27 September 2011

Congratulations to the 2011 Telstra ACT Business Women's Award winners

| johnboy
Join the conversation
47

Chief Minister Katy Gallagher has congratulated the winners of the 2011 Telstra ACT Business Women’s Award.

The awarded ones are:

    Telstra ACT Business Woman of the Year; and White Pages Community and Government Award: Dr Robyn Walker, Director-General of Health for the Royal Australian Navy and of Health Capability for the Australian Defence Force – recognised for her service and reforms to improve the health of our armed forces.

    Commonwealth Bank Business Owner Award: Karen Nicholas from Learning Options, Manuka – whose business offers 40 nationally accredited qualifications in business.

    Hudson Private and Corporate Sector Award: Janine Yokom, Westpac Belconnen – recognised for her leadership of the branch which has become one of the top seven of the bank’s 650 national branches.

    Marie claire Young Business Women’s Award: Julie McKay, UN Women Australia, Canberra – recognised for her efforts to diversify the income stream of UN Women Australia which has resulted in a fivefold increase in her operational budget.

    Nokia Business Innovation Award: Barbara Reid, ACT Government Health Directorate.

Join the conversation

47
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

chewy14 said :

Jim Jones said :

Holy sh1t, the ABS, FAHSCIA and News Ltd are all part of the left-wing, PC-driven equality industry!!!

This thing is bigger than we thought, the conspiracy is truly vast.

Yeah, just like the conspiracy of every company deliberately losing money by paying male employees extra money when they could be hiring cheap female labour.
Damn those evil Capitalists and their money hungry ways.

Shh.. don’t burst his little bubble. His whole world might come crashing down and then who knows what rants me might have to endure!

Jim Jones said :

Holy sh1t, the ABS, FAHSCIA and News Ltd are all part of the left-wing, PC-driven equality industry!!!

This thing is bigger than we thought, the conspiracy is truly vast.

Yeah, just like the conspiracy of every company deliberately losing money by paying male employees extra money when they could be hiring cheap female labour.
Damn those evil Capitalists and their money hungry ways.

Jim Jones said :

Holy sh1t, the ABS, FAHSCIA and News Ltd are all part of the left-wing, PC-driven equality industry!!!

This thing is bigger than we thought, the conspiracy is truly vast.

Some of these organisations have senior executives who are women!

Holy sh1t, the ABS, FAHSCIA and News Ltd are all part of the left-wing, PC-driven equality industry!!!

This thing is bigger than we thought, the conspiracy is truly vast.

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

“left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

Lol, the evil feminazis are at it again.

I

No Jim. No mention of “feminaizis”. Can I recommend a good optician, or remedial reading tutor for you?

Oh, must have been the ‘equality industry’ jarring my vision.

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

“left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

Lol, the evil feminazis are at it again.

I

No Jim. No mention of “feminaizis”. Can I recommend a good optician, or remedial reading tutor for you?

Jim Jones said :

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

“left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

You should totally write all about this on Andrew Bolt’s blog. Maybe it would cheer him up.

Again, nothing to dispute what I have said, just personal attack. Why not join in the debate Jim?

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

“left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

You should totally write all about this on Andrew Bolt’s blog. Maybe it would cheer him up.

Ben_Dover said :

“left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

Lol, the evil feminazis are at it again.

You know, I’ve just gone through every one of those link of yours Jim, and they all say pretty much the same thing, I’ll use this to illustrate;

•Previous research on the wage gap in Australia has been quite extensive, but drawing firm conclusions about the key determinants of the wage gap in Australia from the literature is difficult due to the range of findings, and the wide variation in samples, methods and focus in earlier studies.
•It is clear from previous studies that a large proportion of the wage gap in Australia cannot be explained simply by the differing characteristics or endowments of men and women. In most studies, a very large majority of the wage gap is due to differences between the wages of men and women that cannot be explained by the sorts of variables which are included in gender wage gap models. These unexplained differences in wages may be due to direct discrimination, or to other unmeasured differences between men and women
•In order to quantify the contribution of particular variables to the wage gap in Australia, as well as provide policy relevance, we use a simulation methodology developed by Olsen and Walby. This approach moves the average characteristics of women to those of men, and quantifies how much the wage gap would be reduced and how much women’s wages would improve if this were to occur. This process is undertaken for variables considered to have relevance to policy and gender wage differentials, and all other variables are treated as controls.
•Using this simulation methodology we find that the key determinants of the gender wage gap in Australia include industrial segregation (25 per cent), labour force history (seven per cent), under-representation of women with vocational qualifications (five per cent) and under-representation of women in large firms (three per cent). However, being a woman accounts for a very large 60 per cent of the wage gap. This finding is in line with other literature and represents that part of the wage gap which is due to discrimination or other differences between men and women not captured by differences in their measured characteristics.

In other words; “we will continue to claim there’s a wage/pay/income gap, and claim it is due to being a woman, but we cannot prove a damn thing.”

Oh, and most of those sources come from what I call the; “left-wing, PC driven, equality industry”, and are hardly neutral or unbiased.

Jim Jones said :

Um … nope. There are buckets and buckets of research that demonstrates otherwise (I’ve already made reference to quite a lot). There was one mentioned in the SMH this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/national/mindless-bias-holds-women-in-check-20110927-1kvhz.html

And an entire wikipedia entry about gender pay gap in Australia with lots of lovely links to peer reviewed evidence that demonstrates otherwise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_Australia

And yet neither of your two links give any reasons for this alleged “pay gap” other than to say; ” simply due to women managers being female”, and the like. No substance whatsoever.

So you are waiting for the men’s awards hey….how about you men actually go ahead and organise that? Oh that’s right your a man….it may take a while whilst you wait for a woman to do it for you.

The rest of which citations? I wasn’t aware that you’d copied and pasted anything else from wikipedia.

Mysteryman said :

Jim Jones said :

“Ian Watson of Macquarie University examined the gender pay gap among full-time managers in Australia over the period 2001-2008, and found that between 65 and 90 % of this earnings differential could not be explained by a large range of demographic and labor market variables. Watson notes that a “major part of the earnings gap is simply due to women managers being female.” He also found that despite the “characteristics of male and female managers being remarkably similar, their earnings are very different, suggesting that discrimination plays an important role in this outcome.”[“

“while some of the 17 per cent earnings gap between men and women can be explained by different occupational choices and other factors, most of the wage difference was ”explained by being a woman or by being a man”. And it warns that companies’ attempts to reform their workplaces can be undermined by unconscious bias, especially against women in roles of authority.”

Arguing against the existence of gender pay disparity in Australia is akin to arguing against the existence of climate change – all the evidence and experts are on one side, the other side consists of people who believe that personal belief and ideological leanings trump reality and peer-reviewed research.

Copying and pasting the results from one study that you found on Wikipedia hardly qualifies as evidence for your claim that “all the experts are on one side” – especially as other experts, such as Juan Barón & Deborah Cobb-Clark (both of ANU) who found that “irrespective of labour market sector, the gender wage gap among low-paid, Australian workers is more than explained by differences in wage-related characteristics. The gender wage gap among high-wage workers, however, is largely unexplained in both sectors suggesting that glass ceilings (rather than sticky floors) may be prevalent. Gender differences in employment across occupations advantage (rather than disadvantage) all women except those in high-paid, private-sector jobs…”. High-paid, private-sector jobs are a small part of the workforce. Hardly the picture of widespread and ingrained discrimination you’re trying to paint.

I’ve read the study that you’re copying and pasting from and while I may have misunderstood it, the author doesn’t appear to directly address the issue of men working an average of 6% more hours a week, and having 13% more experience on average than the woman, despite the fact that it clearly shows in his tables.

Firstly, the discussion was centred on high-paying roles. And yes, it is well established that pay disparities are greater at high levels (particularly management level) – not to mention the fact that traditionally female industries all just happen to be very low paying compared with traditionally male industries.

What’s your response to the rest of the citations? Information on gender pay disparity is hardly hard to find. As mentioned previously, there was a new report released very recently and appeared in the newspapers today (I’ve already given a link).

Is that all part of the vast conspiracy against men or something?

Finally, I’m not painting a picture of “widespread and ingrained discrimination”. The problem is well acknowledged to be largely a result of unconscious systemic bias.

That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist and/or doesn’t warrant looking at closely.

Actually I did know that JJ, but thank you, I hadn’t been patronised today.

johnboy said :

in my observation of women in the workforce there’s a lot more to the calls on their attention than just the formal absences.

To say nothing of you have to wonder how many would choose to accurately record the full extent of their absences?

In choosing to side with a vast conspiracy, as opposed to neglect, you seem to be abandoning occams razor.

Vast conspiracy? Give me a break.

Try “systemic bias”. Read some of the research, it really is very simple.

Also – I think that you’ve misunderstood what Occam’s Razor actually means: “when faced with competing hypotheses that are equal in other respects, selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions”.

It doesn’t mean “the simplest explanation is the best”, that’s a common misconception.

Jim Jones said :

“Ian Watson of Macquarie University examined the gender pay gap among full-time managers in Australia over the period 2001-2008, and found that between 65 and 90 % of this earnings differential could not be explained by a large range of demographic and labor market variables. Watson notes that a “major part of the earnings gap is simply due to women managers being female.” He also found that despite the “characteristics of male and female managers being remarkably similar, their earnings are very different, suggesting that discrimination plays an important role in this outcome.”[“

“while some of the 17 per cent earnings gap between men and women can be explained by different occupational choices and other factors, most of the wage difference was ”explained by being a woman or by being a man”. And it warns that companies’ attempts to reform their workplaces can be undermined by unconscious bias, especially against women in roles of authority.”

Arguing against the existence of gender pay disparity in Australia is akin to arguing against the existence of climate change – all the evidence and experts are on one side, the other side consists of people who believe that personal belief and ideological leanings trump reality and peer-reviewed research.

Copying and pasting the results from one study that you found on Wikipedia hardly qualifies as evidence for your claim that “all the experts are on one side” – especially as other experts, such as Juan Barón & Deborah Cobb-Clark (both of ANU) who found that “irrespective of labour market sector, the gender wage gap among low-paid, Australian workers is more than explained by differences in wage-related characteristics. The gender wage gap among high-wage workers, however, is largely unexplained in both sectors suggesting that glass ceilings (rather than sticky floors) may be prevalent. Gender differences in employment across occupations advantage (rather than disadvantage) all women except those in high-paid, private-sector jobs…”. High-paid, private-sector jobs are a small part of the workforce. Hardly the picture of widespread and ingrained discrimination you’re trying to paint.

I’ve read the study that you’re copying and pasting from and while I may have misunderstood it, the author doesn’t appear to directly address the issue of men working an average of 6% more hours a week, and having 13% more experience on average than the woman, despite the fact that it clearly shows in his tables.

90% of prison inmates in Australia are male.
I demand that the government fix this horrible discrimination against females now.

Jim, I’ve read the reports that came up with the 17% figure. They list a range of causal factors, like motherhood and hours worked to which they attribute about 8% of the figure.

They then attribute the remaining 9% to gender discrimination.
They do this, not because they found evidence of gender discrimination, but simply because they couldn’t think of any other reasons for the gap.
Social factors like what people actually want are not taken into account. Perhaps you can see the fault in this kind of methodology?

Interestingly, there is no pay gap for Gen Y. Perhaps because changes to the workplace are filtering through or perhaps because they generally don’t have kids or a family yet.

in my observation of women in the workforce there’s a lot more to the calls on their attention than just the formal absences.

To say nothing of you have to wonder how many would choose to accurately record the full extent of their absences?

In choosing to side with a vast conspiracy, as opposed to neglect, you seem to be abandoning occams razor.

johnboy said :

Dunno JJ, it’s hard to see anyone, regardless of gender, taking on the responsibilities of motherhood without it impacting on their day job in some way or at some level.

Is that fair?

Do we want that as a society if we want the best women raising the best children?

Probably not.

But it’s going to be damn tricky to get around.

Look at the research, it takes into account factors such as absence from the workforce, etc.

“Ian Watson of Macquarie University examined the gender pay gap among full-time managers in Australia over the period 2001-2008, and found that between 65 and 90 % of this earnings differential could not be explained by a large range of demographic and labor market variables. Watson notes that a “major part of the earnings gap is simply due to women managers being female.” He also found that despite the “characteristics of male and female managers being remarkably similar, their earnings are very different, suggesting that discrimination plays an important role in this outcome.”[“

“while some of the 17 per cent earnings gap between men and women can be explained by different occupational choices and other factors, most of the wage difference was ”explained by being a woman or by being a man”. And it warns that companies’ attempts to reform their workplaces can be undermined by unconscious bias, especially against women in roles of authority.”

Arguing against the existence of gender pay disparity in Australia is akin to arguing against the existence of climate change – all the evidence and experts are on one side, the other side consists of people who believe that personal belief and ideological leanings trump reality and peer-reviewed research.

johnboy said :

Dunno JJ, it’s hard to see anyone, regardless of gender, taking on the responsibilities of motherhood without it impacting on their day job in some way or at some level.

