Women of colour are facing the sharpest workplace barriers in the UK, according to new research by non-profit People Like Us and Women in PR. The findings show that ethnic minority women are more likely than any other group to experience exclusion, discrimination, blocked progression and the mental strain of navigating unequal workplaces.
The research highlights stark day-to-day inequalities, uneven career progression and pay disparities. The study also points to growing “representation tax”, with 23% of ethnic minority women carrying the burden of being the only voice for diversity in the room and employers are being urged to address these persistent gaps.
In an interview with Asian Voice, Angela Balakrishnan, Vice President at Women in PR, provided further insight into the research findings.
What does this gap look like in practical terms for women?
Across both the survey findings and the interview insights, the message was clear: this gap manifests in multiple, everyday ways. Many women, for instance, reported their ideas are overlooked in meetings, ignored, dismissed, or only acknowledged when repeated by someone else. There is also a persistent ethnicity pay gap, driven by underrepresentation of ethnically diverse women in leadership roles, reinforcing inequality.
The gap is also evident in access to opportunities, not only promotions but also stretch assignments, mentorship, and manager support. Additionally, many women feel pressure to self-censor or conform, an invisible burden often unrecognised, alongside gaps in feedback and recognition. Many feel undervalued or unclear about how performance is assessed. Employers and leaders need to take concrete steps to redesign workplaces and implement structural change enabling women of colour to thrive and lead.
To what extent is this also a peer-level issue and how can colleagues do better in addressing it?
In this research, many of the challenges identified are systemic and structural, meaning those in positions of power have a critical role in driving change. However, peers and allies can also make a meaningful difference in everyday workplace culture. For example, in meetings, colleagues can be more attentive, noticing who is being overlooked or interrupted, and actively creating space for them to contribute. Allyship also includes advocating for others by recommending individuals for opportunities and ensuring their contributions are recognised. The research highlights that women of colour often face barriers to informal networks that support progression, so sharing connections is important. Speaking up against racism, sexism, and microaggressions is also vital.
How does “representation tax” differ for women?
Representation tax also intersects with gender, which can make the burden even heavier.
In practical terms, it can arise when someone is the only person in a room with a particular lived experience or background and is repeatedly asked to provide perspective, insight, or “diversity thinking” for the group. This can be exhausting, as it goes beyond speaking up and creates an added sense of responsibility to challenge decisions or question emerging ideas. Women from underrepresented backgrounds should not be expected to carry the burden of educating others on race, gender, or inclusion.
Addressing this requires structural change. Organisations must ensure teams and rooms are more representative so this burden is not placed on one individual. At the same time, allies, peers, and managers should take responsibility for their own learning.
Why does the gap between talent and opportunities exist to such an extent?
What we are seeing is not a lack of talent entering the pipeline; in fact, representation at junior levels is improving. The issue lies in the failure to progress that talent into senior roles. For a range of reasons, women are not being given equal access to key meetings, high-visibility projects, or the sponsorship needed for promotion. Progression criteria are often unclear or informal, meaning advancement can depend on being in the “right” conversations or social spaces rather than transparent pathways.
This becomes more complex when leadership itself lacks diversity. Unconscious bias can lead people to hire and promote in their own image. Without deliberate action to diversify decision-making roles, the same patterns will continue, with similar profiles consistently rising to the top. While concerns about tokenism are valid, “meritocracy” is often used to avoid addressing structural inequality. In reality, access to leadership is not always based purely on merit but also networks and connections, making fairness essential.
With calls for mandatory ethnic pay gap reporting, what concrete impact do you think this would have in practice?
I think transparency helps on multiple fronts because it provides the data needed to understand what action is required. Another important benefit of ethnicity pay gap reporting is that it encourages greater openness. It allows employees from ethnically diverse backgrounds to see how their pay compares with that of their peers, which in turn can help address disparities more directly. It gives workers greater agency to advocate for themselves and have more informed conversations about pay and progression.
What two measures should employers prioritise to drive short-term success, and what would meaningful progress look like in five years?
A key priority is active sponsorship from those in leadership positions—being intentional about whose names are put forward for opportunities and avoiding defaulting to familiar networks. Leaders must also consciously open up access to networks and champion people from different backgrounds. Meaningful progress would look like genuinely diverse leadership pipelines, transparent promotion criteria, and equitable access to opportunities.
My message is simple: if you are a woman of colour, you have always been enough. The issue is not capability, but organisations failing to look beyond the surface. It is time for them to do the work.
