Women Veterans – Creating Their Own Solutions for Success

Editor’s Note: This article was written by Tranette Ledford, owner of Texas PR firm Tranette Ledford Communications.

As the occasional headlines remind, many returning women veterans are finding it a challenge to land second careers.   While unemployment rates vary per source or quarterly report, the specific challenges don’t.  Many women returning from service in Iraq and Afghanistan, even with hard skills and a security clearance, are facing a new battle on the home front; a job market rife with obstacles inherent in being female and a military veteran.  The good news is that organizations are growing in numbers and scope as women veterans increasingly turn to themselves to find solutions and break barriers.

“If not us, who?” asked Kimberly Olson, CEO of Grace After Fire, a nonprofit dedicated to providing women veterans with knowledge, insight and renewal.  Olson is a former Air Force command pilot who retired as a colonel after 25 years of service.  She is now a Vision 2020 Texas National Delegate and leads the Grace After Fire organization’s efforts to help guide women veterans through outreach, networking and peer support programs.

“Women returning from active duty are entering the perfect storm,” said Olson.  “There are specific circumstances that directly affect their re-entry to the civilian workforce.  No matter their rank, education or the fact that they are security cleared, one of the reasons they’re finding trouble getting jobs is that they are the nurturers.  They return home and the first thing they want to do is restore the family.  For every female veteran I see, I know there are six people relying on her.  She’s the nucleus.  And that sets her up to care for others first, which robs her of the transition period.  She’s slow to go back to school or enter the marketplace.”

Getting into the game late may mean a time gap on the resume, a red flag to hiring managers.  But that’s not the only one.

“Society looks at women veterans differently,” she said.  “If she served in a diesel shop for example, and goes to get a similar civilian job, she’s just not going to look like a diesel mechanic. They won’t know what to do with her.  They may be thinking they have to take down the girlie posters.”

According to Olson, countering stereotypes often takes more work for women veterans.

“Sometimes women have trouble translating their skill sets to civilian employers,” she said.  “They need to learn the language, particularly with employers who have never served in the military.  They also need to get well-versed in translating other assets because they have great nontraditional skill sets.”

Because of family expectations and societal stereotypes, female veterans often end up downplaying their skills and values.

“They learn that people don’t get what they’ve done in the military, and over time, they stop telling their military service story,” she said.  “For men, it’s the first or second thing they tell people.  For women, it’s the fifth or sixth thing they tell.”

Olson can attest to the fact that when women are active in peer support groups, they increase their opportunities to move forward, both in life and in the job hunt.  They meet others with whom they can relate, learn more about how to best present themselves to prospective employers and how to tailor their interests to the job search.

“Some women who drove trucks in the military don’t want to come home and drive an 18-wheeler,” said Olson.  “They want to get back in touch with being a woman.  In the military, we crush that and grind it into sand.  So they have to take back that part of themselves, which adds another layer to the challenges they face.”

Celia Szelwach agrees that tapping into women veteran support groups can be advantageous personally and professionally.  A West Point graduate and former Army captain, Szelwach has also worked with the Department of Veteran Affairs as an advisor.  In 2007, she formed Women Veterans Network (WOVEN), a volunteer support group offering women veterans opportunities to connect for social support and networking opportunities.

“I became aware of the challenges women veterans face and experienced some of those challenges myself,” said Szelwach.  “When transitioning, women veterans need to network and establish connections outside the military.  This can be difficult unless they have each other to turn to. We are able to help each other find resources we might not otherwise know about or have an introduction to.  That’s why we are here.”

Olson and Szelwach represent only two of the many women veteran support groups available online and in physical locations.  In addition to making connections and finding peer to peer support, transitioning women learn more about specific steps they can take to enhance their opportunities for a successful transition.  Their advice:

• Be upfront about your security clearance, education and other certifications. The value of a security clearance is only going up.  If you have one, state it.  Ditto for any credentials. Instead of downplaying military service, be bold about what you’ve attained.
• Learn to speak employer.  Continue to refine the way you explain your skills and experience.  Tell your story with job description adjectives that match your skills instead of your military job titles.  Never assume employers understand what you’ve done, even if they have prior military service themselves.  Make your expertise clear.
• Network.  Consider networking as the never-ending story.  Fellow veterans who have made the transition are great resources for mentors.  Ask for advice or introductions, not a job.  Continue to expand your network as a course of action in the job hunt.
• Start the job search early.  Even as you work to reestablish your role in the family, continue to put some time into the steps necessary for a second career.

For more information:

Grace After Fire: www.graceafterfire.org

WOVEN: http://womenveteransnetwork.org

Walking the Walk

Editor’s Notes: This blog was written and submitted by Vision 2020 New Mexico Delegate Roxanne Lara.

For the past 4 months, I have been engaged in heavy campaigning across my state for the position of Chair of the Democratic Party of the State of New Mexico. This is an elected position by nearly 400 delegates from all 33 counties in New Mexico, from urban areas like Albuquerque and Santa Fe to some very rural areas.  In my travels, I met many wonderful people who believed in me and my candidacy.  I was blessed with new friends in all corners of the state and in-between.  The race was hard fought, but my opponent Sam Bregman  won this one in the end.  There were three contenders–myself, Cornelia Lange and Sam. 

Almost immediately upon entering the race, I started receiving comments about my hair, my clothing, selection of jewelry and, of course, the height of my heels.  I also received numerous, unsolicited comments about the other woman in the race and her appearance.  After four months in the race, it wasn’t until the last month, that I heard any comment about the man’s attire or appearance. 

What is most telling is that these comments came from mostly women. Throughout this entire race, I found that the most “criticism” came from women–it was women who judged my appearance and told me what I should or should not be wearing; women who said horrible things about me to my supporters; and women who played games with their support/nonsupport of me.  Don’t get me wrong. There were many wonderful women who worked hard in my campaign and will be my lifelong friends, but I was struck by the number of “woman advocates” who were not. 

The differences between true woman-advocates and the others were pretty clear.  Women who support women stay away from snarky comments about appearances, and they judge only on qualifications.  Women who support women look for ways to be helpful and not engage in gossip to tear women down.  Women who support women are honest about their support and don’t play games with whoever is in the room at the time.  Women who support women change the conversation when it gets away from the merits of the candidates. 

Now, I don’t believe that women should support women just because we are the same gender.   But I do believe that if we really want to see the numbers change, then we, as women, have a responsibility to not be the ones driving the petty conversations.  We should be the ones stopping them.   I live in a state with a woman governor and above-average numbers of women in elected office but we can do better in terms of gender equality when we walk the walk.

So, next time someone engages you in Hillary Clinton’s hairstyle or Michelle Obama’s choice of clothing or that your locally-elected female candidate has “put on a few pounds” or that Sarah Palin “sure is pretty,” we have an obligation to stand up and change that discussion to “Hillary sure was one of the best Secretary of States we’ve ever had, traveling to more countries and working with more world leaders than any other Secretary” or “Michelle really has heightened the conversation on healthy lifestyles for our children” or “Sarah Palin sure did a remarkable feat by becoming Alaska’s youngest-ever and first female governor.”

 Whether you “like” the candidate or not, we as women must stand up and ensure the discussion is on merits – not looks or pettiness which only tears women down.

Time For Action on Gender Equality on Corporate Boards

Editor’s Note: This blog was written by Vision 2020 Visionary Delegate Susan Butler.

When it comes to improving gender equality on corporate boards, two of the world’s most economically important countries just declared it’s time for more action.

In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel recently announced her party will push for a policy to require companies’ boards of directors to include at least 30 percent women by 2020.

In Japan, meanwhile, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said he wants the country’s biggest business to set a target of appointing at least one woman executive per company.