Is that fair?

Do we want that as a society if we want the best women raising the best children?

Probably not.

But it’s going to be damn tricky to get around.

it is a shame kids don’t have two parents to raise them, and to have careers.

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

Seeing as you give no rebuttal of my points, you just, yet again, attack me, then yes I must be right.

What points? That pay levels are unequal because women “are unwilling to make sacrifices”?

Lol.

Even wikipedia lists that as a fallacy.

No. Pay leveles are unequal because some women choose other priorities over promotion/advancement.

Um … nope. There are buckets and buckets of research that demonstrates otherwise (I’ve already made reference to quite a lot). There was one mentioned in the SMH this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/national/mindless-bias-holds-women-in-check-20110927-1kvhz.html

And an entire wikipedia entry about gender pay gap in Australia with lots of lovely links to peer reviewed evidence that demonstrates otherwise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_Australia

Women get the same pay for the same job. The issue is that there seem to be fewer women willing to make the sacrifices than there are men.

Having worked for several private sector companies run by very high fliers, I can safely say that only a very small percentage of humans have what it takes to get to the very high levels (in terms of dogged persistence in the face of huge obstacles, the constant stress, the blaming and hassles, the 2am calls to get into the office, etc).

It takes a special kind of person who is willing to have no life other than the company, which is what it really takes. Don’t think for a second that people who hold these positions have anything resembling a normal life. I suprised how many women have made it, as most women I know seem, on average, to be more sensible about work/life balance than men.

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

Seeing as you give no rebuttal of my points, you just, yet again, attack me, then yes I must be right.

What points? That pay levels are unequal because women “are unwilling to make sacrifices”?

Lol.

Even wikipedia lists that as a fallacy.

No. Pay leveles are unequal because some women choose other priorities over promotion/advancement.

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

If only 8.4% of women are wilingt o make the sacrifices necessary to reach that level, then so be it.
.

Lol.

Yeah, the gender pay gap exists because women are lazy.

You really hit the nail on the head with that one.

I did not call women lazy.

poetix said :

‘So now, your point is utter crap. Women ar enot exculded from top positions in busines, but we still have this divisive and sexist “Women’s award” claptrap.’

Survey of top 200 companies:

‘Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions, or 123 seats out of 1467, when a census was conducted this year. As well, women held only 8 per cent of key executive management positions and an “alarming” 4.1 per cent of line manager roles which are considered feeders to the top echelons.’ SMH, October 2010

It’s easy to quote a few exceptions; it’s the overall picture that’s telling.

Do you actually expect that having a 50/50 ratio of men to women in any given job is a meaningful measure of equality? The fact is this: men and women get paid the same amount to do the same job. Less women are doing the “top jobs” for a few reasons – one of which is that it usually takes around 30 or 40 years to get into those kind of positions. 30 or 40 years ago, women were not being paid the same amount, and they were not getting the opportunities that they have been getting since then. In that regard, men had a head start towards those top jobs.

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

You’re privileging a link showing a few senior women (with a typo in the subheading no less) over actual figures (such as “Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions” or maybe even ” despite their higher educational attainment rate, there was not a single industry in Australia where females were paid more than males”, or even, “Australia has a persistent gender pay gap. Between 1990 and 2009, the gender pay gap remained within a narrow range of between 15 and 17%”, or maybe even “WA men will earn about $1 million more than the average-paid woman during a working lifetime because of the gender pay gap”.

There is no pay gap in Australia Jim, men and women get the same pay for the same work. What you are talking about is an income gap, which can be explained in many ways, the main one being duration of service, leave taken, and other priorities which women choose over work/promotion.

Women who prioritise getting to the top (and there are a few, about 8.4% of the work force) can achieve that, we have a female prime minister for example, (an unmarried childless one.) My list showed that many women do make this choice, others do not.

It’s not my fault that the soft left have this idea that women can be more equal than men as long as business and society bend over backwards to accommodate them (which is no equality at all.)

Ben hit the nail on the head. There is an income gap and it has a lot to do with the kind of work being undertaken by women, as opposed to the remuneration BECAUSE they are women.

