A Womans place is in the home - Essay Example

1 Occupation Segregation A Womans place is in the home Up until the 18th century in the UK, when a girl left home, she did so to become someone's wife. She departed her father's house laden with her mothers recipes and maternal wisdom, which would fortify her to care for her husband and her children. The attitude of many men was duly espoused by Queen Victoria and accepted by the Church of England, concerning the subject of female employment, Queen Victoria quipped, 'a woman is not to compete with a man for employment, she is to do the work which God intended her to do, a wife to her husband and a mother to her children' This Victorian attitude to this day has not yet totally gone awash. If a woman did accept work outside of the home, she needed her husband's consent and it was he, who would receive her wages. Women have always been viewed as the nurturing partner and anything outside of that scope was resisted by men in the UK. The Victorian attitude towards women and employment was very prevalent until the first half of the twentieth century, when necessity caused the attitude to be placed on the back burner. During World War II, when most of the able-bodied men were called to arms, it was the women who replaced the men in the munitions factories and performed as mechanics on the air strips. Even though women stepped up to the plate and provided an invaluable service, during the national crisis and labor shortage, as they kept the fighting men in the theatres of war supplied with munitions, and the planes fueled and mechanically ready to fly, their loyalty and hard work was unceremoniously rewarded 2 with them receiving lower pay than their male counterparts. Myra Strober explicitly recognizes that men exploit women and derive various advantages from doing so. Strober has sought to explain the existence and persistence of sex segregation in an economy that in many other ways may operate according to neo- classical market principles. Strober's theory lays the ultimate blame for occupational segregation on the patriarchal system in which men enjoy women's sexual, child rearing, and domestic services in the household. The immediate blame for occupational sex segregation, however, is laid on employers, most of whom are men. In Strober's analysis she states that, "employers basically strive towards two goals (1) profit maximization (wherein if they employ a woman, they will almost invariably pay her less than a male) and (2)enforcing the economic dependency of women on men. The latter is of interest to male employers because it provides the material for the patriarchal system i.e., it forces women to become dependent wives and mothers(employers are said to worry about maintaining women's dependency on men in social classes other than their own because threats to patriarchy in the working class may lead to threats to patriarchy within management or capitalist class(Blau 1977). Strober's theory suggest that women in this society are without question economically disadvantaged compared with men, and this situation is hardly an accident of history or nature. There are obvious ideological (Williams et al 1982) legal (Kanowitz 1969) and informal mechanisms (Bernard, 19/1:88-102). Women's jobs are not as important as men's jobs The notion of perpetual equilibrium sheds some light on this issue.Workers become 3 qualified by making some type of investment in themselves where the decision to invest depends on the gain from qualifying. In this case employers' perceptions of sex differences in qualifications may become self confirming, even when there is no intrinsic sex difference in ability or behaviour. Multiple equilibrium may result. For example, if employers views of female job instability leads them to give women less training and to assign them to jobs where the cost or turnover is minimized, women may respond by exhibiting the unstable behaviour employers expect. This in turn confirms employers' perceptions. On the other hand, if employers believe women are stable workers, they will hire women into positions that are sufficiently rewarding to inhibit instability (Arrow 1976) On the matter of sex differentials in earnings and employment distributions, it is important to elucidate the linkages between the two: to suggest why the same set of factors that produce earnings differentials is also likely to generate employment segregation. Under the administered system of the internal labour market, a firm attaches wage rates to occupational categories rather than to individuals. Under such circumstances the only way in which the firm can distinguish between men and women in terms of pay is to assign them to different job categories. Within occupational categories, institutional constraints mandate equal pay for equal work, except for relatively small distinctions based on seniority and/ or merit considerations. Employers are likely to structure female jobs to fit the perceived average characteristics of women workers. This in turn, influences women's behaviour and productivity a la Arrows perceptual equilibrium. Women may earn less than men both because of their lesser amount of labour 4 market experience and because of the lower returns on experience they obtain (the latter reflecting their smaller investments per unit of time). Despite undoubted change, it is the case that job segregation, through a resilient gender division of labour, remains a characteristic of the labour market. Webster (1946- 48) reflected on the male domination of the crafts; "in craft work, men's jobs have come to be defined as 'skilled' because workers in these jobs are historically organized strongly in defence of their interests and have striven particularly hard to restrict entry (by young workers, or by women workers, or by those not following the apprenticeship route) to their line of work.