Mediating Gender Inequality in the Workplace - Essay Example

[Intrstuctors Social Interaction Processes: Mediating Gender Inequality in the Workplace Gender inequality has been a part of our social setup for centuries. For a long time, this inequality was simply accepted as a fact of life and it was considered a natural preordained phenomenon. However, in this time and age, gender inequality is not as acceptable and many prominent social scientists have put their efforts into ensuring that future generations of women do not have to face the same issues. One of the best ways to handle and diminish this inequality is social interaction which leads to fewer disadvantages for women therefore a discussion of these social interactions would be important for any student of sociology or business. Kane and Sanchez (1994) argue that the discrepancy in attitudes towards women in the workplace exists because of the attitude towards labor division at home. Challenges to the status quo at home are said to be threatening to the interests of men therefore it appears than men want to keep women dependent on them. This would create a situation where the only segment of society who is really concerned about inequality are women themselves since the men (in general) do not wish to do anything to alter the conditions as they are. This is where the writers suggest the first and most important interaction needs to take place before gender inequality can be mediated. If men can not appreciate the changing role of women in their homes it can be expected that they will be hypocritical towards them in the workplace (Kane & Sanchez, 1994). The process of diminishing inequality of the sexes in the workplace begins at home, once men can be made to accept a more equal division of labor at home, they would be less inclined to discriminate against women in the office. Mens display of differing attitudes in terms of home and office equality can only be changed if interactions at home are given the same level of attention as the interactions in the office. The issue of equality of the sexes has often been taken as a diversity issue and that stance is a good starting point since women remain a minority in many professional fields. In fact, the interaction processes required to bring any norm of equality amount to a cultural change within the organization (Kane & Sanchez, 1994). Culture change and interaction between genders take such a long time and is often given such a low preference than the core business of the company that even when companies are actively trying to create greater equality by improving social interaction between the sexes, the process is only said to be seen as "generally slow and patchy" (Beck & Davis, 2005). However, even with the slow process Beck & Davis (2005) had quite a few compliments for the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) program initiated at Westpac and gave valuable insights into which processes could help in mediating gender inequality. The process itself was helped along because Westpac itself was turned (kicking and screaming) into one of the most pragmatic and forward looking companies in the region. Increasing the diversity of their newly recruited people and eliminating biases on the basis of gender, race or disabilities was made a point in the human resource policies of the company. As is the case with most equality concerns, the direction for improving social interaction and therefore improving the status of women in any organization, the direction and decisions must come from the top. In the case of Westpac, both the current and the former Chief Executive Officers showed complete commitment to the cause and actively participated in situations where diversity and EEO issues were raised by the workers or outsiders to the company (Beck & Davis, 2005). The creation of social situations which help in removing the concerns of women must come as orders from the very top of the organization otherwise there is a chance they may not be given the attention they deserve. For any social interaction process that mediates gender inequality, a modern, newly founded company would quite possibly offer higher acceptability of the process. Westpac was difficult to work with because of the culture of the company which was, "founded in 1817, characterized by a traditional, conservative, white Anglo-Saxon male, ‘old bank’ type of culture with a deeply embedded ‘cradle to grave’ mentality" (Beck & Davis, 2005). Of course in a company like this, even the legal requirements for diversity would be seen as nothing more than government mandated compliance requirements, not strategic assets. Such a situation is not limited to only companies like Westpac which had to go through several changes before social interaction processes managed to bring the company to a more diverse and equitable level for women. Even government organizations like the police force and fast moving financial institutions like newly established banks have faced the same issues (Benschop et. al., 2001). In light of similar issues, e.g. government regulations and globalization demands, Rao and Kellehner (2003) present some interesting ideas as to which processes of social interaction would have a positive effect on gender equality. For example, if social movements and society itself can accept changes in the gender infrastructure then governmental policies can be adjusted to create family friendly work environments for the women who wish to have both a career and an active family life (Mills, 2003). However, such changes can not be implemented without active participation from both sides of the government who should be united in bringing about this social