Why Women Continue to Suffer Disadvantage in Employment Relationship - Essay Example

THEORIES ON WHY WOMEN CONTINUE TO SUFFER DISADVANTAGE IN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP Introduction Theories try to come up with a system which binds together knowledge derived from experience. The real world is conceived in the form of behavioural assumptions that come up with a system regarding observed phenomena. A theory must exhibit a relationship between statements made and the frame of reference in the real world (Edwards 2003, p. 98). Analysis of some of the theories helps one to grasp conceptual views of the world. There are a number of theories that deal with marginalization of women in employment relationship. This concept is placed at the centre of industrial relation system. The majority of women are employed in low skilled jobs, and the manner of their dealings with employers is not subject to protections presented by competitive forces within the labour market. Majority of women at the work place are exposed to unfair dealings and outcomes with companies (Colgan & Ledwith 2002, p. 172). Their bargaining power is unequal compared to the firm due to lack of protection. This system works unfairly to women even as nonmarket mechanisms try to provide some form of protection to them. Since early 1800 there have always been legislations meant to protect female workers. This includes prohibition from working in certain occupations, hours of work and compulsory maternity leave. Consequently, firms responded by either substituting female labour or lowering their wages to cater for the costs. Critics observe that protective policies stand in the way of women in their bid to compete with men for high paying jobs (Brown et al 2009, p.151). The paper addresses a range of theories which have been put forward to explain the position women occupy in employment. These theories including radical feminism, Marxist feminism and liberal feminism share some things in common. Apart from postmodernists, labour market segmentation and human capital model the proponents assume human behaviour is determined biologically. On the contrary knowledge from social sciences asserts that as much as people shape society, the society too shapes people. This is to say that the mainstream feminist theories consider women in employment relations in terms of sex as opposed to gender. Liberal Feminism This theory puts much emphasis on the need for human agency as opposed to social structure, in suggesting improvement and explaining women’s position. According to the theory it is vital that both individuals and legislation are subjected to change. However, the behavioural change among people is given much emphasis. The equality between man and women is of primary importance to liberal feminists. This can only be achieved once there are reforms in policy, sex stereotypes meted out and getting rid of barriers to the advancement of women in political, social and economical life (Edwards 2003, p. 143). Institutions that seek to improve women’s position in society through reduction of stereotypes and gender-based prejudices are much appreciated (Cunnison & Stageman 1993, p.185). The theory emphasizes the need for equal employment opportunity between male and female, legislation of affirmative action and programs on management. Discrimination of women in the workplace is given much focus since it is through employment that an individual gains access to housing, education health and leisure (Hoque & Noon 2004, p. 493). The theory advocates for equal rights in all spheres of employment relationship such as recruitment and application, benefits, terms of employment, promotion, health and safety etc. As much as improvement has been witnessed in participation of women in paid employment, sexual division accompanied the progress (Kessler & Bayliss 1998, p. 302). A variety of occupations and sectors where earnings are low, weak collective organization, few promotion opportunities and insecure employment are dominated by women. The earning gap between men and women therefore continues to widen. Women are also discriminated in other areas such as holiday entitlement, hours of work, job evaluation, benefits and training opportunities (Calas & Marta 1996, p.205). In some way the theory of liberal feminism shares boundaries with the crowding theory. The theory asserts that due to hostile working conditions, prejudice and custom, women are pushed into low wage and low productivity jobs. Since the supply of labour in these jobs is in excess then wages are lowered. Marxist Feminism Women employment relations according to Marxist feminism emphasizes on control of production means, class and capital ownership. Women are perceived as flexible and important labour force. They are therefore taken as reserve labour. Women have been confined to inferior positions in the job market. Just as Marx observed capitalists interests being served by a class-based value system, the theory insists men’s interests are served by a gender-based value system. This is primarily in the control, ownership and operation of means of production (Burchill 2008, p. 412). The society and its institutions are therefore arranged in a manner seeing to fulfilment of men’s interests. However, no explanation is given as to why only women are perceived in this manner and the fact that segregation patterns are witnessed in various occupations and in management positions. The theory puts