(Webster) Julie Mellor, chair of the EOC said, "Trade Unions have a key role to play in tackling sex segregation by encouraging employers to train more young people and make efforts to attract more women and men into jobs traditionally done by the opposite sex. Unions need to help employers turn principles into practice if we are to see change in our workplace"(Mellor) "Statistics show that three-fourths of working women are still found in five occupational groups, commonly known as the five C's - caring, cleaning, catering, cashiering, clerical and child care. "jobs which are classified as women's work command lower wages than men's work even when they require similar qualification levels, leading to inadequate pay and income" (Sex Stereotyping) Julie Mellor Chairman of the Equal Opportunities Commission feels very strongly about this recurring and long standing inequality and she points out, "Britain needs to tackle the barriers that prevent many (women) from reaching senior positions, we as a 5 society, need to reassess the value we place on jobs traditionally done by women. How on earth can we justify, for example, the low pay received by people caring for children and older people - surely one of the most valuable roles in our society" (Mellor) Sex Segregation is not prevalent in upper management and some professions A recent article in the Guardian pointed out that "Universities are breaking the law by paying women lecturers and professors up to 8,000 pounds less than men for doing the same jobs in the same subjects". (Guardian) Even in nursing and paramedical studies - where 70 per cent of the lecturers are female - male lecturers earn 1558 pounds more than women in equivalent posts. Only at professor level are women in nursing paid more. Anatomy and physiology departments had an 8,000 pound difference while there was a 7,000 pound gap in veterinary science" (Guardian 2004) Tom Wilson, head of the Union's University department said, "the discrimination is even more widespread and deep rooted than we thought, either they get dragged in front of the tribunals or they take action before they are forced to do so by the courts. The evidence is incontrovertible" (ibid) Research also revealed that there are no women professors among the permanent staff in civil engineering or central computing. Many commentators argue that most of the gender pay gap can be explained by occupational segregation. As Rubery et al points out, "the vast majority of low paying jobs across Europe are occupied by women. This is due to the atypical work in which women dominate employment and to indirect discrimination which devalues female dominated work" (Rubery et al). Carrol et al (1998) carried out a case study of women's 6 pay in a large bank in the UK, and found despite the fact that the banking industry is female dominated, only seven per cent of the female workforce was found in management grades, compared to fifty per cent of the male workers" (Carrol et al 1998). Other commentators such as Ledwith and Colgen (2002) point out that women continue to experience unfavorable conditions in the workplace because of their positions within trade unions. They argue, "that although there is evidence of a growing female membership in trade unions, women are in a minority in the higher ranks of trade unions and are under-represented within the posts of full-time officers and shop stewards, and are therefore not in a strong position to make advances in the equality agenda" (Ledwith et al 2002).Where women are in a position to organize collectively, they face legal hurdles in enforcing their rights through the tribunals. This is typified in a paper concerning inequities in pay in the UK National Health Service (Grimshaw 1998) which refers to an employment tribunal case in which speech therapists (i.e., workers in a female dominated occupation) made a claim of equal value to clinical psychologists and pharmacists (a male dominated occupation), despite the fact that the latter were consistently awarded higher pay deals than the former. The first tribunal found that the pay differentials were the result of separate pay bargaining structures which were seen to constitute a "non-discriminatory" 'material factor' in pay determination. However, this finding was over-ruled by the European Court of Justice which ruled that the existence of separate bargaining groups for female and male dominated professions did not amount to any objective justification for unequal pay."(Grimshaw 1998) 7 Legislation will ameliorate the segregation "Despite nearly thirty years of equality legislation, occupational segregation remains as entrenched as ever" (Sex Stereotypes). The blatant disregard and lack of respect for the labor of women ran rampart and was the standard order of business until the Equal Pay Act 1970 became law. The law applied to men, women and children, but its primary thrust was women. Albeit the Act was created to close the pay gap, it provided only incremental relief and was not the panacea needed to rid the system of the malady; it was riddled with inherent and long standing discriminatory beliefs and practices. The Act did little to prevent discrimination and had no built in mechanism for monitoring and compliance. The Act merely provided legal recourse for individuals who had uncovered a bona fide case of wage manipulation by an employer. This was the hallmark statutory hope for amelioration for more than thirty years. It required a claimant to file