Issue 72 Contents

2006 WISENET AGM

Susan Barker (WA)*, Jennifer Byrne (NSW)*, Ines Carrin (ACT), Julie Christie (ACT), Melissa Wakefield (ACT), Anna Robinson (ACT), Diane Webster (Vic), Sally Stowe (ACT), Rosemary White (ACT), Robyn Porter (ACT), Sari Ruuska (ACT)*, Olivia Broadley (Vic)*, Julie Arblaster (Vic)*.

[Those marked * joined via teleconference.]

Susan Bengtson-Nash, Karen Edwards, Miriam Baltuck, Liz Krenske, Wendy Russell, Donna Edman, Sue Brown.

There were no matters were arising from the 2005 minutes. Julie Christie moved that the minutes be accepted as a true and accurate record and Sally Stowe seconded.

The outgoing National Convenor noted that WISENET has become widely recognised as an influential force and continued being perceived as highly credible by many organisations including UNESCO. The issue of valuing WISENET was raised. We have many non-members contributing to our journal, but they don’t become members. Perhaps this year we need to promote WISENET more actively and seek memberships.

Acceptance of the report was moved by Anna Robinson and seconded by Robyn Porter.

It was noted that subscription revenue increased in 2005 and running costs decreased, leaving us with a good surplus in the bank ($2,716). With the closing of the NAB account, we should save close to $240 a year in bank charges in 2006/2007. It was noted that the moving of journal printing and distribution to Convention Associates meant that journal expenditure dropped by $407. The handover from the ACT to Victoria sees WISENET in a secure financial position.

Acceptance of the report was moved by JulieChristie, seconded by Anna Robinson.

Membership has remained almost constant. There were 149 financial members at the end of 2005 (taken from the January 2006 membership list). These included 3 complimentary (organisations receiving the Newsletter), 3 individual honorary members, 5 subscription-paying institutions, and the remainder financial ordinary (115) retired (12) or student (11) members.

Membership was divided amongst the Link Groups as follows:

ACT                   39    (35 in 2004)

International         5    (This group was disbanded at the beginning of 2006 and members moved to other groups)

QLD                  13    (11 in 2004)

SA/NT                6    (7 in 2004)

NSW

    Sydney          42

    Wollongong     6    (These two groups were formed from the NSW group, 49 strong in 2004)

TAS                    9    (10 in 2004)

VIC                   22    (27 in 2004)

WA                    8    (9 in 2004)

2006 mid-year position: in May there were 151 members listed, of whom 125 were financial.

There was discussion about improving the level of membership in Victoria, with Diane Webster noting that they had held many events which attracted a lot of non-members and they would try to capitalise on this with membership drives in 2006.

The report was moved by Sally Stowe andseconded by Rosemary White.

2005 saw the production of some excellent journals and the policy to rotate journals through Link Groups has been very successful. In 2005 the journals completed a full rotation and would re-start with the Sydney journal in 2006.

Report moved by Anna Robinson and seconded by Ines Carrin.

Reports were presented by Convenors of Link Groups in ACT, NSW-Sydney, Victoria and WA. No other reports were received.

ACT Link Group

Membership increased in 2005, thanks in part to a membership drive involving coffee and cake on the ANU campus. The ACT group continued to meet throughout the year and had two guest speakers at lunchtime meetings. ACT Convenor, Sari Ruuska, also had an opportunity to present information on WISENET to the CSIRO staff association. She thanked Ines Carrin for assisting her through 2005, while she was on maternity leave.

Report moved by Sari Ruuska, seconded by Ines Carrin.

