Do Babies Matter? Gender and Family in the Ivory Tower with Mary Ann Mason

– [Announcer] This program is presented by University of California Television. Like what you learn? Visit our website, or follow
us on Facebook and Twitter to keep up with the latest UCTV programs. Also, make sure to check out and subscribe to our YouTube original
channel, UCTV Prime, available only on YouTube. (light music) – I’m Margaret Chowning, a
member of the History Department but also more relevant
for today’s meeting, Chair of the Moses Lectureship Committee. We are pleased, along with
the graduate division, to present Mary Ann
Mason, this year’s speaker in the Bernard Moses
Memorial Lecture Series. As a condition of
Professor Moses’s bequest, we are obligated to tell
you how the endowment supporting the lectures
came to UC Berkeley. In 1937, University of
California president Robert Gordon Sproul and
the UC Board of Regents established the Bernard
Moses Memorial Lectureship in the Social Sciences. The Lectureship honors
the memory of the late Bernard Moses, a professor
of history and political science at the University of California from 1875 to 1911, and
an emeritus professor from 1911 until his death in 1930. Professor Moses earned
a worldwide reputation for his contributions to understanding the problems of the
Latin American republics, and he was a pioneer scholar
of Latin American history. Professor Moses served as a
member of the United States Philippine Commission from 1900 to 1904. Past lecturers have
included Herma Hill Kay, Lloyd Ulman, Nicholas
Riasanovsky, George Lakoff, Kenneth Stampp, Eugene Hammel, Ken Jowitt, Carolyn Merchant, Jean
Lave, and Emmanuel Saez. Now I’d like to say a few
words about today’s lecturer, Mary Ann Mason. Professor Mason is currently a professor of the graduate school,
and faculty co-director of the Earl Warren Institute
for Law and Social Policy at the UC Berkeley School of Law. Mason is an influential force in the areas of family law, policy,
and child custody issues. Her lecture today, in part inspired by her forthcoming book, Do Babies Matter? Gender and Family in the Ivory Tower, which according to Amazon
is coming out in May, does that sound right? – [Mary Ann] July. – July. (laughs) This book will ask why
female doctoral graduates do not follow the same
career trajectories as men after receiving their degrees. Drawing on 12 years of
research, Mason traces the effect of family formation
on women from graduate school through retirement. This follows on her more
recent work concerning the issues that professional
women face in law, medicine, science, and academia. Mary Ann Mason received
her PhD in American History from the University of Rochester, and a JD from the University of San Francisco. After teaching American
History and practicing law, Mason joined the faculty
of UC Berkeley in 1989, and served as a professor
in the Graduate School of Social Welfare until 2007. Between the year 2000 and
2007 Mason served as the first woman dean of the Graduate
Division at UC Berkeley. She was and is a strong
advocate for graduate student diversity, equity for student parents, and career life balance for all faculty. Her research is a foundation
for UC’s system-wide initiatives, including the
UC Family Friendly Edge, and the nationwide nine presidents
summit on gender equity. Please join me in welcoming
Professor Mary Ann Mason. (applause) – Thank you, Margaret. I’m very honored to be the
Moses lecturer this year, and to be able to speak to my family, my Berkeley family, my favorite people. And my actual biological
family is here as well, where are you? You didn’t sneak out already. (laughs) My daughter Eva and my husband Paul. I’m particularly glad to
be here because as Margaret mentioned this actually
represents 12 years of research, and you have been my experimental subjects for most of this time, as you will learn. So you might be able to
see yourself in some of these pictures and charts and graphs, because we have been studying
you, and the whole UC system. This started actually when I first became the Graduate Dean at
Berkeley in the year 2000. And I have to say, as an old 70s feminist, I was thrilled to see that
a little more than 50% of the entering class were women. Unbelievably exciting to me. Thought we’d never see
this in my lifetime. The graduate students were
less impressed because that’s what they grew up
with, they didn’t realize how different things had been. So as you can see from
this, in terms of the rise of women PhDs, in 1973
it’s 20%, and now it’s actually a little more than 50%. I got a PhD in 1973, actually, and it was only 12% of
my class were women, so that doesn’t surprise me. I got a law degree after
that, and only 10% of my class were women, now law
school is well over 50%, and certainly graduate degrees in history, as you know, are probably
over 60% as well. So things have changed greatly. Amazing, within my lifetime
to see such change. And it’s not just overall,
it’s also in the sciences, which everyone said was going to be stuck in wherever forever, but in fact, since 1973 you’ve seen huge
growth in lots of fields. In psychology it’s 71% now. Even in the field of
engineering of all places, it’s over 22%, coming
from zero that’s a really pretty good jump. And similarly you have
geoscience, and math and science are really going up very fast. Altogether about a little
less than 30% of all PhDs in the sciences are now granted to women. So this is enormously impressive progress. However, I looked around me
and there are some issues here. So this is a test. And the winner either
gets Starbucks or bourbon, depending on your predilection. So what do you think
this diagram resembles? I mean the figure on the
right has got kind of a masculine hulk to him, and the woman on the right’s got those little
bulgy hips, it’s hard to know. So what do you think it is? Start at the top, it’s the easiest. The two heads there,
there’s the 987 and the 325. And this is Berkeley. And Paul you probably know the answer. (laughs) Anybody else want to
guess what this might be? The heads. No, actually, tenure track professors. We’re kind of a shrinking faculty. 987 to 325 of tenure track,
that includes assistant as well as associate and full. And the most important story here though, as it is in general in higher education, are the necks. You see that women have
tiny heads and thick-ish necks compared with
the little skinny necks that the men have. What do you think the neck is? Yes? Adjuncts, part-time,
lecturers on this campus. Doesn’t include graduate
students, just the adjuncts, part-time, and lecturers. Now the necks are the fastest growing part of higher education. It’s really a stunning figure
in the other direction, not a good direction. About 20 years ago
something like 58% of all undergraduates were taught by tenure track professors and now that’s down to 37%, and going down further. The model has been to
