Introduction
The gender pay gap has been an ongoing problem in the US for a long time. Women still make less money for doing the same job as men, despite advances in gender equality. There has been a lot of discussion about the gap, and various solutions have been proposed to deal with the problem. The gender pay gap in the US is examined in this article, along with its causes and potential remedies. While some contend that the discrepancy results from women’s preferences, others assert that discrimination is to blame, as is mainly portrayed in this essay.
Factors Leading to the Gender Pay Gap
Women Work in Lower Paying Industries
The fact that women are more likely than males to work in lower-paying industries is one of the significant contributors to the gender pay gap. Women are more prevalent in historically female-dominated fields, including childcare, retail, and hospitality, even though these fields often pay less than those in which males predominate. This means that even if women have the same education and experience as males, they will still likely be paid less, which places them at a severe financial disadvantage (Gharehgozli and Atal 208).
To demonstrate this, a 2018 report from the US Department of Labor found that men working in traditionally male-dominated industries like construction and extraction earned an average of $23.91 per hour while women in traditionally female-dominated industries like childcare, food preparation, and personal care services earned an average of $13.88 per hour (Ganguli et al. 1350). This shows how the pay gap is influenced by the industries where women are more likely to work, which is a difference of about $10 per hour.
Moreover, women earn less than men in the same historically female-dominated fields, such as education and health care. This is particularly true in education, where women made 82% of what men did in comparable positions (England et al. 6990). This shows that women are more likely to get paid less than their male colleagues even when they have the same credentials and experience.
Additionally, a study indicated that even when women enter historically male-dominated businesses, they frequently encounter a “glass ceiling” regarding upward mobility and compensation (Hoffmann et al. 55). This finding was reported in the American Journal of Sociology. This implies that women are still paid less than males even when they succeed in breaking into industries that men dominate.
Men Dominated Leadership
Women are less likely to hold positions of leadership, which often have higher earnings. According to (Cortés and Pan 356), only 37 out of the 500 Fortune 500 businesses have a female CEO, making up just 4.6% of the CEO population. Contrast this to men, who comprise 95.4% of CEOs according to the same survey. Furthermore, only 28.1% of executive roles in Fortune 500 businesses are held by women, according to the same survey (Cortés and Pan 362). Given that leadership jobs typically carry higher remuneration, the gender gap in leadership positions may impact the female pay gap.
Furthermore, men predominate in most leadership positions relative to women due to traditional and socially constructed gender roles. Previously, women were allocated to care for the home while men were expected to earn a living. This thinking is still prevalent in many locations and is challenging to leave (Rotman and Mandel 600). For example, men are more likely to be viewed as natural leaders and hold positions of power in various settings, including business, politics, and the military. This may result in fewer women holding leadership positions and, thus, lower incomes than men.
In addition, a lack of gender diversity in recruiting decisions may result from a lack of female presence in the business sector. Only 14% of executive-level roles are held by women, according to Manduca (625). Men may be promoted more frequently, while women may find it harder to get their opinions acknowledged. This may make it difficult for women to bargain for higher pay or better benefits, resulting in increased pay disparities.
Additionally, a lack of diversity may prevent women from accessing mentorship opportunities. Rotman and Mandel (560) claim that women need more mentors and sponsors to advance in their jobs. Without these mentors, women are less likely to climb the corporate ladder and assume leadership roles. This may further reduce their earning potential and widen the gender pay gap.
There are many reasons why there aren’t enough women in leadership roles. First is the “glass ceiling” effect, in which women are frequently passed over for leadership positions and promotions. This results from implicit and explicit workplace bias, which can result in discrimination against women. The “motherhood penalty,” a phenomenon where women are penalized for taking time off to care for their children, is the second. This may result in women being passed over for leadership roles or promotions (Gharehgozli and Atal 213).
The effects of gender disparity in the workplace are far-reaching on the economy and society. Women in leadership positions can benefit a company and its workers economically, socially, and culturally. For instance, research has shown that businesses with greater gender diversity in leadership positions perform better financially than those without (Cortés and Pan 378). Women in leadership roles can also serve as positive role models for young girls and women, which can aid in eradicating gender stereotypes and advancing workplace gender equality.
Pay Discrimination
Pay discrimination, such as receiving lower pay for the same jobs as males, is more likely to affect women. One of the most frequent causes of gender pay discrepancy in the United States is pay discrimination. The disparity in salary between men and women for equivalent jobs is known as the gender pay gap. The gender pay gap in the United States is currently 80.5 cents on the dollar, meaning that women get paid 20.5 cents less than males for the same profession (Gharehgozli and Atal 210). This disparity has persisted and has only slightly decreased since the Equal Pay Act of 1963 was passed.
