A tweet alerted me to the reason for the persistence of the gender gap and to studies about the true reasons for it. Quite instructive. The Washington Post article states:
Bowles and her colleagues divided 119 volunteers at random into different groups and provided them with descriptions of male or female candidates who tried to negotiate a higher starting salary for a hypothetical job, along with descriptions of applicants who accepted the offered salary. The volunteers were asked to decide whether they would hire the candidates -- who were all described as exceptionally talented and qualified. While both men and women were penalized for negotiating, Bowles found that the negative effect for women was more than twice as large as that for men.
Subsequent studies used actors who recorded videos of themselves asking for more money or accepting salaries they had been offered. A new group of 285 volunteers were again asked whether they would be willing to work with the candidates after viewing the videos. Men tended to rule against women who negotiated but were less likely to penalize men; women tended to penalize both men and women who negotiated, and preferred applicants who did not ask for more.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Women don't get higher salaries because they don't negociate - and they don't negociate because....
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16329
An interesting study! Most of the scholarly literature suggests that women walk a fine line in the interviewing process in general.
She's expected to highlight her accomplishments without bragging. Women who cross this line are viewed as not modest and therefore unlikable. Men are given far more leeway.
The problem is that many people buy into the pop psychology and self-help books that mistakenly advise women to be assertive, not play down their achivements, negotiate for more money etc. This is contradictory to the scholarly research that clearly demonstrates that women who do this put themselves at a big risk of being viewed as unlikable.
Also, stating that women are responsible for the pay gap if they don't negotiate is common and simply wrong. Most women work in teaching, nursing, or as administrative personnel. These fields are not as well paid as the most common male professions (truck drivers, managers, etc). How will negotiation work for these women?
IIRC, the pay gap is still there when you adjust for all that.
Well, on the subject of different professions, the study looking at negociation differences compared across similar education and experience and fields, so there was still an 11 per cent gap unaccountable for. BTW I would like to attribute this tweet to Illusionist and the article which spawned the inspiration to Jezebel.
The whole idea that women's wages are lower because they allegedly don't negotiate has one big hole in it.
The fact that, for most workers, when you apply for a job, their is a set pay scale and you either take it or leave it.
This is true of most blue collar, service sector and pink collar jobs.
So, for the majority of the workforce who do not negotiate their wages, the boss is responsible for 100% of the wage discrimination, because he/she sets the pay scale.
I wonder how much is, in fact, "set" and how much is negotiable, and how this could be evaluated - since, yes, it's the main part of the equation. The studies quoted above strongly suggest it is possible to negotiate even if perhaps many people may not think of it.
Well, I know that every job I ever had came with a set wage scale - either spelled out in a union contract, or by the civil service regulations of the City of New York or the personnel manager said that's how much we pay for this type of work.
There is no "negotiation" there - basically, if you take the job, that's how much they pay, period.
I suspect that most blue collar and non supervisory clerical jobs are just like that - the wage for that particular type of labor is set by company policy, or negotiated with the union, or determined by the civil service commission, and you take it or leave it.
Obviously, executive and managerial jobs are totally different - but most American workers are production, service or non supervisory clerical workers, so that really doesn't matter.
I have hired ( often at a fairly low level - always 'blue collar' ) and even when the boss says the wage is 'set' there is *always* negotiating room. If not in immediate cash then at least in the time of first review ( for which read raise - so it impacts earning over the long run.) Mostly there is room for more money as well.
Not outside industry limits - but there is always some 'pad'.
I have spent many years doing technical training seminars for professionals in IT. I've observed that the men in my classes were quite comfortable talking with one another about money. It was not at all unusual to hear a man ask another how much he made. I never heard a woman ask that, or even be in a conversation where the question was asked. In order to negotiate effectively, one needs to have some kind of baseline as to what is reasonable to ask for. From what I've seen men tend to be privy to that sort of information way more than their female colleagues.