A new report from the Diversity Council of Australia (DCA) has revealed a worrying reality in Australian workplaces – a strong preference for candidates from “elite” universities, reflecting a deeper issue of class bias in hiring and promotion decisions.
According to DCA’s Class Inclusion at Work report, 58% of HR and diversity practitioners admitted that their organisations show a preference for applicants who attended prestigious institutions such as the University of Melbourne, Australian National University, University of Sydney, Monash University, and others from the Group of Eight.
Of those surveyed, 10% said their organisation always prefers candidates from these universities, while 26% said they often do. Another 22% said it happens sometimes, suggesting that educational pedigree still plays a significant role in recruitment decisions — even when it’s unrelated to job performance.
The impact of education and class bias
The findings shed light on how educational background continues to influence workplace opportunities, despite growing awareness around diversity and inclusion. The report defines “class bias” as favouring applicants and employees who attended elite private schools or universities when making decisions about recruitment or promotion.
Catherine Hunter, CEO of the DCA, said the persistence of this bias is concerning.
“Your social class shouldn’t determine your career opportunities, yet our research shows class bias still impacts who gets ahead and who is left behind,” Hunter said.
“At a time of rising cost-of-living pressures, skills shortages, and economic uncertainty, organisations that allow class to influence hiring not only entrench disadvantage — they risk overlooking valuable talent that can boost productivity and drive recovery.”
For many professionals — including executive assistants — this bias can shape not just who gets hired but also who progresses. A candidate with the right skills and experience may be overlooked in favour of someone with a more privileged educational background, regardless of their performance or cultural fit.
The subtle signals of class
The DCA report also points out that class bias extends beyond hiring practices. Workplace culture can reinforce inequality through seemingly harmless activities or expectations — for example, hosting networking events or team outings that come with high costs, such as fine dining, theatre nights, or golf days.
For employees from class-marginalised backgrounds, these social norms can create a sense of exclusion. Many may also face long commutes or have limited disposable income, making participation difficult.
The report calls on employers to be more conscious of these barriers and to build inclusion into all aspects of workplace life — from social events to language and leadership behaviour.
How to address class bias at work
To create fairer workplaces, DCA recommends several key actions:
- Rethinking recruitment criteria by focusing on skills, experience and potential, instead of university attendance.
- Diversifying professional networks by including opportunities that are free or low-cost, ensuring accessibility for everyone.
- Using inclusive language by being aware of subtle cues that signal exclusivity.
- Assessing cultural contribution instead of cultural fit can bring new perspectives and strengthen the organisation’s culture.
The payoff for doing so is significant. According to DCA, class-marginalised employees working in inclusive environments are 23 times more likely to say their team is consistently innovative, 5.5 times more likely to describe their team as effective, and 3.3 times more likely to remain with their employer.
Inclusion as a business advantage
As Hunter concluded, “By focusing on practical actions across recruitment, development, progression, and workplace culture, organisations can unlock talent that is too often overlooked — and ensure everyone feels included at work.”
