Suchergebnisse

This is a seminal time for Equal Opportunities and Diversity (EO&D) in the UK: the three existing Equality Commissions have been amalgamated into the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and a new Single Equality Act is promised. The concepts of EO&D now incorporate gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, religion and belief and age inequalities. For the future, the problems of separate and relative deprivation, and conflicting experiences and interests, must be tackled, both between and within different categories of disadvantage. These different, complex and sometimes contradictory strands in legislation, policy and practice need to be analysed and understood in order to facilitate genuine social change.This book challenges the official discourse that shapes the debates on EO&D at national, regional and European level. The book will be a key text for students and researchers of EO&D in criminology, social policy, sociology, women's studies, gender studies, public administration, business studies, economics and management and industrial relations, at both undergraduate and postgraduate courses. It will also be of interest to EO&D professionals and policy makers in public and private sector organisations

This article examines how academia in the UK is created and perpetuated by men for men. It is based on three of the author's research projects whose findings indicate patterns of discrimination in UK Higher Education (HE) institutes. The research projects collected both qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative research involved in-depth semi-structured interviews with 80 academics, both women and men at all levels in the UK academic hierarchy. The quantitative research was undertaken via a website survey of the profiles of senior managers in UK HE institutes. The hypothesis is explored that an important mechanism for the continued narrow male-dominated senior management of HE is the disjuncture between formal and informal processes around university promotion. On the one hand, while transparent formal processes seek to locate promotions policies within Equal Opportunity (EO) legislation, other important informal processes are opaque, if not invisible, e.g. definitions of merit, and ways of fostering career development. Rather, these latter rely on particular forms of self-promotion, promotion by certain influential others, and subjective interpretation of policies in a way that tends to marginalise women. It is argued that male cultural hegemony, in replicating itself, perpetuates structures and practices that are insular and designed to primarily benefit a narrow group of men in senior management. These tend to be predominantly, from the disciplines in the physical sciences or engineering where men predominate. It argues that women need to challenge these structures and processes to make universities more compatible with the aspirations of women in academia and to make them more successful institutionally.

This article examines how academia in the UK is created and perpetuated by men for men. It is based on three of the author's research projects whose findings indicate patterns of discrimination in UK Higher Education (HE) institutes. The research projects collected both qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative research involved in-depth semi-structured interviews with 80 academics, both women and men at all levels in the UK academic hierarchy. The quantitative research was undertaken via a website survey of the profiles of senior managers in UK HE institutes. The hypothesis is explored that an important mechanism for the continued narrow male-dominated senior management of HE is the disjuncture between formal and informal processes around university promotion. On the one hand, while transparent formal processes seek to locate promotions policies within Equal Opportunity (EO) legislation, other important informal processes are opaque, if not invisible, e.g. definitions of merit, and ways of fostering career development. Rather, these latter rely on particular forms of self-promotion, promotion by certain influential others, and subjective interpretation of policies in a way that tends to marginalise women. It is argued that male cultural hegemony, in replicating itself, perpetuates structures and practices that are insular and designed to primarily benefit a narrow group of men in senior management. These tend to be predominantly, from the disciplines in the physical sciences or engineering where men predominate. It argues that women need to challenge these structures and processes to make universities more compatible with the aspirations of women in academia and to make them more successful institutionally. ; Este artículo examina cómo la universidad en el Reino Unido es creada y perpetuada por los hombres para los hombres. Se basa en tres de los proyectos de investigación de la autora cuyos hallazgos indican patrones de discriminación en los institutos de Educación Superior (ES) del Reino Unido. Los proyectos de investigación recogieron datos cualitativos y cuantitativos. La investigación cualitativa se basó en entrevistas semi-estructuradas en profundidad a 80 académicos, mujeres y hombres en todos los niveles de la jerarquía académica del Reino Unido. La investigación cuantitativa se llevó a cabo a través de una encuesta on-line a diferentes perfiles de alta dirección en los institutos de Educación Superior (ES). Se explora la hipótesis de que un importante mecanismo para la continuidad de una dirección de la ES, dominada por hombres, es la disyunción entre los procesos formales e informales en torno a la promoción universitaria. Por un lado, mientras que los procesos formales transparentes buscan localizar las políticas de promoción dentro de la legislación sobre Igualdad de Oportunidades (IO), otros procesos informales importantes son opacos, si no invisibles, p.e., definiciones de mérito y formas de fomentar el desarrollo profesional. Estos últimos se basan más bien en formas particulares de autopromoción, promoción por parte de otras personas influyentes, e interpretación subjetiva de las políticas de una manera que tiende a marginar a las mujeres. Se argumenta que la hegemonía cultural masculina, al replicarse, perpetúa estructuras y prácticas que son insulares y diseñadas para beneficiar principalmente a un reducido grupo de hombres en la alta dirección. Estas tendencias tienden a ser predominantes, fundamentalmente en aquellas disciplinas en las ciencias físicas o ingeniería en las que predominan los hombres. Se argumenta que las mujeres deben cuestionar estas estructuras y procesos para hacer que las universidades sean más compatibles con las aspiraciones de las mujeres en el mundo académico y para hacerlas más exitosas institucionalmente.

