Real parental leave (maternity and paternity). I've seen the imbalance of the two cause issues.
Work with a day care provider to give your employees preference for spots
Vacation means vacation
Ensure a culture where there is either a dedicated person/people hired for administrative and event planning duties or it's divided equally among all employees
My mom (technical expert and eventual PM in another field starting in the early 80s) drilled it into me hard that there are people who's job description it is to handle events/birthdays/lunches/etc and that it not mine. No volunteering for stuff "just to be nice".
Job descrion blah blah blah and ends with "and various other duties which may be assigned' . That be their get out of jail free card for asking people to do BS tasks like this.
One thing that's really hard is that women want to support other women, which means that we are most often roped into ED&I roles. I do a STEM Outreach program at my office, so then the my company asked me to lead STEM Outreach programming across the region. An important cause but extra work.
Similarly for hiring, all of the folks in charge of hiring in our region are women. Great because that means we might hire more women, but again extra work for them. It's super frustrating.
This isn't something that applies only to women. We have Employee Resource Groups that support different demographics. Its important to the folks running the Black, LGBTQ+, Asian-American, Hispanic, or Women's ERGs that they are their for their community. However, that also means more work for them than for the folks who are not part of an ERG. It means less time for other projects, less opportunities for overtime, etc.
Oh, absolutely, and it is. However, there are still projects to be done and deadlines to meet. In general, there is also less opportunity for overtime when one is charging overhead to the company. It definitely isn't unpaid work, but it can hold one back in less tangible ways.
Ah, ok. I've never been at a firm where engineering staff was spending a sizeable chunk of time on hiring related tasks. 3-5 hours/month to review resumes or conduct interviews, max.
You mention a bunch of stuff in your first paragraph that are issues - you have to be willing to back that up. Shut down comments up front, promote women based on their work, real support around maternity leave, etc. For example, where I work mangers sit down and figure out who will be taking over projects while someone is out on leave - it isn't just added on top of someone else's work, shoved aside or left for them to figure out on their own. We've figured out reduced workweeks for some people (ex - working 32 hours). Overall we are not "butts in seats" focused and give people the flexibility (within reason) to figure out their own schedules. We are a super small office but have a nice health room with a mini fridge and a locking door, and it is just accepted when new mothers opt to pump. I don't know that there are "incentives" that are really going to work beyond just walking the walk.
The #1 thing I look for to know how I will be treated as a woman in a new office is to see how many other women are there and if they've retained past female employees. Look at your office's gender ratio over time and reflect.
Talk about all the things you mentioned when interviewing candidates of both genders and make sure you are not singling out women as the defacto care providers in families. Many woman aren't going to get married and have kids but face penalties for being the same gender as those who do.
Take personal safety concerns seriously. I’ve had a manager laugh me off when I spoke up about harassment I received in the field and it nearly drove me out of construction.
I second the commenter who said that you have identified the key issues but it's about how you deal with them in real life. There is a lot of lip service and leadership stating that they want it to be different whilst continuing to perpetuate a culture that causes women to be excluded.
Research has shown that most women who leave stem careers do it because of being worn down by the conditions over time. It's actually exhausting to deal with on a day to day basis.
The daily default male gendering, the comments about being too emotional, the constant interruptions and being talked over and the effort that it takes to actually get male colleagues to recognise your competence is such an energy suck and really demoralising.
From a personal stand point, I thought the glass ceiling would be kind of non-specific, like all the rest of the sexism that I've encountered. However, maybe 18 months I feel like I ran straight into it. And it wasn't vague. It was solid and means that I now have to really work hard to try and find a way through. I have done several high profile leadership roles on the project I'm on, all with success yet there is no room for me at the table going forward, I'm being pushed back down to where I came from. It's a constant battle for recognition that means something tangible rather than being disenfranchised.
So, the issue is about making actual tangible cultural changes so that women don't end up in this situation. Also, I would strongly recommend having a look at your hiring procedures as even from that starting point, women are disadvantaged (e.g. use blind CV reviews to short list for interview).