shrink the professoriate and raise the basically
the fungible workplace, the workplace that is
cheap and can move on. Now this is only Berkeley,
because we’re not really doing this with the other slides, but what do you think
the 3000 and 4000 are? Pardon me? They’re a lot of, could
be the graduate students, you’re right, but it’s not. It’s actually the staff. And the staff have,
because there are a lot of technical people, and
people who work in the labs, the men have higher paid
jobs, so those are the broad shoulders, and women not so much. And then at the bottom,
the female bulge there, there are lots of, at a school like this, residence workers and
restaurant workers, et cetera, who are women. So this is the face of Berkeley. But it actually is the face
of most American corporations. And certainly all other
major universities. I’ve had people look at this diagram and do their own, and it’s very similar. It’s what happened since
the feminist revolution. Huge numbers of women in the workplace, but taking the bottom half. And with some representation at the top, but not too much, much more
in the middle management, the neck positions, in the corporate world and in our world it’s
basically the gypsy scholars. This is a little distressing,
I knew this of course, it wasn’t a great surprise to me. And I wanted to look at it more carefully, for my students to see
what was going to happen, and more importantly, for
the university to see it and to take some steps. So what happens to men and
women after they get their PhDs? How does having babies affect tenure? We had a wonderful data set to use. How many PhDs are in this audience? There you go, I knew it, I
knew there’d be a lot of you. So every one of you,
if you got a PhD before or after 1973, filled
it out once, the survey of earned doctorate. We don’t let you graduate
from the graduate division unless you fill out that survey. So that’s the base, and 10%
of all PhDs are followed through every two years,
until they are 76, dead, or have left the country. It’s very hard to escape
NSF, just don’t even try. So that is 160,000
participants, and arguably, it is the best employment
longitudinal database that we have in America. You can ask questions from
this database that you’re not gonna find even for
instance, for doctors, or lawyers, they don’t
have this kind of database. So we’re really fortunate,
’cause you can really pinpoint when and how family
formation makes a difference. Who gets tenure? Do you see the old familiar
heads and necks again? So what is it? Well we can see the guy on the right here. Guy, we’re used to thinking
he’s a guy now, in blue. 78% of those who go into
academia of the men get tenure. And 22% go into the second
tier, part-time faculty, non-tenure faculty, those are the fathers. The fathers actually,
married men, do better than anyone else in the university in terms of promoting up the ladder. They do better than single
men, they do better than single women, they do a lot better than married women with children. The women with late or
no babies do pretty well, they’re kind of in between, 71%. And they have a somewhat bigger neck. Late or no babies, by our definition, late is really about over age 40, because it’s anytime time
post-PhD, five years post-PhD, the average PhD is now given at age 34, so you’re really flirting around age 40 when you’re talking about a late baby. So anything over 40 would be a late baby, there aren’t too many of those. There’s no difference between a late baby over 40 or an early baby, but early babies make a huge difference. And this is anytime, again,
before about the age of 40. And you can see that the
women who have the big necks are disproportionately
married women with children. Now, the interesting part
is, here’s the science world. Same pattern. As you’ll find out, things are tougher for women in science in some
ways, but the patterns are remarkably similar to what happens in the humanities and social sciences. In this case you see smaller
numbers because there are fewer scientists to begin with, so the heads and necks and whatever, are disproportionately,
it’s 3000 and 3000. And then the men have the same big heads, and same looking neck. In this case, however, the
women with late or no babies in science do not do that well. They actually have a lot
of trouble getting tenure, even if they don’t have babies. And those who have babies
do pretty miserably, 53% to 77%. So this is the way academia
has been playing out, and it hasn’t changed much,
these kinds of images, probably for the last 10 years or so, it’s been fairly stable. Now looking at it a different way, it shows kind of a timeline here of falling out of the pipeline. And this is again, everybody,
it’s not just the scientists. And you see the biggest
leak in the pipeline, and this is true in science as well, is before taking that first
assistant professor job. Women are likely to drop out
as you’ll see in a moment, as post-docs, or change their
minds as graduate students. They’ve already decided,
hell no, I won’t go, and don’t take that. It’s the pool promise, we call it. Because when you’re trying
to hire for a new position, you find you don’t have as
many women applying for it proportional to the numbers. So this is a familiar one. And then women are 27%
less likely to become associate professors, in other words, they just don’t get tenure. And women, leg-in and
those slow, slow years of being an associate professor forever, so 20% less likely after 16 years of being an associate professor
to be a full professor. So you see it all the way up, but for women in general it’s
really the younger years, the post-docs and the graduate
students where you see the biggest change, they just don’t enter the pipeline at all. Here you have women in science. Now the interesting part
about women in science is that they, single women actually, take that first job, that
first tenure track job, just about in the same
proportion as married fathers do. So they’re really at an
even keel up to that point. And then single women take a big tumble and don’t get tenure. But the interesting part about it, it’s not just the mother effect. There are more complicated
things going on in science. I think the, I have
been studying with women scientists now for the
last two or three years, and the complexity of the implicit bias and the stereotyping and
the gender discrimination are really quite serious in the sciences. They’re across the board
but not quite as much as in the science. And in the sciences,
married mothers are 35% less likely than married
fathers to take a tenure track, and married mothers drop out 27% less than married fathers with young
children to become tenure. So scientists take a
bigger hit, no question, with motherhood. But it’s not just
scientists who take the hit, the patterns are there, it’s
just tougher in science. And I think the women,
