The gender salary gap in the United States is the ratio of female-to-male or average (depending on the source) of annual income among full-time workers, throughout the year.
The average annual salary of unadjusted women has been cited as 78% to 82% of the average man. However, after adjusting for choices made by male and female workers in college, employment, hours of work, and parental leave, some studies have found that the wage rate between men and women varies from 5 to 6.6% or, women earn 94 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts. The remaining 6% of the gaps have been speculated to stem from gender discrimination and differences in ability and/or willingness to negotiate salaries.
The extent to which discrimination plays a role in explaining gender wage disparities is rather difficult to quantify, due to a number of potentially confounding variables. A 2010 research review by the majority staff of the United States Congressional Joint Economic Committee reported that research has consistently found unexplained salary differences even after controlling measurable factors assumed to affect income - indicating unknown/unmeasured factors from which gender discrimination may become one. Other studies have found direct evidence of discrimination - for example, more work is given to women when the applicant's sex is unknown during the recruitment process.
Video Gender pay gap in the United States
Statistics
The average annual income of women (used by the Census Bureau to calculate the gap includes bonuses, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses no weekly earnings) relative to men increased rapidly from 1980 to 1990 (from 60.2% to 71.6 %), and less rapidly from 1990 to 2000 (from 71.6% to 73.7%) and from 2000 to 2009 (from 73.7% to 77.0%).
With circumstances
By 2016, female earnings are lower than male earnings in all states and the District of Columbia according to a survey conducted by the US Census Bureau. The national female-to-male income ratio was 81.9%. Utah ranked the lowest at 69.9% and Vermont ranks highest at 90.2%.
With industry and jobs
The average weekly income of women is lower than the average weekly male earnings in all industries in 2009. The industry with the biggest gender disbursement gap is financial activity. The average weekly income of women working in financial activities is 70.5% of the average weekly earnings of men in the industry. Construction is the industry with the smallest gender payment gap, with women getting 92.2% of what men earn.
In 2009, women's weekly average earnings were higher than men in just four of the 108 jobs for which data were available for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Four jobs with higher weekly median income for women than men were "Other life, physical, and social science technicians" (102.4%), "bakers" (104.0%), "teacher assistants" (104, 6%), and "dining room and cafeteria attendant and bartender helper" (111.1%). The four largest gender wage gaps are found in well-paid jobs such as "Doctors and surgeons" (64.2%), "securities, commodities and sales agents of financial services" (64.5%), "financial managers" (66, 6%), and "other business operations specialist" (66.9%).
The BLS Report Highlights in Women's Income in 2003 shows that there were only two jobs in 2003 where the average weekly earnings of women exceeded men. Both jobs are "Packers and packagers, hands" (101.4%) and "Health diagnoses and treats practitioners support technicians" (100.5%).
In 2009, Bloomberg News reported that sixteen women who lead companies in Standard & amp; The Poor 500 Index earned an average of $ 14.2 million in their last fiscal year, 43 percent more than the average male. Bloomberg News also found that from people who became CEOs of S & P 500 in 2008, women got a 19 percent increase in 2009 while men took a 5 percent discount.
Several studies on women in the legal profession reveal a steady gap in the number of partnerships in the American Law Firm. Despite the fact that women have graduated from law school in equal numbers for over twenty years, only 16-19% of law firm partners are women.
On August 26, 2016, USAtoday reported that Hollywood's gender payment gap is wider than the average female worker and it is worse for older female stars.
With education
While greater education increases the overall income of women, education does not close the gender salary gap. Women earn less than men at all levels of education and gender wage gaps widen for people with advanced degrees compared to people with high school education. In 2006, female high school graduates earned 69 percent of what their male colleagues earned ($ 29,410 for women, $ 42,466 for men), but female earnings dropped to 66 percent of men for those with advanced or more advanced degrees ($ 59,052 for women , $ 88,843 for men).
By age
The income differential between women and men varies with age, with younger women approaching wage equality compared to older women.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that, in 2013, full-time female workers had an average weekly income of $ 706, compared with an average men's weekly income of $ 860. Women aged 35 years and older obtained 74% to 80% of the earnings of their male colleagues. Among young workers, the income difference between women and men is smaller, with women aged 16 to 24 getting 88.3% male earnings in the same age group ($ 423 and $ 479, respectively).
According to Andrew Beveridge, a Professor of Sociology at Queens College, between 2000 and 2005, young women in their twenties earned more than their male counterparts in several major urban centers, including Dallas (120%), New York (117%), Chicago, Boston, and Minneapolis. The main reason for this is that women have graduated from colleges in greater numbers than men, and that many of these women seem to be interested in large urban areas. In 2005, 53% of women in their 20s working in New York were college graduates, compared with only 38% of men of that age. Nationally, women's group wages averaged 89% of the average full-time wage for men between 2000 and 2005.
According to a Census Bureau data analysis issued by Reach Advisers in 2008, single-child women between the ages of 22 and 30 earn more than their male counterparts in most US cities, with revenues that are 8% greater than the average man. This shift was driven by an ever-increasing number of women who attended college and switched to high-income jobs.
With the race
In the US, using average hourly earnings statistics (not controlling for different job types), the difference in relative salaries to white men is the largest for Latin women (58% of white man per hour incomes) and the second largest for black women (65%), while white women had a 82% salary gap. However, Asian women get 87% as much as white men, making them a group of women with the smallest salary gap compared to white men.
The average woman is expected to earn $ 430,480 less than the average white male for a lifetime. Native American women can expect to earn $ 883,040 less, Black women earn $ 877,480 less, and Latin women earn $ 1,007,080 less for life. The lifetime deficit of Asian American women is $ 365,440.
Maps Gender pay gap in the United States
Describe gender salary break
Any given standard wage gap can be dissected into the described sections, due to differences in characteristics such as education, working hours, work experience, and employment, and/or unexplained parts, usually associated with discrimination. This can be explained further when Americans take into account that men are more likely to negotiate to pay higher. According to a study by Carnegie Mellon, when paying for negotiations, 83% of men negotiate for higher wages compared to 58% of women who ask for more. Researchers say that women who ask for a higher salary or higher starting salary are more likely than men to be punished for the act. Cornell University economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn stated that although the overall size of the wage gap has decreased little by little, the proportion of unexplained gaps by human capital variables has increased.
Using Current Population Survey (CPS) data for 1979 and 1995 and controlling education, experience, personal characteristics, parental status, city and region, occupation, industry, government work, and part-time status, Yale University economics professor Joseph G. Altonji and the US Secretary of Commerce Rebecca M. Blank found that only about 27% of the gender wage gap in each year is explained by the different characteristics.
A 1993 study of graduates from the University of Michigan Law School between 1972 and 1975 examined the gender wage gap when matching men and women for possible explanatory factors such as occupation, age, experience, education, time in the workforce, childcare, average work. , the current grade in college, and other factors. After accounting for all that, women are paid 81.5% of what men "with similar demographic characteristics, family situations, working hours, and work experience" get paid.
Similarly, a comprehensive study by US Government Accountability Office staff found that gender wage gaps can only be explained in part by human resource factors and "work patterns." The GAO study, released in 2003, is based on data from 1983 to 2000 from a representative sample of Americans between the ages of 25 and 65. The researchers control for "work patterns," including work experience, education, and hours of work for many years. work per year, as well as differences in industry, employment, race, marital status, and years of service. With controls for these variables in place, the data show that women earn, on average, 20% less than men during the entire period from 1983 to 2000. In subsequent studies, GAO found that the Commission for Employment Opportunities and the Department of Labor "should better monitor its performance in enforcing anti-discrimination laws."
Using CPS data, US Employment Economy Bureau Stephanie Boraas and William & amp; Economics professor Mary William R. Rodgers III reports that only 39% of the gender salary gaps were described in 1999, which controls the percentage of women, schools, experience, territory, size of Metropolitan Statistical Area, minority status, part-time employment, marital status, union workers, government jobs, and industry.
Using data from a longitudinal study conducted by the US Department of Education, researchers Judy Goldberg Dey and Catherine Hill analyzed about 9,000 college graduates from 1992-1993 and over 10,000 from 1999-2000. Researchers control for many variables, including: work, industry, hours of work per week, workplace flexibility, the ability to work, whether employees work a lot of work, months in employers, marital status, whether employees have children, and whether employees volunteered in the past year. The study finds that wage inequalities start early and worsen over time. "Part of the salary gap that remains unexplained after all other factors is taken into account is 5 percent one year after graduation and 12 percent 10 years after graduation The unexplained gap is evidence of discrimination, which remains a serious problem for women in the labor force. "
In a 1997 study, economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn took a set of human capital variables such as education, labor market experience, and race into account and also controlled for occupation, industry and unity. While the gender wage gap is much smaller when all variables are taken into account, most of the payout gap (12%) remains unexplained.
A study by John McDowell, Larry Singell and James Ziliak investigates the promotion of faculty on the economics profession and found that, controlling the quality of PhD training, publishing productivity, major areas of specialization, current placement in leading departments, age and post-PhD experience Women economists are still very unlikely to be promoted from assistant to colleague and from association to full professor - although there is also some evidence that women's promotional opportunities from association to full professor increased in the 1980s.
Economist June O'Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found an unexplained payment gap of 8% after controlling experience, education, and number of years at work. Furthermore, O'Neill found that among young children who have never had a child, the income of women is close to 98 percent of men.
In the attitude of rejecting discrimination, a 2009 study for the Department of Labor by CONSAD Research Corporation concludes, "it is impossible now, and no doubt it will never be possible, to determine reliably whether any part of the gender gap being observed can not be attributed. for factors that compensate women and men differently on a socially acceptable basis, and therefore can be confidently linked to clear discrimination against women "and continued" In addition, at the practical level, the complex combination of these factors, the factors that collectively determine the wages paid to different individuals make the formulation of policies that reliably will correct the real discrimination that there are tasks that are, at least, frightening and, more likely, unachievable. This conclusion is largely based on a study by Eric Solberg & amp; Teresa Laughlin (1995), yes ng finds that "job selection is a key determinant of the gender wage gap" (as opposed to discrimination) because "any non-inclusive income measure can produce misleading results about the magnitude, consequences, and sources of market discrimination. "They found that the average wage rate of women is only 87.4% of the average wage rate of men, whereas, when income is measured by the total compensation index (including allowances), the average value of the index for women is 96.4 % of the average for males.
A 2010 study by Catalyst, a nonprofit organization working to expand opportunities for women in business, male and female MBA graduates found that after controlling career aspirations, parental status, years of experience, industry, and other variables, graduates are more likely to get jobs with higher positions and responsibilities and earn, on average, $ 4,600 more than women in their first post-MBA job. This affects a woman's ability to pay off student loan debts because college is no cheaper for a woman although she can expect to make less after she gets a degree from male counterparts. This causes women to have more debt than men. This extra debt makes the earnings smaller even more debilitating because women have a more difficult time paying off student loans.
A 2014 study found that the gender salary gap in the United States declined significantly in size from 1970 to 2010, especially as the inexplicable portion of inequality decreased significantly during this period.
By 2018, economists at the University of Chicago and Stanford University, working with Uber analyzing the gender salary gap from Uber drivers show a 7% average salary gap in contexts where gender discrimination is impossible and payments are not negotiated, showing full differences. can be explained as a difference in the average productivity between men and women as a result of the driving force (the average man sped up faster), experience (the average guy has more driving experience with Uber than the average woman), and the choice driver (average guy working hours and locations with higher returns). The above factors explain 50%, 30%, and 20% of each variant.
Source disparity
Working hours
A report by 2014 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics states that working men work 52 minutes more than women who work on their days of work, and that this difference in part reflects the possibility of larger women working part-time. In the book Biology at Work: Rethinking Sexual Equality , Browne writes: â € Å"Because of the sex differences in working hours, the hourly income gap [...] is a better indicator of sexual difference in income than the annual rate. Even the hourly earnings ratio does not fully capture the effect of gender differences in hours, however, because more hourly employees also tend to earn more per hour. "
However, many studies show that variables such as hours work only for part of the gender salary gap and salary gaps shrink but do not disappear after controlling all the human capital variables that are known to affect payments. In addition, Gary Becker argues in a 1985 article that the traditional division of labor in the family harms women in the labor market because women devote more time and effort to housework and have less time and effort available to do market work. OECD (2002) found that women work less because in the current situation, "the responsibility for child rearing and other unpaid domestic work is still not the same among partners."
Job separation
Work segregation refers to the way some jobs (such as truck drivers) are dominated by men, and other jobs (such as child care workers) are dominated by women. Many studies have shown that women's work is dominated by fewer pay, even controlling individual and workplace characteristics. Blau and Kahn economists argue that women's wages as compared to men have increased due to the decrease in job segregation. They also argue that gender wage differences will decline simply and that the level of discrimination against women in the labor market appears to be declining.
In 2008, a group of researchers examined the segregation of employment and its implications for the salaries assigned to the work of men and women. They investigated whether participants would pay differently for 3 types of jobs in which the responsibilities and duties actually performed by men and women are the same, but the work lies well in traditional masculine or traditional feminine domains. The researchers found statistically significant differences in wages between occupations defined as "male" and "female", indicating that gender-based discrimination, arising from job stereotypes and job devaluations typically undertaken by women, influenced the allocation of salaries. The results are consistent with contemporary theories of gender-based discrimination.
A study shows that if a white woman at work all men move to a workplace that is all women, she will lose 7% of her salary. If a black woman did the same, she would lose 19% of her salary. Another study calculated that if women-dominated jobs do not pay lower wages, the average hourly wage of women across the country would rise by 13.2% (men's wages would rise by 1.1%, as salary increases for men working in " women's work ").
A number of studies show that salary gaps shrink but do not disappear after controlling the occupation and a number of other human capital variables.
Workplace flexibility
It has been suggested that women choose less paying jobs because they provide the flexibility to better manage jobs and families.
A 2009 study on high school farewell speech in the US found that women who had a farewell speech planned to have a career that had an average salary of $ 74,608, while male valredict candidates plan to have a career with an average salary of $ 97,734. As to why women tend to be less than men to choose high-paying careers such as surgeons and engineers, the New York Times article cites researchers who say, "The main reason is that they worry about combining family and career one day in the future."
However, Jerry A. Jacobs and Ronnie Steinberg, as well as Jennifer Glass separately, found that male-dominated jobs actually had more flexibility and autonomy than women-dominated jobs, allowing a person, for example, to more easily leave work to tend to a sick child. Similarly, Heather Boushey states that men actually have more access to workplace flexibility and that is "the myth that women choose less paying jobs because they provide the flexibility to better manage jobs and families."
Economists Blau and Kahn and Wood et al. separately argue that the "free choice" factor, while significant, has been shown in studies to abandon most of the unexplained gender income gaps.
Gender stereotype
Research shows that gender stereotypes can be the driving force behind job segregation as they influence educational and career decisions of men and women.
Studies by Michael Conway et al., David Wagner and Joseph Berger, John Williams and Deborah Best, and Susan Fiske et al. find a widespread cultural belief that men are more socially valued and more competent than women in many ways, as well as special assumptions that men are better on certain tasks (eg, mathematics, mechanical duties) while women are better at others (eg, parenting assignment). Shelley Correll, Michael Lovaglia, Margaret Shih et al., And Claude Steele point out that this gender-affinity belief influences the judgments people make about their own competencies on career-relevant tasks. Correll finds that special stereotypes (for example, women have lower mathematical abilities) affect women's and men's perceptions of their abilities (eg, in math and science) so that men judge their own task abilities higher than women performing at the same level. This "biased self-assessment" forms the educational and career decisions of men and women.
Similarly, the OECD states that the behavior of the female labor market "is influenced by learned cultural and social values ​​that might be considered discriminatory against women (and sometimes against men) with particular job and lifestyle stereotypes as 'men' or 'women'. " Furthermore, the OECD argues that women's educational options "can be dictated, at least in part, by their expectations that [certain] types of employment are not available to them, as well as by gender stereotypes prevalent in society."
Direct discrimination
Economist David Neumark argues that discrimination by employers tends to direct women into jobs and lower-wage people in higher jobs.
Bias supports gender roles
Some authors suggest that low-status group members are subject to negative stereotypes and attributes related to their job-related competencies. Similarly, studies show that high-status group members are more likely to receive a favorable evaluation of their competence, normality, and legitimacy.
David R. Hekman and colleagues found that men received a much higher customer satisfaction score than women who performed well. Customers who view videos featuring female and male actors who serve as employees who help customers are 19% more satisfied with the performance of male employees and are also more satisfied with the cleanliness and appearance of the store even though the actors are done identically, reading the same script , and are in exactly the same location as the same camera and lighting angles. In the second study, they found that male doctors were judged to be more approachable and competent than well-performing female physicians. They interpret their findings to show that customer ratings tend to be inconsistent with objective performance indicators and should not be used uncritically to determine payment and promotion opportunities. They argue that the biased customers have potential adverse effects on the career of female employees.
Similarly, a study (2000) conducted by economist Claudia Goldin of Harvard University and Cecilia Rouse of Princeton University shows that when applicant evaluators can see the gender of the applicant they are more likely to choose a male. When gender applicants can not be observed, the number of women employed increases significantly. David Neumark, an Economics Professor at the University of California, Irvine, and colleagues (1996) found statistically significant evidence of sex discrimination against women in recruitment. In an audit study, matching couples for male and female job seekers were given the same rà © chik and were sent to apply for jobs as waiters and waiters in the same restaurant. In high-priced restaurants, the possibility of female applicants getting interviews is 35 percent lower than men and the probability of getting a job offer is 40 percent lower. Additional evidence suggests that a customer bias in favor of men partially underlies recruitment discrimination. According to Neumark, this recruitment pattern seems to have implications for sex differences in earnings, since evidence of informal surveys indicates that earnings are higher in restaurants with high prices.
On the other hand, a 2007 study showed that for the same resume, fewer replies were sent to men than women (it also showed that women are worse off when they have children, while men are worse off when they do not ). A 2015 study showed that women were favored by factor 2 for academic roles in STEM subjects.
Obstacles in science
In 2006, the United States National Academy of Sciences found that women in science and engineering were hindered by the bias and "outdated institutional structure" in the academic world. The Beyond Bias and Barriers report says that extensive previous research shows an unconscious but pervasive bias pattern, an "arbitrary and subjective" evaluation process and a work environment in which "anyone who is short of work and family support usually provided by 'wives' is a serious disadvantage. "Similarly, a 1999 report on the faculty at MIT found evidence of different treatment from senior women and suggests that it may not only include differences in salaries but also in space, rewards, resources and responses against the outside offer, "with women receiving fewer professionals despite the same achievement with their male counterparts."
The study found that work by men is often viewed as subjectively subjective as a higher quality of work that is more or less equal or better by women than by how the actual scientific review panels measure scientific competence when deciding on research grants. The results show that female scientists must be at least twice as good as their male counterparts to receive the same credit and that among grant applicants have a statistically greater opportunity to receive more grants than women who are the same qualified.
Anti-woman bias and perceived role mismatch
Research on the assessment of competence has shown a widespread tendency to undermine women's work and, in particular, prejudice against women in male-dominated roles that may be inconsistent with women. Organizational research investigating biases in perceptions of competent male and female competence has confirmed that women entering high status, male-dominated work settings are often evaluated more vigorously and encounter more hostility from equally qualified men. The phenomenon of "think manager - think male" reflects gender stereotypes and status beliefs that attribute greater status and competency to men than women. Belief in gender status shapes men and women's firmness, attention and evaluation gained by their performance, and the ability attributed to them on a performance basis. They also "evoke a different gender-different standard to link performance with capabilities, which are differently biased in the way men and women value their own competencies on career-relevant tasks, controlling their true capabilities."
Alice H. Eagly and Steven J. Karau (2002) argue that "the notion of discrepancy between gender roles and women's leadership roles leads to two forms of prejudice: (a) perceiving women less favorably than men as candidates for leadership roles and (b) Evaluating behaviors that meet the recipe of a leader's unfavorable role when enacted by a woman, one consequence is a less positive attitude toward women than for male and prospective leaders. Another consequence is that it is more difficult for women to become leaders and to achieve success in leadership roles. "In addition, research shows that when women are recognized to have succeeded, they are less favored and more personally degraded than men who work equally. Assertive women who exhibit masculine, peripheral properties are seen to violate feminine recipes of goodness and are punished for violating the status order.
However, a study in 2018 that analyzes the Uber driver's salary gap suggests a 7% gender difference in hourly wages in contexts where gender discrimination is not possible at the employer level (contracts and algorithms are gender blind) and where there is no evidence of discrimination at the level driver.
Maternity leave
The economic risks and costs resulting from a woman who may leave work for a certain period of time or indefinitely for infant feeding are cited by many as the reason why women are less common in higher-paying jobs such as CEO positions and upper management. It is much easier for a man to be employed in higher-prestige jobs than the risk of losing a woman holder of a job. In a survey of about 500 managers at the Slater & amp; Gordon, more than 40% of managers agree that they are generally hesitant to hire women who fall within the age group that has the potential to give birth to children or women who already have children. Thomas Sowell argues in his 1984 Civil Rights that most of the pay gap is based on marital status, not the discrimination of the "glass ceiling". Income for men and women with the same basic description (education, employment, working hours, marital status) is basically the same. That result will not be predicted under the explanatory theories of "sexism". However, it can be seen as a symptom of the uneven contribution made by each partner to raise a child. Cathy Young cites male and female rights activists who argue that women do not allow men to take on father and household responsibilities. Many Western countries have some form of paternity leave to try to level the playing field in this regard. However, even in countries with relatively gender equality such as Sweden, where parents are given 16 months of paid parental leave, regardless of gender, fathers take on average only 20% of the 16 month paid parent and choose to transfer their days to their partners. In addition to maternity leave, Walter Block and Walter E. Williams argue that marriage itself, not maternity leave, will generally make women more homemakers than men. The Bureau of Labor Statistics found that married women earn 75.5% the same as married men while unmarried women earn 94.2% of unmarried male income.
One study estimated that 10% of the gender gap convergence in the 1980s and 30% in the 1990s could be accounted for by increased availability of contraception.
Several studies found significant maternal penalties on wages and performance evaluations and workplace competencies even after statistically controlling education, work experience, race, whether a full-time or part-time worker, and various human capital and other work variables. The OECD justifies the existing literature, where "significant impacts of children on women's payments are commonly found in the UK and the United States." However, one study found premium wages for women with very young children.
Stanford University professor Shelley Correll and colleagues (2007) sent more than 1,200 fictitious recitations to employers in a major city in the Northeast, and found that female applicants with children were significantly less likely to be hired and if hired would paid salaries lower than male applicants with children. This is despite the fact that qualifications, workplace performance and other relevant characteristics of fictitious job applicants are held constant and only their parental status varies. The mother was punished with a number of steps, including perceived competence and the recommended starting salary. Men are not punished for, and sometimes benefit, parenting. In subsequent audit studies, Correll et al. found that employers actually discriminated against mothers when making evaluations that influenced hiring, promotion, and salary decisions, but not fathers. The researchers reviewed the results of other studies and argued that the role of mothers is in tension with cultural understanding of the role of "ideal workers" and this leads evaluators to expect mothers to be less competent and less committed to their work. Fathers do not experience these types of losses in the workplace because the understanding of what it means to be a good father is not seen as inconsistent with the understanding of what it means to be a good worker.
Similarly, Fuegen et al. found that when evaluators assessed fictitious applicants for lawyer positions, female applicants with children were held to a higher standard than female applicants without children. Dad is really held to a much lower standard than a man not a parent. Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick's show that describes a consultant as a mother makes the evaluators judge him less competent than when he is depicted not having children.
Research also shows there is a "marriage premium" for men with labor economists who often report that married men earn higher wages than unmarried men, and speculate that this may be caused by one or more of the following causes: (1 ) are more productive of married men at a greater extent (linking premiums to marriage with selection bias); (2) men become more productive after marriage (due to the specialization of the labor market by men and domestic specialization by women), or ( 3) entrepreneurs like married men. Lincoln (2008) found no support for the specialization hypothesis among full-time workers. Some studies suggest that this premium is greater for men with children while others have shown maternity to have no effect on wages in any way.
Gender differences in perceived payment rights
According to Serge Desmarais and James Curtis, "the gender gap in payments... is related to gender differences in perceptions of the right to pay." Similarly, Major et al. argue that gender differences in payment expectations play a role in perpetuating unrelated salary differences between women and men.
The perception of wage rights differs between women and men so that men are more likely to feel worthy of higher wages while women's wage rights feel depressed. Women's beliefs about their relatively lower value and lower wage wages reflect their lower social status so that as women's status is raised, their wage rights also increase. However, the manipulation of gender-related status has no impact on the increase in male-enhanced male wages. Even when men's status is lowered on a particular task (for example, by telling them that women usually outperform men in this task), men do not reduce their own salaries and respond with high projections of their own competencies. The prevalent pattern in which men pay more than women for comparable jobs may explain why men tend to start negotiations more than women.
In a study by psychologist Melissa Williams et al., Published in 2010, study participants were given the first male and female names, and were asked to estimate their salary. Men and to a lesser extent women predict a much higher salary for men than for women, replicating earlier findings. In subsequent studies, participants were placed in the role of employers and asked to assess what men and women deserve to earn new income. The researchers found that men and at lower rates women set higher salaries for men than women based on automatic stereotypical associations. The researchers argue that male observations as higher earners than females have led to stereotypes that link men (more than women) to wealth, and that this stereotype alone can serve to perpetuate the wage gap at both the conscious and unconscious levels. For example, the stereotype of a man's wealth may affect an employer's initial salary offer for a male job candidate, or an intuitive sense of a female college graduate about what salary can be properly asked on his first job.
Negotiate salary
A study on the negotiation of graduate work of professional school students found that boys were eight times more likely to negotiate early salary and salary than female students. A survey by the same researchers found that more than twice as many women than men say they feel "very worried" about "negotiating". Several studies on simulated salary negotiations have also found that the average man negotiated more aggressively than women. Other studies, however, found no gender differences in salary negotiations. Barry Gerhart and Sara Rymes (1991) investigated salary negotiation behavior and initiated salary results for MBA graduate students and found that women did not negotiate lower than men. However, women did get a lower refund from negotiations. During a career, the accumulation of such differences may be substantial, according to the researchers.
Situational factors that are considered to influence salary negotiations include:
- Knowledge of competitive wage rates for a task.
- Awareness of gender stereotypes about negotiations.
- Negotiate on its own behalf, versus negotiating anonymously or on behalf of others.
Small et al. shows that "framing the situation as an opportunity for negotiation is frightening to women, because it is inconsistent with norms for decency among low-powered individuals, such as women". Their study of salary negotiations found that women tended to be compared to men to negotiate when the behavior was labeled as "negotiating" but the same possibility when the behavior was labeled as "ask".
Riley and Babcock found that women were punished when they tried to negotiate an early salary. Male assessors tend to rule against women who negotiate but are less likely to punish men; female evaluators tend to punish both negotiable men and women, and favored applicants who do not ask for more. The study also showed that women applying for jobs are unlikely to be hired by male managers if they try to ask for more money, while men who ask for higher pay are not negatively affected.
