Morgan Fisher
SOC 444
Dr. Markowitz
Sex Segregation within the Workplace
In the article titled “Sex Segregation in the U.S. Labor Force” authors Bose and Whaley identify how sex segregation forms within the workplace and the problems arising from this segregation. They argue that sex segregation has resulted from separating males and females in the workplace allowing for jobs to become male or female dominated. Bose and Whaley further argue that this sex segregation in the workplace has had many consequences to the wages, salaries, and benefits of females. In order to understand their argument, the two authors establish an explanation for sex segregation within the paid labor force.
Bose
and Whaley immediately point out that the physical separation of males
and
females within the workplace is not equal.
“Separate is not equal.” While
the Equal Employment Opportunity programs and other legislative
policies claim
to help females in the workplace and create a more equal working
environment,
these programs inherently affect discrimination that is directly or
indirectly
against women (
First of all, Bose and Whaley note that sex segregation starts even before the hiring process. When a company relies on referrals for filling a job opening, the company will ultimately end up with referrals of the same sex of their employees. This phenomenon occurs because a worker tends to associate job referrals to their network of same sex friends. This process of disposing job opportunity information to same sex friends can actually lead to men and women themselves contributing to sex segregation often without their knowledge (Roos and Reskin). Although women are guilty of sharing information this way such as openings in clerical jobs, men use this process in higher positions of occupations to perpetuate sex segregation and to keep women out of these high paying, prestigious jobs.
The structure of these organizations and occupations can further create sex segregation through implementing age limits in the recruitment process. According to Bose and Whaley, the process of using age limits to find employees keeps women in female dominated occupations. Age limits create problems because many females try to enter the workforce after their child bearing days have concluded. Many women are believed to be too old at this point in their life and find that they must settle for low paying, unskilled jobs. These age limits even cause problems in apprenticeship programs which can also keep women out of most blue collar occupations because training for these jobs is often provided in these apprenticeship programs (Roos and Reskin). If women lack the opportunity to enter into one of these programs, then their representation in these blue collar jobs will be proportionately lower than males. Age limits can further perpetuate sex segregation within male and female dominated occupations.
Understanding a lack of admittance into apprenticeship programs can further explain sex segregation on the basis of the limited training available for females within certain occupations. Some companies immediately exclude females because of the need of previous experience. Other companies exclude females because they lack training within a particular occupation. Roos and Reskin support this concept in showing the reluctance of employers to hire any woman who would need training. Employers validate this idea on the basis that training will not be profitable because women will eventually leave the workforce to pursue having a family. Even if the possibility of a family was not relevant, employers would still discriminate on this basis of training because they would have to provide more training for women than men and this process would also not be profitable to the company. The need for training allows men to take high skilled blue collar jobs and leaves women to fulfill service jobs that require little or no training.
While all of these barriers deal with internal issues of the workplace, some external factors exist that continue to keep sex segregation a dilemma in the labor force. Gender socialization has outlined expectations of both sexes that lead to society’s appropriate occupations for males and females. During the industrialization, Bose and Whaley note that society accepted the norm of the man being the breadwinner for the family and the woman staying out of the labor force to take care of the children and run the household. Many years later these gendered work norms still exist and inhibit the types of occupations females can enter. For example, inadequate childcare will keep the female out of the workplace taking care of her children, but the father will continue to work. If women are able to enter the workforce, their occupations are still limited because most women will seek a job that will fit into the schedule of their children so that they can still be available for them (Roos and Reskin). Socialization of the gendered norms has further affected sex segregation within the workplace.
While establishing their reasons of how sex segregation still exists in today’s workplace, Bose and Whaley do not commit the error of assuming the “white middle class” norm. When breaking down this norm, the reader can see that Bose and Whaley do not assume a norm based on the middle class. A section of sex segregation with different categories of occupations was integrated into the article and used to further explain the existence of sex segregation in the workplace. Among the categories of occupations included are white-collar, blue collar, pink collar, and clerical occupations. Furthermore, Bose and Whaley use references to races and ethnicities besides the norm of white people. The references to racial and ethnic groups are integrated into their explanations of sex segregation. The authors seem to have done an excellent job by not assuming the “white middle class” norm to explain the implications of sex segregation in the workplace.
