Impact of gender, race and nationality on women distribution at the workplace

Insert Impact of gender, race and nationality on women distribution at the workplace Gender, ethni and citizenship have affected the distribution of women at the workplace for a long period of time. The past five decades have witnessed remarkable changes regarding gender and racial parity in America. Nationality, on the other hand, influenced the absorption of employees in certain positions. American policies reserve much of the less technical jobs for the locals. The clamor for gender parity spearheaded by the feminist lobbies of the 1960s witnessed women beginning to join the employment pool in large numbers. The ‘ weaker’ gender had previously enjoyed high involvement in the labor market during World War II. Whites and American citizens were at higher chance of being absorbed into the workforce in contrast to minorities. This paper investigates the general impact of gender, race, and nationality on women’s occupational distribution in the United States. In the sunset years of 1960s when the female gender began trooping to the work force in substantial numbers, they were joining the field in order complement the effort of their male counterparts, instead of substituting men after the conflict. This radical change from the one-breadwinner tradition in a family to the contribution of both marriage partners dramatically altered the socioeconomic culture of class of the US society. Regardless, not until the enactment of better social laws in the 1960s to streamline gender, race and nationality issues in the workplace that a reprieve was achieved in the public sector. Nonetheless, the private sector remained non-committal on the issue, hence offered priority to whites. “ Throughout the US history, economic differences among men and women have been constructed and organized a long a number of social categories … gender, race-ethnicity, and class” (Amott and Matthaei 11). The findings of studies imply that the trends of workplace inequality usually tend to revolve around nationality, gender and ethnicity and so is the distribution or assigning tendencies of groups in different workplace environments. For instance, the allocation of males compared to females in a particular workforce environment tends to lean in favor of men who are ethnically and nationally ‘ correct.’ Additionally, the inequality in treatment is concentrated on the connection between occupation and earnings, for example, weighing the earnings of mainstream whites against blacks under the same working conditions. Effects of the social issues By indicating that “ economists view the sexual division of labor as central …” Amott and Matthaei (13) mean improper handling of race, gender and nationality issues often results in occupational inequality. This vice greatly influences the socioeconomic standing of an employee or a job applicant. Occupational inequality is connected with the victims’ access to better opportunities like securing an employment, purchasing a residence or generally owning property. Additionally, individuals who are made to bear the brunt of occupational partiality may find it hard to climb up the corporate ladder and access credit facilities. Occupational standing is inexorably linked to predictions of issues such an individual’s social status. Segregation of the work force based on sex, often results in workplace relationships, which may reduce work output of an individual. Additionally, a fair woman may earn a placement in company opposed to a qualified man. Alternatively, the stereotype that a man is the breadwinner in a family may result in a woman being denied an opportunity to serve in an organization in favor of a man. Most countries give priority to its citizens in an effort to slay the leviathan of internal unemployment rate. In light of this, individuals from other country, their qualifications notwithstanding, may not secure a job in a foreign country. This explains why so many inequalities based on nationality continue to persist in the United States, which gives precedence to its nationals. Though race is an imperative factor, which dictates employee recruitment initiatives in America, it is slowly fading away if the statistics gathered before 1960s hold any water. Amott and Matthaei (18) agree in “ certain” terms that race contributes to the national economy. White men would be granted better salary to work in an organization, as opposed to women or individuals of other ethnicities with similar professional qualifications, hence choosy employers lose more revenue. Gender, race and nationality issues, if properly handle result in employers gaining a competitive advantage in the aggressive market by filling the vacant positions with women and minority groups, thereby limiting occupational disparity. This strategy, if implemented by employers, could become more common in the corporate world over time, thus resulting in the correction of occupational inequality across different sectors in the entire country. Conclusion Despite substantial gains that have resulted in more representation of women and minority groups in the employment pool and attaining positions of authority, a lot still needs to be done to rid the workplace of inequalities. Workplace discrimination is vast leviathan that is inexorably tied to race, gender and nationality issues. Following the formulation and the putting into practice of regulations aimed to protect possible victims, the challenger is nationally and internally addressed by internal governmental organizations. Still, it commonly takes place and the impact is shocking. Nonetheless, the significance of these nationality matters remains imperative for not only the inequality trends of labor force but also dictates the significance of the future work force dynamics, and efforts aimed to correct workplace disparities. Works Cited Amott, Teresa L., and Matthaei, Julie A. Race, gender, and work: a multi-cultural economic history of women in the United States. New York: South End Press, 1996.