(Chapter 16 Internationa! Diversity and Facing the Future .docx

(
Chapter 16:
Internationa
! Diversity and Facing the Future
509
) (
The ILO acknowledges the relationship between discrimination
and poverty
and proposes that people living in persistent poverty
draw from enormous reservoirs of courage, ingenuity,
persistence, and mutual support to keep on the treadmill of
survival. Simply coping with poverty demonstrates the
resilience and creativity of the
human spirit.... Imagine where their efforts could take them
with the support and possibilities to move up a ladder of
opportunity. Our common responsibility is to help put it there.
50
Misperception:
Most people who live in persistent poverty are lazy and
unmotivated.
Reality:
Most people living in poverty survive through enormous
courage, persistence, and resilience.
Valuing, pursuing, and embracing diversity can help place a
ladder of opportunity at the feet of those previously ignored but
who have enorm
ous reservoirs of skills and assets, be they poor, minority group
members,
women, sexual minorities, people with disabilities, or other
non-dominant group members. At the same time, valuing,
pursuing, and embracing diversity can be beneficial for the
organ
izations that employ previously devalued workers and for the
societies in which they live.

) (
I
Facing the Future: The Broad Reach of Diversity in
Organizations
As the world population becomes increasingly diverse, so
should organi
zations. Organizations
themselves differ in their size, structure, earnings, design, and
purpose, and included in the category are various entities such
as schools, churches, governments, nonprofits, retailers, service
providers, co-ops, farms, and countless others in which peop
le earn a living and interact. The success, or failure, of
organizations will be greatly influenced by the ability to attract,
retain, and maximize the contributions of people from all
backgrounds and from around the world, by the ability to mar
ket to div
erse customers, to engage diverse constituents, and to encourage
the full participation of every worker and potential worker. In
this section, we offer recommendations for organizations to
encourage full participa
tion of all potential workers. Returning t
o the original hypothesis that
) (
'"Working Out of Poverty," P- 1.
)
diversity and inclusion provides organizations with a variety of
competitive advantages, we then go on to consider how these
potential benefits reach beyond the organization in which they
occur.
As the world becomes more connected globally, discrimination,
harassment, and exclusion based on race, ethnicity, sexual
orientation, religion, age, family status, physical or mental
ability, weight, appearance, and other irrelevant factors will be
increasingly unwise, unprofitable, and unacceptable. At the
same time, as the world's population becomes more diverse, this

will bring new challenges, threats, and opportunities, including
the propensities to stereotype and discriminate, to hoard rather
than to help, and to fight for resources believed to be scarce.
Rather than stereotyping, hoarding, and fighting, those who
understand the value of diversity expect that including the ideas
and input of more and more diverse contributors would result in
the sharing of more resources. Organizations and their leaders
should welcome the challenges of diversity, minimize the
threats, and capitalize on the opportunities resulting from it.
Attending to "diversity in organizations" is necessary, but not
sufficient, to increase organizational diversity. Organizations
cannot be separated from the individuals who comprise them
and the society in which they exist, nor are individuals and
society distinct from the organizations in which they
participate. Diversity among individuals in the population
should result in diversity in organizations. But absent concrete
actions to ensure that it does, historical evidence and the
current status of many groups clearly indicate that it will not.
The ideas proposed by Cox and Blake, which have been central
to the discussion of why diversity should be valued and
pursued, are only part of the picture. When organizations pursue
diversity solely to obtain cost, resource acquisition, marketing,
creativity, problem solving, system flexibility, and other
advantages, they will help some individuals improve their
circumstances. Indeed, for these individuals, an organization's
self-interested pursuit of diversity is personally helpful. And if
sufficient numbers of individuals in a group are helped, the
group's overall position will improve to some extent. However,
these are superficial and shallow changes, incapable of
supporting long-term, sustainable progress. For long-term
change to occur, a fundamental shift in views on the value of
diversity and the reasons to pursue it must occur. Rather than
seeing diversity solely as a means of gaining competitive
advantage, what is required is changed views of ourselves, our
prejudices and biases, our personal attitudes, and our behaviors.
It involves willingness to pursue and to advance societal

