Deshalb hat der Economist gerade seinen jährlichen Glass-Ceiling-Index veröffentlicht, der die Beteiligung und den Einfluss von Frauen am Arbeitsplatz des Landes zeigt. Wie fast jedes Jahr spiegelt es eine ziemlich traurige Realität für die Schweiz wider.
Wir liegen auf Platz 26 von 29 Ländern. Unterhalb von Griechenland, unter Ungarn, unter so ziemlich ganz Westeuropa. Lediglich Japan, Südkorea und die Türkei rangieren schlechter. Und es hat sich seit Jahren nicht wirklich bewegt.
Wir haben eines der höchsten Pro-Kopf-BIP der Welt, können aber offenbar nicht herausfinden, wie wir Frauen im gleichen Maße wie Portugal in die Arbeitswelt und in Führungspositionen bringen können.
Ich habe einige Vermutungen darüber, warum: die wahnsinnigen Kosten und der Mangel an Kinderbetreuungsmöglichkeiten, die Tatsache, dass die Schulen in vielen Kantonen die Kinder immer noch mittags nach Hause schicken … Aber ich bin gespannt, was andere denken.
Ist es ein strukturelles Problem, ein kulturelles oder beides? Sind die meisten Menschen mit dieser Realität wirklich einverstanden oder wird sie als Problem angesehen?
Würde gerne Gedanken hören, insbesondere von Leuten, die in anderen Ländern gearbeitet haben und vergleichen können.
https://i.redd.it/a5vdrn2vntng1.jpeg
Von LallieDoo
25 Kommentare
Source: https://www.economist.com/interactive/graphic-detail/glass-ceiling-index
(Sadly behind a paywall)
Maybe there is a reason why Switzerland is performing so well economically.
26. I don’t ask myself why with the Swiss Kita system.
What does „women’s influence in the work force“ mean? How many women are working? How many women have high positions? How many women are working in highly-specialized fields?
>We have one of the highest GDPs per capita in the world
That’s the important thing.
[deleted]
But rank great on men’s influence in the workplace, as usual!
I personally never saw the problem here. Usually it even was the opposite where a lot of women were pushed 😅 But maybe there are big differences between cantons, no idea.
26th out of 200 countries, no too bad
How can anyone be surprised? Women’s suffrage dates all the way back to 1971.
People complain about anything, as usual
We want the most competent people in positions of power, irrespective of their sex.
Why should we??? As you say, we doing great economically.
Get the best HUMAN for the job, not the best Woman.
I was “lucky.” I’ve been raising my son alone since he was three — financially as well (I’m a mom). I could keep working because a special school bus picked him up every day at 7 a.m. and brought him home around 4 or 5. No lunches at home to manage.
Sometimes I had to arrange a childminder in the afternoons (usually Wednesdays or Fridays), but because I could work full time, it worked. I was able to build a career.
My son turns 19 in April. Now he travels independently and eats lunch at the same restaurant every day.
I could never have had the same career if I’d had to be home every day for ten years. Impossible.
Anecdotally I’ve been interviewing a lot in the last year, and well over half the hiring managers have been women.
This obviously needs to be dumbed down. The problem isn’t if there are enough incompetent women in positions of power. The problem is whether the capable women have the possibility to reach those positions. Or the desire. So that in the end the whole society benefits. Cause we actually want the most capable humans to make the decisions, right?
If portugal is not doing good economically, and Switzerland *is* doing good economically. And Portugal has many women in positions of influence and Switzerland does not… what does that say exactly?
Are these comments rage bait on purpose or what?
The problem is that basically all leading/deciding positions are then decided by other men, and in a lot of industries there is an old swiss/german boys club. Women often need to prove a lot more than men to get the same benefits. So to whomever said „just prove your worth“, have you ever thought that proving your worth is a lot harder when everyone starts off with thinking you can’t do it?
In my company equally educated women, with more experience than their male peers, were regularly hired at lower salaries. Since it was a small company, there was no pay transparency and this was found out only when a line manager was replaced. And yes, they were good at their job, and eventually got promoted over a lot of the men, but they still lost thousands of francs because someone thought they didn’t look the part by being female.
One of our more progressive supervisors admitted that they „like to hire what they know“ – so other men with similar backgrounds. Despite having clear evidence women they supervise perform same or better. This perpetuates the problem.
Right there embedded with the USA Germany and Japan 🤦♀️
What I find interesting is that the OECD average is not in the middle. This says that the countries below the average really are much worse than the ones high up. The average is being dragged down by the bigoted nine
*sigh* my daughters may have to move away to be appreciated in the work force.
You’re talking about this as if it’s inherently a bad thing. I’ve never heard anyone, man or woman, say „Oh, I wish I was a high level manager!“. This might be used in addition to other data, such as dissatisfaction at work, to reach a useful conclusion but by itself it’s useless. I’m all for equality, but all of this is getting ridiculous, comparing men vs women in random categories and getting angry when it’s not 50/50 without a thought of whether it’s actually a problem.
Women are more likely to care for the children, which is certainly one cause of this as they put their career on pause for years. For this point, I’d love to have data, for example, on how many employers agreed or disagreed to let a new parent reduce their hours to care for a new baby. THAT is something we can work on. If parents could freely decide their hours, they could decide amongst themselves how to distribute child-care time. (Whether that would result in overall a 50/50 distribution, I don’t know, but in this case it would be by choice and thus not a problem.)
In my field of work, it’s like 95% men so the government pushed and still pushes for more women. Problem is that even if the ones hired are highly competent, sometimes outperforming their male colleagues, they’re still seen as token diversity hires. Unfortunate consequence of artificial diversity.
The first, third and fourth biggest economies are at positions 24, 25 and 27. Maybe the issue is different. The leadership positions in these countries have global competition, as they can pay the highest salaries, and you need a long track record to be able to be considered. So you are looking at an older snapshot of the global composition of the leadership class.
As long as nobody shares what and how this index exactly measures, I can’t take that seriously.
On social issues, as a rule, Switzerland is 20 years behind the rest of Europe. The laws on our statue books remain quite sexist depending on the area – and that means discrimination against men and not just against women (eg. custody over children, parental leave, school systems etc.). Outside the law, ask native Swiss women about the discimination that they face – it’s discrete and low level but it’s there (eg. 3 of my female friends all lost their jobs within 6 months of returning to work after maternity recently, random reasons given but it’s clear what it is). Direct democracy is great but it often means we’re moving at a glacial pace when it comes to social issues.