Income inequality is a major ongoing problem in the United States of America. The American Dream started out as everyone being able to have equal opportunities. In many ways this has never been completely true, because there has always been some sort of inequality occurring. Inequality comes in different forms, race, gender, social classes are just a few. Gender inequality is one of the major inequality problems being faced by women today. The unequal opportunities in the work place woman face from day to day has put a strain on their American dream. Although inequality may be viewed as a natural cause of the sex gender system, it is actually the result of false consciousness. Women are academically inclined to perform the same duties as men.
According to the Forbes article “Who Is Really Keeping Women Back in The Workplace?” by Neale Godfrey, women are not getting promotions or equal pay as men in the work place. Women today are paid 83 cents for every dollar a man earns. Women are less likely to receive promotion to manager positions during their early career stages versus men, who are promoted at a 30 percent higher rate.
Even though in the “National Center for Educational Statistics” women are more educated than men, this is looked passed in this promoting progress. Women earn more than half of the bachelor’s degree (57.1%), master’s degree (59.9%), and doctorate degrees (51.8%). Women are often criticized when they request for a high pay or a similar amount that male employees earn. This causes women to become discouraged and eventually drop out according to reports from the Gallup, labor rates for women in 2000 decreased from 59.9% to 56.7% by 2015. This unfair workplace environment leads to the wage gap between men and women, which effects a woman’s American Dream.
Gender inequality effects the entire United States government. Gender inequality will increase poverty, because production will decrease and there will be less incomes in homes, which then decreases the tax revenues as well. For the government this is not good news. This will impact the supply and production system, demand and consumption system, and affect savings and investment. The government will have to come up with tactics to reduce the impact of gender inequality.
The first step toward eliminating genders inequalities in the work place is bringing awareness to the problem. Educating the management team who are in charge of pay rate and placement, will bring a more conscience perspective with gender inequality. A number of policies and state legislations have been put in place to protect women against gender inequality in the workplace in many states across the United States.
Gender inequality is not only occurring in the United States, it is global. Studies from the “UN Women Report” states that only 50% of working age women are represented in the labor force, while men are at a whooping 76%.
Why is this occurring universally? Conflict theorists believes gender inequality is just a tactic to maintain power and privilege, not caring about the expense of women. Throughout history men have always been the dominant gender or the bread winner, taking on roles that viewed them as supreme. Women on the other hand play the submissive role in society. Men are taught early on in life to be goal oriented, and to focus on the relationship of the family to outside societal structures. Women on the hand, are taught to be express themselves emotionally and to be aware of others emotions as well.
Order theorist believes that gender inequality is inevitable from several perspectives. They believe it is impossible to achieve an equal society because naturally from hormones, DNA, and genetic makeup. All these attributes to the difference between men and women, making it impossible for them to be equal.
Even though women have made much process in ending income inequality in the workplace. There is still much more that needs to be done to shift the perspective of many, who believes that men obtain higher earnings. Some may believe that this inequality is natural, while other believes that this views were taught and instilled within society to keep man in power.
Gender Pay Inequality
Since women have been in the workforce, gender pay inequality has long been debated and overall pay inequality and the evident divisions in socioeconomic statuses have affected the way people see themselves and other people In “The Psychology of Inequality” by Elizabeth Kolbert, a study was performed to show that people respond emotionally towards inequity, using a ‘relative income model’ (Kolbert). While this study showed the emotional responses to different pay comparison amongst workers and their peers, who do these feelings truly affect and in what ways? As Kolbert describes, ‘people who see themselves as poor make different decisions, and generally worse ones.’ One of the largest gaps of inequity has to do with gender and in general women make less money than their male peers no matter what wage and education level they are at. This has created gender income gaps, gender wealth gaps, and gender poverty gaps. The following research will explore a ‘chicken or egg’ argument, a who came first or what was the cause or was this the effect, on the vicious cycle of gender pay inequality and how it has affected women’s lower pay and lesser paying career choices.
Women have been paid less since the beginning of time compared to their male piers, and currently women make eighty two cents per dollar a man makes (Roepe). It’s not very clear whether or not this wage gap is due to job choice and education level firstly or the presence of an unchanging sexism and discrimination in the workplace since women are now just as educated as men, if not, more (Cribb). Women often take home 39% less than men do due to taking time off to care for children, and fewer earnings results in fewer dollars to invest in things such as a 401K plan (Roepe). There is also the stereotype of men needing to be the ‘head of the household and primary breadwinner’ (Roepe). Much of the debate is whether or not employment contracts were made with mostly men in mind in terms of higher status positions, with a typical work day not scheduled around when school lets out, causing many women to only work partial days or cutting hours to be able to pick up their children, many without the luxury of having another caretaker or being able to be a stay at home parent (Cribb). Much of the debate is whether or not employment contracts were made with mostly men in mind in terms of higher status positions (Cribb). No matter what field of work, there is always a pay gap between female and male workers of the same field, and this is about the same in terms of level of education (Roepe). These gaps are measured by health and survival, how much education, participation in the economy, and political empowerment (Roepe). However, while many studies are focused on workers of that are high levels such as managers and administrators, there has been a study showing that there is less of a pay gap between genders in young adults and that this is continuing to shrink (Roepe).
