New Delhi, March 7, 2017: Around 64 per cent working women in the metro cities were satisfied with their workplaces, industry body PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry said on Tuesday.
“Majority of women participants (64 per cent) stated they were either completely or somewhat satisfied with their work,” said a survey on “Work Life and Balance and Health Concerns of Women” undertaken by PHD Research Bureau.
The survey said a positive trend was seen in work satisfaction though most women (70 per cent) worked 8-10 hours and travelled long distances, often devoting more than an hour to reach their workplaces.
A majority of women (77 per cent) said the government should come out with more policies for women empowerment.
NewsGrambrings to you latest new stories in India.
According to the industry body, the PHD Research Bureau surveyed around 5,000 working and non-working women from Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Kolkata and Chennai in January-February through a structured questionnaire.
“Of the surveyed women, 56 per cent (2,800) respondents were working women while 44 per cent (2,200) were non-working women,” the report pointed out.
“The majority (84 per cent) reported that they devote 2-4 hours in household work and 49 per cent said they have domestic help.”
The report, however, noted that little support came from family members in running household errands.
The industry body said the survey study was an endeavour to explore and strike a balance between work, life and health status of women in the country. (IANS)
A divided U.S. appeals court Thursday blocked rules by the Trump administration that allowed more employers to opt out of providing women with no-cost birth control.
The ruling, however, may be short lived because the administration has adopted new rules on contraceptive coverage that are set to take effect next month and will likely prompt renewed legal challenges.
Thursday’s ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concerned changes to birth control coverage requirements under President Barack Obama’s health care law that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued in October 2017.
States were likely to succeed on their claim that those changes were made without required notice and public comment, the appeals court panel said in a 2-1 decision.
The majority upheld a preliminary injunction against the rules issued by U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam last year. It, however, limited the scope of the injunction, applying it only to the five states in the lawsuit and not the entire country.
Another federal judge also blocked the rules, and her nationwide injunction remains in place.
An email to the Justice Department seeking comment was not immediately returned.
Obama’s health care law required most companies to cover birth control at no additional cost, though it included exemptions for religious organizations. The new policy allowed more categories of employers, including publicly traded companies, to opt out of providing free contraception to women by claiming religious objections. It also allowed any company that is not publicly traded to deny coverage on moral grounds.
The Department of Justice said in court documents that the rules were about protecting a small group of “sincere religious and moral objectors” from having to violate their beliefs. The changes were favored by social conservatives who are staunch supporters of President Donald Trump.
California filed a lawsuit to block the changes that was joined by Delaware, Maryland, New York and Virginia.
“Today’s decision is an important step to protect a woman’s right to access cost-free birth control and make independent decisions about her own reproductive health care,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.
The states argued that the changes could result in millions of women losing free birth control services, forcing them to seek contraceptive care through state-run programs or programs that the states had to reimburse.
The states show with “reasonable probability” that the new rules will lead women to lose employer-sponsored contraceptive coverage, “which will then result in economic harm to the states,” 9th Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace, a nominee of Republican President Richard Nixon, wrote for the majority.
In a dissent, 9th Circuit Judge Andrew Kleinfeld said the economic harm to the states was “self-inflicted” because they chose to provide contraceptive coverage to women. The states, therefore, did not have the authority to bring the lawsuit, said Kleinfeld, a nominee of Republican President George H.W. Bush.
The case became more complicated after the Trump administration last month issued new birth control coverage rules that are set to supersede those at issue in the lawsuit before the 9th Circuit. Under the new rules, large companies whose stock is sold to investors won’t be able to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage.
Wallace said the new rules did not make the case before the 9th Circuit moot because they are not set to take effect until January. (VOA)