Here in Louisiana we’re mighty proud of our unique and fascinating culture.   When we take a dash of how we practice various religions, toss in our music, our holidays, our festivals and our food (oh the food!) and mix them all together we end up with a mighty delicious gumbo.  One that includes bits and pieces from the people who arrived here from all over – the French and the Acadians, the Spanish, native Americans, African slaves and free people of color – to name just a few.  If you’ve spent just a day in Louisiana you no doubt have a desire to return.  It can be quite magical.

When designing the overall program content for the 2013 Louisiana SHRM State Conference which will be held on April 8/9 in Baton Rouge, it seemed like a natural fit to explore another type of culture – organizational culture.  This, with all its related components, is something that we, as HR leaders and professionals think about, wrestle with and work with every single day.  The three keynote speakers are highly sought after thought leaders in the HR/Recruiting space and we’re greatly looking forward to what they have to say on the subject:

• Dwane Lay - Changing Culture: The Impossible, the Possible, and Living on the Difference

• Jennifer McClure – The Future of HR: Delivering Competitive Advantage in Your Organization

• Bill Boorman - The ‘Cult’ of Work

In addition, we’ll be offering an incredible line-up of concurrent sessions (24 in all!) with topics ranging from “HR’s Turning Point” to “Succession Planning 101” to “Extre

me Labor Relations:  Life in the New Environment.”   In addition to leading a general session as one of our keynote speakers, Jennifer McClure will also be facilitating a pre-conference workshop on Sunday April 7th on the topic “Using Social Media in HR & Recruiting.”  And, for some extra added fun, Drive thru HR will be broadcasting “live” from the conference both days.

Another brand new component of the conference this year will be Social Media Street; a gathering place where attendees can get hands-on in-the-moment guidance and advice from a whole host of awesome HR social media leaders.  And naturally, being Louisiana, we intend to socialize – with a kick-off reception on Sunday evening and a lively, fun, energetic Monday Evening Social at a venue called Boudreaux and Thibodeaux’s where we’ll feast on Natchitoches Mini Meat Pies, Boudin Balls and Cochon de Lait Sandwiches.

We love visitors and invite everyone to come pass a good time with us in Louisiana.  Get your HR learning on, earn up to 14 of those all-important HRCI recertification credits, and take a stroll down Social Media Street.

Laissez les bon temps rouler.

About the author: Robin Schooling, SPHR, is Vice President of Human Resources at the Louisiana Lottery Corporation and a regular contributor to Women of HR.  She serves as the Speaker/Program Chair for the Louisiana SHRM State Conference and also holds the role of Secretary/Treasurer on the SHRM State Council.  She blogs at HR Schoolhouse and you can always find her hanging out on twitter.

We are unwrapping some posts from the Women of HR archives for you this holiday season. Relax, enjoy and let us know if there is a favorite of yours you'd like to see unwrapped and run again.

Several weeks ago I sat next to a very nice older couple on a plane.  I estimated their ages at as close to 80 which means they were probably born at some time in the 1930s and came of age in the 1950s.

In between watching Law and Order: SVU episodes on the airplane TV service, I was scribbling some notes on a legal pad as I reviewed some work materials I had brought along with me. This prompted the Mrs. to open up a fresh line of chit chat with me, as she, with a wide-eyed look on her face inquired,

“Do you work outside the home?”

I have to admit…I don’t think I’ve ever been asked that question in my life.  Nor, quite frankly, did it ever occur to me that anyone would think it even was a question to be phrased that way.  I’ve heard “what do you do?” or “where do you work?” but I don’t think I’ve ever been asked if I worked.  And needless to say, explaining to this lovely woman precisely what Human Resources professionals do presented somewhat of a challenge.

