Connect with us

News

Mining’s push for gender diversity threatened by ‘Andrew Tate’ effect

Published

on

Mining’s push for gender diversity threatened by ‘Andrew Tate’ effect

Deshnee Naidoo has spent her career climbing the ladder in mining and feels the mindset change towards women has been “phenomenal”.

But lately, the former head of Vale Base Metals, a nickel and cobalt producer, has noticed a worrying backlash. When candidates from diverse backgrounds secure jobs, some men in the industry have started using the acronym DEI — diversity, equity and inclusion — in a derogatory reframing: “Didn’t Earn It”.

“I am hearing more anti-wokeism voices. The jury is still out on this one, whether it’s going to grow,” says 48-year-old Naidoo. “We are always taken back to the way things were rather than where they need to go.”

Naidoo’s experience points to how a transatlantic backlash to diversity initiatives — in which high-profile conservatives have criticised schemes such as bias training, or targeting under-represented groups in recruitment — threatens efforts to narrow inequalities between men and women. In mining, one of the industries furthest behind on gender equality, the risk of reversing hard-won gains is especially stark.

Gina Rinehart, Australia’s richest person and the owner of an iron ore empire, has introduced pink mining trucks to raise awareness around breast cancer

“Globally we’re seeing this Andrew Tate effect, where men are taking back power,” says Stacy Hope, managing director of advocacy group Women in Mining UK, referring to the self-described “misogynist” social media influencer. “We need to bring men along on the journey to make sure they become allies.”

Advertisement

A belief that women are being promoted based on gender, rather than ability, has permeated to middle management and boardroom level, according to some female leaders. Naidoo says she has been accused of being “too aggressive and pushy”. “At the executive level, despite the champions we have . . . we just look so far from what we need to look like,” she adds. “The industry still looks like yesteryear at the top.”

Mining has made notable progress on gender equality over the past decade. The number of female directors at the 500 largest mining companies jumped from 4.9 per cent in 2012 to about 18 per cent in 2022, according to White & Case, a law firm.

One of the most high-profile female executives in mining is Australia’s richest person, Gina Rinehart, the owner of an iron ore empire that has introduced pink mining trucks to raise awareness around breast cancer.

Bar chart of Percentage of companies with no women directors showing In 2022 far fewer large mining companies had all-male boards

But the industry is far from parity. Of the top 100 mining groups, 16 still had no women on their boards and one in four of the largest 500 companies had none, the 2022 White & Case figures showed. Diversity at “junior” mining companies, which explore and develop mines and make up the majority of the industry, is still woeful.

The struggle to recruit women comes as the mining sector — crucial to producing the raw materials for the international shift to clean energy — is struggling to attract the most talented staff. Young people, say executives, are increasingly more interested in becoming data engineers than mining ones.

A survey of mining industry leaders by consulting firm McKinsey found that 71 per cent said talent shortages were holding them back from delivering on production targets and strategic objectives. Another survey by PwC found that two-thirds of leaders expected skills shortages to have a big impact on profitability within the next 10 years.

Advertisement

A particular challenge of the extractive industries is location: mines are often in remote spots around the world. At times, the rural communities they are in have different norms to western companies, putting female workers at risk of gender-based violence or local backlash.

To align with the interests of a new generation, the industry is hoping to position itself increasingly as a technology and data-driven business that does not necessarily involve getting mucky in pits or going deep underground.

Hilde Merete Aasheim, right, last month ended her five-year term as chief executive of Norsk Hydro, Europe’s largest aluminium producer. ‘As leaders, we have to be active,’ she says

“I hate when people talk about our industry as heavy industry,” says Hilde Merete Aasheim, who last month ended her five-year term as chief executive of Norsk Hydro, Europe’s largest aluminium producer. “That’s an old word, it’s not about raw muscles any more. It’s really high tech.”

Hope says a perception of mining as a “boys club” has not done it any favours in attracting women. The industry, she says, needs to become “visible” to young people, including as a sector essential to meeting green targets, such as restricting emissions to limit global warming to 1.5C.

“We need young people who are innovating with AI and digital toolsets,” she says. “We’re not doing a good job to make it the industry that needs young people and diverse talent to drive that change.”

Management scandals have not helped that reputation. A 2022 report into workplace culture at British-Australian mining group Rio Tinto discovered bullying and sexism were “systemic” across its worksites, a finding its chief executive Jakob Stausholm called “deeply disturbing”. Rio has now tied executive pay partly to performance on gender diversity and will release results of another review this year.

Advertisement

Elizabeth Broderick, the former Australian Sex Discrimination Commissioner who led the Rio report, says discriminatory incidents in mining were “not isolated workplace grievances” but “symptoms of a permissive culture”.

The situation across the industry is improving in some ways, however. The new amendment to the Sex Discrimination Act in Australia is a “game-changer” in making employers responsible for not just responding to grievances but taking preventive action to create inclusive workplaces, says Broderick.

Aasheim of Norsk Hydro is one woman to have benefited from supportive male leaders throughout her career, which began in a bakery as a teenager. “I have never applied for a job,” she says. “But I have gotten lots of opportunities because I’ve had key leaders that have seen my potential and challenged me on what I could do . . . As leaders, we have to be active.”

But in the face of a backlash against DEI, some say executives need to take a more proactive approach to embed support for women’s advancement across the workforce.

“We need to listen to men’s concerns about the changing workforce demographics and ensure that their fears are heard and addressed,” says Broderick. “Organisations that are increasing the representation of women are working [not only] to change mindsets and behaviours but also to embed everyday respect into their systems and structures.”

Advertisement

Additional reporting by Nic Fildes

News

Trump administration can’t block child care, other program money for 5 states: Judge

Published

on

Trump administration can’t block child care, other program money for 5 states: Judge

A federal judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration cannot block federal money for child care subsidies and other programs aimed at supporting needy children and their families from flowing to five Democratic-led states for now.

The states of California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York argued that a policy announced Tuesday to freeze funds for three grant programs is having an immediate impact on them and creating “operational chaos.” In court filings and a hearing earlier Friday, the states contended that the government did not have a legal reason for holding back the money from those states.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it was pausing the funding because it had “reason to believe” the states were granting benefits to people in the country illegally, though it did not provide evidence or explain why it was targeting those states and not others.

The programs are the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes child care for children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant, a smaller fund that provides money for a variety of programs.

The five states say they receive a total of more than $10 billion a year from the programs.

Advertisement

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, who was nominated to the bench by former President Joe Biden, did not rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but he said the five states had met a legal threshold “to protect the status quo” for at least 14 days while arguments are made in court.

The government had requested reams of data from the five states, including the names and Social Security numbers of everyone who received benefits from some of the programs since 2022.

The states argue that the effort is unconstitutional and is intended to go after Trump’s political adversaries rather than to stamp out fraud in government programs — something the states say they already do.

Jessica Ranucci, a lawyer in the New York Attorney General’s office, said in the Friday hearing, which was conducted by telephone, that at least four of the states had already had money delayed after requesting it. She said that if the states can’t get child care funds, there will be immediate uncertainty for providers and families who rely on the programs.

A lawyer for the federal government, Kamika Shaw, said it was her understanding that the money had not stopped flowing to states.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

National Park Service will void passes with stickers over Trump’s face

Published

on

National Park Service will void passes with stickers over Trump’s face

The Interior Department’s new “America the Beautiful” annual pass for U.S. national parks.

Department of Interior


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Department of Interior

The National Park Service has updated its policy to discourage visitors from defacing a picture of President Trump on this year’s pass.

The use of an image of Trump on the 2026 pass — rather than the usual picture of nature — has sparked a backlash, sticker protests, and a lawsuit from a conservation group.

The $80 annual America the Beautiful pass gives visitors access to more than 2,000 federal recreation sites. Since 2004, the pass has typically showcased sweeping landscapes or iconic wildlife, selected through a public photo contest. Past winners have featured places like Arches National Park in Utah and images of bison roaming the plains.

Advertisement

Instead, of a picture of nature, this year’s design shows side-by-side portraits of Presidents George Washington and Trump. The new design has drawn criticism from parkgoers and ignited a wave of “do-it-yourself” resistance.

Photos circulating online show that many national park cardholders have covered the image of Trump’s face with stickers of wildlife, landscapes, and yellow smiley faces, while some have completely blocked out the whole card. The backlash has also inspired a growing sticker campaign.

Jenny McCarty, a longtime park volunteer and graphic designer, began selling custom stickers meant to fit directly over Trump’s face — with 100% of proceeds going to conservation nonprofits. “We made our first donation of $16,000 in December,” McCarty said. “The power of community is incredible.”

McCarty says the sticker movement is less about politics and more about preserving the neutrality of public lands. “The Interior’s new guidance only shows they continue to disregard how strongly people feel about keeping politics out of national parks,” she said.

Advertisement

The National Park Service card policy was updated this week to say that passes may no longer be valid if they’ve been “defaced or altered.” The change, which was revealed in an internal email to National Park Service staff obtained by SFGATE, comes just as the sticker movement has gained traction across social media.

In a statement to NPR, the Interior Department said there was no new policy. Interagency passes have always been void if altered, as stated on the card itself. The agency said the recent update was meant to clarify that rule and help staff deal with confusion from visitors.

The Park Service has long said passes can be voided if the signature strip is altered, but the updated guidance now explicitly includes stickers or markings on the front of the card.

It will be left to the discretion of park service officials to determine whether a pass has been “defaced” or not. The update means park officials now have the leeway to reject a pass if a sticker leaves behind residue, even if the image underneath is intact.

