care benefit falls quite short of covering the ever-growing costs of child care. Moreover, they warn, the child-care benefit is an individual solution to the issue, wherein middle- and upper-class families can still pay for higher-quality child care, while lower-class families are relegated to the limited choices that they can afford. In comparison, the systemic solution of universal child care could bring equality across the country in terms of child-care prices, quality of care, and staff compensation.
Why do you think federal and provincial governments (other than Quebec) have resisted implementing universal child care?
Helping women combine their paid and unpaid work is a positive goal, but ironically, many initiatives are limited because they apply only to women. Directing work-family initiatives and policies at women only reinforces existing gender divisions of labour. Such approaches imply that women need “special policies” to participate in paid work, rather than acknowledging that all workers—women and men—have family and household responsibilities.
In addition, implementing work-family policies on an individual basis for specific employees or certain workplaces—as opposed to creating systemic national policies—creates further disparities among women by providing some with good options and leaving others with none at all.
In summary, this unit has discussed a number of strategies women and LGB, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people have used to transform their work and their economic statuses. Each method has a different focus and approach to fostering change. The assigned readings for this unit examine some of these issues in more detail. They draw from a diverse range of writers, including academics, union activists, public policy analysts, journalists, and workplace practitioners.