change. While America and most of the civilized western accepts and encourages the role of women in public and private enterprise at a governmental level, a lot more has to be done to give women the same opportunities in less developed countries like India, Bangladesh and Pakistan (Rao and Kellehner, 2003). The case of India is especially important since the lack of equality in the sexes has not only lead to negative economic consequences in terms of not getting fair wages or equal employment opportunities, it has also deprived them of more important things. Krishnan (2005) discusses how women have problems getting even the basic necessities of life due to factors like segregation and economic inequalities which exist at the state level in some cases. At the organizational level, the first thing which companies need to get rid of before they can create an environment which is equitable for women are any segregated settings which does not permit men and women to interact in a healthy manner. Cohen and Huffman (2003) discussed this topic extensively and suggest that gender devaluation is strongest in those organizations where labor is segregated by gender. The root cause of this is the fact that men become stronger in terms of situational control and take over a position from which they benefit while women bear the loss in labor value. Clearly, where there is no work related interaction between men and women, an understanding of each other’s viewpoints or even good communication would be difficult if not impossible to establish. Without this understanding and communication between the sexes, an expectation of equality or equity is far fetched. Not only are the wage levels of women affected negatively in such situations, but their labor input may also be seen as inferior to men. Higher levels of occupational segregation are directly associated with a much higher tendency to devalue women’s work roles, especially in positions of responsibility i.e. supervisor/manager as well (Cohen and Huffman, 2003). While segregation has negative influences, close interaction and socialization increases both conformity and equality of the sexes. Of course conformity may not necessarily be a good thing but equality certainly is and socialization which leads towards equality is beneficial for both male and female workers in an organization. Costello (2004) discusses how mature students in a law school behaved when they discovered that they did not conform to the norms of their chosen profession. The reaction of the students selected for the study shows that equality can often be purchased by women and minorities at the cost of giving up a part of their identity. Costello (2003) begins by saying that success in a given career depends on a person’s ability to internalize the identity which is given to that profession by society. Continued social interaction between the sexes would lead to situations where female or minority members of an organization surrendered parts of their intrinsic cultures to become in-group members of a profession. She discusses the case of Larry and Lashka and says: "In the fall of a recent year, I sat in a law school courtyard where new students shook hands and chatted with one another, excited and anxious and trying to appeared poised. Among these students was a man I’ll call Larry, a tall blond man in neatly pleated khaki pants and a white oxford shirt, conversing with Laksha, a South Asian woman wearing the flowing robes of a colorful salwaar khameez and a bindi dot on her forehead. A couple of weeks into the semester, when once more I observed these students, Larry was wearing an out fit very similar to the one he wore on the first day, but Laksha’s appearance had changed dramatically—she now wore blue slacks and a dark sweater, although she continued to wear a bindi." (Costello, 2003, Pg 138.) There are many other examples given which describe how students changed their minds and wardrobes to conform to an environment which does not like ‘eccentricity’ and rewards those who accept norms. The change in Laksha’s attire is not only attributed to a need to be seen as an equal to the rest of the students, it is also attributed to the social interaction and the need to belong to the group she plans to be with for a considerably long time in the future (Costello, 2003). It can be said therefore, that social interactions bring equality but may reduce the diversity of a group. This loss of diversity is defended by Costello (2003) since professional interaction and social interaction between professionals requires a mastery of two tasks, the first is to have a body of knowledge related to the professions and the second has to do with the creation of a professional identity. It is my opinion that the identity creation process is not good or bad in and of itself, rather it is the social interaction which forces some professionals to create and accept such an identity. I do not think that many of us would prefer a lawyer in ethnic clothes over a lawyer in a business suit. Since the identity creation process and the social interaction which creates the identity reduces gender inequality, it can not be denounced as a bad thing. On the other hand, there are those who think that women have the deck stacked against them and no matter how much they conform or try to attain the professional identity demanded by a business, they will always find it difficult to get to the level they deserve. Roth (2004) shows how Women’s numbers in high-paying, male-dominated professions have increased significantly in the past thirty years yet they hold a much higher number of lower-paying jobs within the same occupations. This situation was examined in the context of the social interactions for securities professionals working in a number of brokerage houses on Wall Street. Over time, the social interaction is diminished and sex based segregation takes place which leads women to change their function at the company, go to a different company or even quit the securities business altogether. This is not only true for finance related companies but similar situations are created for women in other situations where very high paying jobs are involved. Family constraints, the presence of children and gender biased discrimination allows more men than women to get to the top spots in most companies (Roth, 2004). The issue of minority females is even more delicate in social interaction since they face discrimination on both accounts. Roth (2004) reports the case of an African American woman who faced racial jokes and slurs while coming to the realization that she would never be accepted at the company as an equal. The social interaction in this case had an extremely negative effect on her since the senior management was not controlling or even aware of the situation as it might have developed with her. Her race and gender worked against her in social interactions since she was seen as an outsider to begin with. This simply points towards the fact that unless the management and those who are higher up in the social order make it point to stop discrimination and inequality, social interaction alone would have little benefit and might even be harmful for the purposes of creating gender equality. Interaction which depends on racial slurs or sexual jokes would do nothing more than creating a hostile environment that causes people to change companies and careers to find places where they are better respected. Even if it means they are not utilizing their full talent or are accepting lower paying jobs. Healthy social interaction between men and women in the workplace does more than simply remove existing biases, it can also let both groups be aware of any biases which they might have not known to exist. Once a company and its members are aware of workplace biases and situations which disenfranchise women, it can be expected that they behavior would alter significantly to prevent such biases from occurring in the future (Davis & Robinson, 1991). Even though a lot has been done in countries like Great Britain and the United States, there is a lot more which needs to be done before gender equality can be established (Roth, 2004). This persistent need for doing a lot more for gender equality has been questioned by Ridgeway (1997) who asks why gender hierarchies continue to exist in our world even though social scientists and workers for women’s rights have been tirelessly working for equality for more than fifty years. Even the greatest events like the Second World War, or even the most profound changes in our economy e.g. industrialization has not changed the situation for the better. In equalities continue to exist and sociologist can only stand as spectators giving their inputs and ideas. To see and improvement in the situation as it stands would require a fundamental shift in our patterns of thinking as well as our methods of interaction. Ridgeway (1997) says that the way we interact presently creates an "invisible hand" that guides our view of the world and gender roles in general. Gender is a critically important way of defining a person and it can be difficult to talk about or deal with a person on many levels if their gender is unknown. While people may have not issues or difficulties in interacting with those who do not declare their other dimensions of equality, e.g. social status, race etc. not knowing the gender of a person is a lot more confusing for the sake of communication (Ridgeway, 1997). However, once the gender is known, people tend to fall back on schemas and placing others in certain groups which makes interaction comfortable. This process of interaction is that which leads to boxing women into segments and giving them roles other members of the company would be comfortable with (Ridgeway, 1997). This does not mean that we will have equality only when the workplace does not recognize people as men or women. In fact, it is only with greater interaction and networking which will create acceptance and give men and woman the comfort level where they see each other as equals. It is not an easy mold to break since human beings are made to function in a world that continually reinforces the idea of gender differences. There are cultural beliefs and ideas which have been ingrained by all sorts of sources and suggest that one gender is more suitable for certain tasks than others. Of course men have the upper hand when it comes to being viewed as superior and more competent in the office but this stereotype can only be broken once interaction between the genders is increased and appreciated by the management of an organization (Ridgeway, 1997). This interaction must include communication between genders at all levels of a company. Friends family and associates can also be included in social settings provided by the company. This would go a long way in showing how similar the sexes are rather than showing how different they can be. Ridgeway (1997) makes it a point to discuss the sex related labeling of a job and how certain professions carry an image that makes them decidedly male or female oriented. Occupations like nurse or fighter jet pilot may come with social sexual labels that are difficult to shake of. While labels may be easy to change and becoming politically correct is simply a matter of changing the way we speak, there is little to prevent the preference for men as labor which is propagated by the employers. Employers have been shown to strongly prefer hiring males when the job is stereotypically male or even when it is gender neutral. However, even if the job is sterotypically female e.g. nursery school teacher, there is only a weak preference for female employees (Ridgeway, 1997). This weak preference has led some to say that women actually have superior positions in those segments but that is hotly debated in many circles (Castles, 2005). Social interaction and networking within a company can certainly help decrease the amount of gender discrimination faced by women but to expect it to totally eliminate the discrimination would be unrealistic. Roth points out some very important reasons which go to show why women are discriminated against based on gender differences. Women are more likely to face issues at work due to childcare responsibilities since they often have the responsibility of being the primary caregiver. Very few men in sample studies had the responsibility of being the caregiver therefore having a family is often seen as a gender specific problem (Roth, 2004). An organization that cares about its female members could create situations where the women working in the company could interact with their children at an in-house daycare centre. While this would not strictly be a part of the interaction between employees it could help in the creation of a network for mothers at the company who could contribute fully towards the business purposes while keeping their minds free of other issues. Finally, mentoring is one part of interaction which would certainly help women not only in coming up the corporate ladder, it would also give those who are higher up in the chain of command to be in direct contact with those who are far below them. For the mentoring process to work, both mentor and the person being mentored should have an open mind and be willing to communicate their concerns to each other. It must be said that social interaction processes can only go to a certain length in improving the equation between men and women in the workplace. Even then they must be seen to be healthy and free of any discriminatory influences. If not, they would lose what little effectiveness they have. The fundamental requirements for creating equality between the sexes are a change in our way of thinking, working, and in our view of the world around us. Without that, any change would have to be mandated by the government and could in fact be seen as a nuisance by employers. However, the value which social interaction brings to the table that can not be denied in any way. It creates an understand and bridges the gaps between genders. Without interaction, we have segregation which was and still is one of the greatest dividers between sexes and minorities. It falls to the purview of future sociologists to ensure that interaction between genders does not stop and continues on a path towards equality and improvement. It is the only way in which one gender can see first hand how the other gender is influenced by various issues and a dialog can be opened that brings understanding. In my own opinion, I feel that interactions between genders in social settings and even general interaction between the sexes at the workplace must be coupled with awareness and a guided discussion concerning gender inequality issues. It has to be more than simply discussing the latest television episode around the water cooler since that process has been going on for many years without producing any visible results or improvements in the status of women in the workplace. I do not think that equality can be created or gender differences could be eliminated by mere discussions. Unless a company or an organization actively does something to erase these differences and inequalities, they are bound to create problems and misperceptions for women. Word Count: 3,738 Works Cited Beck, D. and Davis, E. "EEO in Senior Management: Women Executives in Westpac." Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resource. 43.2 (2005): 273-288. Benschop, Y. et. al. "The Division of Labour and Inequalities Between the Sexes: An Ideological Dilemma." Gender, Work & Organization 8.1 (2001): 1-18. Castles, J. "Desperate Housewives?" Economist 375.84 (2005): 16. Cohen, P. and Huffman, M. “Occupational Segregation and the Devaluation of Womens Work across U.S. Labor Markets.” Social Forces 81.3 (2003): 881-908. Costello, C. “Changing Clothes: Gender Inequality and Professional Socialization.” NWSA Journal 16.2 (2004): 138-155. Davis, N. J. and Robinson, R. V. “Men’s and Women’s Consciousness of Gender Inequality: Austria, West Germany, Great Britain and the United States.” American Sociolgical Review 56.1 (1991): 72-84. Kane, E. and Sanchez, L. "Family Status and Crticism of Gender Inequality at Home and at Work." Social Forces 72.4 (1994): 1079-1102. Mills, M. B. “Gender and Inequality in the Global Labor Force.” Annual Review of Anthropology 32.1 (2003): 41-62. Obrien, J. The Production of Reality: Essays and Readings on Social Interaction. London:Sage Publications, 2006. Rao A. and Kellehner, D. “Institutions, organisations and gender equality in an era of globalisation.” Gender & Development 11.1 (2003): 142-150. Ridgeway, C. “Interaction and the Conservatio of Gender Inequality: Considering Employment.” American Sociological Review 62.2. (1997): 218-235. Roth, L. “Engendering Inequality: Processes of Sex-Segregation on Wall Street.” Sociological Forum 19.2 (2004): 203-228. Krishnan, S. “ Gender, Caste, and Economic Inequalities and Marital Violence in Rural South India.” Health Care for Women International 26.1 (2005): 87-99. Read More