a grievance within two years. In July 2003 the limit was extended to six years in the UK. To further right the wrongs of past discrimination, in some cases the claimant could file for back pay to the time when the difference started" (Equal Pay Act 1970) To be sure, the Equal Pay Act 1970 was a positive step in the right direction, even though it was a long time coming. And whilst it attempted to correct the wrongs of past discrimination, it did not go quite far enough in addressing the dilemma of gender discrimination in the work place. Consequently, in 1975 Parliament amended the Equal Pay Act 1970 and initiated the sex discrimination Act 1975. Where the Equal Pay Act 1970 dealt with pay disparities of all persons in the work place, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, exclusively targeted discrimination against women. This Act does not address 8 discrimination based on race. The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 lowered the tolerance level against sex discrimination. The fundamental difference between the 1970 and 1975 Acts are, the 1970 Act deals with discrimination after the fact, which essentially permitted discrimination to persist or be tolerated by the parties involved. Whereas the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, discourages the existence or practice of discrimination from the outset. Moreover, to add strength and breadth to the 1975 Act, Parliament called for the creation of a commission, The Equal Opportunities Commission was formed in 1979 to monitor compliance and enforce the act. Between 1970 - 75, as a result of the introduction of the equal pay legislation, the full-time pay gap reduced from 36 per cent to 27 per cent (EEOC 2001). There was a subsequent narrowing of the gap to just over 20 per cent throughout the late 1970s and the early 1990s, as the result of women increasing their participation in education and maintaining their position in the labour market (Ibid). From 1998 onwards the national minimum wage has helped to reduce the pay gap to below 20 per cent. The rate of progress is far too slow - whole generations of women are losing out - but unless action is taken to speed up the rate of change, The UK is still decades away from getting rid of job segregation and the pay gap. James Tilley describes the discrimination of women in the work place as our "durable inequality" which is embedded in our working world. The simple answer to the question according to Tilley, as to why women earn less than men, "that men organize the world of remunerative work, this results in "structural - reproductively "- something 9 anyone who has worked in an institution will know by a simpler name. These inequalities endure because civil rights legislation addresses only the situation in which a hiring boss, or committee, employs or promotes one person but not another in straight competition" (Tilley). He goes on to embellish his point with a situation that crops up again and again in female segregation job complaints. e.g. "You have a large grocery store where there are different departments - one of them meat, the other vegetables. It turns out that the women move into vegetables and the men into meat. At every level they are paid the same. No discrimination. Walking about the store the men go to places where they can talk to other men about football. Women go to places where there are other women and they can swap stories about what ever women talk about. But the promotion structures work differently so that managers mainly come from the meat department. There is no point where you have two candidates, one of them male and one female. No discrimination at point of entry; or even promotion. But what you get over time is an invisible structure which is in effect, "discriminatory" (Tilley) Sex Segregation is grossly exaggerated in the UK The Equal Employment Commission has a keen perception of where the problem areas exist and they have initiated studies to collect the needed data which will enable them to educate and convince employers of the societal benefits of practicing equity in the work place. It is the position of the commission that, "the sex segregation in the workplace will not cease, unless there is a radical rethink of the equality laws. (EOC) Britain's 30 year old gender equality laws are failing to tackle the different causes of the pay gap as well as stop specific pay and other discrimination. 10 During 2005 the commission initiated a study which assessed Equal Pay Reviews. The preliminary conclusion of the commission was that, encouraging businesses to voluntarily examine whether they are placing men and women equally is not working throughout Great Britain. "Only 10 per cent of organizations with their headquarters in Scotland have completed the Equal Pay Review to check for fair play, this is compared to 22 per cent in England and 15 per cent in Wales" (EOC). Four out of five organizations with their headquarters in Scotland have no equal pay activity and do not plan to engage in any activity. The EOC is therefore calling for a new duty on employees to take action on all causes of the pay gap. The new law would modernize existing laws and would: Focus on achieved outcomes Be evidence based and targeted toward the causes of the pay gap, with every employer carrying out a diagnostic "equity check" to find out exactly what action is needed. Be transparent and accountable, with consultations with unions and the workforce on the findings and action plan as well as reporting to shareholders. Smaller businesses would have a programme of support to help them with The process. The member states where appropriate with social partners, are called upon to adopt a multi-faceted strategy to eliminate job segregation in both the public and private sectors and consider setting targets to tackle job segregation. Such a strategy 11 could include inter alia review of job classification and pay schemes to eliminate gender bias, improving statistical and monitoring systems, and awareness raising and transparency as regards to job placements" (Union Employment Guidelines 2002) After four years of promotion, just one-third of large organizations have completed an equal pay review (January 27, 2006) (EOC). The EOC Equal Pay Review research has found no significant increase in the number of large organizations completing a pay review in the past twelve months. At the current rate, the government will miss its own target of having 45 per cent of large organizations completing reviews by 2008. "The least activity is in the private sector where the incidence of sex segregation is much higher than in the public sector. While sixty-one per cent of large public sector organizations have completed an Equal Pay Review or have their first EPR in progress, just thirty-nine per cent have done so in the private sector" (Adams et al 2005). In the 2005 survey, 34 per cent of the large organizations (500+ employees) had completed an EPR. This compared with thirty-three per cent in the 2004 survey, there is no significant statistical change. "only eleven per cent of organizations reported they had done, or were currently doing a pay review that checked for both equal pay and work equal value, this check is one of the foundations of an Equal Pay Review - as recommended in the Code of Practice on Equal Pay" (Adams et al) Females can be found in an abundance in well paying managerial jobs in the UK "Women in Britain get promoted more quickly than men, but are still paid less than their male colleagues despite enjoying faster growth" (32nd ANMS). In a survey of 20,989 individuals employed in over 200 organizations, it shows that 12 the average female leader is 37 years old, compared to an average of 41 for men. But at 36,712 pounds, these female managers are earning 2,674 pounds less than their male counterparts. At director level where the average female is 44 years old (47 for men) the pay is even more pronounced at 22,144 pound. The survey by the Charter Management Institute and Remuneration Economics, show an average earning increase of 5.3 per cent for women managers. This means that the average female head of departments earning 76,402 pounds - still a 5 per cent shortfall on the male equivalent of 80,459 pounds. However, with male managers only awarded an average increase of 4.9 per cent, these figures represent nine successive years that female earnings growth has out performed men. This years survey shows that women's salaries are increasingly being supplemented by bonuses. At senior executive level for example, female managers are receiving larger bonuses than male managers for the first time since the survey began in 1974 (2,302 pounds compared with 2,039 pounds). However, the bonuses paid to women represents a lower proportion of the overall remuneration package worth an average of 10.4 per cent of their salary, compared to 13.7 per cent for men. Even in sectors and functions with a high percentage of female managers, is a distinct gap in remuneration (Compensation and Benefits Discrimination). A Eurostat study conducted in 2001 indicated that the incidence of job segregation is narrowing. Albeit the study points out that the numbers reflect that the incidence is narrowing, it also points to the fact that pay differences may also be seen as a consequence of men's and women's jobs being subject to different evaluations, as well as differences that can be explained only by direct discrimination. 13 Sex Segregation is entrenched in societal attitudes The resilience of the pay gap over time suggests that there are multiple and deeply entrenched casual factors at play both within and outside of the labour market. Within the labour market sex segregation has proved very difficult to eradicate, and while equalizing men's and women's occupational distribution would not necessarily be a positive move for pay equity (Rimmer 1991). Strategies to address the under evaluation of female dominated work (and vertical sex segregation within occupations will be important if the pay gap is to be further narrowed.), is an issue that can best be addressed through collective remedies delivered by industrial tribunals, and considerable efforts have gone into recent equal pay inquires in NSW and Queensland to alert tribunals and the parties before them to the extent to which gender inequality is often historically embedded in the way work is valued. Encouragement of cases under the expanded principles for pay equity that emerged from these inquiries would be a very positive strategy. Vertical segregation, however, is more difficult to address through the industrial relations system. It is at least partly the product of discrimination in organizational culture and practice (regardless of whether it is direct or indirect, intentional or unrecognized), and as such is an area where anti-discrimination rules come into play. While it is undoubtly difficult to address issues through anti- discrimination causes, and the impact of individual settlements on gender pay equity as a whole will always be extremely limited, the existence of anti-discrimination legislation and the public profile of policies and prosecutions are important to the extent that - over time - they have the capacity to influence organizational practice more widely. 