Equality and diversity in employment
Murdock (1949) argued that gender roles are the natural result of the biological differences between men and women. Biological differences such as men’s superior strength and women’s childbearing capabilities make the sexual division of labour the most sensible way of organising society.
This kind of attitude and the prejudice and discrimination it gives rise to are still prevalent in patriarchal society and this has placed women at considerable disadvantage in the labour market. As Grint (1991) has argued work is socially defined and employment is only one type of work, but it depends on who is doing the defining, thus he writes: the subordinate and gendered status of domestic labour and its popular classification as non-work is a valuable reminder of the significance of patriarchal ideology in the evaluation of work (Grint, 1991:40).
This assignment will discuss and assess the view that women have to contend with disadvantage in the labour market as well as organisational life and that this is due to discrimination and prejudice. Beginning with a brief explanation of the emergence of feminism and the feminist theories that will be drawn on, the assignment will concentrate primarily on feminist theory and research to assess how labour market disadvantage may affect women’s chances of employment and their experiences of organisational life.
Feminism
Feminism is a political movement that responds to, and challenges, the mores of patriarchal society and it roots date back to the eighteenth century. Mary Wollstonecraft argued for women’s equal status with men as early as 1792. This was followed by women such as Elizabeth Cady-Stanton and resulted in the Declaration of the Rights of Women in Seneca Fall America in 1848. Most contemporary feminists refer to the renewed struggle for women’s rights as ’second-wave feminism.’ This began in the nineteen sixties, and was influenced by such texts as “The Feminist Mystique” (Freidan, B 1965). Feminism is not a unified body of thought although most feminists contend that women are oppressed within a patriarchal society i.e. a society that is dominated by the needs and wishes of the male father.
Liberal Reformist Feminism
The main aim is to achieve equality with men. The demand for equal pay for equal work and equal opportunity are examples of this. Liberal feminists argue that a woman’s sex should not determine her rights. Abbott and Wallace (1997) and others argue that many of the differences between men and women are not innate. Rather, they are a result of socialisation and the enactment of prescribed, gender identities that portray men as rational, and women as emotional. Liberal feminists seek to work within the system and reform it. Some feminists, in particular Abbott and Wallace (1997), argue that liberal feminism is not an adequate challenge to patriarchal concepts and structures because it remains within a patriarchal framework. It is often bound by the patriarchal categories which have been so damaging to women.
Socialist feminism
Socialist feminists argue that women have been subjected to a specific kind of oppression that has been worsened by their exclusion from the paid labour force (Walby, 1986). Women have been the hidden workforce because labour in the home is not recognised as work. Their work in the home has supported the capitalist system which keeps them in subjection (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Socialist feminists reject the notion that equal rights within a socialist state are the key to women’s liberation. Rather, the key is in achieving economic independence within a socialist state. Although these two groups of feminists may have different approaches they are all concerned to redress the balance between men and women in the workforce and in society as a whole. While feminists acknowledge that the patriarchal oppression of women has a long history they all maintain that this was exacerbated in the nineteenth century with the rise of industrialisation.
Industrialisation and Women’s Work
Some feminists argue that gender inequality became far greater with the coming of the industrial revolution. Before this fathers, mothers, and children worked together and the family functioned as an economic unit. Women and children’s work in agriculture and textiles were vital. Ann Oakley (1981) has studied the ways in which women’s status has changed in Britain from the beginning of the industrial revolution to the late 1970s. She cites the emergence of the housewife role as a significant feature in the reduction of women’s independence. In pre-industrial society most of the household chores were undertaken by children. There was little distinction between home and work, the private and public spheres. At the beginning of the industrial revolution Oakley (1981) argues the factory replaced the family as the unit of production and women were employed in the factories, usually in the textile industries. The Factory Act of 1819 restricted children working.
The growing dependence of children Oakley (1981) contends was the beginning of women’s dependence on men and their restriction to the private sphere. Between 1841 and 1914 a combination of forces contrived to restrict women’s employment in industry. In 1851 one in four married women worked but by 1911 this had been reduced to 1 in 10 (Oakley, 1981). Hacker (1972) has pointed out that the employment of married women as wage earners was perceived as threatening to male employment and so there was pressure to keep them at home. There was an idealisation of the feminine, as the following quotation illustrates:
No woman can or ought to know very much of the mass of meanness and wickedness and misery that is loose in the wide world. She could not learn it without losing the bloom and freshness which it is her mission in life to preserve (Quoted in Hudson, 1970:53-4).
