DAISIES

 

 Picture1

 

 

 

Group members

 

1) Saša Ambrožič

2) Irena Hrovatič

3) Mateja Vidic

4) Urška Laznik

 

 

 

Distribution of roles

 

Chair: Saša

Secretary: Irena

Reporter: Urška

Time keeper: Mateja

 

 

 

      

 

 

 

 

 DISCRIMINATION OF YOUNG WOMEN IN THE PROCESS OF SEARCHING FOR AN EMPLOYMENT

 

 

DEFINITION:

In general discrimination means treating some people differently from others. We could define the concept of discrimination at work as unequal opportunities for those who are searching for their employment and those who are already employed. People's skills, abilities, education and knowledge are more or less ignored or not properly treated when they are searching for a job, being paid, trained or promoted. There are various types of discrimination such as gender, racial, colour, disability, pregnancy, national origin, religious or belief, age discrimination etc.

We will mainly focus on how young women are discriminated in the process of searching for a job. When women are applying for a job, some have lower educational status than others and therefore presumably less opportunities of getting the same job. Women in comparison with men can have the same educational status and skills as men but they may still have less opportunities for getting the same job. These inequalities will be the main  focus of our research, particularly we will concentrate on young women aged up to 35 who are in the process of searching for an employment and have a hard time finding it. Our resarch will be based on these two hypotheses:

 

1. Women with higher education are most likely to be discriminated when applying for a job than women with lower education.

2. Women without children in the process of searching for a job have less chance finding it than women with children.

 

 

QUESTIONS AND DISTRIBUTION OF TASKS:

•   What are the reasons for discrimination of women when they are searching for an employment? (Irena)
•   With which educational status have women more problems finding an employment? (Saša)
•   Are women with children more frequently discriminated than women without them? (Saša)
•   How often are women discriminated when they are searching for an employment? (Mateja)
•   What does the law say about sexual discrimination of women in the process of applying for the job? (Urška)
•   Are women with the same qualifications employed under different terms than men? (Irena) 
•   Do the prejudices of society about women trigger the discrimination? (Urška) 
•    Do women confront with the discrimination and if they do, in what ways? (Mateja) 

 

 

GLOSSARY:

• postponement [pous(t)pounm*nt] (noun): odlog, odlašanje; podreditev, zapostavljanje

• part time employment contract: pogodba o zasposlitvi s krajšim delovnim časom
• sheltered employment: zaposlovanje pod posebnimi pogoji

• collective dismissal: kolektivna odpoved

• collective redundancy - kolektivni odpust

• specific requirements: posebni pogoji

• employment service: služba za zaposlovanje

• interview for position of employment: razgovor za delovno mesto

• employment relationships act: zakon o delovnih razmerjih

 

Picture2

 

Picture sources:

 

1. Picture1: Wallis, Barbara. 2006. BJ webart: Daisy images. Access: http://www.bjwebart.com/daisy_images/daisy_bunch2.jpg (12.3.2009)

2. Picture2: CartoonStock. 1997. Access: http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cza0536l.jpg (12.3.2009)

 

                       

 

LITERATURE:

Internet sources:    

• Čurdova, Anna. 2005. Report of the committe on equal opportunities for women and men: Discrimination against women in the workforce and the workplace. Access: http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc05/EDOC10484.htm (12.3.2009)

• UK goverment. 2009. Employment: Discrimination at work. Access: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/DiscriminationAtWork/index.htm (12.3.2009)

• Vlada Republike Slovenije. Urad za enake možnosti. 2009. Konvencija o odpravi vseh oblik diskriminacije žensk. Access: http://www.uem.gov.si/si/zakonodaja_in_dokumenti/enake_moznosti_zensk_in_moskih/konvencija_o_odpravi_vseh_oblik_diskriminacije_zensk/ (12.3.2009)

 

Literature: 

• Zakon o delovnih razmerjih (ZDR): (neuradno prečiščeno besedilo) z uvodnimi pojasnili k spremembam zakona Nade Perič Vlaj in stvarnim kazalom Janeza Topliška. 2008. Ljubljana: Uradni list republike Slovenije
• Sedmak, Mateja in Zorana Medarič. 2007. Med javnim in zasebnim: ženske na trgu dela. Koper: Založba Annales, 
• Inštitut za delo pri pravni fakulteti Univerze v Ljubljani. 2007. Prepoved diskriminacije: med varstvom človekovih pravic in konkurenčnostjo delodajalca.  Znanstvena monografija ob Evropskem letu enakih možnosti za vse in ob 50-letnici delovanja Inštituta za delo.
• Greif, Tatjana. 2006. Ukrepi proti diskriminaciji v zaposlovanju za sindikate: priročnik, Ljubljana
• Vičič Vlasta, Preželj Branka in Svetlik Ivan, ur. 1992. Zaposlovanje - perspektive, priložnosti, tveganja. Ljubljana: Znanstveno in publicistično središče.
• Ule, Mirjana. 1999. Predsodki in diskriminacije. Izbrane socialno-psihološke študije. Ljubljana: Znanstveno in publicistično središče.

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

MINUTES OF THE FIRST MEETING

held on the 25th February, 2009 at FDV library from 14:25 pm to 16:25 pm

 

Present: Mateja, Irena and Saša

 

Absent: Urška

 

AGENDA:

1. Defining the topic
2. Writing the definition and finding literature
3. Writing questions and defining the central problem of our assignment
4. Any other business

 

Item 1

 

Discussion: Irena suggested that we focus on age and gender but Mateja and Saša recomended that we should only focus on discrimination of women at work. However, we still had some reservations about our topic. After a long reflection we were all in favour of focusing just on women under the age of 35 in the process of searching for an employment.

 

Decision: We have all agreed about the headline: discrimination of young women in the process of searching for an employment.

 

 

Item 2

 

Discussion: Mateja recommended that she and Irena find the literature when Saša writes the definition for our assignment.

 

Action: Mateja and Irena found out that there is a huge amount of literature about discrimination and therefore they decided that they will contact Urška to help them find suitable literature.

 

 

Item 3

 

Saša wrote the definition while Mateja and Irena wrote some questions regarding the topic.  Mateja and Irena each added two questions and at the same time agreed that they still need some  improvement.

 

Assignments: We will all search for more literature. Urška and Mateja will write a few more questions. 

 

Item 4

 

Decision 1: We all agreed that Saša will write and published the minutes on the wiki.

 

Decision 2: The agenda for the next meeting will be decided the day after tomorrow or on the day of the next meeting.

 

Even though Urška was absent we informed her about our PBL activities, the decisions that we reached, the distribution of the tasks and about the next meeting.

 

The meeting lasted 2 hours.

 

Next meeting will take place on 4th March 2009 at the library on FDV. 

 

Chair: Saša

Minutes-taker: Mateja

Time-keeper: Irena 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING

Held on the 4th March, 2009 at FDV library from 11:35 am to 12:15pm

 

Present: Mateja, Irena and Saša

 

Absent: Urška

 

AGENDA:

1. Correcting the definition
2. Writing the hypotheses
3. Finding more literature 
4. Any other business

 

Item 1

 

Discussion: We all agreed that our definition is too general, therefore we changed it.

 

 

Item 2

 

Discussion: Saša recommended two hypotheses and wrote them down.

 

Decision: Mateja and Irena were in favour of that (Urška was informed over the e-mail about the hypotheses and also agreed).

 

 

Item 3

 

Discussion: Mateja infomed us that she will go to another library and find some more literature.

 

Decision: We decided that Irena will help her.

 

 

Item 4

 

Discussion: We all agreed that Mateja will write the minutes of this meeting and that we will all simultaneously update the wiki.

 

Next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 11th March, 2009 at FDV library.  

 

Minutes-taker: Mateja

Chair: Saša

Time-keeper: Irena

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

MINUTES OF THE THIRD MEETING

held on the 11th March, 2009 at FDV library from 11:45 am to 12:15 pm

 

Present: Mateja, Irena, Saša, Urška

 

Absent: /

 

AGENDA:

1. Writing another question
2. Distribution of tasks
3. Any other business

 

Item 1

 

Discussion: We decided to write another question, so the number of questions would coincide with the number of tasks (each of us would have two questions).

Action: Saša recommended one more question and all the members of our team were in favour of it. 

 

Item 2

 

Discussion: Irena suggested that we should all choose between the questions and pick two questions we liked the most. It turned out to be a great idea because we did not have any problems with distributing the questions.

 

 

Item 3

 

Discussion: Mateja suggested an idea that we should start forming questions for the questionnaire.

Decision: We all agreed that questions for the poll must be done until the next week.

 

 

 

 

Next meeting will take place on 18th March 2009 at library on FDV. 

 

Chair: Saša

Minutes-taker: Mateja

Time-keeper: Irena 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

 

MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING

held on the 18th March, 2009 at FDV library from 13:45 pm to 14:45 pm

 

Present: Mateja, Irena, Saša, Urška

 

Absent: /

 

AGENDA:

1. Writing the questionnaire
2. Distribution of tasks
3. Glossary
4. Any other business

 

Item 1

 

Discussion: We all came very well prepared for the meeting, each of us had a list of possible questions for the questionnaire. Then Urška said that she found a very good question poll in a Diploma thesis with the same topic as our project. We reviewed it and agreed to use it to spare some time. However, Saša suggested that she would like to add some questions to the questionnaire and remove one or two. After the discussion Mateja remembered that we should not use Diploma theses as sources.

Decision: According to the disccusion we made a conclusion that we should ask our English lectur if we can use the questionnaire and Urška volunteered to do that. Moreover, we were all in favour of Saša's suggestion.

 

Item 2

 

Discussion: We had already distributed our tasks previous week but this week we decided to distribute our tasks more in detail regarding the empirical part of the project. We divided the literature so each of us got approximately the same amount of work. To improve and shorten our communication Irena suggested that we start another wiki page where we can daily update our project.

Decision: We will start another wiki page until tomorrow and start wrtiting the theoretical part of our project.

 

Item 3

 

Discussion: Irena recommended that each one of us write three words for our glossary and put them on the wiki.

Decision: We were all in favour of Irena's idea.

 

Item 4

 

Discussion: We all agreed that we will write the minutes of the meeting at home and simultaneously update the wiki.

 

 

 

Next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 25th March, 2009 at FDV library.