changes that will reduce widespread inequity among people of
the world. Diversity in organizations is but one aspect of such
societal changes.
510
Chapter 16: International Diversity and Facing the Future 511
I Recommendations for Change at a Societal Level
Governments of many countries have implemented legislation
prohibiting discrimination against and encouraging the
employment of non-dominant groups. Previous chapters have
examined legislation in the United States. Similar legislation
prohibiting discrimination exists in countries such as Australia,
Canada, China, England, India, Mexico, New Zealand, South
Africa, Sweden, and numerous others. Some legislation has
been more successful than others in reducing disparities, but
clearly more needs to be done. The persistence of
discrimination, segregation, and exclusion makes obvious the
insufficiency of legislation. However, without legislation,
circumstances would likely be even worse. At a minimum, laws
signal the need to pursue equity for all people. But strong
measures are needed, rather than a "laissez-faire" approach that
holds no consequences for continued disparity nor offers
incentives to comply.
In addition to legislation, governmental actions are needed to
improve the education of non-dominant groups. Education is an
important part of preparedness for equity, and without
education, inequity is certain to persist. Governments must
work to ensure all residents have a certain minimum level of
education in quality, safe schools. The digital divide between
Whites and people of color, and rich and poor, must be
eliminated. Everyone should have access to computers and the
power of the Internet as part of their education. As much as
possible, in order to improve the opportunities for women,

family-friendly policies should be implemented. Rather than
viewing child care and rearing as an individual or personal
responsibility and a societal burden, children should be thought
of as the future of a society.
I Recommendations for Change at an Organizational Level
In this section, we synthesize and expand upon some of the
recommendations from previous chapters suggested to help
organizations in their pursuit of a diverse workforce and offer
some additional recommendations. Although we have
considered diversity issues relevant to a variety of formal
organizations in a variety of ways (e.g., customer discrimination
in restaurants or stores), the recommendations in this section
focus on organizations as employers. They are based on
problems considered in the previous chapters, are drawn from
the human resources and diversity literature, and are generally
applicable to many organizations anywhere in the world. Some
of the recommendations are in the form of questions rather than
specific prescriptions, in recognition of the differences inherent
in organizations' human resources practices. Answering these
questions
and formulating others that are relevant to one's own
organization and specific industry and locations will improve
understanding of the specific situation for a particular
organization and affect any recommendations. What is the
population of employees, applicant pool, customers, clients, and
constituents? What are their key concerns with respect to
diversity? What legislation exists in the particular location? Is
there evidence of discrimination that needs attention, even in
the absence of legislation?
Management Commitment to Diversity in Organizations
Diversity literature documents the miserable failure of ill-

conceived diversity initiatives, training programs, and other
"diversity" measures. Prior to embarking upon a diversity
program, the commitment of top management is imperative. One
key step is the appointment of a leader at the executive level
who is responsible for and has the authority to make changes.
Some of these responsibilities would include assessing the
organization's diversity climate, developing and implementing
organization-specific diversity objectives and goals and then
measuring progress against them, and addressing concerns,
comments, and suggestions of employees, customers, and
constituents.
In addition to a key diversity executive with power to effect
change, genuine commitment from other executives is also
required for success. When leaders view diversity as an
imperative, whether due to its competitive advantages or moral
and ethical aspects, diversity is more likely. However, not only
is top management commitment to diversity necessary,
commitment from all management in an organization is also
required. Without the commitment of managers and supervisors
throughout an organization, diversity efforts will not be
successful. Senior managers and executives, middle managers,
first-line managers, assistant managers, and supervisors all play
important roles in ensuring that all employees have an
opportunity to work and contribute to organizational success.
As the first line of decision making, first-level managers and
supervisors have the power to obstruct or facilitate diversity.
They are the ones who make fair selection decisions, encourage
working parents to have a healthy work-life balance, facilitate
employees' quest to learn multiple languages, provide
reasonable accommodations for applicants with disabilities and
for those with specific religious preferences, and so on. First-
line, mid-level, and executive-level management can all foster
or impede diversity.
Diversity-supportive behaviors at all levels of management are
observed by employees, and employees are most likely to come
into contact with low-level managers on a regular basis. How do

