Protection of Equal Employment Opportunities in the USA and China - Case Study Example

RuningHead: PROTECTION OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES IN USA AND CHINA. Protection of equal employment opportunities in USA and China Name Course Institution Date Protection of equal employment opportunities in USA and China Introduction Inequalities in employment opportunities continues to be an issue encountered by women and other marginalized group in the corporate world(Shaffer et al 2000).One key area that has ignited much attention and concern over the past decades revolves around the protection of equal opportunities for women. According to Shaffer et al (2000), the increasing number of women in the work force has brought about positive outcomes for both the organizations where women work and for women in general. Nevertheless, women continue to experience more widespread problems as compared to their male counterparts with regards to gender harassment and discrimination in their workplaces. Consequently, a varied number of approaches have been used in an attempt to protect equal employment opportunities for women (Shaffer et al 2000). This paper seeks to examine the protection of equal employment opportunities in USA and China. The focus of this paper will be on the protection of gender-related discrimination in the work place particularly with regards to women. It will depict the extent in which women in USA and China are discriminated against in their work place. Moreover, this paper will compare the approaches used to protect equal employment opportunities in USA and China. This paper will examine various definitions and theoretical issues linked to the topic. Moreover, the approaches used to protect equal employment opportunities in USA and China will be compared and explanation of the differences will be illustrated thereafter. In addition, the effectiveness of these protection measures will be evaluated by focusing on the two major dimensions of such measures in each of the two countries, the legislative environment and the socio-cultural environment. Definitions and theoretical issues “Equal employment opportunities” is a term commonly used to describe equality in aspects of employment such as recruitment, compensation, promotion, working conditions, privileges and equal terms without regard of a person’s gender, race , color, sexual orientation, disability, nationality , age or religion. The struggle against discrimination in employment in a bid to protect equal employment opportunities has over the past decades been one of the defining aspects of countries and the heart of civil rights movements in America and other countries around the world (Burstein, 1994). In China stereotypes on gender roles is considered to be one of the contributing factors of inequality in employment on the basis of gender. Traditional perspectives of female inferiority continues to persist most socio-economic arena and as result the Chinese legal systems have managed to offer inadequate protection of equal employment rights particularly for women. The extent of gender inequalities when it comes to employment opportunities is evident in Chinese recruitment advertisements and the overall representation of women in organizations (GAO, 2008). In USA, the rate of employed women has increased steadily over the years. Nevertheless, Jackson & Fagenson (1993) observe that women are not represented equally in every segments of the labor force instead, they dominate in what is traditionally regarded as female occupations such as nursing, secretarial and clerical related functions. Burr & Agócs (1996) observe that diversity management and affirmative action are some of the approaches used to respond to employment in-equalities in the labour market. According to Wrench (2007) diversity management is a management process used by organizations to develop and maintain a positive workplace whereby the differences and similarities of employees are valued, in order to enable employees to reach their potential and maximize their performance. Diversity management is among the various organizational development interventions that focuses on improving inter-group and interpersonal relationships and communication in the work environment. This management practice accentuates on interactions between employees, their managers and their clients. Diversity management also seeks to change the negative attitudes and stereotypes through awareness programs that help employees to foster empathy and change their perceptive on their counterparts whose characteristics are different from theirs. It is expected that through diversity management better human relations will be realised, improved productivity of work groups and improvements in retention, morale and job satisfaction will be realised. Nevertheless, in as much as diversity management focuses on changing the attitudes of employees, it does not guarantee behaviour change within the organization particularly with regards to altering organizational processes and structures revolving around equal employment opportunities (Burr & Agócs ,1996). Anderson (2004) observes that affirmative actions are active efforts or policies used to redress discrimination and ensure equal opportunities. Affirmative action has its roots in USA in the 1960s and 1970s, this approach was instigated as a response to the intense patterns of racial discrimination in employment institutions and other socio-economic arenas on the basis of race and gender (Burr & Agócs 1996). Affirmative action focuses on hiring compliance and numerical compliance. It is expected that affirmative action yields equity in employment and representation of disadvantaged groups. However, affirmative action does not address issues with regards to retaining