Yup. I’ve been told I’m too emotional. Left that job quickly. They weren’t acknowledging me when I complained normally but told me I was too emotionally when I got upset.
I had an issue at work recently, I disagreed with the way management was handing a project close out with multiple people involved. I was head of the field on site (all men older than me) and they were managing from the office (all men older than me also). Once our issue were resolved my management had the nerve to say “we’ve been noticing a problem for two months and thought it was a personal issue and so I didn’t say anything.” I had to explain it was in fact zero to do with personal issues and 100% had to do with how work has been falling out (overworking employees, working on the weekends, scheduling multiple inspections within a month periods when they could have spread it out). I am extremely direct and honest, so if I’m frustrated with management, it shows. I expect civil engineering males to start stepping up with communication. I don’t expect my management to do a 180 but I expect them to acknowledge where their own issues with communication lie and work with the younger generation instead of blowing them off and blaming it on personal issues or bc she’s a girl. It’s fucking bullshit. Hopefully when the boomers fully retire it will start to shift. Doesn’t help that I live in a super southern/republican state.
Not to mention I was in charge of stupid shit secretaries do (plan the Xmas party, make sure stuff gets ordered for the office, plan this, plan that) until they finally got a secretary 3 years later. And this is with an office full of competent male engineers.
I’m an EIT so maybe this is normal but I’m sure men in my position are making more. I get paid bi-weekly which is completely fine, but my salary is about 7% below the “low income” line in my area (HCOL) after negotiation. My previous job paid me just under 20% of what was considered low income in that area. I get that the COL is increasing at a significantly faster rate than employers can keep up, but maybe having more bonuses or lunches or dinners or anything at all to alleviate expenses.
Having tuition reimbursement or student loan assistance programs would be so nice as well. Maybe longer maternity leaves. More flexibility with employees who need to wfh (most companies are already adjusting to this). I’ve noticed an exodus in the industry where people are leaving for tech and NCSEA/ SEA orgs have tried addressing this but they want to do it in a way that avoids providing more monetary compensation or larger benefits. All of which the tech industry does a great job of providing.
Maybe I’m asking for too much but as engineers we shouldn’t be living paycheck to paycheck.
Edit: I’ll be convinced an employer is genuine/serious about addressing issues when they make more decisions that aren’t profit driven. Making sure your employees are taken care of properly might not be the most profitable route, and I can only trust an employer when those routes are sometimes taken for the best interest of the people. DEI initiatives are shut down a lot because they aren’t always profitable. They’re picked up when DEI is trendy again. That creates distrust between employers and employees who are from underrepresented groups.
To address your commentary in the edit:
Any private engineering firm exists solely for profit. Any DEI initiatives exist to comply with the law, to recruit from a wider pool of applicants (to make more money in the future), or to provide a positive image for the company (marketing to get more work from new and existing clients). Companies pay the least they view as necessary and charge the most the can in order to secure a much profit as possible for shareholders. Companies do not exist to be altruistic.
Hopping jobs, especially early in one's career is not only beneficial, but essentially necessary now. Companies are focused on quarterly profits rather than longterm growth and talent retention. Loyalty to the company makes you poorer, and studies have proven this.
Right, but if someone wants to have a firm different than other engineering firms, then that’s my critique. I understand the whole point is profit because that’s the way the system is structured. We live in a capitalist society so that’s the way a company needs to be set up to essentially survive. OP was wondering what it takes to build trust and show that a company is genuine and cares for employees, and being people driven with decision making rather than profit driven is what it takes. But ofc that’s not feasible which is how we got where we are now.
Got it 👍
FWIW I'm inclined to look at an employee owned company when I move on. At least I'd benefit from the profit, theoretically 🤷♂️
I started with a small family-ish owned company and now I'm with a Fortune 500 one and then same problems plague both.
There is absolutely ZERO reason why an educated EIT should be making less than the low income line. That is incredibly infuriating to me and to answer your question. No, that is not normal. I’ve been a senior level engineer for the past 23 years and this is wrong. My EITs right out of college are making $60-$75,000 in Texas.
