Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Fat chance of promotion for women – while overweight men rewarded

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 09 April 2009
BEING fat is fine for men in the business world, but it might just weigh down women's prospects for promotion, research suggested yesterday.
A study found that being overweight further reinforced the glass ceiling faced by women trying to reach the top.

But for men, a larger waistline seemed to enhance their chances of entering the boardroom.

The study, published in the British jour
nal Equal Opportunities International, focused on the bosses of 1,000 leading companies in the United States.

Photographs of these individuals were assessed by experts, including medical professionals who were able to accurately estimate people's weight.

The researchers found that only 5 per cent of men and women bosses at top companies were classed as obese – lower than the US average of 36 per cent of men and 38 per cent of women of a similar age.

But the study did find that up to 61 per cent of the leading male bosses were overweight – higher than the US average of 41 per cent in this age group – indicating that overweight men were over-represented in high positions in the business world.

In contrast, only 22 per cent of women chief executives were overweight, compared with the US average of 29 per cent in this female age group.

Researcher Mark Roehling, an associate professor of human resource management at Michigan State University, said that the attitudes appeared to contribute to the glass ceiling.

"The results suggest that while being obese limits the career opportunities of both women and men, being 'merely overweight' harms only female executives – and may actually benefit male executives."

The results echo previous research showing that among white, middle-class communities, women faced "harsher weight standards" than men, Prof Roehling said.

The latest research is the first to focus on the potential effect of weight on career advancement to the highest levels of management.

Prof Roehling said the results reflected a greater tolerance – and possibly even a preference – for larger sizes in men, but smaller-sized women.

"It appears that the glass ceiling effect on women's advancement may reflect not only general negative stereotypes about the competencies of women, but also weight bias that results in the application of stricter appearance standards to women."

Tam Fry, chair of the Child Growth Foundation and a National Obesity Forum board member, said previous cases had highlighted weight discrimination against overweight women.

This included an obese woman who was not allowed to emigrate to New Zealand because of her size, and concerns raised over the potential burden on health services.

Mr Fry said with the financial crisis leading to redundancies, more emphasis could also be put on weight in the jobs market.

"There are now so many people going for the same job because so many have been laid off," he said.

"Unless an overweight candidate is particularly well qualified for the job, it is more likely to go to the slimmer, more attractive candidate. It is an employers' market at the moment."





Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

09/04/2009 00:33:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 09/04/2009 00:45:09


This study/report hardly surprises me, and even with the fight for equal rights, many moons ago, women are still manipulated by men.

This is why I rant on about the deceptions of truth, such as girls getting brainwashed into the new cervical cancer jab, and the drug companies testing out their powerful hormones on our women, etc, etc.

Try this on men and it has and never will take place!

The word "sexist" is still very much prevalent, Charles Linskaill understands this, shame other wont admit it and refuse to see it!!!

3

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 09/04/2009 00:48:12


See what I mean?,....re:, (comment #1)


4

fife runner,

09/04/2009 06:18:05
any proof #1 where are the figures. My wife teaches. most teachers are now women. I work for Royal mail. most who go off are men.
5

Kate,

Zurich 09/04/2009 07:25:05
#1, on what are you basing that utterly crass comment? My mother is a retired teacher and now covers for a male teacher who has been twice demoted because he is ill so often, whereas she has hardly had a day off in her career!
6

Paesano,

09/04/2009 08:28:32
#5 - I'm sure in that side by side specific comparison you are right, but think your test population will need to be a bit bigger than 1 man v 1 woman to counter argue. Sadly in my experience I would have to agree with the first part of what #1 says based on working in local offices ranging from 50 to 300 people, by some considerable margin - but hey that's only my experience.

If businesses were to segregate the data into male & female stats they would be accussed of sexism and challenged. It is one of those things that to know definitively if there is a difference between men & women can never really happen in any organised manner, the answer itself can not be acted in the future without discriminating, let alone the act of collecting / analysing the info.

Articles like this are pointless as they only serve to divide - or is it only ok to explore the differences where women are seen to be disadvantaged? Likewise for the comments - #1 says women are off sick too often, and gets treated to outrage from #4 & 5 who state it's men that are off more.....but that's ok right?

The one thing I know for sure is that society is donald ducked.
7

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 09/04/2009 09:19:12
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512312/Women-46-cent-sick-days-men.html

However...

http://www.liv.ac.uk/news/press_releases/2007/09/male_sick_leave.htm

So it may seem that women take more of thier sick allowance in the year but men get longer peirods of if getting signed off by the doc.

I'm just a messanger, please don't shoot. My wife works as a nurse and that's one stressful environment and I'm surprised she doesn't take more time off.
8

Mcsnagpile,

09/04/2009 09:19:28
There are far better quality requirements than being slim, like the ability to take the side of the boss and jointly lie, steal, cheat, and back stab to ISO 9001 standards.

Polls taken at coronary wards found that men are slightly advantaged at that sort of thing.

Happiness is being a fat mercenary.
9

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

09/04/2009 09:40:06
It would be interesting to find out how much 'sick time' women take off work is actually because their children are sick..a day here a day there etc..

Personally all I can say is..having worked with a good deal of men...their 'sick time' tends to involve pubs...sport...music festivals..pursuing and bagging bed post notches...oh and some..this is a cracker...another wee job on the fly....

Not to say us girls are all angels of course.
10

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

09/04/2009 09:42:30
Forgot to mention that this article is rather obvious...no need for a survey...overweight women are heavily criticised in our societies but overweight men ae more tolerated...there...that'll be several thousand dollars please..
11

sam the god,

09/04/2009 10:32:41
The vast majority of over weight people are women just look at the any major street in Scotland and it is obvious to the naked eye. They are then pressurised by other women as the trend is for super slim just look at the types of models that are on the cat walks they then try diets and make themselves ill just to fit into the appropriately perceived criteria of how they should look.

12

Tartan Viking,

09/04/2009 11:00:43
#6. Paesano,

"Articles like this are pointless as they only serve to divide - or is it only ok to explore the differences where women are seen to be disadvantaged? Likewise for the comments - #1 says women are off sick too often, and gets treated to outrage from #4 & 5 who state it's men that are off more.....but that's ok right?"

Well said. Funny how its ok one way but not the other.

Interesting last part though "Unless an overweight candidate is particularly well qualified for the job, it is more likely to go to the slimmer, more attractive candidate. It is an employers' market at the moment."
That possibly means there will be more chance of the post going to a woman then, if more men are fatter? So, how about a study of this then to see if it impacts on fat men (in the interests of balance).
13

Charles Linskaill,

Fighting for Womens Rights! 09/04/2009 13:15:15

At end of the day, it is the women that are indispensable, and us guys are dispensable.

14

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 09/04/2009 13:39:21
Charles

It's not very often think this about you but you are an idiot.

The only person dispensible Charles, judging by your comment, is you.

You're a clown man.
15

,

09/04/2009 15:00:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

Paesano,

09/04/2009 16:11:35
Also, do you think the writer intentionally jokes "reinforces the glass ceiling women face"? First thought reinforcing the glass ceiling would be sensible where chubby ladies are concerned, but then the expression implies women are below the ceiling so all is ok. Then again given chubby fellas are getting the promos so now reckon there is no option but to reinforce the glass ceiling. It's just safer.

Reminds me of how silly the expression throwing stones in glass houses is. This is entirely dependant on the circumstances - if you're trapped inside a glass house of course you have to throw stones, you'd be stupid not to.

It's a good job I have a fleet of underpaid women to effectively do my job else I'd never find the time to write.
17

AC,

Melbourne 10/04/2009 23:45:59
#6 good point about how the reverse statement seems acceptable!
#7 good links, thanks.

I'm suprised though that noone has questioned which is the cause and which is the effect?

I worked in a job flying between UK and Europe every week, long working hours, staying in hotels every night and restaurants 3 times a day (no other choice available), so obviously I ended up puting on weight due to no time for exercise and very few opportunities for healthy food. I imagine that the executives mentioned in the analysis have even worse lifestyles.
18

AC,

Melbourne 10/04/2009 23:48:20
Actually hold on, upoin re-reading I just realised that the percentage of people who are obese is less at the top than the US average.
However my question still applies, has anyone looked in to the causes of the weight gain or loss?
Do some executives have access to better gyms?
Are some people overweight because they can't manage their lifestyle properly (and therefore wouldn't be any good at executive level)?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.