Food industries

Apart from those high flying chemical engineers employed in the oil industry who, according to latest figures released by the IChemE’s 2002 salary review can pick up pounds 50,000 a year, salaries in other science sectors can be variable to say the least. Joanne Bone is managing director of Phlogiston, an award-winning company which is just 18 months old. Based at Loughborough University, it produces a new detection system used across the chemical, pharmaceutical, water and food industries. Now 33 and a mother, Ms Bone admits she works hard, draws little from her company but is the mistress of her own destiny and hopefully has a future.
As of now, she is not tempted to go back into industry as an employee. It has been a long, hard struggle to get to her current position, she says. Ms Bone has an ONC, an HNC, a degree in chemistry, a masters in instrumental and analytical chemistry and she completed her PhD at Loughborough this year. “The salary for my last job in 1997 after my masters plus seven years’ experience was pounds 16,000,” she recalls. There were also occasions, she admits, when issues arose over men being paid more than their female counterparts.
Ms Bone remains passionate about what she does but reckons she won’t be putting pressure on her son to follow in mum’s footsteps. “For the amount of training and effort that goes into becoming a chemist, it is really underpaid. ” Gloucester chemist Ithiel Mogridge, winner of the Female Inventor of the Year award, is now 47 and also owns her own company. And like Joanne Bone, she had many years experience working in industry. Ms Mogridge has a degree in food technology and freely admits that she has come across both gender and pay discrimination throughout her career.

One of her most memorable experiences, in the mid-70s, was when she was sent out to set up and calibrate vehicle wash equipment. “When I arrived, the man on the site went mad and shouted at me that he wanted a chemist and not a woman to do the job. ” Like many women, Ms Mogridge found herself in the position of having to take a career break. She took five years out. When she reapplied for lab jobs in the mid-80s, one potential employer wrote back and told her she was too old. Ithiel was just 29. For anyone thinking that attitudes have changed since then, Ms Mogridge would disagree.
She gave up the staff job which paid pounds 15,000 in the early 90s to set up as an inventor in 1994. “It is not just a confidence issue but personality type issue that stops women going back to work after a break,” she suggests. “Female scientists tend not to be particularly assertive types and they may not want to deal with any unwanted aggression out there. ” Sandra Chapman is professor of astro physics at the University of Warwick. She has only a handful of female graduate Phds, which she describes as “very depressing”.
She believes there is a general attitudinal problem to the sciences and particularly engineering in the UK which is not necessarily reflected in the rest of Europe. “In France, science is seen as an intellectual pursuit – an everyday part of civilised life. Here it is still seen as a bit nerdy. It is this hard hat image that puts women off. ” The way forward, suggests Professor Chapman, is for scientific establishments, whether they are academic or in industry, to operate more family friendly policies. She points to practices that have started in the US where universities will hire couples as a package into a permanent academic post.
“Univer sities are starting to do that here,” she says. There are, of course, companies out there employing large numbers of female scientists and managing to hang on to them. Procter ; Gamble in the UK has 750 staff in science roles, of which 350 are women. Starting salaries are from pounds 25,000 with a degree and higher with a relevant Phd. And, after five years, a scientist could be on a package worth pounds 50,000 to pounds 60,000. According to the company’s UK external relations manager Sally Woodage, it has no problems recruiting scientists (half the recruitment team is female).
Ms Woodage believes the combination of family friendly packages and female role models is a tremendous advantage. Of the number of women who have taken a career break, 80% have come back. There is a similar story from Astra Zeneca, where the company provides flexible working and generous maternity provision. But while it is okay for the lucky ones who make it into the corporate cosiness of flexible policies and sensible salaries, it is quite clear that much work needs to be done by many to shift attitudes and boost rewards to tempt female scientists back into the workplace.
Only when that happens can they make a real difference alongside their male counterparts like Nick Medcalf. There are 50,000 women science, engineering and technology graduates not working in their respective industries at any one time ‘In France, science is seen as an intellectual pursuit. Here it is still seen as a bit nerdy. It is this hard hat image that puts women off’ http://globalarchive. ft. com/globalarchive/article. html? id=020323004817&query=gender+discrimination+in+the+workplace Appendix 2. 9
Leeds Morelli & Brown Announce They are Filing EEOC Claims Charging Race & Gender Discrimination Against Xerox Business Wire; Mar 21, 2002 CARLE PLACE, N. Y. –(BUSINESS WIRE)–March 21, 2002–According to charges to be filed today by Leeds, Morelli and Brown, Xerox employees from New York to Texas and South Carolina to California have repeatedly complained of a pattern and practice of discrimination, and over 100 of those employees, past and present, are now filing complaints with the EEOC which seek a class action lawsuit.
The complaints, filed by Leeds, Morelli & Brown, a leading civil rights firm, reveal that on a daily basis, Xerox employees are assaulted with degrading racial epithets, while management and human resources stand by and fail to respond to employees’ cries for help. The complaints made by plaintiffs are both race and gender-based. Instances of discrimination faced by Xerox employees, according to the charges include: The complaints also state that there are patterns of a lack of promotional opportunity and equal compensation.
Leeds, Morelli ; Brown asserts that minority employees find themselves passed over in favor of junior white applicants who lack their experience and credentials. In addition, minority employees find that they are paid less than their counterparts for performing the same functions, which range from vice president to equipment repair associates. Another dimension to the case, cited in the charges, is the systemic retaliation against those who have the temerity to raise complaints about the unjust treatment they suffered. Pleas to management and human resources repeatedly went unaddressed or mocked.
“As a direct result of the conduct of Xerox, our clients say they have suffered depression and have become withdrawn from family and friends,” noted Len Leeds, partner at Leeds, Morelli ; Brown. “These egregious acts of discrimination have caused degradation and severe emotional distress. Through this complaint, we hope to set an example to companies large and small that this behavior cannot and will not be tolerated. ” The complaints are rampant throughout the operations division of Xerox. In May 2001, the sales force at Xerox filed a nationwide, race-based Class Action Lawsuit alleging unequal treatment and racial steering.