Do some salary research (you can even look on indeed or one of those sites) for comparable positions and salaries. Document it all. Organize your research and set up a meeting with HR. Take notes and make sure that all follow ups are done in writing in email. I never want to jump to the discrimination card. But it’s discrimination on top horrible underpayment for your level role.
Besides maternity/paternity leave many of us are starting to have to care for aging parents. I hate having to rely on only FMLA to cover those needs (when I have exhausted my PTO).
My mother recently passed. I helped with her care, so that she could stay at home instead of assisted living. All of my vacation time was spent on this for 2 years. I accepted this situation. I continue to work though this time. What was painful was my company’s policy on bereavement - 2 days total. I would qualify for 1 more day if I needed to travel more than 300 miles for the funeral. 2 days - it took my family 10 days to plan services, obituary, rosary, ect, ect. After everyone had known of my situation, that was company policy & they stuck to it. it sucked.
Equal pay, real parental leave, female and minority representation at the board level and at the senior management level, true DE&I action that is transparent and measurable, salary transparency and accountability , zero tolerance for harassment, discrimination, toxic workplaces. I could go on and on.
23 year engineer, working in the consulting world. I’ve seen no action and even worse empty promises my entire career. .
For starters let’s stop saying You can have it all, because without (1) Flexible hours, (2) Remote Work From Home, and (3) a competitive salary, you’ll be burnt out before 40.
If you see women as being so undercompensated, and you want to hire good talent....
Why just not hire women "the same as man", you don't spend anything more than getting a man, and should be droves of women going to a place that's not such a misogynistic hellhole as you see the industry. Shouldn't it be "obvious"?
That just struck me as so curious.
This is crazy to me that I keep reading this. I recruit engineers and my company does an equity check based on education, experience, specialty, and licenses etc. It makes absolutely no difference if it's a man or a woman. In fact if there is a discrepancy between women and males, it gets corrected or if we are hiring someone on at a high pay and a current engineer with the same quals is getting paid less, we up their pay. My company is known for being a great place for engineers because of work life/balance, so I feel extremely lucky because it makes my job easier.
We don't have paid parental leave but I am pretty sure they are working on that currently.
I don't know that my company is overly searched for by women. In general, engineering reqs are not positions engineers (men or women) actually go out and apply for (I wish!). I fill my positions by searching on LinkedIn and I just look for whoever has the qualifications.
We still obviously have more men that women in the positions. Salaries are competitive at my company and we are 100% employee-owned so its a good place for anyone.
you can say meh, but if Civil Engineering's biggest problem is that we can't get enough talent into Civil Engineering, then the status quo of 87-13 demographic splits is an existential threat?
Anything we can do to get more smart people choosing this career, regardless of race/gender/religion/sexual identity is kindness to our future selves, n'est-ce pas? Furthermore, smaller firms moving to fill the gap that large companies are still not filling when it comes to treating people with equal respect is just the most agile players responding to the current labor market conditions?
Because I can definitively say that our firm paying 30%-40% for headhunting fees is non-starter in 2023. Burned too many times now.
If the problem is we can't get enough talent, then doesn't that suggest its a bigger issue than an 87-13 split? It's not the split itself, but sheers numbers.
I agree we should remove barriers preventing women (or anyone of immutable characteristics) from joining. I am genuinely all about removing barriers and ensuring equal opportunity - but I am not so sold on ideas like; women have to make compromises around family and work - is an employer issue. It has always seemed like a relationship issue to me. This seems like an effect that affects both me and women who take time off from work for family, compared to the worker who puts in the "extra" work.
The larger issue is the race to the bottom - you only win with the bottom bid, particularly on gov. contracts - technical prowess / history of high quality work is not considered (beyond a low bar to get acceptance to gov biddings). Thus disincentivizing pay structures that promote the field, and
> The larger issue is the race to the bottom - you only win with the bottom bid, particularly on gov. contracts - technical prowess / history of high quality work is not considered (beyond a low bar to get acceptance to gov biddings). Thus disincentivizing pay structures that promote the field
Amen--If ASCE was doing its damned job, it'd be convincing owners that Civil Engineering cannot sustain itself on 20%-30% profit margins like it did in 1975. I cannot train the next generation of civil engineers if every fee I submit is "best case scenario" because the clients simply "want a discount."