But the conversation got me thinking about the varying perspectives we have of women in the workforce; viewpoints that are often glimpsed through a cultural or historical lens.  It’s quite probable that a young woman coming of age in the post WWII era was content (perhaps) with her life and resigned to the fact that her role was to work ‘at home.’  A woman reaching the voting age in the 1950’s was but one generation removed from even having the right to vote.  Thanks to the feminist movement, the Mrs. was able to head to the polling place and pull a lever to show that she did, indeed, “Like Ike.”

But it’s possible she doesn’t want to acknowledge or express any gratitude to feminists; that’s somewhat common. Whether first wave (primarily focused on suffrage and reproductive issues), second wave (primarily focused on equality) or third-wave (challenging and redefining ‘feminism’), feminists have often made men and women uncomfortable even while pushing for societal change that forever changed the lives of women:

• In 1848, the first women's rights convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York. At the end of the convention, some radical resolutions were adopted – shockingly calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.
  bad ingredients in dog food
• In 1870, for the first time, the US Census counted “females engaged in each occupation.”  At that time, women comprised 15% of the workforce.
• In 1920, the US Department of Labor formed “The Women's Bureau” which was tasked with collecting information about women in the workforce and ensuring safe working conditions.  Later that year, the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution was signed into law, granting women the right to vote.
• Between the 1930s and 1950s, a number of business and school districts enacted “marriage bars” which allowed them to fire single women when they married and also allowed them to refuse to hire married women.
• In 1961, President Kennedy established the President's Commission on the Status of Women and in 1963 the Commission issued a report documenting substantial discrimination against women in the workplace.  Specific recommendations were issued by the Commission including instituting fair hiring practices, offering paid
  maternity leave, and ensuring access to affordable child care.
• In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled that sex-segregated help wanted ads in newspapers were illegal.

I’ve thought of this conversation quite a bit lately.  It’s entirely possible that this couple have no children or grandchildren. For surely if they do have grandchildren they've found that many (dare I say most?) young women fully intend to continue their post high-school education and work outside the home.  While there are some people who yearn for a return to a society with strictly-defined gender rules based on religious reasons, I find it hard to believe that the majority of westerners don’t appreciate how the role of women has changed.

I, for one, tip my hat and raise my glass high to salute Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan and all the other brave women who paved the way.

Now let me get back to work.

About the author: Robin Schooling likes gadgets, coffee, wine and football and insists upon surrounding herself with people who are curious and have a desire to try new things.  After 20 plus years in HR, she is fully aware that HR is fun, frustrating, rewarding, maddening and important … and she loves most-every minute of it.  You can keep up with Robin at her blog HRSchoolhouse.com and on the Twitter at @RobinSchooling.

Photo credit iStockphoto

It begins on Friday.  “Got any plans this weekend?  What are you doing?  Are you going to the big game big concert craft sale at the VFW?  Will you be having a cookout party crawfish boil for the holiday weekend?”

And it ends, momentarily at least, on Monday.  “How was your weekend?  What did you do?  Did you go anywhere? Did you do anything?”

It’s office small talk that allows people to appear somewhat interested in the lives of their fellow cubicle dwellers.  More than likely, Glen in Purchasing could really care less that Carmen from Marketing is attending the Annual Furry Convention to be held in Pittsburgh (well, ok, that might intrigue him a bit…), but he feels the need to ask.

But I’ve noticed, throughout my working years, that this idle chatter can turn into yet another form of workplace one-upmanship. I’ve heard the sanctimonious inflection in a woman’s voice as she answered “I retiled the bathroom Saturday morning, applied weed-and-feed to the lawn, hosted a small gathering for 8 on Saturday night and then, after church on Sunday, tackled that smoked salmon w/ foie gras recipe I’ve been meaning to try.  It was a light weekend.”  And I‘ve witnessed the blank-stare and faintly disguised superiority from the questioner when someone (oh wait, that was me) answered “I did absolutely nothing.”

**********

Perhaps it’s a cliché because it’s true when we admonish people to “take time to smell the roses.”  Why must we feel the need to be doing-something-every-minute?  After a busy, hectic and structured work week filled with meetings, appointments, phone calls and tasks, isn’t it just enough to stop, relax and not feel the need to DO?

