New Zealand Census of Women's Participation 2006
2. New Zealand Women's Participation: Widening the Scope
3. Power Pyramid 1 - Governance: Women's Participation
4. Power Pyramid 2 - Employment: Women's Participation
5. Power Pyramid 3 - Politics, Health and Education: Women's Participation
Foreword
What progress are women making in joining men at the top in corporate governance and public life in New Zealand?
The second New Zealand Census of Women’s Participation provides detailed figures and comparisons of women’s representation in leadership and decision-making positions and participation in different sectors of the labour market. The gender composition of the boards of private companies, Crown companies and other Crown entities is examined. Women’s status in law and the judiciary, the media, trade unions, politics, universities, the defence forces and school boards of trustees is also reported on.
The Census is a bench-marking tool that enables an objective analysis of the position of New Zealand women and provides for international comparisons to be made. This is important given the media and the public’s continuing interest in women’s power in New Zealand. Women occupy some of the country’s key leadership positions such as Prime Minister, Governor-General, Speaker of the House of Representatives and Chief Justice. However, the profile of these individual women at the top does not reflect the status generally of women in professional life and may mask the true picture of female participation in senior roles in other areas of New Zealand public life.
The results of the Census show a mixed picture. In the public sector women are making good progress. Women’s representation is still below the 50% target of women on statutory boards by 2000 promised by former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley to the Beijing Women’s Conference in 1995. But it is in line with the Ministry of Women’s Affairs Action Plan for New Zealand Women (2004, March) that pushed out the 50/50 promise to 2010.
However, the findings also show that private sector progress towards women’s participation in governance is grindingly slow. The results again reveal a significant under-utilisation of women’s talents and skills as members of the boards of New Zealand’s top companies. There has been a glacial two per cent improvement from the first Census two years ago in women’s representation on the boards of the top 100 companies listed in the New Zealand tock Market (NZSX). This depressing result is confirmed by the results of the other two securities markets, the New Zealand Debt Market (NZDX) and the New Zealand Alternative Market (NZAX). While there has been a high profile given to the few women at the top, New Zealand in fact languishes behind many comparable countries in terms of women’s participation in the boardrooms of top companies.
For the first time the Census includes discussion of strategies to improve the representation and participation of women in decision-making and public life and promotes an agenda for change. The agenda for change is intended to provoke debate and act as a catalyst. For example, it encourages board chairs, other board directors, agencies involved in promoting good governance, shareholders and the general public to consider the evidence that gender balance can have a positive effect on the performance of the board and on business as a whole. Women are consumers, customers, employees, employers, managers and investors. The Census asks the question: why are they also not directors of companies for the ultimate benefit of the New Zealand economy?
The agenda for change also addresses other issues of accountability in the university sector, the legal profession, the justice system, and the media. Women’s professional and community groups at the national and local levels have a role in using the objective data to raise media and public awareness about women’s progress. It can be used, too, as leverage to encourage policy change. Individual women with the relevant skills, experience, interest and commitment are also encouraged to use existing nominations services for appointments on private and public boards.
The information for the second Census was collected and verified in a number of ways. In some instances the data was purchased from, or supplied by, other agencies, and some of the information comes from previously published or other secondary sources. The different sources of information are reported along with the results. Following publication of the 2004 New Zealand Census of Women’s Participation in Governance and Professional Life, the co- leader of the Maori Party Tariana Turia and the Maori Women’s Welfare League asked whether attempts had been made to report the position of Maori women. Very few of the data sets used to compile the Census report ethnicity data. There is a need for public agencies to properly disaggregate data by gender and ethnicity so it can be comprehensively reported in a reliable manner.
One of the coordinators of the first Census, Dr Su Olsson of the New Zealand Centre for Women and Leadership at Massey University, suffered a fatal illness in 2005 while attending the Academy of Management Conference in Hawaii. She was there to speak on New Zealand’s position at an international panel discussion on the participation of women on boards. This second Census is dedicated to her memory. Su believed that benchmarking progress and making results visible would help change attitudes and inspire an improvement in the representation of women at the top. He tatai tangata ka taea. What gets counted gets done.
| Dr Judy McGregor, Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner, Human Rights Commission. |
Dr Susan Fountaine, New Zealand Centre for Women and Leadership, Massey University. |
New Zealand Women’s Participation: Widening the Scope
The second New Zealand Census of Women’s Participation makes visible women’s status in economic, social and political life and includes governance, professional life and employment.