“Women are Japan’s most underused resource,” Abe said, according to the Financial Times. Women hold less than 2 percent of executive roles at Japan’s top business groups.

The moves by leadership in Germany and Japan follow the imposition of quotas that require companies to appoint more women executives in other countries around the world.

Norway, for instance, now requires companies to fill at least 40 percent of corporate board seats with women. The European Commission wants women to fill at least 33 percent of board seats by 2020. To get countries moving in the right direction, Britain several years ago announced an unofficial quota of 25 percent women on corporate boards by 2015.

In a world where women make up half of the population and in many countries make up half of the workplace, having a relatively small percentage of women as directors seems like a small consolation.

Is it time for corporate board quotas in the United States? I don’t think so.

But, I would hope U.S. companies would do what is right to improve the embarrassingly low numbers of women on their corporate boards.

It just makes good business sense.

Study after study shows that companies that have more women on their corporate boards have better returns than companies with fewer women. Adding more diversity at the upper echelons of management also means better diversity of thought — which in turn means better decision making and broader appeal to more potential customers.

Yet unfortunately, most U.S. companies still don’t get it. Many are still stuck in the “good ol’ boy” system of yesterday that makes it tough, if not impossible, to add diversity on their corporate boards.

Just look at the recent news about Hewlett-Packard. There, longtime board member Ray Lane had to be all but forced out of his role as chairman of the company, according to The New York Times.

HP isn’t as bad as places like Occidental Petroleum, where former Chairman and CEO Ray Irani has been on the board for nearly 30 years, according to the Times.

Instead of waiting for government quotas, boards would be wise to do more themselves to term-limit director positions and implement ‘diversity of thought’ in every way they can.

They can start by helping support women at all rungs of the career ladder.

They can pay women the same as men to make them true equals in the workplace and actually impact the GDP.

They can put more women in leadership positions to feed the pipeline to the boardroom.

And they can support efforts to develop more women leaders across corporate America. One example they can learn from is a women’s leadership event that Microsoft and Amway recently held in Michigan.

By not taking steps like these to improve diversity in the boardroom, corporate boards are not living up to their fiduciary responsibility to do what’s best for their companies and their shareholders.

And that’s not just bad for women and for companies. That’s bad for all of us who depend on a vibrant, diverse economy.

Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day: Celebrating 20 Years

Editor’s Note: This blog was written by Vision 2020 Director of  National Programs and Relationships Catherine Ormerod.

Celebrating its 20th year, Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day is Thursday, April 25. In case you were wondering, you can buy official merchandise (string back pack, squishy pen, tee shirt) to recognize this day. Originally, Take Your Daughters to Work Day was an effort targeted to girls ages 10-14 when their bodies are changing and attention to girls’ physical beauty becomes the obsession of society and individuals. The idea was and is to introduce girls to jobs and careers where intelligence and creativity matter. The work world quickly morphed the day into organized activities for both boys and girls directed by the corporate HR department. There’s nothing wrong with these activities or with including boys. But in our national reflex for political correctness, we have erased the significance of one day – just one day – dedicated to showing girls in middle school that there’s a bigger world beyond the lunch table, the bus stop, the ‘tween magazines and even the classroom. And it is a world that needs their attention.

Yes, it is a stretch to say one day will make a difference in a girl’s life and will ultimately accrue to Vision 2020′s goal of increasing the number of women in senior leadership positions. But it can be a meaningful start. That’s why I propose we embrace the initial concept of showing a girl how business works. If possible, invite your daughter, niece, or neighbor’s child to spend the day with you. If weekday logistics prohibit this, consider inviting her to a business lunch on the weekend. Explain your work. Remember that everything may look unfamiliar and scary to her. So de-mystify. For example, a teenage girl was looking for a job and tried to find the employment office. But she didn’t go in because the sign on the office door said Human Resources. “What are human resources?” she wondered. If you only do one thing this month, do this: take a daughter to work.

Read more on this day with the Huffington Post.

