an article by Sarah Bridges (University of Nottingham, UK) and Samuel Mann (Swansea University, UK; Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods, UK) published in Work, Employment and Society Volume Issue 3 (December 2019)
Abstract
This article uses data from the Labour Force Survey to examine the effect sexual orientation has on wages in Britain. In doing so it provides the first empirical investigation of the effect being in a same-sex legal partnership has on wages.
The results show that gay cohabitees and lesbians face a wage premium compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Decomposition results show that for gay cohabitees this arises due to differences in observable characteristics, while lesbians not only earn significantly more due to differences in their observable characteristics, but they also receive a higher return for these characteristics.
In contrast, although no significant difference in earnings is observed for men in a legal partnership, decomposition results suggest that legally partnered gay males should earn more due to differences in their observable characteristics, while there is also evidence that they face barriers to advancement to senior positions, or a glass ceiling.
Showing posts with label glass_ceiling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label glass_ceiling. Show all posts
Tuesday, 17 December 2019
Monday, 12 November 2012
Benevolent Sexism at Work: Gender Differences in the Distribution of Challenging Developmental Experiences
an article by Eden B. King (George Mason University), Whitney Botsford (University of Houston–Downtown), Michelle R. Hebl, Stephanie Kazama and Andrew Perkins (Rice University) and Jeremy F. Dawson (Aston University) published in Journal of Management Volume 38 Number 6 (November 2012)
Abstract
The current research draws from ambivalent sexism theory to examine potential gender differences in the quantity and quality of developmental work experiences.
In a sample of managers in the energy industry, men and women reported participating in a similar number of developmental experiences (with comparable levels of support), but men rated these experiences as more challenging and received more negative feedback than did women.
Similarly, a sample of female managers in the health care industry reported comparable amounts, but less challenging types, of developmental experiences than their male counterparts’.
The results of three complementary experiments suggest that benevolent sexism is negatively related to men’s assignment of challenging experiences to female targets but that men and women were equally likely to express interest in challenging experiences.
Taken together, these results suggest that stereotype-based beliefs that women should be protected may limit women’s exposure to challenging assignments, which in turn may partially explain the underrepresentation of women at the highest levels of organizations.
Abstract
The current research draws from ambivalent sexism theory to examine potential gender differences in the quantity and quality of developmental work experiences.
In a sample of managers in the energy industry, men and women reported participating in a similar number of developmental experiences (with comparable levels of support), but men rated these experiences as more challenging and received more negative feedback than did women.
Similarly, a sample of female managers in the health care industry reported comparable amounts, but less challenging types, of developmental experiences than their male counterparts’.
The results of three complementary experiments suggest that benevolent sexism is negatively related to men’s assignment of challenging experiences to female targets but that men and women were equally likely to express interest in challenging experiences.
Taken together, these results suggest that stereotype-based beliefs that women should be protected may limit women’s exposure to challenging assignments, which in turn may partially explain the underrepresentation of women at the highest levels of organizations.
Friday, 26 October 2012
Multiple Glass Ceilings
an article by Giovanni Russo (CEDEFOP, Bonn, Germany) and Wolter Hassink (Utrecht University, the Netherlands and IZA, Bonn, Germany) published in Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society Volume 51 Issue 4 (October 2012)
Abstract
Both vertical (between job levels) and horizontal (within job levels) mobility can be sources of wage growth.
We find that the glass ceiling operates at both margins.
The unexplained part of the wage gap grows across job levels (glass ceiling at the vertical margin) and across the deciles of the intra-job-level wage distribution (glass ceiling at the horizontal margin).
This implies that women face many glass ceilings, one for each job level above the second, and that the glass ceiling is a pervasive phenomenon.
In the Netherlands it affects about 88 percent of jobs, and 81 percent of Dutch women in employment work in job levels where a glass ceiling is present.
Abstract
Both vertical (between job levels) and horizontal (within job levels) mobility can be sources of wage growth.
We find that the glass ceiling operates at both margins.
The unexplained part of the wage gap grows across job levels (glass ceiling at the vertical margin) and across the deciles of the intra-job-level wage distribution (glass ceiling at the horizontal margin).
This implies that women face many glass ceilings, one for each job level above the second, and that the glass ceiling is a pervasive phenomenon.
In the Netherlands it affects about 88 percent of jobs, and 81 percent of Dutch women in employment work in job levels where a glass ceiling is present.
Tuesday, 25 October 2011
Beneath the glass ceiling: Explaining gendered role segmentation in call centres
an article by Dora Scholarios and Phil Taylor (University of Strathclyde) published in Human Relations Volume 64 Number 10 (October 2011)
Abstract
Although the call centre is much researched, the literature on gender remains surprisingly undeveloped given the importance of this setting for women’s employment. This study of role segmentation in four call centres demonstrates women’s disproportionate representation in more routinised mass production roles, as opposed to higher status or managerial grades. It also analyses three explanations – human capital, domestic status and supervisor career support. The evidence shows that women face a ‘glass ceiling’, first, on entry to the call centre in terms of human capital disadvantage and levels of domestic constraint and, second, within the call centre in their ability to secure supervisor support for career opportunities. We argue that even for women with similar career aspiration and human capital to men, domestic responsibilities create obstacles before they reach the glass ceiling, especially for managerial roles, and contribute thereafter to reinforcing their concentration in more intensive, lower status work.
Abstract
Although the call centre is much researched, the literature on gender remains surprisingly undeveloped given the importance of this setting for women’s employment. This study of role segmentation in four call centres demonstrates women’s disproportionate representation in more routinised mass production roles, as opposed to higher status or managerial grades. It also analyses three explanations – human capital, domestic status and supervisor career support. The evidence shows that women face a ‘glass ceiling’, first, on entry to the call centre in terms of human capital disadvantage and levels of domestic constraint and, second, within the call centre in their ability to secure supervisor support for career opportunities. We argue that even for women with similar career aspiration and human capital to men, domestic responsibilities create obstacles before they reach the glass ceiling, especially for managerial roles, and contribute thereafter to reinforcing their concentration in more intensive, lower status work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