It moves away from anecdotal and impressionistic accounts of women’s progress to systematic benchmarking in the public and private sectors. The Census provides a comparison with results of governance data from two years ago. It is similar to research published overseas allowing for international comparisons.
The report is intended as a catalyst for improvement in women’s participation in the corporate sector. It provides encouragement for board chairs and other directors to reflect on the diversity of their boardrooms and to ask themselves whether the current composition of their boards is competitive, fair and sustainable. It allows shareholders and institutional investors to think about board succession planning. The findings also suggest that there can be no relaxation of the Government’s commitment to gender balance on statutory bodies if New Zealand is to reach its target.
The results allow national women’s organisations to focus attention on gender participation in governance and decision-making and to pursue activities and policies aimed at closing the gender gaps. The Census also brings to the attention of individual women the need for female skills and experience to be taken into account in the commercial sector.
Researchers, policy makers, politicians and students will also find the Census useful. The first Census was referenced extensively both within New Zealand and internationally. It is hoped that the second Census with expanded content will be of greater use for those who want factual information about the status of men and women’s participation and their power differentials. What gets counted, gets noticed.
CEDAW & New Zealand’s international obligations
New Zealand has an international obligation to promote the participation of women in governance and professional life. Article 7 of CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, encourages the participation of women in political and public life on equal terms with men. New Zealand ratified CEDAW in 1985.
The New Zealand Government has committed itself to improving women’s participation in leadership and decision-making roles and has set a goal of achieving 50 percent representation of women on state sector boards by 2010. The very good news is that as a result of successive governments’ commitment, the first stocktake by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs of all state sector boards and statutory committees by gender shows New Zealand is at 41 percent as at 2004. The bad news is that the private sector languishes at 7.13 percent, which represents only a small improvement in two years.
The CEDAW committee recommended that New Zealand adopt a comprehensive strategy to increase the number of women in policy and decision-making positions in the public sector and strengthen its policies to support the private sector’s efforts towards the promotion of women in decision-making positions. The latter is now urgent, given the low representation of women in the boardrooms of top companies.
The Census provides a benchmarking tool for monitoring not only the concerns of CEDAW (2003) but also The Beijing Platform for Action (1996). The Beijing Platform recommends monitoring and evaluating progress through the regular collection of data on women and men at all levels in various decision-making positions. Gender balance in the judiciary, in trade unions, in political parties and electoral systems are all covered in the 2006 Census report.
Tables referred to in this discussion are available on the PDF version of the full report here or you can order the full hard-copy report here
The NZX comprises three securities markets — the New Zealand Stock Market (NZSX), the New Zealand Debt Market (NZDX) and the New Zealand Alternative Market (NZAX). The NZSX was informally known in the past as the Main Board and includes many of the cornerstone companies of the New Zealand economy. The NZDX offers a range of investment securities including corporate and government bonds and fixed income securities. It was not reported in the first Census. The NZAX is specifically designed for developing companies and companies with non-traditional structures.
Women hold 7.13 percent of board directorships of major companies listed on the New Zealand Stock Market. This figure is derived from the top 100 companies by market capitalisation and comprises 46 women out of the total 645 directors. The figures compare with 5.04 percent recorded in 2004. Only the top 100 companies are reported in the Census by company name in the following tables. However, further analysis of the top 163 companies listed on the NZSX shows the percentage of women in boardrooms drops to 6.44 percent (61 women out of 947 directors).
For the first time a top 100 company, Pumpkin Patch, has achieved gender parity in its boardroom with three women among its six directors. Seven other top 100 companies have two or more women on their boards. They are Telecom, Promina Group, Westpac Banking, AMP Limited, Telstra Corp, Richina Pacific and Kingfish Limited. Only 37 of the top 100 companies have any female directors. Six companies have added a woman to their boards since the previous Census in 2004. They are Contact Energy, New Zealand Refining Company, Freightways, Steel and Tube, Hallenstein Glasson and Ebos Group. Three companies have dropped female board directors including the Warehouse and Tourism Holdings who now have no female directors and Lyttleton Port Company that now has one woman.
Women hold 5.29 percent of directorships in the 40 companies listed on the NZDX. One company, Delegat’s Group, has two women and nine other companies have one woman each. Only 10 of the 40 companies have any female directors.
A total of 5.74 percent of directorships of NZAX companies are held by women, seven females out of a total of 122 directors. One company, Oyster Bay Marlborough Vineyards, has two women out of six directors and five other companies have one woman each. Only six of the 24 companies have any female directors. Three NZAX companies lost women directors since 2004. They are Comvita Limited, Windflow Technology and Loan and Building Society.
Compilation of the 2006 Census shows a significant degree of company churn from the first report in 2004. However, the overall results show continuing, systemic non-participation of women in boardrooms. A total of 63 percent of top 100 companies have no women, an improvement on the 71.91 percent from the previous Census. However, 75 percent of NZDX and NZAX companies have no female board room representation and the NZAX has a significantly decreased proportion of women in governance, falling from 16.39 percent to 5.74 percent between the two Census reports. The NZAX has doubled from 12 companies to 24 companies in the time period but the significant regression is of concern.
The results show dismal progress for women in corporate governance in New Zealand. The findings demonstrate a small increase in two years at a time when there has been heightened public recognition of the need for diversity in participation at the top. They reveal that while the environment in which business operates is dynamic and fast-paced, this sense of change is not reflected in board composition.
New Zealand lags behind many comparable countries in this respect. In contrast, the United Kingdom in 2005 recorded a bigger increase in women in top FTSE 100 companies. The FTSE 100 recorded a new high of 78 companies with female directors. This is over twice the number of New Zealand top 100 companies with female directors (37). The new female directors in the United Kingdom are “more likely to be international, have board experience and have much richer, more varied work backgrounds than the men” (Singh & Vinnicombe, 2005).
In an effort to increase women’s representation, Norway, which has the highest percent of female directors of any European country, has introduced a quota system. This coercive approach requires companies to appoint women to their corporate boards to achieve a 40 percent female representation within a three year period. Sweden has followed this approach but with a 25 percent threshold. In 2003, the Norwegian government issued proposals for new legislation. With regard to members elected by company owners, both sexes are to be represented on boards of two to three members, on boards of four to five, each sex is to have two members, and on boards with more than nine, at least 40 percent representation is required. The new law encompasses all state-owned companies and public limited companies. There are no rules proposed for private limited companies, mainly family businesses, where the owners are personally represented on the board.
Not surprisingly, the proposals have been strongly opposed by business. The Confederation of Norwegian Business and Industry is opposed on the basis that the voluntary approach is working, even if it is slow progress. Norwegian companies also oppose interference in the rights of private companies to run their own affairs.
However, concern about the lack of women in decision-making roles in Europe is not confined to Nordic countries. The European Commission (2005) has undertaken a census of women directors in the top 50 listed companies in countries of the enlarged EU and has issued a Green paper outlining different perspectives on managing diversity in business. The most recent figures show the European average is around 11 percent.
New Zealand’s first ever stocktake across the state sector shows that successive governments have made excellent progress towards gender parity in the membership of all state sector boards and statutory committees. The Nominations Service of the Ministry of Women’s Affairs (MWA) completed the stocktake which shows that as at 20 December 2004 there were 397 state sector boards and statutory bodies with 2605 members and women representing 41 percent (1063) of the total. The stocktake recorded only ministerial appointments that are approved by the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee (APH). This includes the ministerial appointees on bodies that also have elected members, members appointed by professional groups without ministerial involvement, and ex-officio members. It therefore only reports membership that is within government control, through the influence of the APH process.
It needs also to be noted that the data as reported here differs in part from other presentations of the stocktake material by the MWA. This has been done in order to report the latest possible figures available in specific areas. The MWA 2004 results show all the government agencies which are responsible for appointments and the aggregated totals for all the statutory bodies for which they are responsible. The results range from the Ministry of Social Development with eight boards at 61 percent of female ministerial appointees through to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs with one board and no female ministerial appointees. The aggregated table (Table 5) includes District Health Boards and Crown Companies. The gender composition of the boards of the 36 crown companies, state-owned enterprises and other government bodies that come under the Crown Company Monitoring Advisory Unit (CCMAU) is then reported separately as at January 2006 to provide comparison with the previous Census (Table 6). Also presented separately is the latest data on District Health Boards membership which includes both appointed and elected members (Table 7).
The stocktake is the first and it provides a benchmark from which future comparisons can be made. It tells us little about the past, however. Some caution needs to be expressed about directly comparing the stocktake results of 41 percent to, for example, top 100 private sector boards at 7.13 percent. The stocktake includes a wide range of government bodies from those with small, specific, local functions to major public utilities with a more commercial focus. As expected, the agencies working in sectors with a traditionally high proportion of women’s involvement such as the health, social development and community sectors, have the highest representation of women. However, The Treasury, the Ministries of Transport, Justice, Economic Development, Agriculture and Forestry, and Research, Science and Technology are among those with a much lesser proportion of women’s involvement. The stocktake provides transparency and will doubtless be a catalyst for inter-departmental comparison in future.
Figures from CCMAU that cover some major public utilities in power, energy, postal services, public broadcasting, airports, and in the science and research area, show little progress between the two Census reports of women’s board membership. It is vital that women’s participation in governance is not only concentrated in health, education and social development but covers the broadest spectrum of economic activity that contributes to New Zealand’s prosperity.
Women hold 16.91 percent of senior academic positions in New Zealand’s eight universities, up slightly from 15.82 percent in the previous Census. The proportion of women professors (13.77 percent) is down slightly from 2003 but associate professors are up to 19.87 percent. Four universities improved their proportions of senior women (Massey, Victoria, Canterbury and AUT) and four lost ground (Auckland, Lincoln, Otago and Waikato).
AUT retains its top ranking (despite its proportion of women associate professors dropping by 7.14 percent), and slightly increases its overall percent of senior women to 30.36 percent. This partly reflects its newer university status and the way it has appointed senior academic staff. Victoria University moves up from fourth in the previous Census to second place, with 21.47 percent. Waikato drops from an overall second in 2003 to a third ranking (20.63 percent), with its 7.07 percentage point decrease in female professors mostly offset by a corresponding increase in associate professors. Massey University moves from sixth to fourth place (19.31 percent), with the biggest overall increase (5.72 percentage points) representing an improved proportion of women at both professor and associate professor level. Auckland University loses ground, moving from third to fifth overall, linked to its 6.55 percentage point drop in female professors. This decrease was foreshadowed in its Equal Opportunities Annual Report 2004, which noted the falling percentage of senior academic women (although more positively this was reported to be accompanied by a rising rate of promotion applications by women and high levels of success). As in the previous Census, the southern universities are clustered towards the bottom of the various rankings; in 2005, the notable improvement by Massey leaves Otago, Lincoln and Canterbury to consistently take positions six, seven and eight overall.
Canterbury has the lowest proportion of senior academic women of all eight universities (6.29 percent). However, unlike Otago and Lincoln it has at least improved overall since the last Census. Business academic Sue Newberry, who left Canterbury University for an associate professor position in Australia after complaining about gender bias in Canterbury’s promotion round, recently noted “the enduring barriers” facing women at her former workplace. In a letter to The Press newspaper, she claimed that there was much the University could do to improve equity and diversity, writing that “No one is seeking special advantage. Fair and equitable treatment by the university would be fine” (Newberry, 2005, p.8).
The overall slight improvement in women’s status within the universities is mainly attributable to the increase in senior women academics at Massey University, which may be the result of a mentoring scheme introduced in 2004. This was prompted in part by the previous Census and an Association of University Staff (AUS) survey on academic promotions, using Massey as a case study. The survey found that although male and female respondents had similar success rates in the promotion process, women were less likely to both apply for promotion and to feel they had reached the level they aspired to.
While the improved figures for Massey, and to a lesser extent Victoria, are encouraging, the phasing in of Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) for universities creates a further potential barrier for women seeking promotion. The AUS has identified issues with the model’s initial process and outcomes, notably the gender imbalance on panels and women’s lower average scores, which it suggests will “help to solidify existing inequalities” (AUS, 2005). This will require further monitoring.
International comparisons also show academic women in overseas universities clustered in lower level positions, although generally doing better than New Zealand universities. The American Association of University Professors Fact Sheet 2003-4 says that women make up 23 percent of full professors (compared to 13.77 percent in New Zealand) but over half of instructor and unranked positions. Some overseas universities exhibit progressive and award-winning approaches to gender diversity, while in New Zealand the University of Auckland stands out for its comprehensive reporting of equal opportunities. A summary report published in 2005 as part of Auckland’s equity benchmarking shows the New Zealand university tends to be outperformed by at least some of its Australian and Canadian partners in terms of the percent of academic women at associate professor and professor level.
The under-representation of women in academia is not as apparent in the university councils, where government appointments have, at four of the universities, been at least 50 percent female. Only the universities of Waikato and Auckland lack a woman among the four government appointees.
The Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee (AV-CC) is visibly committed to the promotion of gender equity in its public material and has developed initiatives aimed at improving women’s status. The AV-CC's website includes a policy statement on gender equity that specifies a commitment to encouraging each university to undertake specific actions. The Australians have also developed an action plan for women employed in Australian universities that includes performance measures to improve the proportion of female academic staff at particular levels of seniority.
Law Society figures show that while women make up well over a third of practitioners, they lag behind significantly in terms of partnerships. Overall, less than 20 percent of legal partners are women. The Law Society’s 2004 Annual Report shows that more women than men continue to be admitted (496 women and 353 men), and that the number of male and females practising law has risen since the previous Census.
Women have made some inroads as partners in New Zealand’s major legal firms. A total of 17.24 percent of partners at the listed firms are female, up from 14.12 percent in the previous Census. The results are mixed, however. For example, while AJ Park went from ten partners in 2003 to 19 in 2005, the number of women remained static at two. One firm, Anthony Harper, has no female partner, down from one in the previous Census, and is included in this report which looks at major law firms with more than 10 partners, despite dropping below that total. The legal firms which have significantly increased their proportion of women include Anderson Lloyd Caudwell, Brookfields, Kensington Swan, and Meredith Connell. Overall, Phillips Fox Lawyers (31 percent) and Wynn Williams & Co (30 percent) have the highest proportion of female partners.
The Women’s Consultative Group’s 2005 survey of male and female practitioners suggests the gender discrepancy is linked to the average longer practising time of male respondents (notably, 44 percent of male respondents have more than 20 years experience, compared to just 12 percent of women). However, differences in the key issues of male and female practitioners are also telling. Both groups identified hours of work and salary as two of the most pressing issues, but women ranked professional support and advancement as similarly significant in the survey. Other analysis, taking into account years of practice and work area, suggests these differences may be the result of a younger female cohort of respondents. However, the New Zealand Law Society Annual Report 2004 shows equal numbers of men and women with between 11 and 15 years of experience. These reports can be accessed here.
Since 1988, survey data gathered by industry has shown that women comprise nearly half of New Zealand journalists (1988, women 46 percent of journalists; 1994, 45.3 percent), with a non-representative survey in 2004 suggesting women are now 53 percent. However, new data shows that just 19.2 percent of newspaper editors are women. Currently only five newspapers (Northern Advocate, Manawatu Standard, Malborough Express, Oamaru Mail, and the Sunday Star-Times), none of them metropolitan dailies, have women at the helm.
Women are also similarly under-represented on the boards of private media companies. Women comprise just 6.25 percent of board members among privately owned broadcasters, and 8 percent of the boards of newspaper companies. State owned media have achieved a better balance, with 45.0 percent female representation.
There are currently 39 women (32.2 percent) from a total of 121 Members of Parliament (MPs). Since the previous Census, the National Party has doubled its number of female MPs (from 6 to 12) but, along with the Maori Party, has just 25 percent female representation. Other than the Progressive Coalition Party, with its one male MP, New Zealand First is the least representative party in Parliament by gender, having one female MP from a total of seven (14.3 percent). The Green Party has the highest proportion of women MPs (four out of six, or 66.7 percent), followed by ACT (one female MP from a total of two) and Labour (19 out of 50, 38 percent). Nearly half of all women MPs are Labour representatives (19 out of a total 39 women in Parliament).
The current 39 women MPs is an increase of four from the previous election. This is the largest number of women MPs in New Zealand’s parliamentary history (the previous record was 37 women in the 1999-2002 term). Female representation has increased steadily over the past 30 years, especially since the introduction of MMP, but has slowed since the mid-1990s and dropped during the 2002-2005 term.
In addition, three of the total eight parties represented in Parliament have female leaders: Labour leader Helen Clark, Green Party co-leader Jeannette Fitzsimons, and Maori Party co-leader, Tariana Turia. This is one more female leader since the previous Census, but is the result of the formation of a new party (the Maori Party) rather than a shift towards female leadership within established parties.
There are 27 MPs who represent ministerial portfolios (this excludes the two ministers from outside Cabinet from other parties: Winston Peters and Peter Dunne). Of the 21 ministers inside Cabinet, five are women (Helen Clark, Annette King, Ruth Dyson, Lianne Dalziel and Nanaia Mahuta). There are two women (Judith Tizard and Winnie Laban) among the six ministers outside Cabinet.
