Why this matters
Women make up a higher proportion of some occupations and industries, while men are concentrated in others. This is gendered segregation. It operates in two directions: horizontally, across occupations and industries, and vertically, where women and men are concentrated at different levels of seniority within organisations. The problem of vertical gendered segregation, where men are more likely to work in senior leadership while women are concentrated in junior roles, is discussed further under Indicator 1: Gender composition of the workforce.
Gendered segregation is a major driver of workplace gender inequality. It shapes who does particular types of work, who progresses into leadership, who has access to higher-paid occupations and industries. It is reinforced by gender stereotypes about who is suited to particular work, unequal caring responsibilities, limited access to flexible work, bias against people working in non-traditional roles (such as women in men-concentrated occupations), and intersecting forms of discrimination.
Gendered segregation is a key driver of the gender pay gap. Pay tends to be lower in women-concentrated industries and occupations, such as health care and education, and higher in men-concentrated ones, which are often more highly valued. It also entrenches unequal divisions of paid and unpaid work. Because women are more often paid less, heterosexual couples tend to fall back into traditional breadwinner and homemaker roles.
This is one of the hardest forms of gender inequality to shift, because the social and gender norms that shape it are formed early in life. They influence educational choices and career pipelines long before people enter the workforce. Organisations can contribute to change, but they are one part of a much larger picture.
You can read more about how gendered segregation perpetuates gender inequality in the Baseline report (2021, pp. 22-23).
How we define progress
Gendered occupational segregation exists when men and women are clustered in different roles. Progress means moving towards gender balance across all occupations and industries over time. The Commission defines balance using a 45:45:10 framework (45% women, 45% men, 10% any gender). As this is a goal of balance, it is not about changing the representation of any one group for its own sake.
The Victorian public sector is women-concentrated overall and so needs to move towards greater balance. But at the industry and occupational level, the picture varies widely, with some workforces highly men-concentrated. Certain fields have long been understood as ‘men’s’ or ‘women’s’ work: public health care and education are women-concentrated, while police and emergency services are men-concentrated.
The Commission uses ANZSCO codes (Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations) to report on occupations. ANZSCO codes are the skill-based classification system used by Australian and New Zealand governments (ABS 2022). These codes offer a widely accepted and familiar standard for duty holders reporting under the Act. They also enable comparison between the Commission’s data and other Australian datasets.11
The Commission also considers gendered segregation at the industry level. To see a breakdown of duty holders by industry, see Appendix 2.
Gendered segregation is a persistent feature of the whole Australian labour market (JSA 2025), because rigid gender norms shape behaviour from early childhood through education and training and into the jobs people pursue. For this reason, some of the most effective levers for change sit beyond any single employer, resting with governments, peak bodies and the education and training system. These operate alongside the actions duty holders can take themselves, set out in the Commissioner expectations below.
Progress between 2021 and 2025
Progress on gendered segregation was gradual and uneven. There were genuine signs of progress in some traditionally men-concentrated areas. More women were working as machinery operators and drivers, in technical and trades roles, and in management. The transport industry shifted from ‘highly’ to ‘moderately’ men-concentrated. These changes matter, because gendered segregation is both a major driver of the gender pay gap and notoriously slow to change.
At the same time, most occupations remained either men- or women-concentrated, and the overall distribution did not move towards balance. As discussed below, the share of occupations classified as ‘balanced’ fell over the period. While this finding needs careful interpretation, it underlines that the sector is some way from gender-balanced occupations and industries.
Key data measures are presented in Tables 7.1 to 7.3. Findings are discussed in further detail after the tables.
