Fish- Blog Post "Funky 14"
In Chapter 2 of Private Government, Elizabeth Anderson presents her argument for the dictatorial nature of private government. In doing so, she identifies CEO’s as the dictator, where “those dictatorships have the legal authority to regulate workers’ off-hour lives” as well as their lives in the work environment (39). Given this account, I felt it important to consider the role of gender in her argument, and how the disproportionate percentage of male CEOs contribute to this dictatorial work life that is so prevalent in daily life.
As of 2019, women held 30 CEO positions in S&P 500 companies, accounting for only 6% of all CEOs. With Anderson’s discussion of employment at will contracts and general treatment of employees outside of work, I wonder how different it would be with more women in charge. Because the default contract for employment is employment at will, “workers, in effect, cede all of their rights to their employers, except those specifically guaranteed to them by law” (53). When it comes to issues like sexual harassment in the workplace and maternity leave, the fact that “For the most part . . . at-will employment, which entitles employers to fire workers for any or no reason” puts many individuals, particularly women, at greater risk of being fired or feeling uncomfortable or scared for their safety in the workplace (53).
Anderson profoundly writes that “No wonder they are shocked and outraged when their boss fires them for being too attractive, for failing to show up at a political rally in support of the boss’s favored political candidate, even because their daughter was raped by a friend of the boss” (53). The deeply entrenched patriarchal culture of the corporate world puts women in serious danger, because their boss is almost always a man who does not and cannot understand the struggles of women, the trauma of sexual harassment, or the legitimate need to take maternity leave. While I of course acknowledge men also experience sexual harassment, the rates at which women experience it are higher, and are significazntly more pronounced in the workplace (often at the hands of the boss or of someone connected to the boss). Nearly 81% of women experience sexual harassment or assault at some point in their life, which is almost double the rate men experience sexual harassment.
Because of this, the consideration of having more female CEOs could drastically change corporate culture. Female and male employees would likely feel more comfortable filing sexual assault charges, women and families would be less hesitant to pursue a family out of fear of being fired, and there would likely be a greater feeling of comfort and safety more generally. So, while Anderson certainly presents a dominant issue in today’s world, I wonder how the application of gender in her account makes it an issue that can only change with self-employment, or if establishing greater gender equality in leadership positions would also help.
As of 2019, women held 30 CEO positions in S&P 500 companies, accounting for only 6% of all CEOs. With Anderson’s discussion of employment at will contracts and general treatment of employees outside of work, I wonder how different it would be with more women in charge. Because the default contract for employment is employment at will, “workers, in effect, cede all of their rights to their employers, except those specifically guaranteed to them by law” (53). When it comes to issues like sexual harassment in the workplace and maternity leave, the fact that “For the most part . . . at-will employment, which entitles employers to fire workers for any or no reason” puts many individuals, particularly women, at greater risk of being fired or feeling uncomfortable or scared for their safety in the workplace (53).
Anderson profoundly writes that “No wonder they are shocked and outraged when their boss fires them for being too attractive, for failing to show up at a political rally in support of the boss’s favored political candidate, even because their daughter was raped by a friend of the boss” (53). The deeply entrenched patriarchal culture of the corporate world puts women in serious danger, because their boss is almost always a man who does not and cannot understand the struggles of women, the trauma of sexual harassment, or the legitimate need to take maternity leave. While I of course acknowledge men also experience sexual harassment, the rates at which women experience it are higher, and are significazntly more pronounced in the workplace (often at the hands of the boss or of someone connected to the boss). Nearly 81% of women experience sexual harassment or assault at some point in their life, which is almost double the rate men experience sexual harassment.
Because of this, the consideration of having more female CEOs could drastically change corporate culture. Female and male employees would likely feel more comfortable filing sexual assault charges, women and families would be less hesitant to pursue a family out of fear of being fired, and there would likely be a greater feeling of comfort and safety more generally. So, while Anderson certainly presents a dominant issue in today’s world, I wonder how the application of gender in her account makes it an issue that can only change with self-employment, or if establishing greater gender equality in leadership positions would also help.
Comments