In December, conservation group the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., opposing the new pass design.

Advertisement

The group argues that the image violates a federal requirement that the annual America the Beautiful pass display a winning photograph from a national parks photo contest. The 2026 winning image was a picture of Glacier National Park.

“This is part of a larger pattern of Trump branding government materials with his name and image,” Kierán Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, told NPR. “But this kind of cartoonish authoritarianism won’t fly in the United States.”

The lawsuit asks a federal court to pull the current pass design and replace it with the original contest winner — the Glacier National Park image. It also seeks to block the government from featuring a president’s face on future passes.

The America the Beautiful National Parks Annual Pass for 2025, showing one of the natural images which used to adorn the pass. Its picture, of a Roseate Spoonbill taken at Everglades National Park, was taken by Michael Zheng.

The America the Beautiful National Parks Annual Pass for 2025, showing one of the natural images which used to adorn the pass. Its picture, of a Roseate Spoonbill taken at Everglades National Park, was taken by Michael Zheng.

Department of Interior


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Department of Interior

Not everyone sees a problem with the new design. Vince Vanata, the GOP chairman of Park County, Wyoming, told the Cowboy State Daily that Trump detractors should “suck it up” and accept the park passes, saying they are a fitting tribute to America’s 250th birthday this July 4.

Advertisement

“The 250th anniversary of our country only comes once. This pass is showing the first president of the United States and the current president of the United States,” Vanata said.

But for many longtime visitors, the backlash goes beyond design.

Erin Quinn Gery, who buys an annual pass each year, compared the image to “a mug shot slapped onto natural beauty.”

She also likened the decision to self-glorification: “It’s akin to throwing yourself a parade or putting yourself on currency,” she said. “Let someone else tell you you’re great — or worth celebrating and commemorating.”

When asked if she plans to remove her protest sticker, Gery replied: “I’ll take the sticker off my pass after Trump takes his name off the Kennedy Center.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Federal immigration agents shoot 2 people in Portland, Oregon, police say

Published

on

Federal immigration agents shoot 2 people in Portland, Oregon, police say

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Federal immigration officers shot and wounded two people in a vehicle outside a hospital in Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, a day after an officer shot and killed a driver in Minnesota, authorities said.

The Department of Homeland Security described the vehicle’s passenger as “a Venezuelan illegal alien affiliated with the transnational Tren de Aragua prostitution ring” who had been involved in a recent shooting in Portland. When agents identified themselves to the vehicle occupants Thursday afternoon, the driver tried to run them over, the department said in a written statement.

“Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired a defensive shot,” the statement said. “The driver drove off with the passenger, fleeing the scene.”

There was no immediate independent corroboration of those events or of any gang affiliation of the vehicle’s occupants. During prior shootings involving agents involved in President Donald Trump’s surge of immigration enforcement in U.S. cities, including Wednesday’s shooting by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis, video evidence cast doubt on the administration’s initial descriptions of what prompted the shootings.

READ MORE: What we know so far about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis

Advertisement

According to the the Portland Police bureau, officers initially responded to a report of a shooting near a hospital at about 2:18 p.m.

A few minutes later, police received information that a man who had been shot was asking for help in a residential area a couple of miles away. Officers then responded there and found the two people with apparent gunshot wounds. Officers determined they were injured in the shooting with federal agents, police said.

Their conditions were not immediately known. Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney said during a Portland city council meeting that Thursday’s shooting took place in the eastern part of the city and that two Portlanders were wounded.

“As far as we know both of these individuals are still alive and we are hoping for more positive updates throughout the afternoon,” she said.

The shooting escalates tensions in an city that has long had a contentious relationship with President Donald Trump, including Trump’s recent, failed effort to deploy National Guard troops in the city.

Advertisement

Portland police secured both the scene of the shooting and the area where the wounded people were found pending investigation.

“We are still in the early stages of this incident,” said Chief Bob Day. “We understand the heightened emotion and tension many are feeling in the wake of the shooting in Minneapolis, but I am asking the community to remain calm as we work to learn more.”

Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and the city council called on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to end all operations in Oregon’s largest city until a full investigation is completed.

“We stand united as elected officials in saying that we cannot sit by while constitutional protections erode and bloodshed mounts,” a joint statement said. “Portland is not a ‘training ground’ for militarized agents, and the ‘full force’ threatened by the administration has deadly consequences.”

The city officials said “federal militarization undermines effective, community‑based public safety, and it runs counter to the values that define our region. We’ll use every legal and legislative tool available to protect our residents’ civil and human rights.”

Advertisement

They urged residents to show up with “calm and purpose during this difficult time.”

“We respond with clarity, unity, and a commitment to justice,” the statement said. “We must stand together to protect Portland.”

U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, urged any protesters to remain peaceful.

“Trump wants to generate riots,” he said in a post on the X social media platform. “Don’t take the bait.”

A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.

Advertisement

Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.


Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending