Yoshida Academy’s Post

Allyship is a verb. It’s about taking action and standing up for what’s right. As we approach Latina Equal Pay Day tomorrow, it’s important to recognize that Latinas are paid just 57 cents for every dollar earned by white, non-Hispanic men. This pay gap reflects the systemic inequalities Latinas face every day in the workplace. 🔹For every 100 men promoted from entry-level to manager, only 74 Latinas are promoted. As a result, there are far fewer Latinas to promote at every subsequent level and their representation dwindles from there. (The State of Latinas in Corporate Report by Lean In) 🔹Latinas have the lowest promotion rates of any group of women from director to VP. For every 100 men promoted to VP, 90 Latinas are promoted. This holds Latinas back at a key moment when the C-suite is finally in view. 🔹Latina 'Onlys' encounter more microaggressions: 74 percent have experienced microaggressions at work compared to 58 percent of women overall. In particular, Latina Onlys are more than twice as likely to have a coworker express surprise at their language skills or overhear negative comments about their culture. (Latinas are more likely to be “Onlys”—often the only or one of the only people with their racial identity in the room at work.) We can’t close this gap alone. We need allies. So, how can you take action as an ally? ✅ Advocate for Pay Equity: Speak up about salary disparities within your organization. Push for pay audits, transparency, and equitable pay practices. ✅ Mentor and Sponsor Latinas: Help Latinas navigate their careers by offering mentorship and sponsorship. Open doors for them and advocate for their promotions and leadership opportunities. ✅ Support Policy Change: Advocate for policies like the Paycheck Fairness Act and raise awareness about the importance of equal pay laws that protect Latinas and all women of color. ✅ Educate Yourself: Learn about the Latina wage gap and how it impacts their financial security and career growth. Share these insights with your network to spread awareness. ✅ Engage in Transparent Conversations: Talk openly about pay in your workplace. Be willing to share your salary information to help Latinas negotiate fair compensation. Remember, allyship is a verb— take tangible steps to ensure equity for all. As we raise awareness for #LatinaEqualPayDay, let’s commit to taking real action to close the gap and support the Latina professionals in our lives. Data comes from "The State of Latinas in Corporate Report" by Lean In. Link in comments. #Allyship #CloseTheGap #PayEquity #Sponsorship

So farewell then DEI. You won’t be missed. The news that the government is banning all Civil Service diversity jobs is the latest sign that the world is slowly but surely waking up to the true horrors of Diversity, Equality & Inclusion (DEI) policies. It should be a line in the sand for organisations everywhere who are still wasting millions on creating pointless roles for pointless people. Cabinet minister Esther McVey says the government is cracking down on both spending on external DEI programmes and on jobs created solely to focus on diversity. Three cheers for that. The Diversity & Inclusion Manager is the worst kind of bureaucratic HR individual who uses woke orthodoxy to get power for themselves because they couldn’t get legitimacy in a normal way. Their so-called inclusive programmes and policies invariably turn out to be the exact opposite, excluding anyone who does not go along with this nonsense. They do nothing to grow the organisation they work for and simply waste everyone’s time with pointless box ticking exercises. The original idea of wokeness was well-meaning but just like the concept of political correctness before it, it has been hijacked by a bunch of privileged left-leaning liberals and morphed into something very different. It’s time to say enough is enough and send all the failed consultants and snake oil salespeople who have been busy pushing this nonsense on us back into irrelevant obscurity where they belong.

Women in academia have historically been assigned a disproportionate amount of unseen and unpaid work within their faculties, departments, or offices. While unconscious, this behaviour has the potential to negatively impact their professional development in this increasingly competitive space. Unconscious gender bias is an uncomfortable topic to discuss, but critical to address if we are to be equal beyond pay parity. While I am lucky to currently work in a space which is very gender safe, as a woman in academia, I am left with uncomfortable questions to which I do not have answers: 1. When do I say "No" to work which falls outside my job description, and when do I act as a "team player?" 2. When do I insist on the use of my title to assert myself, and when do I allow for a more casual address? 3. Can I say when I am uncomfortable or insulted, or will I be labelled "emotional, dramatic, and problematic?" I believe that women, even in spaces which are explicitly gender neutral, have experienced something similar. Perhaps we have further to go, and more to discuss than we would like to admit.

