Department of Families, Housing,
Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the
Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
March 2013
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Contents
Glossary
3
Executive Summary
4
1
Background
15
1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.3
1.4
Introduction
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Overview
Overview of the new framework
Background to reporting
Consultation process
Project objectives
Project methodology
15
15
15
16
17
17
18
18
2
Findings
20
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
Appropriateness of the five outcome areas
Objects excluded by the proposed outcomes
Amendments and expansion of proposed outcomes
Capturing the broader context of gender equality
Priority reporting matters
GEI 1: The gender composition of the workforce
GEI 2: Workforce composition of governing bodies
GEI 3 Equal remuneration between women and men
GEI 4: Availability and utility of employment terms,
conditions and practices relating to flexible working
arrangements for employees, and to working arrangements
supporting employees with family or caring responsibilities
GEI 5: Consultation with employees on issues concerning
gender equality in the workplace
Other suggestions and key considerations when developing
priority reporting matters
Perceived value of the measures to employers
Information currently collected by business
Utility of new measures to employers
Impact on business
20
20
22
23
25
26
28
29
2.2.5
2.2.6
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.4
32
35
37
40
40
42
42
1
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.6
2.6.1
2.6.2
2.6.3
2.6.4
2.6.5
2.7
Cost to business
Risk of legal prejudice
Concerns relating to specific measures
Alternative sources of information
Positioning of the reporting requirements
Implementation timing
Support for a phased approach
Opposition to phasing
Other comments on timing
Assistance to employers
General comments
Education and support
‘User-friendly’ online reporting
Advice on best practice and leading practice case studies
Further consultation to embed change
Industry-specific considerations
43
43
44
45
47
47
47
49
49
49
49
50
50
50
51
51
3
Conclusions
54
2
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Glossary
ABS
Australian Bureau of Statistics
ANZSCO
Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of
Occupations
ASX
Australian Securities Exchange
ATO
Australian Tax Office
CALD
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse
CEO
Chief Executive Officer
EEO
Equal Employment Opportunity
EOCFW
Employer of Choice for Women
EOWA
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency
EOWW Act
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999
FTE
Full Time Equivalent
GEI
Gender Equality Indicator
KMP
Key Management Personnel
LGBTI
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex
WGEA
Workplace Gender Equality Agency
WGE Act
Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
3
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Executive Summary
Background
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
(FaHCSIA) engaged Ms. Carol Schwartz AM to consult with a range of key
stakeholders in relation to the reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality
Act 2012 (the WGE Act). This report outlines the key themes and issues raised through
this consultation process.
On 6 December 2012, the WGE Act received Royal Assent. The Act amends the former
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 (EOWW Act).
The new Act requires that reporting matters, under specified Gender Equality
Indicators, be set by legislative instrument prior to the start of the 2013 reporting cycle.
These will form the basis for reporting from 2014 onwards.
The aim of collecting this information is to assess gender equality in the workplace.
Further, the new reporting framework is aimed at reducing the regulatory burden on
employers and encouraging measures that improve gender equality outcomes in the
workplace. It will also establish a long term data set to provide evidence-based insight
at both the workplace and industry level.
The Australian Government committed to developing the reporting matters in close
consultation with key stakeholders from industry, business, employee groups, higher
education institutions and other stakeholders with a special interest in or knowledge of
gender equality in the workplace.
To achieve this intent, stakeholder views on the reporting matters were sought via
public submissions and through targeted stakeholder consultations. Prior to the
commencement of the consultation process, an Issues Paper was released, outlining
five key outcome areas and key questions for consideration in the development of
reporting matters.
This included consideration of:

priority reporting matters under each of the indicators (these include both
‘measurable outcomes’ and ‘process indicators’);

the perceived value of the measures to employers;

the impact of the new requirements on business;

views as to timing of the introduction of the new requirements; and

assistance that organisations and industry will require to be able to report on
measurable outcomes and/or process indicators.
4
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
The Issues Paper also presented a Draft Framework for reporting measures under the
Gender Equality Indicators (GEIs).
Key findings from the consultations and submission analysis
Following is a summary of the key findings from the stakeholder consultations and
public submissions process with respect to the reporting matters under the GEIs.
Appropriateness of the five outcome areas
The Issues Paper states that the GEIs are intended to measure and help drive progress
towards five key outcome areas:
1
To improve women’s workforce participation across Australia.
2
To improve women’s representation in leadership positions in workplaces and on
governing bodies.
3
To improve equal remuneration for work of equal value between women and men.
4
To increase flexible working for both women and men, particularly those with
family or caring responsibilities.
5
To promote employee and employer engagement on gender equality.
The consultation process sought feedback on the degree to which stakeholders were of
the view that these five outcome areas sufficiently reflect the intent of the Act.
Objects excluded by the proposed outcomes
A number of stakeholders were concerned that the five outcomes proposed in the
Issues Paper excluded a number of important elements of the principal objects of the
Act. The strongest feedback was received in relation to the exclusion of Object 2(e)
relating to the productivity and competitiveness of business, and Object 2(c) relating to
the elimination of discrimination on the basis of gender.
Stakeholders proposed that these omissions could be rectified by:

The inclusion of an outcome explicitly linking improvements in gender equality
and improved productivity and competitiveness of business, as a basis to position
the new requirements as beneficial to the business community.

The development of an explicit outcome measure on preventing and better
responding to sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of gender.
Of note, there is no proposal to change the objects of the Act, and the outcomes
suggested in the Issues Paper were provided for framing purposes only.
5
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Amendments and expansion of proposed outcomes
The following amendments and additions were proposed to specific Outcomes.

With respect to Outcome 1 (women’s workforce participation), stakeholders noted a
requirement to make explicit reference not only to the quantum but also the quality
of women’s workforce participation. This was proposed as a means to focus
attention on the overrepresentation of women in low-paid insecure work, often
without access to career progression.

With respect to Outcome 2 (representation in leadership positions in workplaces
and on governing bodies), suggestions were made in favour of reporting on
leadership at all levels, rather than restricting analysis to the gender composition of
governing bodies alone.

With respect to Outcome 3 (equal remuneration), there was support for amending
the wording to reflect the Fair Work Act 2009: ‘To improve equal remuneration for work
of equal or comparable value, between women and men’.

With respect to Outcome 4 (flexible working), suggestions were made in favour of
making explicit mention of reducing potential work-related disadvantage for those
who use the flexible work arrangements.
Other comments
Other comments about the Outcomes suggested a need to situate the Outcomes within
the context of a broad range of issues which affect the capacity to achieve gender
equality within workplace settings. These include government policies, the Fair Work
Act 2009, childcare costs and availability, job design, the working environment and
other related issues.
There was also support for exploring the impact of multiple forms of discrimination
faced by women who may traditionally be marginalised (such as women with a
disability, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, women from culturally and
linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds or those identifying as lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender or intersex).
Priority reporting matters
The consultations and submissions provide insights into the critical considerations for
the development of measurable outcomes and process indicators.
Firstly, there should be a capacity to use the reporting matters to move the community
and industry debate on gender equality forward.
6
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Measures must also be practical and meaningful for employers. This includes
balancing the need for a minimum data set with the requirement to promote a genuine
understanding of the position of women.
Process indicators should be used to good effect, enabling the collection of information
about organisational culture or attitudes that promote gender equality, and to
showcase good practice initiatives.
Considerations with respect to each GEI are noted below.
GEI 1: Gender composition of the workplace (‘Workforce composition’)
The consultations and submissions most commonly suggested a need for transparent
reporting on gender composition at all organisational levels. Further, reporting in
this manner was advocated as a basis to better track progress in growing women’s
presence in pipeline positions (i.e. leadership and management positions at all levels
which act as a stepping stone to executive appointments).
In terms of specific measurable outcomes, suggestions were made in favour of
reporting on:

women in executive management, senior management and middle management
positions, drawing on the previous EOWW Act reporting requirements and those
set out in the requirements for citation as Employer of Choice for Women
(effectively, the distance from the Chief Executive Officer (CEO); and

gender breakdown for key management personnel, as defined by the Accounting
Standards.
There was support for disaggregation of data on the basis of gender as well as the
following:

grade, career level or similar levels of seniority within organisations;

industry and occupational classification;

type of role or employment stream; and

contract status (ongoing, fixed term or casual) and hours (full-time or part-time
equivalent).
A limited range of process indicators were suggested as a basis to promote
understanding of the status of women within the workforce. These primarily related
to usage of good practice approaches that shape gender equality and measures taken
for preventing and dealing with sex-based discrimination.
7
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
GEI 2: Gender composition of governing bodies (‘Composition of governing bodies’)
The measurable outcomes which were highlighted as a priority related to the gender of
governing body chair, and the number and proportion of women represented on
governing bodies. These requirements were noted to align with the Australian
Securities Exchange (ASX) diversity requirements, with a view that this information
should be either readily reportable or not an onerous task for organisations to adopt.
Other – although less frequently suggested measures were: the nature of positions that
women hold on boards (i.e. the extent to which women are represented in office
bearing positions); women’s tenure on boards; the nature of more recent
appointments/resignations; and the types of organisations that women are represented
on (e.g. industry sector or the level of financial turnover).
GEI 3 Equal remuneration between women and men (‘Equal remuneration’)
The submissions and consultation feedback offered strong support for reporting on
pay equity. Reference was made to the importance of assessing whether women were
receiving equal remuneration for work of equal or comparable value (the definition of
equal remuneration set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 and used to assess the fairness of
remuneration provisions in Australian workplaces).
In terms of measuring pay equity, there was strong support for measuring not only
base pay, but measuring total remuneration (i.e. base pay, bonus payments,
performance pay and allowances). This was seen to acknowledge that gender pay gaps
calculated using total remuneration are more likely to expose discrepancies in
employee earnings, including any evidence of gender bias in the distribution of the
discretionary elements of pay (such as bonuses and performance pay).
Further, there was a view that process indicators in this area might be particularly
helpful in understanding the steps being undertaken by organisations to promote pay
equity. The most common suggestions favoured reporting upon evidence of the
conduct of regular pay equity audits and access to training for managers and recruiters
in pay equity.
While supporting the inclusion of quantitative measures of pay equity, a number of
organisations consulted were clear that this measure would be likely to require
significant effort for organisations in terms of data collection, analysis and reporting. It
will be critical that the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (the Agency) offers tangible
support to employers to enable effective reporting against this measure.
GEI 4: Availability and utility of employment terms, conditions and practices relating
to flexible working arrangements for employees, and to working
8
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
arrangements supporting employees with family or caring responsibilities
(‘Flexible work arrangements’)
The consultations and submissions raised a range of issues with respect to the GEI on
the availability and utility of flexible work arrangements.
The most significant related to the need for a clear definition of what flexible working
arrangements comprise, and a need to recognise that, as flexible working arrangements
are often set on an informal basis (between a worker and supervisor), the capacity of
employers to report on utilisation of these arrangements may be limited.
A number of measures were suggested to assess the support for flexible working
arrangements and acceptance of this practice within organisations. These primarily
related to: requests for and approval rates for flexible working arrangements; number
of employees accessing flexible working arrangements by gender and type; utilisation
of flexible work arrangements at senior levels; and promotion of flexible workers by
gender.
In general, it was agreed that although these measures were desirable, reporting would
be constrained for the reasons discussed earlier.
Measures related to parental leave
Stakeholders also suggested measuring the uptake of parental leave, returns from
parental leave, approval rates and sustainable return rates (i.e. rate of mothers who
return post parental leave and are still at work after 12 months).
This last measure – while valuable – was perceived as challenging to measure given
that it would require that employers undertake retrospective analysis.
GEI 5: Consultation with employees on issues concerning gender equality in the
workplace (‘Consultation’)
The submissions presented a wide number of views as to the measurement of
appropriate consultation with employees regarding gender equality.
There should be consideration regarding the type and extent of consultation
undertaken by employers with their staff, allowing for flexibility in approach to suit
organisation needs and preferences. There may also be a need to provide training in
gender issues to support employees to provide meaningful feedback. Consultation
should be ongoing, with both leaders and staff, to promote continuous improvement.
Maintaining accountability regarding the consultation process was also considered
important, with a need for organisations to specify how employees have been engaged
in the reporting process.
9
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
In terms of specific measurable outcomes, suggestions were in favour of reporting the
following as a matter of priority:

