The “participation of women in decision-making
positions persists to be seen with scepticism. This transference supports
business practices as women facilitate the foundational support structure
in aspects of care of children and the elderly, office support,
healthcare, and teaching, both in the workplace and at home, allowing their
male co-workers or domestic partners to fully participate in corporate
governance.[1] These
are expenses that are never recognized in a company's financial statements as
they are outsourced at the cost of women's free labour.”
Since “public policy fails to demand greater
systemic change, public law supports present injustices and, as a result,
corporate law fails to consider more holistic private decision-making
structures. Women weigh opportunity costs differently than men, with familial
and societal duties taking precedence over many concerns of progress or
employment. The gendered perception of opportunity costs is created by the fact
that company and household loyalty are usually seen as mutually exclusive
rather than corresponding.”
Women 's familial responsibilities “are still seen as a failure to contribute to the
corporation's existence.[2]
Reform in the public policy cannot singlehandedly change the status quo, this
shall be accompanied by an evaluation of how companies operate and a
fundamental structural change in the workplace.”