... and ain't i a woman?: Sex discrimination laws fall short

February 12, 1992
Issue 

Sex discrimination laws fall short

Australian sex discrimination laws do not adequately protect women and in some cases even reinforce traditional sexist stereotypes, according to a federal parliamentary report.

The Discussion Paper on the Sex Discrimination Act, presented to parliament last week by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, argues that the act contains many loopholes which are actively exploited by employers, organisations and government departments to discriminate against women.

If the committee's recommendations are accepted, the act will be radically overhauled and workplace practices restructured. According to Labour MP Michael Lavarch, chair of the committee, women are discriminated against in the workplace by inflexible working hours and other practices which ignore the competing needs of women looking after children and running homes.

"Like it or not, women in or out of the workplace still do the bulk of child-care and home duties, and often cannot fit into the typical eight hour a day work week", he said. "The unspoken truth is that the paid Australian workforce is in reality dependent on the unpaid labour of women in the home, yet employers are not obliged to take this into account." Lavarch believes it is time this fact of life was incorporated into sex discrimination legislation.

He argues that many exemptions allowed under industrial awards are abused by employers to exclude women from employment. Exemptions include awards preventing women from lifting heavy weights, and occupations in which only workers of a particular sex could perform a duty for reasons of privacy. Other cases cited include the disproportionate employment of male teachers in non-government schools, and discriminatory practices experienced by women working in voluntary organisations and charities.

The report also recommends repeal of many general exemptions under the act. Currently, many positions within the armed forces are closed to women, sporting organisations are allowed to exclude women from membership and provide lower prize money for female events, and the Department of Social Security is still permitted to cast women in the role of domestic carers and men as breadwinners. "The Sex Discrimination Act was enacted in 1984 and reflects the deep social conservatism of people opposed to it then", said Lavarch.

He cites the treatment of female war veterans, who are not covered by the act, as a blatant example of discrimination sanctioned by existing laws. Currently, women who served in World War II don't share their male counterparts' entitlements to special home loan schemes. Only members of the armed forces who served outside Australia are entitled to this benefit, but under past discriminatory legislation servicewomen were not allowed to serve outside Australia. As the armed services are exempt from the Sex Discrimination Act, women have no right of appeal.

The report also argues that Australian women have less legal ht to equal opportunities than other groups, such as Aborigines and homosexuals, specifically protected under the act. "The absence of a general prohibition in relation to discrimination against women is in direct contrast to the Commonwealth legislation dealing with discrimination on the grounds on race", the paper says. Lavarch argues that many hidden or indirect forms of discrimination against women are enshrined in current legislation.

By Angela Matheson

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.