Introduction
Gender inequality is one of the oldest and most persistent features of human history. Dating back to more than seven centuries when agriculture emerged, men have continued to dominate gender relations with women’s role being condensed to the homestead as house wives and taking care of the children while men’s place was in the public domain.
Men were revered since they were considered to have legal powers over their wives and children. During such times, wife beating was a common feature that characterized many homes. However, at the turn of the 20th century there was a rapid wave of social change that began to recognize and appreciate the role of a woman as an equal contributor to society, therefore, women begun to receive recognition as equal players in the social scene.
However, this social change did not come without resistance from certain quarters of society. The wave of change begun in the US and Europe where industrialization had kicked off at high gear therefore creating opportunities which women could easily exploit and also earn a living for the family alongside their male partners.
This wave of social change which advocated for equal rights and opportunities for women continued to pick momentum throughout the decades until the society could no longer ignore the need to level the playing ground in order to accommodate women. For example, women are now taking greater working roles in fields which were considered strictly a man’s domain.
The military and the police departments which not long ago were considered a man’s sphere have seen an increased number of women enrollments. This is a clear testimony to the fact that women can also effectively contribute immensely even in the most challenging and rigorous working environment. However, women are still treated as inferior beings in the working place and therefore continue to endure different forms of discrimination.
Gender inequality in the workplace
Although there is remarkable improvement with regard to gender equality globally, women continue to receive discrimination in the working environment. For example, most women are paid less for the same amount of work as their male counterparts and are the most preferred candidates for low profile jobs such as housekeeping and social services.
A recent survey indicates that approximately 85% of housekeeping jobs globally are undertaken by women. In Angola, Senegal and Ghana the figure stands at approximately 67% while in Egypt and Kuwait it is at 75% (Padavic & Reskin, 2002, p.8). These statistics are clear evidence that women continue to receive discrimination with regard to the kind of jobs they are eligible to do.
However, in the developed world the situation seems to take another twist where women are paid significantly lower salaries as compared to their male counterparts on the same role. A remarkable example is witnessed in South Korea, a country with a considerable number of working class women. Here men are paid 38% higher than women for the same amount of work making it the highest gender salary gap in the developed countries.
In addition, women suffer other forms of discriminatory acts such as undue pressure to give up maternity leave in favor of work (Harden, 2010). The situation is grin especially in the gulf countries where a woman’s place in the society is still limited to the home. Many women in these countries are finding it difficult to get jobs and if they do their pay and terms of employment are much lower than those of the men.
For example, United Arab Emirates which is one of the richest and most developed countries in the Arab world has a gender inequality index of 0.234 according to a Social Institutions Gender Index ranking for 2011 conducted by OECD (2012). The country has a further Global Gender Gap Index of 0.6454. This is a clear testimony to the fact that gender disparity in the region is alarming despite the social and economical gains that the countries have achieved in the recent years.
Although there is an economic boom in these countries, the gender inequality gap continues to widen or remain stagnant. One of the factors that has contributed to this significant level of gender imbalance is the cultural values which are still strongly upheld in these regions promoting the notion that a woman’s place is still in the homestead and therefore should not be seen on the public domain.
A census conducted by the US census Bureau dubbed ‘Occupation by sex and median earnings in the past 12 months for the civilian employed population 16 years and over’ also confirms the same facts.
A careful scrutiny of the census results reveals that women were paid less than men in all occupational categories sampled. For example, the Healthcare support occupations where women controlled an estimated 88.4% of the jobs compared to men’s 11.6%, men were paid an approximately 23,806 dollars as compared to 21,338 dollars for women employees.
On average, women received an average mean salary of 38,609 dollars while men receive an average mean salary of 45,515 dollars annually. These statistics clearly indicate that women earn lesser than men by 8.2% (6,906 dollars). A possible reason for this disparity could be the fact that fewer women were considered for top level management jobs as compared to their male counterparts.