In our quest to appear busy and engaged a

nd active and plugged-in we seem to have collectively embraced the viewpoint that just being in one place (i.e. HOME) for a span of time longer than it takes us to sleep and bathe is now seen as some sign of societal disengagement.    Weekends spent cuddling one’s children on the couch under a comforter, reading a book for the pure enjoyment of it or even mindlessly watching VH1’s marathon of “100 One-Hit Wonders” are all perfectly acceptable ways to spend the weekend – aren’t they?

Yet, I’m convinced; we sometimes ask others how they spend their leisure time for the primary purpose of making judgments about either their lack of ambition or their lack of creativity.

**********

Occasionally I pull my car into the garage on a Friday evening and don’t venture out beyond our property line again until Monday morning. I eat cold pizza for breakfast and cereal for dinner.  I watch The Princess Diaries and Sex and the City reruns.  I read Happy Hollisters books and pretend I’m in 2nd grade.  I deep cleanse my pores. I take a nap in the morning and then, just for good measure, I take another one in the afternoon.

Then, come Monday morning, I go along with the small talk and ask my colleagues what they did over the weekend while I answer their queries as well.

And when I state “I did absolutely nothing” I do so with pride.

Photo credit: iStockphoto

About the author: Robin Schooling likes gadgets, coffee, wine and football and insists upon surrounding herself with people who are curious and have a desire to try new things.  After 20 plus years in HR, she is fully aware that HR is fun, frustrating, rewarding, maddening and important … and she loves most-every minute of it.  You can keep up with Robin at her blog HRSchoolhouse.com and on the Twitter at @RobinSchooling.

The Dress Code policy. There are very few managers or HR professionals who haven’t participated in a dress code conversation.

Sadly, in many organizations, when faced with conundrums such as: “How do I tell Sally she needs to wear a bra?” (answer: “Hey Sally, you need to wear a bra.”) or “What are we going to do so that Bob irons his shirts? (answer: “Hey Bob, iron your shirts.”), the easy lazy answer has always been “Let’s write a dress code policy!”

Many years ago, when I was fresh-faced and eager in my new HR career, the organization I worked for felt the need to move from a common-sense (for the most part) one page Dress Code Policy to a FIVE PAGE policy that spelled out everything from the length of one’s skirt to the banning of pants/skirts that had pockets on the back. The enforcement of this policy would have necessitated, more than likely, the hiring of Sister Mary Agnes to join our staff and roam about measuring skirt lengths with her ruler. As it was, we were already a tad foolish, differentiating the proper attire based on what floor of the building you worked on. If you were a female, and your office was on the 2^nd floor, you were forbidden from wearing pants. Why? That was the Executive Floor (all-male C-Suite at the time) and, apparently, it had been determined that the gals needed to remember their place in the hierarchy.

Now this was a financial institution with drive-through banking stations in the Midwest and in the winter it was not uncommon to hit (and sustain) temperatures well below zero. And as you may recall from the last time you went to a drive-through banking facility the tellers were f-a-r a-w-a-y from you and you probably could have cared less about what they were wearing.  Nevertheless, back in the day, the company I worked for decided that these employees were dressing inappropriately when they wore cardigan sweaters over a nice shirt or blouse. Never mind the fact that they wore the cardigan sweaters because working in those drive-thru facilities was like coming down the wind tunnel at Lambeau Field in the middle of January.

Sorry Joanie; time to ditch the sweater.  Common sense is no match for our dress code policy.

**********

The other day while Googling some random HR stuff, I came across the slide deck for a New Employee Orientation circa  2007.

There were a number of slides devoted to what to wear/what not to wear.  (Spaghetti strap tops and athletic shoes were out; pressed khakis and blazers were in).  I guess it was particularly helpful for this organization to point out that while skirts and dresses were always appropriate for women – “Female executives and their assistants may choose to wear suits.”  I wonder what happened when Grace, the lowly mid-level Purchasing Manager decided to wear a suit?  Scandalous!