Good read. One observation. Those who argue that Equality ( differentiating it from equity) is requiring everyone treated exactly the same hasn’t read or understood the Equality Act 2010. All the variances and exceptions to the core principles are allowing for differences in treatment in various circumstances precisely to address the concerns that “ one size doesn’t fit all”

In professional life - hourly worker to CEO, elected representative to President ~ Diversity2Eliminate Non-Exclusion (D2ENE) DEI is passe and doesn't compute. It is either used for political gaming or DEIWashing. In the case of the former, the liberals use it to prop up minorities and marginalized segments of society for political gains. And, hyper-nationalists and supremacists use it for scapegoating minorities as the source of all problems. Again for parochial political gains. In the case of the latter, DEI-Washing is accused as being used to color the corporate palette to serve its own business gains. What I wish to see is when a qualified candidate appears on the scene, one should not exclude -- or Non-EXCLUDE -- her or him due to race, religion or lack thereof, gender, sexual orientation, among other discriminatory and bigotry factors. Thus D2ENE. (more in Comment)

(Just wanted to post this response I gave in my poli-sci class discussion board. I rarely write this succinct, and I want to bookmark this moment for future-Tatiyana): The difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome is in the location of said "equality" or "sameness". Regarding equal opportunity, equality is found at the beginning of an economic process (for example, going to school, pursuing a career, seeking assistance, etc.). These could also be seen as "pursuits of happiness". Equal outcome refers to a "sameness" in the outcome of the common pursuits of happiness like the ones I listed in the preceding sentence. In her article, "Still the Land of Opportunity?", Isabel Sawhill writes "[the] American public has always cared more about equal opportunity than about equal results" citing the opposite opinion as socialism. So, while Dylan Matthews agrees in his article "The Case Against Equality of Opportunity", that many people think equal opportunity should be the goal in a society, he would say that the more pragmatic perspective reveals that achieving equal opportunity is equivalent to knocking on the doorstep of totalitarianism. References: Sawhill, I. V. (2017, May 10). Still the land of opportunity?. Brookings. https://lnkd.in/gEJt2WR3 Matthews, D. (2015, September 21). The case against equality of opportunity. Vox; Vox. https://lnkd.in/g59Giw4q

In the United States, the push for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has continued despite political backlash. While the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action primarily focused on government actors and universities, some corporate leaders may use it as a reason to abandon DEI programs they already opposed. However, there is still room to advance DEI in the workplace. Here are three practices that will endure even if the law continues to evolve in a conservative direction: 1. Counteracting Bias: Companies can continue practices to counteract bias, such as removing stereotypical language from job descriptions or conducting structured interviews with standardised questions. 2. Ambient Policies: Policies that work to advance overall diversity, such as employee resource groups, mentorship programs, or family-friendly policies, can persist. 3. Universal Policies: Increasing psychological safety benefits everyone, but it particularly helps those at the margins who feel excluded from workplaces without such initiatives. Despite legal changes, these strategies remain legally safe and contribute to a more inclusive work environment. https://lnkd.in/eXkhytbj #DEI #Inclusion #Leadership

🌟 Lilly Ledbetter passed away on October 12th. Here's why I think we all should be talking about her legacy. 💡 Lilly Ledbetter’s fight for pay equity changed U.S. employment law forever. After working at Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company for 19 years, Lilly received an anonymous note from a coworker informing her that she was being paid significantly less than her male peers. ⛔ Her lawsuit against the company eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled against her because she did not file suit 180 days from the date of the discriminatory policy that led to her reduced paycheck. ⚖️ Though she lost her case, her determination led to the passing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009, empowering workers to fight wage discrimination. 👩⚖️ As an HR leader passionate about fostering equity in the workplace, studying Lilly’s advocacy sparked my love for understanding and advocating for fair and just treatment of all employees. Her courage continues to inspire me to challenge inequities wherever they exist. 💬 Why should you know Lilly’s story? Because equal pay is not just a women’s issue—it’s an issue of fairness and respect in the workplace for all. 📚 I invited you to learn more about her incredible legacy and why we must all continue her fight for workplace equity. ✨ Additionally, if this topic has sparked your own curiosity, I would love to continue the conversation with you! https://lnkd.in/dkEHie5x #PayEquity #FairPay #WorkplaceEquality #HRLeadership #LillyLedbetter #HRcommunity #Equity #EqualPayForEqualWork

So the Australian Public Service Commission has released a CALD employment strategy. It is great to see the #APS grappling with institutionalised racism, but there is a deep flaw in the document. It doesn't (directly) call for the APS to make the radical changes required to be a culturally and linguistically diverse Service. It calls for the employment of more culturally and linguistically diverse people in certain roles. Why is that a problem? Because a person can't be diverse...think about it...it just doesn't make any sense unless you a talking about a diversity within a person (Whitman's multitudes...which I don't think they are talking about here!!). Only a group of people can have diversity. Actually when you call a person diverse, you mean that they are the 'other'. Right from the outset you have set up a framework which 'otherises' the very people you want to bring into the fold. And if there is an other there must also be an 'us' whom the other is defined in relation to. The 'us' who gets to decide who is diverse and who isn't. That 'us' remains invisible and unidentified in the document, even though it must be the 'us' who are the problem. In his paper 'The End of Diversity' (2019) Dr. Rinaldo Walcott argues that 'diversity' has "largely been discredited as a practice, idea or process that can produce...social, cultural, political, and economic change..." and I am inclined to agree.