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 '