such managers behave regarding diversity in the organization?
Are they sincere about eradicating sexual, racial, and other
harassment? Do they make sexist,
512
racist, ageist, heterosexist, and other "-ist" comments and
decisions? Are business meetings held in inappropriate or
potentially offensive locations (e.g., strip bars, Hooters)? Are
older workers given or denied training opportunities? The
performance of diversity-supportive aspects of managers' jobs
should be rated along with other job criteria. The adage that "if
it's not measured, it doesn't matter" is particularly true for
diversity efforts.
Changes in Human Resource Practices
Job criteria and the selection team. To facilitate diversity in the
selection process, management and human resources should
start with clear job criteria—what competencies are desired of a
successful candidate? How will these competencies be
identified and compared among candidates? Are the desired
competencies clearly related to successful job performance (i.e.,
valid)? What is the demographic makeup of the recruitment and
selection team? What measures are in place to ensure that all
candidates are viewed fairly? Are there post-hiring analyses of
candidates' demographic backgrounds and their hiring success
in order to check for potential unfairness? As discussed
throughout this book, applicants may not even be aware of
discrimination or unfairness and are unlikely to sue. Although
avoiding lawsuits is not a sufficient rationale for pursuing
diversity, taking these steps will increase the likelihood of a
diverse employee population, which should be the real stimulus.
Recruiting. What efforts can be taken to ensure that qualified
applicants from a variety of backgrounds are included in the

candidate pool? Schools that are highly diverse in race,
ethnicity, sexual orientation, and physical (and, as appropriate,
mental) ability are good places to begin. Referrals from
employees who are members of the target population are likely
to be demographically similar to those making the referral.
Incentives should be offered for referrals who are hired and
retained.
Advertising in publications geared toward certain groups, for
example, Latina Style, Ebony, and the AARP magazine would
increase the pool of Hispanics, Blacks, and older applicants in
the United States. Companies outside the United States could
seek appropriate country-specific outlets that target different
groups.
Selection. Once the pool of qualified applicants is generated,
efforts must be made to ensure that certain candidates are not
unfairly eliminated as the selection process continues. In
attempting to increase diversity among university faculty, for
example, is research in areas related to race, ethnicity, gender,
and diversity devalued because it is not considered
"mainstream"? Is the academic quality of such publications
discounted because
of the research topic? Do corporate organizations recruit
candidates at "historically black colleges and universities"? or
American Indian universities, or are they deemed less qualified
than those from other universities? What steps can be taken to
reduce these misperceptions? Are the schools at which
corporations recruit accredited by recognized authorities? Have
the employees involved in hiring and selecting and the
employee population as a whole been informed of such
accreditation? Are managers and employees aware of ingrained
preferential treatment of certain groups? Do misperceptions
exist about the qualifications of non-dominant and dominant
group members? If either or both are perceived as having been
hired due to non-job-related qualifications (e.g., being a person
of color or being White; being a woman or being a man), how

might publicizing the qualifications of all hires reduce such
misperceptions?
Training and development. Are all employees provided
opportunities to participate in job-related training and
development? Are older workers steered away from training? By
participating in training and development, workers prepare for
advancement opportunities.
Do all workers participate in substantive diversity learning
(e.g., training and education)? Research indicates that poorly
designed or implemented diversity training can have negative
consequences, such as backlash and unmet expectations. Are
diversity learning programs of high quality and well
implemented and relevant? Do such programs include short-term
as well as long-term education? Diversity training is not a
"quick fix" to long-term issues, particularly given institutional
and systemic sexism, racism, ageism, and other "isms." People
need help unlearning and divesting themselves of stereotypical
beliefs about others. Do diversity learning programs help to
eradicate stereotypes?
Do programs include sound data on the hiring, retention,
promotion, and advancement of all groups? If an organization
fears to disseminate such data, that suggests inadequate
attention to diversity. Is there something to hide? Do employees
resist attending diversity learning programs or do they
understand their importance? Is there tolerance for joking and
kidding in sexual harassment training? Are managers and
supervisors periodically updated about changes in EEOC
guidelines and regulations?
Mentoring. Mentoring is valuable in helping dominant and non-
dominant group members succeed in organizations. Dominant
group members are advantaged by their similarity to leaders and
executives; forming mentoring relationships without
organizational assistance is simpler for them than for non-
dominant group members. Successful mentoring programs pair a
protegee with a mentor who is genuinely interested in seeing the
protegee grow and advance. Dominant group members tend to

514
;rs.
have greater access to social networks that share valuable job-

and organization-related information. A formal mentoring
program can provide access to such networks to non-dominant
group members also.
Promotion and advancement. The promotion and advancement
rates of employees should be regularly monitored. Are
promotion rates for non-dominant and dominant group members
similar? Since measures to recruit, select, train, and develop
should be carefully monitored to ensure fairness and equity,
both non-dominant and dominant group members would ideally
experience similar rates of advancement. If they do not, reasons
for differential rates should be investigated. Are women
assumed to be less interested in advancement opportunities
because of perceptions they are more focused on their families?
Are groups with strong family ties believed to be unwilling to
relocate for promotional opportunities due to these ties? Are
men with children viewed as more committed workers and thus
advantaged because of that perception (regardless of its
veracity)?
Are non-dominant group employees held to different standards
than dominant group candidates? What mechanisms are in place
to determine whether differential standards exist and to address
and remove them if they do? Is the performance of all
employees regularly and fairly assessed? Are poor performers
advised and counseled to facilitate improvement? Is there
evidence of "the norm to be kind" when evaluating employees
with disabilities?3 If employees are not given negative
performance feedback when warranted, they will not be able to
improve. If performance is unfairly scrutinized, employees will
notice it and it will serve to depress motivation and increase
dissatisfaction and turnover.
Affinity and employee resource groups. Many organizations
sponsor affinity or employee resource groups, in which people
who are similar in some way or share similar concerns formally
and informally gather as employees. American Airlines, for
example, has affinity groups for Blacks, Latinos, gays and
lesbians, and other non-dominant group members (and allies).

Shell has affinity groups for women, Latinos, Blacks, Asians,
and other groups. Verizon and Lockheed have similar groups.
The existence of affinity groups in an organization may signal
support for and commitment to diversity among employees and
constituents. Affinity groups that are social in nature should not
be confused with formal mentoring programs that provide more
instrumental support and assist non-dominant groups in actual
career progress.
1 'Colella, A., &c Stone, D. L. (2005). "Workplace
Discrimination toward Persons with Disabilities: A Call for
Some New Research Directions." In R. L. Dipboye &c A.
Colella (Eds.), Discrimination at Work: The Psychological and
Organizational Bases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, pp. 227-253.
492 Global Vision
Introduction and Overview
In the first chapter of this book, diversity was defined as real or
perceived differences among people that affect their interactions
and relationships.1 With this as a foundation and a focus on
different groups in the U.S. population, the following fourteen
chapters covered theories of diversity; legislation concerning
diversity; Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Whites, American Indians,
Alaska Natives, and multiracial group members; sex and gender;
work and family; sexual orientation; religion; age; physical and
mental ability; and weight and appearance as specific aspects of
diversity. These are the issues that are currently most important
in the United States, which is where most of the furor about
increasing diversity began and is the source of most of the
published research on diversity.
Each chapter included information on non-U.S. diversity
research, laws, or other issues, but this chapter goes further,
exploring diversity from an international viewpoint.
Researchers and scholars outside the United States have