Still, the presence of salary inequity between genders is present, and since so much of the global wealth and concentration of income has grown, political power over these issues remains with the wealthy (Inequity.org). Issues such as gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and the fact that 63% of minimum wage workers are female are often ignored (Inequality.org). Gender income gaps have shown that only five percent of all CEOs of Fortune500 companies are female, and men have a greater chance of being top earners in the workforce, even though women now make up half of the work force in the United States (Inequality.org). In terms of gender wealth gaps, which is calculated by finding the sum of debts subtracted from assets, women have less than the median retirement amount saved, whereas men have three times more, and across all levels of pay, this is often due to women having more responsibilities for their children and home life (Inequality.org). Another newer factor affecting this gap is that there is student debt, in which females make up 56% of college students and yet their debts are two thirds of all student loan debts (Inequality.org). This has led to the gender poverty gap actually widening over the last 50 years, jumping from 10.8% of women in poverty in 1968 to 13.4% of women in poverty in 2016, which holds greater chance in women of color (Inequality.org). This percentage is doubled for transgendered folk (Inequality.org).
The Government Accountability Office had done a recent study to truly look at how gender pay inequality has affected those of the lowest socioeconomic status, the people making the lowest wages or have the lowest education levels, something that has often been overlooked as studies are often perfomed at the managerial level. This research was unable to measure whether or not career choice or discrimination truly determined pay and it was not able to factor in years or levels of work experience (Government Accountability Office). However, using a group of workers aged 25 to 64 in this wage category, the study showed that one fifth of low waged females were unmarried with at least one child, which is more than three times the amount of men that are unmarried with one child living with them (Government Accountability Office). Women in this category had roughly a $27,000 total annual household income, with $15,000 coming from personal wages and the other $12,000 coming from other household income or government aid, leaving many women below the poverty level if they did not have the other 43% of income coming from elsewhere, with their children sitting at that level right there with them (Government Accountability Office). While better education has been shown to lead to higher wages, it is evident that lesser education leads to lesser wages, but even lesser if the person is female.
Returning to the article by Kolbert, people that viewed themselves as poor were shown in a study to have been more likely to make poor or riskier decisions. This study also showed that people feeling disadvantaged had increasingly different perceptions of racial differences (Kolbert). However, is it possible that people that viewed themselves in negatively unequal pay grade would consciously make decisions to work in career paths that were of a lower pay grade? And if so, is it due to their lowering value of self worth?
In a study presented in Kolbert’s article, a database called Bee’s was formulated with information containing the amounts everyone in certain state employed companies had made, and certain employees were made aware of this database while others were not, allowing certain employees to peek at what their peers were making in comparison to their own income. However, both sets were emailed a job satisfaction survey, and those that had been able to view their peers’ incomes in comparison to theirs were exposed to the ‘relative income model’ in responses, which predicted that those that saw that they made less than their coworkers would be upset and those that made more would be happy (Kolbert). However, while the model was correct in predicting the result of those that discovered that they did not make as much as their peers, those that made more were did not care and were not happier, and this study was later translated to a similar test on both toddlers and capuchin monkeys, in which those with the lesser rewards viewed the inequity, but those that got the better rewards were indifferent or possibly shared their rewards with others (Kolbert). So even in those with a lesser cognitive mindset were able to respond to inequality emotionally but more so if they had received the short end of the stick, as in anyone else of any other level of workforce pay grade.
There are many laws and proposed laws that have strived to change this very apparent inequity amongst people in the workforce. The 1963 Equal Pay Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 have been in existence for many years and have attempted to abolish unequal pay due to all sorts of discrimination (Roepe). Recently in 2009, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act had reversed a Superior Court decision that would have slowed down the ability for workers to sue their employers if discrimination had affected their pay (Roepe). Although the Equal Pay Act was signed in 1963, as of today, the gap has only narrowed by less than half a cent per year of its existence, showing that the gap really has not narrowed much at all (Roepe). Another study described in Roepe’s article concluded that women end up being shorted up to $1.6 million dollars in their lifetime over these differences.
So what came first, women’s choices in lower paying career paths or the inequality in pay? According to Kolbert’s article, it is possible that people that looked down on themselves would make poorer decisions, and so in this case it is possible that being used to pay inequality would perhaps result in women having a ‘give-up’ attitude and settling for lesser paying jobs? However, Kolbert also discussed that those people who looked down on themselves would also possibly make riskier decisions — so would this make any sense as to why more women were taking a jump at obtaining a college degree regardless of the increase in student loan debt that they would have a more difficult time repaying then men would? Or would it allow them to aim for higher paying jobs in hopes of a chance at pay equality or something close? Is going to school and aiming for more pay in a higher position a good risky decision, a poor decision, a poor risky decision, or not a completely thought out decision? As quoted by Kolbert, in a world of pay inequality, in regards to the emotionally negative reactions of the lower paid population and the indifference from those that make more or are comfortable, ‘there are no real winners and a multitude of losers.’ Those with wealth are not phased, but those that do not have much take chances because, well, if they do not have much, what do they really have to lose? Do the wealthy take chances at all even? If so, what do they also have to lose if anything?
As the future grows near, it is with hope that the gender pay gap closes. However, a recent study predicted that it would not fully be resolved for another two hundred and eight years. Even then, perhaps new laws and preventative action in the work place can speed this up and build a better foundation for equality, with men realizing the burdens of women taken in their home life, allowing for more flexibility, even work from home abilities and other creative methods of preventing the wage gap and furthermore preventing negative outlooks from person to person upon themselves. Increase in self worth is heavily and emotionally affected by society’s presentation of worth, and as Kolbert stated, it is not greater wealth but instead a sense of equity that will help all to feel richer.
Gender Gap In The Workplace
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “median weekly earnings of full-time workers were $876 in the second quarter of 2018. Women had median weekly earnings of $780, or 81.3 percent of the $959 median for men” (2018). This is as of July 17, 2018. This disparity is not of times long ago but a problem occurring in present day. Women who have the same education and skill set are often paid less than their male counterparts. Why is this happening and what can we do to prevent this?
Women working is nothing new. From the beginning of time, women worked to support their families in some capacity. Most jobs women held up until the early 20th century was considered “feminine” jobs such as cleaning, child rearing, cooking, etc. Men were considered the “bread-winners” whereas women stayed at home and take care of the children and spouses. During World War II, women started doing men’s work outside the home due to men being drafted. Many women went into industries such a welding, manufacturing and munitions. Some of the women did jobs directly related to the war such as welding planes and vehicles for the armed services. Women were permitted to do man’s work because the industry had no choice. Even though women were doing a man’s job, doing the same requirements, at the same skill level, women still didn’t get paid close to what a man did doing the same job. According to research done by Ruth Milkman (2016), many supervisors stated that the women they had working for them during the war “out-produced the men in most cases” (p.125). The men came home and resumed the jobs they had before being sent to war leaving women to try to acquire jobs elsewhere.
You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. Women got a taste of what they were missing and were beginning to realize that they were being discriminated against. There was starting to become a slow change in the culture of women and their place in society. In 1963, John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act stating that women and men should be paid the same but in one of the subsets there was a loophole. Taken from the act itself, it states “except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex” (EOCC). Companies continued to pay men more and had the law to back them up. Management could explain disparities by stating they had seniority or quality of work, whether that was accurate or not.
In 1964, Lyndon Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlined that people could not be discriminated due to race, sex, color, religion or birth origin. Due to this being passed the creation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EOCC) was created. The purpose of this commission is to investigate and resolve issues revolving around any violations regarding discriminations and current laws. The EOCC today has the authority to take legal action against companies who conspire to discriminate. It is not the solution but a step in the right direction.
In society, there are norms that are either taught directly and indirectly to people. It seems to be the norm, even today, women are thought of as the caregivers and the home organizers. You look into most homes and you will likely see the woman in the homes making the doctor’s appointments and doing more chores inside the house and the men doing the manly jobs outside the house. It is just what people do naturally without thought. The misalignment of gender roles makes its way into the workplace. In an article in the Washington Post (Kray, 2015), they bring up the issue of salary negotiations as a possible reason for the gender gap. The stereotype of when a man brings up a raise is that he’s a man’s man and good for him for standing up for himself. When a woman requests a raise or promotion in the same style a man does, they are often thought of as pushy and unworkable. The article goes on to point out that when even when women are trained to be better negotiators the societal cultures subjugate the effort (Kray, 2015). Kray also points out the one very important solution to this gender gap is transparency. Companies must make more of an effort to share salaries to public and not create an atmosphere of inequality.
Leslie Stahl, a CBS 60 minutes correspondent, recently sat down with CEO, Mark Benioff, of Salesforce, a tech company. The company employs over 10,000 people and they create billions in revenue every year. The sit-down interview was specifically about the gender gap and how it was discovered at his company. He was advised by his human resource office that she did a simple audit of employees and already with the little of information she had, believed there was a disparity regarding men and women. He felt that he had created an environment of gender equality and was astounded on how it even occurred. He then told the human resource officer to do a full audit and what was discovered was that the gap was widespread. The company started going through each job and person and began to equalize pay. This cost the company over 3 million dollars (2018).
This is where it must start. Nothing will change unless all companies are on board and fight the bias on the inside.