are there women scientists in this room? Is that your perception? Yes. (laughs) It is. And I think women scientists get much more discouraged in early age,
so they’re more likely to drop out, which is what
we’re really trying to aim at. These are post-docs, now
in the UC system we have just about as many post-docs
as we have doctoral students in all the system itself,
about 8000 of them I think. And the most dramatic
thing, we actually have tons of data on our UC post-docs,
because in addition to the survey of doctorate
recipients we did several original studies,
this is where you’re probably part of it. How many are faculty members here? There we go. In 2003 there was a UC family survey, which became our backbone
and has been brought up to date really by the climate survey. And then in 2005 we did
all the doctoral students, how many doctoral students in the office? In the office. (laughs) Okay, you might have done
this, or you might not have been here in 2005. And then in 2007 we did the post-docs, we had this whole series. Again, the biggest data
set for these classes of workers of any in the United States, no one has that kind of
data for graduate students, post-docs, or faculty. That gives you a kind of heft and power. But it’s a distinct drop
off there, 41% who have a new child since they became a post-doc, say they changed their
opinion and they’re no longer going to become a research scientist at an academic institution. 41%, versus fathers who become children. Who become children. (laughter) I didn’t say that. Who have children, right, right. And those who had children
previous to a post-doc, again you see a big slide,
they just find the post-doc years just too tough. Other kinds of criteria when we measured, the women with children
are far less likely to go to conferences,
which is the lifeblood of networking and getting a job. They’re far less likely to
have a good relationship with their mentor, which
is not very helpful either ’cause your
mentor is the person who most helps you through life. So post-docs have a serious disadvantage. And show it by just dropping
out of the pipeline. For scientists I think
that’s really critical, ’cause we spend about half
a million dollars, at least, to educate, the federal government does, to educate scientists through their PhD, and their post-doc, and then they leave, just because we don’t do
much to help them stay. So it’s really not a
very good use of funds. And this is our graduate students. Now you all I’m sure know the
graduate students quite well. They change their career goal as well. We did a snapshot, but we asked them, have you changed your career
goals since you entered? And at the beginning of
entering their post-doc, not their post-doc, their
graduate program, women, 46%, wanted to be a professor
in a research institution. But if they had a baby,
and these are all women in the sciences, that number
absolutely plummeted to 11%. Basically getting rid of all the mothers who had babies as doctoral students. For fathers, beginning number was 58%. And that went down to 45%. So it had an effect, but
not the drastic effect that childbirth has. So childbirth is really, the
major reason I think why, in certainly the
sciences, the women do not look as strong as men
going through the pipeline. They start out pretty well, 30%, and then they go down pretty rapidly. Okay. Now here, these are our own
sweet graduate students, and you’ve probably
heard remarks like this, or maybe you haven’t, from women, all uniformly, in just the
comments, the freehand comments. I wanna be able to have
a family, have children, enjoy being a mother and
wife, which are close to impossible when one chooses academia. The clock is ticking
and it will not stop for anything or anyone. And then, here we see the guy. Fed up with the
narrow-mindedness of supposedly intelligent people who
are largely workaholic and expect others to be so as well. He’s sick of it too. So both men and women change their mind, but women more than men, and almost always for family reasons, a significant
difference in that regard. And it’s true that both men and women, the majority, believe
that their university, which is one of our UCs, is
not at all family-friendly. So we don’t have a good example. How many of you have had
women graduate students say, I don’t wanna live your life? (laughs) Doesn’t do well as an example. So here’s a repeat of this
first part of the study. Again, this is over many many studies, and over several years, but
just compiling together. Married mothers are 35% less likely to enter tenure track
jobs than married fathers. Married mothers are 27% less
likely to achieve tenure than married fathers. And mothers often make
their decisions early. Twice as many women than men are likely to change their career
goal away from being a research professor when
they have babies as post-docs. High percentage of mothers
slide into the second tier, the neck, the part-time,
adjunct, and lecturer corps. The gypsy scholars of
the university world. And I was a gypsy scholar for a while, anyone else been a gypsy
scholar in this class? There you go. It is the least well-paid,
least respected, high educated discipline in this country in terms of a job, it really
is just at the bottom of the bill, no respect, no money,
no continuity, et cetera. And yet you find so many women and men, but largely women, doing it because it’s really the only way they can continue on in the university, or think it is. And then, after several years, we’d gotten this pretty well organized, and figured women were
dropping out, et cetera. It occurred to me, and
several others actually, that there was another
important question to address. That equity was not just
looking at the numbers of women compared with men who get tenure, it was also looking at
the family formation of those professors. What did women have to
give up if they wanted to go all the way? What was the effect of
career on family formation? Taking the question on its head. And here you see it even more drastically than you see it in terms of the numbers. These are across all
fields, tenured faculty. And the discrepancy between
men and women is huge. Married women with children, 44%. Married with children 70% for men. Women are twice as likely to be single. The only group that is more similar are married without children,
but the marriage penalty, not the marriage penalty,
the tenure penalty for fertility is very high. And here you see it in the sciences, this is a better drawn diagram
and you get the scale of it. Because as you can see,
women are a little teeny ball up there, a little teeny satellite around a huge moon, as the men are
much larger in the science, but you see it this way,
you see both the numbers and the fact that there’s a discrepancy. A double gender equity issue, a discrepancy in having children. So in here, in sciences, it’s 73% to 53%. Interestingly enough, women
scientists are more likely to be married than women in
humanities and social sciences. Anyone have a guess at why that might be? The numbers are good, the
proportionate numbers. You’re outnumbered by men all the time, so the odds are good. But as they say, the goods might be odd, as they say in a lot of schools. But nonetheless, so they
have a little bit better advantage in terms of
being married mothers, actually, than fathers do. And so many of them
have already dropped out that you’re not seeing of
course, the whole thing. Single mothers, eight percent, and married without children 15%. Basically, getting
divorced is also an area where it’s a lot of discrepancy. As you can see, ladder
rank women are the most likely to be divorced,
and the least likely to be divorced are the second tier women. Because they have chosen that life, because they can’t afford to be divorced, I don’t know, but it clearly
is a different pattern for second tier women. And this is really quite interesting, it’s the census data, and it compares women faculty with women
lawyers to women doctors. And women faculty are
really much less likely to have children, as you can see. However, women in
medicine do almost as well as all college educated women. And that seems to be contradictory, ’cause we know how hard
it is, and what the time dimensions are for women in medicine. But as one of my friends
said, who was a resident at the time, she said,
Mary Ann, we just have to put in the hours, we
don’t have to get tenure. So by the time they’re in their residency they don’t have the
pressure of publication, which is a very different
kind of thing for women. And they also have something
to look forward to. I think medicine is
really unrolling itself as being a far more flexible
career track for women. They have a lot of HMOs,
or places like Kaiser, where people can work
50%, 60% and still have high status, high salary, et cetera. It’s also true that women
are more likely to be family doctors or things
that are not high prestige like surgeons, et cetera. So there’s a little bit
of a second tier effect, but nonetheless, and they
actually earn 50% less than men because they work fewer hours, but still they can maintain their career and not be washed out. Only five percent of
women doctors actually leave practicing medicine. Which is quite astounding. And they have more children. They have more children in part
because they’re also richer. (laughs) This is the problem with, what’s the name of the woman in, who just, the woman in Silicon Valley who took the job all
pregnant, what’s her name? (crowd murmurs) That’s right. I mean, she has a baby and
she says there’s no problem here but then she also has a
staff of God knows how many, so this is, and Cheryl Sandberg as well. So it’s very easy for women who are in that position to say, of course you can do, just lean in. Just lean in, just be tough about it. And I think most academic
women do not have that luxury. Unless you’re married to
someone in Silicon Valley, which most of us aren’t. (laughter) So again, the years from
20 to 30 in all professions are really the make or break years. You have to make it in your profession, whether you’re a lawyer, a doctor, but even more so as an academic. Because you don’t usually
get a second chance. If you don’t get tenure,
you’re likely not to stay in the academic market. And it’s a very intense and
clear five, six, seven years. So although it’s true in all professions, it’s even more intense for women
in the academic profession. I call it the make or break decade. And now you can see in
terms of childbirth here, the little long line
there is the hire date. And at that age most people
are around 35 these days. 35, 36. And then you see the men and
women, these are the years which they have children,
this is the percentage of children they have. Now men have children,
babies, early and often. And through their
assistant professor years, to the right of the hire date, they have a lot of children. Women, more slowly and
only one year do they make a big burst, and that’s four to six years. That’s the tenure year. They’ve got their case in, and now it’s time to have the baby, and then after that it
goes down fairly quickly. So the tenure year has
been the most popular year. The problem with that is the tenure year comes later and later
than it did in the past. So it’s often over 40 and it’s
waiting quite a long time, so you see that it goes down very quickly. Now surprisingly, how can this be? 20 or more years pass being hired, you have a little boomlet
here on the right, what could that possibly be? It’s all men too. The second marriage, yes. A familiar story. Although I have to tell you something, I’m not gonna talk about retirement, but the one factor out
of retirement which is kind of interesting, there
isn’t much difference between men and women in terms of the age at which they retire, with the exception of those who still have
children in the household. Don’t retire, can’t ever retire. And that is largely going to be men, so that’s the only
differential you really see at the end of the career. Here again, just summing it up. Only one in three women without children who takes a fast track university
job ever become mothers. That’s if you enter a tenure
track job without children, you’re not likely to have children. It’s also because of the
age and other things. Women are far less likely to be married with children than are men. 53% to 73%. Women who achieve tenure are
more than twice as likely than men who achieve tenure to be single 12 years out from PhD. Now I’m really sorry there are students in this audience because
this is when the hankies come out, it just sounds so hopeless. But you will see there is
good news following this. It’s not as bad as it seems. And if married, women are
significantly more likely than men to experience
divorce or separation. (sighs) Now it’s getting sadder. Women faculty were more
than twice as likely as men faculty to indicate they wished they could have had more children. That was actually from
our UC faculty survey. Now, can you read this? I can’t believe I forgot to have children. (laughter) Now most of you probably
don’t remember the 80s, but those of you who do, this was a shirt that was very popular,
and it was a backlash against the feminist movement. You know, you’ve given up motherhood. And the thing that’s sad
about it is there’s still some truth to it, more
than some truth to it. That it hasn’t quite worked out the way that we had hoped it would
in terms of having children. Having it all, as they
say, is very difficult. And we are making progress
though, as you will see. I’m just recapitulating
about the family status of tenure faculty, all field. That is, it’s a double
equity problem because it’s both the number of
women who are full professors and also the family
configuration of those who are. So it’s double trouble, as I think of it. And here again are the women scientists, with their little orbs going around. So until we actually reach
equity in both areas, we can’t say that we have
reached any kind of equity in terms of the university world. Now what are your next steps? The good news is we actually
in the last 10 years, have been very active ones for Berkeley, for the UC system, and for
pretty much all universities. There’s been a lot of positive action and things are happening every day, and largely good things,
to make the workplace more flexible, to change the culture, and to try to keep our women
students in the pipeline and not let babies derail them. This is compiling all
together all the many kinds of workplace strategies,
and I’m happy to say that Berkeley now has
pretty much all of them. We have in terms of leaves, parental leave for mothers and fathers,
as you probably know, there’s an active service modified duty of one semester for mothers,
two semesters for mothers, and one for dads, if they are significant, or generally fair about the
distribution of child care, they have to be doing it at
least the 50% of the time. And as you may have
noticed in your department, the men are taking this. This is not something that
is unappreciated or unknown. We have centralized funding for maternity or parental leaves, that
was important as well because some departments
resent it very much if they have to pay
money to hire lecturers, so that was made part
of the original deal. And these are all part of
a number of initiatives that started in 2003,
2004, after we’d published our initial studies it
became a very important political campaign to
take this to Atkinson, and then to take it to the chancellors, and then to take it to
the deans, et cetera. To sell the fact that we wanted to have centralized, flexible,
family friendly policies. And we put in place a great number of them between 2004 and 2005. There was a real fight over some of these. The one that was most
contentious was the part time tenure track, and now for
family reasons you can have a part time, pre-tenure
or post-tenure track of up to five years. According to regents rules
you have to have tenure by the time you’ve been here 10 years, so that’s sort of the
upper limit for pre-tenure. But for post-tenure
it’s usually five years, sometimes it can be longer. People have family needs
altering their life. They have them with their
spouse, with themselves, with their families, et cetera. So it’s a lifelong issue. And that’s the way we actually
managed to get that through because the faculty
were convinced that they also might have needs for
themselves or their spouse, et cetera, not so much with the baby, certainly the men were
not thinking so much that, but they knew that that would happen. And we were very definite about getting some sort of parental leave or recognition for fathers, because when
we do the 2003 survey of faculty, we found that there
had been some good policies on the books way from
the 1980s, but 52% of the mothers who were eligible
didn’t know they existed. And something like 70% of the
dads didn’t know they existed. So mothers rarely took
them, if they didn’t they said it was partly because, those who did know about them, they were afraid that
they would be considered not a strong player, that
it would marginalize them. And men didn’t take them at all, it was just sort of an unknown thing. So in order to change it
to allow women to do it, we want men to get in there. So much of this has been
focused on men as well. Stop the clock for promotions, that’s pretty much the default. Now you have to ask to keep it going. So most people do take stop the clock, not all but most do. And the same thing for fathers. And the part time track as I said, is for mothers and fathers. When we first looked into this, ’cause it wasn’t clear
that there was a part time way of doing this, we
found that on the 10 UC campuses there were a very large number of part time professors. But were they mothers? No, they were largely
engineers or chemists who were starting their own company, and they wanted to keep
their foot in the door and keep their half time job
but also start their company. Very very prominent pattern
in many of the departments. So we thought, if they can do it, everybody else could do it. So we did the part time, pre-tenure track. And the battle came
down to, well how do you actually judge them, and
finally the academic senate, the system wide academic senate, decided in its wisdom
that as long as they had the same kind of publications
they would if they came through at a normal time,
then they were up for tenure. Wasn’t going to cut down the number. Numbers were the same,
they just couldn’t do it in twice the time if they wanted to. Childcare. We have worked very hard on
childcare, everyone does. We have the wonderful new
childcare center at Haste, and we have gotten dependent
care travel grants, both for faculty and for
graduate students as well. And in terms of graduate
students, childcare is a real problem, particularly infant care. We do give, at this university, a five to seven thousand
dollar student bonus for the student parents to be able to use as they like, which helps alleviate it, and a number of graduate
students have their babies in the infant care center. And emergency childcare. This is new, but it is,
most of these things are not that expensive, actually. In fact when we were
looking at maternity leave for graduate students, I
took it to Bob Birgeneau and I said, you know, we can do this, it’s not gonna be that much money. He said, well how much money is it? And I’m no mathematician, I promise you. But on the back of the
envelope I’d figured out the number of graduate
students who were likely to have babies that year,
and we have a lot of graduate students, but still the
number is relatively small, and the little bit of money it would cost, since it’s only for six
weeks and they’re paid almost nothing anyway,
so it was going to be fairly small, so altogether
I think it came out, the highest possibly it
could be 50, and the lowest was going to be 15 or something
and he said, let’s do it. ‘Cause the money just is not that big, there’s always this notion
that somehow we can’t afford these things when
in fact most of them are very affordable. All of these things are fairly affordable. Emergency childcare, the same way. It’s quite affordable. And it gives peace of mind I
think to all mothers on campus. Having the rules alone
don’t do you much good, as we discovered in 2003
when people weren’t using the policies and there was no acceptance of any kind of flexibility
for mothers or fathers. So policies alone do not work, you have to make room for fathers. All policies are
entitlements, not requests. In other words, you don’t
have to ask your department head if you want to have maternity leave or if you want to get part