emphasized the limited relevance to other countries of the U.S.
experience with diversity2 and how little "diversity" there is in
diversity research.3 Yet, diversity as "real or perceived
differences among people that affect their interactions and
relationships" does fit within an international context.
Discrimination, dominance, marginalization, and the
colonization of people based on race, ethnicity, gender,
religion, sexual orientation, and numerous other factors occur
all over the world. From the viewpoint of power, dominance,
discrimination, and control of resources, the fact that diversity
issues (regardless of the chosen terminology) are universal
becomes clearer. As we investigate diversity from an
international viewpoint, we maintain the perspective that
diversity is increasingly inevitable and is of value to
individuals, organizations, and society everywhere.
Misperception: Diversity is a U.S. concept.
Reality: When viewed as the existence of non-dominant and
dominant groups and from issues of power, discrimination, and
control of resources between them, the universality of these
concerns is clear.
Why is encouraging diversity and inclusion important
worldwide? The current and future workforce in many nations is
changing greatly as a result of changes in birth and mortality
rates, immigration, age distributions, advances in health care,
external pressures, and competition. As in the United States, the
growth of the workforce in Canada, the United Kingdom, and
Mexico is small when compared to previous periods. In Spain,
Italy, Germany, France, Japan, and South Africa, declines in the
population of working adults are projected for 2010 through
2050. The need to allow or, indeed, encourage active, full
participation in the workforce is particularly vital in these
countries.
Further, although the majority of the laws, cases, and examples
discussed in earlier chapters are from the United States, the

overall premise of diversity and inclusion via multiple avenues
is common in many places.4 Many of the topics covered in each
chapter are substantially similar regardless of where they occur.
For example, sex and gender strongly influence one's education,
workforce participation, income, treatment, occupation, and
status within organizations
'Dobbs, M. F. (1996). "Managing Diversity: Lessons from the
Private Sector." Public Personnel Management, 25(September):
351-368.
2See, for example, Jones, D., Pringle, J., 8c Shepherd, D.
(2000). "'Managing Diversity' Meets Aotearoa/New Zealand."
Personnel Review, 29(3): 364-380.
3Jonsen, K., Maznevski, M. L., & Schneider, S. C. (2011).
"Diversity and Its Not So Diverse Literature: An International
Perspective." Cross Cultural Management, 11(1): 35-62.
4Strachan, G., Burgess, J., & Henderson, L. (2007). "Equal
Employment Opportunity Legislation and Policies: The
Australian Experience." Equal Opportunities International,
26(6): 525-540.
in Australia, China, England, Japan, New Zealand, Pakistan, the
United States, and most places that one could name. Work and
family considerations, including the availability and cost of
child care, social policies, income, and institutional support, are
important to people wherever they live and work. Differences in
people's religious beliefs affect them everywhere, and employer
discrimination based on religion occurs in many countries. The
racial profiling of minorities discussed in previous chapters is
also a problem in Canada, where Blacks and, to a lesser extent,
Asians are more likely to be stopped and searched (and thus
arrested and convicted) than similarly behaving Whites.5

Discrimination based on color and preferences for White or
lighter-skinned people are common in Brazil, India, Mexico,
South Africa, and many other countries.6 And there are
numerous other similarities, such as wage discrimination, un-
and underemployment, and occupational segregation of non-
dominant racial and ethnic groups, in many countries. In many
places, there are employment-related laws that focus on
diversity issues (e.g., equal employment for women, minority,
or disenfranchised groups) although who is targeted varies by
country.
On the other hand, within each region there are numerous
unique issues and concerns, which are based on that region's
particular historical, cultural, religious, and other differences.
For example, in Saudi Arabia, religious beliefs severely impede
women's participation in the workforce. In Japan, most women
hold temporary jobs, rather than the lifetime jobs that are
common for Japanese men. The Burakumin people in Japan
have experienced historical discrimination and exclusion based
on their class, and this continues today.7 Similarly, India
maintains a system of caste-based discrimination that
disadvantages the majority of its population due to their caste
rather than their individual abilities and competencies.8
Migrants and ethnic minorities in Australia experience
discrimination in various forms despite current diversity
policies.9 Given the size of the world and the number of
countries, each with distinct concerns, a truly comprehensive
study of diversity worldwide is a nearly impossible undertaking.
Even so, there is value in understanding issues that are common
around the world.
It is not possible to include here the history of multiple groups
in every country, as we did in previous chapters for groups in
the United States. However, knowing that country-specific
history, culture, and laws affect diversity everywhere will allow
readers to address and value diversity, regardless of context.
Armed with this knowledge, readers will be better equipped to
investigate, understand, and apply ways to best incorporate the

diversity of a particular area. A "Western" view of diversity is
not at all appropriate to every culture; indeed, a U.S. point of
view is not appropriate for Canada, nor is a Canadian point of
view appropriate for the United States, although both are
Western countries. What is applicable is the recognition that
diversity issues affect individuals, and thus organizations,
differently around the world and so they should be investigated
within the context of where they occur. Figure 16.1 presents
some of the factors to consider in identifying the dominant and
non-dominant groups and areas of concern in
5Wortley, S., & Tanner, J. (2003). "Data, Denials, and
Confusion: The Racial Profiling Debate in Toronto." Canadian
Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 45(3): 367-390;
Wortley, S., & Tanner, J. (2005). "Inflammatory Rhetoric?
Baseless Accusations? A Response to Gabor's Critique of Racial
Profiling Research in Canada." Canadian Journal of
Criminology and Criminal Justice, 47(3): 581-609.
6Glenn, E. N. (2009). Shades of Difference: Why Skin Color
Matters. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7De Vos, G. A., & Wagatsuma, A. (1966). Japan's Invisible
Race: Caste in Culture and Personality. Berkeley: University of
California Press; Gottlieb, N. (1998). "Discriminatory Language
in Japan: Burakumin, the Disabled, and Women." Asian Studies
Review, 22(2): 157-173.
8As in the United States, historical differences in treatment,
access, and opportunity lead to differences in education, health,
wealth and poverty, and other factors that influence individuals.
9Syed, J., 8c Kramar, R. (2010). "What Is the Australian Model
for Managing Cultural Diversity?" Personnel Review, 39(1): 96-
115.
494 Global Vision

Figure 16.1 Considerations Useful for Identifying Non-
Dominant Group Members and Diversity Issues
· Historical differential treatment
· Identifiability, power, discrimination, and group awareness10
· Distribution of wealth
· Employment, unemployment, and underemployment rates
· Participation rates
· Occupational levels, types, and representation in management
and executive positions
· Income and earnings distributions
· Literacy
· Educational attainment
· Return on educational investment
· Residential and employment segregation
· Rates of intermarriage with the dominant group
· Poverty rates
· Health and longevity
· Racial profiling and incarceration rates
· Legal protections
· Political participation11
countries around the world, although not every factor is relevant
to each group in every country.
We begin our exploration of international diversity by
documenting that discrimination and differential treatment are
worldwide phenomena; we then consider sex and gender,
disabilities, sexual orientation, and poverty as important
factors. In each section, we focus on a particular factor in a
specific region. Throughout, we use research drawn from the
International Labour Organization (ILO), an international body
set up to help workers in 178 member states. Members of the
ILO include varied developing and developed countries such as
Albania, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Cambodia, Canada,
Finland, France, Hungary, Kenya, Nicaragua, St. Lucia,
Swaziland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States,
and Zambia. We next consider the future and make some