 

Sydney Link Group

I assumed the role of convenor of the Sydney link group from Meloni Muir in June, 2005. After contacting as many local members as possible via e-mail, I organised a lunch in July which was held near the University of Sydney and attended by 7 members (5 others sent their apologies). A Sunday breakfast and pre-Christmas dinner were subsequently organised by other Sydney members later in the year. I also represented WISENET at the FASTS meeting held in Sydney on 18 August, 2005, and raised issues of a collaborations register, to promote collaborative research, and a Brain Drain Press Club lunch. Much of WISENET activities in late 2005 related to sourcing articles for WISENET J71, which was distributed in April, 2006. Planned activities for 2006 include social functions with a focus on professional career development, and improving contact between WISENET and local organisations with similar or overlapping aims.

Report moved by Jennifer Byrne, seconded by Sari Ruuska.

 

Victorian Link Group

Victoria did not officially have a convenor in 2005 and Diane Webster acted as the de facto convenor. They managed to arrange some meetings, and rotated their locations as they face the same problems of geography as the Sydney group.

Report moved by Diane Webster and seconded by Olivia Broadley.

 

Western Australian Link Group

2005 flew by at least as fast as 2004 and perhaps as a consequence, the WA Link group is in a holding position rather than growing. I have been reflecting on this issue and comparison with another organization – Women in Mining – that has a very large attendance and membership in WA. My cogitation has roamed around the questions; what do we offer and; what could we do to better serve Women in Science, as it is my firm belief that membership will follow if we are of direct relevance to the needs of Women in Science. I was delighted to have the opportunity to discuss the issue also with Rosemary White on her recent visit to WA. A condensed version of my musings will be presented under Any Other Business. Finally, I have not been very active this last year, and if someone else with more energy to spare steps forward to take the role I will be very happy to hand them the role. However, in lieu of anyone doing that I continue to find this position to be very rewarding personally and I am quite prepared to continue for the coming year. I hope that I can take on some of the activities I propose under Any Other Business and that this will flow on to help with the membership at least in WA, if not more generally.

Report moved by Susan Barker, seconded by Melissa Wakefield.

Anna Robinson also passed on information from the Queensland convenor, Susan Bengston-Nash. She is organising a workshop for June/July 2006 in Brisbane. The workshop will be based on areas of career development and work-life balance as well as encouraging women to promote each other rather than just supporting each other. The Queensland link group has also been approached by the government SET taskforce, who want to formally link websites with WISENET.

Juliet Lloyd-Smith tendered her resignation from the committee and this was accepted by the meeting. Melissa Wakefield was nominated as a replacement general member by Anna Robinson. The nomination was seconded by Robyn Porter.

The link group convenors were happy to stay as committee members. Robyn Porter was happy to remain ex-officio.

Rosemary White joined the committee as National Co-convenor.

Anna Robinson thanked everyone in the ACT group for their help over the past four years.

Diane Webster (the new national co-Convenor) moved a vote of thanks for all the excellent work done by the ACT group in moving WISENET on. Seconded by Jennifer Byrne.

Anna Robinson formally handed the chair to Diane Webster and Rosemary White.

Olivia Broadley was formally elected as Journal Co-ordinator, elected unopposed.

Julie Arblaster was formally elected as Membership Co-ordinator, elected unopposed.

Nancy Lane was formally elected as Treasurer, elected unopposed.

As WISENET is incorporated in the ACT, we must have an ACT resident public officer, so Robyn Porter agreed to continue in the post of public officer. Robyn also noted that we have to keep a hard copy members register in the ACT.

A report was tabled by Susan Barker (WA) which raised a range of ideas for increasing membership as follows. “As mentioned in my Annual report, WA membership of WISENET has remained low in the last year. Another organization with a strong presence in WA, Women in Mining, has been very successful in recruiting membership and maintaining attendance at social gatherings. This likely reflects the social needs for employees in the mining industry, where there are serious issues such as the FIFO work arrangements (Fly In, Fly Out) and traditional low proportion and low status of female employees. This suggests that WISENET is not meeting the needs of many women in Science more generally in WA and that, if WISENET activities change to meet those needs, membership and recruitment will follow.

Some ideas of activities and means to attract more attention, and also that serve some real needs. I proposed that WISENET set up a “discussion group” web site where these ideas can be listed, modified, edited, and successes or not for different ideas can be reported. I also proposed that funding set aside for Linkgroup use be accessible to help support or develop some of these ideas where there might be a moderate cost. I propose the Discussion Group format because it offers flexibility in timing of entries, it forms a permanent or ongoing record of ideas and inputs so can be accessed down the track and by others outside WISENET membership if appropriate. [NB According to discussion of this idea at the AGM, an email prompt can be set up for users who would prefer notification that a new message has been entered on the web site, and the Discussion Group type site is relatively easy to establish, so we probably have the expertise available to us to accomplish this proposal and different communication needs for this type of discussion can be met.]

1.  VISIBILITY I see this as one of the most important issues for WISENET and for Women in Science more generally and several of the points below pick up on this issue. We need to find means of promoting our activities and women in science that don’t jar with our sensitivities about self-promotion etc. As a start, I propose that we approach key organizations around the country to ensure we have our website listed as a link on their web sites. e.g. State and Federal Govt portfolios, Popular Science organizations such as the ScienceWA web site run out of SciTech (which is like the Investigator Science Centre in Adelaide), Universities.

2. PUBLICISING PROMOTERS OF DIVERSITY There are key individuals around the nation who are making a positive difference to their (female) employees by their actions. WISENET could acknowledge these individuals and articulate how their contributions are making a difference.

3. SCIENCE MEDIA There are not many such however magazines like COSMOS, Double Helix and Scientriffic etc celebrate Science. We might work out mechanisms to include some of our materials eg edited versions of journal articles into other publications, generate short articles about careers in Science from female perspective, etc.

4. SELECTION CRITERIA This reiterates the email I sent out a few weeks ago in response to an enquiry about names of suitable women for a specialist list. It is not the first time by a long shot that I have heard that enquiry – we’ve got lots of men on our list but we can’t think of any women…

   One of the issues women face is that they tend not to be eminent scientists with “high public profile”. It is a rare woman who can be visible to the male dominated viewpoint, let alone visible and respected, as my experience has been that those who are visible have plenty of quiet detractors undermining their success. WISENET could help contribute to a change in criteria when women are being chosen. Lets suggest in response to such requests, that they look for the quiet achiever; someone who has the academic standing and the length and breadth of experience that are required for these positions; that this alternative is really what they need to “balance” their list. To improve the representation of excellent women on such lists, let’s ask for criteria such as; she has been active in research in her field for more than 2 (or 3, depending on the field maybe?) decades; she has achieved promotion to positions above (Senior - again depending on the field) Lecturer; she has a record of highly cited publications in international journals; she has a track record of community involvement / outreach activities in the area of concern; she has a track record of membership of appropriate working parties/committees/ organisations. In summary, let’s be a part of the paradigm change!

5. LOCAL DISCUSSION GROUPS such as the Senior Women’s group at UWA are having discussions around the “Glass Ceiling” issue. As we become aware of these, let’s tap into them and ask for example, if someone would be prepared to put a summary of the discussion, proposed actions etc into the next WISENET Journal.

6.  Similarly – let’s identify and write to the key individuals in Government departments who might like to have us as one of their advisory bodies.

7.  KEY ISSUES – lets articulate them and publicise them.

• keeping childbearing women in the system seems to be a major issue. This to me goes way beyond getting a spot in childcare – and wouldn’t it be great if there was a central person who could help you locate it when you need it. There is the financial burden of childcare which goes from the first baby in to the last 13+ year old out of the childcare system; the time constraints around the School day and School year timetable; the massive cost of full time care during school holidays.