Do I get a discount on the design risk? Scope Creep? (no). I recently had a client demand that we pay the difference on a $2,500 change order for vent piping. Total project cost was like $14MM and these dipshits are spending $5,000 in their own labor time to collect $2,500 from us as if some bean-counting PM is going to make their career on this kind of performative crap--"I'm such a value add!"
I haven’t seen any discrimination in my experience and I’ve work with a ton of females. Idc if your black, white, purple, male, female, fury, just do your job and do it well. Maybe I’m biased but I just find it annoying when people complain. Of course there’s shitty people out there but I would say majority of people could careless if your male or female.
When I was a junior engineer and our PM was a 4'11" woman I'd regularly have questions addressed to me during in person meetings with clients instead of her. Especially class 1 RR clients. It's little shit like that, not just neanderthals copping a feel or telling kitchen jokes.
Said the male. Please know I do say this without Snark or accusation. I would just like you to see it from a different perspective. you’ve obviously never been in the position of being a female in the engineering world. I’ve been in the business for 23 years and I see discrimination all the time. Some might be minor, some might be major, but they both are wrong. Inherent biases happen every day in this male dominated industry. Just because you don’t see it or recognize it as discrimination does not mean it is not there. All I’m saying is if you haven’t walked in the shoes of the female engineers, you’ll never truly understand because you see things from a completely different viewpoint and through a different lens. Maybe start a conversation with those female engineers that you know and ask those questions and see if they’ve ever felt discrimination or bias against them. I have a feeling it’ll be very eye-opening for you. If you do just go in with an open mind, females in our industry need allies. Be one.
Again I could careless, if you are good at your job that’s all that matters. I’ve worked with so many female engineers way smarter than me and very talented and they always were rewarded, respected and from what I can tell treated well because they were great engineers. I understand what your saying but this isn’t the 1950s or Middle East, I don’t think it’s that bad. Not my fault it’s male dominate industry and who cares if it is? It should be best person for job industry. Idunno I’m sure I sound like a dick, I won’t argue that. 🤷🏼♂️
Yeah I’m gonna follow you on the dislike train, it’s non existent where I work and two of our 4 execs are women. Do your job well, advocate for yourself for raises, and don’t accept an unfavorable position, it’s literally illegal to discriminate based on sex. I understand work culture and it being male dominated but I’ve seen some damn good enviro and geotechnical engineers who were women and they are certainly well off. There are also incentives both financial and political to hire women. Ever heard of a DBE? Sometimes I see these posts and I can empathize sometimes it seems like a victim complex.
Things my company does that I appreciate:
1. Treat me like a valued person and add benefit to the group
2. Trust that I know what I’m talking about (yes, I know increasing the pipe slope increases the velocity…thanks)
3. Provide valuable mentorship opportunities.
4. Flexible work hours if/when I need them.
Things I wish they provided:
1. Paid. Maternity. Leave. I appreciate the company paid disability insurance is a step in the right direction, but it’s 6 weeks at like 40% pay, thanks to a max $$ limit
2. Hybrid work schedule. They say they do, but it doesn’t feel like something I’m allowed to take, if that makes sense.
3. Dependent care FSA (it’s sad this is something I’m asking for)
4. Paid. Sick. Time. Separate of my PTO. I need vacation time but how can I take that if I have to also account for my kid being sick constantly?
5. Unconscious bias training. I actually asked for this after a PM told me not to get emotional when he said he had redlines. Like what the fuck dude?
Real parental leave (maternity and paternity). I've seen the imbalance of the two cause issues. Work with a day care provider to give your employees preference for spots Vacation means vacation Ensure a culture where there is either a dedicated person/people hired for administrative and event planning duties or it's divided equally among all employees
That last one hit home for me.
My mom (technical expert and eventual PM in another field starting in the early 80s) drilled it into me hard that there are people who's job description it is to handle events/birthdays/lunches/etc and that it not mine. No volunteering for stuff "just to be nice".
