THE ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSES OF THE GENDER PAY GAP (Term Paper Sample)

THE ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSES OF THE GENDER PAY GAP Name Course Tutor Nameof University The City and State Date Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u 1.Background PAGEREF _Toc200470812 \h 3 2.Theoretical Framework PAGEREF _Toc200470813 \h 4 2.1.Human Capital Theory PAGEREF _Toc200470814 \h 4 2.2.The gender role theory PAGEREF _Toc200470815 \h 4 2.3.Occupational Segregation PAGEREF _Toc200470816 \h 5 2.4.Undervaluation theoretical model PAGEREF _Toc200470817 \h 5 2.5.The Gender Paradox Theory PAGEREF _Toc200470818 \h 6 3.Analysis of the Legislative and Policy Framework on GPG in the United Kingdom PAGEREF _Toc200470819 \h 7 4.The Gender Pay Gap UK Results and Explanations PAGEREF _Toc200470820 \h 8 5.Evidence from the United States of America PAGEREF _Toc200470821 \h 9 6.Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc200470822 \h 10 References PAGEREF _Toc200470823 \h 12 Background The gender-pay gap (GPG) or gender wage gap is defined as the average difference between the remuneration of women and men in the workforce. Different formulas have been developed to calculate the GPG. The GPG emanates from equality and feminist approaches and generally argues that women are paid less on average than men due to factors like discrimination against women in the workplace and job market. Concerning GPG, there are elements like adjusted and non-adjusted pay gaps. These concepts usually consider accounts like the different working hours, the level of education of the chosen occupation, and job experience, among other things (Vaccaro et al. 2022). The GPG is one issue that has been debated in the media, academia, and policy-making. The reasons that are always linked to the GPG include social, economic, legal, and factors beyond the famous “equal pay for equal work”. Some of the social and legal factors have been linked to workplace discrimination, which favours men in the workplace in promotions, higher pay, and favourable treatment. There have been arguments about the motherhood penalty against fatherhood bonuses, gender norms, and parental leave. The argument surrounding GPG concentrates on causes and consequences that extrapolate beyond the grievances of the individual to deal with economic output, fewer opportunities in business, reduced learning opportunities, and lower pension payments for women (Blecker 2002). On the other hand, there has been another explanation that GPG is a myth and does not exist. The arguments revolve around the reasoning that the gender pay gap can be explained by various factors, such as occupation, part-time work, choices between men and women, and a few working hours, among other factors. The issue of GPG is not only a political issue, but it also touches on the political, legal, and economic aspects of society. From a policy perspective, the same could indicate a reduction of economic output and hence increased dependence on the welfare state. Nowhere else has the GPG debate become mainstream like in the US and the UK. Despite the advancement of women in the workplace, the GPG remains. In countries like the US, the GPG has remained steady for more than two decades. The essay will seek to analyse the above two alternative explanations of GPG. In doing so, the essay will determine the cause of GPG and conclude whether, in the modern world, GPG is a consequence of deep-rooted and systemic inequalities. Theoretical Framework Several competing theories have been raised to explain and justify the existence of the GPG. Looking at these theories helps analyse whether the gap exists as a consequence of systemic discrimination and deep-rooted inequalities between men and women: Human Capital Theory These theories are proposed by authors like Becker (1991). The argument is that it was present historically at least in part because of the lower human capital which women have than men – that is, lower job experience, skill, and knowledge. This historically gave rise to lower productivity among women and hence the reduced wages that they earned. Men had a considerable advantage when it came to investing resources and time in careers and education (Polachek 1981; Manning and Swaffield 2008). With technological development and the entrenchment of equality. The argument for male advantage has weakened over time. The increase in women's education has been cited as a major driver for the reduction of GPG in the US and Britain (Goldin, 2008). A study by Olsen et al. (2010) indicates that education only explains a little of the GPG, with a declining effect. It has been argued that access to education is a major issue affecting women in the UK (Booth and Kee, 2011). However, this analysis is incorrect as the number of women graduating from college is higher than that of men in the UK and particularly in the US (Voyer & Voyer, 2014). This shows that gender pay cannot be explained by a lack of education. What is provable is that breaks