much emphasis on class and ignores existence of divisions in gender before modern capitalism and also its prevalence in non-capitalist societies. Radical Feminism This perspective of feminism proposes domination of men in managerial positions, trade unions etc thus resulting to gender disparity in employment. The blame is heavily placed on patriarchal society which is oppressive to all women despite their class or whether or not capitalism exists (Wacjman 2000, p. 73). For this reason the position that women occupy dictates the wage to be paid. It is considered simply as job segregation. Women occupy the position of secondary wage earners and their wages are lower because of their gender as opposed to occupation. According to the theory a continued dominance of men, through unfair practices and institutions can never be surmounted by mere reforms. It favours establishment of new and exclusive institutions for women to work and create jobs that would ensure incomes are distributed equally. As much as this view tries to address contentious issues in employment relations, it ignores other forms of inequality in the society like class oppression and racism. Human Capital Model The human capital theory observes that the reason behind an individual’s investment in training is influenced by the duration one expects to work. This kind of training is acquired early in school and also on job. The potential earnings of an individual are therefore determined by this training. In order to achieve high earnings a longer work duration must be expected. To raise participation of women labour force, investment in women human capital must be increased accordingly. This will in turn see to reduction of the gap in gender wage. It is precisely as a result of this investment in human capital that earnings of women have shown increase over the years relative to men. As much as an individual expects to benefits from human capital, there are costs to be footed. These are both direct and indirect costs. In the latter costs are in the form of wages foregone in the course of training period whereas in the former one has to pay tuition fees and other related fees. Benefits come in the form of lifetime earning which are increased in proportion to training acquired. Other benefits of training include reduced levels of unemployment, economic growth and conduct in daily life (Blyton & Jenkins 2007, p. 434). Higher earnings are guaranteed once an individual works for more years. This means women that drop out of labour force in order to bear and raise their children, negatively impacts on the benefits of human capital. The lifetime years of work are reduced thus reducing human capital rewards. In the same way the value of investment in human capital also reduces. In third world countries the challenge is greater for the girl child. Most parents are sceptical to offer their girl child higher education since they see no possibility of returns. The child will probably be married off, bear children and spend years raising them. On the other hand people that expect to work for more hours and spend years in the work place expect the highest returns (Panteli, Stack & Ramsay 2001, p. 13). Therefore if an individual expects to spend less time participating in labour force, investment benefits are low and so is the willingness to invest in training. On average women in their lifetime work fewer hours and are expected to invest less in human capital compared to men. Since investment in human capital is lower relative to men, their hourly wages are lower as well (Blyton & Jenkins 2007, p.302). This explains the widening gap in wage between men and women. Normally, earnings are expected to rise annually. This varies with the age of a worker. Earnings for young workers below 35 years increase rapidly as opposed to those above 50 years (Grimshaw, Whitehouse & Zetlin 2001, p. 212). According to human capital model young workers have a long work-life. Investment in training pays off since in the course of the long years of work, the worker reaps substantial rewards. For the older workers fewer returns are accumulated due to less work years. They are therefore unwilling to invest in training. The pattern of training for a typical worker differs greatly to that of a worker whose participation in labour force is irregular. Initially investment in training for such a worker is small. This rises gradually till rearing of children is complete and an individual secure a permanent place within the workforce (Ackers & Wilson, 2003, p. 345). Women earnings are unlike those of men who start with large training that continues to diminish with time. In the former the position of women is as a result of low levels of skills (International Labour Office 2010). The reason why they are in such a position is however left unanswered. Again the theory does not explain the reason behind lack of investment in development of skills before childbirth. This would to a greater extent ensure they maximize their earnings. Labour Market Segmentation Theory Employees with high specialized skills are a great asset to an organization since they cannot be substituted easily. According to segmentation theory firms try as much as possible to retain such workers by providing them with better conditions of work, higher salaries and chances of promotion. Firms observe reward and recruitment policy whereby the labour market is split into a number of segments (Lewis, Thornhill & Saunders 2003, p.231). The