Talk:Gender pay gap/sandbox

Not to be confused with Gender pay gap in the United States.

The gender pay gap (also known as gender wage gap, male–female income difference, gender gap in earnings, gender earnings gap, gender income difference) is a measurable difference between median male and female earnings (expressed as a percentage of male earnings). This gap has been confirmed by considerable research in [nearly every industry] in every industrialized country. Questions that research attempts to address include how to accurately measure the gap, to identify its various sources and their relative importance, and to determine the degree to which they are attributable to any of three broad causes: employment discrimination against women; a combination of the effects of women's personal values, gender-driven differences in human capital, and unbiased market forces; gender-based occupational segregation (in the workplace or the labor market) in conjunction with social undervaluation of female-dominated fields.

Identifying the explanatory factors for well-known phenomena such as occupational segregation and identifying discriminatory elements within them is often key to public policy initiatives intended to address the unequal status of men and women in the labor market, but altering the national wage structure has also been an effective tool for reducing the gap. To the degree that any of explanatory factors reflects a process of valuation of personal characteristics of an individual worker that are unrelated to worker productivity, it is widely held to indicate some degree of wage discrimination against women.

Research and discussion devoted to addressing the causes of the earnings gap are common in three academic disciplines, each with its own points of emphasis: economics (both neoclassical and feminist), sociology (both feminist and Marxist), and social psychology. Generally speaking, this research can be divided into demand-side discussions, which focus on the hiring, firing, promoting and wage-setting behaviors of firms, and supply-side accounts, which focus on the characteristics and behavior of women in the labor market.

human capital supply
market forces
direct discrimination demand

social undervaluation
gender-role socialization
personal values or job shopping (career interruptions) supply
overcrowding model supply
differences in personality traits supply

A [considerable body of research] agrees that [in every industrialized country] a significant percentage of the overall shortfall in female earnings cannot be explained by such differences. "although the wage gap within the same job in the same firm is negligible today, the wage gap between workers in female-dominated jobs and those in similarly-skilled male-dominated jobs remains substantial"

Determining the causes and levels of the gender pay gap is difficult. The factors within the labor market that can work to create such a shortfall are complex and interrelated [and recursive?]. [Not every factor is an instance of discrimination.] Moreover, the actual level of wage differential is difficult to measure, and the selection of a given unit of measurement can reliably and systematically increase or decrease the resulting estimate of the gap.

Mention international aspects. glass ceiling

labor market complexity

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.[and other types of factors too?, labor supply, state of the economy, etc?]

gender segregation

Main articles: Occupational segregation and pink collar

in both occupational choices and wage setting practices Gender segregation or "employment discrimination" can occur in two broad contexts: first, regardless of the overall percentage of males and females within a single firm or industry, women may be unequally allocated to job titles and responsibilities with lower wages. Second, a substantial body of research has established that both female and male workers within female-dominated occupations tend to be paid lower wages than those within male-dominated ones, even when levels of human capital are the same. Research shows that (3 > 1?).

Another observable category, job description or sector of employment, has more explanatory power but is considerably more complex due to gender segregation, which is a feature of every industrialized economy. p.m 209. This gender pay gap can occur in two broad contexts:

either it cannot be explained by an individual's observable wage-enhancing characteristics (collectively known as human capital) such as knowledge and skills acquired through education and experience, or it occurs as a result of working in female-dominated occupations. A substantial body of research has established that both female and male workers within female-dominated occupations tend to be paid lower wages than those within male-dominated ones, due to social undervaluation of fields considered traditionally female.

regardless of the overall percentage of males and females within a single firm or industry, women may be unequally allocated to job titles and responsibilities with lower wages.

Charles, M. (2003).

"nine major occupational categories: managers, professionals, associate professionals, clerical workers, service/sales workers, agricultural workers, craft workers, operatives, and laborers. " (p. 271)

If look only at overall vertical segregation (no horizontal, ie., nine categories lumped together), rates are low and do not support differences between men & women: "models... provide no evidence of female under-representation in high-status occupations" (p. 273). This is an unhelpful aggregation, though, because the high vertical integration (men high jobs) in some sectors is offset by many men in lower-prestige manual jobs. If horizontal segregation is examined, statistics become significantly greater and women are underrepresented in manual labor ("men's work") and over-represented in the non-manual sectors (e.g. semiprofessional, clerical, sales, service, p. 269). Taking all sectors into account, with bot vertical and horizontal segregation, and comparing across countries as well, results are "idiosyncratic and irregular" (271) but indicate strong levels of segregation. Japan has low levels of horizontal segregation but above-average levels of vertical.

horizontal segregation

text here

vertical segregation

glass ceiling

"...the historical lag that women supposedly face... personality traits that would make men and women different... organisational barriers faced by women...[and] stereotyped roles infused at a social level. "

sticky floor

supply-side explanations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

human capital

In its most basic form, the human capital argument of neoclassical economics suggests that the inherent differential attributes of male and female workers (rather than discrimination, social undervaluation of traditionally female occupations, or the gradual and cumulative effects of socialization) offers a robust account for gender segregation in the workplace. In this account, women accrue less human capital over time because they are far more likely to devote time to children and family issues, beginning with pregnancy and continuing thereafter. This disrupts their progress on the career track, reducing their investment in career-related training and job experience, thus lowering their human capital relevant to the labor market, and reducing their overall value to a current or potential employer. The human capital argument is usually taken as the starting point of discussions of the gender wage gap, even among those who wish to de-emphasize or reject the explanatory power of this account.

Gender-role socialization and workers' characteristics

Another account that centers on workers' characteristics, this line of reasoning suggests that gender segregation in the workplace is caused by a series of career path choices women make that systematically de-emphasize raw earnings in favor of other values. These preferences, however, are often presumed to arise as a result of gender-based socialization processes: "...workers' occupational outcomes reflect... the different preferences the sexes develop before reaching adulthood..." So the supply-side version of "socialization" suggests that womens' earnings are negatively influenced by gender-based preferences acquired through enculturation during young, formative years.

The process begins with women either women self-selecting stereotypically "feminine" careers, or de-emphasizing raw earnings in favor of other desirable job characteristics. Preferred features include such things as favorable working conditions, more "family-friendly" fringe benefits (including sick leave, employer-paid parental leave and child care), intrinsic job satisfaction and working with people over things. The process is accelerated when women decline to initiate negotiation for promotions or raises.

size of the labor supply (overcrowding)

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

opportunity structure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

demand-side explanations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

social undervaluation of employment sectors

also social undervaluation gender-role socialization of employment sectors, comparable worth, garbage collectors vs, healthcare givers etc.

employers' preferences

Gary Becker taste for discrimination.

demand for workers

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

economic pressures

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

personnel practices

women are differentially allocated to occupations and establishments that differ in the wages they pay. This involves discrimination in the matching process at the point of hire, in subsequent promotions, and through differential dismissal. ... "allocative discrimination."

other explanations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

wage discrimination

... women may face within-job wage discrimination, by receiving lower wages than men within a given occupation within a given establishment.

Third, women may face within-job wage discrimination by receiving lower wages than men within a given occupation within a given establishment.

international facts figures

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

research

units of measurement, audit design experiments, etc.

"Such considerations underline the importance of understanding how the gap can be made to look smaller or larger by choosing certain measures. Tharenou (2012) notes that, given my discussion of the limitations of the different ways of measuring of earnings (hourly, weekly, annual, focusing on full-time workers or all workers, etc.), I do not suggest which approach is the most fair or accurate in representing the pay gap. I have not suggested a “best” measure because no measure can satisfactorily encompass the complexities of a workforce that encompasses, " "However, it may still be the case that the choice of measure is influenced by a government’s or company’s motivation to portray the gap as smaller or larger. Whether or not the choice of measure is made unwittingly, or deliberately to manipulate the perception of the pay gap, it is important to understand the consequences of using any particular measure."

public policy

compressed wage structures. public sector. unions. "Thus, to the extent that institutions are a major factor leading to more or less egalitarian wage structures (Blau and Kahn, 1996a), we find strong evidence for the importance of institutions and some evidence for the effect of market forces in affecting the gender pay gap." "...gender pay gap tended to be lower in countries with more centralized wage setting institutions as measured by industrial relations researchers (Calmfors and Driffill, 1988)." wage setting institutions

childcare provision

text here

wage-setting institutions

text here

legal proscriptions

text here

actual cases

text here

misc. info

"This is often taken to be a measure of labor market discrimination, although it will be influenced by gender differences in unmeasured characteristics as well. "

References

• Arrow, K. (1973). The theory of discrimination. In Orley Ashenfelter and Albert Rees, eds. Discrimination in Labor Markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973. 3—33.
• Arulampalam, W., Booth, A. L., & Bryan, M. L. (2007). Is there a glass ceiling over Europe? Exploring the gender pay gap across the wage distribution. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 60(2), 163—186.
• Babcock, L., Gelfand, M., Small, D., & Stayn, H. (2013). Gender Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiations. In De Cremer, D., Zeelenberg, M., & Murnighan, J. K. (Eds.), Social psychology and economics. Psychology Press. 239—259.
• Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2001). Understanding international differences in the gender pay gap (No. w8200). National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Charles, M. (2003). Deciphering sex segregation vertical and horizontal inequalities in ten national labor markets. Acta sociologica, 46(4), 267—287.
• Charles, M., & Grusky, D. B. (2004). Occupational ghettos: The worldwide segregation of women and men (Studies in Social Inequality). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Daymont, T. N., & Andrisani, P. J. (1984). Job preferences, college major, and the gender gap in earnings. Journal of Human Resources, 408—428.
• Hegewisch, A., & Liepmann, H. (2013). Occupational segregation and the gender wage gap in the US. In Figart, D. M., & Warnecke, T. L. (Eds.). Handbook of research on gender and economic life. Edward Elgar Publishing. 200—217.
• Kroska, A. (2014). The Social Psychology of Gender Inequality. In McLeod, J., Lawler, E., & Schwalbe, M. (Eds.), Handbook of the Social Psychology of Inequality. Springer. 485—514.
• Lowen, A., & Sicilian, P. (2009). 'Family-friendly' fringe benefits and the gender wage gap. Journal of Labor Research, 30(2), 101—119.
• Lips, H. M. (2013). Acknowledging Discrimination as a Key to the Gender Pay Gap. Sex roles, 68(3-4), 223—230.
• Petersen, T., & Morgan, L. A. 1995). Separate and unequal: Occupation-establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. American Journal of Sociology, 101,(2), 329—365.
• Plantenga, J. & Fransen, E. (2010). The extent and origin of the gender pay gap in Europe. In Chant, S. H. (Ed.). The International handbook of gender and poverty: concepts, research, policy. Edward Elgar Publishing (pp. 415—420).
• Reskin, B. (1993). Sex Segregation in the Workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 241—270.
• Shauman, K. A. (2006). Occupational sex segregation and the earnings of occupations: What causes the link among college-educated workers? Social Science Research, 35(3), 577—619.
• Stockdale, M. S., & Nadler, J. T. (2013). Paradigmatic assumptions of disciplinary research on gender disparities: The case of occupational sex segregation. Sex roles, 68(3-4), 207—215.