If you had to guess the employment gap between working-age men and women, what would you say?
15%? 20%? More?
Ali McKee, General Manager of ThunderLabs, thought so too. Until she looked at the data.
The participation gap is actually narrower than expected: just under 10%.
But that’s where the similarity ends.
In her recent appearance on the ThunderCast, Ali shared how surface-level stats mask a deeper divide in how women participate in the workforce, especially after becoming parents. From part-time pathways that stall career growth to the ripple effects on superannuation and financial independence, the impacts run far deeper than headcount.
Ali’s reflections are both personal and data-backed — and a timely reminder that workforce equity requires more than hiring parity. It demands structural change.
Here’s what she unpacked and what it means for decision-makers shaping the future of work.
Participation Rates Tell One Story But Not the Whole Story
Ali noted the surprising closeness of the participation rate figures between men and women. On the surface, it looks like parity: around 61% of women of working age are employed or actively looking for work, compared to 70% of men.
The numbers might suggest participation is strong. But the roles people return to and what those roles make possible tell the real story.
- The type of work women return to is often different.
Many women re-enter the workforce through roles that prioritise flexibility over progression. Sectors like education, hospitality, and customer service are common landing spots. Not necessarily by passion, but by necessity.
These industries offer “flexible” options that rarely lead to executive paths or long-term growth.
- Flexibility comes at a cost.
The very features that make these roles accessible — shorter shifts, rostered hours, or casual contracts — often limit how far someone can go. Training budgets, stretch assignments, leadership exposure…these are harder to access if you’re not “in the office” or “on call” enough.
- These jobs are more likely to be part-time, not full-time.
That’s a structural divide that ripples into everything else: pay, super, influence, and career narrative. Part-time work shouldn’t mean part-time opportunity, but in practice, it often does.
Implications of Part-Time Work for Women
Ali highlighted a tension: Many women choose flexibility. But the cost is often growth. And it’s not a small price to pay.
- Part-time roles often lack clear progression pathways.
Part-time employment may provide work-life balance, but it rarely comes with a career ladder. Many part-time roles are task-based or operational, rather than strategic. That means women in these positions are less likely to receive the stretch opportunities or project exposure that drive development and promotion.
- Leadership roles are rarely offered part-time.
Even when part-time workers demonstrate the same capability as full-time staff, leadership roles are disproportionately reserved for those who can commit to full-time availability. A 2021 WGEA report found that only 7% of managers work part-time, despite women making up the majority of part-time employees (30% of women, compared to 11% of men).
- The long-term trade-off is not just in pay but also in opportunity and influence.
When fewer women are given access to decision-making roles or key growth pathways, the impact compounds. It’s not only about salary or super contributions (though those matter deeply).
It’s also about representation in the rooms where change is made. Fewer women in senior roles means fewer role models, fewer sponsors, and slower systemic change.
Ali’s reflections echo what the data has been saying for years: flexibility without redesigning progression is a false choice. If part-time is where many talented women land, it needs to be a viable runway, not a cul-de-sac.
Superannuation, Retirement, and the Long View
In the podcast, Ali also reflected on how this pattern compounds over time.
- The more time out of full-time work, the lower the super contributions.
Superannuation is tied to income, and if you’re working fewer hours, earning less, or stepping out of the workforce entirely for periods of caregiving, your retirement savings inevitably take a hit. And it’s not just the missed contributions — it’s the missed compounding over years and decades that follows.
- This leads to a significant retirement wealth gap.
Data from the Association of Super Funds of Australia (ASFA) showed that women retire with an average of 23% less super than men. For many, that gap represents very real constraints on choices, housing, and healthcare in retirement.
- Over a lifetime, this limits financial independence.
Women facing separation or unexpected job changes in their 50s or 60s often find their financial footing is far less secure than their male counterparts. It’s a knock-on effect from years of prioritising flexibility over financial security, often because the workplace offered no third option.
What Needs to Shift and Where the Opportunities Lie
Ali doesn’t argue that all women should pursue full-time leadership roles. What she calls for is options that don’t limit growth.
- Better support for upskilling during parental leave.
Time away from work does not have to be time away from learning. Access to online courses, short certifications, or even mentoring during leave could help women re-enter the workforce with sharpened skills and greater confidence.
Employers who offer these opportunities show they’re thinking long-term. Not just about retention, but capability.
- More leadership roles designed for flexibility, not just full-time office presence.
Most executive roles still assume a traditional 9–5. Designing part-time or hybrid leadership roles would not only open doors for more women, it could also reshape company culture to be more results-focused and human-friendly.
- A rethink of how we define career ambition beyond hours worked.
Ali points out the unspoken bias: ambition is too often equated with availability. But availability is not always a sign of drive. It’s a reflection of circumstance. We need to start valuing outcomes over presence. A high-performing person working 4 days shouldn’t be overlooked for someone less impactful just because they’re clocking in 5.
Closing Thoughts
On paper, participation rates might look close. In reality, the divide shows up in pay, promotion, super, and long-term security.
Yes, women are returning to work. But they’re returning into roles shaped by old assumptions about ambition, availability, and leadership. If we want to make progress, part-time work must become a path, not a pause.
Ali’s reflections leave us asking:
- What if flexibility and ambition weren’t mutually exclusive?
- What if we built work that adapts to life, not the other way around?
🎧 To hear more from Ali’s story and the data behind it, listen to the full ThunderCast episode with Chris McGowan.
