Hidden Health Hazards in Women's Work

Citation

Phibbs, S. (2009), "Hidden Health Hazards in Women's Work", Gender in Management, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 477-480. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542410910980423

This is a book that every woman working in a senior management position, every person who is responsible for the occupational health and safety of employees and all who believe in meritocracy or that workplace equality for women has been achieved, needs to read. For those of us, who are already attentive to workplace discrimination against women, it provides a comprehensive but sobering analysis of the issues.

The book has been rushed into print to coincide with the International Labour Organisation's 2009 campaign “gender equality is at the heart of decent work” as part of which the month of April focused specifically upon women's occupational health and safety (Briar, 2009, p. 221). The publication of the book, and this review, coincides with a series of significant policy set‐backs in the area of gender equity in employment in this country. This month New Zealand's recently elected conservative (read neo‐liberal) National Government axed pay and employment equity investigations into two female‐dominated public sector occupations (teacher aids and social workers) and disestablished the pay and employment equity review office within the Department of Labour (including Briar's own job). The Tertiary Education Union (TEU) (2009) estimates that New Zealand women earn on average 12 per cent less than men. In the public sector the gap is as much as 35 per cent.

The cut backs announced by the New Zealand government have placed in limbo a potentially damning, undisclosed report into the employment of female principals, teachers and school support staff, which identifies 17 specific employment equity issues within this sector (Woulfe, 2009). The announcement has also placed in jeopardy 17 employment equity reviews currently under way in relation to tertiary education (TEU, 2009). Every review that has been done in the public sector has shown women being paid less than men for doing the same work (TEU, 2009). These trends are indicative of a wider problem across most sectors in this country. Yet, New Zealand women have failed to get political traction or to win public support in this area. Reflecting on this failure, three inter‐related reasons come to mind, the first the trend within neo‐liberalism to turn public issues into private troubles, the second the belief that equality is already structurally possible, and the third to explain away the gender pay gap as the result of women's personal choices. This book is therefore a timely reminder of the range of structural barriers, employment issues and workplace hazards for women.

The book tackles the following three myths related to women's employment:

Women's work is safer than men's. Women work less than men and so have less exposure to work‐related health hazards. Women and men are equally well covered by existing health and safety measures (Briar, 2009, p. 188).

Organised into three sections, the first three chapters set out the evidence that both paid and unpaid work is hazardous for women. In each of these chapters, comparisons are made to, and recent literature cited from, five English speaking countries – New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA. This coverage makes these three chapters an excellent quick reference guide for literature and teaching material. The second three chapters provide case studies in the areas of new mothers, community‐based caregivers and academia. The final two chapters focus upon recommendations for employers, for public policy and implications for population health. A feature of the book is that women's occupational health and safety issues are set alongside those of men. In reading the book, it is therefore possible to gain insight into the occupational health and safety issues for men, as well as those of women.

Chapter 1 challenges the assumption that women's employment is safer than men's. Occupational health and safety risks are outlined for women in female‐dominated, mixed gender, male‐dominated occupations and in relation to unpaid caring and domestic work. Chapter 2 considers effort and reward imbalances in relation to women's work and incomes. It is argued, for example, that changes in the gender pay gap have not resulted from improved pay and employment status for women, but from falling male wages (Briar, 2009, p. 50). Health risks to women from unequal opportunities (downward occupational mobility, job stress and time pressures) and unsupportive working environments (bullying, violence and discrimination) are outlined. The theme of employment impacts upon women's health outcomes is continued in Chapter 3. Evidence for stress‐related health outcomes; depression, burnout, musculoskeletal disorders, work‐related cancers, reproductive health outcomes, accidents and occupational infections is presented. Women's greater life expectancy and poorer health expectancy is tackled. Statistics documenting a narrowing of the gap in life expectancy between men and women show an average downward trend of 2.3 years since the 1970s across the five English‐speaking countries cited. This change is attributed to an increasing life expectancy for men and a stalling life expectancy for women. Of concern is the fact that this trend is gathering momentum, with one‐third of the change having occurred during the last five years (Briar, 2009, p. 87).

Chapters 4‐6 provide case studies from New Zealand in relation to the domestic, voluntary and public sectors. Of particular interest is Alison Kirkman's research which looks at female community dementia care workers employed by Alzheimers New Zealand. Common features of their work – low pay, emotional demands, its part‐time nature and uncertainty of employment – are usually indicative of poor health outcomes, yet employees “appear to enjoy better self‐reported health than many other women working as paid or unpaid health care providers” (Briar, 2009, p. 107). She asks the question what is it about this workplace that enhances the health of employees? Key factors identified in Kirkman's research include the following: dementia care workers have a high degree of autonomy in their work, flexible hours, a sense of job satisfaction (making a difference), good support networks are provided by their employer as well as the workers themselves recognising that their job is not as hard as that of family carers.

The chapter on academia is based upon original research which focuses upon (institutional) discrimination in relation to the 70 per cent of women who work in non‐career positions such as tutors, senior tutors, assistant lecturers and fixed term lecturers. The table which summarises the survey findings disputing common assumptions held by human resources managers and university management as to why women “choose” non‐career positions makes particularly interesting reading. For example, the common assumption that non‐career jobs suit staff with care‐giving responsibilities was contradicted by interviewees who stated that “their job would not have allowed time for caregiving responsibilities”. In addition “[s]urvey findings indicated that female academics were less likely than their male colleagues to have dependent children” (Briar, 2009, p. 134). While women in non‐career positions saw appointments to permanent positions with clear career paths (such as lecturer or senior lecturer) as a solution to some of the forms of unfairness or discrimination that they experienced, my own research suggests that for many women and some men in the academy, this is not the case (Phibbs and Curtis, 2006; Curtis and Phibbs, 2006).

Chapter 7 is aimed at employers, employees and unions. It provides examples of best practice and suggestions for inclusive gender sensitive health and safety in workplaces. Family‐friendly workplaces, reducing stress, preventing musculoskeletal disorders, violence and occupational health problems are considered. Useful advice is provided regarding developing a healthy workplace code and gender sensitive (as opposed to gender blind) education for workplace health and safety. The critique of individualised lifestyle approaches to health promotion and arguments made for organisational change, provide a particularly useful summary of these debates for people interested in exploring the structural determinants of health.

The final chapter focuses upon the role of governments and public policy in relation to gender and employment equity. Women are more dependent on government policies for their health and well being than are men. They are over‐represented in poverty statistics and more likely to be members of the working poor. Policies that are identified with targeting poverty in order to improve gender equality for women include single parent benefits, tax credits, minimum wage legislation and universal child benefits. Strategies that support healthy work through pay equity and anti‐discrimination policies and create work‐life balance (parental leave, breastfeeding at work, flexible work and childcare provision) for women are considered. In each of these areas, comparisons are made regarding these policies in relation to New Zealand, Australia, the UK, Canada and the USA and recommendations provided. The final section briefly considers women's health in relation to economic policy and the global economic crisis. The only area in which I am left dissatisfied is that greater attention is not paid to the impact of neo‐liberalism on the provision of healthy and safe working conditions for women. The rise of the consumer ethic, for example, where freedom and rights are equated with the ability to spend money, has legitimated a system of inclusion and exclusion by virtue of economic status. Individualism, which associates poverty and adverse health outcomes with lifestyle choices, also obscures the very real structural barriers to advancing pay and employment equity and improving workplace health and safety for women.

The Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion states that public policy provides the context for facilitating improvements in population health. The charter requires “policy makers to be aware of the health consequences of their decisions and to accept their responsibilities for health” (WHO, 1986). Given the political context into which the book has been released, the New Zealand Government would do well to take note of the arguments presented.