Presenteeism as Proof of Loyalty: How Work Cultures in Security Sector Institutions Undermine Gender Equality

Lauren Lowe (GPS Member, PhD candidate)

When loyalty is measured by who stays latest and sacrifices most, security sector institutions (SSIs) entrench a work culture that penalises care and undermines gender equality.

Our research conducted at the Monash Global Peace and Security Centre and funded by Global Affairs Canada as part of the Elsie Initiative for Women in Peace Operations, finds that work cultures in SSIs (including armed forces and police) which devalue care impact the careers of personnel with caring responsibilities, including recruitment, retention, and progression. We identify ways in which SSIs can better attend to the care needs of personnel and support their meaningful participation in security work.

Work culture in SSIs

Participants working in SSIs describe a prevailing masculinist work culture, which continues to value strength, domination, and aggression while devaluing traits associated with femininity – including care, empathy, and compassion. Such a work culture determines who is seen to be a good “fit” and what is expected of them: long unpredictable hours, constant availability, frequent travel, and the willingness and ability to prioritise work over their personal lives. This reinforces self- sacrifice (both physical sacrifice and that of time and resources), presenteeism and constant availability as an indicator of commitment and dedication to be rewarded – often through career advancement.
This further contributes to a maternal bias in security sectors, where the participation of personnel with caring responsibilities – especially women – is constrained by the expectations of long working hours and availability at short notice, meaning carers are typically seen as less capable, committed and reliable: And I know from my own personal experience, this overworking is quite typical. So, mothers are very concerned that they might be regarded in a different light, so they work much more than their colleagues, for example, and they do suffer (female police officer).

Being unable to attend work at short notice, particularly in the middle of the night or when caring for dependents, and being unable to remain behind due to school pickups or appointments, disadvantages the career progression of many (particularly women) in favour of those who can be more physically present in the workplace: I’ve heard arguments from senior managers saying things like, well, if so and so has to go home at four o’clock, because at school pick up, but so and so is still here at midnight…surely I can reward the person who [remained behind]…They’re showing loyalty, they’re showing extra effort, all of these things (female in the armed forces).

Supporting care

Influenced by, and compounding, presenteeism, self-sacrifice, and “limitless availability” (as one participant puts it), are practical challenges regarding accessible and adequate childcare and other care facilities. Focussing on childcare, many personnel mention the challenges they face finding childcare services that accommodate their unpredictable and long work hours. This is particularly an issue for single parents and those who may not have informal support networks to help
with some caring responsibilities. The costs of childcare also make finding adequate childcare difficult, particularly for households on a single income or multiple children.
The assumption that there is someone at home to take care of children means that the caring responsibilities of personnel are often overlooked, and the burden often placed on their partner or families who must shoulder additional care work – often at the expensive of their own careers:


… it’s the financial impact, but it’s also what it represents, because it represents a
bias that assumes there is a wife at home taking care of the kids…the only choice
you can make about having your kids in day-care or with a nanny is if you have awife who doesn’t work (female civilian in UN HQ).

Frequent relocations also mean that personnel must constantly find and pay for childcare, which is especially difficult when moving to smaller areas with less available options and lengthy waiting lists.
The difficulties of having to manage childcare with a demanding work schedule, and a work culture which values presenteeism and availability, means that many leave the sector, especially women. This has impacts for the security sector as it means fewer women remain or progress (some may even be deterred to join in the first place), leading to less women in leadership roles, and missing the operational benefits of having diversity among personnel (such as broader skills, experiences,
and knowledge).

What can be done?

Participants in our research identify key recommendations for SSIs to address harmful work cultures that fuel presenteeism, for instance, and limit the meaningful representation and participation of personnel with caring responsibilities. These
include:

  • Ensure all policies are gender-responsive and do not penalise personnel with caring responsibilities, particularly pertaining to recruitment, promotion, and leave.
  • Normalise care in the workplace, for instance by making flexible working arrangements more available where feasible, and promoting uptake of parental leave, particularly by men.
  • Introduce “family-friendly” policies, including subsidising childcare or other care facilities. Wraparound childcare in the workplace is also mentioned as reducing costs, accommodating work schedules of personnel, and reducing travel times.
  • Raise awareness of the impacts of caring responsibilities among personnel and leadership and deliver training for leadership on how to manage carers and what support policies exist.
  • Identify and address maternal bias in the workplace and ensure disciplinary actions are taken against those who discriminate against carers.
  • Ensuring lactation rooms or private spaces are available for lactating parents, accommodating time in work schedules should an employee need to express milk.
  • Address harmful work cultures that promote self-sacrifice by investing in well-being and self-care, including support mechanisms and training leadership to
    promote help-seeking among personnel.

Until SSIs stop equating commitment with self-sacrifice and availability with loyalty, they will continue to exclude carers, lose experienced personnel, and undermine their own effectiveness.