Table 7.1: Occupational segregation trends by gender (women) – ANZSCO categories
| Occupation | 2021 | 2023 | 2025 | Percentage point change 2021-2025 | Classification change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clerical and administrative | 73.7% | 72.7% | 72.9% | -0.8pp | No change – Moderately women-concentrated |
| Community and personal service | 62.2% | 63.0% | 63.8% | +1.6pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Labourers | 51.1% | 51.3% | 51.7% | +0.6pp | No change – Gender balanced |
| Machinery operators and drivers | 10.6% | 15.4% | 16.9% | +6.3pp | No change – Highly men-concentrated |
| Managers | 52.5% | 54.8% | 55.9% | +3.4pp | More segregation – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Professionals | 70.2% | 70.1% | 69.5% | -0.7pp | No change – Moderately women-concentrated |
| Sales workers | 52.8% | 56.3% | 56.6% | +3.8pp | More segregation – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Technicians and trades | 38.8% | 40.2% | 40.9% | +2.1pp | No change – Slightly men-concentrated |
Source: Workplace gender audit workforce data, 2021, 2023 and 2025.
Notes: To understand how to interpret the different types of progress ratings, see Data measures in Appendix 1. The percentage point change column may not always reflect the exact difference between years due to rounding.
Table 7.2: Occupational balance trends
| Segregation Category | 2021 | 2023 | 2025 | Percentage point change 2021-2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced occupations (45-55%) | 37.5% | 25.0% | 12.5% | -25.0pp |
| Men-concentrated (>55% men) | 25.0% | 25.0% | 25.0% | 0.0pp |
| Women-concentrated (>55% women) | 37.5% | 50.0% | 62.5% | +25.0pp |
Source: Workplace gender audit workforce data, 2021, 2023 and 2025.
Notes: To understand how to interpret the different types of progress ratings, see Data measures in Appendix 1. The percentage point change column may not always reflect the exact difference between years due to rounding.
Table 7.3: Industry segregation trends by gender (women)
| Industry | 2021 | 2023 | 2025 | Percentage point change 2021-2025 | Current tatus |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community and cultural services | 59.7% | 59.0% | 61.6% | +1.9pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Finance and insurance | 61.3% | 62.9% | 64.3% | +3.0pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Local government | 63.0% | 62.5% | 61.7% | -1.2pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Other | 45.7% | 48.3% | 48.8% | +3.1pp | No change – Gender balanced |
| Police and emergency services | 36.4% | 38.0% | 38.2% | +1.7pp | No change - Slightly men-concentrated |
| Public health care | 78.2% | 77.4% | 77.1% | -1.0pp | No change – Highly women-concentrated |
| TAFE and other education | 59.7% | 60.0% | 60.0% | +0.3pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Transport | 24.4% | 27.3% | 29.4% | +4.9pp | Less segregation – Moderately men-concentrated |
| Universities | 58.1% | 59.3% | 59.6% | +1.5pp | No change – Slightly women-concentrated |
| Victorian Public Service | 69.7% | 69.7% | 69.5% | -0.2pp | No change – Moderately women-concentrated |
| Water and land management | 41.0% | 43.0% | 42.9% | +1.9pp | No change – Slightly men-concentrated |
Source: Workplace gender audit workforce data, 2021, 2023 and 2025.
Notes: To understand how to interpret the different types of progress ratings, see Data measures in Appendix 1. The percentage point change column may not always reflect the exact difference between years due to rounding.
Signs of progress
More women worked in traditionally men-concentrated occupations
There was improvement in some traditionally men-concentrated occupations, where women’s representation rose:
- machinery operators and drivers (16.9%, up 6.3 percentage points)
- technicians and trades workers (40.9%, up 2.1 percentage points)
- labourers (51.7%, up 0.6 percentage points).
These increases did not always shift an occupation’s overall classification. Machinery operators and drivers, for instance, remain highly men-concentrated despite the largest single rise. Some changes are built on smaller workforce numbers, so should be read as early movement rather than transformation. Even so, growing participation by women in traditionally masculine roles is an encouraging result.
More women worked in transport, finance and insurance
Transport shifted from a ‘highly’ to ‘moderately’ men-concentrated industry. This represents meaningful progress in a traditionally men-concentrated industry and is consistent with the sector’s sustained effort to support women into transport careers (see Ghalebeigi et al.). In finance and insurance, women’s representation rose by 3 percentage points. While this part of the public sector is not highly men-concentrated, the broader finance and insurance industry traditionally has been. Increased representation of women in this part of the public sector therefore represents positive progress towards greater gender balance.
