Although it does not compensate for a slashed wages, past studies have found that women receive higher pay increases. Redyced stereotyping may be the result of these increases. Reduced stereotyping occurs when a manager does not have a sufficient amount of information to evaluate the individual and therefore base his/her decisions on stereotypes. When enough information is present, reduced stereotype is less likely to occur. Structural features may also be a factor in this gender difference. Many organization base pay increases on a performance rating and their level in their job grade. In this structure, employees that are paid less are eligible for higher pay increases than employees with higher salaries. Therefore, if women start off with lower salaries, they will be more likely to have higher pay increases.
Harris, Gilbreath and Sunday (2002) decided to put these theories to test. Using previous data from a government-owned, contractor-operated nuclear waste facility in the united states. 218 participants were randomly selected to participate; 174 were men and 44 were women.
In their analysis, it was found that seniority, education and performance ratings did not differ between men & women. However, compared to men, women had significantly lower salaries (on average about $1000 less per month) and were in lower grades. When including job grade, education level and seniority as variables in their analysis, it was found that salary differences decreased but did not put an end to the salary differences between genders. On an annual basis, women earned a range of between $1080 (in 1991) and $2004 (in 1993) less than men.
It was found that women received pay increases that were, on average, 5% greater than men. These differences diminished once job grade and base pay were added as variables. Furthermore, performance ratings did not impact the differences between gender.
There are several limitations that must be considered in this study:
- First and foremost, this study is about 8 years old.
- The organization was new and employed individuals for only 4 years.
- The organization work with government contracts and therefore may have strict anti-discrimination laws to abide by.
- The time frame that was examined was only two years.
|This picture does not reflect my personal opinion.|
It is clearly a controversial image, but I like the
message at the bottom.