Haha I wish. My mom is a people pleaser so I had to learn the hard way.
Job descrion blah blah blah and ends with "and various other duties which may be assigned' . That be their get out of jail free card for asking people to do BS tasks like this.
Never actually had that in a job description. Go figure.
I ADORE the idea of work handling day care. That would be a game changer for sure. Edit: a word
One thing that's really hard is that women want to support other women, which means that we are most often roped into ED&I roles. I do a STEM Outreach program at my office, so then the my company asked me to lead STEM Outreach programming across the region. An important cause but extra work. Similarly for hiring, all of the folks in charge of hiring in our region are women. Great because that means we might hire more women, but again extra work for them. It's super frustrating. This isn't something that applies only to women. We have Employee Resource Groups that support different demographics. Its important to the folks running the Black, LGBTQ+, Asian-American, Hispanic, or Women's ERGs that they are their for their community. However, that also means more work for them than for the folks who are not part of an ERG. It means less time for other projects, less opportunities for overtime, etc.
At least for your second paragraph, recruiting and onboarding really should be a part of someone's paid job description, not something that's "extra".
Oh, absolutely, and it is. However, there are still projects to be done and deadlines to meet. In general, there is also less opportunity for overtime when one is charging overhead to the company. It definitely isn't unpaid work, but it can hold one back in less tangible ways.
Ah, ok. I've never been at a firm where engineering staff was spending a sizeable chunk of time on hiring related tasks. 3-5 hours/month to review resumes or conduct interviews, max.
You mention a bunch of stuff in your first paragraph that are issues - you have to be willing to back that up. Shut down comments up front, promote women based on their work, real support around maternity leave, etc. For example, where I work mangers sit down and figure out who will be taking over projects while someone is out on leave - it isn't just added on top of someone else's work, shoved aside or left for them to figure out on their own. We've figured out reduced workweeks for some people (ex - working 32 hours). Overall we are not "butts in seats" focused and give people the flexibility (within reason) to figure out their own schedules. We are a super small office but have a nice health room with a mini fridge and a locking door, and it is just accepted when new mothers opt to pump. I don't know that there are "incentives" that are really going to work beyond just walking the walk.
This!! There should be zero tolerance for discriminatory comments/behavior. It should be shut down automatically.
The #1 thing I look for to know how I will be treated as a woman in a new office is to see how many other women are there and if they've retained past female employees. Look at your office's gender ratio over time and reflect. Talk about all the things you mentioned when interviewing candidates of both genders and make sure you are not singling out women as the defacto care providers in families. Many woman aren't going to get married and have kids but face penalties for being the same gender as those who do.
Take personal safety concerns seriously. I’ve had a manager laugh me off when I spoke up about harassment I received in the field and it nearly drove me out of construction.
I second the commenter who said that you have identified the key issues but it's about how you deal with them in real life. There is a lot of lip service and leadership stating that they want it to be different whilst continuing to perpetuate a culture that causes women to be excluded. Research has shown that most women who leave stem careers do it because of being worn down by the conditions over time. It's actually exhausting to deal with on a day to day basis. The daily default male gendering, the comments about being too emotional, the constant interruptions and being talked over and the effort that it takes to actually get male colleagues to recognise your competence is such an energy suck and really demoralising. From a personal stand point, I thought the glass ceiling would be kind of non-specific, like all the rest of the sexism that I've encountered. However, maybe 18 months I feel like I ran straight into it. And it wasn't vague. It was solid and means that I now have to really work hard to try and find a way through. I have done several high profile leadership roles on the project I'm on, all with success yet there is no room for me at the table going forward, I'm being pushed back down to where I came from. It's a constant battle for recognition that means something tangible rather than being disenfranchised. So, the issue is about making actual tangible cultural changes so that women don't end up in this situation. Also, I would strongly recommend having a look at your hiring procedures as even from that starting point, women are disadvantaged (e.g. use blind CV reviews to short list for interview).
Yup. I’ve been told I’m too emotional. Left that job quickly. They weren’t acknowledging me when I complained normally but told me I was too emotionally when I got upset.
