Newsflash: A Barely Dented Ceiling

Link to article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/business/07gender.html

The glass ceiling has been broken. How many times have we heard that same mantra? True, women have made some great strides since the times of standard (and limited to) teachers and nurses, but has all discrimination really been shattered? Is the old statistic of “sixty cents to every man’s dollar” still holding true? It’s easy to try to deny this in light of all the successful women out in the work world today, but their success stories should not be taken as the norm. There are in fact many biases still in place where women and work are concerned and no matter what is attempted to stop them, it is difficult to suppress them completely. In his April 6^th article “Novartis Bias Suit to Begin,” published in The New York Times, Duff Wilson explores this issue as he brings to light the recent sexual discrimination suit brought up against Novartis Pharmaceuticals for their mistreatment and discrimination against more than 5,600 female employees. It is through this burgeoning trial and many others like it that Duff exposes the discrimination that females still face in the workplace today, despite whatever ground they seemed to have gained.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals is a branch of the Swiss-based drug company giant that runs in the United States. The company has been “cited by Working Mother magazine as one of the 100 best companies in the nation for 10 years in a row, through 2009” (Duff 1). Yet, despite this long-time accolade, Novartis presently finds itself on the wrong end of one of the largest sexual discrimination lawsuits in the country. The female employees behind these accusations are suing for over $200 million in damages that they believe were inflicted upon them simply due to their gender. The issue is firmly intertwined with issues of pregnancy and motherhood and many of the women involved in the suit feel that they were slighted and passed over because of their families or even simply because of the potentiality of them becoming pregnant. Fourteen women will be testifying at the upcoming trial, and among their complaints are “one woman…states that her Novartis manager told her he preferred not to hire young women, saying, ‘First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes flex time and a baby carriage,’” another “claims she was encouraged to get an abortion,” and finally, the lead plaintiff claims that after she had twins, she “was repeatedly passed over for promotion by men who had inferior sales numbers” (Duff 1). These women feel that they have sufficient evidence to make a case, but Novartis claims innocence, insisting that they don’t “discriminate against women. [Novartis’s] policies and practices are absolutely cutting edge and are very, very favorable to women” (Duff 1). Though there is precedent of Novartis sexist crimes, the outcome of this trial is still very up in the air. Even with firm evidence, the case could be tied up in court for years.

The Novartis case is not an anomaly. Even the most “women-favorable” companies can play into these games of gender discrimination and then use these ill-begotten honors as shields. Ann Crittenden reveals a similar situation when following the life of interior designer Virginia Daley in “The Mommy Tax.” After Daley had a child and tried to cut back her hours in accordance with her company’s maternity policies, she was denied her lessened hours and was in fact given more work. Her company, Aetna Life & Casualty, was also one of the leaders in Working Mother’s annual list, but Daley nonetheless found herself being forced out when she was unable to maintain the hours demanded of her and her family. She was fired soon after. When she went to trial in 1997, Aetna was the victor. This is also unfortunately not an anomaly. Even worse, most cases of gender discrimination don’t even get to a hearing. In his article, Duff speaks about how even the largest sex discrimination case, one concerning over two million women and Wal-Mart, “was tied up in appeals over class certification and years from a possible trial” (Duff 1). If even a suit of that size and stature cannot get a fair trial, imagine what it would be like on a smaller scale. Cases like this are almost always their-word-versus-mine and I suppose that it can be said that it just goes to show that these women aren’t lying when their voices are often the ones being ignored or called false.

Anti-discrimination laws were made to protect people—in many cases women—but what’s the use of having them if they’re never enforced? With many cases of sexual discrimination going untold, another percentage ignored and discounted, a smaller percentage settled out of court, and another even smaller percentage perhaps getting their change to speak to a jury, only to have them discount the evidence as well, it seems a never ending cycle. It often seems that one of the only ways for women to try to avoid this cycle is to give up their lives as mothers and to embrace the sort of “like a man” work persona and aesthetic that Ariel Levy is so critical of in Female Chauvinist Pigs. But is that a solution at all? Why should women have to compromise themselves, their futures, their families, simply in order to earn what they deserve? Women didn’t ask to be the gender responsible for baring children. It is no personal crime of theirs, is not something they do just to spite their employers. Yet, that is exactly what it’s treated like. Crittenden is more than correct when she calls motherhood a “tax,” and perhaps it’s even worse than that. Until motherhood is given the dignity that it is deserved and women are accepted as workers and mothers without conditions or qualms, sex discrimination in the workplace will continue. And with the legal system doing so little to discourage it, the possibilities of that happening grow slimmer and slimmer.

The glass ceiling may have been cracked, but it has by no means been shattered. Duff Wilson makes that clear in his article through the example of the female employees’ struggles as they fight for the equal treatment that they deserve from Novartis. Being a mother is hard enough without having to pay yet another price for it. One might think that women would be thanked for bearing future generations, but that fact hasn’t seemed to been properly conveyed to employers yet. Until that time, women will have to continue to fight, because whatever the “women cents to men cents” ratio is these days, it’s certainly not an equal one.