The Russian labor market demonstrates a high degree of segregation based on gender. Many women work in low-paying occupations. This segregation is attributed to differences in educational backgrounds and individual productivity features throughout the country’s labor market. This is likely to have contributed to the ongoing discrimination witnessed in Russian work places. Part of the task for this paper is to explain why there are varying gender gaps in Russian workplaces and whether any intervention measures are helping to ease the difference.
Since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Russian labor market has embraced free market dynamics. However, historical influences still play a part in the allocation of labor. Integration of women at work has always been an ideology in Russia (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 342).
Klimova (648) shows that there is a significant correlation between gender and the type of job assigned to a person. The researcher also concludes that there is no influencing factor caused by marital status on occupational allocation. After looking at historical data, the researcher also explains that over time, the difference in the regional characteristics of female occupation allocations diminished.
However, female job allocations still depended on the nature of the job. Job allocation is the process of assigning certain work positions to an employee, based on the socially perceived capabilities of the employee. Many women took non-geographical dependent jobs in comparison to their studied male counterparts.
Authors are able to bring out the existing effects of gender discrimination on female job occupations by subjecting the conditions that women face to male participants. Alternatively, they can eliminate the challenges that females face and then observe whether the females are able to make choices similar to males. If that were the case, then the removed factor would be considered as the cause of the gendered variation in occupation. When it comes to choosing suitable work, the Russian female workforce is not as empowered as the Russian male workforce.
In the Soviet era, women were seen as an important factor in the industrialization of the country and they were allocated education and work opportunity by Russia’s socialist government (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 341). Work was determined and managed by state authorities, thus it was predictable for women to work in certain jobs. In addition, women received adequate time off work to cater for family needs, such as raising children and attending to their maternity leaves.
The contribution of females remained high during the Soviet years and their numbers in the workplace matched those of males. Despite the equality in number, the nature of jobs that most females ended up having was very different from what men actually got (Klimova 649). Allocation by state ensured that gender roles represented by ideology featured in actual workplaces. Both men and women understood their part and contributed to their jobs in the manner assigned (Klimova 649).
Practices of labor allocation in the Soviet era helped to reduce discrimination against women. Women continued to receive work benefits during the Soviet era. They got these opportunities as the government worked towards increasing their participation in productive labor in the country. Despite the many endeavors of including women, there were certain positions that they could still not reach, partly due to stereotypes and due to vagueness of policies (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 342).
The efforts made by authorities to develop equality in Russian workplaces among the genders have not paid off. In the Soviet era, the wages earned by males were significantly higher than those of women because males took to technical jobs and manual jobs, while females mainly did routine repetitive jobs. Klomova (650) quotes the figure as 30 percent more in most cases. Ironically, the constitution at the time emphasized on equal pay for equal work, a policy that seemed only to apply to the allocation of work and less on the allocation of payment.
The policy would ensure that both men and women were not discriminated against when getting work, but it overlooked their compensation terms and ended up letting men work in higher paying jobs, while women worked in lower paying jobs only. The correct non-discriminatory position would be that the employer, which in this case was the government, provides equal pay. There should be no differences in the earning ceilings of women and men.
Comparison with other countries
To understand the characteristics of the labor market in Russia, it is crucial first to get an outlook on how people sell labor to employers. Labor markets are not perfect throughout the world. There is always interference from stakeholders that shifts labor prices, demand and supply against what the market would naturally dictate when left alone.
Various institutions, mainly government, trade unions, and specific labor groups, are important in labor markets. As they aim to provide a socially justifiable environment for exchange of labor, they create market imperfections from an economist point of view. Most importantly, the arising imperfections do not affect both genders equally in most cases.
The inability of private companies to offer similar job opportunities for both men and women causes gender discrimination. According to Booth, Francesconi and Frank (298), firms may not freely promote women in higher positions because they view them as more costly than men in terms of skills training. Here, gender characteristics make males more favorable for work promotions. Johnes and Tanaka (100) looked at three countries’ data in 1993 and in 2000 to determine whether the observed gender differences in the workplace were similar across the world.