time pre-tenure track. That is an entitlement to you. It’s like you have Christmas Day off, and you have Thanksgiving Day off. It’s not something that you
have to fight about, or beg for. And centrally funded, if possible, because then, again, the department chair will be much happier. Deans and chairs toolkit. Ah ha, we have it! Creating a Family Friendly Department, Deans and Chairs Toolkit. And this was developed here at Berkeley for all 10 campuses and it has, we’ve used it at recruitment time. And we’ve used it at
retreat time for the deans and chairs every year,
so they actually know what the policies are, which
is enormously important. They know what the problems are, the research in the back,
and then they know what the penalties are, which I’m
kind of a believer in as well. They know that the provost
at the University of Oregon had to pay $490,000 to
a woman when he said, and he was the provost, he said, with two children I don’t
think it’s appropriate that you have tenure, or
something that blatant. Rarely do you hear anything that blatant, but when you do, there
is a penalty for it. But the idea was, it’s not just
the nice, good thing to do, it’s the legal thing to do and there are consequences for not doing it. So this has been a very successful book, people have used it all over the country and just filled in, it’s online, so they just fill in their own documents, their own policies, and it’s
been used all over the place. And well advertised,
publicly posted explanation of benefits for all level of scholars. I think we do that pretty
well for all these levels of scholars you find on the web. There are things that are not on the web, which I’m gonna talk about,
because we don’t have them yet, one is the dual career policy. Many universities have pretty
strong dual career policies that they actually advertise, or at least say what the parameters
are, and the rules. Dual career, which I’m sure many of you can appreciate, is what
keeps women, often, from getting jobs,
because they’re following, they’re the trailing spouse
and they don’t get the job. But it’s also the thing
that makes it hardest for provosts and deans to hire anyone. ‘Cause so many people
come as dual careers. We don’t do a great job
with that at Berkeley. Other universities do
because they are expanding or they have more land, and things, but that’s a very important one as well. And a high level administrator and a legal counsel responsible for
advertising and enforcing the policies, well we
do have Angie, Stacy, and others in the office here, they’ve been very good
about promoting this policy so I think we do very well with that. And Sheila O’Rourke is very tough on these policies as well. She was one of the
people who pushed through the office of the president
our initial competitive edge. Now here is my favorite poster boy. Those in the history
departments will recognize him. This is Mark Brilliant, he’s
a professor of history here. And I sat next to him at a dinner, at Paula’s house
actually, and he mentioned that he had been so
happy with the policies that he’d put an acknowledgement
in the front page of his new book. First I knew about it,
I don’t think he knew who I was either, but. When Ezra Max Brilliant was
born in 2008, I was able to enjoy him as much as I
did during his first year without risking my career
owes in good measure to the architects of the UC
Family Friendly Edge program. They designed enlightened
policies that children of all working parents should receive as Ezra did and for
which I am very grateful. I don’t think these programs get that kind of valuation very often. That was, it’s a good example though that here’s a father who really
took advantage of it, really appreciated it,
and will have changed the culture because it is a dad doing it. Now I want to talk just
a few minutes about the kind of best practices
and needs that scientists, women scientists have. Which are somewhat different. Although ultimately
there’s a lot of overlap. Women scientists are, for the most part, supported by the federal agencies. And the federal agencies
until very recently have done almost nothing in terms of
family friendly initiatives. Only now is NSF and NIH
jumping up to the plate a bit, but as you see many of
them do nothing at all like discount caregiving
resumes and grant reviews, or provide instructions to peer reviews on family accommodations, or collect data on gender and family status. I’ve been working with NSF,
in fact I was on a Skype with the congressional
committee this morning, pushing the agencies to
take some initiative in this because when they see that
they’re losing their students, they really should do something about it. To work with the universities, to do more in terms of
the thing that I think would make most difference,
they do now offer supplements for the lab, for the PI, for anyone who gets
pregnant so they can pay someone to replace them. The re-entry post-doc
is what we really need. Because how many of you
are scientists here? Yes, do you have the
notion that if you drop out for five years you’re
just dead, brain dead, dead to science, can’t
possibly be revived? Yeah. I don’t think that’s so
true in law or history but it certainly is the
atmosphere in science. But if you had a yearlong
or a half yearlong post-doc could you rev up your mind again? I think so, we just
haven’t done much of that. So as a routine part of not
losing our women scientists, to let them stay out
for awhile, which many need to do in raising children. But to let them come back as well. We’re losing a huge amount of brain power and social capital for our universities. But there are many of these
very different issues. This was another survey
that we took of all the 13 major agencies who support science in universities and colleges. Includes NIH and NSF are the biggest, DOA is pretty big, and down to USDA. And since then there
has been some movement to try to get them together. NSF has tried to get
the different agencies to talk to each other,
NASA’s trying to do this. Oh, Bob is trying to do
it, he’s been very tough on getting universities to get together and do Title IX and save
women from whatever. So it’s a good time for
this, and I’m hoping, this is really where I
spend most of my time now is with these agencies,
that they will be more proactive, because that’s where the money is in science, and the
rules make it almost impossible sometimes for women. I think the first RO
is now given at age 40, or something like that,
so it’s a very long, hard, road, and if you
have a child it’s very easy to get knocked off of. And this is what the AAU universities, 62 major research universities,
do now for graduate students, post-docs, academic
researchers and faculty. Only 13% of these 62
give at least six weeks paid leave to women graduate students for maternity, I’m proud to say
