Gender. Age & Work Essay

University of KwaZulu Natal Work & Identities (PSYC702)

Gender, Age, and Work

Presenters:

Devon Ferreira (204519344) Siphesihle Ngobese (205516965)

Date: 3 April 2009

1

Introduction With such a convoluted and multifaceted issue to cover, this essay in essence shall seek to provide a concise presentation and elucidation around as many concepts and ideas that go into the knowledge and discourses of gender, age and work. Thus our paper shall begin by charting the origins of the modern discourses, by looking at their common starting point and most pervasive discourse that has structured modern society; and that is of patriarchy. Such a start shall entail, providing a definition of patriarchy and its key tenets. With this having been provided, this essay shall then chart the development of patriarchy by placing it in an epochal-historical context dating from the earliest forms of human society, namely Hunter-Gatherer to the Agrarian/Feudal, to the Capitalist mode of production (whereby we shall examine the industrial revolution which was its catalyst). Such a historical placement, shall allow for this paper to then be able to chart the rise of other movements which arose in stark opposition to patriarchy, namely the Feminist movement. Our assessment of Feminism shall provide the foundations into explaining why modern and post-modern society has called-for and worked towards change, redefining itself, whilst constantly struggling to instil change from the hegemony of the patriarchal society. This mini debate within this essay shall provide a great foundation to the next idea raised which is of the changed attitudes and beliefs of women around concepts and issues of work. Such a discussion shall look at the perceptions of women and men in the work place, and chart how and why regardless of the progression society has made, women still do the bulk of the domestic work. The next idea that is raised pertains to the notion of the feminization of work; with a look into the stats that advocate that there has been a sharp rise in women entering the workforce. This phenomenon shall be discussed and critiqued accordingly. The penultimate section of this essay shall move to a discussion of careers, with an express focus on the implications the gender and age of workers. At this juncture we’ll discuss the composition of the 21 st century workforce, and look at the five life stages that influence the modern workers decisions around their careers and work. The final idea this paper shall present is a contextualization of most discourses raised in the preceding sections by looking at local income disparities, the commercialization of domestic work and its stigma, and the development of local

2

legislation including its short comings in addressing the local labour market. A conclusion shall then summate.

Historical Background The society we live in has been shaped by a multitude of discourses that make up everything about us, right down to our constructed sense of self. Intrinsically, the very fabrics of society and the institutions we live by inform our own actions, and guide our collective responsibility as a society. Oddly enough, as noted by many a social writer, the very fabrics of society that exist today place male prominence at their centre, and go as far as subordinating females to ensure this dominance. This facet of society is called patriarchy, and is the most pervasive form of organizing society, and setting up a socialhierarchy based on gender. Thus lays the most crucial question at this stage which is just exactly what patriarchy is? The Oxford dictionary describes patriarchy as the; “form of social organization in which the father or oldest male is the head of the family, and descent and relationship are reckoned through the male line; government or rule by a man or men” (Oxford, 2008). Such a definition, although encapsulating what patriarchy is, doesn’t take into account the full rigours of this concept, thus patriarchy is also posited as the structuring of society on the basis of family units, where fathers have primary responsibility for the welfare of, and authority over, their families (Henslin, 2001). The concept of patriarchy is often used by extension to refer to the expectation that men take primary responsibility for the welfare of the community as a whole, acting as representatives via public office. It is also important to state that patriarchy is, regardless of your ideological or methodological viewpoint, the most common and accepted method in which gender relations have come to be conceptualized. That is whether you are a creationalist, evolutionist, Marxist or a societal liberalist, all concur that patriarchy is dominant; and that the commonly held notion is that the organisation of collective human effort has centred around male dominance the subordination of females. Terbon (2004) notes though that, the world was not equally patriarchal, though the powers of fathers, adult

3

sons, brothers and husbands although virtually everywhere overwhelming, did differ across cultures and customs (2004:17). Like most science, the default inclination is to try attributing a natural or biological rationality to phenomena; thus the origins attributed to patriarchy stem from biological determinism. This seeks to explain male/female relations from an anatomical differences approach (that is because men are naturally bigger and stronger than women, they are also social dominant. Such a line of thinking is paraphrased in Freud statement that anatomy is destiny (Mies, 1986:45). More degradingly, women are seen as having their share of the production and reproduction of life as a function of their biology or ‘nature’. Thus the root of patriarchy stems from the derived idea that women tend to be identified with nature, and man with culture. This view has shaped human society from our earliest forms of existence, right up to present society; and has manifested into the division of labour controlled whom does and how we do work. Centrally on this issue is that this discourse has entrenched itself into all societal institutions that go into shaping whom we are (e.g. family, school, work, and church). Let us examine how this has developed over three major epochs (Hunter-Gatherer, Agrarian,/Feudal, Industrial Revolution and Capitalism).

Hunter-Gatherer A hunter-gatherer society is one whose primary subsistence method involves the direct procurement of edible plants and animals from the wild, foraging and hunting without significant recourse to the domestication of either (Burenhult, 1994); thus people in these communities had very little societal structure, as most were nomadic groups that roamed following the seasons and wild migratory herds. In these forms of society, anatomical differences DID matter, as bigger stronger and testosterone-driven men found hunting wild game much easier (Diamond, 1998). The women were relegated to foraging (wild berries and nuts) and catching small game like

4

rats, rabbits, fish (such women had to stay close their children for safety sake). Thus by virtue of physical attributes, this was the roots of the gendered division of labour, as men gained prominence because their work and exploits provided the most protein. His importance as provider was built into the very mechanics of production. The bonds men created through expeditions of hunting are assumed to be the beginnings of culture, as they were of sharing experiences, techniques and methodology of the skills (Diamond, 1998). Thus in essence the male was in control of his skills and ability, and thus he derives resources from his participation in the public sphere. The Oxford (1994) reading put’s it concisely by writing; the male is able to control his input into the household economy (1994:7). This is in stark contrast to the way women’s labour is perceived; in contrast women on the other hand (just like the plants they foraged and the fruits that they picked) were ALSO just producers. Thus women’s work was (and is) seen as an extension of their physiology; that is, of the fact that THEY give birth to children, of the fact that nature has provided THEM with a uterus (Mies, 1986:45). All the labour that goes into the production of life, including the labour of giving birth to a child, is NOT seen as the conscious interaction of a human being with nature, that is, a truly human activity; but rather as an activity of nature itself, which produces plants and animals unconsciously and has no control over this process. Thus Mies (1986) contends that due to the biologistic definition of women’s interaction with her nature, her work both in giving birth and raising children as well as the rest of the domestic work does not appear as work (1986:45). Therefore the hunter-gather epoch ushered in a period of time whereby respect for women’s work wasn’t seen as a priority as their work in itself had its importance negated. Thus, patriarchy had found it’s expression, and even with a change in times, nothing was going to change nor stop the prolific patriarchal societal discourse.

Agrarian (Feudal society)

5

The advent of farming and agriculture redefined human existence, as it organised human effort into sedentary settlements that tended to support larger numbers of populations (Diamond, 1998), thus accruing a more expansive division of labour. This is a society that is based on agriculture as its prime means for support and sustenance. The surplus of food and a higher calorie production that farming and animal husbandry offered, allowed for societies to form new specialized roles such as monarchs, politicians, artisans, labourers, and most importantly developing a standing army (Diamond, 1998). However, the most significant aspect to highlight here is that all these new specializations excluded women. Crucially, patriarchy had evolved with the changing epoch and mode of production, and the women was now confined into the home as this was the domain whereby she could best effect her biological role of child-bearer and rearer. This is qualified best by many authors, the best of whom writing that, ‘even though societies mode of production had changed, and that new forms of organizing work and society arose during this period; women’s work still had no significant value above that of its biological and reproductive purposes (Mies, 1986:45). Thus the inequalities of gender were entrenched and worse yet accepted into society, with Cornell arguing such inequalities of gender being sustained through a complex of institutions (e.g. the school, the home/family, and the workplace). Therefore it is at this juncture of our historo-epochal assessment that we introduce two more concepts that have gone hand-in-hand with patriarchy. These are exploitation (namely of women by men) and the concept of power-over. Exploitation involves a persistent social relationship in which certain persons are being mistreated or unfairly used for the benefit of others. This corresponds to one ethical conception of exploitation, that is, the treatment of human beings as mere means to an end or as mere "objects" (web1). In different terms, "exploitation" refers to the use of people as a resource, with little or no consideration of their well-being.

1

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/exploitation/

6

The notion of power over derives itself from the realization of one group that they are in a position of influence over another, and may thus use that to exert their agenda on them in as hegemonic fashion as they please. Thus a central feature of patriarchy is the exploitation of women’s surplus labour for the benefit of men.

The Industrial Revolution (catalyst for Capitalism) The industrial revolution in England in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was marked by rapid increases in production, trade and population, as manufacturing rose to prominence over agriculture as the engine of development (Beder, 2000:36). Thus the industrial revolution meant a change in epoch again, and a new class division and division of labour. Established landowners benefited from the industrial revolution and some become capitalists in own right (Beder, 2000:37); however the paradox was landownership’s was still the reserved right for men, a capitalist mode of ownership merely carried over these privileges. Thus a new social relation of power-over and exploitation was created, with the master & serf replaced by the capitalist and proletariat. Terbon (2004) notes that social stabilization after the convulsions of the industrial revolution meant a strengthening of the patriarchal institution of marriage-if not patriarchal power within marriage-and family. Terbon (2004) summarizes this point eloquently when he writes that the world of wives were institutionally subordinate to husbands virtually everywhere, as most societies took special tolls of women (2004:70-71). A divergence from the norm under the capitalist mode of production was that the reorganising of society through the emergence of the working class placed male dominance (that is, the breadwinner idea) at risk, as in capitalist society all had to work to subsist. However, the dominance of the patriarchal ideal, and the depth of just how much it had entrenched itself in society was evident in women and children occupying the lower and even more dangerous paying jobs. People were forced to work long hours by machines, clocks and constant supervision (Beder, 2000: 37). This is the root of modern exploitation

7

of women whom work both at work for a wage (usually below par), and then had undervalued domestic work to do. Thus the development of a gendered division of labour has developed from simple anatomical and biological rationality, into a socially engineered modus of asserting male dominance over feminine subordination. Capitalism entrenched patriarchy by ensuring that men always benefit from female surplus labour at all levels… these levels are in essence the very institutions that goes into socializing us, such as the family (whereby women contracted to their husband to produce children for him alone, for the sake of being able to pass on inheritance), the school/work (where women and men are taught and/or enact their different roles from a gender point of view, it is here that male importance is entrenched), and religion (which Marx calls the opiate of the masses). On the issue of religion, It is argued pertaining to women that they are allowed to withdraw into religion in practically all societies is no small measure, due to the fact that religious ideology, as formulated and popularised by the patriarchs, keeps them (women) safely subservient (IBR, 1991:21). The world around 1900 was a patriarchal world, where the laws of fathers ruled the world of children; including grown-up children, at least if unmarried (Terbon, 2004:70). This is encapsulated by the vast majority of people interviewed in a study conducted by the Institute for Black Research (1991) which found that both sexes held that men are superior, that they have priority claim to employment, that women owe men their labour, and are accountable to them; this is encapsulated best in the text by the IBR (1991) by stating that the majority of women interviewed continued to believe in the subordination, and did not consider it their right to engage in activities outside the family without seeking patriarchal permission (IBR, 1991:39). However, a glimmer of change arose. In stark contrast to the entrenched patriarchal society that had developed over centuries, the Feminist movement arose in the 19th century, and sought to break the chains of inequality and exploitation (especially in the workplace). Feminist movements, often supported by male socialists and radicals had arisen in the America’s, in Oceania and in Europe, pioneered by Britain and growing most strongly in

8

Scandinavia (Terbon, 2004:19). This movement, although pervasive, took a while as it was as neither established nor old as patriarchy which been ingrained in society. In essence, Feminism doesn’t attack the male hegemony in society, more than the females’ actual acceptance of it. Thus in relation to the concept of labour, the development of feminism advocated that labour can only be productive in the sense of producing surplus value as long as it can be spent in the production of life, or subsistence production (Mies, 1980).

