gender reimbursement gap
A gender reimbursement gap exists for healthcare workers, and many studies have qualified the difference between male and female workers. Desai et al. (2016) analyzed over three million of the Medicare reimbursement claims for 2012 and compared the totals against a worker’s productivity in the United States. A significant differential was found at a 95% confidence interval with huge figures US$ 18 677.23 existed between 11 of the specialists with only two showing an insignificant difference, but a difference all the same. Despite their years of experience or productivity, female healthcare workers are still reimbursed less than their male counterparts. It reflected a culture of equal work but unequal pay. However, the study did not use objective non-survey data to provide a more accurate understanding of the gender gap in reimbursement for healthcare providers.
Gender pay disparities do not only exist in the field of medicine but also across different organizations. A comprehensive study by Smith-Doer et al. (2019) used 16 million records from 2.8 million over 14 years to investigate organizational variations in the gender pay gap. Results showed that markets that were presumed to ensure a ‘merit-based’ competition for incomes, in reality, depict gender subjective outcomes. The data compared male and female federal workers in similar occupations and workplaces. Organizations were categorized into two, traditionally masculine such as physical sciences and engineering and non-gendered to include biological and interdisciplinary sciences (Smith-Doer et al., 2019). Human capital variances majorly influenced the pay gap in non-gendered agencies.
In contrast, in the male-dominated fields, men received higher pay, a concept referred to as within-job discrimination. The pay gap in gender-neutral agencies was influenced by individual characterization in that race, and educational backgrounds were used to reinforce gender hierarchies (Smith-Doer et al., 2019). The organizational variations explained by what means pay practices matter in particular organizational contexts. Nevertheless, the focus of the study on the corporate level meant overlooking the individual level process.
In Information and technology (ICT), the gender wage gap is exacerbated by the glass ceiling effect, which refers to barriers that deter advancement in a profession, especially among minority groups. Vertical segregation and discrimination in the pay gap are evident in a study carried by Segovia‐Pérez et al. (2020) with patterns that differed between technicians and specialists, women being inferior. The empirical analysis of data from the Spanish Earning Structure Survey for 2014 with a sample of 6 176 ICT workers established that discrimination against technicians was higher than against specialists (Segovia‐Pérez et al., 2020). The glass ceiling in ICT was on a decline in ICT aided by its globalization. Moreover, the sample used in the study comprised a homogenous group in terms of qualifications and education.
A Fundamental global rethinking of women’s role in society and the promotion of gender equality to achieve sustainable development has since before the American Revolution with minimal success as today’s trends attest. Countries like the United Kingdom (UK) still reported a gender pay gap of 8.9% of full-time workers in 2019 despite the Equality Act 2010 (Frank 2020). The research modeled a ‘professional banding’ system introduced in some UK universities hoping to eliminate gender-based discrimination. Using a sample of 117 professors from all ages and schools found that the expensive indirect approach of ‘professor banding’ was not successful because of the external market, briefer female occupancy in the position of professor, and ‘sticky floors’ for women (Frank, 2020). ‘Sticky floors’ is a metaphor that refers to conditions where women deter themselves from advancement. A direct method was successful at the University of Sussex that basically bridged the gap by paying all women an extra 4000 euro pounds and solved the challenge once and for all (Frank, 2020).