it’s Berkeley and one other. (laughs) The other is Princeton, who also actually give the parental leave to men. Post-doctoral fellows, 23%. That’s not very good either. Post-doctoral fellows
have a problem because sometimes they’re considered employees, as they are in the UC
system, which does give them guaranteed leave, they
are staff, they have the same kind of rights. Most of the time they’re
considered trainees, and have no policies at all. So they are really floating,
they’re in a gray area. Academic researchers,
18%, and faculty get 58%. Have a long way to go on all these fronts, but particularly those two
on the left are the most vulnerable populations, they’re the ones we’re most likely to lose. And very little has been done for them. Ah, now we’ve come to my
favorite topic which is new. In the course of studying women in science which we’ve been doing more for the last three or four years, we found many things. But one of the things that
I kind of stumbled on, is that Title IX actually has very strong prohibitions against
pregnancy discrimination. It is very strong. How many of you knew that Title IX covers pregnancy discrimination? You do Bill because I told you. You did know. No, I don’t think so. Even Title IX coordinators
often don’t know that. It’s really quite shocking. But it’s very clearly
there in the regulations, it’s starting to come
through the case law, and it really could
transform certainly the childbirth issue, because
they have very strong regulations here,
altogether, no discrimination in false pregnancy,
termination, et cetera. In education program or activity, in employment, this means TAs,
RAs, post-docs, et cetera. And medical coverage. You have to treat childbirth
as a temporary disability and pay for it with the
insurance as you would a temporary disability. And if the student’s health
coverage covers gynecological care it also must cover
pregnancy and childbirth. So there are really
strict rules about what insurance will cover, how
you must not be left behind, and basically the rules
say that anyone who has a child, which is usually a woman, must be given the leave
appropriate, determined by her doctor, or whatever,
and must be returned to the same place with no disadvantage. That includes an educational program. So if you have to drop out for six months and you’re post-doc or a graduate student, you can’t be kicked back
or let go, you have to be reinstated and catch up or do whatever, but they have to accommodate you. If you have a job, they
have to take you back after six months, or
six weeks, or whatever. And not lose status. These are very strong regulations. And I think they haven’t been really found because they’re probably kind of difficult for universities to want to have to face, but now, interesting, I
just looked at the website of our own wonderful
Berkeley before I came, ’cause I’d seen it before
but I’d kinda forgotten. I Googled in Title IX and discrimination and pregnancy discrimination,
pages and pages about Title IX on our
website, and athletics, and what the rules were, et cetera. And then, we have a whole
Title IX sexual harassment office, so sexual harassment
has been the new frontier. But now the new new frontier is definitely going to be pregnancy discrimination. And this is what Obama
said, we’re going to have Title IX compliance, must be compliance, he went on and on about it. The NASA guidelines, which he recommended, actually include a big section
on pregnancy discrimination. So it’s just around the corner, as I say, this is my mission. A number of other people,
once they learn about this are interested in it too. Because it would provide
a lot of coverage, as I said, often graduate
students and post-docs are not considered
employees, they’re considered trainees, et cetera, in all the aspects of their work life and
their education life, and medical coverage. So, you’re going to be
hearing more about this. You have to have a Title IX coordinator, we have one, but doesn’t cover
pregnancy discrimination. Complaint procedure,
dissemination, and self-evaluation. These are the keys to get going. So hopefully we’ll be doing
that soon at Berkeley. Here’s one biology graduate student. Once I got pregnant I felt that my advisor no longer considered
me a serious scientist. He gave me easy, not
very important projects and spent much less time with me. You hear this complaint
a lot, that particularly in the sciences that
pregnant women feel they are no longer taken seriously. Now that’s very hard to do, to prove, has to be intentional
discrimination, all kinds of criteria, but just knowing that there is a discrimination
policy and that we don’t accept discrimination like we don’t accept sexual harassment, which
changed the workplace, I think would be an important step forward for women in science and everywhere. This, actually not this presentation, there’s a video
presentation, we have an NSF dissemination grant, an
advanced dissemination grant, taking all of our research
and best practices over the many years, and
Joan Williams is my co-PI. She runs a center called WorkLife Law, she’s done a huge amount in creating new family responsibilities, discrimination, and gender bias things. So together we have about eight of these, which are just coming
online next week actually. Do babies matter? They’re 15 minutes long,
they’re a video with wonderful wonderful Power Points and pyrotechnics, and also some extra teaching materials to go along with them. So anybody can use them anywhere. And they’re free, they’re gonna
be on our website next week. Do babies matter, four
patterns of gender bias, ensure they don’t derail your career, how does your workplace mess up, (laughs) measure up, mess up is good too. Double jeopardy, women
of color in science, this is really kind of unique and new. They interviewed 60
women of color in science and she came up with some really
quite interesting patterns. Some things are illegal,
including pregnancy discrimination and other issues. It’s cheaper to keep her. This is an analysis of
what family policies cause, what it causes to lose someone, what is it causes to retain someone, what it causes to recruit someone. And it was started at
the University of Iowa, but right now our very own Clair Brown in the Economics department
is carrying on the study. Because we have some
good data about things that have been in place that have worked and how much they cost. And these are difficult
correlations to make, and we haven’t had these
policies for too long, but we’re already seeing good things. Like, since 2003, the
percent of babies born to assistant professors
has doubled, women. No children in 2003, excuse
me, 73% had no children in 2003, and now in 2009,
only 36% have children. I think we kind of left that off there. 2009 was the. For men similarly, 61% in
2003 and now it’s only 41%. But the real doubling has been with women assistant professors. Now I consider that a victory. And it’s clearly just our new policies that have made it all worth it. I take full credit for it. (laughs) But we have, this is what I
