Abuse in the Workplace- a case of Gender Discrimination - Research Paper Example

Abuse in the Workplace- a case of Gender Discrimination inserts his/her Inserts submission Women continue to claim that discrimination hampers their progress in organizations. Research; however, has explored this issue from a different perspective where gender discrimination is regarded as a myth and exaggerated claim rather than reality. The notion of discrimination is best described as favorable treatment towards individuals not on the basis of merit but on the basis of bias or other immoral attitude (Mill, 1963).

In what follows, a critical approach towards gender discrimination is taken along with its implications for organizations. Cases of gender discrimination are a common sight in the workplace today. Not long ago a lawsuit was filed against the Boston Cigna HealthCare Company for charges of gender discrimination. According to the lawsuit, it is alleged that the company intentionally discriminated against Bretta Karp and other female employees by displaying unfavorable treatment towards them compared to their male counterparts in terms of promotion practices, pay increases and an uncongenial workplace environment (Chase & Reidy, 2011).

The company, however, denied all charges by claiming that it is committed to diversity management and does not allow any such behavior that leads to discrimination of any sort (Chase & Reidy, 2011). Discrimination, such as the above, adds to the woes of females in the workplace by lowering their morale and threatening their self-esteem. Research suggests that after having controlled for factors such as age, education, experience, skills and parental status, women still receive only 81% of the pay of men for similar nature of work (Ashkanasy, Wilderom, & Peterson, 2010).

Since time immemorial, women’s role is subordinated to that of men’s because it is assumed that women tend to be physically weaker than men and family laws in some societies force women to take on a role secondary to that of men. However, on the other side of the argument are critics who argue that the notion of discrimination itself maybe criticized as merely a ghost feeling by females with ‘victim mentality’ (Metz & Moss, 2004). According to research, discrimination is more often superficial than real.

Using attribution and stigma-consciousness theories as their model, researchers have concluded that females are most likely to attribute their poor performance at organizations to sexual discrimination because of their past knowledge of the same (Metz & Moss, 2004). Therefore, discrimination can be a myth rather than a reality. This ‘victim mentality’ could in fact hurdle a woman’s capability to attribute poor performance to internal factors (Metz & Moss, 2004). Stigma consciousness can be explained as a “one’s focus of one’s stereotyped status” as opposed to recognition of one’s stereotyped status (Pinel, 2004).

In the research, Pinel concluded that stigma consciousness and perceptions of discriminatory behavior are positively co related (Pinel, 2004). People high in stigma consciousness tend to recall more instances of discrimination compared to those who rank low (Pinel, 2004). At the individual level, women who rank high in stigma consciousness expect the behavior of their male equivalents to be discriminatory towards them (Pinel, 2004). Consequently, women bring out negative behavior from their male counterparts by behaving critically towards them (Pinel, 2004).

Another finding that supports the claims made by these critics is that it is often true for people to experience the ‘spotlight effect’ and experience insecurity as to whether the stereotypes of their group (in this case, women) are valid or not (Steele C. , 1998). Subsequently, they try to attribute the response to discrimination in an attempt of self-defense (Steele C. , 1998). Furthermore, another group of critics contests that discrimination at workplace may in fact be the result of poor performance by women (rather than mere stereotyping) which results in their getting lower wages and little career progression compared to that of men.

Therefore, according to this view there are other factors, apart from discrimination, that can lead to limited advancement of women in the workforce, the most primary factor being family responsibilities. Research has proven that mothers are more likely to take the primary responsibility for taking care of their dependants than fathers (Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999). Since this is the case, women are more likely to take career breaks in order for nurturing their dependants. At the other end of the spectrum, however, are individuals who argue that the case of gender discrimination at workplace is justified.

These individuals argue that some factors such as the amount of work hours, education levels and career ambitions are becoming increasingly similar in the two genders (Howard & Bray, 1988) and these factors have a significant impact on employee progress in organizations. To conclude, there is strong reason to suggest that women seem to be a victim of a vicious cycle in which the advancement of women in organizations is seen as a violation of social norms which lends itself to male domination and reduces the morale of women which ultimately stifles their growth within organizations.

This is contrary to claims of many psychologists and researchers who regard discrimination as a myth rather than reality. The inferior status of women compared to men at workplace since time immemorial cannot be accounted for by any factor other than discrimination and the large wage differential suggests that although much is being said about it, little is being actually done. References Ashkanasy, N., Wilderom, C., & Peterson, M. (2010). The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (2nd Edition ed.). California: Sage Publications. Chase, K., & Reidy, C.

(2011, March 4). Cigna sued on claims of gender bias:Manager says her pay, title reduced. The Boston Globe. Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman. (1999). Research on work, family and gender: current status and future directions in G. Powell (ed.). California: Sage Publications. Howard, A., & Bray, D. (1988). Managerial lives in transition. New York: The Guilford Press. Metz, I., & Moss, S. (2004). Gender, Work and Discrimination. Gender and Diversity in Organizations (pp. 1-35). California: Sage Publications. Mill, J. S. (1963). Utilitarianism.

London: Parker, Son and Bourn. Pinel, E. C. (2004). You're Just Saying That Because I'm a Woman: Stigma Consciousness and Attributions to Discrimination. Self & Identity, 3(1), 39-51. Steele, C. (1998). Stereotyping and its threat are real. American Psychologist, 53(6), 680 – 681.