Changing

Attitudes

of

Women

towards

Work

and

Domestic

Responsibilties Compared to world of 1900 patriarchy has had to retreat everywhere. The legal rights of women have been extended in all countries and the expansion of education and paid work has extended autonomy. Dramatic socio-economic, political and cultural changes have undercut the authority of men. Therefore the biggest social change since the 1970’s has been the increase of women in the labour force. According to statistical data collected from the 1951 Census, it showed that only 22 percent of married women were playing an active role in the economy compared to 1987, which saw 68 percent of married women economically active (Hakim, 1979). In association with this there has been a change in attitudes towards working women. Although a study carried out in 1965 of working age women, revealed that only a small minority of women felt that being married barred women from working, informing us that these attitudes have changed little, it is the change in beliefs about women with children and work that has been the most radical (Newel, 2000). However, upon closer inspection of these surveys, one can highlight some impending irregularities. Although only 25 percent of women in the studies believed that “women’s place is in the home”, 46 percent of women agreed that a husband’s role is to earn money, and a wife’s role is to care for the children and maintain the home (Newel, 2000: 94). One can presume then that work for a women should be accompanied together with domestic demands and responsibilities What is interesting to point out is that the younger generation of full time working women and students hold less traditional attitudes, 9

than their husbands who more often than not hold on to a more traditional position with regards to gender roles at home and work (Newel, 2000: 94). Another feature of women’s employment is that there is a tendency in the rate of women’s employment according to family responsibilities. Here a women’s employment can be characterized by one or more career break which coincide with the birth of their children and pre-school development (Newel, 2000). Britain compared with many other European countries fare poorly in the provision of maternity rights and subsidized childcare. With the cost of childcare facilities being so high, this has had a direct bearing on woman’s employment (Berry-Lound, 1990). Therefore many women are forced to turn to part-time work due to the fact that it would be uneconomic for many women to work full-time, especially when most women are found to occupy low paid jobs. Ultimately these women found their experiences of motherhood to have a negative impact on both their earnings and job status, due to the fact that taking more breaks from to rear children, results in them more likely than not returning to a lower occupational level (Newel, 2000: 95). Despite the increasing equality of women in the workforce, in terms of numerical value, the segregation of women’s work remains to have a stranglehold with regards to women’s movement into the higher ranks of employment (Hakim, 1981). Women still tend to occupy only a narrow range of jobs, “most of which can be seen as an extension of their role within the family” (Dex 1987; Sipley 1990 in Newel, 2000: 95). There is this notion that although their remains a clear segregation of women’s work, the traditional family, comprised of a female housewife and male breadwinner, is no longer a typical social arrangement, as it is said that women are increasingly becoming breadwinners (Newel, 2000). You would think that since this traditional family is said to be declining, household responsibilities would be equally shared. However research shows that there once again still remains a clear segregation with regards to household chores, and the disturbing reality is that millions of women are returning from a full day’s work to an additional several hours of housework (Newel, 2000). What this means is that although we may see men taking a more active role in the home, it remains far cry from being classified as an equal sharing of domestic responsibilities.

10

What is most interesting, is that according to Brannen and Moss (1988), they found that majority women do believe that domestic chores should be shared equally between the husband and wife. However these same women did not convey much displeasure with the situation they found themselves in (Newel, 2000). They maintain that the “problem of juggling full-time employment with motherhood is essentially theirs” (Newel, 2000: 96). Many of the men in this study accepted the return to work of their wives for purposes of bringing home a dual income, but overlooked the difficulties that arise in holding down a job as well as running a home (Newel, 2000). Llwelyn and Osbourne (1990) suggest that these women are trying to live up to a “superwomen” ideal. However if we think about, in essence such a role model would be idealistic, since more and more women are now turning to external help from nannies or housekeepers making the “superwomen” more of a fantasy than a reality. (Newel, 2000: 96) Despite the difficulties women face combining a family and career, this is a choice that many women are making, mostly out of financial necessity, but also for personal fulfillment (Polakof, 1991 in Newel, 2000). Yet there are still many obstacles which women have to grapple with when re-entering the workplace with a family. Whilst legislation has been passed to prevent direct forms of discrimination, the extent to which these laws have reduced indirect discrimination, such as personnel policies, is minimal (Newel, 2000). Organizations could play a pivotal role in trying to eradicate inequalities within the workplace, however many of these organized fail to take into account the level to which such personnel policies actually indirectly discriminate against a female labour force which increasingly consists of women with young children (Newel, 2000). This gendered division which takes place within the domestic sphere prevents women from putting a lot of time and effort into their careers. An individual’s career progression is dependant on their ability and commitment to appear as a feasible and long term prospect, which involves being able to work long hours (Newel, 2000 : 96) Therefore many women, with families found themselves unable to progress through the ranks of the workplace. This why it is not surprising to find women who are demanding executive jobs are more likely to

11

be single compared with male colleagues. Those women trying to juggle a career in amongst home and family responsibilities often combine both roles through working parttime, and as a consequence sacrifice long term career prospects (Newel, 2000: 97). It is clear that evidence suggests that women’s attitudes are changing and as a result are expanding their roles. However there is little evidence that men are doing the same by participating in the domestic and childcare responsibilities traditionally taken on by women. A survey carried out by a group of researchers set out to look at how far these problems are acknowledged by a group of men and women working full-time, in two major blue chip companies, specifically there attitudes and beliefs about traditional gender roles within the home and work domains. On the issue of whether men and women share equal opportunities within the workplace. Women were more likely to feel that they do not share equal opportunities in the workplace and that women were at a disadvantage when it came to promotion opportunities, because employers were hesitant to give promotions to women out of the fear that they will leave to have children. The men on the other hand were less likely to recognize the lack of equal opportunities for women (Newel, 99). This presented somewhat of a contradiction because at the same time most men expected women to fulfil their traditional role by taking responsibility for the household management. This can be construed as men either assuming women are ‘superwomen’, which is unlikely as we have already suggested, or mostly likely men having low expectations, if any, of women to having, or indeed wanting to have, progressive careers, given that men are less likely to believe that women can combine the dual role of mother and worker (Newel, 2000 :99). On the issue of domestic division of labour, researchers found significant differences between male and females with regards who should be responsible for common household tasks. It became evident in the study that males believed that household tasks should be divided up along clearly defined gender lines, whilst the females believe in an equal sharing of all household tasks (Newel, 2000). However what becomes apparent here is that the males’ vision of how domestic task should be divided up was more in line with reality

