IWPR, Led By C. Nicole Mason, Fondation CHANEL, And Melinda French Gates’ Pivotal Ventures Joined Forces To Launch The First Power Plus Summit To Grow Women’s Power And Influence
C. Nicole Mason, President & CEO of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research
IWPR
Working women got hit the hardest during this pandemic, and the “she-cession” continues into 2022 with a much slower job recovery rate than men. In early 2022, men recovered approximately 875,000 new jobs, vs. women recovered 62,000 jobs. According to the National Women’s Law Center, there are still nearly 1.1 million fewer women in the labor force than in February 2020. Women left the workforce mainly due to being the primary caretaker of their loved ones during the pandemic. As we are coming out of the pandemic, women who left the workforce have difficulties getting back on track, and they are facing multiple issues such as gender wage gap, sex, and age discrimination.
In 2021, women earned just 83.1 percent of what men earned, based on IWPR’s analysis of median weekly earnings for full-time workers. Women with younger children had to balance caregiving, housekeeping, and career decisions. When the gender wage gap remains significant, it is a fact that families will have to make that financial decision where the woman decides to quit and stay home as the caregiver.
Washington Post reported in October 2021 that nearly 70% of women over age 40 are still unemployed or for at least six or more months. A study from AARP showed that almost 1/3 of the job seekers identified age discrimination as an impediment to finding a job. From research conducted by Patrick Button, a Tulane University economist, there was substantial evidence that the age discrimination against older women is much more severe than their male peers.
Although many leaders and organizations have stepped forward to advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace, it is not enough to move the needle. Dr. C. Nicole Mason, CEO, and President of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) told me that solid, bold, and systemic policies and structures must be implemented for real changes to happen.
Pivotal Ventures
Pivotal Ventures
“The coming together of a global pandemic and economic crisis has revealed the fragility of our economy and health care system and the burden carried by women in a society where both racism and sexism are deeply entrenched and embedded,” said Dr. C. Nicole Mason. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research is partnering with Fondation CHANEL and Pivotal Ventures, a Melinda French Gates company, to host the Power+ Summit on April 27-28 in San Francisco. This Summit aims to bring bold ideas and accelerate change and push women’s progress and equality in the U.S. and globally. Summit speakers include Ai-Jen Poo, Dawn Staley, Jennifer Klein, Letitia James, Cecile Richards, Roxane Gay, and many other influential executives and policy makers.
FONDATION CHANEL
CHANEL
“IWPR is showing—starting with the Power Plus Summit—that the world is full of women visionaries in all sectors. Their transformative ideas and ability to connect the dots to provide systemic solutions are critical for our society’s ongoing vibrancy and progress toward a more sustainable and inclusive model,” said Kate Wylie, Global Chief Sustainability Officer & President Fondation CHANEL.
Chan: Please tell us about IWPR and the Power+ Summit.
Mason: I’ve been working on women’s issues, economic security, and well-being for the last two decades, and I came to IWPR 2 years ago when IWPR was operated as a sleepy think tank on an academic campus in Washington D.C. I thought we could be doing so much more and linking our research to real-world policies and outcomes. We could use our research to change the narrative to shift and create movement and change hearts and minds. IWPR is the only think tank on economic equality for all women to build power influence.
In my role, I am thinking of how big we can be, what we see as problems, and what we see as solutions. One of the ways I thought would be a strategic convener. We believe the future begins with bold ideas and beyond what we hear from individual thinking and ideas.
What we have been trying has not been working. The gender pay gap only closed by 20% in the last 20 years. What kind of thinking do we need to close up the gap? Women may be there, but the conversations are not dominated or proposed by women. Women usually don’t get to pitch the big ideas.
The Summit is bringing in women thought leaders, luminaries, and a few men to think about what it will take to accelerate change. What are the bold ideas out there? Start the conversation in a different place, and think out of the box. It has been amazing to see people’s responses and the Summit is creating a space for women to really dig in.
IWPR
IWPR
Chan: Are you surprised to see the pandemic has pushed us back several decades? Why is the pandemic reinforcing the traditional gender roles?
Mason: Pre-pandemic, women were already saddled with the majority of the caretaking and family responsibilities. We were already not earning what men were making, and we were already segmented and segregated into gender-dominated occupations that pay less. During the pandemic and all of these inequalities came into sharp focus. The system wasn’t working, and all began to crumble. Women internalize a lot. We didn’t know how to do it all, and we were told it was our fault. The pandemic actually told us that it was not our fault, and it was how the system and work were set up. Individually, we knew it was true, but the pandemic opened up the truth and we started talking about it publicly.
Chan: Do you think women who left the workforce are mostly women with young children, or do you see something else?
Mason: There was a diversity of women who left. Women who were primary caretakers and who could afford to go off-ramp. Grocery clerks who are living from paycheck to paycheck who exited the workforce. Another segment that we didn’t really talk about was younger women without children. Younger women made up 20% of unemployment because they had a hard time finding a job.
Regardless of your social-economic status, women who could work remotely had more flexibility and opportunities than women who had to show up at the physical location. Women who were dropping out was across all sectors.
Chan: Do you see the older generation above 55 getting hit badly?
Mason: Yes, particularly women who have children and elder parents – will leave their jobs because of the pay gap even if they are passionate about their careers. Families are making a calculation based on their bottom line. It shouldn’t be that way.
Chan: Women over age 40 are still unemployed, and nearly 70% are unemployed for six months or longer, classified as long-term unemployment. Why do you think it takes this group of women that much longer to find jobs at these times?
