Gender Discrimination and Regulatory Behaviour: An Exploratory Study in Policing
| Author | Tim Prenzler |
| DOI | 10.1350/ijps.6.3.171.39134 |
| Published date | 01 May 2004 |
| Date | 01 May 2004 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Gender discrimination and regulatory
behaviour: an exploratory study in policing
Tim Prenzler
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland,
4111, Australia. Tel/Fax: (011–61) (0)7 3875 5613/5608; email: t.prenzler@griffith.edu.au
Received: 12 November 2003; accepted 7 January 2004
Tim Prenzler
is head of the School of Criminol-
ogy and Criminal Justice, Griffith University. His
research interests include civilian oversight of
police, the history of women police, and the
development and regulation of the security
industry.
A
BSTRACT
This paper examines the relationship between
police departments and equity agencies in Aus-
tralia. Previous research has shown marked dif-
ferences in the performance of police in fulfilling
the requirements of equity legislation. Responsi-
bility for ensuring compliance with anti-
discrimination and affirmative action legislation
rests with equity agencies — which ‘police the
police’. The paper reports the results from a
survey of these agencies to obtain their accounts of
factors facilitating or hindering police compliance.
These factors are framed in terms of agency
powers, resources, regulatory strategies and police
responses. The study found that regulatory agen-
cies were highly detached from police departments
and that differences in compliance were largely the
result of factors independent of regulatory action.
A ‘culture of under-enforcement’ remained as the
most likely explanation for regulatory failure. The
paper concludes by emphasising the need for more
active monitoring and a more confrontational
approach to under-achieving departments.
BACKGROUND
This study was developed in response to
research showing major differences between
police departments in Australia in the 1990s
in the application of legislated anti-
discrimination and equal employment
opportunity principles. A study by Prenzler
and Hayes (2000) found a highly mixed
picture of the degree of commitment and
achievement in gender equity on the part of
the eight departments. Performance was
measured across indicators such as male and
female application, recruitment and acad-
emy graduation rates; deployment, promo-
tion, and retention rates; and complaints of
harassment or discrimination. Attention was
also given to the extent to which depart-
ments collected data to measure perform-
ance and engage in diagnostic assessments
of problem areas. The findings showed a
fairly consistent pattern in outcomes, with
three main levels of performance. New
South Wales (NSW) and Queensland stood
out as high achievers in employing and
promoting women police — with recruit-
ment of women up to 33 per cent and
above, and affirmative action support pro-
grammes in place. Tasmania, South Australia
(SA), the Northern Territory (NT) and the
Australian Federal Police (AFP) showed
moderate achievement. Victoria and West-
ern Australia (WA) were notable for lack of
progress in advancing women police. All
departments had inadequate data collection
processes; although NSW, in particular, and
Queensland had the best. Departments in
the middle group were generally good per-
formers in recruitment and training —
International Journal of Police
Science and Management,
Vol. 6 No. 3, 2004, pp. 171–182.
© Vathek Publishing,
1461–3557
International Journal of Police Science & Management Volume 6 Number 3
Page 171
To continue reading
Request your trial