Progress Report #3 - November, 1999

Executive Summary

Full Report (PDF)

Appendix A (PDF) - Ordinance
Appendix B (PDF) - Guidelines for a Gender Analysis
Appendix C (PDF) - Bibliography
Appendix D(PDF) - Participants
Appendix E (PDF) - DPW Employment Data

Press Release

Request for Feedback

To anyone who is working on CEDAW, particularly on the local level, please let us know what you are doing, if the material here is useful, if you have adapted it to your own situation. We welcome your stories and comments. You can write to us at cosw@ci.sf.ca.us.

Executive Summary

More than fifty years ago, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed in San Francisco. Now, as we enter the next millenium, San Francisco continues to exercise its leadership in support of human rights, especially as they pertain to women and girls. In April 1998, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. enacted an ordinance implementing the principles underlying the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Through community outreach and a public hearing held in October 1997, we learned that despite San Francisco’s continued support for women’s rights, there was still a need for the City and County of San Francisco to take more proactive steps to protect the human rights of women and girls. The CEDAW Ordinance provides an approach to eliminate discrimination and ensure equal opportunity. It requires us to examine the different needs, roles, and responsibilities of all persons and then to ensure that the budgets, employment practices, and provision of services reflect these differences.

This report represents the first step in implementing CEDAW principles in San Francisco. We have independently analyzed two city departments to evaluate their response to the needs of different genders, ethnicities, and other key attributes: the Juvenile Probation Department and the Department of Public Works. These departments exhibited great courage and honesty in participating in this process. We thank the Department of Public Works for its receptivity to this process, and we thank the Department of Juvenile Probation for going beyond what was expected in this time period by conducting focus groups among its employees.

History and Background

CEDAW is an international treaty that was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979 *1. Although more than 165 countries have ratified CEDAW, the United States still has not done so; consequently, it is not subject to CEDAW’s obligations.*2 At least nine states, eleven counties, and twenty cities have passed resolutions urging U.S. ratification of CEDAW, but San Francisco is the first and the only city in the United States to begin to implement CEDAW in its own laws.*3 The Ordinance works to promote gender equity and equal access in (1) economic development and employment, (2) violence against women and girls, and (3) health care.*4 The passage of this historic ordinance resulted from a unique public/private partnership between the San Francisco Commission on the Status of Women (COSW) and a consortium of community organizations spearheaded by the Women’s Institute for Leadership Development for Human Rights (WILD). It also would not have been possible without the support and efforts of then President of the Board of Supervisors, Barbara Kaufman.

San Francisco is leading the way, but others are soon to follow. Organizers from Seattle, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Boston are working toward similar initiatives. The Ordinance also has received international recognition. It was included in the United Nations Development Fund for Women’s collection of best practices worldwide for implementing CEDAW.

The Ordinance is designed to eliminate discrimination, including violence, against women through implementing CEDAW principles within San Francisco. The CEDAW Ordinance broadly defines discrimination against women and girls as any: distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex that has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cutural civil or any other field. The definition of discrimination includes gender-based violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately.

The first step of the implementation process is to examine selected departments for discrimination in the areas of employment practices, budget allocation, and the provision of direct and indirect services. This is done through gender analyses that identify discrimination and provide remedies for such discrimination, if found. The ordinance also requires human rights education for city employees and integration of CEDAW principles into City policies. Finally, through exercising its leadership, the City will work toward implementing the principles of CEDAW in the private sector. Local implementation is delegated to the COSW, with oversight from a CEDAW Task Force. The eleven CEDAW Task Force members include elected officials, organized labor, government employees, and community advocates with expertise in economic justice, human rights, violence against women, and health.

Methodology

The aim of the gender analysis is for all departments to examine proactively the different needs of the population they serve and employ, and to integrate those needs into their daily operations.

The Task Force selected two departments to undergo the first gender analysis in 1999. Although these are two distinct departments, the CEDAW framework recognizes that all departments are interconnected and part of a unified whole. Thus, the actions of the selected departments impact other departments and private entities. Equally important, the CEDAW framework also recognizes that many practices are set by city-wide policies, unions and/or the public, and that external factors can influence the creation of an efficient or just environment within any single department. The Department of Public Works was selected for its large size, nontraditional employment opportunities for women, and provision of indirect services (services not provided directly to an individual person), such as street construction and building design. The Juvenile Probation Department provided an opportunity to examine service provision to an increasing population of diverse young women, and to delve into its emphasis on community services.

In March 1999, the COSW hired the international consulting group Strategic Analysis for Gender Equity (SAGE) to work with the Task Force to develop and implement gender analysis guidelines with the two selected departments. Developing the guidelines was a collaborative project. SAGE prepared the Guidelines for a Gender Analysis based on input from the selected departments, the COSW staff, the CEDAW Task Force, organized labor, and community groups. The guidelines provide a framework to evaluate and address any differential impact of service delivery, employment practices, and budget allocation. The framework outlines a process for gathering information, analyzing the information with a human rights gender perspective, and making recommendations to correct any inequities.

The two departments underwent gender analysis in the summer of 1999. The SAGE consultants and COSW staff members met with the departments’ appointed liaisons and staff to provide technical assistance. The analysis was conducted with the help of department staff, unions, and community representatives. The departments used the guidelines to conduct a self-analysis, based on the view that critical self-examination is essential for any long-term change. SAGE, together with the COSW staff and CEDAW Task Force, examined the information provided by the departments, their staff and community groups to evaluate the departments' adherence to the principles underlying CEDAW, and to provide recommendations on how the departments could better protect and promote women’s human rights through their operations.

Findings

First and foremost, the COSW found that the very process of conducting a gender analysis created an awareness of and sensitivity to gender-related issues at both departments. Most departmental personnel not only were receptive to the analysis as a proactive approach to eliminating discrimination, but some staff, on their own initiative, have begun to change the way they evaluate their policies and programs to serve all persons more effectively. Top management at the Juvenile Probation Department expressed that the gender analysis had a decisive impact on their operations. Similarly, staff at the Department of Public Works acknowledged that service delivery may impact women and men differently. Many staff members of both departments appreciated the vision of incorporating an awareness of human rights with a gender lens into their work, recognizing that they serve a diverse population with many needs.

Despite their efforts, both the Department of Public Works and Juvenile Probation need to correct some deficiencies to ensure that women and girls’ human rights are met.

  • Department of Juvenile Probation

The Department of Juvenile Probation (JPD), with a budget of approximately 25.9 million dollars, has already begun to address the different needs of its growing female population. The Department's Community Programs Division has recently given several grants to community organizations to provide gender-specific programs. This Division has a contracting process that is inclusive of community and client needs and encourages service providers to communicate and cooperate with each other and departmental staff.

While the Department has created some gender specific programs that appear to meet girls' needs, many staff who regularly work with girls have not been educated about these services. As a result, community groups report that many youth who could benefit from the gender-specific programs are not referred to them. More staff training about gender specific programming is necessary to ensure that staff is equipped to refer and place clients appropriately. Also, although the Department has been aggressive and successful in securing state, federal, and other funding to offer these services, most of the funding for these programs is temporary and thus at risk. Funding and gender programming in each division needs to be integrated into the regular budget process to sustain and promote this critical work.

In addition to sustaining current funding, there is a need for additional services for young women. Both the Department and community advocates have stated the need for expanded mental health services in Juvenile Hall*5, especially services that are gender specific. There is also a need to develop, expand and/or redesign services for sexual assault, domestic violence, parenting and pregnancy prevention, delinquency prevention for at risk girls, substance abuse prevention, education, and transition planning.

The Department's ultimate goal must remain to help girls and boys exit and remain free from the juvenile justice system. Although the Juvenile Probation Department is not responsible for the rapid increase of young women in the criminal justice system, it must continue to enhance its efforts to seek alternatives to incarceration. It must also continue to collaborate with other pieces of the criminal justice system to provide more alternative and preventive services.

As a result of extensive outreach, the Juvenile Probation Department’s workforce is diverse with respect to both race and gender, and generally reflects the population served by the Department. However, women are still under-represented in nontraditional employment areas, such as engineers and utility workers. The Department plans to conduct greater outreach to remedy this under-representation.

  • Department of Public Works

The Department of Public Works (DPW), which is responsible for maintaining city streets, public areas, and buildings, has a budget of approximately $115 million and a staff of 1549, making it substantially larger than the Juvenile Probation Department. The Department of Public Works has taken a lead in improving retention of employees. It has created a training department that emphasizes quality and fairness in the workplace and has initiated programs in response to employees stated needs for professional development. However, there is much work to be done to bring more women into nontraditional employment areas; creative outreach and recruitment efforts are necessary.

With few exceptions, the Department of Public Works has not yet integrated gender into its service provision. Part of the reason is that the Department of Public Works mostly provides indirect services (services such as street cleaning that are not provided directly to an individual person) where the gender impact is not immediately obvious and difficult to address. In addition, many of the Department’s projects are client-driven whereby different city departments, also lacking training in gender specific needs, request assistance with their buildings. Consequently, projects will not include a gender element unless the Department of Public Works begins to bring this emphasis and awareness to the client department's attention.

