Women’s participation in the paid workforce increased especially around the 1950’s. This also had a significant increase of married women in the workforce. By 1983, women were over one third in the workforce, and in the 1990’s women were almost 50% in the workforce. Young women entering workforce stayed longer, and even after getting married they continued working. Despite women entering the workforce in unprecedented numbers, and the great strides made by women in the workplace, inequality still persists (Tierney, 2011, p. 197). Since they were able to work, women have been struggling in the workforce. However, Issues such as sexual harassment and underpaid are diminishing very slowly, but still occur in many instances.
According to social role theorists, gender stereotypes stem from traditional labor divisions (women as caregivers and men as providers), thus making gender a diffuse role. This is also because of a different set of rules that people generalize across variety of social situations. Such sex- roles spill-over to the work place and are referred to as sex- role spill- over. An excellent example is seen in the work places, where women are more often likely compared to men to plan social events at work, in addition to fulfilling their job, description (Rudman, 2008, p. 184).
Certainly, by 1981, majority of women were in the paid workforce doing majority of work (double duty), both at home and in their work places. Daycare facilities have expanded since then, but nowhere meets the demands of the working paid women. Many women are forced to make their own arrangements for the care of their own children. Despite the phenomena of women entering the workforce in large numbers, the cruel reality is that poorest people are the children and women (Tierney, 2011, p. 197). This is shown by the fact that most welfare recipients are women who are widowed, divorced or separated, and most of them have children, at least over 50% of women. Similarly, researches show that women are more likely to experience family- related career interruptions compared to men (Damaske, 2011, p. 60). They are forced to quit jobs, turn down promotions, take significant time off or reduce their working hours due to such interruptions.
Evidently, also, women in the workplace can receive higher ratings than a man in regards to competence, but can still be undervalued because they are being compared to a lower standard than a man’s (Rudman, 2008, p. 184). Ironically, in this situation, a woman can be shortlisted for a job, but less likely to be hired compared to the man shortlisted in the same job. Therefore, this shows that high evaluation and performance ratings do not necessarily translate equitable rewards to the different genders.
Similarly, shifting hiring criteria is seen as another method of discrimination, which can disadvantage men as well as women. Research shows that different hiring criteria’s shift favoring gender- typical strength of the applicants; and most of the time favoring men in different positions, especially when candidates are required, thus women are disadvantaged (Rudman, 20008, p. 184). This type of discrimination is linked to sex- typing of a job, thus works to preserve sexual segregation in the workforce (Haas, 2009, p.78). Consequently, this ultimately favors men over women, because highest standard and high-paying jobs are dominated by males. Accordingly, in the year 2010, every dollar earned by a man, a woman made 77 cents, hence a great gender gap which needs to be addressed and rectified. In the same note, it can be seen that research also show that certain women age- group entering the workforce over the last 30 years, women are less likely to ask for raises in aspirations of top management positions, as compared to men.
Additionally, sexual harassment is widespread, and research shows it has a significant impact on women. Such harassments range from unwanted sexual advances, insults, rape and threats to sexual assaults. This threatens the livelihood of those having low wages, and not all workers can get effective solutions to such harassment hence negatively impacting on the number of women in the workforce (Karsten, 2006, p. 57). Women perceive more situations sexually harassing as compared to men, because men have less experience with sexual harassments and the following devastating effects (Levin & Becker, 2010, p.45). Also, women are always more likely to feel less socially supported in their career as compared to men; this is because men are less likely to feel the need for social support as they rarely feel their social roles are being devalued.
Conclusion
There should be different conceptual researches to understand women’s and men’s workforce patterns. Changes should be made to gendered workforce patterns to ensure that work force participation results into new working ways.
References
Damaske, S. (2011). For the family?: How class and gender shape women's work. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Haas, S. (2009). Sexual harassment in a male dominated workplace. S.l: s.n.
Karsten, M. F. (2006). Organizational practices and individual strategies for women and
Minorities. Westport, Conn. [u.a.: Praeger.
Levin, B. L., & Becker, M. A. (2010). A public health perspective of women's mental health.
New York: Springer.
Rudman, L., & Glick, P. (2008). Social Psychology of Gender: How Power and Intimacy Shape
Gender Relations. New York: Guilford Publications.
Tierney, H. (2011). Women's studies encyclopedia: 1. London: Aldwych Pr.
