Several women directors say that they have received notices from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission asking to set up interviews in an apparent start to an investigation over gender discrimination in Hollywood.
According to a copy of the letter obtained by Variety, the EEOC
is asking directors to speak with them so that “we may learn more about the
gender-related issues” they are facing in entertainment. The letter indicated
that the interviews would be conducted in the month of October.
In May, the ACLU of Southern California called on the EEOC to investigate “the systemic failure to hire women directors at all levels of the
film and television industry.”
They cited
figures showing hiring of women directors in entertainment well behind their
proportion of the population. In one of the figures cited, women made up just
7% of directors were in the 250 top grossing films in 2014, two percentage
points lower than it was in 1998, according to a study from the San Diego State
University Center for the Study of Women in Television & Film. According to
a recent report from the Directors Guild of America, the number of TV episodes
directed by women in 2014-15 was just 16%, albeit a modest gain from a year
earlier.
Director Maria Giese, who made
the initial inquiry with the ACLU four years ago, said that she had received an
EEOC letter and was hoping to set up an interview in the coming weeks.
She has been writing about the issue on her own blog, Women Directors in Hollywood, and last
month gave a speech to Hollywood Business and Professional Women in which she
outlined the history of past legal efforts as well as push back she has gotten
from the DGA.
Among
those who also received a letter was Lori Precious, who said that she was
“euphoric” that the EEOC appeared to be moving forward with an inquiry.
Although
there have been efforts in the past to investigate gender discrimination in
Hollywood, “the real problem is it just never turns into change,” Precious
said. The EEOC also conducted a report on race and sex discrimination in
Hollywood in the 1980s.
Another
recipient was Melanie Wagor, who said that “everybody is ecstatic and really
thankful for the ACLU and the EEOC for taking this seriously.”
A
spokeswoman for the EEOC said that federal law does not allow them to confirm
or deny the existence of a charge.
But she said that the “EEOC will continue to vigorously enforce Title VII’s nondiscrimination
requirements. Title VII prohibits covered employers from discriminating on the
basis of sex. … We also encourage the industry to publicly address the
serious issues raised by the ACLU and to take proactive steps to address these
issues.”
The ACLU
of Southern California had been gathering anecdotal information from 50 women
directors, resulting in a 15-page letter sent to the EEOC, the
federal Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program and the state
Department of Fair Employment and Housing.
“Women
often reported the pervasive perception that hiring women directors is viewed
as more ‘risky’ than hiring men; even men with less experience,” the ACLU
letter stated. “This perception is particularly harmful where multiple
decisionmakers must agree each time a director is hired, and each decisionmaker
is wary of hiring outside the standard (male) norm.”
Among
other things, the letter said that even women who have initial success are not
hired consistently or their careers stall, or they are not trusted with bigger
budget projects at the same rate as their male peers.
“Both
research and the anecdotal evidence we gathered showed serious gender
disparities in opportunities, even for women whose films debut at prestigious
festivals,” the letter stated.
A spokesman for the Alliance for Motion Picture and Television Producers said they had no comment.
The letter
was critical not just of studio and network hiring practices — including the
reliance on lists in deciding who to hire — but also of the role of talent
agencies and the DGA.
The ACLU
letter concluded that the guild’s efforts to increase the hiring of women “are
ineffective and some practices may perpetuate discrimination.”
The letter
cited “a widespread perception that the DGA leadership did not prioritize
increasing the number of women directors hired and at times expressed hostility
or blocked efforts of female members to make the issue a higher priority.”
Although the guild has worked with studios to create “shadowing” programs and
fellowships for women directors and ethnic minorities, the ACLU letter said
that many women view the programs as “condescending to women, especially where
women directors are required to participate as an express or implied condition
of getting work, while comparably experienced men are not.”
The DGA
sued two studios, Warner Bros. and Columbia Pictures, over hiring practices in
1983, but the class-action litigation was dismissed two years later after a
federal judge ruled that the guild had a conflict of interest in representing
the class. Among other things, the judge, Pamela Rymer, wrote that the DGA, as
the collective bargaining agent, itself faced triable questions as to whether
its procedures also contributed to discrimination. What followed was an
agreement between the DGA and the studios requiring employers make “good faith
efforts” to hire women and minority directors and to provide a report on the
sex and ethnicity of those hired.
The DGA
had no comment on Tuesday.
At the
time the ACLU released its letter, the DGA said in a statement that the “lack
of network and studio action to hire more women and minority directors is deplorable.
The DGA has been a long-standing advocate pressuring the industry to do the
right thing, which is to change their hiring practices and hire more women and
minority directors.”
But it
said that the ACLU had made “no effort to contact the DGA concerning the issues
raised in its letters. The ACLU’s assertions reflect this lack of investigation
as to the Guild, and ignore its efforts to combat discrimination against women
directors and to promote the employment of women directors.
“There are
few issues to which the DGA is more committed than improving employment
opportunities for women and minority directors, it is time for change,” the
guild said.
News of
the EEOC’s issuance of letters was first reported by the Los Angeles Times.