the proportion of employees who were provided an opportunity to give feedback,
and the mechanism by which feedback was received; and

the proportion of managerial and non-managerial employees who participated in
consultation processes, by gender.
In terms of process indicators stakeholders suggested information should be collected
about the type and range of consultation undertaken, recognising consultation
methods are likely to vary by workplace and that good practice would dictate that
employees are provided with more than one mechanism for consultation, in order to
ensure feedback is both representative and meaningful.
Other considerations with respect to the priority reporting matters
The most significant consideration with respect to the development of the reporting
matters related to the use of a standardised industry and occupational classification
system. It became apparent that, while there reasonable support for a classification
system (on an industry basis), that there was limited support for using the Australian
and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) for this purpose.
This related to concerns that the system would create significant impost on business in
its initial stages and fail to provide useful or meaningful data to either employers or the
Agency.
Impact on business
The potential impact on business was highlighted from multiple perspectives.
There were concerns about the degree to which the new reporting requirements would
come with additional cost, rather than streamlining and simplifying current reporting
processes, as suggested in the Act.
These comments were most apparent with respect to measures of pay equity, flexible
working and the process indicators. In particular;

while there was strong support for measuring equal remuneration, there was a
view that collection of data in this area would be beyond the capacity of some
organisational IT systems. Support will be required (and should be provided by the
Agency) in this area.

a large number of submissions suggested that capturing the availability and
utilisation of the full range of flexible work arrangements (i.e. both formal and
informal flexibility) would be difficult for employers. Manual systems of collection
10
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
may need to be implemented as such arrangements are unlikely to be recorded in
central human resources systems.

some industry-based stakeholders were clear that the time and costs involved in
reporting against process indicators may outweigh the benefits: such reporting was
perceived by some as unavoidably subjective and unlikely to yield useful
information.
Some stakeholders also expressed concern that issues relating to the provision of
potentially legally prejudicial information – raised by employers during the legislative
process – had not been addressed. Reporting on process indicators and pay equity
were viewed as the most problematic with respect to issues of exposure.1
There was strong support for the gender equality reporting measures to draw on
existing data sources and streamlining of reporting requirements across different
government reporting regimes as much as possible. Where information is disclosed
and made publically available under existing workplace relations obligations,
additional reporting obligations were seen by some stakeholders to be unnecessary.
Finally, it was emphasised by a range of stakeholders – both in industry and advocacy
groups – that the Agency must communicate the benefits of the reforms to business
and make clear the links between the reporting process, improved workplace gender
equality, and business productivity and competitiveness. This may provide the basis to
encourage commitment to the reporting process, and establish the tangible value it
offers, over and above any costs.
Implementation timing
A large number of stakeholders expressed strong support for a phased approach to the
implementation of reporting measures, particularly in relation to those measures
which vary most substantially from the existing reporting requirements under the
EOWW Act.
There was widespread support for limiting the number of reporting matters for the
2013/2014 reporting cycle to those that are readily reportable, reflect the existing
reporting requirements and reflect employers’ data collection capacity. Easily
reportable process indicators were also perceived important in areas where outcome
measures are not yet well developed.
It was strongly recommended that the development of more complex ‘stage 2’
reporting requirements occur in close consultation with industry and other key
1
Note: Confidentiality provisions apply with respect to remuneration data. This should mitigate against areas of
significant risk.
11
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
stakeholders. It was generally indicated that phasing should occur over a period of
one to two years, to reduce the level of uncertainty and change for employers.
There was also a reasonable level of support in both the submissions and consultations
for the consideration of encouraging organisations, over time, to consider the impact of
the gender equality agenda for those women who typically experience greater barriers
to workforce participation and equality.
Assistance to employers
Stakeholders provided relatively consistent feedback in terms of the types of assistance
that would be most useful to reporting organisations, including the need for education
and support developed and delivered in partnership with industry; the need for a
‘user-friendly’ online reporting system; and the provision of advice and examples of
best practice in relation to each GEI.
Conclusions
The following conclusions were drawn as to the reporting matters:
1. Priority measurable outcomes
Reporting matters should principally comprise a minimum set of quantifiable
measures (‘measurable outcomes’), which are meaningful with respect to the intent of
the Act.
GEI 1 Gender composition of the workforce
With respect to gender composition of the workforce, priority reporting matters should
include workplace profile disaggregated on the basis of: gender by workforce tiers
reported as distance from the CEO; employment status (full-time/full-time equivalent);
contract status (ongoing fixed term or casual); and profile of Key Management
Personnel (KMP).
Measures relating to the recruitment, promotion and retention of staff should also be
considered, but phased in over time:

recruitment measures should include: gender composition of applications for
position by level (to be introduced in year one of reporting); gender composition of
applicants interviewed (to be introduced in year two of reporting); and gender
composition of applicants appointed to positions (to be introduced in year three of
reporting).
12
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

promotion measures should include: number and proportion of employees
awarded promotion by gender, employment status and level (introduced in year
two of the reporting).

retention measures should include: number and proportion of employees who have
resigned by gender, employment status and level (introduced in year two of
reporting).
GEI 2 Gender composition of governing bodies
With respect to composition of governing bodies, priority reporting matters include the
gender of Board Chair and the number of Board Members by gender.
GEI 3 Gender Pay Equity
With respect to gender pay equity the priority reporting matters are: annual average
base salary per Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff member by gender and workforce tier;
annual average total remuneration; and graduate annualised pay salary on entry, by
gender.
GEI 4 Availability and utility of flexible work arrangements
With respect to the availability and utility of flexible working arrangements, priority
measures should include: the number and rate of employees taking and returning from
parental leave by gender and manager/non-manager status; number and rate of
employees taking and returning from parental leave by gender and by employment
status; and the number of requests and approvals for extended parental leave by
gender and manager/non-manager status.
GEI 5 Employee consultation
These measures would be reported against the process indicators.
2. Process indicators
Employers should be invited to identify from a selection of best practice/evidence
based strategies those that their organisation is applying with respect to each GEI. This
information would be collected in a survey format.
In addition, employers could be invited to elaborate – on a voluntary basis – on how
these strategies are enabling (or making a difference to) gender equality in their
workplaces and provide copies of relevant policies and strategies.
3. Phasing and associated timing
13
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
A phased approach should be adopted, including limiting the number of reporting
matters for the 2013/2014 reporting cycle to those that are readily reportable, and
reflect existing data collection capacity. To minimise burden, the focus should be on
use of the workplace profile and the managerial levels specified in the pre-existing
EOWA reporting templates.
Certainty should also be provided to employers about the scope of reporting
requirements in the first and later years, to enable a planned approach and reduce the
need for employers to modify or update their information technology or human
resource systems, to accommodate changing requirements.
4. Minimising impact on business
Electronic reporting that includes close-ended questions for reporting on process
indicators should be used to streamline the reporting process. Consideration should
also be given to how the reporting methodology can be aligned with existing regimes
(for example, the ASX reporting guidelines) through ensuring the use of consistent
counting rules.
5. Education and support
The Agency should provide a range of positive supports for transition to the new
regime, including information and training workshops; provision of guidance material;
the creation of a ‘user-friendly’ online reporting tool; and advice on what constitutes
evidence based practice in improving performance against each of the GEIs.
6. Communication and engagement of stakeholders
The Agency must continue to communicate the rewards of a diverse workforce to
Australian business.
Partnering with industry to provide information assistance through industry
associations will support the communication of key messages to employers.
7. Voluntary reporting for smaller organisations
Organisations with less than 100 employees should be able to voluntarily report on the
Gender Equality Indicators. This will help mainstream the reporting process and
promote gender equality reporting as part of good business practice.
8. Ongoing consultation
There is an opportunity for the Agency to create a technical working group engaging
key employers, employer groups, unions, academics, women’s interest groups and
other key stakeholders. This working group would consider further implementation
issues associated with the new Act, including reviewing the reporting requirements
over time, the use of an occupational classification system and the minimum standards.
14
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
1
Background
1.1
Introduction
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
(FaHCSIA) engaged Ms. Carol Schwartz AM to assist the Office for Women with the
stakeholder consultation process for the development of the reporting matters under
the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (the WGE Act). This report outlines the key
themes and issues raised through this consultation process.
1.2
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
1.2.1
Overview
On 6 December 2012, the WGE Act received Royal Assent. The Act amends the former
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace 1999 Act (EOWW Act).
The new Act requires that reporting matters, under standardised Gender Equality
Indicators (GEIs), be set by disallowable instrument prior to the start of the 2013
reporting cycle. These will form the basis for reporting from 2014 onwards.
The aim of collecting this information is to assess gender equality in the workplace.
Businesses should be able to identify their strengths and areas for improvement.
Reporting will enable employers to consider their practices and outcomes from year to
year, and in comparison with their industry peers.
The Act also includes other measures and initiatives which are outside the scope of this
report. These include setting industry benchmarks, making public reports accessible to
employees, the future setting of minimum standards (which will not be considered
during the first year of implementation), and related compliance arrangements.
The principal objects of the Act have also been amended. They are:
a) to promote and improve gender equality (including equal remuneration between
women and men) in employment and in the workplace;
b) to support employers to remove barriers to the full and equal participation of
women in the workforce, in recognition of the disadvantaged position of women in
relation to employment matters;
c) to promote, amongst employers, the elimination of discrimination on the basis of
gender in relation to employment matters (including in relation to family and
caring responsibilities);
15
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
d) to foster workplace consultation between employers and employees on issues
concerning gender equality in employment and in the workplace; and
e) to improve the productivity and competitiveness of Australian business through
the advancement of gender equality in employment and in the workplace.
The amendments reflect the new focus of the Act (to promote and improve gender
equality in the workplace) with specific recognition of equal remuneration and family
and caring responsibilities as issues central to the achievement of gender equality. The
objects also make clear the underpinning nature of gender equality to improved
business competitiveness and productivity, and the particular need to focus on
removing barriers to women’s full and equal workforce participation.
The Workplace Gender Equality Agency (the Agency) is responsible for administering
the WGE Act. The role of the Agency includes reviewing reports lodged by relevant
employers, dealing with those reports in accordance with the Act, and providing
advice to employers on gender equality related matters.
1.2.2
Overview of the new framework
The WGE Act introduced five GEIs.

