The promotion of equal remuneration for work of equal value has long been a controversial topic while discussing about the unfair employment practices in the labor market. The topic has gotten more publicity in the recent decades as many feminist movements and authors seek to highlight and eradicate unfair employment practices. With popular Hollywood magazines like vanity fair, and celebrities like Jennifer Lawrence and Kerry Washington openly speaking up about such practices and supporting movements such as “#Ask4More” that promote equal remuneration for work of equal value. This paper seeks to analyze the gender pay gap and how it is measured, as well critique the bias present in the way in which we measure pay equity, analyze if the difference in the pay gap are due to discrimination or solely due to women underperforming. To conclude the paper will possible solutions to the outlined problems.
The gender pay gap is the difference of wages adjusted/unadjusted of women compared to men. The pay gap has always existed primarily because of socially constructed gender roles that depict the men as sole breadwinners of the house, and women to be domestic workers caring for the family and ideas about the dissimilarity between the genders meant men where better at performing tasks. According to the 2017 International Labor Report “ World Employment Social Outlook: Trends for women 2017”, over the decades there has been increased participation of women in the work force, however the pay gap provides empirical evidence of the labor market favoring the male gender by providing them with better wages and opportunities. The report claims that the pay gap and its effects are a huge economic and social challenge. The report explains that the pay gap has caused a huge difference in participation rates of women, even though the pay gap can be seen decreasing slightly it is not necessarily due better wages and opportunities for women but also a decline in men participation, moreover access to the jobs is also limited as women who are participating or are willing to participate are less likely to secure work than there male counterparts. Even though women work more numbers of hours if unpaid and paid work combined, however in paid work they tend to work fewer hours due to constraints such as family or part time work is the only option available. Gender segregation has also contributed to the problem as they tend to favor male is more, white collar, high paying job and industries where as women are more concentrated in part time less-skilled job. The report concludes that women are held back in the work force because of a set of different reasons, however these constraints are rooted in our social norms and are not only because of gender segregation and women’s choice to work. If we were to overcome this barrier both developed and developing countries would benefit as a whole not just the female gender, there would be increased employment and the global tax revenue would increase by $1.5 trillion. However, to over come this barrier the report suggests that it would require regulation and policy to change gender role conformity and address socio economic factors like care provision and influence participation.
Lips Hillary the author of “The Gender Pay Gap: Challenging the Rationalizations. Perceived Equity, Discrimination, and the Limits of Human Capital Models” explores and discuses the causes of the gender gap and the inefficiencies in how we measure pay equity. The author explains that when trying to understand the reasons behind the gender pay gap economists put forth the neoclassical perspective of human capital to justify why the gender pay gap exists, and believe that the difference in the gender pay gap is the result of gender behavior and work skills. The theory argues that the workers personal investments such as experience, education, skill, and loyalty result in the difference of opportunities and wages. Thus, the gap is not the result of discrimination but rasher the result of the difference in human capital then men and women possess. However Hillary believes that the human capital approach is not the reason of the gender gap, rather it’s a mere tool designed to justify these discriminatory practices, with evidence that even in cases where both men and women have equal human capital, women still do not receive the equal compensation and the gap persists. The author argues that the human capital model it self is discriminatory as the grounds/standards set are not neutral but are standards set by men and favor men thus, the model is bias towards men. Furthermore, Hillary examines variables used to measure the gender pay gap itself and how different variables depict different gender pay gaps, but nevertheless prove that the gender pay gap exists. Hillary argues that even after adjusting for differences in human capital, the variables being used does not account for discriminatory practices and disregards the gender stereotypes embedded deep within society that apply to the occupations in question. In Fudge and Vosko’s work
“Gender, Segmentation and the Standard Employment Relationship in Canadian Labor Law, Legislation and Policy” The authors much like Hillary, are of the view that discrimination in the labor force is related to gender roles and stereotypes. The authors talk about labor segmentation in the Canadian market, and believe the segmentation is a result of gender stereotyping occupations. They explain that the stand employment relationship was there to protect the rights of workers from their employer’s however, the SER is itself is based on gender roles, as it regulates according to the male breadwinner concept where women are care givers. Fudge also believes this is one of the contributing factors why women workers are concentrated in part-jobs.
Moreover, many feminist contribute their disparity to the glass ceiling effect, in the article by the wall street journal The Glass-Ceiling: Why Women Can’t Seem to Break the Invisible Barrier that Blocks Them from Top Jobs the writers talk about the glass ceiling effect and how it contributes to worsening conditions for women. The glass ceiling is a metaphor used to represent the barrier to entry women face while trying to pursue higher end jobs. The article highlights that the reason for women working more part time small jobs is due to the glass ceiling that has been installed by the predominantly white males. Blau and Kahn in their work “The Gender Pay Gap: Have Women gone as far as they can” the authors explore the trend in the gender gap and employment and conclude that even with improvement in the past decades, the pay gap now seems to be a stand still and this can be contributed to the glass ceiling effect among other factors.
In conclusion, the gender gap can be contributed to several factors, societal norm and procedures have turned SER into a gender stereotype enforcing regulation that enforces the dominant male breadwinner ideology, and the gap can be contributed to using variables to calculate the gap that do not adjust for discrimination and unfair human capital measurement. The prevalence of the male dominate business practices has left women to be demotivated or accepting of the status quo in which because of the constraints put on them chose to participate less, in similar fields and on part-time bases. To solve this problem regulation of the labor market along with influencing the participation of women by changing societal norms is needed.