” Melbourne University social researcher Mark Wooden said men were earning on average 15 per cent more than women because they put in more time at the workplace. All high achievers in all walks of life … put in long hours into their activity,” Professor Wooden said. “It’s (the pay equity gap) got a lot to do with the fact that women are not prepared to work longer hours.” “

Women are earning less, statistically. But it’s because they are less likely to work the same hours as men, or in the same kind of jobs as men (especially high-risk/high pay jobs). People like Jim are perpetuating this notion that a woman, working the same hours and with the same qualifications as a man, are being paid less for the same job. They aren’t. It is simply not true.

Dunno JJ, it’s hard to see anyone, regardless of gender, taking on the responsibilities of motherhood without it impacting on their day job in some way or at some level.

Is that fair?

Do we want that as a society if we want the best women raising the best children?

Probably not.

But it’s going to be damn tricky to get around.

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

Wow. All the evidence is completely wrong, and you are right.

Who would have thought it?

Seeing as you give no rebuttal of my points, you just, yet again, attack me, then yes I must be right.

What points? That pay levels are unequal because women “are unwilling to make sacrifices”?

Lol.

Even wikipedia lists that as a fallacy.

Jim Jones said :

Wow. All the evidence is completely wrong, and you are right.

Who would have thought it?

Seeing as you give no rebuttal of my points, you just, yet again, attack me, then yes I must be right.

On a different issue, it’s good to see that Ms McKay has been busy at things after (or before) her unfortunate mistake in sitting on a war memorial. Although of course the important issue is how that money is spent, now that the ‘stream’ has been ‘diversified’.

You’d better write to Australian Economic Review, The Economic Record, the National Center for Social and Economic Modelling, the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, the Australian Journal of Labour Economics, Goldman Sachs JBWere Investment Research, etc. and tell them that they’re all wrong.

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

You’re privileging a link showing a few senior women (with a typo in the subheading no less) over actual figures (such as “Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions” or maybe even ” despite their higher educational attainment rate, there was not a single industry in Australia where females were paid more than males”, or even, “Australia has a persistent gender pay gap. Between 1990 and 2009, the gender pay gap remained within a narrow range of between 15 and 17%”, or maybe even “WA men will earn about $1 million more than the average-paid woman during a working lifetime because of the gender pay gap”.

There is no pay gap in Australia Jim, men and women get the same pay for the same work. What you are talking about is an income gap, which can be explained in many ways, the main one being duration of service, leave taken, and other priorities which women choose over work/promotion.

Women who prioritise getting to the top (and there are a few, about 8.4% of the work force) can achieve that, we have a female prime minister for example, (an unmarried childless one.) My list showed that many women do make this choice, others do not.

It’s not my fault that the soft left have this idea that women can be more equal than men as long as business and society bend over backwards to accommodate them (which is no equality at all.)

Wow. All the evidence is completely wrong, and you are right.

Who would have thought it?

Jim Jones said :

You’re privileging a link showing a few senior women (with a typo in the subheading no less) over actual figures (such as “Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions” or maybe even ” despite their higher educational attainment rate, there was not a single industry in Australia where females were paid more than males”, or even, “Australia has a persistent gender pay gap. Between 1990 and 2009, the gender pay gap remained within a narrow range of between 15 and 17%”, or maybe even “WA men will earn about $1 million more than the average-paid woman during a working lifetime because of the gender pay gap”.

There is no pay gap in Australia Jim, men and women get the same pay for the same work. What you are talking about is an income gap, which can be explained in many ways, the main one being duration of service, leave taken, and other priorities which women choose over work/promotion.

Women who prioritise getting to the top (and there are a few, about 8.4% of the work force) can achieve that, we have a female prime minister for example, (an unmarried childless one.) My list showed that many women do make this choice, others do not.

It’s not my fault that the soft left have this idea that women can be more equal than men as long as business and society bend over backwards to accommodate them (which is no equality at all.)

Ben_Dover said :

If only 8.4% of women are wilingt o make the sacrifices necessary to reach that level, then so be it.
.

Lol.

Yeah, the gender pay gap exists because women are lazy.

You really hit the nail on the head with that one.

Ben_Dover said :

poetix said :

‘Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions, or 123 seats out of 1467, when a census was conducted this year.

Why is that unfair?

If only 8.4% of women are wilingt o make the sacrifices necessary to reach that level, then so be it.

poetix said :

It’s easy to quote a few exceptions; it’s the overall picture that’s telling.

Another one who doesn’t click links to find out what they are talking about.

You’re privileging a link showing a few senior women (with a typo in the subheading no less) over actual figures (such as “Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions” or maybe even ” despite their higher educational attainment rate, there was not a single industry in Australia where females were paid more than males”, or even, “Australia has a persistent gender pay gap. Between 1990 and 2009, the gender pay gap remained within a narrow range of between 15 and 17%”, or maybe even “WA men will earn about $1 million more than the average-paid woman during a working lifetime because of the gender pay gap”.

Jim Jones said :

Wow. A whole 7 women who are in top positions.

Obviously the pendulum has swung much too far in women’s favour if there are *that* many powerful women.

All the statistics and information regarding the gender pay gap in Australia must just be completely made up. After all – SEVEN of them.

Try clicking the link Jim, you’ll not make such a fool of yoruself then.

poetix said :

‘Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions, or 123 seats out of 1467, when a census was conducted this year.

Why is that unfair?

If only 8.4% of women are wilingt o make the sacrifices necessary to reach that level, then so be it.

poetix said :

It’s easy to quote a few exceptions; it’s the overall picture that’s telling.

Another one who doesn’t click links to find out what they are talking about.

pharmer said :

How is someone from the ACT Government the winner of a business innovation award?

“ACT Government” Does that not give you a clue.

‘So now, your point is utter crap. Women ar enot exculded from top positions in busines, but we still have this divisive and sexist “Women’s award” claptrap.’

Survey of top 200 companies:

‘Women held only 8.4 per cent of board positions, or 123 seats out of 1467, when a census was conducted this year. As well, women held only 8 per cent of key executive management positions and an “alarming” 4.1 per cent of line manager roles which are considered feeders to the top echelons.’ SMH, October 2010

It’s easy to quote a few exceptions; it’s the overall picture that’s telling.

Ben_Dover said :

poetix said :

Check out the board of any big company. Find out about their remuneration. That’s the Men’s Business Awards for you.

Adelaide Brighton, Sam Toppenberg: Executive General Manager Human Resources.

AGL Energy, Jane Thomas: Group Head of People & Culture.

Alesco, Luci Rafferty: Group General Manager, .

Alesco, Rebelle Moriarty: Group General Manager Human Resources.

Alumina, Judith Downes: as the CFO, she is responsible for finance, accounting, treasury, investor relations and taxation.

Amcor, Julie McPherson: Company Secretary since 2005. As both an investment banker and a lawyer,

Amcor, Leslie Desjardins: Joined Amcor in 2007 from GM Holden Ltd in Melbourne where she worked as CFO and Executive Director Finance,

http://www.maynereport.com/articles/2010/04/22-1025-8104.html

So now, your point is utter crap. Women ar enot exculded from top positions in busines, but we still have this divisive and sexist “Women’s award” claptrap.

Wow. A whole 7 women who are in top positions.

Obviously the pendulum has swung much too far in women’s favour if there are *that* many powerful women.

All the statistics and information regarding the gender pay gap in Australia must just be completely made up. After all – SEVEN of them.

How is someone from the ACT Government the winner of a business innovation award?

poetix said :

Check out the board of any big company. Find out about their remuneration. That’s the Men’s Business Awards for you.

Adelaide Brighton, Sam Toppenberg: Executive General Manager Human Resources.

AGL Energy, Jane Thomas: Group Head of People & Culture.

Alesco, Luci Rafferty: Group General Manager, .

Alesco, Rebelle Moriarty: Group General Manager Human Resources.

Alumina, Judith Downes: as the CFO, she is responsible for finance, accounting, treasury, investor relations and taxation.

Amcor, Julie McPherson: Company Secretary since 2005. As both an investment banker and a lawyer,

Amcor, Leslie Desjardins: Joined Amcor in 2007 from GM Holden Ltd in Melbourne where she worked as CFO and Executive Director Finance,

http://www.maynereport.com/articles/2010/04/22-1025-8104.html

So now, your point is utter crap. Women ar enot exculded from top positions in busines, but we still have this divisive and sexist “Women’s award” claptrap.

troll-sniffer said :

Still waiting for the Telstra Business Men’s Awards to happen. Fair’s fair.

What a totally unpredictable thing to say!

Check out the board of any big company. Find out about their remuneration. That’s the Men’s Business Awards for you.

I have to agree with troll-sniffer. Its the 21st century. The 60’s ended a while back. I think the pendulum has swung enough. Let bring some equality to out society.

troll-sniffer10:15 pm 27 Sep 11

Still waiting for the Telstra Business Men’s Awards to happen. Fair’s fair.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.