The gender pay gap is a problem that affects both women and the economy economically. Women account for about half of the labor force in the country and significantly increase family incomes. African-American and Hispanic women make considerably less than white women, making them particularly impacted. The gender wage gap significantly impacts women’s and their families lives, especially given the state of the economy today.
Regardless of their skills or experience, women are frequently paid less than males for the same position. Women are more likely to be given entry-level jobs with lower pay and fewer possibilities for growth. Additionally, women are more likely to experience workplace discrimination, such as being passed over for promotions and receiving less money for doing the same job. Sexual harassment is also more common among women, which can reduce career possibilities and income.
In the United States, the gender wage gap has a lengthy history founded on historic and modern elements of gender inequality. Women were frequently denied entry into particular professions, denied access to the same educational possibilities as males, and paid less for the same work as men. In many ways, these historical causes of inequality still exist today, but the modern causes of the gender pay gap are far more pernicious. Women are more likely to be given lower-paying positions, encounter workplace discrimination, and suffer a salary penalty due to becoming mothers.
Systemic and Institutional Sexism
The gender wage gap is more likely to affect women because of institutional and systemic sexism. The US has a long-standing and widespread issue with the gender wage gap. It is estimated that women in the United States who work full-time, year-round, earn 80 cents for every dollar earned by men, a 20 percent pay discrepancy (Hoffmann et al. 55). For women who are not white, this difference is significantly more significant. For every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men, Latinas and African American women receive only 61 cents and 53 cents, respectively Litman et al. (9). This disparity is inappropriate and has been linked to institutional and systemic misogyny.
The institutionalized and systematic discrimination against women is referred to as systemic sexism. Organizations, institutions, and influential individuals who favor men perpetuate this inequality, frequently without their knowledge or consent. Systemic sexism manifests as a broad, ingrained societal issue that leads to women earning less money across various industries and job sectors. For example, women in the same roles as men tend to receive lower pay, reflecting a deeply rooted gender bias in how wages are set. According to Litman et al. (15), women earn 82 cents for every dollar paid to men, even after accounting for factors like job type, education, and experience. This disparity suggests that societal norms and biases shape wage structures, perpetuating gender inequality.
Institutional sexism, on the other hand, refers to discriminatory practices that are embedded within organizations and institutions, often through policies or regulations. This form of sexism is institutionalized, meaning it is formally or informally integrated into the systems and practices of organizations, resulting in unfair pay differences between men and women. For example, certain policies or structural barriers within companies or governmental bodies might contribute to women receiving less compensation than men for the same work. According to Litman et al. (9), institutional sexism is often evident in organizational practices that systematically disadvantage women in terms of salary and opportunities for advancement. When job type, education, experience, and other criteria are considered, women are still paid 82 cents for every $1 earned by men, according to (Litman et al. 4). This shows that salary discrimination against women is a problem among employers.
Policies to End the Gender Pay Gap
Equal Opportunities
The gender pay gap in the United States can be closed by upholding equal opportunity laws. Equal opportunity laws guard against discrimination based on gender, race, religion, national origin, handicap, age, and other legally protected traits. These laws guarantee everyone is treated equally and relatively at work (Kim 279). By outlawing wage discrimination, existing equal opportunity laws can contribute to closing the gender pay gap. When workers are paid differentially depending on their gender, race, or other protected characteristics, this is wage discrimination. Employers would be barred from participating in salary discrimination by enforcing current equal opportunity laws to reduce the gender pay gap.
Maintaining the status quo in terms of equal opportunity laws can also help to reduce the gender pay gap by providing more robust protection for working mothers and expectant mothers. Unfortunately, prejudice against expecting and new parents frequently occurs at work, leading to lower pay and fewer career chances (Kim 278). Employers would be forbidden from discriminating against expectant mothers and mothers by following current equal opportunity laws, which would aid in closing the gender wage gap.
Family-Friendly Policies
Family-friendly workplace policies foster an atmosphere where men and women can successfully juggle their work and family commitments. By giving men and women the same opportunity to participate in fulfilling work and family activities, these policies can narrow gender gap inequities in the US. For instance, parents may find working and caring for their family simpler when they have flexible work schedules, paid parental leave, and subsidized childcare (Kim 280). Paid family leave can also ensure that men and women can take the same time off when they become parents, which can contribute to bridging the gender gap.
Finally, giving staff members access to professional growth opportunities will ensure that men and women have equal opportunities to succeed in their careers, which can also help eliminate inequities. Employers can establish a work environment that promotes gender parity by enacting these rules.
Comparable Worth
A program known as “comparable worth” aims to close the gender pay gap in the United States by raising wages for positions that women predominately hold. By adopting this strategy, women’s salaries would be increased to parity with those of males who perform comparable work. Doing this would ensure that all male or female employees receive the same pay for the same work (Card et al. 167).
