Arguments used by Organizations to Discriminate Based on Gender
Students Name
Institutional Affiliations
Course
Professor’s Name
Date
Arguments used by Organizations to discriminate based on Gender
For a long time, women have consistently fought for gender equality at the workplace in our contemporary world. Gender discrimination is a phenomenon that has been primarily considered standard in the places of work. Many have found it a women’s concern because gender discrimination has mostly affected women (Lyness & Grotto, 2018). It is argued so because, in most cases, it has been confirmed that organizations have more men than women. For example, nearly 44.3% of the employees in the S&P 500 companies were women in 2017, but they were not well represented in the leadership and management (Lyness & Grotto, 2018). They held 36.4% of the first to middle-level management positions, 25.1% of senior-level positions, 19.9% of corporate board seats, and only 5.4% of the CEO positions (Lyness and Grotto, 2018). Stainback & Skaggs (2010) confirm that there exists sufficient proof that minority and female access to supervisory jobs tends to happen in organizations with more considerable minority and female representation in nonsupervisory roles. The concept of gender discrimination refers to a situation where an individual is subjected to a different and unfair kind of treatment when compared to others due to gender (Rangvid, 2019). In as much as gender discrimination at the workplace may have both the strengths and weaknesses, it appears that the weaknesses outweigh the advantages, which is why the issue should be resolved.
Justification of Gender Discrimination
Psychosocial processes
Verniers & Vala (2018) use the social dominance theory to justify gender discrimination in the workplace. According to this school of thought, justification of activities that sustain social inequalities is brought about by the declaration of public approval or the support legitimizing myths, gender, and the roles associated with gender (Verniers & Vala, 2018). These ideologies have additionally been proved by the system justification theory, which has studied the social stereotypes, meritocracy, political conservatism, among others (Verniers & Vala, 2018). According to the opinion of the system justification, it is documented that immigrants can easily take jobs away from the native societal members and consequently increase the rates of crime in the regions they occupy (Veniers & Vala, 2018). As a result, native members of society tend to respond to disliking immigrants. This, to a greater extent, exposes the association between prejudice and the immigrants (Verniers & Vala, 2018). In the same spirit, it is perceived that the same mediational procedure is responsible for gender discrimination, especially in women at the workplace (Verniers & Vala, 2018). This is because initially, most jobs in organizations, whether locally or globally, were held by men. It was irrespective of whether the job had a lower rank and salary or higher ranks and consequently, higher salaries.
Very few women could secure such jobs, and even when they acquired the posts, they were discriminated against and harassed at workplaces. Verniers & Vala have the feeling that the gender discrimination aspect of sexism is linked to the gender discrimination witnessed at various workplaces. They support this argument by saying that the maintenance of power inequality is considerably brought about by the traditional gender roles, which also happen to be at the center-stage of the whole concept. Fundamentally, gender roles have played a key role in discrimination against women in the workplace. This can be seen from the idea of sexist attitudes based on gender roles. Verniers and Vala say that the adoption of the sexism attitude leads to more opposition to women at the workplace. This sexism attitude, which gives a clear distinction of the roles of men and those for women in the family setting and at their profession, justifies the discrimination based on gender (Verniers & Vala, 2018). Thus, it will take more time for this kind of discrimination to be resolved entirely.
Motherhood Myths
Over the years, there has been an undisputed tradition that dictates the role of women and men at the family level. For instance, Verniers & Vala (2018) argue that the legends have held that marriage is the most fulfilling adult relationship that both men and women turn to when gender relations are challenged. It is believed that women are best endowed with parenting responsibilities and that they are more connected to their children. Importantly, it is considered that employed women on more than one occasion have neglected their parental duties to their children. As a result, family relationships worsen at the expense of the profession.
When it comes to paying gaps, researchers have shown that it depends on the flexibility of employees based on gender. For instance, there are those professions that may involve long working hours, such as lawyers and auditors. In such cases, men are likely to take more hours working as compared to their women counterparts who also consider childcare and household duties (Thakur, 2017). Additionally, scholars identified that men tend to take more of the last-minute shifts and rescheduled themselves to take about 83% of the overtime hours while women, on the other hand, took more of the unpaid time off via the Family Medical Leave Act, considered less of the last-minute overtime hours and shifts as well as avoiding weekend and holiday shifts (Reppond & Bullock, 2020). Another research indicates that women are willing to give up about 40% of their earnings to avoid irregular work programs (Vesely & Goodman, 2019). As a result, men gain more experience due to long working hours. This experience then plays a fundamental role in the promotion of more men than women and consequently attracting more salaries as compared to their women counterparts. This aspect thus justifies gender discrimination in the workplace.
