These women understand that their fertility is limited. Women are born with all of the eggs they will ever have, and these decrease throughout life. Above age 35, egg quality declines more rapidly and by age 44 the chances of pregnancy, even with in vitro fertilization, are less than 2 per cent.
But many employers have not realized the potential to tailor employee benefits to this sought-after demographic. Companies are under increasing pressure to diversify their talent. “Hire women or explain why you refuse to do so” is a recent rubric. The Minerva Foundation grades CEOs with a “Face of Leadership Scorecard” based on their representation of female executives. GE launched a campaign to “Balance the Equation” by hiring 50 per cent women for their entry-level technical positions by 2020.
Hiremorewomenintech.com suggests ways that employers can reconstitute job descriptions to include and appeal to women. For example, one could say “community of engineers” rather than “dominant engineering firm.”
The critics claimed that egg freezing was a corporate tactic to keep women working longer by pressuring them to defer pregnancy. Some contended that companies should instead focus on changing society’s structure to encourage women to have babies in their biological prime.
Sure, she could use a sperm donor and get pregnant at 28 like the critics suggest, but many women I encounter are holding on to their visions of having it all. Others are already in a committed relationship but they are not ready to start a family. They want to get a good education, work hard, have a career, travel and plan for kids later. Who are we to judge their priorities?
Oct. 28, 2017 "Scholarships give female business students a boost": Today I found this article by Jennifer Lewington in the Globe and Mail: