Briefing: Gender inequality and the pandemic
The impact of COVID-19 has seen unprecedented change in workplaces, but have these changes disproportionately impacted women? Should employers be concerned about the so-called ‘she-cession’? This briefing looks at the issues.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, it is women who have faced additional pressures and responsibilities in their home lives and the impact of this in workplaces is becoming increasingly clear. Before the pandemic, women were already doing more hours on average of unpaid work per week, mainly due to taking responsibility for childcare and housework. Women are reporting that this situation has worsened due to a reduction in paid work over the last 18 months. The Office for National Statistics found that, between July and October 2020, a total of 15.3 million jobs were furloughed in the UK. Out of that number for which gender was known, 52% were women despite women only making up 48% of the workforce. The differential for female staff can partly be accounted for as a higher proportion of women work in sectors that had to completely shut down during lockdowns, such as hospitality and events. Concerningly though, research by the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London found that women were more likely to be furloughed for longer periods.
As the furlough scheme was introduced to help employers avoid redundancy situations, when the scheme ended the individuals on furlough were at a higher risk of facing redundancy. Given the furlough statistics, it is hardly surprising that the Office of National Statistics found that unemployment levels for women had increased by 28% since the start of the pandemic. For women who faced job losses over the last couple of years, it is likely there will be a concern that any time out of the workplace will have a continued detrimental impact on their career progression in the future.
We have also encountered more employers making detrimental decisions based on stereotypical assumptions around women at work – for example, pregnant women selected for redundancy ahead of men with comments being made such as “she doesn’t need the job because her husband works”.
Returning to the office and career prospects
There are some positive developments. More employers are offering new flexible and hybrid approaches and while a flexible approach is likely to be welcomed by all employees, it is clear that certain employee groups are more likely to reap the benefits of this, especially women (who are more likely to have primary caring responsibility for children and other dependents) and disabled workers.
It’s important to ensure that homeworkers continue to feel like part of the team and access the same culture as those employees physically attending the office. Managers need to think about how they can manage homeworkers going forward to avoid a two-tier workforce with those in the workplace being favoured. Continuing with online meetings and regular ‘check in’ calls is important but managers do need to be trained on how to manage effectively in these situations.
Employers also need to be cautious about unintentionally contributing to gender inequality. Some employers, for example Deloitte, are allowing employees to decide when they visit the office. Will this policy mean employees with caring responsibilities choose to stay at home and others attend the office, becoming more visible and potentially move favoured by their managers? Does career development positively correlate with being physically in the office? In 2015, a study conducted by researchers from the Stanford Graduate School of Business found that while people working at home were 13% more productive, they were not rewarded with promotions at the same rate as their colleagues who were in the office. It is important that when carrying out pay reviews and/or making promotion decisions that employers should ensure decisions are being made fairly and can be justified to avoid any successful claims for lawful discrimination.
Employers need to actively promote gender balance and progression so that if an individual does have the choice to work at home more regularly, it does not impact on their future career progression and pay.
What should employers do?
Employers should reflect on internal practices, consider what policies have survived the pandemic, and if there are any which may negatively impact women in the workplace then change them. If any of the policies or procedures currently have a greater negative impact on female employees than males, there is a risk employees can claim they are being indirectly discriminated against on the grounds of sex.
Employers should also be prepared to tackle gender stereotypes in the workplace to ensure men and women are on an equal footing. Employers who have adopted hybrid working should have well-drafted policies in place and managers should be trained on how to manage homeworkers.
If employers receive flexible working requests to work from home, it’s important managers know the process to follow to avoid breaching the Flexible Working Regulations 2014. Managers also need to treat staff working reduced hours equally otherwise they could fall foul of the Part Time Worker Regulations 2000 too.
On a more positive note, the Employment Bill is expected to be published in 2022 and we anticipate new measures will be introduced to address concerns around diversity and inclusion in the workplace. It is expected to change flexible working rights so they become day-one rights, introduce a right to time off for carers and extending the period which applies to pregnant employees being protected from redundancy. All of this should help to support women better in the workplace.
Pam Loch is an employment law solicitor and Roisin Kavanagh is a solicitor at Loch Employment Law.
related content