segments are highly immobile thus creating inequality in income and chances of mobility. This segmentation is assumed also to affect attachment of women’s labour force. Employment interruptions experienced by women bring about costs that vary with labour market segments (Scott, Dex & Joshi 2008, p.168). There are three subdivisions of labour market. These include peripheral labour market, occupational-specific labour market and the internal labour market. In the latter, skilled employees acquire firm-specific knowledge as they ascend the institutionalized career ladder (Kirton & Green 2000, p. 98). The workers become bounded to the firms in such a manner that their skills become specific to a company thus difficult to transfer to other firms. With a fitting educational certificate one can gain access to occupational-specific labour market. There are numerous sub-segments in this labour market. Here a worker can transfer skills from one firm to another. Within the sub-segments however the mobility is limited. Peripheral labour market on the other hand attracts low salaries and unattractive working conditions. Workers require no specific credential to perform unskilled tasks (Rose 2008, p.278). Due to being stereotyped by employers, access of women to internal labour market segment is curtailed. They are perceived to have low aspirations and owing to family responsibilities their labour force attachment is low. Employers would therefore prefer to hire men for positions in internal labour force segment. This to a greater extend help reduce replacement costs. Firms expect full-time and continuous employment meaning that women who gain access to internal labour force segment have to conform to these policies (Kersley et al 2006, p. 46). Once they become mothers most women are expected to withdraw from this segment. Furthermore, apart from exclusion women are subjected to more losses in form of loss of income, position and important skills (Purcell 2000, p.138). A downward mobility is expected once a woman resumes duty. The internal labour market segments together with occupation-specific labour market segment do not favour women. However, it is the peripheral segment with flexible work arrangements that is relegated to women (McRae 2003, p. 325). The segment offers unskilled jobs which women accept due to necessity. Postmodernist Theories There are extreme varieties of postmodernist theories which are against categorization of any kind, critical of other feminist theories that attempt to understand or interpret the world as a system or distinct reasoning (Calas & Marta 1996, p. 152). The theory favours as many rationales as there are people in the world. Each individual has a way to arrive at and attach meaning to experiences such that it becomes impossible to come up with a general system to perfectly reflect social phenomena (Brown et al 2009, p.). Through language people are able to construct the world around them acting as a reflection of ideas, assumptions and values. Postmodernists argue for the existence of problematic views and assumptions regarding reality and truth. As much as there are some systems, they must be subjected to thorough analysis. There is therefore a possibility of domination coming courtesy of some of the systems in the manner in which power is distributed in society (Ackers, Smith & Smith 1996, p.256). The way individuals experience work and direct thoughts is influenced by the discourse they are exposed to. In societies with a capitalist system, discourses are constructed in a manner whereby language of employment, work or enterprise leads workers into certain understanding of meaning that justify unequal position held in the industrial process. People form notions of work and construct personal identities through linkage of meaning and understanding (Blyton & Turnbull 2004, p.189). In contemporary society the thinking and behaviour of female employees, elderly and minorities in the work place is manipulated through cultures, language and symbols developed by the management (Savage & Anne, 1992 p. 187). Notions such as compliance with will of management as the sole legitimate authoritative source, teamwork are awarded positively with recognition and status (Liff 2003, p. 76). On the other hand negative meanings are tagged on alternative thinking such as trade union activities as a source of authority. Inequality in wealth and power distribution within a capitalistic economy is supported by the religion, media, education and advertising. These institutions attribute positive meanings to existing inequalities and negative meanings on attempts to change the existing order (Gennard & Judge 2010, p.167). Those who are prune to benefit the most in the existing economic order generate values, beliefs and ideas through meaning systems, language and symbols. The beneficiaries on top of the helm include corporate managers, pro-business managers, media managers, shareholders, business owners who are mostly powerful men with sufficient capital and influence. As a result women have come to accept subjugation as true and real. Postmodernist theories observe that work place behaviour can hardly be understood through systems or objective generalizations. There is no value whatsoever in general theories and case studies. Employees behave in a contradictory manner; meaning is derived from the use of language while working and behaviour is shaped through the use of language (Hollinshead, Nicholls & Tailby 2003, p.73). In analyzing employment relations subjective work dimensions must be of primary concern and the derivation of meaning from language, symbols, culture and rituals around the place of work. Conclusion From the above theories it can be concluded that indeed women continue to suffer marginalization in the labour market. They are dominant in low skilled labour; receive lower wages, and their employment relations in general continue to suffer in unequal society. The reasons for this trend are varied. As much as radical feminists allege that the male dominated society is to blame still the matter is more complicated. It has become so challenging to pinpoint exactly the right measure to undertake in order to effectively address the challenges. It can be observed as postmodernist view that no single theory can effectively address the disparity in the labour market. The behaviour of individuals in society is influenced by a myriad of factors. It is probably for this reason that some critics tend to combine the approach of a number of perspectives in order to arrive at a more solid explanation. For instance it has been suggested that Marxist and radical views can be synthesized such that women’s employment is analyzed in terms of materialism, class and patriarchal power. Both capitalism and patriarchy have been blamed on labour segregation. There are also other economic matters which must be put under consideration on dealing with women’s employment. These include features in the individual sector such as labour intensity, costs of labour and competitiveness. It is important however, to consider postmodernist theory that seek to understand work place behaviour beyond systems or objective generalizations. Bibliography Ackers, P & Wilson, A (eds.) 2003, Understanding Work & Employment: Industrial Relations in Transition Oxford: OUP Ackers, P, Smith, C & Smith, P 1996, The New Workplace and Trade Unionism London: Routledge Blyton, P & Jenkins, J 2007, Key Concepts in Work London: Sage Blyton, P & Turnbull, P 2004, The Dynamics of Employee Relations Basingstoke, 3rd edn, Macmillan Brown, W, Bryson, A, Forth, J & Whitfield, K (eds.) 2009, The evolution of the modern workplace. Cambridge University Press. Burchill, F 2008, Labour Relations in Organizational Context London: CIPD Calas, B & Marta, L S 1996, From The Woman’s Point of View: Feminist Approaches to Organisation Studies", Handbook Organisation Studies, Sage Publication, London. Colgan, F & Ledwith, S 2002, “Gender and diversity: reshaping union democracy” Employment Relations, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 167-189 Cunnison, S & Stageman, J 1993, Feminizing the unions: challenging the culture of masculinity. Avebury Edwards, P (ed.) 2003 Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice Oxford, 2nd edn, Blackwell Publishing Fairbrother, P 2000, Trade Unions at the Crossroads London: Mansell Gennard, J & Judge G 2010, The Insecure Workforce London: Routledge Grimshaw, D, Whitehouse, G & Zetlin, D, 2001, “Changing pay systems, occupational concentration and the gender pay gap: evidence from Australia and the UK” Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 209-229 Hollinshead, P, Nicholls, P & Tailby, S 2003, (ed.) Employees Relations London, 2nd edn, FT Pitman Hoque, K & Noon, M 2004, “Equal Opportunities Policy and Practice in Britain” in Work, Employment & Society, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 481-506 Hyman, R 1975 Industrial Relations: A Marxist Introduction Basingstoke: Macmillan International Labour Office 2010, Women in Labour Markets: Measuring progress and identifying challenges. International Labour Office, ILO-Geneva Kelly, J 1998, Rethinking Industrial Relations London: Routledge Kersley, B, Alpin, C, Forth J, Bryson, A, Bewley, H, Dix, G & Oxenbridge, S 2006, Inside the Workplace: Findings of the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey (WERS 2004) London: DTI Kessler, S & Bayliss, F 1998, Contemporary British Industrial Relations Basingstoke, 3rd edn, Macmillan Kirton, G & Green, A M 2000, The Dynamics of Managing Diversity: A Critical Approach. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Lewis, P, Thornhill, A & Saunders, M 2003, Understanding the Employment Relationship London: FT Prentice Hall Liff, S 2003, “The Industrial Relations of a Diverse Workforce” In Edwards, P 2003 (ed.) Industrial Relations Oxford: Blackwell McRae, S 2003, ‘Constraints and Choices in Mothers’ Employment Careers: A Consideration of Hakim’s Preference Theory’, British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 317-38 Panteli, N, Stack, J & Ramsay, H, 2001, “Gendered patterns in computing work in the late 1990s”, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 3-17 Purcell, K 2000, “Gendered employment insecurity?” in E Heery & J Salmon (eds.), The Insecure Workforce. London: Routledge Rose, E 2008, 3rd Ed, Employment Relations London: Prentice Hall. Salamon, M, 2000, Industrial Relations London, 4th edn, Prentice Hall Savage, M & Anne, W 1992, Gender and Bureaucracy, The Sociological Review, Blackwell Publishers UK. Scott, J, Dex, S & Joshi, H (eds.) 2008, Women and employment: changing lives and new challenges. Edward Elgar Wacjman, J 2000, Feminism facing industrial relations in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 183-201 Williams, S & Adam-Smith, D 2009, Contemporary Employment Relations: A Critical Introduction, 2nd edn, Oxford: OUP Read More