It
is easy to
understand that sex segregation still exists and that the consequences
can be
detrimental to women, but it is quite harder to implement programs and
policies
or change the existing ones to allow the break down of sex segregation
to
begin. Many employers try to reduce sex
segregation by operating on a merit based system. But
this attempt at limiting sex segregation
in the workplace still inhibits women.
Merit tends to be awarded subjectively and is generally arranged
on
gendered lines (
A
general idea
that can precede creating the training manual to eliminate sex
segregation is
to change the value placed on women’s work.
It is apparent that men and women both tend to devalue the work
that
women do and they even devalue the work of a woman that is identical to
that of
a man (
Changes to the structure of the workplace must be included in this diversity training manual to help curb the problem of sex segregation. First of all, the physical separation barrier within the work environment must be broken down. For example, clerical work done by females in an engineering firm can be implemented into the environment in which the engineers work. This will allow for daily interactions between males and females and could change the negative perceptions males tend to have about the jobs that women fulfill. Changing attitudes of employees about occupational characteristics are needed to break down the physical and psychological barriers between males and females in the work environment.
Further structural changes must deal with policy and procedure adjustments. Since child rearing continues to keep women in low paying, low status jobs, the structure must be changed to allow women to enter and leave the workforce without consequences. Amendments to the policy and procedures of the workplace should reflect a family friendly environment. Women should be allowed to leave their occupation with adequate maternity leave and then reenter into the same job and status within the company. Allowing mothers to keep the same job upon returning will reduce the occupational mobility these women usually experience and the low wages and lack of benefits that are typically associated with their mobility in the workforce. Furthermore, both mothers and fathers should be allowed family sick leave to take care of sick children or other family members. Implementing these policies will reduce the occupational mobility for women and will keep them out of occupations that society typically sees as sex segregated.
In addition to policy and procedures, changes to the hierarchy within a company must be made to create a more equal opportunity environment. The hierarchy itself does not create sex segregation, but instead the employees in the higher ranks of the hierarchy create sex segregation. Instead of employers promoting on the basis of homosocial reproduction which usually leads to only men receiving promotions, these promotions should be based on the experience and time that employees have put into their occupation. For example, a man who has only been working at a company for a year will not be promoted over a woman who has been working in the same position for almost five years. Also, a woman with a higher production rate will be promoted over a man with a lower production rate. This process establishes merit as an objective reward in which the basis of merit does not change when dealing with different employees or in different situations. In addition, those people within the higher ranks of the hierarchy should be readily available in the workplace of the workers they supervise so that they can see first hand the time and effort employees put into their jobs. This will allow employers to be more educated about the work processes of their employees and will lead to merit being more equally distributed based on production and success of an employee instead of social factors.
After analyzing this article about sex segregation, it appears that it holds many strengths. First of all, Bose and Whaley provide a detailed account of sex segregation. This account provides definitions of sex segregation including numerical information on female and male dominated occupations from the U.S. Census Bureau. In this section, the two authors also illustrate the process of an occupation transitioning from male to female domination and the loss of prestige associated with this transition. In addition, Bose and Whaley use different occupational categories, white-collar, blue collar, and pink collar, to further explain sex segregation.
Another strength of this article is created by explaining several causes of sex segregation to show the significance of this problem for women. In order to explain this phenomenon, Bose and Whaley use different theories and many historical events. For example, they use the social-control theory to explain the social pressures men and women encounter when entering sex-atypical occupations. The federal court order to allow women to enter steel mill jobs illustrates this theory. Beyond theories, Bose and Whaley also use procedures within the workplace, such as the hiring process, to show more causes of sex segregation.
Even though Bose and Whaley have established a well written article, a few weaknesses do appear. First of all, they do not fully identify many of the possible external factors that can lead to sex segregation. They identify the concept of work being secondary to family for women, but do not explain why their contribution to the family leads to lower paying, sex segregated jobs, but men can maintain a family and high paying, prestigious jobs. Secondly, Bose and Whaley do not address the possibility of sexual harassment arising from sex segregation. Sexual harassment has become an intensifying problem for women in the workplace, but it was not identified in this article as a consequence of sex segregation. Finally, this article would have been more complete with a section on ways to reduce sex segregation and the adverse effects that result from it.
Sex segregation has been a persistent problem within the workplace and has become a prevailing dilemma as the number of women participating in the labor force continues to rise. Its complexity has made it difficult to create modifications that can change the status of women at the workplace. The creation and installation of a diversity training manual, however, will create these solutions that can improve the conditions females face within the workplace everyday.