January 7, 2010 at 12:19 pm
sreid08: Interesting article that adds greatly to the discussion. Thanks for posting it.
January 7, 2010 at 12:24 pm
sreid08 (1/7/2010)
http://uwnews.org/uweek/article.aspx?visitsource=uwkmail&id=54721%5B/quote%5D
I've got to say that this really amuses me, since I DO feel comfortable in a space that is filled with, as the article puts it, stereotypical computer science objects. At least half of the non-work things on my cubicle walls are pretty stereotypically geeky, and the objects that they mention as being in the stereotypical space would make me feel like I belong. But hey, maybe that's why I'm in IT in the first place.
Jennifer Levy (@iffermonster)
January 7, 2010 at 12:29 pm
sreid08 (1/7/2010)
http://uwnews.org/uweek/article.aspx?visitsource=uwkmail&id=54721%5B/quote%5D
Yes, very interesting article. Here is the link again so that others interested can just click here instead of copy/paste.
January 7, 2010 at 12:32 pm
cherie j sheriff-437357 (1/7/2010)
It is a great career area for women in general. I see the only problems are logistics.
Excellent point. A lot of the problem that I've seen is the reluctance of management to allow telecommuting or flexible time. Most of the management I've worked under has viewed such things as a way to slack off. I lucked out in that I got to tweak my hours to fit my sleep/productivity schedule a bit better, but working remotely is something that's only allowed as an occasional thing. I don't personally understand the problem as long as the work gets done and there's coverage for critical systems when coverage is needed, but I've never yet had a boss who saw it that way.
Jennifer Levy (@iffermonster)
January 7, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Jennifer Levy (1/7/2010)
cherie j sheriff-437357 (1/7/2010)
It is a great career area for women in general. I see the only problems are logistics.Excellent point. A lot of the problem that I've seen is the reluctance of management to allow telecommuting or flexible time. Most of the management I've worked under has viewed such things as a way to slack off. I lucked out in that I got to tweak my hours to fit my sleep/productivity schedule a bit better, but working remotely is something that's only allowed as an occasional thing. I don't personally understand the problem as long as the work gets done and there's coverage for critical systems when coverage is needed, but I've never yet had a boss who saw it that way.
And this is actually true regardless of who you are. I did work for a great boss at one time that allowed me to telecommute once a week and during the winter use my own judgement on wether I should try to drive to work or work from home during inclement weather (snow storms).
January 7, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Jennifer Levy (1/7/2010)
sreid08 (1/7/2010)
Here is an interesting article out of the University of WA that talks about why there are less women in the tech field....http://uwnews.org/uweek/article.aspx?visitsource=uwkmail&id=54721%5B/quote%5D
I've got to say that this really amuses me, since I DO feel comfortable in a space that is filled with, as the article puts it, stereotypical computer science objects. At least half of the non-work things on my cubicle walls are pretty stereotypically geeky, and the objects that they mention as being in the stereotypical space would make me feel like I belong. But hey, maybe that's why I'm in IT in the first place.
Jennifer -- It amused me too for the same reasons. I get all the geek jokes and have the stereotypical geek humor/toys. But maybe that is the point of the article -- you and me and the other women like us are the ones that fit into this environment - but most women don't because they don't feel comfortable - and we do. Plus we get the whole 'logic' thing of computers and they don't. I'll tell ya, I've got a sister who fits that - she doesn't get the logic of computers AT ALL!
Sherri
January 7, 2010 at 12:53 pm
kerry_hood (1/7/2010)
Steve Jones - Editor (1/7/2010)
We could also open salaries. I wouldn't mind that. Let people stand up and prove they're worth more.
I don't think comparison of salaries always works for women, post child-rearing break.
There's a number of women I knew in Project Management who, before their first baby, were scaling the peaks determined to break the glass ceiling (not me, I wanted the 'technical' career path). Once they had the baby (if they bonded) they re-prioritised their lives, and as one said "I really don't know why I slaved so hard for that promotion".
As I said in my previous post, a number then leave at the nursery-starting school stage to work in education to get around the nightmare of school holidays. So their salaries would then be lower, especially if they became class room assistants instead of teachers.
Myself, I have compromised my salary (badly unfortunately) to work for someone (a man in his twenties) who I have confidence will let me go on the too-frequent occasion I have a family crisis. I want to be able to walk out of the office without worrying about what will be said when I come back the next day; I can just contact him when the crisis is over and arrange when I'll make the time up.
It's also important to me, to get the home-life balance, that I work 5 hours (eat your heart out here!!) SHORTER than everyone else so I can do two afternoon school runs a week. This means I keep in contact with other mums who will then help me out when I need them (no relatives).
So in my case, my salary might be rather compromised, but it's a result for the quality of my life - I can meet the family's needs and be paid for having the pleasure of developing software in a team.
Oh, and on the logical thinking argument: I spent years concealing the fact that I don't debug logically; I have dyslexia and it's given me the gift of debugging intuitively.
If you are working 5 hours a week less (1/8 of a 40 hr week and thus roughly 13% less) and were making only 13% less, you would be getting a fair trade and you haven't really lost any of your per hour rate. If you are working 13% less and making 50% less...the employer will argue that is the cost of flexibility and the rest of us will say they're getting a really good bargain at your expense. When I was sick a few years ago I negotiated my time down to 30 hrs per week temporarily with a straight 25% reduction in salary, and it was great for all concerned. If they had wanted to cut more off my salary for me to do it, I would not have been happy about it and may have said, forget it, I'll take FMLA instead. It's different of course when you are first negotiating a job than changing the terms.
Whether you're male or female, childfree or child possessing, work / life balance should play into your job choice and salary negotiations. If a person wants to ensure they work a 40 hr week, they shouldn't be required to have children to do so. This person might make less money than the person who takes the job that requires 50+ hr weeks, and that is a choice they make.
When it comes down to it though each person and their employer has to come to mutually agreeable terms, in terms of hours, salary, other benefits. If one or the other party doesn't like the arrangement that is where the problems start. If both parties are happy, who is anyone else to argue?
I am pretty sure I've been lowballed on salary several times in the past, but I prefer to negotiate for more vacation days instead of pressing the salary issue. Many companies seem more willing to give up an extra couple weeks than an extra couple thousand dollars even though technically two weeks of vacation is worth more when you break the salary down into dollars per week. Plus, I have more time for my life and that makes me happy. I just figure out how much money I want and think I'm worth and if they offer me at least that, anything more is lagniappe.
--
Anye Mercy
"Service Unavailable is not an Error" -- John, ENOM support
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." -- Inigo Montoya in "Princess Bride"
"Civilization exists by geologic consent, subject to change without notice." -- Will Durant
January 7, 2010 at 1:04 pm
That's an interesting article (I edited the link to make it hot) and thanks for posting it.
There are lots of "geeks" among the women I know in IT, but those are the easy ones. The ones with a passion for this area. There are plenty of others that have a talent, and might enjoy the work, but are put off for various reasons.
The Women in Technology luncheon at the PASS Summit mentioned this as a trend issue as well. young women are worried about being classified as "geeks" and avoid technology. That's the part that I'd like to change. Get people more comfortable with being an IT professional.
We'll never eliminate bias. It's part of being human. however we can try to reduce it, or keep it under control at tolerable levels.
January 7, 2010 at 1:12 pm
All I have to say is that I am very honored to have been mentored for a short time by Lt. Grace Hopper when I was in the US Navy. She later became an admiral. She introduced me to programming when I was waiting for a security clearance. I type the punched cards for an early meteorological program and when I asked what it was for, she took a few days to teach me and I was hooked.
I didn't know she was/would become famous until after the Navy when I attended college for data processing and programming courses. One of them mentioned her in a history of D.P. chapter.
😎
January 7, 2010 at 1:31 pm
I wonder how much the "geek" stereotype is responsible for the overall decline in Computer Science majors.
I also wonder if liking sci-fi by computer people has to do with our interest in technology and where it could take us. (off topic I know, but I still wonder :-D)
January 7, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Regarding wage diversity, the EPA (Equal Pay Act), states that no person shall be paid less for doing the same work as someone else having the same qualifications. Under the Lilly Ledbetter Act, the prior 180 day window to file a complaint to the EPA on wage differences has been nulled and allows for filing at the point of the person finding out about the wage descrepancy. Employers are also not allowed to retaliate against any employee who files a complaint. Employers can be fined and also made to pay retribution if found ito be n violation of the act.
January 7, 2010 at 2:59 pm
Bravo! Thanks for the link! Great article, rings true.
I went to an all-women's college in the 1970s where the math/computer science building was plain - no posters one way or the other. So, it was gender-neutral. Plenty of women in the program - not just because there were no male undergraduates, but because it was kinda cool to give it a try. Then we were hooked...
I guess the sci-fi posters, etc referred to in the article make it a boys' clubhouse, which sends a message in itself. So THAT is the barrier to entry? The office environment is gender-neutral, but you have to have the education to even get there, so it makes sense.
Colleen
January 7, 2010 at 3:07 pm
I believe it is because we simply aren't interested in operating systems and networks
What do other women think - do you want to work with operating systems and networks and hardware or with programming and web applications and databases??
If you are talking about Kernel mode programming which in the Microsoft platform relates to DDK it maybe part learning curve because it is C/C++ and the same with operating systems, C# can be used for network programming but it is still complex area of programming. I also think opportunities are limited because only very large companies like Microsoft, Intel, HP and a few others use system and kernel mode programming. There are more uses for network programming because SMTP, web services and other low level web infrastructure includes sub set of network programming.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
January 7, 2010 at 3:14 pm
I am absolutely more interested in databases. Then Programming after that. Networking itself doesn't hold much appeal to me.
January 7, 2010 at 3:16 pm
Personally I don't like programming much, but in my career I have seen some pretty decent women programmers...I don't mean pretty by looks btw 😉
Thanks..
The_SQL_DBA
MCTS
"Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives."
Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 199 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply