Report on Female Staff Discrimination at Columbia University, February 1971, page 27
uéhuytther questions submitted bywa spoakcr at the status of Women hoarind ‘ March 11, 1970. ' - M ; Any comuittee or study group organized to investigaté the status of women at Columbia should give thorough uttontion to the problems of women on cut ‘ O :j‘d&u1nistrat1vo staff. ’:h§:§Ma§¢T§aay coaéo of women who uove for years heid the second poaition thy M. o dlvtoion or otticovof tho Unruerxity wﬁo have qualifications equal to orL :/ouperior to tho two for whom th¢y7w§rR;A»u V nu. .mi..4 .3 A%V,;t,,m; artorm fa mo H. V*.MohAattout1ontohou1d be sivqn to*po§§' §i1—§baéﬁ ahﬁlicauts for jobs at c¢g§$§1a. regardless of their qualiticattons, Viotiiveuétypiug tests?‘ Male appliou V_ re not. way is it assumed ttat women jipptitontstate iookiﬁg for sccretariil jobs? 5 Eco does our Placcmont Office taspond.to oompanies who discriminate in h£§tnﬁ2;f: “ :Are thcre to tow male administrative aséiétants because men are unwilling to. Q acccpt these jobs at the salaries offored? L .. A .0." .3 ’F1na1fy. I should like to recomnend_that at least one member of whatever committee W“ is formed as a result of these hearingo be a member of the administrative staff; , WA‘. . . ' . , ., .~v».m-—~«-ya ’ . 6 f . ~ . t -r ., v '