Trade unionism was born male-centred and revealing a sexist attitude on the role of women in society, in particular with regard to their integration in the labour market and in the unions. This attitude soon became dominant and led the union strategies towards women for a long time. They aimed to exclude them from the labour market or at least accepting their work as transitory and confined to certain branches with lower wages. This acts of discrimination against women led them to found their own unions. It is what Briskin (1998) called "a separatist strategy". With the increasing integration of women in the labour market, union’s strategies shifted from a logic of exclusion to an organisation one. New structures were born to accommodate them. However, although the growth in absolute and relative numbers of women in the unions, their participation in these organisations remains less intense and there is not a corresponding increase in their proportion in the decision-making bodies, with unions rarely providing adequate representation (Cook et al., 1992; Curtin, 1997; Garcia, 1993, 1999; Garcia et al., 2003; Trebilcock, 1991). For Le Quentrec et al. (1999), this is a socially constructed situation, whereas for Healy and Kirton the explanation lies in the unions, which will constitute "male oligarchies" (Healy and Kirton, 2000). For their part, Chaison and Andiappan (1987) argue that it was the sexual division of labour that led to a segregation that restricted the visibility and influence of women in the movement. This communication aims to contribute to the study of this theme. It was based in a documentary analysis of the biographical profiles of the board members of about 50 Portuguese unions with jurisdiction in the public administration, as well as of other documents, such as the social reports of some public services.

--