May the Best Man (or Woman) Win

by Stephen Gambescia

I traveled with a dozen college students and faculty to London early September to see the Paralympics (disability Olympics). The experience brought new meaning to human performance in sport– the ability to go faster, higher, and be stronger. The trip was the culmination of a course on “Perspectives on Disability.” Recently Secretary of Education Arne Duncan promulgated the need for schools to provide students with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate alongside their peers in after-school athletics. In Philadelphia, a young girl and her parents are challenging the league to let her continue to play football beyond the sixth grade.

Given these events, I continue to ponder the meaning of “otherness,” especially as it relates to sport. I am starting to challenge why we have gender-specific competition in elite sport, especially in non-contact sports.

I am surprised how few women, both in sport and out, consider this evolution to equality a radical idea. With just a few months of study of the Paralympics, I am able to appreciate human performance in sport without parameters or qualifiers of the corporeal. So many “barriers” have been broken in sport, it seems that it may be time to consider mixed competition at the elite level– especially in non-contact sports.

The women I have engaged in this conversation have been surprisingly quick to note the many “significant differences” between men and women. I thought the women’s equality movement advocated for “no significant difference.”
Naturally, I understand there are anatomical differences between men and women. However, considering human performance comparisons, especially at the elite sport level, are we not talking about matters of degree, not matters of principle?

For example, at 5’6” most 6’6” men or women would easily outperform me in dunking a basketball. I cannot dunk a basketball; not as a matter of principle of gender, but simply a matter of degree of performance.

Furthermore, I cannot get a good answer why several non-contact sports have to be segregated. Is there a gender difference in diving? Is there a gender difference in sharp shooting? Archery? Dressage? Most Olympic sorts don’t have contact. Why do we continue to compete separately in these?

Take running events– pure and simple human performance events. Many argue that muscle strength gives the males the advantage. Is this not a matter of degree and not principle? There is little I can find principally different between men and women in “just running.” What about the marathon? An argument can be made that since women hold more body fat, they are better equipped to go the distance.

One could argue that socio-cultural constructs have historically favored men in certain sports. Arguments have been made along characteristics other than gender that have proven to be false. For example, African Americans “are not good at” tennis. African Americans “don’t play ice hockey.” Even anthropomorphic arguments in sport have not always held up. In 1992 several Asian runners placed highly in the marathon, including first and second place, disabusing us of the notion that “the Asians are not good distance runners because of their body build.”

Even if socio-cultural forces are strong, have we not advanced in sport to look past stereotypes? Let’s take a close analysis of the need for gender segregation in non-contact sport at the elite level. It appears that the arguments for separate competition are matters of degree not of principle.

I have learned from Paralympians that we should not look at elite athletes principally for their differences, but in matters of degree in how well they perform for themselves or compared with “others,” however we choose to define “otherness.”
Our mantra in the future for wishing well the elite athlete will be “May the best women (or man) win!”

Stephen Gambescia teaches at Drexel University (Philadelphia, PA). Nine students and three faculty attended the Paralympics in London as part of their Great Works Symposium course.

Stephen F. Gambescia, PhD, MEd, MBA, MHum, MCHES
Associate Professor Health Services Adminisration
College of Nursing and Health Professions
Drexel University
1505 Race Street–4th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
215-762-8405 sfg23@drexel.edu

The Well Established And Broad Case For Supporting Women

Editor’s Note: This blog was written and submitted by Vision 2020 Visionary Sponsor, The Philadelphia Foundation.

Women are nurturers, leaders, caretakers, providers, teachers — and so much more. While many strides have been made toward gender equality, challenges and hardships still remain. Young girls deserve equal opportunities for financial independence, access to education and the opportunity to accomplish their dreams and life goals.  

The Philadelphia Foundation funds nonprofits that empower and prepare girls with the social and economic skills necessary for a healthy and successful lifestyle. We partner with our component fund-holders to support women’s organizations.

More than 30 of our 900 active funds specifically support women and girls, and many others do so as part of their overall approach to philanthropy. We have funds whose focus is abused women, women artists, women in food careers and women in politics.

We help build the endowment for several nonprofits that serve women. The Alice Paul Institute and the League of Women’s Voters of Pennsylvania are among the 60 nonprofits that grow their permanent financial resources though us. Additional funds provide direct annual support for Women’s Way, Girls Inc., and for the Boys & Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Philadelphia, Nicetown, Bridesburg and Germantown.

We’ve been doing this so long – since 1918 – that some of our funds have purposes framed in quaint language. The Elizabeth Phile Stott Fund, established through the creation of a private foundation after her death in 1848, provides fuel and other necessities for “reduced or decayed females.” The Anne Gerhard Maris Fund, also initially established as a private foundation by Elizabeth’s niece in 1929, is targeted for  “the relief of gentlewomen in reduced circumstances.” Times and language change, but the philanthropic purpose of these two visionary women continues to be fulfilled, exactly as they had intended.  

Among our newest funds is one established by a group of women who decided to pool their financial resources for maximum impact, and another that honors the can-do spirit and legacy of a family’s Italian grandmother.

The Women and Girls Fund provides The Philadelphia Foundation’s professional staff with the financial resources needed to assist organizations that improve the lives of women and girls in our region.

You can support any of these funds by visiting www.philafound.org and selecting the “Give Now” button. If you so choose, you can designate your donation an honorary tribute to the women who have played vital roles in your own life.

Supporting women is an investment that pays off immediately, as well as with “compound interest.” The Foundation knows that  confident, independent women use their acquired skills to benefit the next generation. In that way, gender equality not only improves the lives of women, but also aids in the economic and cultural  development of our entire community for generations to come.

That’s something Elizabeth Phile Stott and Anne Gerhard Maris – along with many other philanthropic women through the years – knew well. For that, we – those you could call their granddaughter’s granddaughters — are most grateful.

As Equal Pay Day Nears, Female Wages Lag, Hurt Economy

Editor’s Note: This blog was submitted by Vision 2020 Delegate Yvonne Wood, Chair of the Tennessee Economic Council on Women.

TECW: Half of Tennessee’s population and workforce not likely to attain their full earning potential

Equal Pay Day has been set for April 9 by President Obama and the National Committee on Pay Equity to bring attention to wage discrimination and other factors that contribute to a gap in wage between genders. The Tennessee Economic Council reports the following in preparation for the day of awareness:

• In 2010, women made up 51 percent of Tennessee’s population and 47 percent of its workforce while earning just 77 percent of what Tennessee men brought in annually, at the median.1,2

• Several studies, including the Economic Council’s own Wage Gap report, have shown that this gap begins as soon as women graduate and persists in nearly every sector. What’s more, the gap is shown to increase as workers grow older and advance in their careers.

• 63.9 percent of women are either primary breadwinners or co-breadwinners in their home.3

• Women are more likely than men to spend their wages on household purchases, childcare, and other various needs for everyday life.4

• Tennessee women are disproportionately represented in lower earning career fields–such as food service, health care, social services and education—and earn less than male counterparts in these fields as well.2

• Only 36 percent of the managerial occupations in Tennessee are filled by female candidates.1

“The wage gap stifles a woman’s ability to meet the needs of herself and those in her household,” says TECW Director Phyllis Qualls-Brooks, “but that’s only one part of it. We also find that women continue to be obstructed in their career paths, and are choosing or being steered into a diminished role in the workplace. This affects the entire state because women are improving stock values and decision-making where they are able to pry their way into the board room. We are missing out on the ingenuity and diversity that a female perspective can add.”

“We have had some successes, but we have a great deal more work to do,” adds TECW Chair Yvonne Wood. “Wearing red on Equal Pay Day, learning more about the wage gap, or attending a local rally are ways to help close this gap.”