12

than the women’s. This traditional division of domestic responsibility is evidently apparent, and perhaps what more striking is the fact that for males, having a family resulted in them having reduced responsibility for household management and a return to the traditional gendered division (Newel, 2000). There was little difference between women with or without children in how they shared domestic roles with their partners. However in general, women tended to take on greater responsibility for day to day management of the household (Newel, 2000). According Bradley et al (2000), “new men”, so they say, want to spend more time with their children. However, despite studies having showed that this might be the case, the gap between their involvement and that of mothers remains appalling. According to time budgets conducted by Jonathan Gershuny, in 1985 women who worked full-time spent on average 107 mins a day looking after their young children while full-time men spent fourty-five minutes (Bradley et al, 2000:85). Women feel that in order to maintain a decent living, they need to bring home a second income, yet they continue to see household tasks as primarily their responsibility (Bradley et al, 2000). As is evident from the above men have continued to hold onto more traditional views and as a result there has not been a significant “masculinization” of domestic division of labour. This has been a contributing factor to women’s labour market marginalization and is how men have managed to dominate the labour market (Bradley et al, 2000: 85). These traditional views, held by men, were also reflected when questions arose about childcare arrangements. For example men were much more likely to agree, that a woman is more suited to looking after children, due to their maternal nature, and whilst women also agreed that they were the best suited for taking care of the children, men saw it less adequate that they make use alternative arrangements for childcare, for example nannies, and housekeepers (Newel, 2000). . Many organizations have made organizational arrangements which allow for equal opportunity policies to be made available to expecting mothers, that facilitate the ability to

13

combine both home and job demands. Such policies are flexible working, career breaks, and job sharing (Newel, 2000). When asked how effective these arrangements were in encouraging women to return to work, not surprisingly, men saw less need for these types of arrangements whilst women did. However it was suggested in this paper that encouragement of these sorts of arrangements, by women, in the long run may sort to confirm them as the domestic sex (Newel, 2000). As was shown in this paper whilst women attitudes to work have changed somewhat and would like to strip themselves of some of the household management, in reality the domestic division of labour remains gender specific (Newel, 2000). This linked the fact that male attitudes revealed a much less positive tendency to change traditional domestic roles. Men still expect women to run the home and look after the children, and to take time off work when children are sick. Yet when it comes to work women are seen to be letting her domestic life affect her work, as they are not being prepare to make sacrifices for their career. Therefore in reality the blame is shifted towards the women for their difficulties in the workplace (Newel, 2000)

Feminization of Work We have mentioned already that more and more women are being integrated into the economy. These developments, fall under an umbrella term which is the Feminization of work. There are number of meanings for this particular term. First one is the feminization of the labour force. This means that the influx of women into the labour market has reached a comparable rate to that of men. This increase in the proportion of jobs is a common feature of the most advanced capitalist societies, and is associated with the growth of service-sector employment which allows for an increasing numbers of women’s jobs, involving caring and catering for the needs of the clients (Bradley, Erickson, Stephenson & Williams, 2000).

Traditional ‘male jobs’ in

manufacturing are slowly becoming non-existant, leading to declining male employment rates, increased idleness and unemployment. Increased male unemployment has become a

14

major public concern around the world but especially in Britain (Bradley et al, 200).. However, the way unemployment figures are calculated, appears to be controversial due to the fact that it could be said that the portion of women who reluctantly fall prey to unemployment may go unrecorded (Bradley et al, 200). This is likely because women are presumed stay at home mothers, or may have the luxury to stay home and those who are seeking work but to no avail often aren’t included in the unemployment figures. This does not in any way lessen the concern for male unemployment and it still remains a “real important social change and significantly affects gender relations within families” (Bradley et al, 2000: 76). You will found that in many countries the traditional family, based on the “male breadwinner and dependant housewife” has been replaced with dual-earning families. With this break down of traditional families, so is the male breadwinner being undermined, especially when more women are seen to be bringing up children on their own (Bradley et al, 2000: 72). The second use of the term is the feminization of occupations. This refers to the movement for women into occupations which were previously occupied by men. But as you will realize it has not really amounted to this. If women make up a greater proportion of the workforce, we would expect there to be an accompanying change in the allocation of women and men in different occupations, meaning more women in men’s jobs (Bradley et al, 2000). However, the segregation of work into men’s and women’s job has been, and still is, an established feature in most societies, amounting to a major source of male dominance, making the myth of a female takeover exactly that, a myth (Bradley et al, 2000). It has been a common occurrence for employers to have tried to feminize particular occupations. E.g Transforming and deskilling the tasks of clerks. With the use of such strategies employers are able to exploit the fact that women’s work has less socioeconomic importance than male work (Bradley et al, 2000). This provides employers with a great opportunity to lower labour cost, through the employment of women in these positions and paying them less. The employment of women benefits the employer in other ways as well, due to the fact that women are also said to be less likely to form collective

15

organizations, therefore making them easier to control (Bradley et al, 2000). However it must be said that although feminization has not brought about a total collapse of gender segregation, women have been seen to be making inroads into certain areas traditionally assigned to men, like law, medicine and accountancy. Women are now able to compete on an equal playing field with men, largely because of their increased levels of tertiary education and other credentials (Bradley et al, 2000: 72) On the bottom end of the occupational scale, however, there has been little improvement and women have made little advancement into the so-called “traditional male jobs” in manufacturing or transport which are in decline (Bradley et al, 2000: 78). The third use of the term is feminization of work, whereby the “very nature of jobs, tasks and skills is changed in ways said to make them more suitable for women” (Bradley et al, 2000). Since there is a growing concern in modern-day firms with quality and customer service, there is another motivation for employers to engage in feminization resulting labour cost cuts (Bradley et al, 2000: 78). Women are said to instinctively possess skills which are valuable to have in this extremely competitive service industry of today, like caring, communicating and making people feel good. This aspect of feminization entails a qualitative, not just a quantitative change (Bradley et al, 2000). In other words it not just the sheer number of women in employment that has changed but also the very nature of jobs that have changed as well. Companies seeking to increase their profit accumulation need to develop new methods and new ways of organizing their production process. This in turn calls for new types of workers and different working methods (Bradley et al, 2000). Thus male workers wanting to enter work within this new environment may need to develop some feminine aspects of themselves (Bradley et al, 2000: 79). This aspect of feminization is evident when it comes to the notion of a new feminine style of management. “Women are said to operate with a more empathetic, interactive, peopleorientated management style which becomes transformative for the organization” (Bradley et al, 2000: 79). This style of management is seen to be most effective when organizations are experiencing organizational change and cultural reconstruction. Thus it can be said that women are ideal change agents, because women are able to empower their employees encourage full participation and commitment to changes processes within the company