GEI 1 – The gender composition of the workforce

GEI 2 – Gender composition of governing bodies

GEI 3 – Equal remuneration between women and men

GEI 4 – Availability and utility of employment terms, conditions and practices
relating to flexible working arrangements for employees, and to working
arrangements supporting employees with family or caring responsibilities

GEI 5 – Consultation with employees on issues concerning gender equality in the
workplace
Employees in the non-public sector with 100 or more employees (reporting
organisations) will need to provide information against reporting matters that are
relevant to each Indicator. This replaces previous reporting on workplace programs.
The new reporting framework aims to reduce the regulatory burden on employers and
encourage measures that improve gender equality outcomes in the workplace. It will
also establish a long term data set to provide evidence-based insight into gender
equality issues at the workplace and industry levels.
After consultation with stakeholders, the Minister for the Status of Women (the
Minister) must, by legislative instrument, specify matters in relation to each GEI prior
to the beginning of the reporting period to which they apply.
16
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
1.2.3
Background to reporting
The requirement for organisations to report on gender equality is not new. Under the
previous framework, relevant employers were required to prepare a public report in
writing about the outcomes of the employer’s workplace program. Reporting
organisations were required to:
a) provide a workplace profile;
b) describe the employer’s analysis of the issues in the employer’s workplace relating
to equal opportunity for women;
c) describe the actions taken by the employer during the reporting period to address
the priority issues identified in the analysis; and
d) describe the actions that the employer plans to take in the next reporting period to
address the issues relating to employment matters that the employer would need to
address to achieve equal opportunity for women in the workplace.
It is intended that reporting against defined GEIs will streamline and simplify the
reporting process.
1.2.4
Consultation process
The Government committed to developing the reporting matters in close consultation
with key stakeholders from industry, business, employee groups, higher education
institutions and other stakeholders with a special interest in or knowledge of gender
equality in the workplace.
To achieve this intent, stakeholder views on the reporting matters were sought via
public submissions and through targeted stakeholder consultations. Prior to the
commencement of the consultation process, an Issues Paper was released, outlining
key questions for consideration in the development of reporting matters. These
questions related to:

priority reporting matters under each of the indicators (these include both
‘measurable outcomes’ and ‘process indicators’2);

the perceived value of the measures to employers;

the impact of the new requirements on business;
‘Measurable outcomes’ are defined in the issues paper as data and statistics that enable a view of the ‘state of play’ –
for example, the number of women and men at the executive level, or the proportion of employees returning from
parental leave. It may reveal areas for improvement in gender equality. ‘Process indicators’ are defined as information
on the existence of certain conditions, practices or policies – for example, the availability of flex-time for employees.
This will enable employers to compare their practices with those of other employers, particularly those who are making
good progress towards gender quality.
2
17
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

views as to timing of the introduction of the new requirements; and

assistance that organisations and industry will require to be able to report on
outcomes measures and/or process indicators.
The Issues Paper also presented a Draft Framework for reporting measures under the
GEIs.
1.3
Project objectives
The scope and objectives of the project included to assist the Minister with the
stakeholder consultation process for the development of the reporting matters.
1.4
Project methodology
This involved an analysis of public submissions and a targeted stakeholder
consultation process.
These activities are discussed further below.
Analysis of public submissions
Submissions were sought from a broad range of stakeholders, including industry,
business, employee organisations, higher education institutions, and other
stakeholders with a special knowledge or interest in gender equality in the workplace.
Submissions opened on 21 December 2012, and closed on 29 January 2013.
Sixty-one submissions were received from the following stakeholders:

Individuals – 12

Employer associations or industry peak bodies – 11

Professional associations – 3

Trade unions – 3

Academics, universities or research bodies – 12

Advocacy and interest groups – 15

Community service organisations – 2

Employers – 2

Religious organisation – 1
Submissions were analysed on a thematic basis against the questions set out in the
Issues Paper.
18
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Stakeholder consultation process
Concurrent with the analysis of the public submissions, Ms. Carol Schwartz conducted
targeted consultations with key stakeholders. The consultation process included:

Two 1.5-hour group meetings, held in Sydney and Melbourne. The meeting in
Sydney was held on Thursday 7 February 2013 and attended by 18 stakeholders.
The meeting in Melbourne was held on Tuesday 19 February and attended by 23
stakeholders.

Eleven individual consultations meetings held in Sydney and Melbourne (two via
teleconference) between 6 and 20 February.
Participants included representatives of industry, business, employee organisations,
unions, academics and other stakeholders with a special knowledge of interest in
gender equality in the workplace.
The consultations provided stakeholders with an opportunity to build on feedback
provided in the public submission process. The consultations sought feedback about
the proposed reporting matters and what organisations would need to assist them to
report on the GEIs.
Role of KPMG
KPMG acted in a support role to Ms. Carol Schwartz, preparing the consultation
materials, assisting to set-up the consultations, participating in all consultation
activities, conducting the submission analysis and supporting the report preparation.
19
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2
Findings
The findings presented below are based on stakeholder feedback received during the
targeted stakeholder consultation process and analysis of the public submissions. The
findings address each of the considerations outlined in the Issues Paper, published by
the Office for Women.
2.1
Appropriateness of the five outcome areas
This section considers the extent to which stakeholders agreed the proposed outcome
areas reflect the intent of the Act.
The Issues Paper states that the GEIs are intended to measure and help drive progress
towards five key outcome areas:
1
To improve women’s workforce participation across Australia.
2
To improve women’s representation in leadership positions in workplaces and on
governing bodies.
3
To improve equal remuneration for work of equal value between women and men.
4
To increase flexible working for both women and men, particularly those with
family or caring responsibilities.
5
To promote employee and employer engagement on gender equality.
The consultation process sought feedback on the degree to which stakeholders were of
the view that these five outcome areas sufficiently reflect the intent of the Act – as
defined by the principal objects.
The majority of stakeholders indicated that the key outcomes described in the Draft
Framework sufficiently reflect the intent of the Act. There were, however, a number of
stakeholders who provided only qualified support for the key outcomes in their
current form. Their concerns are detailed below. The discussion is grouped in three
sections:
2.1.1

areas identified as being excluded from the outcomes in their current form;

proposed amendments to or expansions to each of the five outcome areas; and

additional issues to be considered in the context of the outcomes.
Objects excluded by the proposed outcomes
A number of stakeholders were concerned that the five outcomes identified in the
Issues Paper excluded a number of important elements of the principal objects of the
20
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Act. The strongest feedback was received in relation to the exclusion of the following
objects.

Productivity and competitiveness of business (Object 2(e))
Although the principal objects of the Act include ‘To improve the productivity and
competitiveness of Australian business through the advancement of gender equality in
employment and in the workplace’, this object is not reflected in the proposed
outcomes. There is a view that the inclusion of an outcome explicitly linking
improvements in gender equality and improved productivity and competitiveness
of business would both ensure the new requirements are positioned as a ‘valueadd’ to Australian business, in word and in fact, and underscore that gender
equality is essential to maximising Australia’s productive potential and continued
economic growth.

Elimination of discrimination on the basis of gender (Object 2(c))
The Australian Human Rights Commission’s 2012 national sexual harassment
survey found that a quarter of women (25 percent) and one in six men (16 percent)
aged 15 years and older had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace in the
past five years.3 In addition, discrimination on the basis of sex, pregnancy and
potential pregnancy are significant inhibitors of women’s participation in the
workforce.
Given the prevalence of gender discrimination in the workplace, a range of
stakeholders supported the development of an explicit outcome measure on
preventing and better responding to sexual harassment and discrimination on the
basis of gender.
As one stakeholder noted:
“While the GEIs were developed to address ‘the most pressing contemporary gender
equality challenges’ and the 2009 Review of the former Equal Opportunity for Women in
the Workplace Act 1999 (EOWW Act) identified sexual harassment as a key barrier to
achieving gender equality for women and men, no GEI on sexual harassment has been
included in the WGE Act.”
Similarly, another stakeholder commented that it would be “incredibly remiss of the
legislation and reporting framework not to include data on gender discrimination and sex
based harassment.”
Australian Human Rights Commission, Working without fear: Results of the Sexual Harassment National Telephone Survey
(2012) cited in the Australian Human Rights Commission’s submission.
3
21
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
A small number of stakeholders suggested that a separate set of key outcome areas
is unnecessary4. They argued that, as the principal objects of the Act were clearly
worded in plain English and comprehensive with respect to the Act, the wording of
the Act should be used unchanged.
Of note, there is no proposal to change the objects of the Act, and the outcomes
suggested in the Issues Paper were provided for framing purposes only.
2.1.2
Amendments and expansion of proposed outcomes
2.1.2.1
Outcome 1: To improve women’s workforce participation across Australia
There was strong support from a number of stakeholders that this outcome refer not
only to the quantum, but also the quality of women’s workforce participation; for
example, by considering:
‘To increase and improve the quality of women’s workforce participation across Australia’
or
‘To improve the quality and quantity of women’s workforce participation across Australia’.
It was suggested that Outcome 1 in its current form does not fully capture the
corresponding object of ‘promoting and improving gender equality’ and the changes
suggested above would help address the overrepresentation of women in low-paid
and insecure work, often without access to career progression.
Two submissions recommended amending Outcome 1 to ensure issues of segregation
by field, industry and occupation are not obscured; for example:
‘To improve women’s workforce participation across all industries and occupations’
2.1.2.2
Outcome 2: To improve women’s representation in leadership positions in
workplaces and on governing bodies
A number of stakeholders noted that the breadth of Outcome 2 ‘To improve the
representation of women in leadership positions in workplaces and on governing bodies’ is
not currently captured in the corresponding GEI, which is restricted to the gender
composition of governing bodies only.
Their concerns reflected the views of a large number of stakeholders, who identified
the role of women in leadership as instrumental to improving gender equality for
women at all levels of the workforce. A common theme throughout the consultation
4
It was noted that the principal objects set out in section 2A of the WGE Act adequately describe the purpose of the Act
and the reporting arrangements, and that section 3 of the Act contains statutory definitions for interpretation.
22
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
process – and raised in both submissions and targeted consultations – was the
importance of the female talent pipeline for management and executive positions. This
is discussed further in section 2.2.
2.1.2.3
Outcome 3: To improve equal remuneration for work of equal value between
women and men
There was reasonable support for amending Outcome 3 to more precisely reflect the
intent of the WGE Act and the equal remuneration provisions in the Fair Work Act 2009.
This could be achieved by changing the wording of the outcome to:
‘To improve equal remuneration for work of equal or comparable value, between women and
men’.
Some stakeholders suggested that Outcome 3 should specify that equal remuneration
is judged on the basis of total remuneration, which includes base pay, performance
bonuses, penalty rates, overtime, salary sacrifice arrangements and other additional
remuneration benefits.
2.1.2.4
Outcome 4: To increase flexible working arrangements for both women and
men, particularly those with caring or family responsibilities
Although few stakeholders made specific recommendations in relation to Outcome 4, a
strong theme evident throughout the consultations was the importance of ensuring
employees using flexible work arrangements are not disadvantaged.
Three
stakeholders explicitly suggested amending Outcome 4 to not only improve flexible
working arrangements, but include reducing disadvantage for those who use the
arrangements.
2.1.2.5
Outcome 5: To promote employee and employer engagement on gender equality
A number of stakeholders emphasised the need to ensure the reporting supports
genuine and meaningful engagement on gender equality. One stakeholder expressed
strong concern that Outcome 5 does not appropriately reflect the object of fostering
consultation between employees. They recommended that the outcome be amended to
reflect the obligation of employers to consult with employees and their representatives
about the reporting matters during the process of preparing and lodging reports, in
addition to promoting employee and employer engagement more generally.
2.1.3
Capturing the broader context of gender equality
A number of stakeholders highlighted the importance of situating gender equality
within the context of broader issues of diversity to capture the impact of multiple
forms of discrimination on particular groups of women.
23
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

Vulnerable women and minority groups
Feedback was received from a small number of stakeholders about the need to
focus on the relative position of women who may traditionally be marginalised in
terms of the workplace. This included some support for amending the outcomes to
make reference to the experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women,
women with disabilities and women from culturally and linguistically diverse
(CALD) backgrounds.
A number of other stakeholders emphasised that gender equality reporting should
not be solely focused on issues of women in leadership, but must also take account
of the experiences of “women on the shop floor” – that is, taking both a ‘top down’
and ‘bottom up’ approach to improving gender equality.

Identifying the experiences of those individuals who identify as lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender or intersex (LGBTI)
A small number of stakeholders strongly urged for the outcomes to be expanded to
take into account issues of equality for those identifying as LGBTI, recognising that
this group of individuals may experience different outcomes. Two stakeholders
provided submissions which strongly recommend that lesbians be considered as a
distinct subset of the cohort ‘women’ and a separate group for the purpose of
reporting to the Agency.