It is critical for departments to begin examining the role of gender in the provision of indirect services, most obviously in the area of safety concerns for women. While not all indirect services have a gender component, it is critical to institutionalize the questions so that gender concerns are not overlooked. What are women’s needs? What are men’s needs? How, if at all, do the needs differ based on gender? How can the concerns of all persons be best incorporated into the project? Some bureaus were uncomfortable even asking these questions, but without asking these questions, we will never know if there are gender concerns. When these questions are asked and answered, as done in the Bureau of Architecture, we see innovations such as additional lighting and visibility where customers enter and leave public facilities.

Already, the Department of Public Works maintains a well-developed system for receiving community input through neighborhood forums. These forums could be expanded to examine and address the impact of its indirect service on women and other traditionally underrepresented populations. The Department could also conduct walk throughs of buildings under construction by males and females who will use the completed facilities.

Historically, the Department of Public Works has been subject to much outside criticism from community groups, Supervisors, and female employees for its lack of a diverse workforce. It has begun to address these deficiencies through different programs, most notably the "Project Pull" internship program that provides high school students from groups traditionally underrepresented in architecture, engineering, and other similar fields the opportunity to work at DPW. This inventive program breaks down traditional stereotypes by allowing young people to envision themselves in jobs they might otherwise not consider. At present, there is female under-representation in most job categories, particularly the skilled trades, maintenance workers, and technicians. More creative efforts are necessary to recruit more women into nontraditional positions. These efforts should be developed in partnership with other City departments, unions, tradeswomen’s associations, and community organizations.

The Department of Public Works has shown a commitment to professional development and training for its workforce. This same commitment must be made to expand family-friendly workplace policies that meet employees' stated needs. The Department's Personnel Office is processing its first job share and is committed to creating a childcare referral program for its new employees. Such programs should be expanded to all employees. Innovative solutions to the realities of employees' family obligations are called for even if they are difficult to implement.

  • Cross-cutting Themes

We found that several themes were present in both departments. Many of these issues are regulated at the City and County government level. Although we only have information from these two departments, these are city-wide policy issues and, thus, must be addressed at this level. That said, the departments also must take whatever actions are within their power to remedy the situations.

First, we found a general need for education on human rights with a gender perspective. This represents not so much a deficiency within the two selected departments as something that we must be vigilant about creating for all departments. Many department personnel were unaware of the framework of human rights in which all rights and needs are interconnected. Further, the concept of gender discrimination, in contrast to sex discrimination, was quite new to them. When the education process was missing or unsuccessful, it was obvious that the department’s analysis suffered greatly. In this respect, the Juvenile Probation Department, with its recent history of funding gender-specific programs, had a head start in understanding the gender analysis process. While the Department of Public Works staff members, in particular the top management, were receptive to participating in this process, the Department analysis suffered from an unfamiliarity with gender issues and human rights work. This training is crucial for staff to learn how to incorporate gender concerns into budget planning, program and service development, and employment practices.

Second, there is an absence of comprehensive data relevant to evaluating the gender equity of department’s budgets, services and employment practices. In some cases, specific department policies called for such information but execution did not happen. For example, the Department of Public Works’ own regulations require it to maintain data on requests for part-time work, but the Department does not collect and analyze this information. These data are essential to designing and delivering effective and equitable services, creating fair employment practices, and equitable budget allocations.

A broader issue - one that must be addressed city-wide - is the need to collect data disaggregated by gender, race, and other attributes. While we understand the sensitivity and legal issues involved in asking for confidential information (which includes the fear that this information can be misused to discriminate against employees and clients), it is necessary to collect this data voluntarily for a meaningful analysis. It is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a human rights violation unless the data are disaggregated on as many dimensions (e.g., gender, race, class, family status) as possible and then adequately analyzed.  Dissaggregating solely on the basis of gender or race is often insufficient to reveal all forms of discrimination.  For example, without knowing if one is a mother or father, it is difficult to determine trends in promotions of women or men with children. If race or sexual identity is hidden from the analysis, biases can also remain undetected. Dialogue, study, and focus groups about the effective means to collect sensitive and, by law, voluntary and confidential information must take place not only among employees, but also in concert with unions and community groups.

In addition, both departments did not provide detailed information on budget allocations for gender specific purposes. For example, the Juvenile Probation Department told us that 25 percent of its budget covered services for girls on the basis that girls represented 25 percent of its clients. Although it is often difficult to parse such information out, it must be done. More human rights training, mentioned above, will help staff learn how to gather this information and analyze it. Effective enforcement of women’s human rights requires directing funds to meet gender specific needs.

Third, there is a need to create a more fair and equitable workplace. Both departments need to enhance their efforts to recruit, sustain, and develop a more diverse workforce with an emphasis on family-friendly environments. Each department has made efforts at decreasing discrimination in employment and diversifying their staffs. These are the first steps. Both departments must conduct more outreach, and develop creative and effective recruitment programs to increase gender and racial diversity, especially in the skilled trades and maintenance areas. This is particularly true at the Department of Public Works.

Efforts also must be taken to create an environment where each person can work and advance professionally. Professional development programs such as mentoring and leadership circles,*6 should become more of a priority in both departments. The Department of Public Works offers quality training programs but still needs to expand opportunities to ensure that both women and men have equal opportunity for advancement. Much of this work should be conducted in cooperation with the relevant unions, which represent an important resource and liaison to staff.

In addition, there is a clear absence of family-friendly policies in both departments. As noted above, some of this is beyond the control of any single department as unions, elected officials, other City departments (such as the Department of Human Resources), and the public all play important roles in developing and implementing more family friendly policies. Nevertheless, it is an area where the departments can show leadership in addressing employee needs.

Employees in both departments mentioned childcare/eldercare problems. Relying on the new city-wide childcare center, as both departments suggested, is inadequate since the center accommodates less than fifty children. Both departments have similar issues in needing round the clock staffing. Helping employees find childcare/eldercare referrals and resources to meet this demand would communicate a crucial recognition of the family needs of employees. This would not only help with attendance but would also increase the retention of female employees, who generally remain the primary caregivers in the family.

While the City of San Francisco should provide leadership in offering flexible work options, there is still much within an individual department's power. Expanding long-held notions of work options is a major undertaking, but one that must be done to remain competitive. Each department can begin by implementing current written policies, as often a written part-time work and/or flexible work policy is ignored and/or discouraged. The City must consider job sharing as an alternative. Many employees have also expressed a desire for telecommuting, which cuts commuting time and thus provides employees an opportunity to spend more time with their families during non-working hours. While these may not be viable options for all employees, they should at least be explored, particularly in light of the San Francisco Bay Area’s traffic and environmental concerns. City-wide, flexibility and creativity should be at the forefront of any department’s efforts to provide adaptable work arrangements that encourage nontraditional means of assisting employees with competing family (whether children, parental, or other) demands.

Conclusion and Recommendations

As stated above, this report represents the first step in the process of implementing CEDAW in San Francisco. The Commission on the Status of Women, together with the CEDAW Task Force, will continue to revise the guidelines, to work with selected departments as they undergo gender analysis, to conduct City-wide training in human rights with a gender perspective, and to look at ways to implement CEDAW in the private sector.

We call on the City and County of San Francisco and its City departments to:

  1. Increase education in human rights with a gender perspective
  2. Expand the collection of data disaggregated by gender, race, and other attributes
  3. Create a more fair and equitable workplace
  • Increase effective recruitment efforts for a diverse workforce
  • Provide meaningful family friendly policies to retain employees
  • Increase professional development and training opportunities for all employees

The findings and recommendations are intended to assist the City and County of San Francisco in its efforts to protect and promote the human rights of women and girls by eliminating gender discrimination. By serving as the initial departments to undergo gender analysis, the Juvenile Probation Department and the Department of Public Works have taken the critical first steps toward identifying underlying gender discrimination and remedying inequities. We laud their generous participation, honesty, and efforts. We encourage continued dialogue among department staff, the Commission on the Status of Women, unions, and the community to continue this process and implement the general recommendations listed above as well as the specific recommendations listed under each department. It is our hope that this ongoing work will continue to serve as a model for protecting women’s human rights here in the United States and throughout the world.

-------------------------
footnotes

*1The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, opened for signature 12/18/79, entered into force 9/3/81. The entire text of CEDAW is available on-line at http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/content.htm. For additional resources on CEDAW and international human rights, see also http://www.wildhr.org.

*2Once a country adopts CEDAW it must follow a set of protocols and reporting mechanisms that help to ensure compliance with CEDAW principles.

*3The State of California has twice passed resolutions on CEDAW. Other California cities and counties that have passed resolutions on CEDAW include: Los Angeles County, Marin County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, the City of Redlands, the City of San Diego, the City of San Jose, and the City of West Hollywood.

*4See San Francisco Administrative Code, Chapter 12 K, also known as the CEDAW Ordinance. The full text of the Ordinance is attached as Appendix A, and is available at the Commission's website, http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/

*5Juvenile Hall is a youth detention facility in San Francisco. Its programming is further explained later in this report, under Juvenile Probation Department, Section 2, Delivery of Services, subsection a, Gender and Service Delivery.

*6There are models in the private sector from some large companies that understand the importance of investing in human resources. These models can inform citywide policies. See Good For Business: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital, The Environmental Scan, A Fact-Finding Report of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, Washington, D.C., March 1995, and A Solid Investment: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital, Recommendations of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, Washington. D.C., November 1995. Both reports are available at http://www.ilr.cornell.edu. See also, recent reports from Supervisor Mabel Teng's Glass Ceiling hearing in December 1997, available at the Office of Supervisor Mabel Teng, Board of Supervisors, City and County of San Francisco.