16

(Bradley et al, 2000: 79).. However Wajcman (in Bradley et al, 2000), among others, are hesitant to argue that women really operate with a different style. Moreover as, Collinson and Hearn (in Bradley et al, 2000) show, masculine and feminine styles are not the equivalent to men and women (Bradley et al, 2000). This is because you may found a woman manager displaying an authoritarian role within a company in an attempt out shine her male counterparts at their own game, while you may also found a male manager showing off his feminine style (Bradley et al, 2000) These are not the only factors which influenced feminization and there are other factors that have encouraged phenonomen. One is the role of the state in promoting equal opportunity policies and another is “the actions and the aspirations of women themselves” This points to a so called emergence of a “climate of equality” (Bradley et al, 2000). I say so called because many researchers are not totally convinced about Equal Opportunity programmes and there is a lot of scepticism surrounding such programmes. They argue that such programmes are often viewed as “window dressing”, in other words employers are merely trying to appear as being progressive in their actions, but in actual fact are not really doing so. Alternatively they may be unwillingly incorporated in the organization to avoid being penalized by equality legislation (Bradley et al, 2000: 80). Therefore the organizations are not making a wholehearted effort to create a “climate of equality” None the less Equal Opportunity programmes have brought about improvements for women. These programmes have helped women to advance themselves at work. But more importantly is the effect it has had on cultural attitudes. While many managers and male employees may resist such programmes, it is difficult to be openly discriminatory (Bradley et al, 2000: 80). This has been described as a “profound cultural shift involving the emergence of a new consciousness and widespread public discourse about gender equality” (Bradley et al, 2000: 80). This is linked to the new spirit of independence among women. Women are taking a stand and confronting those who place them in subordinate roles whereby they are forced to fill non-standard jobs on the grounds that men are inherently superior. This challenges the dominant view of women being less ambitious than men, a view reflected in the work of Catherine Hakim. Hakim claims that there are only a few women who will adopt a lifestyle similar to that of men (Bradley et al, 2000). However

17

recent studies, like Ian Proctor and Muriel Padfield’s research among young adult women, shows that amongst the single employed women there was strong evidence of commitment to employment (Bradley et al, 2000). Women constantly “planned and re-planned their careers according to what opportunities were offered or withheld” (Bradley et al, 2000: 80). Amongst the group of early mothers, whilst some had chosen to become full time mothers because of restricted labour market opportunities,

most women, once their

children had reached a certain age, had become involved in some form of full-time or parttime work (Bradley et al, 2000).. The majority of women foresee employment playing a rather important role later in their lives (Bradley et al, 2000). Such research implies that the new generations of women have become more adapted to employment than their mothers. Thus they see themselves working for much of their lives and reject being relegated to the home (Bradley et al, 2000). Despite these positive views expressed by young women, men still see women them as less committed to their work. The tenacity of such views is in part stereotyping, but also reflects the complexity of women’s new life choices, as they continue to bear the majority of responsibility for domestic work. But nevertheless, there has been a positive turnaround in women attitudes, which can be seen in their determination to participate in the labour (Bradley et al, 2000: 82). Despite these positive changes, feminization has by no means brought about total equality between and there still remains a clear distinction between men’s work and women’s work. Vertical segregation, which remains prominent in many, if not most, organizations, prevents even those women who have managed to gain access into an organizational category from reaching top positions within it This makes women the least represented people in top management professions (Bradley et al, 2000) With the coming of the service based economy, gender segregation has taken on new forms. The most noticeable feature being the distinction between full-time male jobs and part-time female jobs (Bradley et al, 2000). Before gender segregation at work involved differences in content and nature of tasks performed by men and women, now it has

18

infiltrated contractual arrangements of employment for men and women as well. The amount of women in non-standard jobs is characteristic of their labour market marginalization (Bradley et al, 2000). There are differences between men and women when it comes to who performs what type of non-standard work. Men are concentrated in the better forms of non-standard work, such as shift work and night-working, self-employment and subcontracting, while women are seen to occupy the less desirable forms of nonstandard work, like part-timers, home and family workers and temporary employees (Bradley et al, 2000). Part-time employment is heavily concentrated in service sector, and not surprisingly this is the type of employment most women found themselves doing (Bradley et al, 2000). As already mentioned in this paper, there is a definite link between women’s domestic responsibilities and non-standard/part-time work, underlining the depreciation of both. Women take non-standard jobs so that they are able to cater for their families needs, making this choice a female one, which in turn discourages men from taking such jobs (Bradley et al, 2000). Although there has been a small rise in male part-time employment, this usually takes place amongst the younger and older generation (Bradley et al, 2000). Young men wanting to enter the labour market usually utilize part-time work as a stepping stone. Whilst older men usually take on part-time work as way of easing out of full-time employment. Women on the other hand may engage in part-time work at various stages in their life, usually corresponding with the birth of their children (Bradley et al, 2000). Men therefore show more resistance towards non-standard work, viewing it as “incompatible with norms of masculinity, especially the breadwinner role….. which retains enormous symbolic and material importance in men’s lives even when it is actually in decline” (Bradley et al, 2000: 84). Since the 19th C there has been a “significant shift from private forms of patriarchal control, exercised by individual men and families, to public forms embedded in the structural arrangements of paid employment and the state” (Bradley et al, 2000: 85). Gendered power is has now been expressed through a range of resources which are differentially deployed by men and women at work. There are three important forms of

