 |
| Employee
Relations |
 |
Contents
1. Introduction
2. The current women’s position in the labour market
3. Basic causes of differences in the position of men and
women in the labour market and employee relations
a. Skills deficit
b. Occupational segregation
c. Discrimination
d. Interruptions in employment to care for family members
e. Part-time employment
4. Conclusion
5. Bibliography
Introduction
In the contemporary economy, employee relations are growing
to be more complicated and it is extremely important to carefully
analyze the recent trends in the labor market in order to
fully realize and objectively assess the current situation
in this market. In fact, nowadays the labour and traditional
views on this process start to change, not in the last turn
due to the increasing role of knowledge and information.
In this respect, it is particularly important to thoroughly
analyze the position of women in the labor market and the
extent to which their role has changed in the modern economy
and employee relations. It is not a secret that traditionally
women were in a deprived position compared to men and this
is it is necessary to find out whether this problem is still
relevant as well as to attempt to trace the basic causes of
the existing difference between men and women in the labour
market.
In such a way, it will be possibly to eventually define the
basic components that constitute the gap between men and women
employees in the modern economy.
The current women’s position in the labour market
Speaking about the current situation in the labour market,
it should be pointed out that it has really changed compared
to the situation that could be observed a few decades ago.
First of all, the labour market demands and its structure
are changing and what is more the gender difference has a
trend to gradually decrease that, though, does not necessarily
mean that they have already disappeared. In fact, nowadays
the growth of new industries stimulated by the rapid development
of new technologies, especially in the sphere of IT, creates
the situation when the labour market demand on physical semi-qualified
or non-qualified labour force gradually decreases.
As a result, the role of information and knowledge is growing
and in the future this trend may become dominant. Naturally,
in such a situation, some economic theories concerning labour
need to be improved or precised. In this respect, it is worthy
of note the human capital theory which traditionally defines
human capital as “a way of defining and categorizing
peoples’ skills and abilities as used in employment
and as they otherwise contribute to the economy” (Walby
and Olsen 102).
Briefly speaking, it is possible to say that, according to
this theory, labour is one of the highest value the employees
possess and, to a certain extent, labour is a cornerstone
of employee relations. This is why it is very important for
an employee to be competitive in the labour market that can
be archived only through the high level of his/her skills
and abilities he/she can offer to the market, or literally
to employees.
In fact, it is hardly possible to underestimate the role of
human capital in employees relations since human capital is
a stock of assets one owns, which allows one to receive a
flow of income, which is like interests earned. On the other
hand, it is necessary to emphasize that human capital is substitutable
though it does not mean that it will replace land, labour
or capital totally, but “it can be substituted for them
to various degrees and be included as a separate variable
in a production function” (Allen 233).
In such a way, nowadays, actually as always, the relations
of employees are defined by their skills and abilities which
actually form human capital. On the other hand, there is another
component of human capital that substantially differs modern
employees relations from those of the past and this component
is knowledge. Objectively speaking, knowledge can hardly be
referred to human capital as a kind of standard skills or
abilities of an employee. Knowledge is really unique and it
is substantially different from the physical labour that used
to dominate in the past and, to a significant extent, contributed
to the domination of men in the labour market, while knowledge
creates opportunities for women to gain better position in
the labour market and really benefit from employee relations.
actually, knowledge reveal certain limitations of the human
capital theory exactly because of the uniqueness of knowledge
which cannot be really standardized and classified by this
theory.
Basically, the uniqueness of knowledge and its difference
from the physical labour may be explained by several factors
which can potentially put men and women in more equal positions
in employee relations and labour market.
Firstly, knowledge is expandable and self-generating. Practically
it means that as doctors get more experience their knowledge
base will increase, as well as their endowment of human capital
(Kelvin 134). It is also important to emphasize that nowadays
“the economics of scarcity is replaced by the economics
of self-generation” (Kelvin 137) not in the last turn
due to knowledge which is self-generating, i.e., to put it
in simple words, knowledge can produce knew knowledge. Secondly,
knowledge is transportable and shareable and, consequently,
knowledge can be easily moved and shared. Even though knowledge’s
transfer does not prevent its use by the original holder,
“the transfer of knowledge may reduce its scarcity-value
to its original possessor” (Allen 304).
Thus, at first glance, according to the theory of human capital,
knowledge, becoming one of the defining factors in the modern
labour market, should provide equal opportunities for both
men and women to benefit from their human capital and establish
equal employee relations. In fact, this exactly what the harkim
theory implies. To put it more precisely, according to this
theory the balance is essential in employee relations since
it will contribute to the improvement of the position of employees
through equal pay for the same labour, for instance, and,
consequently, it will lead to higher productivity and efficiency
of work. However, the reality is quite different from this
ideal assumption and actually reveals certain to idealism
in the harkim theory that undermines, to a certain extent,
its plausibility and reliability.
Basically, the current situation in the labour market and
employee relations is still characterized by a substantial
gap between men and women that may be clearly observed in
the pay and productivity gap (see Table 1). In this respect,
it should be pointed out that, according to the recent research
(Walby and Olsen) in the UK, statistical data analysis found
that the pay and productivity gap practically in all issues
discussed was in favour of men that reveals the fact that
the position of women is worse than that of men. To put it
more precisely, the gender gap has been used as the most appropriate
proxy available for the productivity gap per hour. The gap
between women’s and men’s education is associated
with 6% of the gap. Occupational segregation is associated
with 13% of the gap, including comparing a situation of no
occupational segregation with the current level of segregation.
However, what is the most remarkable is just being female
associated with 29% of the gap.
Furthermore, the difference in the length of women’s
full-time work experience (10,9 years), and that of men (18,2years),
is associated with 26% of the gap. The greater interruptions
to the employment due to the family care by women as compared
with men were associated with 15% of the gap. The extent to
which women are more likely than men to work part-time, 4,4
years, rather than 0,3 years, is associated with 12% of the
gap.
Basic causes of differences in the position of men and women
in the labour market and employee relations
Obviously, the substantial gap in the position of men and
women must have some causes which actually engender the inequality
of employee relations between men and women and it is very
important to find out these causes and thoroughly analyze
them. Otherwise, it will be practically impossible to trace
the trends that will define the future development of the
labour market and employee relations, neither it will be possible
to find possible solutions to minimize or even totally eliminate
this gap.
Skills deficit
Specialists (Allen) emphasize that one of the major reasons
for the significant gap between men and women in the labour
market, which affects their level of payment and productivity,
is the skills deficit. However, this problem is not as simple
as it might seem to be at first glance because it is not just
a lack of certain skill which women do not possess but it
is the problem of the systematic deprivation of women of a
possibility to acquire essential skills and develop respective
abilities to be really competitive compared with men.
First of all, it is necessary to underline that the root of
this problem is not in the employees or employers but rather
in the system of education at large, traditional cultural
values and stereotypes, socially dogmatized behaviour, and
others. Practically, it means that one of the major problems
that results in the lack of skills of women employees is poor
education of women, though it does not mean that they receive
no education or their education is poor at large scale but
still they have less opportunities than men, especially when
they choose the future profession. For instance, women on
average “have fewer educational qualifications than
men” (Walby and Olsen 155).
As a result, women cannot simply enter traditionally male
qualifications because of the lack of education. However,
it should be said that nowadays young women have eliminated
this problem but they cannot fully closed this gap because
there are women at an average age. Not surprisingly that at
the present moment the average women is less qualified than
an average man.
Some researches (Allen) revealed the fact that in order to
raise the average employed woman to the educational level
of the average man, she would need the equivalent of 0,3 years
of education. However, it is necessary to underline that this
problem does not affect all women. In fact, the gender gap
in educational qualifications is concentrated among those
women who are over 40, and those who are employed part-time
or not at all, while for younger women the gap is getting
closer as it has been just mentioned above. As a result, the
significant part of the skills deficit is caused by this gendered
qualifications gap among the specific group of women named
above.
Remarkably, many women, especially those working part-time
or who do not work at all are willing to continue their education.
To put it more precisely, two-thirds of part-time women workers
(66%) or those not working (63%) were willing to undergo additional
training or education. On the other hand, many of them (63%
not working and 53% part-time) would find it difficult to
pay for themselves, while among those prepared to undergo
additional training or education, 79% said that they would
be more likely to start training if it was free (Walby and
Olsen 174).