and integrating women or employees from minority groups. It also does not guarantee change in an organization’s policies and practices in a bid to ensure that there is equal career opportunities and participation for marginalized groups (Burr & Agócs 1996). A comparative description Both the USA and China have put in place measures or affirmative action to protect equal employment opportunities for women. In this section, the effectiveness of these protection measures will be evaluated by focusing on the two major dimensions of such measures in each of the two countries, the legislative environment and the socio-cultural environment. Legislative Environment The legislative environment in a country is an important factor in determining whether equal employment opportunities for women are upheld. These normally include equal employment opportunity policies or affirmative action. Equal employment policies are meant to redress the imbalances in access to opportunities and retention of jobs between majority and minority or advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Affirmative action, on the other hand, seeks to reverse the cumulative effects of a history of inequality by assertively hiring females even where males are available for the same positions. While the former seeks to eliminate barriers to women’s employment, the latter seeks to ensure numerical representation through enforcing compliance standards. In this case, both of these policies and actions are meant to provide women with equal employment opportunities as compared to men by discouraging discrimination on sexual grounds (Cooke 2003). In the United States, domestic legislation such as Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action legislations have had the most profound effects on female employment. As part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) legislation was enacted which prohibited unions, employers or employment agencies from discriminatory practices in hiring and firing, wages, terms and conditions of employment, promotions, use of facilities, training and retraining and apprenticeships (Uri and Mixon, 2001). EEO legislation is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Affirmative Actions, on the other hand, are contained as part of Executive Order 11246 issued in 1965. Monitored by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program (OFCCP), they ensure that affirmative action is taken to ensure employment of applicants their color, religion or sex notwithstanding (Uri and Mixon 2001). Just like in the United States, the state has played a critical role in the protection of equal employment opportunities for women. The high rate of participation of women in employment can be attributed to the establishment of the Socialist Chinese state in 1949 (Cooke 2003). Subsequently, a raft of legislations has been introduced by successive Chinese governments as state policies to not only promote equal opportunities for women but also to protect their employment rights. These include but are not limited to the 1955 Labour Insurance Regulations of the People’s Republic of China, the Female Employees Labour Protection Regulation of 1988 and The PRC Law on Protecting Women’s Rights and Interests (1992) (Cooke 2001). Affirmative Action has also been undertaken such as a policy of replacing male with female workers in commercial and sales sectors to widen the scope of occupational opportunities and possibilities for women. Therefore, it can be seen that both China and the United States have approached the problem of equitable employment for women through state policy. Uri and Mixon (1991) have demonstrated the effectiveness of the EEO programs in the United States. The result of their study into the effects of EEO and affirmative action concluded that projected female employment not only increased in the 20-54 and 55-64 age brackets but that it also stabilized for date collected during the 1947-1988 period. Census data from 1990 has also reaffirmed the quantitative success of such policies in the United States. Women comprised nearly half the workforce, estimated at 45.4 percent (by the US Department of Labour) or 60 percent of all women (Uri and Mixon 1991). China’s policies have also been quantitatively effective. As of 2001, China’s female workforce stood at 0.33 billion, 47 percent of its workforce and 11 percent above the global average (Cooke 2003). However, these legislative measures have not effectively addressed the underlying issue of gender inequality and discrimination in both countries. While policies such as Equal Employment legislations have served their numerical or quantitative purposes, they have not translated to real qualitative gains in terms of eliminating gender based discrimination. This is largely attributable to the socio-cultural environment. The Socio-Cultural Environment Despite the quantitative gains made by employment equity and affirmative action policies, the gender equality situation in both countries has not changed significantly. Despite the progressive increase of women in the workforce in the United States, two thirds of the female workforce are in female dominated professions with low job ceilings, short career ladders or in essence, limited opportunities for career advancement (Shaffer 2001). The situation is comparatively worse in China. As an illustration, women are employed in an estimated 50 % fewer professional jobs than their male counterparts and 11% fewer managerial jobs (Shaffer 2001). This situation is a reflection of the socio-cultural environment in both countries. The evidence provided seems to support the general trend that women in the United States have relatively more access to better career opportunities than their Chinese counterparts (Fagenson and Jackson 2003: Shaffer 2001). This can largely be attributed to the improved social status of women in the United States. The income disparities between employed women in the United States show a lower deviation than that of China. Also, Women in China have been traditionally marginalized and their role in public life restricted. Shaffer (2000) points out to the fact that gender discrimination in society and the workplace has become a norm in China unlike the in the more liberal United States where women are aware of their rights to access equal opportunities. As a result, women in China are consigned to lower paying jobs which are traditionally designated for women and discouraged from applying for jobs viewed as the reserve of men (Cooke 2001). As an illustration of gender discrimination, Chinese companies have continuously stated preferred genders while advertising jobs and set recruitment criteria which are difficult for women to meet (Woodhams et al 2009). For instance, Gao (2008) concludes that Chinese firms are more likely to recruit women for clerical and sales jobs and men for managerial or professional jobs which they clearly state in their job adverts. Based on the finding of this study, it is therefore evident that both USA and China have gender related inequalities in the employment arena. Consequently, these countries have approached the problem of equitable employment for women through state policy. A number of legislations have been enacted in a bid to protect equal employment opportunities particularly for women. To some extent these legislation have been effective since they have increased the number of women in employment (Cooke, 2003). However, these legislative measures have not effectively addressed the underlying issue of gender inequality and discrimination in both countries. In order to bridge the gap between the existing inequality problems, this paper recommends that a more proactive diversity management programs should be introduced in organizations so as to ensure equal employment opportunities for women and other marginalized groups. Conclusion The protection of equal employment for women is one key area that has ignited much attention and concern over the past decades. In USA, the rate of women in the workforce has increased steadily over the years however women are not represented equally in every segments of the labor force. In China stereotypes on gender roles and traditional perspectives of female inferiority are the key root causes of gender employment inequalities. The struggle against genders discrimination in employment in a bid to protect equal employment opportunities particularly for women has been at the heart of civil rights movements in America and China. Diversity management and affirmative action are some of the commonly used approaches to respond to employment in-equalities in the labour market in USA and China. Both the USA and China have implemented measures or affirmative action to protect equal employment opportunities for women In USA domestic legislation such as Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action legislations have had the most profound effects on the protection of equal employment opportunities for women. On the other hand, the high rate women in employment in China can be attributed to the establishment of the Socialist Chinese state in 1949. As a result several legislations such as the Female Employees Labour Protection Regulation of 1988 and The PRC Law on Protecting Women’s Rights and Interests (1992) were enacted to promote equal employment opportunities for women. The use of state policy is one of the evident similarities between USA and China’s approach to protect equal employment opportunities for women. However, these legislative measures have not effectively addressed the underlying issue of gender inequality and discrimination in both countries. References Anderson, H. (2004). The Pursuit of Fairness: A History of Affirmative Action. UK: Oxford University Press. Burstein, P. (1994). Equal employment opportunity: labor market discrimination and public policy. Transaction Publishers. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Burr, C. & Agócs, C. (1996). Employment equity, affirmative action and managing diversity: assessing the differences. International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 17 No. 4/5, pp. 30-45. Cooke, F. (2001). Equal opportunity? The role of legislation and public policies in women's employment. Women in Management Review; 16, 7:8, p. 334. Cooke, F. (2003). Equal opportunity? Women's managerial careers in governmental organizations in China', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14: 2, 317-333. Gao, Z. (2008). Gender Discrimination in Chinese Recruitment Advertisements: A Content Analysis. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, Vol. 9(4). Jackson, J. & Fagenson, E. (1993). The Status of Women Managers in the United States. International Studies of management & Organization. Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 93-112. Shaffer, M., Joplin, J., Bell, M. & Oguz, T. (2000). Gender Discrimination and Job-Related Outcomes: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Working Women in the United States and China. Journal of Vocational Behavior 57, 395–427. Uri, N. & Mixon, W. (1991). The effects of U.S affirmative action programs on women’s employment. Journal of policy modeling volume 13, issue 3, pp. 367-382. Woodhams, C., Lupton, B. & Xian, H. (2009).The persistence of gender discrimination in China - evidence from recruitment advertisements', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20: 10, 2084 -2109. Wrench, J. (2007). Diversity management and discrimination: immigrants and ethnic minorities in the EU. New York: Ashgate Publishing. Read More