such as having children reduce the women's experience and hence may hurt job prospects (Goldin 2008). The study by Olsen and Walby (2004) shows that over 19% of the GPG is explained by differences in work histories. It is also well understood that women are almost equal in their early career stages. The GPG rises over the career of women, and hence, education cannot be blamed for gender GPG (Dex et al., 2008). The gender role theory This theory argues that GPG can be explained because of the differential gender roles that are attributed to men and women (boys and girls) during early life, and is influenced by society and culture, and relates to everything that occurs in the schools, home, family life, personal relationships, and employment (Lips 2013). Due to the above, men and women usually follow different employment and education paths, which leads to a difference in payment. The separation into traditional gender roles is thus an unconscious choice between the genders, and they are constrained by expectations and pressure passed from one generation to another (Ochsenfeld 2014). Occupational Segregation Those occupations which have higher proportions of women, such as care, nursing, hospitality, etc, have always been referred to as feminised. Levanon et al. (2009) reveal that such occupations have lower average pay, and both men and women in such feminine occupations receive lower pay. In the UK, 17% of the GPG is associated with occupational segregation. The other explanation is that many careers, which are often male-dominated, such as STEM, are higher paying than feminised sectors. This means that, on average, men would have higher pay than women. This is one of the reasons why there have been campaigns for women and girls to enter into high-paying careers in tech and sciences (Olsen et al. 2010). Horizontal segregation involves men occupying higher positions in the workplace and earning more money as a result. It has also been shown that within the workplace, men and women perform different roles and hence receive different payments. There is another argument dealing with horizontal segregation and, hence, different career choices between genders, leading to differentiated payment determined by the market. The argument is that the feminised sector is undervalued. Studies in the US reveal that desegregation would solve this problem. The problem is that the effect of occupational segregation is usually very complex and difficult to analyse. There is an argument that desegregation is on the decline in the US (Miller & Vagins, 2018). The major concern with this is that desegregation cannot work if women willingly choose the so-called feminised sectors of the job market. Undervaluation theoretical model Related to occupational segregation is the undervaluation theory. The argument is that the work done by women is predominantly undervalued economically and socially. The theory is well entrenched in the US, unlike the UK. The theory posits that society undervalues some work done by women only because it is women who do it. This argument is not substantiated by Perales (2013) and Brynin and Perales (2016). They failed to take into account that the value placed on work in modern economics is usually based on the skills required and the demands that the consumer is willing to pay for the skills and products. The argument is that workplace practices are socially constructed and cause the undervaluation of women's labour. Hence, the theory argues that social pressure norms, actions of employers, and the government play a role in determining the payment. Further, there is an argument that pay practices consider typical male behaviour, like long working hours, continuous working hours, and aggressive negotiating tactics. Since women do not conform to the above style, many of them lose (Grimshaw & Rubery, 2015). The reliability of this theory and the assumption of undervaluation of human labour just because they are women does not have a basis. The theory lacks uniformity and does not have a universal application to GPG (Bettio & Verashchagina, 2009). The argument is also weak, as men who work in these feminised sectors generally earn less than men who work in higher-paying jobs. The conclusion here is that some jobs attract lower pay because of the economic value placed on the job (Brynin & Perales, 2016). The Gender Paradox Theory This is one theory that is not only controversial but also very opposed. The upside is that the findings of the gender paradox theory have not been disputed. The social role theory and the gender role theory are key theories that are used to justify low pay for women. These support the idea of deep-rooted discrimination as a consequence of GPG. These conclusions are rebutted by the gender equality paradox, which outlines that gender differences in occupational choices and personality are more pronounced and larger in countries that are more gender-equal or egalitarian. According to this explanation, the big five personality traits, such as depression, self-est...