Women in the Workplace
1996: by Paul-Robert Hipkiss, for Dr O.P. Rafferty, McMaster University.
For centuries women have played an important role in the evolution of work. From agrarian-helper in antiquity to an aggressive participation in guilds during the late Middle Ages, their presence has been felt. At present, however, women are becoming increasingly involved in the workplace. Despite such a proliferation of female employees, it is evident that related policies regarding women's rights and comparable worth within the workplace are as archaic as work itself. This essay will examine the issues surrounding female employee discrimination with emphasis of pay equity. In the end, we will come to understand why women receive (overall) lower wages for the same work done by men.
In Canada, according to Krahn and Lowe, many women place an importance on social relationships from work, whereas men are concerned with extrinsic rewards. Although social relationships may be considered an intrinsic reward by some scholars, they are not derivatives of the performance of work, therefore, not an intrinsic reward. Thus, the difference in gender work orientations is understandable due to the variance of socialization between the sexes. More often than not, women's work is seen by most people as addition to the family income and can be abandoned at any given moment when the need is no longer evident. On the other hand, men have been traditionally viewed as the main breadwinner of the family. Hence, men have placed an importance on extrinsic rewards such as adequate wages, benefits, and advancement; however, for women, such importance becomes inconsequential due to the abandonment factor. To this date the vast majority of women have been placed in this category. Furthermore, and for the most part, the general public thought that work liberated women, which in turn gave females an avenue of retreat from the household. Therefore, the argument that gender-role socialization perhaps encourages women to place less importance on extrinsic rewards, and greater concern for relationships within the job, seems creditable. Furthermore, it appears that our society has continued to espouse such an ideology even to this date. In support of this argument, a recent study by Krahn and Lowe illustrated a comparison of present female and male work values. According to this study women were more likely than men to place an importance on social relationships at work (Krahn & Lowe, p.332).
Religion had, in addition, placed a considerable constraint on the evolution of pay equity. The religious fundamentalist adheres to a value in which the family is the foundation of a community, and a community likewise is the core of society. According to such a belief, society is dominated by males; therefore, families ought to be similar with a patriarchal figure exercising authority (Spiegel, p.69). Of course, the Christian version of the family has its roots in the Holy Bible. The text of Ephesians is often quoted by Christian traditionalists: "Wives are subject to your husbands..." (Eph. 5:21). Obviously, this view of marriage encourages discrimination between the sexes. However, any policy integrating employment equity or comparable worth, from a religious perspective, would weaken the family and thus increase social instability. Moreover, the entrance of women into the workplace is seen as "limiting [their] ability...to lead a full religious life..." (Spiegel, p.74). Albeit unfortunate, many individuals bring to work such orientations, and in retrospect do not envision a workplace encompassed with equality.
The question we must now ask ourselves is: 'Do these work orientations suit our present work environment?' Of course not! In Canada, the female labour force is approximately 43% of the total work force with 87% in the service-related industry (Cohen, p.60). Despite the vast number of female workers, women only earn approximately 67 cents for every dollar earned by men (Krahn & Lowe, p.171). No longer do women work in order to further social relationships outside of the home. They become employed out of economic necessity. Single-parent families are becoming an increasing norm in our society with the female as head of the household. Whatever the reason, the rise of the divorce rate, widowhood, or the unwillingness of couples to enter into marriage, low income for women places an enormous burden on our children. A survey done by Glazer illustrated that approximately 45% of all female single-parent households with children under the age of 18 were living under the poverty line (Glazer, p.190). These statistics are alarming, for not only are women affected by the unfair distribution of economic wealth, but the future of such impoverished children is also in question. If the family is the foundation of the community, according to the religious perspective, then, to place children into poverty directly or indirectly through unfair distribution of economic wealth is not in the best interest of a healthy community. Moreover, if a healthy community is the cornerstone of a productive society, then, inequitable distributions of economic capital must come to a halt with the advent of more stringent comparable worth policies.
In Ontario, Premier Bob Rae introduced pay equity legislation in 1992. However, due to conservative entrepreneurial free-market values, Premier Mike Harris, during the time he was Premier, proposed to curtail the Social Democratic legislation. In the 90s, some scholars argued that the Constitution Act of 1982, under section 15, did not permit the Conservative Government to amend the provincial pay equity legislation (Krahn & Lowe, p.183). In fact, Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives the Canadian populace an instrument in which gender equality must be guaranteed (C. Act, 1982). But, workplace standards fall under provincial jurisdiction and subsequently are of no federal concern. In reality, all ten provinces can have different policies affecting the interpretation of comparable worth. Even still, if we exclude the jurisdiction factor of the equation, does the Charter not compel provincial governments to act equitably when forming new legislation? The answer is 'no'. Under section 33 of the Charter "a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section...15 of the Charter." (C. Act, 1982). So much for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In other words, provincial governments have the right to introduce legislation that may not favour pay equity in spite of (notwithstanding) the guarantee of gender equality as outlined in section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On the one hand, there is a form of a guarantee of equality, and on the other hand, such a right can in fact be taken away by the provinces. Therefore, Harris' past proposal to quash Rae's pay equity law became seemingly possible. However, as we approach a more developed global free-market system with each sphere aspiring to a greater competitive edge, pay equity no longer appears to be a government objective. Lower and unequal wages dominate the capitalistic agenda for increased profits. Human capital has become lost within the cracks of capitalist global dogma.
If the present situation appears bleak for working Caucasian females, African women workers are isolated from two fronts, which are as follows: 1) the fact that they are female puts them in society's normative social minority group (even though the population of women outnumbers that of men), and 2) the fact that they are of African descent also places them in a second minority group (it is interesting to note how most minorities such as Hispanic and Asian fall under this same category of dual burden of race and sex). Thus, African female workers are a minority for being female, and such a minority is compounded by the fact that they are a visible minority (Wallace, p.48). Some explanation of this phenomena also lies in the present educational attachment to employment. Many employers, if not all, require a twelfth-grade education for office and clerical work. For whatever apparent reason, Wallace's research indicates that African female workers often do not meet these requirements, therefore, placing them in lower paying jobs. Even when a person of African descent applies and meets the said requirements, according to Wallace, companies hire proportionately fewer African females compared to Caucasian females, and even in the cases when visible minority females are hired, they are often placed in lower paying jobs (Wallace, p.51). Here, we not only encounter discrimination in terms of comparable worth, but we are also confronted with an all too familiar form of discrimination based on race. Contrary to the cliché, we have not reached the golden promise or our era.
The explanation for why women receive lower wages has been further demonstrated by Harriet Zellner. She illustrated the wage-gap between men and women in terms of choice. Zellner assumes that women will choose jobs in which they will encounter little penalties for interrupting their paid work to bear and raise children. In addition, women often choose part-time employment (part-time jobs are always associated with low wages) in order to meet family responsibilities. Thus, women's concentration in low-paying jobs is a personal choice due to the rationale of women's expectations for intermittent participation in the work force. The ease with which female workers can move in and out of the work force is a form of a trade off for such low wages (Zellner, p.85). This argument receives further support from a survey conducted by Hewlett, estimating that women take nine years off from their fobs due to family responsibilities (Kitchen, p.147). However, these researchers fail to include into their equations the present economic conditions of society. Many women, if not all, become employed due to economic necessity. The days of traditional single-income families are numbered. Therefore, employment for women is not a matter of choice in the truest sense, nor is the type of job they choose.
Some scholars have indicated that the problem of wage differentiation stems from absenteeism. A higher number of female workers require more sick leave than men. Francesca Bettio conducted a survey that placed women at 8.92% overall and men at 5.41% overall per year in industrial related fields (Bettio, p.223). When compared to clerical or service work, women were, again, in more need of sick leave. According to the research, women were absent 4.54% of the time and men were absent 3.72% of the time per year. Although the percentages of absenteeism for women-workers was higher than men-workers, Bettio failed to mention in her research that both figures (male and female) increased from clerical to industrial, and the overall difference between the sexes was inconsequential. Nevertheless, perhaps the biggest problem of absenteeism lies in the unwillingness of men to help with domestic duties such as house cleaning and child rearing. Women are simple over worked. If the problem is to be solved, then, men must commit to their share of responsibility.
A large concern to the problem of unequal distributions of economic wealth rests within the Canadian school system. As it often happens, a girl is taught from an early age to have a different view of the role in life, to focus on the family, and to see many subjects as gender-specific. From the curriculum to the book, teaching methods and pedagogy, and interactions in the classroom, all of these have adverse effects on children in particular as to how they will view life in their latter years. Even play time is sometimes segregated. When it comes to choosing a career later in life, women opt for traditional roles such as nursing and teaching. Likewise, men become more prone to further their studies in areas of mathematics and physics (Wickham, p.119). All of this leads to the conclusion that substantive changes have to be made, especially in the first part of a person's life. If the position of women and their labour opportunities are to be transformed, then, the experiences at school must be altered in order to reflect a more harmonious gender-relative society. Women must have more mentors depicted in school texts. Women must be counselled into a greater array of professions such as physics, engineering, and construction. Men, as well, should look at other forms of employment like nursing, secretarial work, and teaching. Parents, school counsellors, and teachers must take a more active role in fostering a positive educational environment. Both parent and school are linked together when considering the health of a child's education (Mott, p.23). In the end, a more cultural perspective must be taken when rearing children, and in order to eliminate a reappearance of discriminative values, we must not adhere to utilitarian perspectives of social reproduction.
Thus far, we have questioned an array of issues surrounding women's work. We have examined female work orientations and found that many scholars have attempted to argue women's work as a mere addition to family income; as a result, such argumentation appeared archaic in reasoning. Religious values of women being submissive to men did not adequately relate to our conception of modern cultural value systems. Without further ado, both ideologies proved to be correct in their interpretation of present market values; however, both are inadequate with regard to female equality. We also looked at the Constitution Act as a base for equal economic distribution between the sexes, but, to no avail. With brief commentary on minority groups, in the end, we concluded that our schools in conjunction with parents (or caregivers) were culpable for the discrimination many women have experienced in the workplace throughout the years, and continue to face. As our economy conforms to a global market system, evidence indicates a rise in single-parent families or at least single-income families, and as can be projected, in the case of single-parent families, they will be headed by women. This projection is not an overestimation but more of a reflection of present conditions. We must collectively compel government to legislate comparable worth values into existing laws. Improvements in day care are needed in order to alleviate part of the burden of child rearing for single-parents. Society's social conditioning of its young must reflect a more harmonious, equal, and a non-segregation value system. If we make such progress in bringing about equitable wage controls, we will not only improve the family unit as a whole, but our entire economic prosperity will flourish (Pollak, p.24). Women who tend to be poor do not spend the little amount of money they do have. If women represent approximately 43% of the total labour force, as mentioned above, then, through increased wages government would be able to increase the nation's Public Treasury by at least 43%, if not more. Pay equity also makes economic sense.
SOURCES
Bettio, Francesca. The Sexual Division of Labour (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 1988.
Bible, The Holy. The New Testament: "Ephesians".
Cohen, Mrjorie Griffin. Free Trade and the Future of Women's Work (Toronto: Garamond Press), 1987.
Constitution Act, 1982.
Glazer, Nona. "Paid and Unpaid Work". In Women in the Workplace: Effects on Families edited by Kathryn Borman (New Jersey: Albex Publishing Corporation), 1984.
Kitchen, Bridgitte. "Employment Strategies for Women and the Sexual Division of Labour". In Unemployment and Welfare edited by Graham Riches (Toronto: Garamond Press), 1994.
Krahn, Harvey and Graham Lowe. Work, Industry, and Canadian Society (Scarborough: Nelson Canada), 1993.
Mott, Frank. The Employment Revolution (Cambridge: The MIT Press), 1982.
Pollak, Nancy. Critical choices, Turbulent Times (Vancouver: The University of British Columbia Press), 1994.
Spiegel, Fredelle. Women's Wages, Women's Worth (New York: Continuum), 1994.
Wallace, Phyllis. Black Women in the Labour Force (Cambridge: The MIT Press), 1990.
Wickham, Ann. Women and Training (Philadelphia: Open University Press), 1986.
Zellner, Harriet. "Determinants of Occupational Segregation". In Unemployment and Welfare edited by Graham Riches (Toronto: Garamond Press), 1994.