Factors that Differentiate the Male and Female Workforce - Essay Example

ID: 1406523232 Module: Managing Diversity Module BUS017 Topic: Discuss the factors that differentiate the male and female workforce andhow these underpin and structure women’s career trajectories. Introduction Gender is a social identity group that is usually debated when addressing managing diversity disputes. It is often associated with discrimination and inequalities faced by womenfemale workers across the globe. “Inequality regimes” imposed by organizations help us understand more about the entwined practices and processes that keep such inequalities persistent (Acker 2006). Labor market where the individual’s role, preferences and level of education is concerned further explains gender segregation. Similarly, the employers play a crucial role in this discussion of gender segregation. Different employment patterns ares evident in the high demands for cheap labor (due to the global economic depression), high rates of part time jobs and the increased demand for women’s labor. The gender pay gap globally is considered relatively high between the two sexes. Even though, organizations worldwide set out diversity strategies to narrow this pay gap, but the problem still persists. In the Australian case the country has made major legal and societal leaps towards woman rights in the workforce that resulted in noteworthy improvements in female participation and pay parity. Nonetheless, the gender pay gap remains relatively high between the both genders (CEDA2013). In Industrialized nations, males were estimated to earn 17.6 per cent higher than females. The highest gender pay gap was found in South Korea and Japan at an estimated 30 per cent higher wages than women. In the USA the pay gap is around 19 per cent. Belgium ranked lowest in the pay gap estimates of only 9.3 percent. (Rampell 2010). These pay imparities shed light on the differences in the male and female workforce and how it inevitably determines the career paths and pay aspirations for those female workers. The labor market is gender segmented in the sense that male workers earn higher than their female counterparts, and males are integrated into prestigious, managerial posts while females are left with junior, part time – low paid jobs. To understand this kind of discrimination and inequality between the sexes, it is essential to discuss the reasons behind such a dilemma and how those explanations shape the career trajectory of female workers. Discussion of Theoretical Framework Organizational gender gap is deeply rooted in the workplace supplemented by certain beliefs and traditions, most of which are myths, which hinder the career path for women (Fox in CEDA 2013) Regardless of lower pays and workers’ status, women aren’t considered any less then their male counterparts just because they get paid less and hired on lower skilled jobs. As a matter of fact, Labor force participation, gender differences in human capital are much stronger arguments to explain those differences (The World Bank 2012). Human Capital, Domestic status and supervisor career support influence the roles occupied either by men or women. (Scholarious and Taylor 2011). Although human capital and parental status can help explain the discrimination in higher-managerial jobs mostly dominated by men, a sociologically driven analysis gives more to the debate. Personal preference in life-style choices helps determine female aspirations for managerial posts. Women tend to be diverse in their work patterns, and choose from three work-life style preferences: work-centered, adaptive and home based. (Hakim 2000 cited in Walsh 2012). However, organizational structures, and policies importance should be considered together with individual preferences. It is more of an interchange between personal preference and career constraints manifested in organizational human resources policies that outline women’s career paths (Walsh 2012). Regardless of organizational interventions such as integrating women into the male culture and policy, interventions on expanding the roles of women in managerial positions, in the United States, interventions of expanding the roles of women in managerial positions, still there are limitations of transference of gender hierarchy due to cultural beliefs of masculinity thus reinforcing stereotypes attached to women (Ely and Meyerson 2000 in Nimoto 2013). Wal-Mart is considered to be the one of the biggest employers in the world and they claim that they are the most diverse workforces in the USA. However, Wal-Mart faced individual gender discrimination lawsuits. These cases proves organizational policies can act as a hindrance to women careers (Kirton and Green 2008).There are intersectional inequalities in organizations’ structures, especially in the case of Caribbean, Bangladeshi and Pakistani women in the UK labor market. Those women face two kinds of inequalities, gender and race (hence the greater chance of exploitation and discrimination as apposed to white women in the labor market) (Crenshaw 1991 in Healy 2011). The case of CBP women shows the underlying effect of culture and workplace interaction in demostrating inequalities and discrimination, where those women are often required to downplay their religious identities and beliefs to be able to fit in the workplace (Healy 2011). The importance of legislation must not be neglected in our debate since its main task is to provide understanding, values and proper attitudes (Dickens 2007). Even feminist argument is shaped by political culture (Webb 1997). Case Studies and Further Interpretations A) Call Centers Taylor and Scholarious’s (2011) study on four call centers is an important organizational study of workforce segregation due to its tendency for high female employment. However, there is a higher representation of males within managerial/senior posts. This will be explained through different elements including human capital, domestic status and career support to the roles employed by males and females. These females are offered flexible working conditions and career opportunities in “women- friendly” workplaces (Russell 2008 in Taylor 2011). But a less optimistic projection is that call centers are criticized for being the “female ghetto”, hiring those women on semi-skilled, clerical jobs with flat career structures. Not to mention the “glass ceiling” these females face when deeming a promotion (Belt 2002 in Taylor 2011). Men on the other hand are more likely to occupy higher status business positions (Lloyd and Payne 2009 in Taylor 2011). Organizational and worksite dimensions are important determinants of gender segmentation, but women’s employment integrated with their human capital and domestic lives are the disadvantages related to woman’s working lives (Belt 2009 in Taylor 2011). The call center provides a general view of the claim of some women preferring flexible working hours, not much commitment ,secondary source of household income and the differences in preference. All these can be explained by Horizontal (job role) and vertical (status) differences (Hakeem 2000 in Taylor 2011). Employment trends were explained by a gendered division of labor (Webb 2010 cited in Taylor 2011). According to a survey conducted by Taylor and Anderson (2008) males were engaged in technical help-desk work with an estimate of 69 per cent and in financial services such as stockbroking at around 59 percent. Females on the other hand were engaged in basic customer service and sales roles with an estimate of 80 per cent of the total workforce in call centers. The contribution of the workplace to the debate surrounding segregation of the genders in the workforce is insufficient. A wide range of human capital characteristics interrelated with household experiences and (its inevitable entitlements to constraints), as well as how they are treated, help us shape women’s positions at work. Therefore the study indicates that call centers aren’t as they are criticized to be as “female ghettos” especially in the case of women who aspire to attain managerial roles. But women still face ambiguity of opportunity. Some might argue that women did achieve better jobs, but the progression on the ladder to management roles are hampered by low human capital such as education, household obligations , constraints accessing social capital, which confine many women workers to lower demanding jobs (Lloyd and Payne 2009 in Taylor 2011). The continuity of the presence of the glass ceiling alongside preexisting hurdles prior to entering the workforce and a gendered division of labor contribute to the explanation of how career paths for women are shaped by the gendered workforce. Conclusion Gender segregation, discrimination and inequality regimes have always been constant features of the labor market. As evident in the gender pay gap across the globe, males usually earn 19 per cent more than their female counterparts. This pay gap is explained through the domination of males to the senior and managerial posts, while women do not enjoy such pleasures and end up in low paid, junior jobs. An analysis of this kind of segregation in the labor market and its underlying effect to women’s career trajectories is further discussed in the literature. A comparison of national and international approaches to managing diversity issues such as gender discrimination, alongside the factors that lead to the explanation of these differences. Case studies of four call centers in the UK, most of which are predominantly occupied by women -especially in the lower skilled junior jobs,- show that women are underrepresented in high managerial posts and that may be attributed to three explanations: Human Capital, Domestic Status, supervisor career support and the policy structure within the workplace. Women face a “glass ceiling” when applying for such posts due to their domestic responsibilities and obligations, which in turn hinders their opportunities to reach the glass ceiling of higher posts and, therefore, they tend to concentrate on lower status work. Moreover the policy structure of the workplace adds to the answer as the structure of the call centers is designed to integrate males as managers and women with flexible working hours in deskilled jobs (Scholarious and Taylor 2011). Another case study adds to the interpretation of differences in the gendered workforce, by examining women in the legal profession. The gender promotion gap to acquiring partnership in the law firm is not simply explained by human capital, differences in female-male characteristics or family status. It goes beyond those dimensions and an emphasis is put upon sociological perspective of individual preferences, attitudes and aspirations. Women,as previously stereotyped for discarding the opportunity to be promoted for their domestic status, is not the reality. Women do have aspirations to become managers balancing their lifestyles as domestic caregivers. But their aspirations are hampered by the notion of the gendered structure of the law firm, where the road to partnership is long and full of constraints. We believe that a thing that shapes women trajectories is an interplay between individualistic preferences and organizational constraints (Walsh 2012). We conclude with an international perspective of gender segregation in the Japanese example. Gender inequalities within the organizational structure of Japanese firms are vertically segregated and legitimized by the culture of the workforce. Gender stratification within the culture and femininity stereotypes advocates lower status of woman in Japan. As well as the gendered double-track hiring system, which signifies the differentiation between males and females in terms of pay, promotion, benefits etc. exists, this hinders the career prospects for women, especially when the gender gap in education is narrowing in the country (Nemoto2013). Given the theoretical framework of managing diversity, especially in the gender sphere alongside the case studies of national and international aspects, make us conclude that no matter the efforts in narrowing the gender segregation in the labor market and hence shaping women’s career outlooks are, they are all dependent on an interplay of women’s aspirations and commitment to their cause and reshaping organizational structural policies, which would shape career paths for women. References Acker. J 2006, Gender and Society, Inequality Regimes: Gender, Class, and Race in Organizations, Vol. 20 No. 4 Dickens, L 2007, The Road is Long: Thirty Years of Equality Legislation in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations 45:3 September 2007 –1080 pp. 463–494 Kirton and Greene n.d. (forthcoming) The Dynamics of Managing Diversity (4th edition) Chapter 9 – Diversity and organizational performance Geraldine H, Bradley, H and Forson C 2011, Intersectional Sensibilities in Analysing Inequality Regimes in Public Sector Organizations Gender, Work and Organization. Vol. 18 Scholarios, D, Taylor, P 2001, Beneath the glass ceiling: Explaining gendered role segmentation in call centres human relations 64(10) 1291–1319 © Walsh Gender, J 2012, Work and Organization. Vol. 19 No. 5 September 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432. 00607.Not Worth the Sacrifice? Women’s Aspirations and Career Progression in Law Firmsg Kirton, G 2008, ‘Managing multi-culturally in organizations in a diverse society’, Chapter 8 in S. Clegg and C. Cooper (eds.), Handbook of Macro Organizational Behaviour, Sage Noon, M 2007, The fatal flaws of diversity and the business case for ethnic minorities Work, employment and society Publications Ltd® Volume 21(4): 773–784 [ Webb J 1997,, The politics of equal opportunity volume 4 number 3 july, Blackwell publications Nemoto, K 2013, When culture resists progress: masculine organizational culture and its impacts on the vertical segregation of women in Japanese companies Work, employment and society 27(1) 153–169 © World Development Report 2012, Gender Equality and Development The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World BankThe International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World  Rampell C 2010, The gender wage gap around the world. Available at http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/the-gender-wage-gap-around-the-world _ Women in Leadership: Understanding the gender gap 2013, Ceda 
isBn: 0 85801 287 _557 46787 Read More