That, of course, was on the Do/Don’t slide for women. And naturally there was a Do/Don’t slide for men. The headers of these two slides:

“Men Should Look Nice” and “Women Should Look Pretty.”

I am not kidding.

**********

I think about a new employee sitting in a conference room in 2007 (that’s only 5 years ago!) with other newbies. She was excited to start her new job, perhaps even making a bit more money than in her last gig.  She had been through numerous interviews, got a good vibe from her soon-to-be-boss and felt she made the right decision for her career when she accepted the job offer.

And then she learned what this company considers important for the success of its female employees when she’s told She Should Look Pretty.

I wonder how long I would have lasted?

Photo credit iStockphoto

Several weeks ago I sat next to a very nice older couple on a plane.  I estimated their ages at as close to 80 which means they were probably born at some time in the 1930s and came of age in the 1950s.

In between watching Law and Order: SVU episodes on the airplane TV service, I was scribbling some notes on a legal pad as I reviewed some work materials I had brought along with me. This prompted the Mrs. to open up a fresh line of chit chat with me, as she, with a wide-eyed look on her face inquired,

“Do you work outside the home?”

I have to admit…I don’t think I’ve ever been asked that question in my life.  Nor, quite frankly, did it ever occur to me that anyone would think it even was a question to be phrased that way.  I’ve heard “what do you do?” or “where do you work?” but I don’t think I’ve ever been asked if I worked.  And needless to say, explaining to this lovely woman precisely what Human Resources professionals do presented somewhat of a challenge.

But the conversation got me thinking about the varying perspectives we have of women in the workforce; viewpoints that are often glimpsed through a cultural or historical lens.  It’s quite probable that a young woman coming of age in the post WWII era was content (perhaps) with her life and resigned to the fact that her role was to work ‘at home.’  A woman reaching the voting age in the 1950’s was but one generation removed from even having the right to vote.  Thanks to the feminist movement, the Mrs. was able to head to the polling place and pull a lever to show that she did, indeed, “Like Ike.”

But it’s possible she doesn’t want to acknowledge or express any gratitude to feminists; that’s somewhat common. Whether first wave (primarily focused on suffrage and reproductive issues), second wave (primarily focused on equality) or third-wave (challenging and redefining ‘feminism’), feminists have often made men and women uncomfortable even while pushing for societal change that forever changed the lives of women:

• In 1848, the first women’s rights convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York. At the end of the convention, some radical resolutions were adopted – shockingly calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.
• In 1870, for the first time, the US Census counted “females engaged in each occupation.”  At that time, women comprised 15% of the workforce.
• In 1920, the US Department of Labor formed “The Women’s Bureau” which was tasked with collecting information about women in the workforce and ensuring safe working conditions.  Later that year, the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution was signed into law, granting women the right to vote.
• Between the 1930s and 1950s, a number of business and school districts enacted “marriage bars” which allowed them to fire single women when they married and also allowed them to refuse to hire married women.
• In 1961, President Kennedy established the President’s Commission on the Status of Women and in 1963 the Commission issued a report documenting substantial discrimination against women in the workplace.  Specific recommendations were issued by the Commission including instituting fair hiring practices, offering paid
  maternity leave, and ensuring access to affordable child care.
• In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled that sex-segregated help wanted ads in newspapers were illegal.

I’ve thought of this conversation quite a bit lately.  It’s entirely possible that this couple have no children or grandchildren. For surely if they do have grandchildren they’ve found that many (dare I say most?) young women fully intend to continue their post high-school education and work outside the home.  While there are some people who yearn for a return to a society with strictly-defined gender rules based on religious reasons, I find it hard to believe that the majority of westerners don’t appreciate how the role of women has changed.

I, for one, tip my hat and raise my glass high to salute Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan and all the other brave women who paved the way.