19

resource which men tend to monopolize. They are the economic, positional and symbolic (Bradley et al, 2000).. In terms of the economic resource, you will find across the world that men still earn more than women. Although legislation has been passed, such as the Equal Pay Act, in countries like Britain, most women work part-time in low paying jobs where such Acts do not apply, and men still tend to be the big earners. (Bradley et al, 2000). In the majority of dual earning households you will find, men earned more, even when women have obtained a higher occupational status. This is due to men’s accessibility to overtime and bonus payments and women’s slow progress up the salary scales. As discussed, women’s domestic responsibilities place women at a disadvantage when it comes to earning capabilities and promotion opportunities due to their breaks in employment during childrearing (Bradley et al, 2000). This is linked to the vertical segregation we spoke of earlier, men hold most positional resources in organizations, where most of the decision making and authority falls (Bradley et al, 2000). Although there has been a slight increase in women managers, they are usually blocked from moving any higher up the ranks due to the persistence of gender discrimination (Bradley et al, 2000). Many women are therefore forced to give up on the struggle for advancement and find work in a more “women friendly” environment (Bradley et al, 2000: 87). Though the use of “old boys’ networks” men get a foot in the door when comes to promotions. This is because within these “old boys’ networks” men hold a considerable amount of power and are able select and promote candidates who they feel fits the “ideal worker”, presumed by them to be male (Bradley et al, 2000: 87). This highlights the importance of symbolic resources in maintaining male power. Men in top positions are seen as the ones who hold all the power and therefore they have the right to set the rules and norms within the workplace (Bradley et al, 2000). Men “determine the criteria for acceptable workplace behaviour and the meanings of such key concepts as excellence, leadership potential, a good worker, commitment, even the working day” (Bradley et al, 2000: 87). Research shows that although there is an increase in women

20

managers, their work requirements are still heavily influenced by male norms (Bradley et al, 2000). Since many men associated women’s bodies with sexuality and reproduction, it is deemed inappropriate in the work environment. “The ideal form of embodiment for the workplace is male; as men do not menstruate or show the bulge of pregnancy” (Bradley et al, 2000: 88).

Careers: The Notion of Age & Gender in the Workplace In and amongst the already convoluted discourses around gender in the workplace, lies the idea around age. Age is best expressed through an individuals life (and consequently career) stages; and like all other variables in the workplace, these too are measured and monitored. Thus ones career development can be studied by relating career stages during the lifespan. Traditionally the chronological age (of the person) has been used to determine developmental turning points in the person’s life; however a person in the workplace regardless of education level, age or gender is trying to secure work tenure through having a career. Thus Schreuder & Coetzee (2003) assert that since competency (learning how and know-how) has become important, a person’s career age is am ore meaningful indicator to organisations and to a person’s self-understanding (that is, the career-self) than one chronological age development (2003:154). Thus in essence the 21st century workforce is characterised by five workforce generations, namely the Silent generation (born 1922 to 1945), Baby Boomers (born 1946 to 1964), Generation X (born 1965 to 1976), Generation Y (born 1977 to 2000), and Millennium generation (born since 2000). The Silent generation are argued to be the most traditional; they tend to be the wisdom keepers and natural workplace leaders and mentors [even if they don’t hold managerial positions] (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:32), the Baby Boomers on the other hand are said to have placed education high on their priorities; having enjoyed the privileges of being raised in homes of economic prosperity. In the current workplace however, they face stressors, time demands and money constraints all of which require company support and understanding (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:32). Generation X are listed as having a sense

21

of entitlement and less political interest (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:32), as a result they are viewed as slackers. This generation is attributed to a high divorce rate, and increasing number of working mothers, leading to them being characterised as independent, resilient and able. Generation Y are largely self-confident and usually goal-setters that can multitask; are listed to be team-players and tech-savvy, with a desire for structure and direction (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:33). All these age groups play a major role in the dynamism of the 21 st century workplace, and it is the ever increasing and difficult role of management to deal with all these age-groups and their diverse interests. This often makes it difficult to initiate team structures and group tasks, as one may have to manage personalities and characters of certain age groups. Lastly on the concepts of age in the workplace is the three life stage we go through specifically in the place of employment. The first is the Early Life/Career stage whereby, primarily the task of this phase is finding a place for oneself in the adult world. Schreuder & Coetzee (2003) argue that this involves two tasks which can be of an opposing nature, namely ‘exploring the adult world’ and ‘creating a stable adult life’ (2003:160). Research indicates that approximately 95% of young adults enter marriage, although men are less motivated to marry and are more concerned about the future careers, while women are concerned about both career and family considerations (Gordon & Whelan, 1998). The Mid Life/Career transition is dominated by conscious ageing, an acknowledgement of mortality and, with that, a potential for increased illness and disease (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:167). Bardwick (1986) asserts that at 50 and older, women experience the physical changes of menopause that is as symbolic as death (in Schreuder & Coetzee, 2003:167). A survey conducted indicated that adults 50+ are facing the following life/career challenges, earning a living, living one’s dreams, upskilling oneself, achieving ones goals and recognition. All these facets have implications for the workplace, as these issues are common to both sexes. Lastly is the Late Life/Career stage, argued to be a distinguished period, Schreuder & Coetzee (2003) argue that these workers or pensioners should rather be studied as individuals, than as a group that is associated with stereotypes such as unproductive, unmotivated, or intellectually too rigid to adapt to change (2003:172).

22

South African Context If we take a look at the situation in the South African, we will see that women are in no better position than the rest of the world. In fact they are probably worse off. Labour markets and policies in South Africa promote decent work, which is productive work in conditions of freedom, equity and security for both men and women (Laura Addati and Naomi Cassirer, 2008). However it is evident South African women still face multiple forms of discrimination in both policy and practice on a daily basis. Women find it particularly difficult to enter the labour market as employers tend to favour men. Those women lucky enough to find work are often restricted to work in the less productive sectors of the economy. As a result of the type of work women find employment in, women often earn less than men (Laura Addati and Naomi Cassirer, 2008).. The situation of women in South Africa, is certainly among the least advantageous even today. The majority of the nation's poor are women. Rural African women make up the poorest of the poor (Maharaj, 1999). This is because most of their monthly income comes from pensions and remittances from relatives. These women fall within 20 percent of the poorest households which bring in a monthly household income of between R400-R700 (Maharaj, 1999). If we take a look at the Global picture you will found that women make up about 40 percent of world employment, yet women still earn 12 to 60% less than their male co-workers, even in occupations such as nursing and teaching. These women make up an increasing proportion of the world’s poor due to the fact that they are concentrated in low-paid, unprotected, temporary or casual work and do not enjoy the same level of social protection as their male counterparts (FEDUSA, 2008). Statistics SA (SSA), has compared the incomes of households headed by women with those of households headed by men. Results showed a greater proportion (37%) of women-headed households in non-urban areas fell in the category of the poorest 20 percent of households in the country, as compared with male-headed households (23%) in non-urban areas (Maharaj, 1999). In urban areas, once again women-headed households

23

made up a greater proportion (15%) of the poorest 20% of households, as compared with male-headed households there (5%) (Maharaj, 1999). Women in South Africa, irrespective of their race, religion, and socio-economic status do not enjoy equal access to social groups and the country’s resources. Male domination and female subordination has plagued women in South Africa and in turn impacted on their particular experiences and quality of lives (Maharaj, 1999). Male domination in South Africa arising from such inequalities is replicated in the rapes, femicides and other sexual violence affecting mostly poor women (Maharaj, 1999).. Such blatant disregard for women is putting an enormous strain on health facilities and costing the economy millions of rands each year, yet it continues to happen due to the fact that male domination is being nurtured by gender inequalities which make women poorer than men (Maharaj, 1999) Gender inequality in the form of income inequality is most evident in the formal sector of the economy, the sector whose goods and services are counted in calculations of the GDP. In trying to fathom why women are paid less perhaps one could look at the educational attainment of both genders. If we compare educational attainment between the different races we will see that it varies from an average of under six years for Africans and Coloureds, to eight years for Indians and almost ten years for whites. But what is interesting to note is that it is relatively equal for both men and women, compared with many countries, where men have more schooling than women (Maharaj, 1999). South African women participating in labour market, in actual fact, have an average of 1.2 years more education than men. It is commonly understood that years of education is a predictor of occupation and occupation is a predictor of income levels (Maharaj, 1999). If this was certainly the case, we would expect South African women to be earning the same if not more as the men, especially in professional and technical employment where women economically active men make up a greater proportion than economically active men.

24

However, South African women earn on average 13 percent less than men's in the formal labour force (Maharaj, 1999). Looking at it in terms of the different racial categories will present further surprise. African women's incomes are identical to African men's even though African women average two more years of education than African men. If years of education were a predictor of occupation and occupation a predictor of income levels, we would expect African women to be earning at least 20 percent more. Same applies to white women, who average 67 percent of white mens’ despite having equal educational attainment. Coloured women's educational advantage over men also fails to be converted into a wage advantage. Indian women do not have an educational advantage over Indian men so their lower salary in relation to their men does not spark much disappointment (Maharaj, 1999). The exploitation of workers, in particular women workers, has been a feature of life in South Africa for decades. Apartheid thrived on cheap labour and workers had to compete with migrant labour system, passes and influx control, job reservation, low wages and oppressive laws. South Africa with its new Constitution, established in 1994, has since included certain core labour rights. Section 23 of the constitution establishes the fundamental rights in respect to labour relations. In particular section 23 (1) and (2) provides that everyone has the right to fair labour practices, and every worker has the right - to form and join a trade union; to participate in the activities and programmes of a trade union; and to strike (Benjamin, 2008: 3). South African Labour legislation also provides a substantial package of statutory labour rights for employee. The principle statutes that provided these protections are: Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 – Allows for freedom of association, organisational rights, collective bargaining; right to strike; and protection against unfair dismissal Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 – Allows control over hours of work, annual leave, sick leave, maternity leave, severance pay, notice pay; sectoral determinations

25

Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 – Enforces Anti‐discrimination and affirmative action Skills Development Act 97 of 1998 – Allows for skills development and training Unemployment Insurance Act of 2001 – Allows for unemployment and maternity benefits Compensation for Occupational Diseases Act 130 of 1993 – Allows for compensation for work‐related injuries and diseases Occupational Safety and Health| Act 85 of 1993; Mine Health and Safety Act 29 of 1996 – Protects health and safety in the workplace (Benjamin, 2008: 4) However despite all the rights afforded to workers, the coverage of South Africa’s labour law regime is determined by a conventional definition of the employment relationship. This definition of an employee is as follows: any person, excluding an independent contractor, who works for another person or for the State and who receives, or is entitled to receive, any remuneration; and any other person who in any manner assists in carrying on or conducting the business of an employer (Benjamin, 2008:5). Therefore only workers who fall within this definition are entitled to receive the full protection of labour law; those excluded have little or no legal protection or entitlement to social insurance benefits (Benjamin, 2008) Male workers tend to make up the majority of workers who receive the full protection of the labour law. Some women have been lucky enough to get the opportunity to participate in the formal economy where they too, enjoy the privileges of protection. Thus some women have left the realm of domestic and family work and concentrate on their careers. This has left a void of domestic work behind. However domestic work and family work is essential for the maintenance of a family and needs to be done, thus we have given it a monetary value, albeit very low one, and employ other people, mostly women who are not afforded the same opportunities as their employers, to take care of the domestic work and family work. This type of work however is not covered by statutory protection.

26

This bares consequences for many women in South Africa. With stable public-sector jobs being eliminated through privatizing public services, a large proportion of women found themselves in the informal sector, and remain outside the world of full-time, stable and protected job in what is known as the informal economy (Benjamin, 2008). Within the informal economy women are concentrated at the lower end, occupying jobs like street vendors, home-based garment workers, child care providers, domestic work and unpaid family work, where decent work deficits are the greatest. Their work provides subsistence for their families but is not recognized as formal employment so they have no access to legal protections or benefits (Benjamin, 2008). As everyone knows, the HIV epidemic has risen to escalating proportions. According to recent data collected by UNAIDS Epidemic Update 2007 1.7 million people in SubSaharan Africa were newly infected with HIV in 2007. Bringing the total number of people infected with HIV to 22.5 million (Addati & Cassirer, 2008). Of those people infected with HIV more than half are women. Those HIV positive women, face struggles not only with the disease but trying to cope with a working life, because of the discrimination and stigma that takes place within the workplace (Addati & Cassirer, 2008). The situation for families affected with HIV/Aids is often the most dramatic. The caring needs increase at a time when further income is needed to pay medical expenses and compensate for the likely loss of income of the infected family member (Addati & Cassirer, 2008). This results in not only a loss of income from the infected family member, but often forces other family members, mostly women, to give up on paid employment and care for the sick family member (Addati & Cassirer, 2008: 5). This has direct consequences on women since the added burden of caring for the sick person intensifies all dimensions of unpaid work (Addati & Cassirer, 2008). This makes it very difficult for women to continue with their paid employment, thus putting their

27

futures at risk. Since the women in the family spend more time caring for the infected person, they have, not only, less time at the disposable to continue paid employment but also to contribute to the well being of the household family (Addati & Cassirer, 2008). We would like to end of this section by giving a definition of decent work defined by the International Labour Organisation: “Decent work is productive work for women and men in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity. Decent work involves opportunities for work that is productive and delivers a fair income; provides security in the workplace and social protection for workers and their families; offers better prospects for personal development and encourages social integration; gives people the freedom to express their concerns, to organize and to participate in decisions that affect their lives; and guarantees equal opportunities and equal treatment for all.”(FEDUSA, 20008: 2) However this vision of decent work is very often not applied to women. Women in South Africa still have to overcome the many obstacles that come their way. This due to the fact that women still face direct and indirect forms of discrimination and that it is still difficult for women who leave the labour market to care for their children, to re-enter it when their children get older. Often due to their disrupted careers, women tend to be over represented among the income elderly This essay began by laying out operational definitions of key concepts such as patriarchy, exploitation, power-over, and feminism. These definitions were given get further relevance as they were situated within a historo-epochal context, where we began with the Hunter-Gatherer society to chart the beginnings of patriarchy, then progressed into the Agrarian society in the aims of showing how it was entrenched into the very fabrics and institutions f society; including the division of labour. The elucidation on it’s influence on Capitalism was effective at showing how it still exists today, and thus it’s antecede has arisen n the form of Feminism. This allowed for this paper to chart the changes in

28

women’s attitudes towards the spheres of employment and work. Although their attitudes have changed and the traditional family has declined, women still bear the brunt of domestic responsibilities; which in turn affects their progress in formal work. The preceding section of our analysis contextualized to that there has been a feminization of work which has brought about an influx of women into the labour market. However, we showed that although there has been a definite increase of women in the labour market, it has certainly not brought a total collapse of the segregation of labour. Women still direct and indirect forms of discrimination, whether it be through organizational policies or government legislation. The following section narrowed the scope to the individual, by briefly showing the major discourses that inform career choice. The ideas raised highlighted how the age dynamics within the workplace, contribute to a dynamic and multifaceted age grouping within the 21st century workplace. Such an assessment allowed us to concisely examine the individual, and their life/career span, whereby the argument made is that chronological age does not make for accurate determinants of career progression. The final section of this analysis involved the contextualization of some of the ideas raised into a South African perspective. This entailed a look at the income disparity between men and women, with the focus on exposing how patriarchy has become embedded into all spheres of societal organization, from legislation to structural arrangements of paid employment. This facilitated a look at the effects of HIV/AIDS epidemic on South African women, and how it adds t the burden of domestic work, jeopardizing their own careers and well-being of the family household due to time spent caring for the ill.

Bibliography

29

•

Addati, L and Cassirer, N (2008). “Equal sharing of responsibilities between women and men, including care-giving in the context of HIV/AIDS” United Nations Office: Geneva

•

Bardwick, J (1989) The Plateauing Trap. Toronto, Bantam Books

•

Beder, S (2000). Selling the Work Ethic. Scribe Publications, Australia

•

Benjamin, P (2008). “Informal Work and Labour Rights in South Africa” DPRU: University of Cape Town

•

Berry-Lound (1990). “Work and the Family: Career Friendly Employment Practices” London: Institute of Personnel Management

•

Bradley, H; Erickson, M; Stephenson, C & Williams, S (2000). “The Myth of the female takeover” (Ch 4). Myths at Work. Polity Press: Cambridge

•

Brannen, J & Moss, P (1988). Women in Engineering: A Good Place to be?” London: Macmillan Education

•

Diamond, J (1998).

•

FEDUSA, (2008). “FEDUSA calls for decent work, decent life for women embargo” Media Release 8 August 2008

•

Gordon, J & Whelan, K (1998). Emotional Intelligence. New York

•

Hakim, C (1979). “Occupational segregation” Department of Employment Research Paper, no.9

•

Hakim, C (1981). “Job segregation: trends in the 1970’s” Department of Employment Gazette, Decembern

•

Institute for Black Research (1984). Black Woman Worker. Durban

•

Llewelyn, S & Osbourne, K (1990). “ Women’s Lives” London: Routledge

•

Maharaj,

S

(1999)

“Gender

Inequality

and

the

Economy:

Empowering Women in the new South Africa” Keynote speech at Professional Women's League of KwaZuluNatal, August 9, 1999 •

Mies, M (1986). Patriarchy and Accumalation on a World Scale. London

30

•

Newel, S (2000) “The superwoman syndrome: gender differences in attitudes toward equal opportunities at work and towards domestic responsibilities at home” in K. Grint (Ed). Work and Society: A Reader (Chapter 5: Domestic Work, pp 94-108

•

Schreuder, A & Coetzee, M (2003). Careers: An Organisational Perspective. Lansdowne:Juta & Co. Ltd

•

Therbon, G (2004). “Between Sex and Power: Family in the World 1900-2000” London: Routledge

Internet References •

Oxford (www.oxford.com) accessed @ 27 March 2009

•

Stanford University (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/exploitation/) Accessed @ 28 March 2009

31