• Part-time and flexitime employment are the norm now for some but still unheard of for others

• International research has identified that having children is damaging to a woman’s career in Science. Now is the time to articulate the needs of Science career women with children and actions that can help maintain their careers. For example, academics and research staff are reliant on obtaining grants for research. How can you manage career boosting activities when you have a second job “after hours” that can add up to more than 60 hours a week, on top of your paid job? How many women with families have a “wife” at home? I suggest that a separate criterion be established for looking at research grant applications, analogous to the Early Career Researcher (ECR)– this one called something like “Woman With Children (WWC) – that recognises women in this stage of their lives have to be superhuman to achieve as many publications a year as Professorial staff with 25 members in their research group and that, the fact that they are publishing less papers than the Professor does not mean their track record is poor and they do not deserve research support.

I look forward to the web based working party and I hope that by our actions we can really start to make a difference. Some days this is the only thought that keeps me going in my career – that by staying in it I might be making it easier for someone else to do likewise…”

The meeting agreed that Susan had raised some very important issues and that raising our profile was a key priority for 2006. A discussion ensued about the options for setting up an online discussion forum where female (and male) scientists could discuss how to strike a work/life balance, develop their career, or find out other information on surviving as a woman in science. The National Executive will meet with Melissa Wakefield and Julie Christie to discuss how such a forum could be set up. Susan Barker moved a vote of thanks to the national executive for agreeing to run a discussion forum.

1. Anna Robinson noted that we had received a survey from the National Library about the inclusion of the WISENET journal in Pandora. Julie Christie said that being recognised by the National Library meant that journal articles could be listed as publications in annual departmental records.

2.  It was noted that FASTS received extra funding of $800,000 over a four year period in the recent federal budget. This was flagged up as a source of funds for WISENET.

3. The report by the Executive Director of FASTS on Science meets Parliament (SmP) was released today. Anna requested any feedback from the meeting. Julie Christie noted that the hours were not child-friendly and perhaps a crèche could be provided? Also that their idea of an early career researcher obviously didn’t include people with families as the early career researchers breakfast ran from 7am to 9am, a time when most parents are caring for their children and getting them to childcare/school. The meeting discussed the importance of SmP for professional development Anna Robinson pointed out that for ANU researchers, outreach is part of the promotion criteria and SmP definitely qualified as outreach. The meeting felt that next year we should try to bring an interstate member to SmP.

4. Rosemary White had to leave the meeting early, but moved a vote of thanks to Anna Robinson for the outstanding work she has done as National Convenor. It was carried unanimously and with acclamation.

5. . Anna Robinson noted that Jenny Graves was investigating the possibility of putting US$30,000 of her L’Oreal-UNESCO prize into a fund to allow female researchers to buy themselves time, whether it be by getting a housekeeper, babysitter, taxi fares etc. It is based on a similar scheme in Europe. Jenny asked WISENET’s advice on the proposal. It was recommended that a better entity to administer such a venture was the Australian Academy of Science. Further, that such a fund provided an opportunity to divert any large donations to WISENET into this fund. Diane Webster raised the idea of a link to this fund being set up on the WISENET website once established. The meeting agreed.

6. Anna Robinson noted that link groups need a minimum of five members or they will have to be merged with another group.

7. Anna Robinson raised the problem of women not achieving success in Federation Fellowships and the Prime Minister’s Science Prizes. The meeting discussed the need for greater transparency in the selection of winners and it was noted that when similar fellowships in the USA kept returning male winners there was a huge outcry and the selection process was dramatically overhauled. Anna Robinson and Sally Stowe wondered if this was part of a general backlash which sees the government spending $19 million on the ‘problem’ of boys lagging 6% behind girls at school, but nothing on the 70% gap between men and women in senior positions. The meeting agreed that WISENET could work on this by lobbying FASTS and supporting letter-writing campaigns.

8.  Robyn Porter noted that our constitution is presently in breach of the Incorporations Act, which states that any constitutional change requires 21 days notice and agreement by 75% of members to the change. Our constitution only allows 15 days and needs only a consensus of agreement. The change will be implemented at the 2007 AGM.

The meeting closed at 7.25pm with a vote of thanks to the outgoing National Executive. Some of the attendees continued the discussion over dinner and drinks at Tossolini’s.

 Issue 72 Contents