14 Conclusion Whenever classes of people are individually or collectively affected by unfair treatment under a law or policy, or when there is no law or remedial checks, which offers protection for this class, then it is the duty of the government to take the lead in an effort to eradicate this type of de facto discrimination. The British government has stepped forward with legislation, and have gone to the lengths of appointing commissions to monitor the adherence and administration of these laws. However, it has now come into view that sex segregation, while it fosters economic deprivation and hardships upon its unwitting victims, it can be an economic windfall for the practitioners of policies which adversely affect women. Moreover, it has been pointed out, that the vein of the issue is deeply engrained into societal norms. Today, a woman is just as likely to become the victim of sex segregation at the hands of another woman, as well as by a male. The attitudes with which we view the work of women vs the work of men must be seriously adjusted. Moreover, the value which we place on the work which women traditionally are engaged must be modified. We must not forget that, 'all labour that is honest, is honourable'. Women have never received their just consideration either inside or outside of the workplace; chances are whenever they are hired, they will be channeled into a job which is not on a broad based fast track for middle or upper level management; the phenomena which causes and enables the disparity in job placement and selection by Human resource personnel or bosses, which ultimately exacerbates the disparity of wage distribution between men and women in the workplace has not always been of major concern. The 15 reasons why it has been able to persist, can be attributed to the social and psychological efforts of men as well as women. This is a problem which affects every member of society and everyone must do their share, albeit incremental, to contribute towards erasing this scrooge from our midst as well as our minds. We no longer live in a day or era when a woman needs less money than a man. Perhaps she is the major breadwinner, whatever set of circumstances which has created this situation, or whatever her situation is, it is basically irrelevant. Point is, when she presents herself to do a days work she must be compensated and considered on par with her male co workers. Moreover, she must also be provided equal access to all available opportunities. Also, as was previously pointed out, women do have responsibilities outside of the workplace which few men have or share, consequently, if a woman is desirous of working, then the types and varieties of jobs should be made available for her, which enable her to accommodate her nurturing responsibilities. Now is the time for all good men, to come to the aid of the woman. Bibliography Arrow, K., (1972) "Models of Job Discrimination". A. H. Pascal, ed., Racial Discrimination in Economic Life, D. C Heath and company) 83-102 Astbury, L., et al (2001) Gender Equality in Pay Practice (EOC research discussion series 2001) [on line] Accessed on line on October 25, 2006 from www.eoc.org.uk Bergman, B. R. (1974) "Occupational Segregation, Wages and Profits When Employers Discriminate by Race and Sex", Eastern Economic Journal, 1 (April - July) 103 - 110 Bernard, Jessie (1971) Women and Public Interest, Chicage Blau, Francine (1984) Sex Segregation in the Workplace, Trends, Explainations and Remedies, National Academic Press [on line] Accessed on line on October 25, 2006 from www.fermat.nap.edu Blau, Francine, (1977) Equal Pay in the Office, Lexington Press [on line] Accessed on line on October 25,2006 www.fermat.nap.edu Carrol, M., et al, (1998) "Women Pay in Banking in the United Kingdom", a case study of XYZ bank, MacMillan Press Clark, Steve, Eurostat Statistics in focus 5/2001 theme 3, national data. Durostat data -Earnings of men and women in the EU [on line] Accessed on line on October 27, 2006, from www.eiro.eurofound.ie Colgen, F., and Ledwith, S., (2002) Gender Diversity and Trade Unions, MacMillan Press, London Equal Pay Act 1970 [on line] Accessed on line on October 26, 2006, from www.pfc.org.uk European Union Employment Guidelines (2002) EUO 109236 [on line] Accessed on line on October 26,2006, from www.europa.eu.int Gender Wage Gap in the UK,(2004) Universities are breaking the law, Guardian, October 3, 2005 [on line] Accessed on line on October 26,2006, from www.bbcnews,com Grimshaw, D. (1998) "The Health Sector in the United Kingdom", a case study, MacMillan press: London Income Data Services, "Survey Trends, BBC News January 20, 2003 Kanowitz, Leo (1969), Women and the Law: The Unfinished Revolution: Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press Mellor, Julie, Equal Opportunity Commission, BBC News January 20, 2003Sex Discrimination Act 1975 [on line] Accessed on line on October 27,2006, from www.ets.gov.uk Sex Stereotyping in education and work-investigation, free to choose, tackling gender barriers to better jobs [on line] Accessed on line on October 26,2006, from www.eoc.org.uk Stefan, Schafer, et al (2004), Equal Pay Reviews are failing a new approach is needed[on line] Accessed on line on October 25, 2006, from www.eoc.org.uk Tilley, Charles, (2005) Interview addressing the question: Why, Guardian, April 4, 2002 [on line] Accessed on line on October 25, 2006, from www.bbcnews,com Women and Work, More women in management - but they are still paid less, compensation and benefits discrimination [on line] Accessed on line on October 27, 2006, from www.management-issues.com Williams, John, E., (1982) Measuring Sex Stereotypes: A Thirty Nation Study, Beverly Hills California, Sage Publications Read More