Broader context of gender equality
Some stakeholders emphasised that while the proposed reporting matters “go some
way to addressing the lack of data”, they do not capture a number of other issues that
affect gender equality in the workplace. These include government policies
(taxation, welfare (income support/redistribution), the Fair Work Act, childcare
costs/availability/quality, education/skills development and shortages); the
interaction between workforce participation and unpaid care work; employer
values, industries and occupations, job design and working environment;
employees’ work practices, attitudes and preferred hours of work; and market
forces (labour supply and demand and labour costs).
It was noted that impact of gender equality reporting must be considered in the
context of a range of other strategies that are necessary to improve the workplace
gender equality, for example, “driving policy changes to improve access to suitable
affordable child care and leading debate that highlights the need for more sharing of
responsibilities for carers and shifts in wider cultural attitudes towards traditional gender
roles”.
24
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2.2
Priority reporting matters
The consultations and submissions provide insights about the critical considerations
for the development of measurable outcomes and process indicators.
First and foremost, there should be a capacity to use the reporting matters as a catalyst
for change and to advance the community and industry debate on gender equality.
As was noted in consultations with industry groups, employers, women’s interest
groups, academics and unions in Sydney:
“We have to get the data that flashes the red lights on these issues. As in, saying to
business, ‘Guess what, you don’t have women in senior management positions –
why not?’ or ‘Guess what, women in these roles are getting pay $X less than their
male peers – why?’ In many cases I would expect business to say ‘We had no
idea’”.
“Everyone is looking to the WGEA for the data. From here we can pursue the
questions about deeper cultural change – because it will be impossible for people to
say ‘we don’t believe it’.”
Measures must also be practical and meaningful for employers. This includes
balancing the need for a minimum data set, with the requirement to promote a genuine
understanding of the position of women.
As an example of this sentiment, a union submission is clear that:
“Our members are hopeful that these requirements are smarter and more targeted
at connecting EEO Reports to tangible improvements to workplace equity across
all levels of organisations’. The most useful indicators are those which facilitate
genuine analysis and identification of inequity.”
Measures should further capture the quality of work that women have available to
them, incorporating pay, hours, autonomy, flexibility and security of work. Specific
attention should be given to the characteristics of jobs that women and men are
employed in.
Finally, process indicators should be used to add value from a number of perspectives:

To enable collection of information about organisational culture and workplace
attitudes so as to understand not only ‘what is happening’ (that is, the extent of
gender equality) but also ‘why the situation for women is changing, or otherwise’. This
position was supported most strongly by advocacy groups.

To enable good practice organisations to demonstrate the types of strategies and
initiatives they are putting in place to progress the gender equality agenda.

To reflect the degree of commitment that organisations have towards their diversity
programs.
25
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Drawing on the stakeholder consultations and submissions, the following sections
provide insight into stakeholder views about the range of measurable outcomes and
process indicators that could apply with respect to each of the GEIs
2.2.1
GEI 1: The gender composition of the workforce
The gender composition of the workforce was consistently identified as a priority
reporting matter.
Measurable outcomes
The consultations and submissions most commonly suggested a need for transparent
reporting on gender composition at all organisational levels. This was identified as a
means to support an understanding of women’s relative representation at each tier of
management (i.e. women in executive, senior manager and manager positions) and
across the broader workforce.
Further, reporting in this manner was advocated in order to better track progress in
growing women’s presence in pipeline positions (i.e. leadership and management
positions at all levels which act as a stepping stone to executive appointments) and to
better understand the extent to which career development processes are delivering the
planned outcomes for women. This recognises that without increasing the number of
women in critical line positions, the pool of women available to access governing board
and senior leadership positions will remain small.
In support of this suggestion, a number of stakeholders drew attention to the
Australian Census of Women in Leadership Report (2012)5 which demonstrates that
there is a concentration of women in lower level positions in Australian companies and
a paucity of women in key pipeline positions. As evidence, this report notes that less
than 10 per cent of key management personnel positions are held by women in ASX
200 and ASX 500 companies and that, in these same companies, approximately six per
cent of women hold line management positions and 22 per cent hold support
management positions.
In terms of specific measurable outcomes, there were suggestions in favour of
reporting the following as a matter of priority.

Women in executive management, senior management and middle management
positions drawing on the previous EOWW Act reporting requirements and those
set out in the requirements for citation as an Employer of Choice for Women
(effectively, ‘distance from the CEO’).
5
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency (2012), Australian Census of Women in Leadership. Australian
Government: Canberra.
26
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

Gender breakdown for key management personnel as defined by the Accounting
Standards.
There was support for the disaggregation of data on the basis of gender and each of the
following:

grade, career level or similar levels of seniority within organisations;

industry and occupational classification;

type of role or employment stream; and

contract status (ongoing, fixed term or casual) and hours (full-time or part-time
equivalent), in recognition that this would go some way to highlight the quality of
women’s employment.
Reporting on recruitment, exits, retention and promotion was also suggested as a basis
to understand contributors to workforce gender composition.
Finally, there was some limited support for exploring representation of particular
groups of women at all levels of the workforce (i.e. minority and marginalised groups,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, women from CALD backgrounds,
women with disabilities and those who identify as gay, lesbian or transgender). There
was also some support for reporting on the level of access to career development,
mentoring and coaching.
Process indicators
A limited range of process indicators were suggested as a basis to promote
understanding of the status of women within the workforce. These related to:

usage of good practice approaches that shape gender equality (for example, the
extent to which positive recruitment practices are applied or the level of access to
regular performance reviews by gender);

measures for preventing and dealing with sex-based discrimination;

extent to which meeting of gender equality outcomes is linked to remuneration;

access to other gender equality training; and

whether organisations have voluntary targets with respect to the representation of
women, details of these targets and progress against them.
Feasibility of reporting matters
In assessing the feasibility of these reporting matters and the capacity of industry to
report, some stakeholders noted a number of considerations:
27
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

Leadership positions need to be defined, as these will be vastly different for
businesses from different industry settings.

‘Distance from the CEO’ will be a useful measure if it can be adequately defined for
reporting purposes. There will, however, be complexities for some industries (such
as higher education) and organisation types (such as multi-nationals). Aligning job
classifications to the distance from the CEO may create a more effective measure of
women’s roles within the workplace.
Measures such as remuneration, education qualifications and other skill indicators
could be included among indicators for cross-gender comparisons.

2.2.2
Leadership and governance data may be less useful for very large organisations,
such as supermarkets, which are spread over many locations that are distant from
the organisation’s governance structure.
GEI 2: Workforce composition of governing bodies
Stakeholders showed strong support for reporting on the gender composition of
governing bodies.
Measurable outcomes and process indicators
Those measurable outcomes highlighted as a priority related to the gender of
governing body chair and the number and proportion of women represented on
governing bodies. These requirements were noted to align with the ASX diversity
requirements, with a view that this information should be either readily reportable or
not an onerous task for organisations to adopt.
A number of additional measures were suggested as means for organisations to better
understand the extent to which women are represented on governing bodies and to
inform the development of strategies to address under-representation. These relate to
the nature of positions which women hold on boards (i.e. the extent to which women
are represented in office bearing positions), women’s tenure on boards, the nature of
more recent appointments/resignations and the types of organisations on which
women are represented (i.e. the sector or the level of financial turnover). These
measures were suggested as a means to provided insight as to progress with gender
equity at the board level.
Some submissions were also in favour of collecting information about adoption of
voluntary targets or quotas for the gender composition of their governing bodies and
annual reporting against these targets. This was supported on the basis that “research
has shown that public reporting of outcome targets helps advance internal progress towards
them”.
28
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Feasibility of reporting matters
Specific considerations with respect to this GEI were noted by the Higher Education
sector, which indicated that universities do not always have full control over
appointments to their governance bodies (for example, members of the University
Senate – the highest level board – are appointed by state governments, the Governor as
well as elected by staff and students).
2.2.3
GEI 3 Equal remuneration between women and men
The submissions and consultation feedback offered strong support for reporting on
pay equity, with reference made to the importance of assessing whether women were
receiving equal remuneration for work of equal or comparable value (the definition of equal
remuneration set out in the Fair Work Act 2009).
Feasibility of reporting matters
Stakeholders endorsed the measurement not only of base pay, but total remuneration
(including performance bonuses, penalty rates, overtime, salary sacrifice arrangements
and other additional remuneration benefits).
This was seen to acknowledge that gender pay gaps calculated using total
remuneration are more likely to identify discrepancies in employee earnings, including
any evidence of gender bias in the distribution of the discretionary elements of pay
(such as bonuses and performance pay). Further, there was a degree of recognition
that within some sectors that base salary can play an increasingly small part of total
remuneration (for example, in finance), thereby making this measure even more
important.
However, while supporting the inclusion of quantitative measures of pay equity, a
number of organisations consulted suggested that this measure would likely require
significant effort for some organisations in terms of data collection, analysis and
reporting.
Pay equity audits were noted to be time consuming, with a concern that it may difficult
to identify differences in pay that relate to factors such as the quality of work or
specialisation of different workers. This was thought to be particularly the case in
organisations and industries where remuneration is more variable and relies on
individual negotiations with each employee.
Some stakeholders suggested that in order to measure pay equity, there would be a
need for the collection and analysis of information about duties performed, level of
responsibility, skills, qualifications, hours worked, performance, experience and
related domains.
29
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Others agreed that these elements go to the very heart of pay inequity but that these
are not necessarily elements that are objectively assessed with an eye to gender bias.
“Women’s jobs” are often structured and understood differently, with “men’s jobs”
more likely to have inherent and historical rewards such as paid overtime, bonuses and
stronger recognition of skills. The point was raised strongly that pay inequity is not just
about direct comparisons between women and men doing the same work within an
organisation but, importantly, it is also about the way in which women’s and men’s
jobs are valued differently.
Exploring this point further, stakeholders suggested a number of mechanisms to
reduce the associated burden for employers. One alternative would require employer
to report on a sample of occupations each year, rather than all employees.
A second alternative might involve developing an agreed equity pay tool in
collaboration with industry, noting that the cost-effectiveness of applying this tool
across a diverse range of organisations and industries, would need to be tested. In both
cases there is a need to recognise that understanding equal remuneration is likely to be
difficult and the assistance of the Agency (through tools and specialised support) will
be crucial to the success of this measure.
On balance it appears that knowing and reporting on total remuneration by categories
across organisations – and, ideally, quantification of each element – would give
employers the best start in terms of working towards an improved understanding of
the complexities of pay inequity. Furthermore, given that an important element of pay
inequity is occupational and industrial segregation, and the different value placed on
traditionally women’s and men’s work, it will be important to have rigorous and
standardised measures of pay equity that can enable comparison of outcomes within
and across industries
A final concern related to the confidentiality of information on remuneration. There
was a view that consideration should be given to how confidentiality is maintained for
women at senior executive levels, noting that, given the smaller number of women at
senior levels, their remuneration packages may be more readily identifiable that their
male counterparts6.
Given the agreed value of reporting in this area, it will be critical that the Agency offers
tangible support to employers to enable effective reporting against this measure, and
use of information gained by this measure.
Further, for ease employers should also be able to use its employees’ most recent group
certificates (which include all additional payments such as performance payments,
6
Note: Confidentiality provisions apply with respect to remuneration data. This should mitigate against areas of
significant risk.
30
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
penalty rates, overtime, bonus payments and allowances per annum) to determine
total remuneration. This should reduce the burden of reporting.
Measurable outcomes
With respect to specific outcomes indicators, suggestions were most consistently made
for reporting upon:

average annual wage base salary per FTE staff member, by gender;

annual average total salary per FTE staff member, by gender;

differences by gender and workforce tier (e.g. senior executive, senior manager,
manager and other non-managerial staff);

overlaying gender with category of staff, occupation and industry; and

graduate annualised pay salary on entry.
Consideration of pay disparity by occupation and industry was considered to be a
valuable method of assessing trends of systematic biases. Reporting on graduate
salaries was identified as an important way to explore the extent to which pay
disparities start from entry into organisations.
Other related (but less common suggestions) were put forward in order to further
explore pay equity as it relates to different categories of workers. These included:

benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to part-time
employees;

any pay differential for women with disabilities, compared to other women in
similar roles;

consideration of differences by location; and

differences in remuneration between those working on-site and off-site.
Process indicators
There was a view that process indicators in this area might be useful for identifying the
steps being undertaken by organisations to address pay disparities. Suggested
indicators included:

evidence of pay equity audits on a regular basis;

access to training for managers and recruiters in pay equity;

a review of all current job roles using the Australian Standard on Gender Inclusive
Job Evaluation;
31
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2.2.4

specific programs to address barriers for women identified through pay equity
audits or committees, such as policies to promote pay equity and work value
assessments for female dominated job classifications (noting that these indicators
should be able to take on a variety of forms as different initiatives will be suitable
for different organisations);

pay transparency, including whether employees are precluded from discussing
their individual pay outcomes with colleagues; and

review of employees’ pay on return from parental leave.
GEI 4: Availability and utility of employment terms, conditions and practices
relating to flexible working arrangements for employees, and to working
arrangements supporting employees with family or caring responsibilities
Feasibility of reporting matters
The consultation and submissions raised a range of issues with respect to the flexible
work arrangements GEI.
In order to assess the availability and utility of terms, conditions and practices related
to flexible working, there was a strong view from stakeholders that flexible working
arrangements need to be clearly defined. This reflects that there are a large number of
different types of flexible work and no common definition across organisations or
industries. Considerations noted with respect to the definition include:

the intent of flexible work (i.e. to increase the flexible working arrangements for
both men and women, that benefit both the employee and employer). Often
flexible employment arrangements benefit the employer, resulting in precarious
employment and insecure work for the employee;

the requirement to adopt a broad perspective of flexible working arrangements,
rather than considering women’s parenting responsibilities alone; and

the requirement to think of flexibility beyond part-time work.
Organisations also need to be thinking more broadly about how they can provide the
necessary conditions for providing flexible work opportunities.

This should include a shift in focus from the sex or caring responsibilities of the
jobholder, to the design of the job, the hours of work and the way in which
organisations organise and structure work. In addition, the objective should be to
mainstream flexible work and enable access to training, development and
promotion in order to prevent reinforcing labour market disadvantage to those
taking up flexible working arrangements.
32
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

Ensuring flexibility is not limited to part–time work and includes other practices,
such as a structured work week that allows flexible start and finish times,
telecommuting, working from home, job sharing arrangements and other related
conditions.

There will be genuine challenges in collecting data about the extent to which
flexible conditions are offered and taken up. Many submissions highlighted the
difficulties in capturing data about the availability and uptake of informal flexible
arrangements: capturing the availability and utilisation of informal arrangements
(usually made between the worker and direct supervisor, rather than being
specifically contracted and recorded in central human resources databases) is likely
to be difficult and costly for businesses.
There were also a range of suggestions about how to collect information about
flexibility.

A more frequent suggestion favoured the inclusion of additional questions within
existing employee engagement surveys as a basis to embed diversity and flexibility
in the minds of management as an organisational culture issue that strategically
contributes to high business performance, rather than “just a policy and HR issue”.

Other suggestions were in favour of a tool to assist with data capture related to this
measure. As an example, the Queensland Department of Justice and the Attorney
General have a tool available called the Flexible Work Arrangements Request tool
which can be used for these purposes. The tool guides employers through a
consistent and fair process for requesting and assessing flexible work arrangements
and monitors the uptake of such arrangements.
Other stakeholders made the point that measures related to flexibility should not be
interpreted in isolation, and must be sensitive enough to capture workplace attitudes
toward gender equity. For example, a company that has a high level of female part
time workers may be a company that is proactively making flexible working
arrangements available. Equally, however, it may be a company that is discriminating
against women and offering jobs with lower security and working hours while
disproportionately offering full time roles to men. Further exploration by the Agency
may be warranted.
Finally, there were some concerns raised about the value of collecting information
about the ‘rates and quantum of parental leave available’ measure. This reflected a
view that most parents have access to unpaid parental leave under the Fair Work Act
2009 in conjunction with Government funded parental leave payments and dad and
partner pay. This measure would simply show which employers provide parental
leave entitlements above those in the Fair Work Act 2009 and the Paid Parental Leave Act
2010.
33
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Measures outcomes related to flexible working
Giving consideration to this perspective, a number of measures were suggested to
assess the support for flexible working arrangements and acceptance of this practice
within organisations. These primarily related to:

requests and approval rates for flexible working arrangements;

number of employees accessing flexible working arrangements by gender and type
(including part time, work from home, variable start and finish times, job share,
compressed week);

utilisation of flexible work arrangements at senior levels (as a basis to demonstrate
the legitimacy/acceptance of their use for all employees); and

promotion of flexible workers by gender.
Measurable outcomes related to parental leave

Uptake of parental leave.
Stakeholders suggested that there are a range of measures to assess the uptake of
parental leave. Those that were most commonly suggested included:

-
Number/rates of employees taking parental leave.
-
Number/rates of employees returning from parental leave.
-
Approval rates for requests for extended parental leave.
Sustainable return from parental leave.
There were a substantial number of suggestions for measuring: the rate of mothers
who return to work after parental leave and are still at work after twelve months; the
number of women promoted to a higher classification level within twelve months of
returning from leave; and reasons for resignation within twelve months of parental
leave.
While these measures – the first in particular - were identified as valuable, concerns
were raised about the capacity for reporting in this domain. There was a view that
within large organisations – even those with sophisticated data management systems –
measuring sustainable rates of return would require a high degree of discipline and
data analysis to determine retrospectively which employees have left, returned and
stayed.
34
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Process indicators
There was a view that process indicators should be used to assess the nature and use of
policies and good practices to enable workplace flexibility and to support employees
with caring or family responsibilities.
Such indicators might include:

availability and use of policies to support flexibility and parental leave;

how the organisation uses the design of the job to enable flexibility;

availability and utility of flexible working and parental leave arrangements via:

2.2.5
-
itemisation of formal flexible work options available;
-
availability and use of flexible work options by men and women and level in
organisation (non-managerial/managerial); and
case studies of leading practice initiatives (which can be linked to awards such as
the Employer of Choice for Women citation).
GEI 5: Consultation with employees on issues concerning gender equality in
the workplace
Feasibility of reporting matters
The submissions presented a wide range of views regarding the measurement of
appropriate consultation with employees regarding gender equality.
Consideration should be given to the type and extent of consultation undertaken by
employers with their staff, allowing for flexibility in approaches to suit organisations’
needs and preferences. This recognises that an overly prescriptive approach could
constrain organisations. As one stakeholder suggested:
“(a)ny process indicator for this outcome should not set specific consultation processes, to
ensure that organisations are able to engage with their staff in the ways that best suit the
organisation”.
Suggested mechanisms for consultation included: the use of employee engagement
surveys; staff focus groups; ongoing consultative mechanisms; use of Gender Equality
committees; exit surveys or interviews; and/or creation of male and female champions
advocating equality in all levels of management. Related to this, a number of
submissions highlighted the need to provide clarity on what consultation means in
practice and the appropriate standard required. For example, whether there is a need
to establish ongoing consultative forums, or to provide more than one opportunity for
employees to provide feedback.
35
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
A number of submissions identified the need to consider appropriate mechanisms to
engage those who may be marginalised in the context of consultation, including
those who may not speak up due to cultural reasons, language, job security and related
issues. This group includes women who are migrants, Indigenous, younger, older,
have special needs, from low socio economic backgrounds and poor educational
backgrounds. This should also include those who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual,
transgender or intersex.
There may also be a need to provide training in gender issues to support employees
to provide meaningful feedback: for example, due to the complexity of the issues at
hand it would be very difficult for the majority of employees to genuinely agree with
issues around pay equity without some form of training and support.
Depending on the size of the organisation, stratifying the consultation process and
outcomes by level/employee type should be considered. In all cases, the level of
consultation should be balanced against the practicalities of data collection and
reporting, including challenges in collecting information across large multi-site
organisations.
Employers should also have ongoing mechanisms to engage line managers in all
aspects of identifying gender diversity issues and developing appropriate responses,
recognising that these are the individuals who will have responsibility for
implementation of any resultant gender diversity initiatives.
As one submission noted:
“Gender diversity is a leadership issue…“ therefore, “Asking [employers] to report
on how they have consulted with and engaged their line managers as part of their
gender diversity diagnosis, business case development, strategy development and
implementation phases… would be an excellent way to educate employers [on the
importance of leadership for achieving gender equality].”
It is important that consultation is ongoing and reflects good practice in continuous
improvement. That is, organisations should clearly report to their employees the
nature of feedback received, how they have acted on the issues, and seek ongoing
feedback regarding the gender equality/diversity initiatives that have been established
in response to the consultation process/es. As part of this process, employees must also
be notified of the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) reporting process, the
lodgement of the report, and how they can access the report.
External accountability regarding the consultation process was also considered
important. This includes: providing information on how the organisation has
consulted with staff and acted on the issues that have emerged; verification that
employees and their representatives have participated in the EEO reporting process
36
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
and have been notified of the lodgement of the report; and the date the report will be
provided to stakeholders.
It was also suggested that external reporting specify the percentage of workforce
directly consulted by sex (to ensure that all levels of the workforce and both women
and men are consulted), as a basis to ensure that men and women are engaged
equally, and that consultation processes do not result in men becoming disengaged, as
men are central to achieving progress in gender equality.
Finally, some submissions suggested that external accountability would be enhanced
by the Agency conducting its own consultation processes. Some submissions indicated
a preference for surveys rather than reporting against this measure. It may be
appropriate for the Agency to conduct surveys of the types and quality of consultation
with employees that is occurring. This may be more valuable and less burdensome
than annual reporting requirements for all businesses against this GEI. There may also
be a requirement to re-assess the value of this measure over time in terms of making
a useful and meaningful contribution to gender equity.
Measurable outcomes
In terms of specific measurable outcomes, suggestions were in favour of reporting the
following as a matter of priority:

the proportion of employees who were provided an opportunity to give feedback,
and the mechanism by which feedback was received; and

the proportion of managerial and non-managerial employees who participated in
consultation processes, by gender.
Process indicators
In terms of process indicators, stakeholders suggested that information should be
collected about the type and range of consultation undertaken, recognising
consultation methods are likely to vary by workplace and that good practice would
dictate that employees are provided with more than one mechanism for consultation in
order to ensure feedback is representative and meaningful.
2.2.6
Other suggestions and key considerations when developing priority
reporting matters
Submissions set a range of other critical considerations in developing priority reporting
measures. These are set out below.
37
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Importance of definitions
A number of stakeholders identified the requirement for clear definitions of the
following terms:

Distance from the CEO – there must be clarity about the definitions of management
tiers (such as executive management, senior management and middle
management) to enable comparison within and between industries.

Governing body – the definition of governing bodies must be sufficiently flexible to
take into account differences within industries and professions. It must also
consider how organisations with global governance structures will be treated.

Flexible work arrangements – definitions of flexible work practices should go beyond
formal employment terms to include the full range of informal arrangements
available to employees.

Concept of consultation.
Use of a standardised classification system
The majority of stakeholders supported the need for a standardised industry and
occupational classification system, to support comparability both within and across
industries. However, achieving a classification system that works for the majority of
organisations, provides meaningful data and does not move too far away from
organisations’ current classification systems, is likely to be a significant challenge for
the legislation and implementation of reporting matters.
There was reasonable support for the development of a classification system (on an
industry basis) in collaboration with reporting organisations and industry
representatives to enable cross-industry comparisons. This would be developed over
time - classification of occupations would not occur in the first year, rather, there
would be work towards a classification over time on an industry basis in collaboration
with a technical working group, comprising reporting organisations and other key
stakeholders. Implementation timing is further discussed in Section 2.5.
Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO)7
The issue of whether ANZSCO would be an appropriate system of occupational
classification was canvassed extensively in the consultations. This was based on the
7
The Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) is a classification system that
provides for the standardised collection, analysis, and dissemination of occupation data. It was jointly developed by
the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Statistics New Zealand and the Department of Education, Employment and
Workplace Relations (DEEWR).
38
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
representations made by the WGEA in the first consultation, which identified
ANZSCO as the preferred classification system.
ANZSCO was discussed in a broad context during the consultations that included its
use, not just at the high level (i.e. classification in terms of major groups or sub-groups)
but in terms of the full range of levels and individual occupations (i.e. at least to the
minor group level).8
There was limited support for using ANZSCO for this purpose. This related to strong
concerns that the system would create significant impost on business in its initial
stages and fail to provide useful or meaningful data to either employers or the
Agency. A number of stakeholders spoke from direct experience of ANZSCO, rather
than operating from a theoretical basis.
Stakeholders identified the following concerns.
1. It is too rigid: employers were concerned they would be required to make
arbitrary decisions in order to fit employees within the narrow confines of
ANZSCO.
2. It is outdated: it does not take account of emerging professions, nor the reality
of contemporary jobs.
3. It has no relevance for a number of sectors: for example, the higher education
sector.
4. It is not a good fit for multi-nationals.
5. Sound working knowledge of ANZSCO is not widespread, even among HR
professionals.
This feedback was relatively consistent across stakeholder groups (for example,
employer groups, unions, academics/universities/research bodies, and advocacy and
interest groups).
The consultation discussions identified the following ways forward:

the use of ANZSIC for the purpose of industry classification;

reporting by tiers of management with clear definitions;

establishment of a technical working group – comprising industry, employer
groups, unions, academics, women’s interest groups and others - working closely
with government to develop alternative classification options on an industry basis;
and
8
‘Major groups’ reflects the eight high level occupational classifications – manager, professionals, technicians and trade
employees, community and personal service, clerical and administrative, sales, machinery and labourers. ‘Minor
groups’ refers to the 80 or so occupational categories.
39
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

the possibility of phasing in Level 1 ANZSCO to classify non-manager staff in the
second reporting period (not widely supported).
Stakeholders recognised the necessary trade-off between flexibility and consistency in
classification. It was also acknowledged that, currently, there is no clear alternative
classification system. The overwhelming message however, was that using ANZSCO
would compromise the value of the reporting process for business and for the Agency.
If ANZSCO is introduced as a classification system, it may marginalise industry rather
that encouraging further progress with the gender equality agenda.
Regular review
Measures for gender equality need to be reviewed regularly to determine if they are
appropriate and effective. It is recommended that if, over time, certain data is found
not to advance the aims of the Act, its collection should be phased out.
Targets, timeframes and metrics
To ensure the reporting requirements produce valid and reliable statistical data,
stakeholders supported the setting of measures which:
2.3

include a definition of the time period;

are accurately defined; and

identify data points that allow comparisons for research purposes.
Perceived value of the measures to employers
This section summarises the perceived value of the proposed measures to employers.
It considers the extent to which employers currently collect the required information
and outlines which measures are perceived as the most and least useful to employers,
and why.
2.3.1
Information currently collected by business
There was consistent feedback throughout the submissions and targeted consultations
that most employers routinely collect information relating to GEI 1 Gender composition
of the workforce as part of existing requirements under the EOWW Act and GEI 2 Gender
composition of governing bodies as part of fulfilling broader corporate reporting
requirements.
The level of disaggregation of data in relation to the gender composition of the
workforce varies by organisation. There was a general view that larger, leading
40
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
practice organisations would collect information
detail/disaggregation (i.e. at the occupational level).
at
a
greater
level
of
Leading practice organisations – for example, employers identified as Employers of
Choice for Women – may also collect data specifically for the purpose of considering
equal remuneration (GEI 3), however this was generally reported not to be
widespread. It was reported that organisations do not generally collect data on flexible
working arrangements (GEI 4) beyond employment status.
There was a general view that while employers may not specifically collect and analyse
data in the context of gender equality, a substantial amount of information relevant to
each of the indicators should be available to all employers, as a function of complying
with a range of existing financial and other legislative obligations. For example: payroll
systems include job classifications and pay scales; group certificates include total
remuneration; and human resources staff keep records of appointments, higher duties,
returns from parental leave, written requests for flexible work arrangements,
attendance at training courses, and discrimination/harassment complaints. This
information is also often presented in reports to boards of directors and / or
shareholders.
It was suggested that employers with an advanced understanding of the benefits of
diversity (often listed companies with larger numbers of employees) are likely to make
use of this and additional data to address workforce participation and other related
issues, while those for whom gender equality is a lower priority tend not to take
advantage of the data they have. Reporting on this information may, therefore, require
organisations to invest in the necessary IT and human resource systems to collect,
analyse and report the data.
A number of stakeholders emphasised that the new reporting requirements will
encourage employers to access and use the information already at their disposal to
more accurately inform them about their workforce and their progress on gender
equality. The following quotes reflect these views:
“In our view organisations need to be committed to collecting and analysing this
information if they are going to take gender equality seriously. Requiring the
collection and reporting of this information would encourage cultural change in
some organisations.”
“It is understood in business that having accurate data on the business’s resources
‘makes business sense’. The same is true for human resources, and collecting
accurate data on women and men in the workforce will be a benefit to the business.
If data is not currently collected on these measures, it is likely to improve business
awareness on accountability matters.“
41
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
“It is in fact simply a matter of good management to analyse workforce policies,
procedures and practices in line with the Gender Equality Indicators. This not only
ensures gender equality, it also assists businesses to achieve a diverse, skilled and
experienced workforce.”
2.3.2
Utility of new measures to employers
As discussed in Section 2.2, there was strong support across stakeholder groups for a
minimum number of robust, quantifiable measures that can demonstrate a tangible
impact on improving gender equality.
Feedback suggests that employers will derive the most value from reporting on
measures that give an accurate picture of the areas in which gender quality issues
exist and therefore allow organisations to develop targeted initiatives to address those
issues. One industry stakeholder provided the following examples of the types of
insights that can be gained from particular measures.

The workplace profile coupled with analysis of gender equity by level will illustrate
gender gaps in the leadership or development pipeline, and also help to isolate
whether overall gender pay inequity is attributable to one particular area. It will
also assist in understanding whether the gender pay inequity is the result of
unequal outcomes for women in the organisation, or actually reveals an absence of
women (or men) at certain levels within the organisation.

Analysis of successful return rates from parental leave will show whether the
organisation is able to accommodate and support employees who have family
responsibilities and wish to work flexibly.
In addition to the value of robust quantitative measures, there was a reasonable level of
support from stakeholders who participated in the targeted consultation process for
the inclusion of a small number of ‘basic attitude questions’ that capture the impact of
organisational culture and work practices and attitudes on gender equality in the
workplace. Support for these measures was strongest among advocacy/groups and
academics/universities/research bodies; however a reasonable level support was also
evident across industry and unions.
2.4
Impact on business
This section discusses the impact of the new reporting measures on business. It
considers which outcomes or process indicators will be most difficult and/or costly for
employers to report on and suggestions for alternative means to collect this
information.
42
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2.4.1
Cost to business
The consultation process revealed a significant level of unease amongst industry about
degree to which the new reporting requirements would impose additional costs on
business.
While recognising that the intent of the Act is to streamline and simplify current
reporting processes, many stakeholders had reservations that this would actually be
the case:
“It may be asserted that these changes will be useful to employers, but whether this
is borne out on a cost benefit basis remains to be seen.”
One industry group stated that:
“Feedback from several members indicates that if the full range of measurable
criteria and process indicators are reported, employers will need to engage
additional staff to meet requirements. Based on the engagement of a consultant to
do this work over four weeks each year, at a rate of $200 per hour, the cost of
meeting reporting requirements could easily reach $30,000 per employer per year.
Similarly, if auditing and reporting tasks are absorbed within the workload of
existing staff, their capacity to perform other duties decreases.”
A number of stakeholders were concerned that there has been insufficient analysis of
the costs and benefits of the proposed measures to date.
Some stakeholders expressed strong concern about the costs to business but indicated
they could not provide a proper assessment of the impact of the new requirements
until a more detailed framework is developed.
Most stakeholders who expressed concerns about the potential costs to business did
not discount the value of the new requirements to business, but rather urged that
introduction of any additional reporting requirements – beyond what is currently
collected or readily available to business – should be guided by opportunities to
achieve outcomes at least cost to business.
2.4.2
Risk of legal prejudice
Some stakeholders also expressed concern that issues relating to the provision of
potentially legally prejudicial information were raised by employers during the
legislative process have not been addressed:
“Our organisation is also concerned that information which will be required to be
collated may be sensitive in nature, and be provided without any context, may be
misleading and could damage the interests of the reporting firm.”
43
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Stakeholders indicated that reporting on process indicators and pay equity would be
the most problematic in this respect:
“Of particular concern is the degree of exposure employers may face on account of
a requirement to collect sensitive records on attributes which may appear to form
the basis of decision making. This, in turn, is likely to result in costly litigation
and/or additional process to provide a defence to any potential litigation.”
It is noted that confidentiality provisions apply to all information relating to
remuneration and, therefore, the risk of this is considered to be low.
2.4.3
Concerns relating to specific measures
As highlighted in sections 2.2, specific concerns were raised about the collection and
provision of information relating to GEI 3 Equal Remuneration, GEI 4 Flexible working
arrangements, and the requirement to report on process indicators. These concerns are
briefly summarised below.
Concerns relating to reporting on GEI 3 (equal remuneration)
Although there was widespread support across stakeholder groups for the inclusion of
pay equity as a priority reporting matter, some stakeholders indicated that this
measure would create significant challenges for business. Principal concerns included
the need to define a user-friendly yet robust methodology, and concerns about the
provision of commercially sensitive or potentially legally prejudicial information to the
Agency.
In relation to the risk of exposure to future litigation, it was noted that employers have
existing pay equity obligations under the Fair Work Act, equal remuneration orders,
obligations under agreements and awards, minimum wages and adverse action claims,
and a range of obligations under anti-discrimination legislation at the State and
Commonwealth level:
“Employers should not in any way be legally prejudiced by the proposed
information collection on equal remuneration. Employers must not be required to
compile information for this exercise which can be used as a basis for commencing
litigation against them at some later stage.”
In relation to this point, it is noted that confidentiality provisions apply to all
information relating to remuneration and, therefore, the risk of this is considered to be
low.
44
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Concerns relating to reporting on GEI 4 (flexible working arrangements)
A large number of submissions suggested that capturing the availability and utilisation
of the full range of flexible work arrangements (i.e. both formal and informal
flexibility) would be difficult for employers. Manual systems of collection may need to
be implemented as such arrangements are unlikely to be recorded in central human
resources systems.
As an alternative to the provision of lengthy information relating to employment terms
and requests for flexible work arrangements, there was a reasonable level of support
for the use of a short survey (with standard questions provided by the Agency) to
report employees’ experience of flexibility in their workplace. It was suggested that
this approach may also be effective for capturing information in relation to GEI 5
Employee consultation. It was also noted, however, that if collecting this data involves a
survey, survey response rates are likely to impact of the accuracy of the measure.
Concerns relating to process indicators
There was concern among some stakeholders that requirements to report on process
indicators may be problematic:
“The resource industry is concerned that company processes, strategies and policies are
unlikely to be measurable, are unavoidably subjective, would place an undue reporting
burden on employers, and will not yield useful information.”9
It was suggested that:
“Employers are far more likely to collect, or be able to easily compile, measurable factual
data on employee characteristics. We are very sceptical regarding the usefulness, or
reliability of some of the more subjective and imprecise information being considered.”10
It was recommended that employers should not be asked to make subjective
judgements in complying with their obligations under the Act. Any reporting should
be restricted to concrete, proportionate and easily accessible information.
2.4.4
Alternative sources of information
There was strong support for the gender equality reporting measures to draw on
existing data sources and for the streamlining of reporting requirements across
different government reporting regimes as much as possible. Some stakeholders stated
that it is unnecessary to set additional reporting obligations where information is
disclosed and made publically available under existing workplace relations
obligations.
9
AMMA
Ibid, p5
10
45
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
A number of stakeholders urged for a thorough data gap analysis be undertaken prior
to specifying and additional reporting mechanisms. There was a strong view among
these stakeholders that failing to do so would impose unnecessary costs on business.
Suggested information sources, relevant to specific indicators, included the following.

Data on GEI 1 (gender composition of the workforce) could be sourced through labour
force data collected by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (Noting that data
collected by the ABS is not workplace specific, but could provide an overview of
the gender profiles of various industries and occupations).

Data on GEI 2 (gender composition of governing bodies) is monitored by the Australian
Institute of Company Directors for publicly listed companies (noting that WGEA’s
coverage is much broader).

Data on GEI 3 (equal remuneration) is monitored by the ABS and Graduate Careers
Australia. In addition, the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and
Recommendations see ASX-listed companies disclose in their annual reports
achievements against various gender objectives, including the proportion of
women in senior management and wider company roles. One industry group was
of the view that “this substantial body of information may be able to be used by the WGEA
without imposing additional reporting obligations on a number of relevant employers.”

It was suggested that information of relevant employment terms, conditions and
practices (GEI 4) and the level of consultation with employees on workplace gender
equality issues (GEI 5) could be obtained from workplace agreements collected by
the Fair Work Commission. One union noted that:
“Consultation on issues concerning gender equality in the workplace’ – particularly in
regard to flexible and family friendly work arrangements – is already governed by the
Fair Work Act, including both the National Employment Standards and enterprise
agreements made under the Act.”

It was suggested that the Australian Tax Office (ATO) may be able to assist in
identifying businesses with over 100 employees.
It is noted, however, that information from these sources may not be available for all
reporting organisations and may also be subject to significant practical and privacy
constraints, precluding any utility on this context.
Where gaps in the existing information base were found, it was suggested by some
stakeholders that a more targeted approach to data collection be considered: such as
commissioning research, targeted surveys or case studies of a sample of employers;
with a view that this would enable the provision of useful data to the Agency while
minimising the cost to business.
46
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
It was also suggested that consideration be given to obtaining additional information
from surveys that target sectors where particular issues are identified. Consideration
would need to be given to the extent to which such an approach would compromise
the collection of comprehensive data set that supports longitudinal analysis.
2.4.5
Positioning of the reporting requirements
It was emphasised by a range of stakeholders – both in industry and advocacy groups
– that the Agency must communicate the benefits of the reforms to business and make
clear the links between the reporting process, improved workplace gender equality,
and business productivity and competitiveness. It was suggested that framing the
reforms in this way will be critical to positioning gender equality reporting as good
business practice and help ensure high levels of acceptance and compliance by
employers. The following quote illustrates this point:
“Employers who understand the benefits of diversity are less likely to review the
new requirements in terms of ‘costs’ and ‘compliance’ but rather as an essential
business resources that drives continuous improvement and delivers business
benefits.“
In addition, stakeholders emphasised the need to recognise the range of industry
initiatives already in place to progress gender equality. For example:

Male Champions of Change group (initiative of Sex Discrimination Commissioner,
Elizabeth Broderick);

‘Employ Outside the Box’ initiative (Australian Chamber of Commerce and
Industry);

Australian Women in Resources Alliance;

National Association of Women in Construction; and

TAFE NSW Illawarra Institute ‘Work opportunities for women: painting and
decorating’.
2.5
Implementation timing
2.5.1
Support for a phased approach
A large number of stakeholders expressed strong support for a phased approach to the
implementation of reporting measures, particularly in relation to those measures
which vary substantially from the existing reporting requirements under the EOWW
Act.
47
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
There was generally a strong view that organisations of all sizes would require some
time to adapt their systems and data collection processes. For example, while smaller
firms are likely to need time and assistance in establishing the necessary data
collection, analysis and reporting systems, larger firms are likely to need time to
manage the scale of the requirements and possibly change/adapt current systems. It
was suggested that the ‘higher bar’ of outcomes with prescriptive definitions may
require significant system upgrades even for leading practice organisations. It was
generally indicated that employers would be likely to remain more supportive of the
new regime if a phased approach was introduced, as opposed to the immediate
introduction of (potentially) more burdensome and complex requirements.
There was widespread support for limiting the number of reporting matters for the
2013/2014 reporting cycle to those that are readily reportable and reflect existing data
collection capacity, as well as easily reportable process indicators in areas where
outcome measures are not yet well developed. As identified in section 2.3, the areas
that stakeholders identified as most readily reportable are those that align with the
existing workplace profile which would inform GEI 1 Gender composition of the workforce
and information on GEI 2 Gender composition of governing bodies.
Stakeholders did not support the use of ANZSCO in the initial reporting period. Given
the challenges in identifying an occupational classification system that is both
workable and widely accepted, there was strong support across stakeholder groups for
the development of a classification system over time, on an industry basis, in
collaboration with a technical working group, comprising reporting organisations and
other key stakeholders.
It was strongly recommended that the development of more complex ‘stage 2’
reporting requirements be occur in close consultation with industry and other key
stakeholders. It was generally indicated that phasing should occur over a period of
one to two years.
There was also a reasonable level of support in both the submissions and consultations
for the consideration of encouraging organisations, over time, to consider the impact of
the gender equality agenda for those women who typically experience greater barriers
to workforce participation and equality, i.e. women with a disability and Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander women.
The phasing-in of a set of voluntary indicators was also recommended. These metrics
would complement the standard, mandatory measures and could be used by business
on a voluntary basis to further understand their organisation’s gender equality
outcomes. It was also suggested that these voluntary metrics could be used by the
Agency to test metrics that could be usefully developed for broader reporting in the
future.
48
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
2.5.2
Opposition to phasing
A small number of stakeholders did not support a phased approach. These
stakeholders indicated that the transition timing requirements specified in the Act
allow business adequate time to prepare and were concerned that a staged approach
that limits the number of reporting matters in the initial reporting period could risk
undermining the integrity of the data and the need for consistency.
The following quote illustrates the strength of feeling with respect to one stakeholder
on the urgency of the reforms:
“The review of the legislation has been on foot since 2009 and employees have
waited long enough for the reporting regime. The implementation of the new
reporting regime already has a 12 month phase in period whereby employers are
not obliged to submit full reports for 2012/13 in order to prepare for the new
format and further extension is unnecessary.”
2.5.3
Other comments on timing
A number of stakeholders urged the Agency to reconsider the timing of the reporting
cycle: suggestions for reporting in August-September were made to enable employers
to draw from Group Certificates in reporting on the pay equity measures. Some
stakeholders also proposed that the Agency’s annual reporting cycle and application
for Employer of Choice for Women be combined in a single report to minimise
duplication of effort.
2.6
Assistance to employers
Stakeholders provided relatively consistent feedback in terms of the types of assistance
that would be most useful to reporting organisations, including the need for education
and support, developed and delivered in partnership with industry; the need for a
‘user-friendly’ online reporting system; and the provision of advice and examples of
best practice in relation to each GEI.
2.6.1
General comments
A number of stakeholders emphasised the need to consider, in particular, the needs of
smaller organisations who are less likely to have a strong capacity for data collection
and analysis and therefore more likely to find the requirements burdensome, although
there was no strong evidence that reporting would actually be more or less
burdensome for smaller or larger organisations. It was suggested that additional
assistance – financial or otherwise – may be required to support these organisations in
meeting their reporting obligations.
49
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
It was also recommended that the Agency consider targeted education to the CEOs of
smaller organisations to impress the business case for gender equality reporting and
encourage the allocation the necessary resources to support the reporting process.
2.6.2
Education and support
It is understood that the Agency is offering a series of workshops to educate employers
about the new reporting requirements. The Agency has also produced a range of
educational materials. These kinds of supports were identified as useful to reporting
organisations, and reflect the types of support identified by stakeholders during the
consultation process:
2.6.3

Information and training workshops for industry and employers. There was a
strong level of support for workshops to be co-led with industry bodies and
advisors to business to ensure advice is targeted and relevant. It is noted that some
industry groups have already partnered with the Agency to deliver workshops to
support their members to transition to the new regime. There is strong demand
across reporting organisations for these types of sessions.

Provision of comprehensive and accessible guidance material, for example a ‘toolkit’ that includes guidelines for measuring/reporting on each of the reporting
matters, templates and sample reports. Industry has offered to support government
in the development and communication of this information to employers. It was
suggested by one industry group that a similar program to the Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations’ Fair Work Education and
Information Program be considered to support the gender equality reporting
requirements.

Online and telephone ‘hotline’ assistance – for example, to advise employers on
how to classify staff, or clarify definitions with respect to reporting matters.
‘User-friendly’ online reporting
Stakeholders emphasised the need of a ‘user-friendly’ reporting system that would be
simple, streamlined, secure and low-cost of business. There was strong support for an
online reporting tool that provides reporting templates, drop-down menus and in-built
calculators.
2.6.4
Advice on best practice and leading practice case studies
Feedback indicated that employers would benefit from advice on what constitutes
evidence based practice in improving performance against each of the GEIs. There was
strong support for the provision of a range of leading practice case studies related to
50
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
each GEI, to assist employers in developing their own practice in relation to gender
equality strategies.
The publication of the case studies would also provide the opportunity for leading
practice organisations to ‘showcase’ their success and contribute to a culture of shared
learning and continuous improvement.
2.6.5
Further consultation to embed change
The importance of ongoing consultation with industry was emphasised throughout the
consultation process. The following quote from an industry peak bodies demonstrates
the strength of feeling with respect to this:
“Whether or not the objectives are achieved will depend on the benchmarks and
targets that are set and these will be contested – accordingly it is critical that
adequate time is provided to consult with industry.
We cannot emphasise enough that while we understand the need to progress
forward with the implementation of the legislation as quickly as possible, it is
critical that adequate opportunity is provided to consult with industry as the
implementation proceeds.
The new Act represents a significant difference in the way organisations manage
gender reporting and it is vital that goodwill is maintained by consulting closely
with business and supporting their efforts to meet the challenge of the new
arrangements”.
2.7
Industry-specific considerations
There was generally a reasonable level of support for some level of flexibility in the
requirements to account for diversity across industries and sub-industries. This did
not, include support for exclusions or exemptions for particular industries.
There was almost unanimous acceptance that, to be an effective instrument of change,
reporting must be apply to all industries and sectors. Ongoing consultation with
industry representatives, unions and employers, was identified as essential to ensure
the reporting matters (and, in the future, industry benchmarks and minimum
standards) are appropriate and relevant for particular industries.
A range of industry-specific concerns were in both the submissions and targeted
consultations, these included:

Building and construction industry
-
Flexibility in reporting to capture industry specific factors – for example, the
impact of remoteness on pay equity.
51
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
-

Legal profession
-

When examining ’levels’ within organisations client facing staff in legal firms
assume a level of managerial responsibility despite the fact that their title does
not carry the title manager. Guidance should be given as to whether client
facing Senior Associates, Special Counsel and Consultants fit into the
management class.
Banking, finance and insurance sector
-

Concerns that the application of non-compliance penalties may hamper the
competitiveness of participants in the building and construction industry, given
government is one of the industry’s biggest clients.
Key issues identified within the score are the degree of discretionary pay,
individualised pay outcomes, lack of transparency regarding remuneration,
lack of consistent job classification, and a major reliance on Hay (not skills
based) which, according to some, has been found to inadvertently incorporate
gender bias.
Higher education sector
-
Requests were made to continue to grant universities an extension to usual
reporting timeframe to 31 July annually as the nature of the staffing cycle
requires a later reporting date which aligns with current employee data
collection and reporting requirements to the Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR).
-
Recommendation that the higher education sector remain separate from the
broader education sector in the development of benchmarks, recognising the
sectors’ distinct gender profile. It may be more appropriate in the higher
education sector to consider two individual workforces: academic and nonacademic staff.
-
It was also recommended that – for universities – gender pay differences would
be more accurately measured by analysing headcounts at each level of
professional and general staff, rather than by examining salaries, as pay and
conditions of staff are strictly governed by the terms of the collective staff
agreements and adherence to performance management policies.
Some stakeholders recommended that casual staff be excluded and analysed
separately, as casual staff are often closely tied to the universities’ research
student profile and are often the result of research grants rather than a central
strategic staffing position.
Other stakeholders disputed this and emphasised the importance of including
casual staff (estimated to be approximately 60 per cent of staff in Australian
52
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
universities), recognising that these staff often do not receive parental leave,
long service leave, certainty of hours and assistance in balancing work and
family responsibilities.
-
A small number of stakeholders suggested that, while the indicators should be a
minimum for all industries, there may be some case for additional or industry
specific measures to be developed over time with relevant industry bodies
(employer and unions) and researchers.
53
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
3
Conclusions
This section draws conclusions as to the implications of the consultation process for the
implementation of the reporting matters.
1. Positioning
The Gender Equality Indicators can and should be used as an instrument to promote
change in organisational culture and practices, rather than as a compliance-focused
activity. To this end, it is critical that the reporting matters under the Workplace Gender
Equality Act 2012 be positioned as a value-add to business, offering the opportunity
(first and foremost) to improve business productivity and competitiveness.
2. Priority reporting matters
Reporting matters should principally comprise a minimum set of quantifiable
measures (‘measurable outcomes’), which are meaningful with respect to the intent of
the Act.
A) Measurable outcomes
Based on feedback provided through stakeholder consultations and submissions, the
following specific measurable outcomes have been proposed with respect to each
gender equality indicator:
GEI 1 Gender composition of the workforce
Priority measures:

Workplace profile disaggregated on the basis of gender, by:
-
Workforce tiers11, similar to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s 2012-13
form for the organisational workplace profile. These tiers would be reported as
distance from the CEO and include ‘CEO’, ‘senior executive’, ‘senior manager’,
‘manager’ and ‘other staff’. 12
-
Employment status (full-time/full-time equivalent) and contract status
(ongoing fixed term or casual)
The measurable outcomes under Gender Equality Indicator 1 should build on the workplace profile set out in the
reporting template provided under the former EOWA reporting requirements, with a greater degree of granularity
introduced by additional management tiers. A consistent definition would need to be developed which includes a
description of the relationship to the CEO for each level. This would enable organisations to classify their management
staff, at each level. (Note: this work is consistent with that being undertaken by the Male Champions for Change group,
with respect to their Gender Reporting Project. There should be a strong capacity to learn from the experience of this
project, although recognising that the Male Champions for Change are drawn from Employers of Choice for Women).
11
It is recommended that with respect to the category ‘Other staff’, greater levels of disaggregation should be phased in
over time; this would involve agreement to an appropriate occupational classification system.
12
54
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Profile of KMP, disaggregated employment status.13
-
Other measures:
The following measures relating to the recruitment, promotion and retention of staff
should also be considered, recognising that this may impose a higher degree of burden
on organisations in terms of data collection and analysis. Consideration could be given
to introducing these indicators in a staged approach over a two year period.14

Recruitment:
-
Gender composition of applications for position by level (introduce in year
one of reporting).
-
Gender composition of applicants interviewed (introduce in year two of
reporting).
-
Gender composition of applicants appointed to positions (introduce in year
three of reporting).

Promotion: number and proportion of employees awarded promotion by gender,
employment status and level.

Retention: number and proportion of employees who have resigned by gender,
employment status and level.
GEI 2 Gender composition of governing bodies
Priority measures:

Gender of Board Chair.

Number of Board Members by gender.
GEI 3 Gender Pay Equity
Priority measures:

Annual average base salary per FTE staff member, by gender and workforce tier
(as defined in GEI 1 above) 15.
KMP has been selected as a measure as this domain is already being reported by ASX 500 Companies and is
considered a useful means of considering women’s relative authority and responsibility within organisations. KMP are
defined in Australian Accounting Standard AASB 124.
13
14 Measures
of recruitment and promotion are designed to promote transparency of process, recognising that bias in this
area can act as a barrier to achieving gender equality in the workplace.
It is expected that the Agency would use this information to determine the pay gap between
men and women. Annual average per FTE has been used to account for differences in pay
15
55
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012

Annual average total remuneration (including base pay, discretionary pay, bonus
payments, performance pay and allowances and other remuneration benefits) per
FTE staff member, by gender and workforce tier16.

Graduate annualised pay salary on entry, by gender.
GEI 4 Availability and utility of flexible work arrangements
Priority measures:

Number and rate of employees taking and returning from parental leave by
gender and by manager/non-manager status.

Number and rate of employees taking and returning from parental leave by
gender and by Employment status.

Number of requests and approvals for extended parental leave by gender and
manager/non-manager status.
GEI 5 Employee consultation
These measures would be reported on in the process indicators.
B) Process indicators
Recognising the importance of ensuring that reporting is not viewed as a compliancefocused activity, employers should be invited to identify – from a selection of best
practice/evidence based strategies – those that their organisation is applying with
respect to each Gender Equality Indicator. This information would be collected in a
survey format.
In addition, employers could be invited to elaborate – on a voluntary basis – on how
these strategies are enabling (or making a difference to) gender equality in their
workplaces and provide copies of relevant policies and strategies.
This will support employers to showcase the innovative strategies they are using to
promote gender equality in the workforce and ensure that the reporting process is used
in an educative manner (i.e. to support the Agency’s understanding of best practice
policies and strategies that employers may apply), as well as to drive continuous
improvement in culture, attitude and behaviours.
between part-time and full-time members of the workforce. An alternative to this measure
would be average base salary and average total remuneration per contract hour .
It is expected that the Agency would use this information to determine the pay gap between
men and women. Annual average per FTE has been used to account for differences in pay
between part-time and full-time members of the workforce. An alternative to this measure
would be average base salary and average total remuneration per contract hour .
16
56
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Process indicators could be principally drawn from the Review of evidence based Gender
Equality Indicators and Practices undertaken by Graeme Russell and Cecelia Herbert. An
example of the approach is provided with respect to GEI 1 below. Other potential
questions are listed against the remaining GEIs.
GEI 1 Gender composition of the workforce

Which (if any) of the following strategies do you have in place to support gender
equity?
(a) Gender based employee networks
(b) Targeted gender based retention programs
(c) Mentoring for women
(d) Coaching for women
(e) A formal sponsorship program targeting women
(f) Identification of high performing women
(g) Other (please list).

Strategies in place to prevent and respond to sex based harassment and
discrimination (including training for managers on better responding to sex based
harassment and discrimination).
GEI 2 Gender composition of governing bodies

Targets in place in relation to improving the gender composition of governing
bodies.

Voluntary measure: description of formal, merit-based process for selecting
governing body members.
GEI 3 Gender pay equity

Good practice strategies being used to support pay equity.

Voluntary measure: description of any actions initiated as a result of the findings of
the organisation’s gender pay equity analysis.
GEI 4 Availability and utility of flexible working arrangements

Employee perceptions on flexibility of their workplace.
It is suggested that a small number of standard survey questions, based on good
practice, be provided to employers to capture the impact of organisational culture and
individual attitudes and values on uptake and tangible impact of flexible working
57
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
arrangements for employees. For many organisations, these questions could be
integrated into existing employee engagement surveys.
Consideration should also be given to the inclusion of questions on the provision of
employer-funded parental leave schemes, for example:

Whether organisations offer employer-funded paid parental leave in addition to the
government’s paid parental leave scheme.

Whether organisations offer employer funded Dad and Partner leave (for
secondary carers) in addition to the government’s paid scheme.
GEI 5 Employee consultation

Have senior management have authorised the report? (yes/no)

Did you provide opportunities for your workforce to comment on the gender
equality report? How? (Drop down boxes)

Which of the following strategies have you used to consult with / engage your
employees on gender equality issues? (Drop down boxes)

Voluntary case study on how consultation has been used to inform continuous
improvement on gender equity issues.
3. Phasing and associated timing
A phased approach should be adopted, including limiting the number of reporting
matters for the 2013/2014 reporting cycle to those that are readily reportable, and
reflect existing data collection capacity. To minimise burden, the focus should be on
use of the workplace profile and the managerial levels specified in the pre-existing
EOWA reporting templates.
Certainty should also be provided to employers about the scope of reporting
requirements in the first and later years, to enable a planned approach and reduce the
need for employers to modify or update their information technology or human
resource systems, to accommodate changing requirements.
4. Impact on business
Use of electronic reporting, including close-ended questions for reporting on process
indicators, should be used streamline the time and process for preparing and
submitting reports.
58
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
Consideration should be given to how the reporting methodology can be aligned with
existing regimes (for example, the ASX reporting guidelines) through ensuring the use
of consistent counting rules.
5. Education and support
The Agency should provide a range of positive supports for transition to the new
regime:

Information and training workshops – in an appropriate quantum to meet demand
– for both industry and employers.

Workshops co-led with industry bodies and advisors to business.

Provision of comprehensive and accessible guidance material, for example a ‘toolkit’ that includes guidelines for measuring/reporting on each of the reporting
matters, templates and sample reports; and access to advice and assistance on
reporting matters online or over the phone.

Creation of a ‘user-friendly’ online reporting tool to ensure the reporting process is
simple, secure, streamlined and low-cost for business. Reporting templates, dropdown menus and in-built calculators will assist employers.

Advice on what constitutes evidence based practice in improving performance
against each of the GEIs.
6. Communication and engagement of stakeholders
Feedback gathered during the consultation process demonstrates that there is a
significant amount of goodwill across all stakeholder groups towards the reform. To
maintain this goodwill, it is imperative that the reporting matters be positioned by the
Agency as providing ‘value-add’ to Australian business. Reflecting the principal
objects of the Act, the Agency must continue to communicate the rewards of a diverse
workforce to Australian business.
Partnering with industry to provide information assistance through industry
associations will support the communication of key messages to employers.
The publication by the Agency of leading practice case studies (gathered via the
reporting process) in relation to each indicator will showcase the business benefits of
gender diversity, and further support shared learning and a culture of continuous
improvement among Australian employers in relation to workplace gender equality.
59
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Reporting matters under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012
7. Voluntary reporting for smaller organisations
Organisations with less than 100 employees should be able to voluntary report on the
GEIs. This will help mainstream the reporting process and promote gender equality
reporting as part of good business practice.
8. Ongoing consultation
The consultation process identified high levels of commitment to working
constructively and collaboratively with government in the ongoing implementation of
the reforms.
Building on this commitment, there is an opportunity for the Agency to establish a
technical working group - comprising key employers, employer groups, unions,
academics and women’s interest groups - to consider further the implementation issues
associated with the new Act. This group could be charged with providing input and
advice on wide-ranging matters including a review of the value being derived from the
reporting requirements over time, the use of an appropriate occupational classification
and the minimum standards.
60