Council picks more top jobs for women

David Ottewell

April 14, 2004

| Submit Comments | Comments (11) | Previous | Next

MANCHESTER city council has decided that having women in half its middle management posts is not enough to even up the sexes - and has raised the target to more than 55 per cent.

Town hall bosses say the new target will ensure more women make it to the top of the tree in future.

But the move has been condemned by men's rights campaigners.

The council has set a target of having women occupying 55.3 per cent for the first four rungs on the principal officer ladder, an increase on a previous target of 50.4 per cent which has been reached.

Figures from the 2001 census showed that only 47.3 per cent of Manchester's working-age population was female. However, some 69 per cent of the council's workforce are women.

Discrimination

By 2003, 50 per cent of staff in principal officer posts graded 1-4 were women. But the figure for higher grades - the top jobs in local government - was 42.2 per cent.

Discrimination is against the law but positive action - such as setting targets to reverse historical imbalances against women, ethnic minorities and disabled people - is not.

Jim Battle, chairman of the council's finance and general purposes scrutiny committee, said: "You set the targets slightly high to make sure you get equality within the chief officer core.

"We want to remove what might be perceived as a glass ceiling for women compared to men."

George McAulay, chairman of the UK Men's Movement, said: "It is wrong. Management should be advanced on merit alone, not gender, race, disability or any of the other artificial constructs of the growing social Marxism in this country.

"Men tend to be not very politically active where gender issues are concerned and can easily be outgunned and outmanoeuvred."

Positive action or discrimination? What do you think?

| Submit Comments | Comments (11) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 11 and replies | View All

Sarah, Hulme (14/04/2004 at 13:04)

It is discrimination if the council turns away the best candidate for the job because he's a bloke not a woman. I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to raise the profile of women within the higher ranks of the council or encouraging more appropriately qualified women to apply for these jobs, but itis impossible to positively discriminate against one group without committing negative discrimination against another. Two wrongs don't make a right after all!

A Mere Man, Wythenshawe (14/04/2004 at 13:09)

There is one word for this - SEXISM. Candidates should be selected based upon ability, not gender and ability. Positive discrimination is still discrimination, and the Council are hypocrites to pursue this pathetic policy.

G FORBES, DUNDEE (15/04/2004 at 10:52)

This is blantant discrimination against men yet again.Men in britain are sick of the marksist feminazi and media who demonise men at every turn.

G Forbes

Peter C., Wirral, Merseyside. (15/04/2004 at 12:50)

Extremism motivated by left wing hatred. Such a story is the epitome of socio-political "alcoholism" - one is too many, a thousand is not enough.

The women's movement has long since become a monstrous, lost and insane cause. Like all forms of extremism, it will unwittingly realise it's antithesis.

Feminism will destroy women - and some of the most vehement misogynists will be women themselves.

S Allan, KENT (15/04/2004 at 17:18)

I bet there's no such gender blending in Manchester's schools, no men teaching those "nasty boys". If women are so brilliant, why wont they take responsibility for thier actions.

John, San Francisco (15/04/2004 at 19:55)

I'd like to say that this is shocking, but everyone should know by now that feminism stopped being about equality around 1970.

Richard Grego, New York, NY (15/04/2004 at 20:08)

This is clear discrimination against men. Discrimination does not = positive action, no matter how you try and slice it. History is history, forget it, none of todays women have been discriminated against. But if you want to talk history, then men have been the victims of violence far more than women. Men have died protecting women from invaders who would rape, kill, and pillage for centuries. Men have always done more dangerous jobs and still do. So get over it.

John Clarke, Norwich (15/04/2004 at 21:48)

So discrimination is against the law, but "positive action" is not... a clear case of Orwellian doublethink of the type that is being increasingly used to justify the unjustifiable. I am glad I don't live in Manchester where the council implements such PC nonsense. However it seems to be prevalent in plenty of other places. It needs to be challenged everywhere it manifests itself, or we will end up with men being hounded out of jobs in all sectors simply for being the wrong sex. Because you can be quite sure of one thing: where "positive action" is taken, it will always be to boost the numbers of women in areas where men predominate: never the reverse. In other words a formula to ensure that in the population as a whole, there will eventually be far, far more women in employment than men. What else can be the result where male-dominated jobs are changed to achieve a 50/50 balance (or even worse per Manchester city council), while female-dominated jobs are allowed to remain as such?

Dave, Bristol (20/04/2004 at 10:30)

This is blatent discrimination. the law disallows discrimination based on gender. In which case - if women are not making it then either they are not good enough for the job or the people making the selections are discriminating illegally. If it is the former - OK. If it is the latter then they should be prosecuted or sacked.
the problem with quotas is that the taxpayer ends up paying for less competent workers. I for one would rather for example see a burly 6 foot fireman appear at my 3rd storey window when stuck in a fire with a broken leg - than a 5 foot four woman who would not be able to get me out.
Quotas breed incompetence - everyone (especially in public service) MUST be selected on their ability to perform the function best. Regardless of political correctness or seeming unfairness to a collective group. By using quotas you are in dereliction of duty to the council tax payers to give them best value service. Simple !

Sarah, Hulme (21/04/2004 at 12:27)

Richard Grego: Men have died protecting women against invaders raping and pillaging villages? But protecting them from whom? Other men of course!!! What a ridiculous argument!

S Allan, KENT (05/05/2004 at 11:53)

Sarah Hulme:"other men of course"? driven by what? her in doors wanting a bigger castle?
women are the greediest creatures on this planet men are foolish enough to try to please them.
Bling Bling!!

()

Report

News