Despite the recent The Economist magazine proclamation of pending equality in the workplace, evidence suggests that the situation is more complex.
Commentators on my recent post here at Creative Class raised several good points:
Alan Says: Start celebrating when women earn 50% of total salaries – I expect the champagne will remain on ice for a long time/ probably forever. Sorry of this seems pessimistic.
Jana Says: There’s a big difference between women being 50% of the workforce and women being equally represented in the workforce. My guess is that the majority of the women in the study are in lower level positions than the men. An example being that in one company I worked for was that the majority of the accounting department was female, but these were people inputting invoices, doing reconciliations and payroll. The counterpart was that the head of the department was male.
Without a better look at the statistics I’m not sure if this is something to celebrate.
The folks at Economix blog also weighed in:
Furthermore, the Current Population Survey data show that women are more than twice as likely as men to work part time (24.6 percent in 2008 compared with 11.1 percent in 2008). A measure of equal participation in paid employment should take that difference in hours into account.
The Economist notes that women remain underrepresented in management positions but registers considerable optimism concerning current trends.
By contrast, recent research by the sociologists Philip Cohen, Matt Huffman and Stefanie Knauer showed that women’s entry into management positions in the United States slowed significantly in the 1990s.
The consensus seems to be that The Economist jumped the gun in declaring a female victory.
In light of this discussion, it’s worth re-examining and considering Penelope Trunk’s long-held belief that women — along with younger generations invading the workforce — have changed the entire workplace game. I agree with Trunk that for many women and men, the new career (or should I say life) goal isn’t to maximize salary but instead to maximize life experiences, including those of raising children, spending time with friends and family, and generally enjoying the rich offerings life gives.
From a 2005 Penelope Trunk blog post:
Forget the glass ceiling because it’s about to become irrelevant. Not because women are finally going to get to the top of Fortune 500 companies in forces of more than two companies at a time. That may happen, but no one’s holding their breath. The glass ceiling is going to become irrelevant because the women who are coming into the workforce now see what’s above that glass and they are uninterested.
…. five years after earning an MBA, 40% of women are working from home. Often the press writes about this statistic like it’s a travesty, but I think it’s great. It’s an achievement that these women have decided they can find success on their own terms instead of having to fit themselves through paths that were established for men, decades ago.
The disenchantment with corporate life is not limited to women: eighty percent of men aged 20 to 39 said that a flexible job to accommodate kids takes a higher priority than doing challenging work or earning a high salary.
Many women with children — and increasingly their male partners as well — will gladly forgo career advancement, and the higher salaries that go along with it, in return for a more flexible job that allows for a better and more fulfilling family life.
Moreover, many organizations have much less hierarchical structures today. This suits the many women and men who value life experiences over corporate ladder-climbing. Working on interesting projects and with great people is a life experience they treasure — climbing a corporate ladder increasingly is not.
Your thoughts?
January 18th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
Interesting thoughts – I like the idea that people are looking for a complete life “package” rather than corporate success. I wonder how this would stand up if we look at an area where house prices are lower than the major corporate centres – would this effect the choices of workers? Seems to me that so many choices are driven by real estate costs (writing from outside the US, so not sure if this has changed since the GFC, with concerns about self, family and quality of life taking a back seat for so many people.
I’d love to hear your thoughts?
January 19th, 2010 at 10:17 am
As someone who is starting to enter their peak earning years, I find this spot on with my values. I am a GenXer, but have always been ahead of the curve when it comes down to “what matters most”. When I started into my career after college, climbing the corporate ladder was the last thing I cared about. I wanted a balance between work and life. Actually, more of an integration of work and life and having the flexibility to shift when needed. Lots have changed in the last 16 years, and am glad to see that GenY and Z are thinking about a whole life rather than just a work life.
It’s interesting to watch, but I wonder how this trend will play out with our current economic situation. Will this finally redirect us to the important things rather than promoting over-consumption?
January 19th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
I don’t think you can measure the qualitative with the quantitative. That is to say that the quantitative numbers; if women make up 50% of the workforce, or 50% of the total salary, or 50% of companies’ CEOs are women, cannot tell us about the “success” of woman’s integration into the workforce, nor the feminist project.
January 19th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
As a 49-year-old woman who owns her own business (in part because I never did well at taking direction!), I agree with Penelope Truck that the indicator of success has changed and that plenty of women do not care to break the glass ceiling so much as to break the mold, to change the mindset that says that success is defined by success in corporate life. When I am dead and gone, I hope that I am remembered for something besides having been a successful business owner!
January 19th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Starting with Alan’s question, it’s a good one. My thoughts: Making the choice to live in the suburbs for many families requires one parent not work in a professional “downtown” type job, if at all. The commuting costs (time and money) are too high. Suburban options may make sense for the family that wants or can afford to have one non-wage-earning or only-part-time-earning adult.
But, because many women have the education, upbringing and expectations for a professional career, they are not going to let real estate limit their options. This is why, I believe, we’re seeing more families and married couples living in apartments and condos near work. They could theoretically afford a suburban house, but it would mean seeing each other a lot less — and doing household chores like lawn mowing when home rather than spending quality time together.
Does this answer your question?
January 20th, 2010 at 4:56 pm
I know this is heresy, but I can’t imagine a job that is so important and stimulating that someone would choose to rent an apartment just to be close to their employer. Personally, I would rather have a beautiful yard with lush gardens, and plenty of peace and quiet, in a safe area far away from the smell of other people’s food, noise, crime, and ambient sound pollution.
For me the term “full employment ” sounds like a threat, rather than a promise. I am sure the world is moving toward my opinion, that having control over one’s own time is preferable to living in an ant hill and working…Boomers changed the world of work during the late seventies, and eighties. Before them the world was 9-5, but after them the work schedule has become more flexible. Recently work has changed again, as fewer jobs are necesary for corporations to operate, as they automate and offshore everything possible. The vast majority of working women fall into the category of white collar slave, at best. The word “career” is a joke for most women.
January 21st, 2010 at 4:35 pm
Although participation by women in the paid workforce has continued to increase, household income has not kept up with rising household costs. Elizabeth Warren’s research can be accessed through some interesting University of California Television:
The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class UC Television Video
Elizabeth Warren presents her comparison of family expenses 1970-71 to 2005-06 and talks about the continuing rise in bankruptcy among the middle-class in a 2007 lecture. The data show how changes in costs affect spending patters so that the current two-income family of four is in worse shape than their single income parents 35 years before. The research work led to her concerns about the credit problems in the U.S. and vulnerability of families to economic setbacks. Ms. Warren is currently Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP funds.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A&feature
Background Interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1Uk-DwUvJw&feature=channel
January 28th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
As a professional woman working for a fortune 100 company, I enjoy all the perks that go with it (stock, bonuses, a great salary). I have however, become disenchanted after the birth of my third child. I love my job. I love what I do…I even love the company I work for…if only they would allow part-time employment. I find myself considering venturing out into the jobmarket at a time when the economy is suffering. What is wrong with a woman, or man for that matter, working part-time? If you can use their skills and they are an employee worth retaining, why is this such a big deal?
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:38 pm
I am a non-professional with 35 years of experience in the technology field. I work in the production rather than the service sector of IT. My company is large, greater than 10,000 people.
I see those who climb the corporate ladder, male or female, as non or even conter productive. The main thrust of managment is to reduce costs by outsourcing and reaping short term gains. I could understand not wanting to persue the glass ceiling.
January 18th, 2011 at 4:32 am
That statistic doesn’t tell us about success that women achieve while working. And the thing is not in salary or quantity of women that are measured in worforce. Women nowadays are gaining more and more power.