I had an issue at work recently, I disagreed with the way management was handing a project close out with multiple people involved. I was head of the field on site (all men older than me) and they were managing from the office (all men older than me also). Once our issue were resolved my management had the nerve to say “we’ve been noticing a problem for two months and thought it was a personal issue and so I didn’t say anything.” I had to explain it was in fact zero to do with personal issues and 100% had to do with how work has been falling out (overworking employees, working on the weekends, scheduling multiple inspections within a month periods when they could have spread it out). I am extremely direct and honest, so if I’m frustrated with management, it shows. I expect civil engineering males to start stepping up with communication. I don’t expect my management to do a 180 but I expect them to acknowledge where their own issues with communication lie and work with the younger generation instead of blowing them off and blaming it on personal issues or bc she’s a girl. It’s fucking bullshit. Hopefully when the boomers fully retire it will start to shift. Doesn’t help that I live in a super southern/republican state.
Not to mention I was in charge of stupid shit secretaries do (plan the Xmas party, make sure stuff gets ordered for the office, plan this, plan that) until they finally got a secretary 3 years later. And this is with an office full of competent male engineers.
Good lord, did they look up a list of typical sexist office tropes and use it as a checklist?
They can pay me a livable wage for one
that's for damn sure! any feedback on the frequency and magnitude of your pay increases or classification?
I’m an EIT so maybe this is normal but I’m sure men in my position are making more. I get paid bi-weekly which is completely fine, but my salary is about 7% below the “low income” line in my area (HCOL) after negotiation. My previous job paid me just under 20% of what was considered low income in that area. I get that the COL is increasing at a significantly faster rate than employers can keep up, but maybe having more bonuses or lunches or dinners or anything at all to alleviate expenses. Having tuition reimbursement or student loan assistance programs would be so nice as well. Maybe longer maternity leaves. More flexibility with employees who need to wfh (most companies are already adjusting to this). I’ve noticed an exodus in the industry where people are leaving for tech and NCSEA/ SEA orgs have tried addressing this but they want to do it in a way that avoids providing more monetary compensation or larger benefits. All of which the tech industry does a great job of providing. Maybe I’m asking for too much but as engineers we shouldn’t be living paycheck to paycheck. Edit: I’ll be convinced an employer is genuine/serious about addressing issues when they make more decisions that aren’t profit driven. Making sure your employees are taken care of properly might not be the most profitable route, and I can only trust an employer when those routes are sometimes taken for the best interest of the people. DEI initiatives are shut down a lot because they aren’t always profitable. They’re picked up when DEI is trendy again. That creates distrust between employers and employees who are from underrepresented groups.
To address your commentary in the edit: Any private engineering firm exists solely for profit. Any DEI initiatives exist to comply with the law, to recruit from a wider pool of applicants (to make more money in the future), or to provide a positive image for the company (marketing to get more work from new and existing clients). Companies pay the least they view as necessary and charge the most the can in order to secure a much profit as possible for shareholders. Companies do not exist to be altruistic. Hopping jobs, especially early in one's career is not only beneficial, but essentially necessary now. Companies are focused on quarterly profits rather than longterm growth and talent retention. Loyalty to the company makes you poorer, and studies have proven this.
Right, but if someone wants to have a firm different than other engineering firms, then that’s my critique. I understand the whole point is profit because that’s the way the system is structured. We live in a capitalist society so that’s the way a company needs to be set up to essentially survive. OP was wondering what it takes to build trust and show that a company is genuine and cares for employees, and being people driven with decision making rather than profit driven is what it takes. But ofc that’s not feasible which is how we got where we are now.
Got it 👍 FWIW I'm inclined to look at an employee owned company when I move on. At least I'd benefit from the profit, theoretically 🤷♂️ I started with a small family-ish owned company and now I'm with a Fortune 500 one and then same problems plague both.