recommendations for change to improve opportunities for equity
and inclusion for all workers as the twenty-first century
continues. As much as possible, we recognize variance between
the dominant and non-dominant groups, the colonized and the
colonizers, and other important distinctions.
Coming full circle, this chapter (and book) ends with a return to
the factors unique to the diversity situation in the United States,
emphasizing its urgency of attending to diversity, given the
distinctive history and great diversity among U.S. inhabitants as
compared to other countries. With its history of slavery,
immigration, religious freedom, and its often expressed (but not
always practiced) welcome of diversity, the United States is
potentially the most diverse nation of all. Its history generates
more potential for division but also more opportunities than in
many other countries. While many countries have permitted
slavery or
10From Dworkin, A. G., & Dworkin, R. J. (1999). The Minority
Report, 3rd ed. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Publishers, pp. 11-
27. nHausmann, R., Tyson, L. D., & Zahidi, S. (2010). The
Global Gender Gap Report 2010. Geneva: World Economic
Forum, http:// www.weforum.org/pdf/gendergap/report2010.pdf,
accessed November 23, 2010.
indentured servitude, nearly annihilated their indigenous
peoples, and have subordinated women, none had and continues
to have the unique combination of factors the United States
does. Given its history and the current diversity of its
population, no longer does the United States have the option to
discriminate, exclude, and limit the contributions of an
increasingly diverse population if it is to compete in an
increasingly global world without boundaries. Thus, we make

recommendations specific to the United States in the final
section of this chapter and book.
I Discrimination and Differential Treatment as Worldwide
Phenomena
The ILO's "Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at
Work" is viewed as a "commitment by governments, employers'
and workers' organizations to uphold basic human values—
values that are vital to our social and economic lives."12 One of
the four values addressed in the ILO's declaration is the
elimination of workplace discrimination. As discussed
throughout this book, discrimination is a formidable impediment
to diversity in organizations. The ILO's posture on people's
rights to freedom from employment discrimination confirms the
existence of discrimination and differential treatment
worldwide. Targets vary by region, but discrimination exists
everywhere and "denies opportunities for individuals and robs
societies of what those people can and could contribute."13
The need to eradicate discrimination and to make other
conscious efforts to include and value the perspectives of all
workers has been a consistent theme in this book. The ILO also
takes the position we have discussed in previous chapters, that
eradicating discrimination would benefit individuals,
organizations, the economy, and society. Many countries have
instituted antidiscrimination or equal opportunity legislation
(see Table 16.1).14 The emotional, psychological, and economic
rewards of workplace fairness for individuals are apparent. For
organizations, as we have pointed out, diversity can provide
benefits related to cost, resource acquisition, marketing,
creativity, problem solving, and system flexibility. The ability
to hire from a larger pool of workers, rather than excluding
workers based on characteristics not related to their
productivity, is beneficial for organizations. Avoiding lawsuits,
boycotts, and lost business are also positives for organizations,

wherever they are. For
l2ILO. (2003). "Declaration on Fundamental Principles and
Rights at Work." http://www.ilo.org/dyn/
declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.INDEXPAGE, accessed
November 21, 2010.
''http^/www.ilo.org/declaration/principles/eliminationofdiscrimi
nation/lang-en/index.htm, accessed November 21, 2010.
l4Table 16.1 provides a limited summary of laws in selected
areas. Readers are encouraged to investigate the laws in specific
countries of interest.
(
Country
Act(s)
Provisions
Argentina
Anti-discrimination Act, No. 23.592, 1988
Prohibits sex discrimination. Sanctions any person who
impedes, obstructs, limits, or in any way undermines
constitutional rights or guarantees on the basis of sex.
Australia
Disability Discrimination Act; Sex Discrimi
nation Act, as amended; Equal Opport
unity for Women Act; various others
Prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, criminal record,
disability, sex (including pregnancy, potential pregnancies),
sexual orientation, same-sex couples, various others.
Canada
Canadian Human Rights Act; various others
Prohibit discrimination based on race and color, national or
ethnic origin, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital or
family status, physical and mental ability, and other areas. An
act requiring equal pay