Now let me get back to work.

Photo credit iStockphoto

We’ve all seen them lined up in impressive displays at Barnes and Noble. We’ve read some of them. We may have even been told we need to take some cues/lessons from them.

Books on Leadership. Just googling the phrase gives me 138 million results.

There are, apparently, a lot of people who want to hone their leadership skills, and to do so they’ll read everything from Tribes to Who Moved My Cheese.

Now I’ve read my share of books, articles and posts from a diverse group of authors on this subject. I’ve immersed myself in academic materials and skimmed through excerpts in business journals. I’ve definitely gleaned bits of wisdom and invariably, when reading these materials, find a nugget or two that I can place in my pocket and use to make me a better leader. I enjoy reading stories of successful leaders who have transformed themselves and transformed organizations. But I think I’ve latched on to the two ingredients necessary to develop one’s leadership capabilities. Just as when making a roux, it seems to me that being an effective and ultimately inspiring leader requires just two ingredients to start:

• Continuous curiosity
• Appropriate use of one’s social skills

So let’s break these down.

Curiosity

As children we explore, learn and test out new things by touch, by taste, by just ‘doing.’ Successful adults still retain that thirst and desire for new knowledge for ongoing learning and acquisition of new knowledge is necessary for a successful leader who needs to regularly ask “what’s happening in the world beyond my four walls?” “How does A impact Z?” “What do we need to do to spur innovation or growth or sustainability?” “How can I acquire the knowledge that I need to get myself – and my team – there?”

Social Skills

Social skills are those skills that allow us to communicate and interact with others and socialization (which begins when we are infants) is the process by which we learn the norms and expectations for how we socialize with others.  Refining one’s social skills is necessary for business success of course – any time a new employee enters a work group or organization, they must be socialized to the culture. Naturally, managers and team members need to have the ability to interact with others and resolve conflict while managers must tap into their social skills in order to delegate, manage, counsel and coach others, and model and reinforce expected behaviors. Leaders take this one step further however by harnessing the power of their social skills to drive this process for others; adjusting as needed to fit situations and people. But make no mistake about it … a leader must be able to succeed in social interactions.

**********

Peter Northouse has a definition – “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.”

So is it a tad too simplistic – putting together a complex dish like LEADERSHIP with just two ingredients? Perhaps. But just as with a recipe, we can start with a few basic ingredients as the foundation of a scrumptious dish. Layer in the rest.

And flavor to your taste.

It’s often struck me how magazine editors, television producers and the mass (and-not-so-mass) media provide all of us, but particularly women, with mixed messages. 

Leave it to Gawker to do a recent post in which they take the magazine Woman’s World to task for their paradoxical covers simultaneously touting miraculous weight-loss cures next to pictures of luscious and decadent baked goods.  

We wonder why we, as humans living in the first world, perpetuate the cycle of baking and  binging on saturated fats and ooey-gooey goodness and then search in vain for the miracle cure to shed the pounds.

But we’ve lived in this world for a long time and, as women, we’ve been handed a lot of mixed messages in the working world over the years:

• Your innate, nurturing nature will make you a good people-manager but if you really want to succeed you need to be more aggressive.
• Your aggressiveness and holding people accountable at work is a great thing but be careful that you don’t come across as a bitch.
• You don’t need to dress like a man to get ahead but your professional attire may be a tad too seductive feminine. You’re not Amanda on Melrose Place.
• You need to be assertive but not too pushy.
• Go out and promote yourself, your business and your accomplishments but think about the fact that “good” girls are polite, quiet and often humble. It’s not nice to brag.
• As a mother you have the power to choose whether to work outside the home or be a SAHM, but remember that whatever decision you make, you will be scrutinized (and judged) by others. 

So what’s the best way to deal with these mixed messages? 

