Who Stands to Benefit? Examining Positive Consequences of Male Allyship for Female and Male Faculty

Institutions devote significant resources to gender diversity and inclusion, yet little empirical research has examined the benefits of male allyship in higher education. Using women’s other- and self-reports and men’s self-reports from 101 male-female colleague dyads in male-dominated departments, we tested a model involving men’s allyship, women’s inclusion and vitality, and men’s growth and work-family enrichment. As hypothesized, men’s growth mediated the link between their allyship and work-family enrichment, and women’s perceptions of men’s allyship predicted women’s vitality, both directly and through inclusion. However, men’s allyship was weakly associated with women’s perceptions of their allyship, and men’s benefits were unrelated to women’s inclusion or vitality. Findings highlight the importance of male allyship while underscoring disconnect between women’s and men’s experiences.

Gendered Help at the Workplace: Implications for Organizational Power Relations

One of the most thoroughly studied aspects of prosocial workplace behavior is organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Yet, the definition of OCB seems to overlook the fact that help-giving acts may be of different types with different consequences for both giver and recipient. The present research explores workplace help-giving behavior by investigating the importance of gender as a factor that facilitates or inhibits specific types of help that empower and disempower independent coping: autonomy- and dependency-oriented help, respectively. A pilot and two following studies were conducted. The pilot study empirically assessed which acts would be clearly perceived by participants as representing both types of help. Then, using the descriptions of these acts, Study 1 examined which type of help would be perceived as most likely to be given by a male or female employee to a male or female colleague in a sample of 226 participants (78% women). Study 2 explored which type of help participants perceived as one they would rather receive from a male or female helper in a sample of 170 participants (65% women). Our findings indicate that male and female respondents who rated men giving help were more likely to expect them to give autonomy-oriented help, especially to women. There were no significant differences in dependency-oriented help. Further, women preferred to receive more autonomy-oriented help than men did, regardless of the help-giver’s gender; no significant results were found for men. Implications for OCB and workplace power relations are discussed.

Remedies for Breach of the Contract of Employment

Wallie Nangle was an executive officer in the Lord Chancellor's Department. In November 1989, it was alleged that he had sexually harassed a female colleague. Following an investigation in which the complaint was upheld, Mr. Nangle was transferred to another department with a loss of increments for 12 months. This decision was upheld after an appeal to the permanent secretary in the department, though the loss of increments was reduced from 12 to three months. Alleging that these decisions had been taken in breach of the rules of natural justice and with procedural impropriety Nangle sought judicial review. But the application failed, with the Divisional Court holding that despite his status as a civil servant, the plaintiff was engaged under a contract of service and that he should seek relief in contract rather than public law to remedy any loss which he had suffered.1 The question which arose in this case was precisely what remedies could Nangle secure in private law? He might recover damages for any loss of increments if the employer had in fact failed to comply with the terms of the disciplinary code. But it is difficult to see what contractual remedy would have been available at the time against the Crown to restrain a disciplinary transfer on the ground that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted in breach of the rules of natural justice, that is to say in breach of rules applying more usually in public law which the courts have shown little desire to apply in the context of employment.