
How COVID-19 Is Setting Working Women Back
November 12, 2020
In early October, the United States Labor Department reported that women were leaving the workforce at four times the rate of men. A few months earlier, a report from McKinsey Global revealed that while women made up just 43% of the workforce, they had borne 56% of COVID-related job losses. This data — and much more — led one news source to call this moment “America’s First Female Recession.”
What exactly is going on? Why are women losing and leaving jobs more than men during this global pandemic? And what can we do about it?
Here to answer these questions is Colleen Ammerman. Ammerman is the director of Harvard Business School’s Gender Initiative. She is also the co-author of an upcoming book Glass Half Broken: Shattering the Barriers That Still Hold Women Back at Work.
This Episode Covers the Following Issues
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseJul 2025
LGBTQ Rights
Women's Rights
Supreme Court Will Hear Challenges to Bans on Athletic Participation by Transgender Students
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court today granted certiorari in two federal court cases involving transgender youth challenging bans on their participation in local school and college sports. “Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status. Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do–to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” said Joshua Block, Senior Counsel for the Ířşě±¬ÁĎ’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.” “Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.” Earlier this year, efforts to enact a national ban failed in the U.S. Congress. Since 2020, 27 states have banned transgender youth from playing school sports. Many of these bans allow for invasive forms of sex testing that put all female student athletes at risk and open the door for any school official or adult to question and harass young women. In Florida, a 15-year-old junior varsity volleyball player was the subject of a police investigation after an anonymous accusation, prompting local officials to draft a 500-page report investigating her medical history, body weight, and anatomy. In Utah, a teenage basketball player was accused of being transgender by a member of the state board of education, leading to threats of violence against her and her family, and a teenager in Maine faced a similar attack from a state senator. In May, President Donald Trump bullied a 16-year-old transgender girl for participating in a high school track meet. Many women athletes have spoken out against bullying and discrimination against transgender student athletes. This includes Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, Dawn Staley, Sue Bird, and Brianna Turner, as well as leading organizations fighting for gender equality in athletics including the Women’s Sports Foundation, the Women’s National Basketball Player’s Association, and the National Women’s Law Center. The two cases the Supreme Court has agreed to hear include: Little v. Hecox, a challenge brought by one transgender and one cisgender student athlete against Idaho’s 2020 ban on transgender athletes and requirements for sex testing West Virginia v. B.P.J., a challenge brought by a teenage transgender girl against West Virginia’s 2021 ban on transgender athletic participation The two cases charge the bans with violating the rights of transgender and cisgender female students under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution. In addition, West Virginia v. B.P.J. argues that the bans violate Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in educational programs. Federal courts have blocked enforcement of these bans in both lawsuits. These cases are part of the Ířşě±¬ÁĎ’s Joan and Irwin Jacobs Supreme Court Docket.Court Case: B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of EducationAffiliates: Idaho, West Virginia -
Press ReleaseJun 2025
Reproductive Freedom
Women's Rights
Ířşě±¬ÁĎ Responds to Supreme Court Greenlighting State Efforts to “Defund” Planned Parenthood
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled today that Medicaid patients do not have a right to sue to enforce their right to a qualified health care provider of choice under the Medicaid statute. The decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic will facilitate some states’ politically motivated efforts to block low-income patients’ access to certain health care providers and may effectively defund Planned Parenthood and other disfavored providers by barring them from state Medicaid programs. “The majority decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic contradicts Congress’s clear purpose to give Medicaid patients their choice of qualified health care providers and also wrongly curtails patients’ rights to vindicate their choice of provider through Section 1983,” said Cecillia Wang, National Legal Director for the Ířşě±¬ÁĎ. “The decision may have the effect of blocking patients’ access to birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing and treatment for patients in South Carolina and potentially will permit state officials to override patients’ choice of provider based on political whims.” “The impact of this decision on our reproductive freedom will be compounded if Congress follows through on federal efforts to 'defund' Planned Parenthood by prohibiting patients from choosing Planned Parenthood health centers for their care,” said Deirdre Schifeling, Chief Political and Advocacy Officer of the Ířşě±¬ÁĎ. “Doing so would force the closure of hundreds of Planned Parenthood health centers nationwide, robbing people of their freedom to get reproductive health care from trusted providers in their communities and would result in shuttering 1 in 4 of the country’s abortion providers. "Make no mistake: our reproductive freedom is still under siege. The Ířşě±¬ÁĎ remains committed to fighting for Planned Parenthood, abortion access, and the fundamental human right to control one’s own body using every tool we have. -
News & CommentaryJun 2025
Women's Rights
Parents Push Back Against the Trump Administration's Latest Attack on Working Families
The Trump administration is attempting to gut Head Start, a federally-funded early childhood program Congress created for low-income familiesBy: Julia Birnbach -
WashingtonMay 2025
Women's Rights
Washington State Association of Head Start and Early Childhood Assistance and Education Program et al., Robert F. Kennedy et al.
The Trump Administration is threatening the future of Head Start – a program that has provided critical and evidence-based services—from education to childcare— to more than 40 million children and their families. The Administration by gutting Head Start staff and resources, delaying funding, and prohibiting activities that “advance or promote” “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility,” is irreparably harming the young children and low-income families who rely on Head Start.