They examined data for the United States, Russia, and Japan. They showed that the rate of return to education increased in all countries studied. However, for Russia, the rate increase was lower than that of Japan and the United States for women. Throughout the globe, as measured by the countries’ data, the researchers found out that marriage adds the earnings of males. In Russia, where the same is true, there were varied results observed in 1993 and in 2000.
Economic rationale thinking may influence a firm’s decision to discriminate against women’s pay demands. Most importantly, there was no significant relationship between union membership and earnings in Russia, but there was a substantial decrease in the earning power of females when they joined unions. In Russia, where the geographical land is big, there were regional differences in earnings. However, there were none in the USA.
Both males and females in the latter country had similar variations in the earning potential across regions. A noteworthy factor in the research by Johnes and Tanaka (112) is that it relied mostly on data from a survey that is not generally labor-centered.
Thus, although the research points to the general gender differences caused by institutions taking part in the labor market in the USA, Russia and Japan, the findings might be less accurate in strict labor terms. Nevertheless, the findings help to paint the picture of the existing variations between Russia and other countries.
Human capital remains a key resource for transformation for economies towards knowledge based ones. A knowledge-based economy relies on expertise and services of its workforces as key economic outputs. It also depends less on physical product exports. Countries come up with policies that relate to gender equality and to create equal opportunities that will ensure the economy gains most from the participation of all genders in labor production. However, economic policies have to work amid social norms and policies.
Current situation on gender gaps in the Russian workplace
The evidence of gender discrimination in Russian places of work is attributable to the country’s historical policies. In Russia, social and political histories continue to shape the present organization of labor (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 341). Russia has more women than men, and the gap of the genders is about 10.6 million people. Although women are the majority, men account for a high number of labor market participation.
Out of all employable women, only 63 percent take part in productive labor, while the figure for men is 72 percent as of 2007 (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 343). Women have lower percentages of overall level of education compared to men, and they pick high position jobs that are less associated with status and leadership.
However, among those educated to fill such high positions, the chances for women are higher than those of men are. All this shows that where the society accepts that a given job position is suitable for both women and men, women with qualifications stand a higher chance of getting the job.
The present discrimination in the workplace that women encounter arose mainly due to the reform process in Russia after the Soviet era. Many women had to leave ambitions for competitive sectors and settle for low skilled and low paid segments of the economy. They also had better job opportunities in high-risk areas (Zavyolova and Possokhova 47).
After missing jobs in competitive markets, women found entrepreneurship appealing. By 2006, 31 percent of small and medium enterprises were under the leadership of women (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 344).
The present data shows that women who have children, who are pregnant, and those who are above the age of 45 are at the highest risk of being discriminated in the workplace (Zavyalova and Kosheleva 344). However, the government of Russia is taking substantial steps to ensure that the existing rates of discrimination in Russian workplaces subside.
Interventions
Similar to explicit policies and constitutions’ direction in the Soviet era that encouraged women to be part of the labor service, present day government interventions include policies on discrimination. The Russian government relies on economic and social data to understand the problem of workplace gender differences in the country. As a remedy, it has enacted a number of legislations that prohibit discrimination.
The laws explicitly mention sex, race, nationality, language, social origin, place of residence, religion, attitudes, and convictions or memberships of public associations are non-valid reasons for discrimination. Unfortunately, Russian labor statistics still show gaps in male and female access to high paying jobs. Women are not getting sufficient positions in public administration.
Whenever they are about to be promoted, they still have to overcome other stereotypical barriers on the right jobs for women or their productiveness. Thus, they continue to face a glass ceiling that is limiting their progress in independence. They have limited control of their careers, as much as they already have the right education levels.
Specific companies, due to the exposure to global concerns on women discrimination issues, are now opening up to the possibilities of having separate career progress channels for both genders. Such processes and avenues recognize the different needs of both genders and aim to provide a reconciling environment to ensure that job opportunities are equal for both males and females.
Other companies simply chose to invest more in the training of women. An example provided by Zavyalova and Kosheleva (347) is that of the Shell Company, which provides professional development to its entire female workforce. The company also provides working conditions that cater for the unique needs of women.
In fact, the adoption of working spaces to suit women needs so that they can fit into work roles that were traditionally done by men has become a global trend. Russian companies that are embracing the new workplace features appear to be moving towards globalization more than simply complying with government directives against gender discrimination.
