Example of critical thinking on hoop dreams:job discrimination

Hoop Dreams: Job Discrimination

Question #1:
When it comes to determining compensation an employee deserves, several factors would have to be taken into consideration. First of all, the need of the company for an employee to perform a particular job must be balanced with the cost factor, the realistic amount the company is able to afford. The skill requirement for the job must be considered, because if the job is a difficult one requiring a lot of education, experience, and so forth, it will be harder to find, attract, and keep employees who have these skills. If little training or education is required, the compensation can be less because the company can assume that it would not be costly to train or replace a new hire. The typical wage and benefits for the position should be considered, because in order for a company to remain competitive, especially if the job requires a high level of skill, the company must be able to retain loyal workers. Compensation does not have to include just salary, but also other benefits and perks such as good vacation time, insurance, flexibility, etc.

Question #2:

It does not appear to be morally acceptable for women to benefit from their status as mothers. Both men and women can be parents, so unless fathers gain some kind of benefit as well, it seems simply discriminatory to favor women just because they are mothers. However, considering the “ wage penalty” women endure due to motherhood, trying to argue that women deserve some special benefit for being mothers seems like an extreme reaction when bringing people closer to equality would be a more rational goal. According to researchers Michelle Budig and Paula England who examined a National Longitudinal Survey of Youth for 1982-1993, “ Results show a wage penalty of 7 percent per child. Penalties are larger for married women than for unmarried women” (2001, p. 204). While the rewards of motherhood may be many, it appears that making gains in the working world is not one of them.
In an ideal world, groups such as women that were discriminated against throughout history would not need to be entitled to benefits that could lead to discrimination against the formerly empowered and dominant groups. In this ideal world, people would suddenly realize the equality of all people or at least the potential for varying levels of success in everyone. People would not be greedy, harbor doubts against others, or play favorites because of race, gender, religion, sexuality, and so forth, and all people would be considered equally for jobs, rewards, and more based on experience, skill, education (assuming everyone had equal access to a good education), and so forth.
However, that is not the way things work at the current time. According to the “ Hoop Dreams” case study, “ administrators told the women that because they and their sport didn’t draw as much attention as men, they shouldn’t be paid as much” (Shaw 2013, p. 418). As a specific example, there may be nothing wrong with the way this compensation is decided. However, that a lower wage for Coach Marianne Stanley was also supported with the defense that “ if someone like Marianne Stanley wants to enter the big leagues, then she should coach men,” clearly points to the idea that prejudice and sexual discrimination are at the heart of this decision (Shaw 2013, p. 418). After all, to distill this justification, that means that women are lesser/small while men are greater/big. It seems more just that a hard look should be taken at how compensation is decided upon and that equality should play a bigger factor than it currently does.
People need to be confident that they are chosen for a job because of their skill, hard work, expertise, education, dedication, and other similar factors. Whether they are the formerly discriminated or dominant, they should not worry that they were overlooked for a position because of gender, race, or sexuality.

References

Budig, Michelle J. & England, Paula (Apr. 2001). The Wage Penalty for Motherhood. American Sociological Review 66: 204-225. Retrieved from http://www. asanet. org/
images/members/docs/pdf/featured/motherwage. pdf
Shaw, William H. (2013). Business Ethics. Independence, Kentucky: Cengage Learning.