for men and women in same jobs has also been passed.
France
Constitution, Penal Code of 1994
Criminalize discrimination based on race, religion, or ethnicity.
Germany
Various laws
Prohibit sex discrimination, harassment, unequal pay, pregnancy
and maternity discrimination.
Hungary
Act CXXV 362/2004 of 22 December 2003, Equal Treatment
and Promotion of Equal Opportunities
Prohibits direct or indirect negative discrimination, harassment,
unlawful segregation, and retribution based on sex, racial
origin, color, nationality, national or ethnic origin, mother
tongue, disability, state of health, religious or ideological
convict
ion, family status, motherhood (pregnancy) or fatherhood,
sexual orientation, sexual identity, age, social origin, financial
status, among other protected areas.
South Africa
Employment Equity Act (amended)
Applies to a broad spectrum of employers; prohib
its "unfair discrimination" and requires affirmative action;
covers Africans,
coloureds
, Indians, people with disabilities, and women.
United Kingdom
Equal Pay Directive; Equal Treatment Directive; various others
Prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, race, sex,
pregnancy, parental status, marital or family status, among other
protected areas.
Table
16.1
Various Equal Employment Opportunity Legislation in Selected
Countries
The language of the legislation may vary, and all protected

areas are not listed. In addition to employment-related laws,
many laws refer to housing, accommodation, and other areas.
)
496
society, the benefits of eliminating discrimination and valuing
diversity are immense—they can reduce poverty worldwide,
increase life spans, and create stronger economies, among other
countless positive outcomes. People who have the opportunity

to work, contribute, and receive fair treatment and remuneration
become, again quoting the ILO, "creators of life and
communities ... caregivers and receivers ... workers, consumers,
and entrepreneurs ... savers, investors, producers and employers
... inventors and generators of knowledge ... as citizens and
organizers."15 On a societal level, these outcomes are lasting
and sustaining.
Having argued that diversity is indeed a worldwide concern, we
now consider specifically from a global perspective three of the
topics from the preceding chapters: sex and gender, disabilities,
and sexual orientation. In addition, we investigate poverty and
class, in recognition of the unique contribution of
discrimination and differential treatment to poverty in countries
around the world.
I Sex and Gender: The Status of Women around the World
Volumes of research from various disciplines attest to women's
low occupational status worldwide. The ILO views disparities in
access to education and women's disproportionate share of home
and child care as contributors to discrimination against
women.16 Females often receive less education than males, and,
as discussed throughout this book, education is closely
associated with earnings and the likelihood of being employed.
In part as a consequence of less education, women are less
likely to be employed, and when employed they tend to earn
less than men, worldwide. In addition, women work fewer hours
than men and are more likely to live in poverty than men. On
the other hand, even with similar or more education, women's
earnings and status are generally lower than men's. With more,
less, or equal amounts of education, discrimination and
segregation contribute to women's lower occupational status and
earnings all over the world.
Population and Participation Rates
Due to the need for more workers, lower birthrates, and changes

in attitudes toward women's employment and in social policies
concerning child care, women around the world are
participating in the workforce at
1J"'Working Out of Poverty.'" (2003). Report of the Director-
General, International Labour Conference, 91st session, p. 23.
'6hrtp://vvww.ilo.org/declaration/principles/eliminationofdiscri
mination/lang-en/index.htm, accessed November 21, 2010.

(Chapter 16 Internationa! Diversity and Facing the Future .docx

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à (Chapter 16 Internationa! Diversity and Facing the Future .docx

Similaire à (Chapter 16 Internationa! Diversity and Facing the Future .docx (12)

Plus de joyjonna282

Plus de joyjonna282 (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

(Chapter 16 Internationa! Diversity and Facing the Future .docx