In as much as specific firms may be intervening in the problem, they only constitute only a part of the entire Russian labor industry. In fact, Hawkins and Knox (513) note that overall, women in Russia today are experiencing more strains and psychological stress than they did under the communist system. The social expectations are changing. While women are getting fewer opportunities for jobs that pay well, they are facing increased pressures on their incomes, just like men.
The problems are in both rural and urban environments. A part of the challenge is attributed to the demographic crisis that this paper mentioned earlier in terms of population differences among the genders.
In addition, the specific gender problems that women face in different Russian societies eventually have an impact on their ability to take up emerging job opportunities. For example, cases of early pregnancies, abortions, and unhealthy lifestyles bring down women’s ability to advance careers, more than they do to men (Solodnikov and Braithwaite 90).
Meanwhile, social, political, and health care, as well as economic changes in Russia contribute to the betterment of women’s welfare. They are increasing education for women so that they can deal with their gender related problems adequately. Whether these changes will lead to better positions for women in top job positions in public administration and private companies is yet to be seen.
Although the impacts of such interventions are still low, the discrimination problems prevalent in the Russian society should subside with continued emphasis on empowering women. One of the positive measures taken by the government is the increase in funding for social problems, like poverty and alcoholism (Hawkins and Knox 513).
Conclusions
Dealing with the economic dynamics is one thing, but forgetting the historical influences of the workplace will ensure that the Russian workforce remains gender unbalanced.
There are visible differences in the level of workplace participation between male and female workers in Russia. In low-level jobs, participation is almost equal, while the percentage of men is higher than that of women in high-level jobs, such as leadership position or administrative positions. These trends are consistent with those of many other developed countries. However, the uniqueness of the Russian cases is evident when one looks at the situation from a historical content.
If Russia were still aiming to become an industrialized country, then gender differences in the workplace would be understandable. However, during the Soviet era, the country had sufficient policies to ensure that women took as much effort as men in nation building. As a result, the country had a high number of women in the workplace. However, there were still glass ceilings to the levels of jobs that women could access.
Reforms aim to correct perceived gender imbalance problems in the workplace.
They have allowed women to take on entrepreneurship, where there is less systemized discrimination. At the same time, an increase in social demands of women, combined with lack of adequate education is making Russian women miss company-specific and statewide policies that aim to increase the participation of women in the workplace.
Social problems, such as early pregnancies and alcoholism, do a lot of harm to Russian women and are responsible for the current gaps in male and female employee numbers, in high-level jobs in Russia. These social factors contribute to present day discrimination. Fortunately, new interventions by the government to spend money on alleviation of social problem will have better impacts than previous legislative policies that failed to reduce the gender gap in the workplaces.
Works Cited
Booth, L. Alison, Marco Francesconi, and Jeff Frank. “A Sticky Floors Model of Promotion, Pay and Gender.” European Economic Review 47 (2003): 295-322. Print.
Hawkins, A. Catherine, and Karen S. Knox. “Gender Violence and Discrimination in Russia; Learning From an American-Russian Patnership.” International Social Work 57.5 (2014): 511-522. Print.
Johnes, Geraint, and Yasuhide Tanaka. “Changes In Gender Wage Discrimination in The 1990s: A Tale of Three Very Different Economies.” Japan and the World Economy 20 (2008): 97-113. Print.
Klimova, Anastatsia. “Gender Differencs in Determinants of Occupational Choice in Russia.” International Journal of Social Economics 39.9 (2012): 648-670. Print.
Solodnikov, Vladimir Vladimirovich, and Kim Braithwaite. “Abortion: Legal Regulation and Russians ‘Public Opinions’.” Russian Social Science Reviews 52.2 (2011): 71-93. Print.
Zavyalova, K. Elena, and Sofia V. Kosheleva. “Gender Stereotyping and its Impact on Human Capital Development in Contemporary Russia.” Human Resource Development International 13.3 (2010): 341-349. Print.
Zavyolova, Elena and Sofia Possokhova. Psihologiya Predprinimatel’stva [Psychology of Entrepreneurship]. St Petersburg: St Petersburg State University Press, 2004. Print.