mean by changing the culture. Where people feel it’s
okay to have children, and at least in the law school, because we have a lot of young faculty, you see the men and women often talking childcare talk in the hallway. Which is, I think pretty
healthy for young parents to be able to do that
freely and not feel that they are restricted in any way. So I’m very proud of that. But I just wanted to say, the last thing I wanted. The book is coming out. Not actually in May but in July. Do Babies Matter? Gender and
Family in the Ivory Tower. And this is the life course
book that I mentioned. A lot of the information you heard today is in it of course, and then it takes it from graduate school years
through finding your first job, through falling in and
out of the tenure track and the second tier,
through getting tenure, through going through
associate, and then finally the retirement years. And then with a whole lot of suggestions along the way and at the end
for how to change things. And as I said, my heart
has been in doing more for graduate students and
post-docs, because again, you see the most serious
drop out at that point. But the book really talks
about all the different areas of your life. This is your life, so if
you want to read about your life, this is it, Do Babies Matter? I have to say, it’s pretty serious stuff. I mean, hopefully we wrote
it in a nice easy way, but it’s got a whole lot of
graphs and appendix at the end. (laughs) You don’t have to read those. Well thank you very much, and I’m ready for any quick questions. (applause) – [Woman In Stripes]
Thanks, it seems like a lot of your data set comes from California. Just fantastic, you have
a really large data set and it looks like you found
lots of really cool trends, and I’m wondering which of
those trends in your opinion would have changed if you
had a nationwide data set? – Well actually most of
this does come from the nationwide data set,
the survey of doctorate recipients, which is everyone. And then the ones about
post-docs and graduate students are more from our own
surveys in California. But of course we have a huge number, so these are important. And I think we’re pretty representative of research universities,
because otherwise if you’re not a research university
you’re not having post-docs and graduate students either. So I don’t think that’s so far off. Many other universities
have used this data and these slides and such
and they seem to feel that it works pretty well
for their university as well, so that’s a good question. I think it’s okay though,
from what we know. And the survey of doctorate recipients, which is most of this,
is clearly everyone, not just UC. Yes sir. – [Man] Thank you for
that, and as a young father and a gypsy scholar at the moment, especially appreciate it. Especially, I certainly
am very familiar with when I have gone off to look
after my little daughter and pick her up and
things, there’s definitely a sense that I get from other staff of, they wouldn’t say it,
but there tends to be an implication of well, shouldn’t
your wife be doing that? They would never say that, of course, but there’s always that
sort of implication. But one thing I wondered
was whether your data was affected or whether
the percentages changed or how it was affected
in places where perhaps teaching was valued more than research, and how much is this
perhaps to a certain extent an indictment on the domination in the way of the research ideal
rather than teaching? Or perhaps thinking
about the balance there. – Right, I think that’s
a very good question. And in the original survey
the graduate students rated four year liberal arts colleges to be a whole lot more family friendly. But the truth is, our
survey really does cover them as well, the big general survey about when people drop out, et cetera. And there isn’t that much difference between them at that stage. But because we are geared
in graduate students and post-docs, these are
people who are probably going to go on to research universities, more likely at any rate. But it’s a good question. And by the way, thank you,
for taking your daughter, and just being a good role model. Because I think it takes a lot of courage for men to do that, but
again, once you have three men carrying around the snuggy, then they all get used
to it and it becomes just ordinary, so just becoming ordinary is what we’re aiming for. (audience member speaks unintelligibly) And employed, yes. So you’re the gypsy scholar now, yes? Well, I hope, there actually is some hope for gypsy scholars, because a lot of, good percentage, it’s in the book, do get hired out of that to a regular job. Just not necessarily in the place where you’re the gypsy scholar. (laughs) – [Woman] Hi, I was wondering
if you could measure any effects based on the
career of the other partner? – Yes. Actually, there’s a whole
thing, I can’t remember all the numbers but they’re in the book, about dual career couples. And not surprisingly, women are more often the trailing spouse, and have
more trouble than men do. However, having said that they’re about, 38% of all couples it’s the men
who are the trailing spouse. And they probably have
even more trouble because it’s hard for their ego not to do this. It was a good survey
that came out of Stanford and the numbers are just
not clear in my mind at the moment, but it is a real difficulty for women, whether or
not they have children, it’s a difficulty for women. (light music)

4 comments

  1. She's concerned with the top of the career pyramid, but the undergrad degree discrepancy is now a problem of the lower half. An undergrad degree doesn't get you a job anymore, it's no where close to what it used to be. More men have distressed truly anemic careers, but more men are tenured. She never talked about the former problem, and maybe that's just a blind spot, I don't know.

  2. maybe….but while I agree with few,only few, of the proposed/implemented actions, the ideological approach is horrible.

    Babies are a problem, and if an highly educated woman "steps down" to play the mother, this is an issue, For who? For that woman or for someone else? What's the problem if she steps down but the family is economically and emotionally balanced?

    Did they ask those women if they feel happier being in full career or having a more balanced approach to life?

  3. maybe someone should check how women here in the Philippines manage careers and a family: part of the answer is that they not only hire caretakers (who often are from the same family for generations) but that they rely on extended family to care for the children when they work overseas or are at the jobs. In the US, "feminists" seem to think if women are not men they are not equal…

Leave a Reply

(*) Required, Your email will not be published