Of the 14 select committees, six are chaired by women and five have a female deputy chair. Three committees (foreign affairs, defence and trade; health; and social services) have both a woman chair and deputy chair. The finance and expenditure select committee has no women represented and another three committees have only one (government administration, primary production, Maori affairs). Women are the majority on two select committees. The highest proportion of women MPs sit on the health (nine out of 11 members are women) and social services (eight out of eleven) committees.
According to the Inter-parliamentary Union, New Zealand is well above the global average of 16.3 percent for parliamentary representation. Nordic countries do the best in regional terms, with an average of 40 percent women. Currently New Zealand is ranked 14th in the world for women’s representation, just behind South Africa and ahead of Germany. Rwanda tops the list, with 48.8 percent women, followed closely by Sweden (45.3 percent), then Norway (37.9 percent), Finland (37.5 percent) and Denmark (36.9 percent). Australia comes 27th (with 24.7 percent), United Kingdom 50th (19.7 percent), and United States 66th on 15.2 percent. These figures are all based on the lower or only house, as at 30 November 2005. More details are available here .
Local spheres of government are important as one entry point for women’s national participation in decision-making. Following the most recent local body elections, in 2004, there are currently 275 women serving as regional, city and district councillors and mayors, from a total of 1024 seats. The proportion of women at 26.9 percent, is down from 27.9 percent in 2001 (and 29 percent in 1998; see Shi, 2005). The number of women councillors of all types (regional, city and district) dropped from 2001 to 2004, but the number of mayors increased slightly, from 12 in 2001 to 14 in 2004. Only 18.9 percent of New Zealand mayors are currently women, up from 16.2 percent in 2001.
A 2005 study of Australian women’s representation in regional and rural organisations, from companies to local government, shows that 17 percent of local government chairs are women. Overall figures for local government councillors were not reported but the study did convey the findings from a New South Wales Department of Local Government survey (looking at the 144 NSW councils) showing that in 2004, 26 percent of councillors elected were women – unchanged from the 1999 election (Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services, 2005). These figures are similar to New Zealand.
The United Cities and Local Governments organisation’s data about women’s representation in local decision-making, used to develop the Local Government statement presented to the Beijing+10 summit meeting in New York, shows that 20.9 percent of councillors (in the 67 countries studied) are women, although the global figures are steadily increasing. The overall figure for mayors (from 60 countries) is 9 percent. These statistics can be accessed here.
Survey data gathered by Local Government New Zealand alongside official statistics, suggest that following the most recent election elected members have become less ethnically diverse. The proportion of Maori dropped from 5.3 percent in 2001 to 4.3 percent in 2004, and other ethnic groups went from 2.7 percent to 1.7 percent. In 2004, the overwhelming majority of elected local government members were Pakeha (94 percent). However, it should be noted that this information is based on a survey with an 86 percent return rate and excludes elected members of District Health Boards and Community Boards.
Figures provided by the Ministry of Health show that women currently hold 95 of the 226 positions on District Health Boards around New Zealand. This number is slightly down from 96 in 2002 but up from 91 in 2004. The figures vary significantly across regions, with Wairarapa, for example, having a strong tradition of female representation (currently eight female and three males), and South Canterbury consistently having few women (two women and nine men). Boards such as Auckland currently have more balanced representation than in the past and others, such as Tairawhiti, West Coast, and Lakes, have consistently achieved equality or near parity. Around the country, the numbers of women range from two to eight, and the numbers of men from three to nine.
Women continue to be well represented on school Boards of Trustees at 51.9 percent of board representatives (2004). However, gender composition of boards mirrors imbalances in the school system. Reflecting the teacher and staff populations, staff representatives are 80 percent women. Student representatives are 59 percent female. Meanwhile, fewer women than men are Principals or Acting Principals, ministerial appointments, or proprietor’s representatives.
There is also a continued trend of women being slightly less likely than men to be elected onto boards by parents with this becoming especially marked in the choices of parents in wealthier, urban areas. For example, in decile 1 schools women comprise 64 percent of candidates and 62 percent of parent-elected trustees. At decile 10 schools, women are only 41 percent of candidates and 40 percent of parent-elected trustees. Overall, women made up exactly half of all candidates for election, and were 49 percent of all parent-elected representatives. Female candidates also overall had slightly less experience than the male candidates. Only 41 percent of board chairs are women. Most board chairs are parent-elected representatives.