However, a study in 2018 that analyzes the Uber driver's salary gap shows that a 7% pay gap persists in the context in which salaries are not negotiated.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics investigates job characteristics related to wage premiums, and states: "The tasks most highly valued by the market are generally cognitive or supervisory.The job attributes related to interpersonal relationships do not seem to affect wages, nor do the job attributes demanding physical or dangerous. "Economists Peter Dorman and Paul Hagstrom (1998) state that" The theoretical case for wage compensation for risk is reasonable but almost uncertain.If workers have utility functions where the expected likelihood and cost of occupational hazards enter as arguments , if they are fully informed of the risks, if the company has sufficient information about the expectations and preferences of the worker (directly or through revealed preferences), if safety is expensive to provide and not public goods, and if risk is fully transacted in the anonymous labor market, , then the worker a will receive the appropriate premia wage to offset disutility with the assumption of greater risk of injury or death. Of course, none of these assumptions apply in full and if one or more of them are quite different from the real world, the actual compensation may be less than utilities -offsetting, nonexistent, or even negative - low wage combinations and poor working conditions. "
Impact
Economy
A study in October 2012 by the American Association of University Women found that during a 35-year career, an American woman with a bachelor's degree would earn about $ 1.2 million less than men with the same education. Therefore, closing the salary gap by raising women's wages will have a stimulus effect that will grow the US economy at least 3% to 4%. Women currently account for 70 percent of Medicaid recipients and 80 percent of welfare recipients. Increasing the participation of women workers from the current level of 76% to 84%, as in Sweden, the US can add 5.1 million women to the world of work, again, 3% to 4% of the size of the US economy.
Retirement
According to a report by the Joint Economic Committee of the United States Congress, gender wage gaps are jeopardizing the security of women's pensions. Of the various sources of income that depend on Americans in the future, many are directly related to the earnings of workers during their careers. This includes the benefits of Social Security, based on lifetime earnings, and defined benefit pension benefits that are normally calculated using the formula based on employment and employee salaries during peak income years. Persistent gender wage gaps leave women with less income from these sources than men. For example, Jamsostek guarantees older women is 71% of older male allowances ($ 11,057 for women versus $ 15,557 for men in 2009). Revenue from public and private pension based on women's own work is only 60% and 48% of male pension income.
Current policy solution
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009
In 2009, President Barack Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. This law extends the law of limitations on cases in which a worker finds that they are receiving discriminatory payments, allowing them to demand and receive remunerations more than six months after they receive payment. This is seen as a win for those struggling against the gender wage gap, because if a woman at the end of her career finds that she has made less money than a man doing the same job, she now has more than six months from the date of her last payment check to file claims and may receive rejected wages.
Popular cultural reactions
To help raise awareness about payment gaps, a pop-up store called "76 is Less Than 100" operated during April 2015 in the Garfield neighborhood in Pittsburgh. The non-profit store, which sells arts and crafts designed by women, charges the full price to men while women get a 24% discount to reflect the salary gap between men and women in Pennsylvania. The operator of the store plans to operate a similar shop in the fall of 2015 in New Orleans titled "66 is Less Than 100", to reflect the salary gap in Louisiana. The store made national headlines after Patricia Arquette referred to the salary gap at the 87th Academy Awards two months earlier.
Public character reactions
Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook, is a strong supporter for closing the gender salary gap. In his book, Lean In, he encourages professional women to "lean" into their careers, negotiate for higher salaries to reduce the pause of payments, and to find a supportive partner who will actively help raise the child- to help reduce mother's punishment. He is also the founder of LeanIn.Org, who has run a national social media campaign using hashtags #BanBossy and #LeanInTogether.
The Oscar-winning actress, Jennifer Lawrence, also brings international attention to the gender gap with an essay on the sidelines of paying Lena Dunham's attorney's salary. In his essay, he discussed the fact that he was paid less. from him American Hustle co-stars, made public by Sony's hacking scandal. He mostly blames himself for "failing as a negotiator" and is focused on being liked. This essay highlights that gender salary disparities exist for every industry and all of Hollywood.
However, this public reaction has been criticized for realizing white feminism because they do not take into account the intersexality and increased barriers facing colored women. Intersersional feminists often find that white feminists try to speak for all women when conveying their experience of gender salary disparities, whereas in fact their problems can not relate to colored women who face additional barriers to racism.
See also
- US labor law
- The same pay for women
- Gender-Based Price Discrimination
- Glass ceiling
- Inequality of revenue in the United States
- pregnancy discrimination in the United States
- Equal Payment Day
Legislation:
- Bennett Amendment
- The 1963 Equal Payment Act
- Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009
- Payet Liability Act
References
External links
- Why All Your Reasons to Gender Gap Pay Is Wrong - Alicia Adamczyk for Time.com (April 12, 2016)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments