06/23/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

women's commission. They were Margie Hendrikson, 1990 Dogwood; Erica Hovet, 3204 Fillmore Street; Barbara Caulfield, 1176 Lorane Highway; Sara Lichtenstein, - 1650 Kona Street; Theresa Engelmann, 1910 Fairmount Boulevard; Joan Acker, 2345 Patterson Street; Karen Alvarado, 2415 Skyline Boulevard; Anne Stewart, 2790 Charnel ton Street; Judy Cassell, 385 Merrill Court; Laurie McDonald, Women's Skill Center; Catherine Lauris, 1240 East 18th Avenue; Evelyn McConnaughey, 1653 Fairmount Boulevard; and a representative of the Women's Transitional Living Center. Also supporting the proposal were Joe Lashway, chairman of the Democratic Central Committee; John Fair, chairman of the Republican Central Committee; and James Klonoski, representative of the Democratic Party of Oregon. The thrust of their remarks was that a separate commission to focus its efforts only on women's problems was necessary in view of the numbers of women in the work force who were under-represented in seeking positions of authority. Ms. Hendriksen said that the commission should be staffed with representatives of groups actively work- ing in women's rights areas. Ms. Hovet noted precedent had been set in the United Nations and at the Federal level. She said that contact with inspectors reviewing compliance of local governments with Federal law indicated such a commission would aid them and show good faith of the local government in attempting to comply with regulations governing contracts for Federal funds. Also, noncompliance with Federal laws concerning sex discrimination was costly in terms of legal fees. Ms. Caulfield commented that experience in Seattle with a women's commission and an office of women's rights had moved that city forward in getting specified jobs and training programs for promotions for women and had carried out resources programs for training and recruitment programs. She said the complex and widespread problem of job barriers and inequality in pay necessitate a body to be concerned only with women's rights. Ms. Lichtenstein said that male and some female resistance to e affirmative action programs as it concerned women would be better met if a commis- sion was formed since it would be sure to attract large numbers of volunteers de- termined to find solutions to women's problems. Ms. Engelmann described the proposal for creation of a commission. A separate body, she said, would be flexible so as to take advantage of whatever opportunities pre- sented themselves to advance the cause of women. It would take the responsibility for dealing with sex discrimination leaving to the present Human Rights Commission the responsibility for dealing with discrimination in other areas covered by ordinance (minori ties, race, religion, etc.), and would comprise appointees nominated by various women's organizations, the Central Labor Council, the Demo- cratic and Republican Central Committees. . Ms. Acker reviewed the history of efforts to gain recognition of sex discrimination. Since establishment of the Human Rights Commission, she said, it was felt the women's situation had not changed - there were still inadequate earnings, lack of job opportunities, etc. - and that was borne out by a survey of hiring practices in the city itself which indicated the proportion of female city employes less than the national and state averages. Although the city created an administrative posi- tion with the responsibility of dealing with women's problems, she said, that posi- tion was given very little support from the Human Rights Commission. In fact, the Commission had appeared offensive and hostile to women's organizations when they suggested creation of a women's commission, this made it appear evident a separate commission to deal exclusively with women's problems was needed. She added that during the past six years there had been no action by the Human Rights Commission . with regard to sex discrimination unless pushed by women outside the Commission, there had been no women active in problems relating to sex discrimination appointed to the Commission, and that women could not continue to be treated as a minority group. She said a decision to refer this propo~al back to the Human Rights Commis- sion would be consLdered a rejection of the request. 34q, 6/23/75 - 15