Naturally, it is also necessary to take into consideration
socio-cultural norms and traditions that also affect dramatically
the skills deficit of women. However, in the respect to these
problems the similar trend may be traced as concerning educational
qualifications. To put it more precisely, women of the younger
generation are less susceptible to the impact of socio-cultural
norms that used to define the life of women over 40.
Nonetheless, it should be said that the problem of the skills
deficit is real and it still persists. This is why the skills
deficit influences the general statistics and widens the gap
between men and women in their competitive struggle in the
labour market and deteriorates their employee relations. however,
the recent trends are rather positive and leave the room for
the real possibility to change the situation for better and
make the position of women equal to that of men due to the
equal access to educational qualifications and positive socio-cultural
changes based on principles of the gender (and actually not
only gender) tolerance and equality.
Occupational segregation
Another cause of the existing gap between men and women in
the labour market and that creates numerous problems in employee
relations is the occupational segregation. In fact, the essence
of this problem is rather historical and to a significant
extent predetermined by the past trends in the labour market
and employee relations. Basically, there is a pronounced concentration
of women and men in different occupations, with “women
overrepresented in lower paid occupations” (Walby and
Olsen 229). This is actually the essence of the occupational
segregation. In practice, the occupational segregation in
part involves a form of labour market rigidity that prevents
the allocations of the most appropriate worker to any give
job slot. On the other hand it may be a failure of the market
to allocate people to their most productive location and the
occupational segregation turns to be supplanted by this objective
and purely economic factor that has little relation to gender.
In such a way, it should be said that the occupational segregation
is quite an important factor that contributes to the deterioration
of the position of women in the labour market and brings in
inequality in employee relations of men and women. Moreover,
even though there may be some other objective causes that
prevent people both men and women from allocation of the most
appropriate job slot, but they do not totally eliminate the
problem of the occupational segregation which persists and
may increase the negative impact of other causes on the deprived
and unequal position of women in the labour market and employee
relations.
Discrimination
Discrimination is also a very important factor that may be
viewed as one of the causes of the currently existing gap
in the pay and productivity of men and women which equally
affects their position in the labour market and employee relations.
To a certain extent, discrimination is similar to the occupational
segregations because it prevents the best allocation of workers
to job. In such a situation, women turns to be more discriminated
than men. The main reason is that often they have lower paid
jobs compared to men, which, in their turn, may occupy higher
position in a company or an organization. As a result, gender
discrimination influences employment of women and their employee
relations.
Basically, discrimination is another form of rigidity that
may depress women’s potential productivity level, if
it means that, for example, there are mis-matches between
women’s skills and experience and the jobs they are
doing. In such a way, discrimination may be quite a serious
factor deteriorating employee relations and women’s
position in the labour market but it is necessary to emphasize
that this problem is also, to a significant extent, originates
from the past historical practices since nowadays the policy
of tolerance and equal opportunities dominate in the society.
On the other hand, there will still remain possibilities for
discrimination until women are less presented in the executive
personnel compared with men.
Interruptions in employment to care for family members
Nonetheless, unlike the causes mentioned above leading to
the deprived position of women in the labour market and employee
relations, there are some natural factors that put women a
priori into unequal position compared with men. In this respect,
it is possible to speak about interruptions in employment
to care for family members. Obviously, this problem is basically
caused by stereotypes and traditional views, according to
which, women should primarily stuck to household and family.
As a result, it is traditionally believed to be their responsibility
to take care for family members, regardless their job and
career perspectives.
On the other hand, there may be interruptions which are not
directly caused by the care for family members, for instance,
unemployment which may have the same effect on women’s
position in the labour market and decrease their competitiveness.
However, all interruptions to employment, whether for unemployment
or to care for family members, have a depressing effect on
productivity. Naturally, this affects employee relations and
again puts women in a disadvantageous position.
Furthermore, while men experience more unemployment, women
take much more time out of the labour market than men do in
order to care. As a result, men turn to be objectively more
preferable for employers to hire than women. At the same time,
interruptions in employment of women produce a negative impact
on their professional level that may deteriorate their productivity
and efficiency of work that apparently would not make an employer
to change his/her mind concerning the choice of a man or woman
employee.
Moreover, significant numbers of women suffer downward occupational
mobility between their highest level occupation before having
children and their current one. However, not all mothers stop
employment as a result of having children. Those of them who
are better educated, better paid and who have the most flexible
employers are more likely to retain their labour market attachment.
Obviously, the lack of flexibility is one of the major reason
that women find it hard to combine caring and employment.
As a result, often women actually have to make a choice either
in favour of caring or employment. However, it is necessary
to underline that the “increased flexibility and better
wages were likely to encourage more women to start work or
to increase their working hours” (Allen 188), though
it will hardly change the attitude of employers to women and
the former would hardly appreciate the idea of increasing
flexibility and better wages. Thus, interruptions of employment
to care for family members is still one of the objective and
serious causes of the worse position of women in the labour
market and employee relations.
Part-time employment
Finally, the last cause of the difference in the position
of women and men in the labour market and, to a certain extent,
discriminating employee relations that will be analyzed in
terms of this paper is part-time employment. In actuality,
part-time employment accounts for many factors that reduce
women’s pay and productivity. It should be pointed out
that researches revealed the fact that “women who work
part-time are the least educated, work in the most segregated
occupations, and have the shortest employment histories”
(Walby and Olsen 315). Obviously, in such a situation part-time
employment may be viewed as a serious factor deteriorating
the position of women in the labour market compared with men
and their employee relations may be characterized by the substantially
higher degree of discrimination because of being female.
Further, it is worthy of note that while extra years of experience
of full-time work increase pay, productivity and efficiency
of work of women, and consequently, their competitiveness
in the labour market, than extra years of part-time work experience
“are associated with lower pay” (Allen 426). Nonetheless,
many women are forced to enter part-time work when they have
young children to care about but, what is even more important,
is the fact that considerable numbers of women do not return
to full-time work when their children grow up.
Also it should be said that, according to the recent researches,
of women employed part-time, 44% do not have dependent children,
while 32% of women with no dependent children work part-time
(Walby and Olsen 341). At the same time, in developed countries
the part-time sector may constitute quite a substantial sector
of the labour market. For instance, the part-time sector,
at 23% of the workforce, is larger in the UK than in many
other countries. However, regardless the country this sector
remains low paid and low productive and, in such a context,
a large number of women, being employed in this sector, is
quite disturbing and indicating at their disadvantageous position
in the labour market and employee relations.
Conclusion
Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is possible
to conclude that nowadays the position of women in the labour
market and employee relations is still quite difficult. It
is not a secret that gradually, the position of women is getting
better but, nonetheless, there are a variety of factors which
prevent women from being really in equal position compared
with men and, what is more, have equal opportunities in the
labour market and avoid discrimination in employee relations.
In general, it is necessary to emphasize that some problems
which provoke such a situation in the labour market and employee
relations are caused by factors that may disappear in the
future since even at the present moment these factors are
quite weak among the younger generation. Among such factors
may be named the gap in educational qualifications, socio-cultural
stereotypes and prejudices, and probably discrimination, though
the latter is still considered to be one of the most serious
problems. On the other hand, there are objective, or natural
factors such as interruption of employment to care for children
but even such problems can be solved, or at least, their negative
effects may be minimized. In this respect, it is worthy of
note that the equal time spent by both men and women to care
for family members may really change the position of women
for better in this respect.
Bibliography:
1. Allen, R. Economic Development of the UK. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2003.
2. Dooling, H. Gender Studies. London, Routledge, 2001.
3. Heilbroner, R.L. and Milberg W.S. The Making of Economic
Society. London: Prentice Hall, 1998.
4. Heintz, J. And Folbre N. The Ultimate Field Guide to the
UK Economy: A Compact and Irreverent Guide to Economic Life
in Britain. NY: Norton and Co, 2000.
5. Kelvin, G. Economic History of the 20th c. NY: New Publishers,
1999.
6. Kelvin, G. Female Labour Force in the Modern Economy. NY:
Random House, 2002.
7. Peterson, L. Modern Economy: Trends and Perspepectives.
London: Routledge, 2004.
8. Walby, S. and Olsen, W. The Impact of the Women’s
Position in the Labour Market on Pay and Implications for
UK Productivity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
9. Wilkinson, W. F. Labour Market and Employment. NY: New
Publishers, 2002.
|
|