This paper reports on part of a comparative eight-country study of higher education (HE) policy across Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey, and UK. It explores the uneven shift from the traditional collegial to a new managerialist organisational form both between different countries and even within the countries. It provides an overview of each country's HE system and then analyses the gendered character of academic leadership. Finally, it comes to the conclusion that there is no indication that either the collegial or the managerial system is more conducive to gender equality. It is clear that the strength or absence of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action frameworks has a greater impact on gender equality in universities. ; Professor of Equal Opportunities and Social PolicyDepartment of Social SciencesLoughborough UniversityLE11 3TU UKB.M.Bagilhole@lboro.ac.uk+44 (0)1509 223380Šiame straipsnyje pateikiama aštuonių šalių – Australijos, Airijos, Naujosios Zelandijos, Pietų Afrikos, Švedijos, Turkijos ir Jungtinės Karalystės – lyginamosios aukštojo mokslo politikos studijos dalis. Straipsnyje nagrinėjami nevienodi poslinkiai nuo tradicinės kolegialios prie naujos vadybinės organizacinės formos ne tik skirtingose šalyse, bet ir šalių viduje. Jame pateikiama kiekvienos šalies aukštojo mokslo politikos apžvalga, tuomet analizuojami lyčių skirtumai akademinėje lyderystėje. Straipsnyje parodoma, kad Jungtinėje Karalystėje ir jos buvusiose kolonijose vadybinis valdymo modelis labiau įsitvirtino, o žemyninėje Europoje vis dar išlieka kolegiali valdymo sistema. Anglosaksiškose šalyse bei Švedijoje daugiau moterų valdymo organuose nei Viduržemio jūros šalyse (Portugalijoje, Turkijoje). Tačiau moterų profesorių daugiausia yra Turkijoje. Bet vis dėlto moterų mažai ir tarp profesorių, ir universitetų valdyme. Daroma išvada, kad nei kolegiali, nei vadybinė sistema nėra palankesnė lyčių lygybei. Kolegialaus valdymo sistemoje vyrų socialiniai tinklai išstumia moteris. Esant vadybiniam valdymui, lyčių lygybė labai priklauso nuo centrinės valdžios požiūrio, kuris nieko gero nežada, nes centrinės valdžios atstovai dažnai būna išeiviai iš verslo. Tampa akivaizdu, kad lygių galimybių ir skatinamųjų veiksmų struktūrų stiprumas ar jų nebuvimas turi didesnę įtaką lyčių lygybei universitetuose. Daroma išvada, kad moterų lyderystės universitetuose ateitis priklausys nuo visuomenės nuomonės ar politinio spaudimo, nepriklausomai nuo to, ar valdymo modelis vadybinis, ar kolegialus. Šis tyrimas patvirtina anksčiau gautus rezultatus, kurie rodė, kad moterų pažangą akademinėje bendruomenėje labiausiai skatina atviras ir skaidrus įdarbinimas. O uždari sprendimai, kad ir kur jie būtų priimami, ar tai būtų vyrų tinklai, ar rektoratas, neskatins moterų įdarbinimo.

AbstractIncorporating the social differentiations of gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief, and age into UK equal opportunities and diversity legislation involved creating a new single equality body for Great Britain (England, Scotland, and Wales). This paper assesses the efficacy of an Equality and Diversity Mainstreaming approach established in Northern Ireland (NI) for this new agency. It also stresses the potential value of "intersectionality" to further policy planning and development. It is argued that the combination of the NI model underpinned by the concept of intersectionality could offer a way forward for the new agency where, importantly, the issue of gender remains one of the most important axes of domination. Copyright © 2010 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

PurposeThis study of women "pioneer" priests in the Church of England was to gain further information on women in a non‐traditional, male‐dominated occupation. Uniquely prior to 1994, women were barred from entry to the priesthood altogether, and are still debarred from the top of the Church hierarchy.Design/methodology/approachA national conference for all Diocesan Advisers in Women's Ministry offered the opportunity of surveying 31senior and experienced women priests from across England. They completed an extended open‐ended questionnaire. Agreeing to take up these posts made these women somewhat self‐selecting and not necessarily representative. Also it would be useful to gather data on male clergy experiences for comparison.FindingsGiven their long bitter struggle to be ordained, these women were older, and had more experience than other women in non‐traditional occupations. They did experience a deeply gendered organisation, both through structural disadvantage and cultural hostility. However, most report that becoming a priest has impacted positively on their self‐confidence and positive identity. They see themselves making changes to the gendered regime of the Church, challenging what it means to be a priest through their presence, language, and symbols.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study have important policy implications. The Church's recruitment and selection processes need to change to ensure openness, fairness and transparency. Family friendly policies need to be introduced, including flexible working and job sharing possibilities open to both women and men. Also, the Church needs to make clear its disapproval of discrimination and unacceptable behaviour towards women priests.Originality/valueThe paper provides information on women working in a non‐traditional male‐dominated occupation.

AbstractAs the voluntary sector, particularly the use of volunteers, has been promoted and given greater importance and responsibility by the government, and statutory personal social services have been attacked, the boundaries between voluntary and professional care have become blurred. This article investigates this phenomenon using data from a study of a Home‐Start scheme, which employs two part‐time professional workers to organize a pool of volunteers. It looks at the reality of the provision of voluntary care from the perspective of the volunteers, the organizers of the scheme, and those for whom they provide a service. The gender perspective is considered as a crucial aspect in the "blurring of the boundaries". It is argued that the new rhetoric of the flexibility and adaptability of welfare provided by the voluntary sector hides the increasing use of women volunteers, to offer sophisticated and intensive care. This creates a dilemma. In some cases, the women volunteers and their organizers feel that the essential nature of the care and the responsibility they are expected to take on are inappropriate and should be fulfilled by professional workers. On the other hand, the clients feel that its voluntary nature is an essential part of this care and that it could not be provided by paid statutory workers.