Strengths of Arguments for Discrimination Based on Gender
Despite being harmful, discrimination against gender has proved beneficial to some extent. For instance, specific duties and responsibilities are considered more suitable done by women, while others are more appropriate for men (Windels, 2016). For example, data released by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revealed that some of the jobs best done by women include Preschool and Kindergarten teachers where female workers take 97.6%, dental hygienists at 97.1%, speech-language pathologists at 96%, dental assistants at 96%, childcare workers at 94%, secretaries and administrative assistants at 94% (Allen, 2019). Furthermore, the medical records and health information technicians at 93.6%, among others (Allen, 2019). All these professions, when done by women, are most likely to deliver the best outcomes possible.
Discrimination at workplaces based on gender has equally proved beneficial in works that require more muscles, and only men can be comfortable working at such places. An example includes construction sites. Building and construction is an industry dominated by men due to work involved (Paap, 2018). This is advantageous as it prevents women from taking part in heavy duties, which might be harmful and even cause health complications.
Since women are more attached to children and family-related duties, discrimination at the workplace by, for instance, releasing women from work earlier than men and assigning night shift duties to men works best for women. This is because they can find some time to respond to family issues, including childcare and other household duties (Harell et al., 2017). For example, when women are released earlier enough from their work stations, they can always have time to collect their children from school (Szastock et al., 2019). As a result, it helps to build and strengthen family relationships.
Weaknesses of the arguments for Discrimination Based on Gender
According to Heilman & Caleo (2018), the unequal treatment of women at the workplace has a high chance of increasing stress among the victims. Moreover, the increased pressure causes mental health problems among the victims, which dramatically affects employee workability since they will not be able to perform effectively (SteelFisher et al., 2019). The stress also influences employees to absent themselves from work frequently. The overall outcome of this is the unimpressive results on the organizational performance.
When women are forced to take job leaves coupled with the inability to work at similar shifts like those for men, it leads to decreased job satisfaction. This confirms a preferential treatment for men, and as such, men are in a position to attract frequent promotions, which also improves the earning levels (Bader et al., 2018). On the other hand, women are disadvantaged because they cannot effectively learn and acquire new skills and experience that come with long hours of job operation (Bader et al., 2018). Because of this limitation, women are constrained when it comes to the attraction of high-level jobs or ranks within an organization.
With the increased stress level, which improves the health complications, and the dissatisfaction of female employees as a result of discrimination, there are high turnover rates in an organization. This is because the affected employees seek other organizations that will provide better environments for them. In their new organizations, they try to satisfy their needs, which were denied by their previous employers. This has undistinguished results for most organizations since they spend more funds on recruitment, selection, and training of new employees (Dunham, 2017). Sadly, women employees often encounter sexual harassment, which makes the work environment unbearable and hostile. There are uncountable reported cases of sexual harassment for women (Marchiondo, Ran & Cortina, 2018). Leave alone those that go unreported. It is argued that most women are sexually mistreated by male managers when they seek job promotions and salary increments (Carliner et al., 2017). Unbelievably, most women are threatened for dismissal if they do not give in to their managers ‘sexual demands and desires (Carliner et al., 2017). For this reason, it is not surprising to encounter women leaving lucrative positions due to limited or complete lack of opportunities for growth, obstinate work hours, and insufficient or lack of female confidants and peers.
Importantly, gender discrimination in the workplace has a tremendous effect on the reputation of the business. This is because the spread of allegations of harassment and discrimination of employees to the general public will destroy not only the brand image but also to a more significant extent, contribute to decreased stock prices (Meyer, Tegtmeier & Pakura, 2017). When the stock prices fall, it exposes the company to the threat of takeover (Meyer, Tegtmeier & Pakura, 2017). Additionally, the shareholders will not be pleased with the operations of the organization because their primary interest is to maximize their wealth, which is not possible when the stock prices decline (Lawrence & Weber, 2014). Consequently, the organization losses its value. Also, the falling stock prices will send a negative perception to the general public, who shall respond by hesitating to purchase the company goods (Lawrence & Weber, 2014). This will also go a long way toward reducing the company’s investments since the executive management is forced to be more conservative about expansion and related concerns (Lawrence &Weber, 2014). The aspect hurts the business organization even more as they find it hard to recruit other workers as a result of the destroyed image, brand, and reputation.
There is a high tendency for increased workplace conflicts as a result of employment discrimination based on gender. This is because the team focus risks shifting from the official duties and responsibilities of the employees to a more kind of drama in the office (Park et al., 2017). More time is then spent on non-productive issues rather than essential business concerns such as productivity, employee enhancement through additional training, among others. Common examples of conflicts experienced at the workplace today due to gender discrimination include the interdependency-based conflicts and work style differences where the different genders want to perform in their way (Sheppard & Aquino, 2017). This leads to disunity in the organization among different genders. Therefore, these kinds of disputes have the potential of dividing the employees into antagonistic groups with one-part siding with the discriminated employee, whereas the other group consoles with the presumed discriminator. The result of this is the unremarkable business operations that negatively influence organizational performance. When this happens, the organization risks failing and can quickly be forced out of the market or liquidated since it can no longer be a going concern.
As a result of the discrimination at the workplace and the intensified conflicts, organizational morale is mostly hit. In consequence, the organization is split into a significant dimension. For example, in such cases, it is common to find workers taking tea at different time intervals to evade the difference of opinions among workers. This leads to dissatisfaction, low-level productivity, and frequent absenteeism among employees, especially those discriminated against (Hideg & Ferris, 2016). Additionally, it tears apart the relationship between employees and employers, peers, company management, just to mention but a few. Fundamentally, these effects are felt by the consumers of the company’s goods and services, hence destroying the corporate culture.
Since happy and comfortable employees are usually the best job performers in all the aspects of organizational activities, it becomes tight, if not possible, for an organization that has evidence of employment discrimination based on gender to perform effectively. In most cases, women feel the effects of discrimination, sexual harassment, among others, and this makes them less productive (Veniers & Vala, 2018). Accordingly, the overall company organizational output is hurt. In such cases, the organization may find itself operating at consecutive losses from period to period hence lower profitability. Necessarily, it may be justifiable for the organization to close down.
It is common for organizations that have been accused of employment discrimination on the grounds of gender to face numerous lawsuits. Such organizations usually have more court cases because employees seek justice. For example, Nike Company in the United States of America has a history of court cases where its former female employees filed a lawsuit over the allegations of discriminating against women on the grounds of pay, promotions, unfavorable conditions for employment, among others (Unsal & Hassan, 2018). The lawsuit read that at Nike Company, the pecking order was an unscalable pyramid for women in such a way that the more superior the job title, the fewer number of women (Alexia, 2018). The company admitted that it had failed to hire and promote women (Alexia, 2018). Other organizations that have faced similar lawsuits include Walmart, where female employees filed a case in 2001 against the company in US federal court for women discrimination in salary, bonuses, and training (Jordyn, 2017). Similarly, a gender discrimination lawsuit was filed against Microsoft company in 2015 at the USA courts. In 2018, the court of appeal agreed to reconsider the class-action status for 8,600 current and former employees (Peterson, 2018).
As a consequence, such legal actions may be dangerous to the company because they are likely to attract expensive charges should the organization be proved guilty of employee discrimination. This is because it will be ordered to compensate the victims. The cost of expiation may be burdensome for an organization to bear, especially when a large number of employees are affected. Therefore, the organization will be put at the risk of severe losses which may drive the company to shut down or otherwise liquidated, taken over or merged with others to operate effectively.
Conclusion
In as much as gender discrimination at the workplace may have both the strengths and weaknesses, it is unchallenged that the weaknesses outweigh the advantages. As a result, the concept of gender discrimination should be prudently resolved if the general society has to benefit. This script analyzed the arguments for the justification of gender discrimination, which included the psychosocial process. This majorly involved the sexism attitude and related aspects. Also, motherhood myths were discussed as a justification that required the parental roles of women at the family level. Importantly, the script analyzed the strengths of the arguments, which included a better performance in specific fields as described by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Additionally, the report discussed the weakness of the evidence for discrimination at the workplace based on gender. Some of the discussed weaknesses include the increase of stress among the victims, increased job dissatisfaction, increased turnover rates, destroyed business reputation, costly legal cases, among others. Since the weaknesses have the edge over the robustness, this report finds it fundamental that the issue of gender discrimination at the workplace is sorted out to realize the potential in women and hence benefiting the general society.
References
Alexia (2018). Why the gender discrimination lawsuit against Nike is so significant.
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/15/17683484/nike-women-gender-pay-discrimination-lawsuit
Allen, S. (2019). An Examination of the Role of Grit and Related Indicators for Breaking through the Stained Glass Ceiling for Women Leaders in the Presbyterian Church (USA), Inc. (Doctoral dissertation, Spalding University).
Bader, B., Stoermer, S., Bader, A. K., & Schuster, T. (2018). Institutional discrimination of women and workplace harassment of female expatriates. Journal of Global Mobility.
Carliner, H., Sarvet, A. L., Gordon, A. R., & Hasin, D. S. (2017). Gender discrimination, educational attainment, and illicit drug use among US women. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 52(3), 279-289.
Dunham, C. R. (2017). Third generation discrimination: The ripple effects of gender bias in the workplace. Akron L. Rev., 51, 55.
Harell, A., Soroka, S., Iyengar, S., & Lapointe, V. (2017). Attitudes Towards Work, Motherhood, and Parental Leave in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Mothers and Others. The Role of Parenthood in Politics, 247-267.
Heilman, M. E., & Caleo, S. (2018). Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 725-744.
Hideg, I., & Ferris, D. L. (2016). The compassionate sexist? How benevolent sexism promotes and undermines gender equality in the workplace—Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(5), 706.
Jordyn (2017). Walmart lawsuit (re gender discrimination in the USA)
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/walmart-lawsuit-re-gender-discrimination-in-usa
Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2014). Business and Society: Stakeholders, ethics, public policy. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
Lyness, K. S., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and Leadership in the United States: Are We Closing the Gender Gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 227-265.
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104739
Marchiondo, L. A., Ran, S., & Cortina, L. M. (2018). Modern discrimination.
Meyer, V., Tegtmeier, S., & Pakura, S. (2017). Revisited: how gender role stereotypes affect the image of entrepreneurs among young adults. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship.
Paap, K. (2018). Working construction: Why white working-class men put themselves—and the labor movement—in harm’s way. Cornell University Press.
Park, S. G., Kang, H. J., Lee, H. R., & Kim, S. J. (2017). The effects of LMX on gender discrimination and subjective career success. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 55(1), 127-148.
Peterson (2018). Female employees to sue Microsoft over alleged gender discrimination & sexual harassment: USA.
Rangvid, B. S. (2019). Gender Discrimination in Exam Grading? Double Evidence from a Natural Experiment and a Field Experiment. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 19(2).
Reppond, H. A., & Bullock, H. E. (2020). Reclaiming “good motherhood”: US mothers’ critical resistance in family homeless shelters. Feminism & Psychology, 30(1), 100-120.
Sheppard, L. D., & Aquino, K. (2017). Sisters at arms: A theory of female same-sex conflict and its problematization in organizations. Journal of Management, 43(3), 691-715.
Stainback, K., Tomaskovic-Devey, D., & Skaggs, S. (2010). Organizational approaches to inequality: Inertia, relative power, and environments. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 225-247.
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120014
SteelFisher, G. K., Findling, M. G., Bleich, S. N., Casey, L. S., Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., … & Miller, C. (2019). Gender discrimination in the United States: Experiences of women. Health services research, 54, 1442-1453.
Szastok, M., Kossowska, M., & Pyrkosz-Pacyna, J. (2019). Women Can’t Have It All: Benevolent Sexism Predicts Attitudes Toward Working (vs. Stay-at-Home) Mothers. Social Psychological Bulletin, 14(1), 1-17.
Thakur, P. (2017). Myths Mystifying Female Identity in India: Sashi Deshpande’s Feministic Concern. IJETSR ISSN, 2397-3386.
Unsal, O., & Hassan, M. K. (2018). Employee lawsuits and capital structure. Review of Managerial Science, 1-42.
Verniers, C., & Vala, J. (2018). Justifying gender discrimination in the workplace: The mediating role of motherhood myths. PloS one, 13(1).
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=printable&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190657
Vesely, C. K., Letiecq, B. L., & Goodman, R. D. (2019). Parenting Across Two Worlds: Low-Income Latina Immigrants’ Adaptation to Motherhood in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 40(6), 711-738.
Windels, K. (2016). Stereotypical or just typical: how do US practitioners view the role and function of gender stereotypes in advertisements? International Journal of Advertising, 35(5), 864-887.