It appears that women were mainly employed at the lower levels of the company structure and therefore attracted lower salaries. On the other hand, most men were employed at high levels of management structure and therefore earned higher salaries as compared to the women. The other possible reason for this disparity could be that women were actually paid a lower salary than men even when working at the same capacity.
This clearly highlights that women were discriminated against with regard to holding positions of power in higher levels of management. Their participation was mostly limited to the lower levels of the company structure. The situation is worse in other occupations where the salary gap appears to widen further (U.S Census Bureau, 2012, p.3). A closer look at the American labour force participation rate also paints a grim picture.
The percent of mothers with children over 18 years who were working or looking for work remained at a significant 70.6% in 2011 registering a negligible drop of 0.2% from the previous year. This means that 29.4% of mothers with children over 18 years were not eligible to work or look for work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2012). This is a poor score for a country which is a global leader in advocating for women rights both on the social arena and the work place environment.
However, we must acknowledge the fact that the United States has made huge strides in closing the labor force participation rate gap for mothers which stood at 28% in the 1975 Census by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (Garey, 1999, p.2). The current 70.6% labor force participation rate of mothers with children over 18 years is quite commendable although much needs to be done to empower the other women and close the gap further.
It is worth noting that women have also contributed to the gender imbalance at the working environment since they have a stronger bond to motherhood and therefore are readily willing to give up their jobs in favour of motherhood. Garey gives classic examples of women who faced with motherhood challenges opted to quit their jobs (Garey, 1999, p.191). This kind of exodus will continue to create gender imbalance at the work place if it is not addressed promptly.
Recommendations
Women need to create a balance between their role as mothers and their need to work. Too much attachment to the later will continue to provide a stepping stone for advancement of gender inequality. Men also have a responsibility to support women in parenthood in order to create a balanced equation in the home that can allow women to be actively involved at the workplace.
Mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure that gender biasness in the work place does not continue evolving taking different forms which make it difficult to detect and deal with. The government needs to set up strict guidelines for all employers to make sure that women receive the same treatment as men while in a working environment.
In addition, women have shown the ability to contribute effectively in top levels of management and therefore they need to be given a chance to work at this level. In fact, in some cases they have been seen to perform more efficiently than their male colleagues. Furthermore, the ability of an individual to perform is not derived from which gender one comes from but rather from the skills and virtues one possesses.
Conclusion
The gender issue at the workplace needs to be addressed promptly in order to ensure that all parties involved receive adequate compensation for the duties and responsibilities they perform. Favorism should not be encouraged under any circumstances. By denying women an equal opportunity to participate in the working environment will be lying to waste their unique expertise and disregarding a valuable human resource asset which could otherwise contribute immensely to organizational growth and development.
Each individual should receive an equal measure for the same amount of work done whether male or female. In addition, it is worth noting that the motherly heart of a woman if nurtured and well compensated can become an effective tool in the working environment. Women are noted to have a more tender and passionate heart as compared to men and therefore if this virtue can be harnessed in the working environment, it can contribute to better job performance coupled with efficiency and reliability.
In no case should gender become a benchmark or a weighing balance for equating job performance or measuring an individual’s ability to perform efficiently at a given capacity. However, all individuals regardless of gender should be given an equal opportunity to showcase their skills and the most competent individual given the opportunity.
References
Garey, A. (1999). Weaving Work & Motherhood. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Harden, B. (2010). With pressures high, South Korean women put off marriage and childbirth. The Washington Post. Web.
OECD, (2012). Social Institutions Gender Index. Web.
Padavic, I., & Reskin, B. (2002). Women and Men at Work. London: Pine Forge Press.
U.S. Census Bureau, (2012). Occupation by sex and median earnings in the past 12 months (in 2010 inflation adjusted dollars) for the civilian employed population 16 years and over (S2401). American FaceFinder. Web.
U.S. Department of Labor, (2012). Employment characteristic of families – 2011. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Web.