Bank of Glass Ceiling er America

Attorney at Law reports:

Bank of America, which acquired the former Merrill Lynch and Co. last year, discriminated against female brokers by offering them lower retention benefits than their male colleagues and steering wealthier investors to brokers who were men, according to a newly filed lawsuit.

The suit was filed today on behalf of Jaime Goodman, a Merrill broker since 1992 who joined Bank of America when the bank acquired Merrill on January 1, 2009. Goodman claims her new bosses demonstrated gender bias against her and other female employees.

She is seeking class-action status for her suit, which if granted would allow other women who claim they were similarly harmed by Bank of America’s allegedly discriminatory practices to join in the litigation.

Info Source: Calgary Herald

Felection - Fixing the Date

Democracy Watch outlines some of the reasons why Harper's Election call is bad for democracy:

. . . delaying the election until at least spring 2009 would give time to pass key bills, as well as complete various investigations and court cases, on key good government issues, as follows:

-a proposed law that bans loans to election candidates (except by banks and other financial institutions) is still under review by the Senate, and until it passes the loans loophole will allow anyone to buy off a candidate in violation of the spirit of donation limits that came into effect a few years ago;
-the investigation and court case concerning limits on spending on advertising by local candidates is not completed, and holding an election when limits are not clearly defined will likely lead to abuse in election spending;
-a court case filed by Democracy Watch has not been completed, and as a result it is unclear exactly what lobbyists can do to help candidates and parties during elections;
-another court case filed by Democracy Watch has not been completed, and as a result it is unclear whether Prime Minister Harper and his Cabinet violated the federal Conflict of Interest Act by making decisions concerning the Mulroney-Schreiber affair;
-the federal Ethics Commissioner has still not ruled on whether Finance Minister Jim Flaherty violated the Conflict of Interest Act when he handed out a contract to a friend, and;
-last but certainly not least, there are 90 loopholes in the federal government’s accountability and decision-making system that need to be closed, including loopholes that allow party leaders to lie to voters when making election promises, that allow secret donations to nomination race candidates, and that allow party leaders to dictate who will be the candidate in any riding.

Via Rabble.

Smudget Shmoooes.

As usual, the conservatives turn their back on working-class, low income families and high five the rich corporations:

All indications in the run-up to budget day pointed to the NDP and Bloc Québécois opposing the budget, and the party leaders did little to dispel that Tuesday.

"This is a budget that clearly fails the working families of Canada," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

"You simply have to note that the large corporations are getting six times as much of a tax subsidy as we see in spending for programs and for the needs of Canadians.

"In fact, individual taxpayers are going to have to pay 12 per cent more of the cost of government, while corporations will pay 14 per cent less."

Mr. Layton called the Conservative budget approach to setting funding priorities "completely unfair."

"There is nothing here to train the doctors that families need," Mr. Layton said.

"There is nothing to help deal with prescription drug costs that are really tough on families now. There's nothing for affordable housing. It is not a budget that New Democrats can support."

In Pursuit of an Oligarch

The Globe and Mail today prints an interesting report on Russian women chasing oligarchs for financial stability:

It's a tempting aspiration for starry-eyed young women. Russia's moneyed-men set don't shy from spending lavishly. They drop thousands of dollars a night at Moscow's most exclusive nightclubs, like Diaghilev Project, where, until it burned down Thursday afternoon, a VIP booth started at $10,000. They take private jets to vacation spots in the Alps and the south of France. Squiring beautiful women is chief among their pursuits.

Sounds familiar to me. Reminds me of lots of the puck bunnies in town; drooling after the Flames and frequenting the clubs the hockey stars party at in pursuit of lots of bucks. The surpising part of this article, though, in in the description of classes designed to teach young women how to "conquer" an oligarch:

Mr. Radovsky, 42, said the key for women wanting to attract powerful men is to act powerless.

A gifted sterva, Mr. Radovsky explains to his rapt students, is someone who can control men. There are a handful of roles men prefer in women, he said - sexy, playful, haughty. But tonight he's teaching the benefits of behaving like a servile child.

"Act like a four-year-old girl," he says, pacing the studio. "Your mother probably told you if you want something to get it yourself," he explains. "Get that out of your head. You have to be a funny bunny when he comes home from work with his paycheque."

One by one the women practise their Lolita acts. Holding two oranges, Mr. Radovsky asks one student to beg for them. "It's so elementary. If you act like a baby, the man will treat you like a little baby and want to give you everything."

She kneels at Mr. Radovsky's feet, looks up and asks for the orange. He replies that he doesn't have any. The women is stumped.

"If the guys says 'No,' just keep asking. You have to be confident in your role as a baby."

Exasperated, Mr. Radovsky calls in his wife, a 23-year-old former model. She throws herself at her husband's knees and begins to cry. Mr. Radovsky turns the oranges over and she trots out of the room in her high heels.

Mr. Radovsky said his schools are designed to empower women.

Oh I get it!!! Acting Powerless is empowering! It all makes sense, now. The article doesn't offer an effective rhetort when it cites the objection to these behaviour and conquering courses from a woman who writes novels about the rich and powerful and is herself married to a power monger. Jane Armstrong could have concluded her article with a real pow had she referenced a woman with a lion's voice against such oligarch oggling and the growth of feminism in Russia. The only nod to women's advancement is a tiny paragraph mid-story:

But some critics fear the Russian craze to marry up is sending the wrong message to women, who are starting to make real gains in Russia's expanding middle class.

Clearly there's an important motive for dialogue on Social structure and justice, here, when there does happen to be an abundance of women seeking men purely for day to day wealth in spite of living under an abusive husband.