Victorian ideology said that women were created to help men and that this could best be done if they remained at home seeing to his comfort (Haralambos et al, 2000). Oakley (1981) contends that as the century progressed the working class were also influenced by this ideology and this locked women into the housewife role. The First World War brought some changes and from 1914-1950 the number of married women who were employed in some capacity increased significantly, although women’s primary role was still seen as that of housewife (Oakley, 1981). While Oakley may be right in her arguments regarding industrialisation it has to be said that as the twentieth century progressed women’s role as housewife became less important and many more women have gained economic independence.
Liberal feminists agree that gender role socialisation has resulted in confining role models for men and women and this in turn has led to discrimination against women in society. These feminists struggle to achieve women’s equality with men and have been successful in a number of areas. Women at all levels have been involved in the struggle to achieve equal participation with men in paid employment (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). In 1970 the Equal Pay Act stipulated that women were entitled to the same pay as men if they were doing the same job. This was strengthened in 1982 because the European Court demanded it. In 1984 a further amendment allowed that women were entitled to the same pay as men in their organisations providing they could prove that their work involved the same kinds of decision making and skills as their male counterparts. The Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 made it illegal to discriminate in employment, in education and in the provision of goods, between men and women. Women should have equal access and an equal chance for promotion. Some jobs were regarded as outside the confines of the act e.g. working in a refuge (Haralambos et al 2000).
Marxist feminists e.g. Coontz and Henderson (1986) are of the opinion that gender inequality is a result of the differing roles that men and women have in the production of goods. Women’s subordinate status in society is a result of the Capitalist system and this is a system that could not exist without women’s work in the home. Thus their oppression benefits capitalism rather than men. Benston (1972) holds that women have also been a reserve labour force for Capitalism that has allowed employers to boost profits and keep wages low. Men are still regarded as the breadwinners and so women’s employment is seen in secondary terms. Married women provide a source of cheap labour and their socialisation means that they are a compliant workforce who are easily dismissed when they are no longer needed.
They are far less likely than men to be members of trade unions (Barron and Norris, 1976). The gender ideology that has filtered down to the working classes has affected their solidarity as a class and this makes them more easily controllable by the Capitalist system. Marxist feminists such as Hartmann (1981) argues that while Marxism may give an explanation of exploitation by the capitalist system it does not explain the inequalities between women and men. Marxism does not explain for example why women should be seen as responsible for household tasks and capitalism could just as easily still profit if men stayed at home while women worked. Barrett (1984) is also critical of theories which claim that capitalism alone is responsible for women’s exploitation. She points to the fact that working class men benefit just as much from their wife’s labour in the home as does capitalism. While both Hartmann and Barrett believe that capitalism does play an important part in supporting inequalities Marxist theory is not sufficient to give a complete picture of women’s exploitation. There needs to be a more fully comprehensive feminist theory to achieve this. Brenner and Ramas (1984) argue that there needs to be a thorough analysis of both capitalism/class inequalities and of patriarchy. They believe that there is potential for greater gender equality but this will require political struggle.
Walby (1990) argues that an analysis of patriarchy must remain central to feminist concerns. She also believes that the area of paid employment has been a key feature in creating inequalities for women. While the state has, in theory, supported equality between the sexes with the Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay Acts, they have not actively pursued the issue. Walby (1990) contends that married women often choose not to work because of the limited opportunities available to them. While there has been a huge increase in women’s participation in paid employment, largely due to feminist struggles and capitalist demands for cheap labour, there has still been a failure in preventing inequality at work. Walby (1990) believes that while state policies no longer aim to keep women confined to the home they have done little to alleviate women’s exploitation in the public sphere. Women tend to be restricted to certain occupations such as teaching, nursing, shop or clerical work. Most of these forms of employment are low paying and have less status than much of the work that men do. 80% of primary school teachers are women and although men may be employed working in primary schools it is usually at senior levels, the majority of head teachers are still male.
In later work Walby (1997) distinguishes between older and younger women. She claims that older women are still constrained by private patriarchy (where the home is most important) they are more likely to be dependent on a male. Older women are also generally less qualified than younger women and this restricts their opportunities in the labour market. Younger women have benefited from the changes that have taken place over the last thirty years and many school leavers in Britain are better qualified than their male counterparts. Stacey (1993) agrees with much of Walby’s earlier analysis but criticises the fact that there is too much concentration on structural oppression and not enough on women’s actual experience. Both she and Pollert (1996) are more concerned with the subjective experiences of women and how they resist or deal with inequalities in their lives.
Tags: diversity, equality, feminism, gender roles, industrialisation, socialist, women
