Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2016-10
Why do occupations dominated by women pay less? How ‘female-typical’ work tasks and working-time arrangements affect the gender wage gap among higher education graduates
Even though women today constitute the majority of higher education graduates, they still earn considerably less than their male counterparts. Previous research demonstrates that occupational sex segregation is important for understanding the gender wage gap, since occupations dominated by women pay less; yet less is known about why this is the case. This article explores two possible mechanisms: the devaluation of ‘female-typical’ work tasks and working-time arrangements. Hypotheses are tested by applying OLS regression and Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analyses to the log hourly wages of a representative sample of German higher education graduates from 2001. Results confirm that occupational overtime increases and occupational part-time work decreases wages, indicating that occupations dominated by women pay less due to their ‘female-typical’ working-time arrangements. However, inconsistent with the devaluation thesis, tasks like teaching/educating increase wages for women, too, which speaks against a general lower value of ‘female-typical’ tasks, at least among the highly qualified.
AckerJ (1990) Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: a theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society4(2): 139–58.
2.
BeckerGS (1962) Investment in human capital: a theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy70(2): 9–49.
3.
BeckerGS (1985) Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor. Journal of Labor Economics3(1): S33–58.
4.
BoltonSCMuzioD (2008) The paradoxical processes of feminization in the professions: the case of established, aspiring and semi-professions. Work, Employment and Society22(2): 281–99.
5.
BraakmannN (2013) What determines wage inequality among young German university graduates?Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik233(2): 130–58.
6.
BuchmannMKriesiI (2012) Geschlechtstypische Berufswahl: Begabungszuschreibungen, Aspirationen und Institutionen. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie52: 256–80.
7.
BudigMJEnglandP (2001) The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review66(2): 204–25.
8.
BudigMJMisraJBoeckmannI (2012) The motherhood penalty in cross-national perspective: the importance of work-family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society19(2): 163–93.
9.
BuschA (2013) Der Einfluss der beruflichen Geschlechtersegregation auf den ‘Gender Pay Gap’. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie65(2): 301–38.
10.
ChaYWeedenKA (2014) Overwork and the slow convergence in the gender gap in wages. American Sociological Review79(3): 457–84.
11.
CharlesMBradleyK (2009) Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries. American Journal of Sociology114(4): 924–76.
12.
ConnellRW (1987) Gender and Power. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
13.
CromptonRHarrisF (1998) Explaining women’s employment patterns: ‘orientations to work’ revisited. British Journal of Sociology49(1): 118–36.
14.
CromptonRLyonetteC (2011) Women’s career success and work-life adaptations in the accountancy and medical professions in Britain. Gender, Work and Organization18(2): 231–54.
15.
DingeldeyI (2000) Einkommenssteuersysteme und familiale Erwerbsmuster im europäischen Vergleich. In: DingeldeyI (ed.) Erwerbstätigkeit und Familie in Steuer- und Sozialversicherungssystemen. Opladen: Leske+Budrich, 11–47.
16.
EnglandP (1992) Comparable Worth: Theories and Evidence. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
17.
EnglandPLiS (2006) Desegregation stalled: the changing gender composition of college majors, 1971–2002. Gender & Society20(5): 657–77.
18.
EnglandPBudigMFolbreN (2002) Wages of virtue: the relative pay of care work. Social Problems49(4): 455–73.
19.
EnglandPFarkasGKilbourneBSDouT (1988) Explaining occupational sex segregation and wages: findings from a model with fixed effects. American Sociological Review53(4): 544–58.
20.
EnglandPHermsenJMCotterDA (2000) The devaluation of women’s work: a comment on Tam. American Journal of Sociology105(6): 1741–51.
21.
FilerRK (1985) Male–female wage differences: the importance of compensating differentials. Industrial and Labor Relations Review38(3): 426–37.
22.
FrölichM (2007) Parametric and nonparametric regression in the presence of endogenous control variables. International Statistical Review76(2): 214–27.
23.
GanglMZiefleA (2009) Motherhood, labor force behavior, and women’s careers: an empirical assessment of the wage penalty for motherhood in Britain, Germany, and the United States. Demography46(2): 341–69.
24.
GashV (2008) Constraints or preferences? Identifying answers from part-time workers’ transitions in Denmark, France and the United Kingdom. Work, Employment and Society22(4): 655–74.
25.
GinnJArberSBrannenJDaleADexSEliasPMossPPahlJRobertsCRuberyJ (1996) Feminist fallacies: a reply to Hakim on women’s employment and whose myths are they anyway: a comment. British Journal of Sociology47: 167–77.
26.
GottschallKSchröderT (2013) “Familienlohn” – zur Entwicklung einer wirkmächtigen Normierung geschlechtsspezifischer Arbeitsteilung. WSI Mitteilungen66: 161–70.
27.
GrönlundAMagnussonC (2013) Devaluation, crowding or skill specificity? Exploring the mechanisms behind the lower wages in female professions. Social Science Research42(4): 1006–17.
HakimC (1996) Key Issues in Women’s Work: Female Heterogeneity and the Polarisation of Women’s Employment. London and Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Athlone Press.