You can certainly decode the message and place it in context. You may want to chalk it up to the sender’s personal beliefs and biases and merrily file it away in your brain. You can always push back and clarify for understanding (pushy? polite?)  And I would argue that you really need to do that if the giver-of-the-message is your leader or a professional mentor.

As a woman, I’ve been on the receiving end of some of these messages – from both men and women. Have you? 

Photo credit iStockphoto

A recent story on SHRM highlights the differences in how men and women invest. 

 The article points out that, according to analysis done by MassMutual, “women recognize the need for better asset diversification while, historically, men have demonstrated more aggressive investment behavior.” While the analysis of investment style based on gender was interesting, what really struck me was the statement that, ”retirement plan balances for women continue to trail men by approximately 40 percent, and their deferral percentages continue to trail those of men by 0.5 percentage points.”

And other studies seem to find much the same. This past December, Wells Fargo released the results of a retirement planning survey (poll conducted by Harris Interactive, Inc) which focused on middle-class Americans spanning their mid-20s to those already retired and in their 60s. 

One of the key findings was that women shockingly underestimate what they will need, financially, in retirement. One rule of thumb is to calculate that you’ll need 70 percent of your pre-retirement salary to live comfortably. Of course, to be able to jet-set around the world, get a weekly mani/pedi and monthly massages, or manage unexpected medical issues, you’ll potentially need more than 100 percent of your pre-retirement annual income.

Now, I’m no Jean Chatzky, Suze Orman or even Dave Ramsey. My family can certainly attest to the fact that I sometimes like to fritter away my hard-earned cash on baubles and trinkets and fun stuff. But one thing I’ve learned, and truly try to live by, is the concept of “pay myself first.” I’ve always taken full advantage of retirement plans offered by my employers and it’s not just the HR-person in me that causes me to encourage others to do the same. It’s a reality that we ALL must “pay ourselves first” and plan as best we can for our post-working years. 

This is important for women and here are just a few reasons why:

• Women who retire at age 65 can expect, on average, to live another 19 years. That’s 3 years longer than a similarly situated man. Women who enter retirement as part of a couple may well be faced with ending retirement “single” and the loss of a spouse could mean the loss/reduction of some post-retirement benefits.
• With a divorce rate in the U.S. between 40-50 percent, women need to be aware of options that may be available to them under a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) in the event of a divorce or legal separation.
• According to the U.S. Department of Labor, just 45 percent of working women (age 21 to 64) participate in a retirement plan. Of course, not all employers sponsor plans; the Employee Benefit Research Institute states that just 62 percent of employers do so.  And that makes it even more critical for working Americans to use other investment vehicles to save for their retirement.
• Women tend to invest more conservatively than men so it’s very important they carefully choose where and how to invest their money to garner the best return. Women (and men) can consider making catch-up contributions beginning at age 50, to 401(k) plans and other retirement accounts.

I know it’s often unimaginable for a 23-year-old worker to envision retirement when they’ve just started paying off student loans. It seems like common sense to resist making 401(k) contributions in favor of covering one’s right-now living expenses - pesky things like food, shelter and electricity.  

Whether you’re earning $25,000 or $100,000 a year, you need to treat your working years as your ‘wealth accumulation’ years. Put aside what you can. Put it to work and let your investments grow.

C’mon ladies (and gentlemen), pay it forward. To yourself. To your future.

Photo credit iStockphoto.com

This past fall, the Pew Research Center, in association with TIME, conducted a nationwide poll exploring modern marriage and the American family.

Their findings seem to indicate that, in strictly ‘practical terms,’ marriage is not as necessary as it used to be. Whether for reasons of companionship, sex, children or professional success, their report indicates that marriage is no longer a necessity. Interestingly enough, just 14% of the people surveyed felt that getting ahead in a career is easier for a married person, while 24% said it was easier for a single person.

Maybe it’s the organizations in which I’ve worked, or the circles in which I’ve traveled, but I’ve found that in many corporate and organizational settings, the expected norm for women on their way into or already in leadership roles is that they be married (kids not necessary) much more so than their male counterparts. This is not to say I’ve not found extremely successful women leaders who are single, divorced or in a committed (non-marriage) relationship -  I have. But there’s an unacknowledged stigma attached to the female leader who has not ‘settled-down.’

The woman who remains unattached, or, heaven forbid, has various companions, is seen as either overly wed to her career, unable to form a relationship, not able to “do it all” (spouse, house and 2.3 kids), or a tramp. However, the man who is single and may have a different woman on his arm at each corporate event, is still seen as in control, dedicated to his job, charismatic, and, as a bonus, a “ladies-man.” Because let’s face it, there’s still some cache attached to that label.

Single people (male and female) can be happy, fulfilled and content. And snicker all you want, but Sex and the City (the show, not the horrendous movies) did a lot to bolster the confidence of single women everywhere.

But we still live in a couple-focused society.

We get invited to weddings, parties and professional events as “Sally Jones and Guest.” The BIG BOSS comes into town each quarter and invites the local leadership team out to dinner – with their spouse/guest. And the male leader who brings a different companion to each of these quarterly dinners is still viewed more favorably than the female leader who does the same.

I’m reminded of the time when it seemed every female professional/leader who got married hyphenated her name. For some, it was a fervent desire to not accept patriarchal norms and abandon their name and for others it was a matter of self-identity.  Perhaps there was a professional need to proclaim “see – I AM married – thus the hyphenated name which clearly reflects that.”

So, has the need to declare that one is no longer single disappeared? Is singlehood among women leaders or would-be-leaders still a barrier to success?

Or am I the singular person who thinks it is?

Photo credit iStock Photo

There are many belief systems, religions and styles of observing or celebrating one’s faith.  It’s a subject that comes up in HR when we’re tasked with evaluating a request for religious accommodation or we consider how we’ll handle an employee relations issue when Employee A feels harassed by Employee B’s proselytizing in the work place.

Now I’m by no means a religiously observant person.  I do, however, find it fascinating to read about different religions and belief systems.  From a historical and social perspective, it’s endlessly interesting to me to look at the connection between different religions and see how they’ve shaped and continue to influence the world in which we live.  One group I’ve been trying to understand is the group of Christians who live by directives set out by the Apostle Paul in the Pastoral Epistles of the New Testament (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus).

In the King James Version of the Bible, 1 Timothy, Chapter 2 (v 11 – 13), we read:  “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.  For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” 

Or, in a new translation – “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”

******* 

Some scholars and writers have taken great pains to point out that these scriptural verses do not mean that woman is inferior to man.  After all, they point out, there are other verses which speak to the woman being permitted by her husband to have authority over the domain of the household – to “marry, bear children and guide the house.”  However, many are in agreement that these edicts DO let us know that woman is subordinate in rank to man.

There are some who point out that this is primarily within the context of teaching or worshipping within the confines of the Church; after all, this is a basis for some denominations to not ordain women pastors or priests or to allow women to be religious leaders.  But even if this IS only within the context of a religious service or religious teaching – how can a viewpoint like this not permeate the rest of society?

*********

There are a number of religious bloggers who discuss their faith.  I recently read a blog post where the writer made very clear that “it is my husband’s policy that I not engage men in discussions” and “I will not respond to comments from men, especially questions which could put me in a ‘teaching’ position.”   

Now I fervently support individuals having the ability to freely believe in and worship whatever deity, deities, or non-deities they wish.  And to live by whichever commandments or teachings they believe are imperative.  But I can’t help but wonder how the men who believe that women are subordinate handle their interactions with women in the workplace. 

How do the sons, raised in these households, move out into a society where they will have to take directions from a woman, or be taught/instructed by a woman?  If a male employee has a deeply-held religious belief that a woman is not to be in a position of authority over him, what happens if his newly-hired manager is a woman? 

And would everyone, perhaps, view things just a tad differently had Eve arrived on the scene before Adam?