“During recent years women have made a significant progress in entering the managerial positions in corporations as the proportion of women managers increased by almost 26% between 1970 and 1992” (Powell, 1994). Here as the conflict perspective states, a change was brought about in society due to the power struggle between men and women for power and prestige. But still they, “are held back from reaching top managerial positions as statistics indicate that between 1979 and 1991 the ratio of women in top management positions increased by only 2%. This is what is often referred to as the glass ceiling phenomena” (Powell, 1994). This is an invisible barrier that prevents women from reaching top management positions not because of lack of skills or abilities but just because of their sexual orientation. The position this barrier is placed at differs depending on the organisation as well as the industry. “Men usually derive their power and authority in society from the kind of work they do and the position they might hold in their organization whereas traditionally women have done this through their roles in the family” (Wolf, 1979: 98-101). This is due to the conventional societal settings where the primary responsibility of females is of marriage and child-bearing and their role as bread earners for the family is considered secondary, thus, not being able to attain positions of power in the work setting. “According to gathered data, even as the society progresses and women shift towards paid work they are unable to obtain positions of authority and power in higher level management positions from where they can influence the setting of the workplace” (Jacobs, 1995). Preference is still given to men over women even if they have the same kind of education and professional skills. (Wolf, 1979) This goes in line with the functionalist sociological perspective, according to which, women and men have clearly specified roles in society. On one hand, women perform the so called expressive roles, such as, providing their children with emotional and understanding support. On the other hand, men perform the instrumental roles, more simply work. According to the functionalists this is the most efficient way for a family to operate.
Certain factors have been outlined which could explain the glass ceiling. One bias being that it is inherent in a patriarchal society, where men intentionally want to keep women in positions where they remain dependent. Another bias, which exists, centres on the similar-to-me effect. Here, a person would give more favourable evaluation to someone who is similar to him/her in terms of background and attitude. Thus, “if top management positions are mostly held by males they would unintentionally prefer to promote a man rather than a woman to a top management position” (Powell, 1994). Becker’s “Human Capital Theory” could also explain the discrimination that is observed in corporations. According to him, the promotions, authority and the pay that is received by an individual, does not only depend on his/her education. Several times it depends on the amount of money or resources that the individual has invested in further broadening their skills. Another discrimination within the working environment is called, evaluative discrimination. This is when female employees undertake work tasks which were initially perceived to be a man’s skill but are paid considerably less than the males. This may happen even when they possess the same skills and abilities as men, and perform the same tasks just as efficiently. This has also been linked to the wage setting process whereby the high presence of females in an occupation is said to be relatively lower than men. This has been shown by studies, “which reflect that the occupations with high concentration of women workers have relatively lower wages when compared to male dominated occupations which require the same level of skills and work. Thus evaluative discrimination does not target an individual but the whole occupation” (Hultin & Szulkin, 1999). On the other hand job discrimination targets individuals rather than the occupation. Here, women performing the same job as men, within the same organisation are discriminated against with lower wages. Though, “unjust treatment like this is illegal in most of the developed countries it still exists in third world countries where women are paid less than men when they are performing the same work” (Stockdale & Crosby, 2004). This is exactly what the conflict perspective states about gender stratification. Men have devised the sexual division of labour which lets them have an upper hand in their relations with women due to the higher prestige and income men receive.
Discriminating in employment is unavoidable. Indeed, discrimination is necessary when rejecting unsuitable applicants for a job. However in the past it was possible to discriminate against prospective employees due to non-skills based criteria but rather on physical characteristics of the person which would have no influence on their ability to do a job. For example discriminating against a woman because she was not a man, or discriminating against a black man because he was not white. This type of discrimination is unfair and morally wrong. Unfair discrimination on the basis of gender, ethnic origin and disability is illegal in the UK due to the implementation of equal opportunities legislation. Indeed “equal opportunities legislation is based on the principle of treating everyone equally, regardless of characteristics such as gender, ethnicity and disability, at least unless these can be shown to be relevant to the ability to do the job” (Foster & Newell, 2002). Equal opportunities do not just give employees equality within the workforce, it can also, benefit a commercial organisation. “Inappropriate discrimination may deny an organisation access to skills, knowledge and experience that will enhance productivity” (Corbridge & Pillbeam, 2002). Unfair discrimination may also have the potential to lead to increased stress levels and/or to higher absence levels of employees. Both of which, lead to decreased levels of productivity and lower standards of work. However, human resource departments must not use quotas and employ a pre-set number of women. This is also unfair discrimination and can mean people being hired who are not suitable to do a job. The benefits of giving the best person the job regardless of gender are obvious. The organisation may enjoy, for example, higher innovation and creativity, improved productivity, an even a better public image, and consequently increased consumer loyalty. The management of diversity concept is “founded on the premise that harnessing differences will create a productive environment in which everybody feels valued, where their talents are being fully utilised and in which organisational goal are met”(Kandola & Fulerton, 1998).
Nowadays, males find themselves in an unfamiliar position within the working environment and in everyday life. Over the last twenty years, women have made major steps in society, attaining jobs and entering managerial positions in corporations. This has ultimately lead to confrontations between the two sexes, both willing and prepared to fight to reach their objectives. This confrontation, has affected males more than females, as men had not foreseen this occurring since they have always thought of females as the inferior sex in relation to their own. This situation is very bizarre, as even today, in 2008 females are fighting for equality, so why would males feel victimised by equality in contemporary organisations? An issue that has been raised by males in their defence is the notion of maternity leave for women workers. Traditionally, it was not thought of as normal disability for which the employee should be given grants and leaves because according to them it was in the employees hands when she wanted to be a mother. In some corporations like IBM, female workers are given grants for up to a year when they are on maternity leave. Even though a lot of corporations have already adapted this policy, when this amendment was proposed in the U.S House of Representatives, the chambers of commerce representative argued that, “this would work against the equal hiring of women and male workers because it would raise the cost of hiring women workers for the firm” (Berch, 1982). This develops into a situation where, on one hand the corporations are trying to give equal rights to women workers by granting them paid pregnancy leaves, and on the other hand discouraging the hiring of women workers as it increases the cost for the organisation and would result in lower pay for them.
In conclusion, as one can see, despite the astonishing increase in female workers with an impressive augment in participation rate in the labour force over the years, “being only 43% in 1970 and rising to 61% in 2003” (Bureau of Labour Statistics). The working conditions the workplace still has to undergo some major changes before they are completely free of gender biased thinking. For the women to be on the same level as men in the workplace they will have to move on from the expressive roles that the functionalists argue as an important function of the society. It is possible to state that males are therefore not victims of equality in contemporary organisations, but victims of their closed minds and their incapacity of comprehending that the integration of a female workforce will help improve their own working ability.
Bibliography
Books:
Corbridge, M. & Pillbeam, S. (2002) People resourcing; HRM in practice, p. 190, London, FT Prentice Hall.
Davinson, M. & Burke, J. (2004) Women in Management Worldwide: Facts, Figures and Analysis, p. 96, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Eaton, J. (2004) Equal opportunities and the management of diversity
Freedheim, K., Weiner, B., Velicer, F., Schinka, A. and Lerner, M. (2003) Handbook of Psychology, John Wiley and Sons
Kandola, R. & Fulerton, J. (2000) Diversity in action: Managing the Mosaic, Beekman Books
Stockdale, S. & Crosby, J. (2004) The Psychology and Management of Workplace Diversity, p. 151, Blackwell Publishing
Journals
Foster, C. & Newell, S. (2002), Managing diversity and Equal Opportunities – Some practical implications, Business and Professional Ethics Journal 21.