30.
HallATiemannM (2009) BIBB/BAuA employment survey of the working population on qualification and working conditions in Germany 2006, suf_1.0. In: Research Data Center at BIBB (ed.) GESIS Cologne (Data Access). Bonn: Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training.
31.
HelbigMLeuzeK (2012) Ich will Feuerwehrmann werden! Wie Eltern, individuelle Leistungen und schulische Fördermaßnahmen geschlechts(un-)typische Berufsaspirationen prägen. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie64(1): 91–122.
32.
HermanCLewisS (2012) Entitled to a sustainable career? Motherhood in science, engineering, and technology. Journal of Social Issues68(4): 767–89.
33.
HookJL (2010) Gender inequality in the welfare state: sex segregation in housework. 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology115(5): 1480–523.
34.
JannB (2008) The Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition for linear regression models. The Stata Journal8(4): 453–79.
35.
KilbourneBSFarkasGBeronKWeirDEnglandP (1994) Returns to skill, compensating differentials, and gender bias: effects of occupational characteristics on the wages of white women and men. American Journal of Sociology100(3): 689–719.
36.
KonietzkaDKreyenfeldM (2010) The growing educational divide in mothers’ employment: an investigation based on the German micro-censuses 1976–2004. Work, Employment and Society24: 260–78.
37.
LechertYSchimpl-NeimannsB (2007) Mikrozensus Scientific Use File 2005: Dokumentation und Datenaufbereitung. ZUMA-Methodenbericht 2007/08. Mannheim: ZUMA.
38.
LeuzeKStraußS (2009) Lohnungleichheiten zwischen Akademikerinnen und Akademikern: der Einfluss von fachlicher Spezialisierung, frauendominerten Fächern und beruflicher Segregation. Zeitschrift für Soziologie38(4): 262–81.
39.
LeuzeKStraußS (2014) Female-typical subjects and their effect on wage inequalities among higher education graduates in Germany. European Societies16(2): 275–98.
40.
LiebeskindU (2004) Arbeitsmarktsegregation und Einkommen – vom Wert “weiblicher” Arbeit. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie56: 630–52.
41.
McGrathSDeFilippisJ (2009) Social reproduction as unregulated work. Work, Employment and Society23(1): 66–83.
42.
NieuwenhuisRNeedAVan Der KolkH (2012) Institutional and demographic explanations of women’s employment in 18 OECD countries, 1975–1999. Journal of Marriage and Family74(3): 614–30.
43.
ÑopoH (2008) Matching as a tool to decompose wage gaps. The Review of Economics and Statistics90(2): 290–9.
44.
OchsenfeldF (2014) Why do women’s fields of study pay less? A test of devaluation, human capital, and gender role theory. European Sociological Review30(4): 536–48.
45.
OECD (2013) Education at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.
46.
PeralesF (2013) Occupational sex-segregation, specialized human capital and wages: evidence from Britain. Work, Employment and Society27(4): 600–20.
47.
PetersenT (1989) The earnings function in sociological studies of earnings inequality: functional form and hours worked. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility8: 221–30.
48.
PetersenTMorganLA (1995) Separate and unequal: occupation-establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. American Journal of Sociology101(2): 329–65.
49.
PolachekSW (1981) Occupational self-selection: a human capital approach to sex differences in occupational structure. The Review of Economics and Statistics63(1): 60–9.
50.
RidgewayCL (1997) Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: considering employment. American Sociological Review62(2): 218–35.
51.
SchrammMBeckS (2010) Dokumentation des Scientific Use Files “HIS Absolventenpanel 2001”. Hannover: Hochschul-Informations-System.
52.
Stadelmann-SteffenI (2008) Women, labour, and public policy: female labour market integration in OECD countries. A comparative perspective. Journal of Social Policy37(3): 383–408.
StuhlmacherAFWaltersAE (1999) Gender differences in negotiation outcome: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology52: 653–77.
55.
TamT (2000) Occupational wage inequality and devaluation: a cautionary tale of measurement error. American Journal of Sociology105(6): 1752–60.
56.
Tomaskovic-DeveyDSkaggsS (2002) Sex segregation, labor process organization, and gender earnings inequality. American Journal of Sociology108(1): 102–28.
57.
TrappeHPollmann-SchultMSchmittC (2015) The rise and decline of the male breadwinner model: institutional underpinnings and future expectations. European Sociological Review31(2): 230–42.
58.
TriventiM (2013) The gender wage gap and its institutional context: a comparative analysis of European graduates. Work, Employment and Society27(4): 563–80.
59.
UsdanskyML (2011) The gender-equality paradox: class and incongruity between work-family attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Family Theory & Review3: 163–78.
60.
WolfE (2002) Lower wage rates for fewer hours? A simultaneous wage-hours model for Germany. Labour Economics9(5): 643–63.
61.
ZieglerA (2005) Erwerbseinkommen. In: BothfeldSKlammerUKlennerCLeiberSThielAZieglerA (eds) WSI-FrauenDatenReport 2005. Handbuch zur wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Situation von Frauen. Berlin: Edition Sigma, 241–306.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
