Caroline Fredrickson is the author of the new book Under the Bus: How Working Women Are Being Run Over. She is the president of the American Constitution Society, and also has worked for the ACLU and NARAL Pro-Choice America. She lives in Silver Spring, Maryland.
Q: You write, “So while the media debate ‘opt out’ and ‘lean
in,’ the real focus should be on those who are ‘left out.’” What do you see as
the most important problems that should be addressed for women in the workplace?
A: There are a number, but one of the most significant
issues remains that with women continuing to be the dominant caregivers, we
haven’t adopted the workplaces for them to thrive and also take care of their
responsibilities at home.
Q: In the book, you state that many people are still left
behind despite the passage of legislation over the past century to improve
working conditions. What are some of the reasons the legislation did not succeed
in addressing these concerns?
A: In part the origins of the exemptions that left so many
women out have sort of been forgotten. It was a surprise to me, and somewhat
appalling, what were the stated reasons behind the exclusions: They were
forthright in saying the wanted to exclude African Americans from the law.
Q: What were some of the other things that surprised you as
you researched the book?
A: In terms of child care, I was surprised by the
half-hearted effort in World War II. Even some women in American history known
as being protective of women in the workforce [and their access to work] were
protective of mothers.
There was a begrudging understanding that women taking
traditionally men’s jobs was a necessity, but they were rather concerned about
the fact that mothers were working at all, despite the fact that it was
necessary.
Also, [it surprised me] to uncover the history of the close
call we had with universal child care legislation in this country. Legislation
was passed—it’s hard to imagine in this day and age. But it didn’t make it over
the finish line because of Phyllis Schlafly and the organizations she
supported.
Q: How did you come up with the book’s title, and what does
it signify for you?
A: You try and come up with something that sounded catchy,
but encapsulates the point of the book.
There is a visual element that’s real here. When you look at
the Congressional Record, and read about how members of Congress discussed how
they would carve out this group of workers...people who worked in the fields
and in houses—as a result, 90 percent of African American women were carved out
of any protections of the New Deal initially. There was incredible exclusion of
African American workers. It was shocking.
Q: You ask, “Why do women, particularly women of color,
continue to earn less than men?” Why do you think that still is true now?
A: There’s a big hangover from these exclusions. The home
care industry is dominated by women of color. It’s finally beginning to get the
protection it deserves [which] is a big step forward way too long in the making.
Women dominate the low-wage workforce and those women tend
to be women of color. It’s two-thirds women, and a large proportion of the
two-thirds are women of color. Between the two things, you start to see why
wages lag so much.
Q: What impact have temporary workers had on working
conditions for women?
A: It’s a big issue because even when you can make inroads
for legal protections, [employers will] hire temps. A company will have workers
for decades who are still designated as temps and don’t get the same benefits
as other workers.
For a workforce that’s particularly vulnerable, it’s a very
high burden for low-wage workers to overcome, so they don’t tend to challenge
it. So unscrupulous employers, or ones driven by the bottom line, [can] take the
low road and not appropriately categorize their workforce.
Q: Do you think any of the presidential candidates are
addressing the concerns you raise in the book?
A: Yes! I was really pleased that in the last Democratic
debate they talked quite a bit about…family leave. It was refreshing to see.
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen quite as much on the Republican side, but even
there, there is a recognition that [these] ideas matter. Marco Rubio announced
a family leave policy—it’s purely voluntary, but that he needs to talk about it
is significant.
Q: What do you see looking ahead?
A: I tend to be an optimistic person, so I’m pretty
optimistic! [Actions] on the state and local level are very encouraging. There
are so many places where they raised the minimum wage, even red states where it
was raised through ballot initiative. [Issues like] paid sick leave, parental
leave…across the board, conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans,
see a real need to make changes in workplace policies.
No matter what happens at the presidential level, there will
be change, because the American people want it. It has to come from the bottom
up, not the top down.
Q: What are you working on now? Another book?
A: I’m so busy between my regular day job and a lot of speaking
to ACS audiences and others, it’s kept me on the road and busy. I’d like to
write more about a general issue facing so many workers—misclassification, and
[the transferring] of high-wage jobs into contingent jobs.
I wrote about adjuncts in The Atlantic last month. It’s
interesting to see how structures to protect workers are slowly being
dismantled, and [employers] are using more contractors and temporary workers…
It’s started to [affect] lawyers and doctors. It deserves a
lot of attention—these issues are encompassing a larger and larger percentage
of the workforce, including professionals.
Q: Anything else we should know?
A: The one other [reason] I’m optimistic is the women I
talked to are amazing. I was so buoyed by the work these women had done, often
immigrant women, seeking better legal protections. It’s pretty incredible
seeing how brave they are. If we all join together, we can accomplish a lot.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb
No comments:
Post a Comment