The main advantage of this program is that it will boost female earnings and reduce the wage gap between men and women. As women are frequently paid less than men for performing the same job, it would also aid in closing the gender pay gap in many industries (Kim 280). As they would be treated equally to their male colleagues, it would also increase the likelihood that women would be hired and promoted.
Before implementing this policy, employers would need to assess the jobs that both men and women hold and compare them to see if there is a salary gap. If so, companies would have to change their pay scales to reflect this and raise the pay for female workers. Employers must not prejudice female candidates or workers when choosing who to hire and promote. An essential policy that could aid in reducing gender differences in the US is comparable worth (Kim 280). This proposal would aid in decreasing the gender pay gap and increasing the salaries of female employees by raising compensation in occupations with a preponderance of female employees.
Unionization
Due to their remarkable ability to bargain collectively, unionized workers earn ten to thirty percent more than non-unionized workers. This enables individuals to bargain with their employers for better pay, benefits, and working conditions. Enabling women to negotiate for the same pay and benefits as their male counterparts rather than being constrained to the wages and benefits determined by their employers can reduce gender gap inequities in the United States (Card et al. 145). The gender pay gap will be reduced by ensuring that all workers receive the same pay, regardless of gender.
Additionally, unionized workers enjoy superior benefits, such as health insurance, paid sick leave, and retirement plans, than non-union employees. Women especially need these advantages because they are more likely to take time off for childcare or other family obligations (Kim 281). Better benefits for unionized workers would ensure that women are not disadvantaged when caring for their families. Finally, unionized workers frequently have better access to educational and training opportunities than non-union workers (Card et al. 150). This can ensure that women have the same access to job progression chances as their male counterparts. Women can more readily climb the corporate ladder by having equal access to these changes, which will aid in reducing the gender wage gap in the US.
Naysayer
A critic of this essay would assert that women’s decisions to enter lower-paying professions rather than discrimination are to blame for the gender pay gap. They can contend that the gender pay gap results from women’s preferences for careers in more historically female-dominated industries like healthcare and education, which are frequently lower-paying than those traditionally dominated by males. Additionally, they can contend that women’s lack of ambition is the real cause of the absence of female leadership roles rather than gender discrimination. They might think there are fewer female leadership positions because women lack the motivation to rise to the top. Finally, they can contend that measures like equal opportunity, family-friendly laws, and unionization are unnecessary because women’s decisions, not discrimination, are what lead to the gender pay difference.
Conclusion
In conclusion, several institutional and systemic manifestations of gender discrimination contribute to the gender pay gap. There is a pay gap because women are more likely to work in low-paying fields and are less likely to assume leadership roles. In addition, women are more likely than males to face workplace discrimination, the “motherhood penalty,” and lower pay for doing the same job, all of which add to the gender pay gap. There are several ways to deal with this problem, including enforcing equal opportunity legislation, establishing family-friendly policies, and promoting unionization. These actions can help close the gender pay gap and make the workplace more egalitarian for both men and women.
Works Cited
Card, David, et al. “Unions and Wage Inequality: The Roles of Gender, Skill and Public Sector Employment.” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D’économique, vol. 53, no. 1, 2020, pp. 140–173. Web.
Cortés, Patricia, and Jessica Pan. “When Time Binds: Substitutes for Household Production, Returns to Working Long Hours, and the Skilled Gender Wage Gap.” Journal of Labor Economics, vol. 37, no. 2, 2019, pp. 351–398. Web.
England, Paula, et al. “Progress toward Gender Equality in the United States Has Slowed or Stalled.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117, no. 13, 2020, pp. 6990–6997. Web.
Ganguli, Ishani, et al. “Physician Work Hours and the Gender Pay Gap — Evidence from Primary Care.” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 383, no. 14, 2020, pp. 1349–1357. Web.
Gharehgozli, Orkideh, and Vidya Atal. “Revisiting the Gender Wage Gap in the United States.” Economic Analysis and Policy, vol. 66, 2020, pp. 207–216. Web.
Hoffmann, Florian, et al. “Growing Income Inequality in the United States and Other Advanced Economies.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 34, no. 4, 2020, pp. 52–78. Web.
Kim, Marlene. “Policies to End the Gender Wage Gap in the United States.” Review of Radical Political Economics, vol. 45, no. 3, 2013, pp. 278–283. Web.
Litman, Leib, et al. “The Persistence of Pay Inequality: The Gender Pay Gap in an Anonymous Online Labor Market.” 2019, pp. 1–19. Web.
Manduca, Robert A. “The Contribution of National Income Inequality to Regional Economic Divergence.” Social Forces, vol. 98, no. 2, 2019, pp. 622–648. Web.
Rotman, Assaf, and Hadas Mandel. “Gender-Specific Wage Structure and the Gender Wage Gap in the U.S. Labor Market.” Social Indicators Research, vol. 165, no. 2, 2022, pp. 585–606. Web.