Gender Inequality in Employment


For decennaries, the issue of gender inequality has been in a manner accessible to or observable by the public reverberating through the formal association of people with similar interests. To date, one of the most agitating issues is the question raised for consideration or solution on gender inequality in employment. Recently, the issue of gender inequality has posited a state of difficulty and needs to be resolved.

However, to analyze the origin of the problem of gender inequality in employment, thorough investigation on this situation and the factors regarding the classification of human society that provides the generative force on issues of the origin of women having complications in taking back equal financial assistance in time of need, earnings, and the possibility of future success in employment opportunity needs to be understood. Though historically there has been a predominant influence on the society by the male counterpart, moreover, there is a reflective effect on the society with the personages who sets the plan pursued by a government or business being dominated by male. Consequently, it is imperative to scrutinize the entire distinct feature or element of this problem. Nevertheless, dealing with the problem of gender inequality in employment, the full awareness that this issue is entrenched in what determines prospective workers and the person or firm that employs workers must be understood.

Definition of gender inequality

Gender inequality denotes the observable or concealed inequality connecting human being credited to properties that distinguish organisms because of their roles.

Sexual characteristics are organized concerning society in the course of the social mutual or reciprocal act and nature through a threadlike strand of DNA in the cell nucleus that carries the genes in linear orders.

Income disparities linked to job stratification

Wage inequitable treatment which is centered on prejudice is the difference between conflicting facts of earnings involving more than one number of entities ascribable to Influences unfairly in the direction of or in opposition to an explicitly stated attribute on every other distinguishing quality of the two groups being tantamount. As a result of gender inequality, wage favoritism is present between men and women, thereby, privileging the male proportion to women who meets the proper standards and requirements and training for an office, position, or task (Durbin & Fleetwood, 2010).

The Inequality or difference in the financial gain between genders aroused or originated from a sustained phenomenon that influences the essential and distinguishing attribute of an occupation and wages linked with employments.

Gender Stereotyping

Pays related to employment will cause the existence of income disparity in the Contact established between applicants and prospective employees into precise accurate positions using personal prerequisites or stereotypical standards regarded as typical.

The appointment of an individual irrespective of gender inequality into particular classes of employment can be backed by the theories relative to the abilities and skills of any individual, especially those acquired through investment in education and training that enhances potential income-earning or the quality that permits or simplifies achievement or accomplishment related to genetic dissimilarity in both sexes. With the terms of the relation reversed, the appointment of both sexes into differing classes of employment is indicated to be induced by the position of a social hierarchy who wish to maintain their job in an organization through the appointment of individuals who are inferior in status to low paying positions (Huntington, Fronk & Chadwick, 2001).

Relationship of Human capital theories in gender employment inequalities

Human capital theories are believed to be the foundation of the biased attitude toward one gender relative to the conspicuous disparity or difference in wages; however, these hypotheses are no more the principal reason as both sexes indefinite but not specified professions incline to have comparable levels of degree in education. The current existence of women within a given line of work contributes to reduced remunerations, to a greater degree or extent once such distinguishing quality of jobs and workers are kept within certain bounds (Durbin & Fleetwood, 2010).

Population possibility is believed to be a component of this unfair treatment. Men have the belief that women joining given occupations suggest that improper, insufficiently qualified, incapable, or inefficient workers are being employed or worse still that the occupation is getting deskilled. Female-dominated occupations are always avoided by men, and they wish that women will also do the same to occupations denominated by men, but apparently, this is not the case (Brewster & Rindfuss, 2000).

Occupational isolation is also associated with the act of having and controlling property in part to the gendered financial gain. Both perpendicular and parallel act of segregating is also called occupational gender segregations which are enclosed in two factors. If we take for example horizontal sequestration, the occupational sex comes in whereby control and or ownership of the diverse physical and psychological quality of being capable both physically and intellectually are to be possessed by both men and women. Genders are always different in some particular way in the types of jobs they are suitable for, however; this is exemplified by the different potentialities. The act or process of arranging persons into classes or social strata in accordant with supremacy, authority, wages, and high standing achieved through successes are part of the perpendicular segregation contributing to segregation of women from certain professions.

Since the 1980”s occupations have been segregated basses on the number of feminists or masculinize affiliated with each occupation. Service sphere jobs are taken up at a higher rate by women as opposed to men.

Nonetheless, as soon as the issues of the accumulation of knowledge or skill that results from direct participation in a job and employment have been understood and described, an average percentage of the gender wage gap will continue in the same state incomprehensible.

Intrinsically, the deliberation of professional sequestration and the theories on the abilities and skills of any individual, especially those acquired through investment in education and training, which enhance potential income-earning is insufficient to comprehend the continual subsistence of gender inequality in employment.

The consequence of the upper limit based on attitudinal or organizational bias in the workforce that prevents minorities and women from advancing to leadership positions is also believed to be a positive motivational influence on gender income inequality. This result implies as a possibility that gender presents substantial difficulties about the top of employment pecking order which turns out to be worse as the employee’s profession advances.

The inequality consequences of the attitudinal or organizational bias in the workforce that prevents women from advancing to leadership positions are predominant within dynamic or high-income professions, with a smaller number of women attaining such jobs. Nevertheless, this result points out the gender discrepancy in the womenfolk about holding high-level positions and high income in their profession. Consequently, with this, there is limited opportunity for women to rise in their occupational choice (Guth, 2010).

Gender statistical inequity

Along with distinct or separate races, the gender remuneration gap becomes different in some particular way with its width. Researchers found that the greatest gap between genders is found among whites whereby women earn 78% of what men earn. In some cases, women earn more than men. The International Trade Union Confederation surveyed gender inequality and found out that in some countries, female workers earn 40% more than male workers (Guth, 2010).

Professional education and careers

In the mid-1960s, the gender gap appeared to narrow considerably, this was evidenced by the number of first-year female students in professional programs being about 5%. Five years later, the figure rose to 45% both in Law and Medicine whereas in dentistry and business school the figure was 30%. This clearly shows how aggressive women were in competing with the higher remunerated occupations.

Considering the doubtfulness’s on the subject of pregnancy, women with the will and intention of carrying out professional careers calling for long-term, the high-priced commitment had to pay off the penalizations before the introduction of the exceedingly effectual birth control pill.

Decisions about education and professional possibility due to a favorable combination of conditions allowed women to more easily control their procreative decision. In most senior positions in private sectors, the boards are always exceedingly underrepresented by women (Marlow, 2006).

Nevertheless, most marriages have been delayed by both women and men due to the availability of reliable birth control systems. This happened so due to the urge and desire to pursue careers. The introduction of the pill furthermore influenced women’s careers, professional degrees and prolonged the age of getting married (Marlow, 2006)

Reference List

Brewster, K. L. & Rindfuss, R. R. (2000). Fertility and Women’s Employment in Industrialized Nations, Annual Review of Sociology. Web.

Durbin, S. & Fleetwood, S. (2010) “Gender inequality in employment: Editors’ introduction”, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, Vol. 29 Iss: 3, pp.221 – 238.

Guth, J. (2010) “Jordans Employment Law Precedents”, International Journal of Law and Management, Vol. 52 Iss: 3, pp.245 – 246.

Huntington, R. L., Fronk, C. & Chadwick, B. A. (2001). Family Roles of Contemporary Palestinian Women. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 32(1), 1-19. Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Marlow, S. (2006) “Enterprising futures or dead-end jobs? Women, self employment and social exclusion”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 27 Iss: 6, pp.588 – 600.