Mason: It’s a combination of ageism and sexism. Labor market discrimination is very real. We know when it comes to race but also in age and when you add gender into the issue. It becomes a real burden. Especially if you were off-ramp, you might have a gap on your resume. When you are out of work for some years and re-enter work at 40, you miss the years of work where one usually has career progression, mobility, and a mid-level career. That’s a very competitive sector where younger people are also entering that sector. There are many reasons, but more women coming off the ramp vs. men play a huge factor here. Mainly due to family situations, it is far more challenging to get back on-ramp after taking off a certain amount of time. That plays a significant factor in why women are unemployed longer and take longer to find a job.
Chan: 1.1 million jobs are still not recovered from women who lost jobs – Do you think men replaced women in some of these jobs?
Mason: No, not men. Men tend not to like women-dominated sectors as they are lower-paying jobs. And when men are in those sectors, they tend to earn more than women in the same positions. So that’s not what’s happening here. Some of those jobs have disappeared for good. A decline in retail jobs, and some restaurants never re-open. Women are having a more challenging time re-entering the workforce. Daycare and schools have re-opened and are still very unpredictable. So even if you are ready to go back to work, but you don’t have reliable child care, or when your school closes due to an outbreak. It’s hard for you to get back on-ramp. So many women are still on the sidelines. It’s a constrained choice. Take care of the kids or make a living – an impossible choice as you have to do both.
Chan: What will happen in the next 12-18 months?
Mason: Women are at our wicks’ end in the USA and globally. We were already juggling a lot, doing double duty before the pandemic. The policies we thought would get fixed like universal child care, paid sick leave, pay gap, broken economy, broken systems haven’t come to pass. Women are feeling very devalued. There’s no lifeline in sight. I hope that child care and schools stabilize over the next 12-18 months, the virus is behind us significantly, and women on the sidelines get back into the workforce in substantial numbers.
I am less optimistic about what we know would make a difference for women. I thought the pandemic was an opportunity for us to get it right. To build a system that will make a difference for women and families. It doesn’t seem like we are any closer than pre-pandemic when we didn’t know the things in full color.
Chan: Do you have any opinions on women’s mental health?
Mason: This has been a trying time for everyone. The strain on mental health and well-being on everyone. But for women – we say we need help; this is not sustainable, and what we are hearing back is that it’s ok, you will figure it out, you figured it out before. We will not give you the lifeline or things that will make a difference to you.
There is no lifeline. No one is coming to save us. Frankly, it has been tough for some time; let’s work to fix this. But it’s not happening.
Chan: You love big and bold ideas and being a change agent. What are some of these examples of bold ideas?
Mason: Starting a conversation in a different place, starting with low-hanging fruits, apparent solutions, and strategy. We tend to tell women to negotiate better if they want equal pay. We tell women to go to lunch and get a sponsor if they’re going to get into the C-suites. But we all know that we can go to lunch every day and still not get into the CEO position of a company.
First, we should be honest about what’s holding women’s progress back.
Secondly, if we say what would move the needle and be honest about what it takes and put that out in the world, we start with the big ideas instead of the small ones. That’s what we are planning to do at the Summit and grapple with the big ideas around women.
For example, we do all the organizing, test the best policies, and then we get up to the doorsteps of the house of representatives and the senate, and it gets killed. What went wrong? The idea got stopped because the majority of congress is men. Suppose you are going to talk about power play politics or representation. A bold idea would be to mandate true equal representation. So why shouldn’t the senate be made up of 50% men and 50% women? And there should be a term limit. If that’s what we genuinely believe would accelerate women’s progress, why shouldn’t we start the conversation there? Change and mandate the system and structure instead of tinkling around the edges. And that’s what we want to do at the Power+ Summit.
Women need ownership, and I am not talking about small businesses. We need to own corporations. The bold idea would be to mandate women’s rights in large corporations. Let’s layout ownership and why it is essential. It’s a different kind of conversation and let’s move away from the conversations of small individual changes and behaviors to instill true policies.
We can talk stats all day, but look at how few women are on boards and what does it mean? Underneath it all is that women don’t own these businesses or corporations.
Chan: Why do you think people skirt around the issues instead of saying what they want?
Mason: Fear. It’s only one word. It’s fear.
It is fear of rejection that we are not being taken seriously. It didn’t work before; why would it work now? It’s all about fear of being excluded. Even when you bring up a big idea, there are always doubts about reaching the big picture from people. You will never get there if you can’t accomplish fear, and the truth is, you will never get there if you can’t change the conversation of the destination.
Chan: How did you get Fondation CHANEL and Pivotal Ventures involved?
Mason: I was starting at IWPR and got an introduction through a friend with Pivotal Ventures. I told Pivotal about big impact and how to do this work differently. Coming into IWPR after a founder of 30 years, I have all of these ideas that we can be more than researchers and we can be the solution drivers, but the staff didn’t think I could do it because we didn’t have the investments. She (Pivotal Ventures) saw the vision and invested right before the pandemic. She bet on the vision, and she bet on me. We have been partners for the last two and a half years. When I brought them the idea of the Summit, they were fully on board.
Fondation CHANEL is a very private, behind-the-scenes, and quiet foundation. They invested in IWPR, but I thought we wanted to have a more extensive partnership when we met. They came to D.C. and sat with us and just brainstormed, and in the end, they said yes to our bold vision. This is something that Fondation CHANEL has never done before in the USA.
We know there’s a way to accelerate change. We need to pull the people together to think big. We should position women as the knowers, the solution, and the strategy.
Chan: How do you suggest for people give back?
Mason: Start with your passion. The issues that you find exciting and that you can commit to yourself. I think everyone has a role to play. We need all of the skills and talents at this moment. Find an organization in that passion and connect your talent to that organization. It can be national or local. There is something we are aiming for, shooting for, and everyone gets behind it to organize and mobilize around that big idea, even if that idea may sound ridiculous.