Women’s representation in management continued to grow
Women’s representation in management increased from 52.5% in 2021 to 55.9% in 2025 (up 3.4 percentage points). Given management roles are traditionally men-concentrated, this increase points to improving access to management for women. This reduction in vertical gendered segregation matters, as progress in who leads organisations is as important as progress in who works in particular occupations and industries. The shift in the gender composition of managers tipped this occupation into the slightly women-concentrated category. This is because more than 55% of employees in this group are women, outside the 45:45:10 threshold. Although managers are now classified as slightly women-concentrated, this reflects women reaching a share of management that is closer to their representation in the public sector workforce, not an overconcentration of women in leadership.
Areas for attention
Most occupations remained gender concentrated
Despite encouraging movement in some men-concentrated occupations, gendered segregation remains entrenched across the Victorian public sector. In 2025, 7 of 8 occupations were gender-concentrated (5 women-concentrated, 2 men-concentrated). Six occupational groups remained in the same category as in 2021.
At first glance, the distribution of occupational groups appears to have become more gender segregated. The share of occupations classified as ‘balanced’ fell from 37.5% to 12.5% over the period, while the women-concentrated share rose correspondingly. However, it is worth considering this shift in context. The occupations that changed category (managers and sales workers) shifted from ‘balanced’ into ‘slightly women-concentrated’ as women’s representation grew. In the case of managers, that movement is towards women gaining ground in a traditionally male-concentrated, higher-status occupation. This is a positive development, even though it registers as ‘more segregation’. Because sales workers form the smallest occupation group in the dataset (around 1,200 of close to 500,000 sector employees) relatively small workforce changes can move it between categories, and it is prone to fluctuation between reporting years.
There have been small shifts in the distribution of occupations across categories. Importantly though, the sector has not become meaningfully more segregated in a way that disadvantages women. But nor has it moved towards balance. With only 8 occupational categories, each shift moves the percentages substantially. This is why the occupation-level distribution should be read alongside the more granular industry and occupation data rather than on its own.
While gendered segregation remains deeply entrenched, a small number of encouraging shifts are underway. Achieving a more gender-balanced workforce will require sustained action across education, career pathways, workplaces, industries and government, extending well beyond the influence of any single employer.
Commissioner expectations
The Commissioner expects duty holders to make sustained, deliberate efforts to reduce gendered segregation. It is one of the most persistent forms of workplace gender inequality, shaped by social norms and stereotypes that develop over a lifetime. Progress will take time, but organisations are not powerless to influence it.
Smaller duty holders should look for ways to act collectively at the industry level to recruit and retain underrepresented genders. This may involve working with similar organisations or peak bodies, schools, TAFEs and other education providers to strengthen talent pipelines and encourage people into non-traditional careers from an early stage. Larger organisations may may be able to invest directly in targeted pathways, traineeships, mentoring, scholarships and networks that support more gender-balanced recruitment over time.
Within their own workforces, duty holders should focus on attracting and retaining underrepresented genders into specific occupations, roles, and areas. This includes building internal pathways through upskilling, job-shadowing and development opportunities, and critically reviewing role requirements that act as unnecessary barriers for a particular gender. Organisations should also consider where skills can be developed on the job or through traineeships rather than requiring prior experience. Gendered imagery and language are not the whole story, but they are powerful signals of who belongs in a role or industry. Recruitment campaigns and internal and public communications should show people of different genders across the full range of roles.
Many of the strongest levers on gendered segregation lie beyond the control of any single employer – including the education system, occupational pipelines and broader social norms. However, organisations still have significant influence over who they recruit, develop, promote and retain. The Commissioner therefore expects duty holders to use every lever available to them while working collaboratively with governments, education providers, industry bodies and other employers to achieve lasting change.
Footnotes
- ANZSCO codes have been critiqued for being insensitive to gender equality issues and perpetuating the undervaluation of women’s work (Risse 2025). In acknowledgement of these issues, and to better reflect the differences between Australian and New Zealand workforces, Australia is shifting to the OSCA (Occupation Standard Classification for Australia) framework (ABS 2024).
Updated