Sexism in the city sparks big payouts

"On a typical evening, we would all go out for dinner after work - then the men would go off lap-dancing and I would end up going home. I was never asked if I wanted to go and I made it clear that I wasn't interested in that part of the evening.

"As a woman in London, you have to go against your instincts and become as political as the men if you want to survive. If that means playing golf and networking the same way as the men, then that's what you have to do. It's not enough being good at your job."

Such was the male-driven culture at a leading investment bank that confronted one woman as she climbed the corporate ladder. She successfully sued them for sexual discrimination after it became clear that her lap-dancing colleagues were earning much higher bonuses than she was.

"That was the nature of the game," she said.

Over the past couple of years, courts and tribunals have heard numerous claims of such sexist behaviour and discrimination.

"Had cancer, been a pain and is now pregnant," were the words used by a colleague in an email to describe Julie Bower, a drinks-sector analyst at Schroder Securities in Britain.

Ms Bower eventually won 1.4 million ($3.6 million) in compensation, the largest award of its kind, after a case brought with the backing of the Equal Opportunities Commission. She alleged sexual discrimination and unequal pay, and claimed that while male colleagues received bonuses of up to 650,000 ($1.7 million), she was given 25,000 ($65,000).

Elizabeth Weston, 29, a lawyer at Merrill Lynch, the investment bank, was awarded 1 million ($2.6 million) in an out-of-court settlement of her claim against the company over remarks made by a colleague at a party about her breasts and her sex life.

Meanwhile in a New York case, with implications for its other employees, another investment bank, Morgan Stanley, has paid 6.5 million ($17 million) in an out-of-court settlement with Allison Schieffelin, a senior bond trader.

She claimed she had been denied promotion and excluded by the bank's male-orientated culture, which indulged in "bonding" trips to strip clubs, casinos and golf clubs.

The case was backed by the US's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which claimed there was a "pattern or practice" of discrimination against women at the bank, which has agreed to pay 21 million ($55 million) to hundreds more employees with claims of sexual discrimination. It has set aside a further 1 million ($2.6 million) to fund an awareness campaign at its offices in London and New York.

But are these cases simply rare examples of dinosaur behaviour, or indicative that male-dominated City firms remain the last bastions of inequality and sexual discrimination, in a macho, success-driven culture?

Assessing the scale of sexism is difficult.

A 25-year-old consultant, who has worked in London for two years, explained.

She said: "There's no blatant discrimination in the office. But there are corporate outings like golf trips and it would never occur to them to invite me. I don't actually play golf but they don't know that so it is quite exclusive. Also, at a rough count, I would say that around 80 per cent of the senior management are male."

Jane Mann, head of employment at the solicitors Fox Williams, who has represented several women who have brought successful discrimination cases, believes the claims that get publicity only represent the tip of the iceberg: "For every one that gets to a tribunal, many others are settled out of court and we never hear about them."

Lawyers stress that although the size of some awards seemed high, it has to be remembered that most of the women making claims were high earners, who believe they were denied lucrative bonuses and salary hikes given to male colleagues by discrimination. A 50-year-old financial manager, who has worked in the City for more than three decades said: "At one point, my deputy was earning more money than me. I found that extremely difficult and it obviously undermined my position. But when I asked for my salary to be matched to his as a matter of principle, they refused. I honestly feel that this situation would simply not have arisen if I was a man."

In many cases, women, often believing it is the only way to survive, go along with the macho culture and turn a blind eye to discrimination and sexism, before eventually deciding enough is enough.

William Dawson, head of employment for solicitors Simmons and Simmons, says these are the most difficult cases for companies to defend.

"The company will often try to deal with the action by arguing that the employee accepted what was going on. But that puts them in a position where they have to defend a macho culture and answer the inevitable question of why they did not deal with it beforehand."

Both solicitors agree that, although there are few means of collating such information, the anecdotal perception that the number of claims is on the increase is true. The increase is occurring because women are now more resistant to the casual discrimination. They are more aware of their legal rights when men doing the same job are paid more.

- INDEPENDENT