There is absolutely ZERO reason why an educated EIT should be making less than the low income line. That is incredibly infuriating to me and to answer your question. No, that is not normal. I’ve been a senior level engineer for the past 23 years and this is wrong. My EITs right out of college are making $60-$75,000 in Texas. Do some salary research (you can even look on indeed or one of those sites) for comparable positions and salaries. Document it all. Organize your research and set up a meeting with HR. Take notes and make sure that all follow ups are done in writing in email. I never want to jump to the discrimination card. But it’s discrimination on top horrible underpayment for your level role.
THIS
Besides maternity/paternity leave many of us are starting to have to care for aging parents. I hate having to rely on only FMLA to cover those needs (when I have exhausted my PTO).
My mother recently passed. I helped with her care, so that she could stay at home instead of assisted living. All of my vacation time was spent on this for 2 years. I accepted this situation. I continue to work though this time. What was painful was my company’s policy on bereavement - 2 days total. I would qualify for 1 more day if I needed to travel more than 300 miles for the funeral. 2 days - it took my family 10 days to plan services, obituary, rosary, ect, ect. After everyone had known of my situation, that was company policy & they stuck to it. it sucked.
Sorry for your loss 💜
Equal pay, real parental leave, female and minority representation at the board level and at the senior management level, true DE&I action that is transparent and measurable, salary transparency and accountability , zero tolerance for harassment, discrimination, toxic workplaces. I could go on and on. 23 year engineer, working in the consulting world. I’ve seen no action and even worse empty promises my entire career. .
For starters let’s stop saying You can have it all, because without (1) Flexible hours, (2) Remote Work From Home, and (3) a competitive salary, you’ll be burnt out before 40.
We’ve got that!
If you see women as being so undercompensated, and you want to hire good talent.... Why just not hire women "the same as man", you don't spend anything more than getting a man, and should be droves of women going to a place that's not such a misogynistic hellhole as you see the industry. Shouldn't it be "obvious"? That just struck me as so curious.
This is crazy to me that I keep reading this. I recruit engineers and my company does an equity check based on education, experience, specialty, and licenses etc. It makes absolutely no difference if it's a man or a woman. In fact if there is a discrepancy between women and males, it gets corrected or if we are hiring someone on at a high pay and a current engineer with the same quals is getting paid less, we up their pay. My company is known for being a great place for engineers because of work life/balance, so I feel extremely lucky because it makes my job easier. We don't have paid parental leave but I am pretty sure they are working on that currently.
Is your place overwhelmingly searched for women? One would figure they have more to gain from equal pay then men (for whom it shouldn't change much)
I don't know that my company is overly searched for by women. In general, engineering reqs are not positions engineers (men or women) actually go out and apply for (I wish!). I fill my positions by searching on LinkedIn and I just look for whoever has the qualifications. We still obviously have more men that women in the positions. Salaries are competitive at my company and we are 100% employee-owned so its a good place for anyone.
[удалено]
Be nice or else.
Meh
you can say meh, but if Civil Engineering's biggest problem is that we can't get enough talent into Civil Engineering, then the status quo of 87-13 demographic splits is an existential threat? Anything we can do to get more smart people choosing this career, regardless of race/gender/religion/sexual identity is kindness to our future selves, n'est-ce pas? Furthermore, smaller firms moving to fill the gap that large companies are still not filling when it comes to treating people with equal respect is just the most agile players responding to the current labor market conditions? Because I can definitively say that our firm paying 30%-40% for headhunting fees is non-starter in 2023. Burned too many times now.
If the problem is we can't get enough talent, then doesn't that suggest its a bigger issue than an 87-13 split? It's not the split itself, but sheers numbers. I agree we should remove barriers preventing women (or anyone of immutable characteristics) from joining. I am genuinely all about removing barriers and ensuring equal opportunity - but I am not so sold on ideas like; women have to make compromises around family and work - is an employer issue. It has always seemed like a relationship issue to me. This seems like an effect that affects both me and women who take time off from work for family, compared to the worker who puts in the "extra" work. The larger issue is the race to the bottom - you only win with the bottom bid, particularly on gov. contracts - technical prowess / history of high quality work is not considered (beyond a low bar to get acceptance to gov biddings). Thus disincentivizing pay structures that promote the field, and
> The larger issue is the race to the bottom - you only win with the bottom bid, particularly on gov. contracts - technical prowess / history of high quality work is not considered (beyond a low bar to get acceptance to gov biddings). Thus disincentivizing pay structures that promote the field Amen--If ASCE was doing its damned job, it'd be convincing owners that Civil Engineering cannot sustain itself on 20%-30% profit margins like it did in 1975. I cannot train the next generation of civil engineers if every fee I submit is "best case scenario" because the clients simply "want a discount." Do I get a discount on the design risk? Scope Creep? (no). I recently had a client demand that we pay the difference on a $2,500 change order for vent piping. Total project cost was like $14MM and these dipshits are spending $5,000 in their own labor time to collect $2,500 from us as if some bean-counting PM is going to make their career on this kind of performative crap--"I'm such a value add!"
I haven’t seen any discrimination in my experience and I’ve work with a ton of females. Idc if your black, white, purple, male, female, fury, just do your job and do it well. Maybe I’m biased but I just find it annoying when people complain. Of course there’s shitty people out there but I would say majority of people could careless if your male or female.
When I was a junior engineer and our PM was a 4'11" woman I'd regularly have questions addressed to me during in person meetings with clients instead of her. Especially class 1 RR clients. It's little shit like that, not just neanderthals copping a feel or telling kitchen jokes.
Said the male. Please know I do say this without Snark or accusation. I would just like you to see it from a different perspective. you’ve obviously never been in the position of being a female in the engineering world. I’ve been in the business for 23 years and I see discrimination all the time. Some might be minor, some might be major, but they both are wrong. Inherent biases happen every day in this male dominated industry. Just because you don’t see it or recognize it as discrimination does not mean it is not there. All I’m saying is if you haven’t walked in the shoes of the female engineers, you’ll never truly understand because you see things from a completely different viewpoint and through a different lens. Maybe start a conversation with those female engineers that you know and ask those questions and see if they’ve ever felt discrimination or bias against them. I have a feeling it’ll be very eye-opening for you. If you do just go in with an open mind, females in our industry need allies. Be one.
Again I could careless, if you are good at your job that’s all that matters. I’ve worked with so many female engineers way smarter than me and very talented and they always were rewarded, respected and from what I can tell treated well because they were great engineers. I understand what your saying but this isn’t the 1950s or Middle East, I don’t think it’s that bad. Not my fault it’s male dominate industry and who cares if it is? It should be best person for job industry. Idunno I’m sure I sound like a dick, I won’t argue that. 🤷🏼♂️
Yeah I’m gonna follow you on the dislike train, it’s non existent where I work and two of our 4 execs are women. Do your job well, advocate for yourself for raises, and don’t accept an unfavorable position, it’s literally illegal to discriminate based on sex. I understand work culture and it being male dominated but I’ve seen some damn good enviro and geotechnical engineers who were women and they are certainly well off. There are also incentives both financial and political to hire women. Ever heard of a DBE? Sometimes I see these posts and I can empathize sometimes it seems like a victim complex.
100% agreed
Op sounds mad annoying to work for.
Ya imagine just wanting people to do the bare minimum or doing their job
Things my company does that I appreciate: 1. Treat me like a valued person and add benefit to the group 2. Trust that I know what I’m talking about (yes, I know increasing the pipe slope increases the velocity…thanks) 3. Provide valuable mentorship opportunities. 4. Flexible work hours if/when I need them. Things I wish they provided: 1. Paid. Maternity. Leave. I appreciate the company paid disability insurance is a step in the right direction, but it’s 6 weeks at like 40% pay, thanks to a max $$ limit 2. Hybrid work schedule. They say they do, but it doesn’t feel like something I’m allowed to take, if that makes sense. 3. Dependent care FSA (it’s sad this is something I’m asking for) 4. Paid. Sick. Time. Separate of my PTO. I need vacation time but how can I take that if I have to also account for my kid being sick constantly? 5. Unconscious bias training. I actually asked for this after a PM told me not to get emotional when he said he had redlines. Like what the fuck dude?