The Glass Ceiling: A Critical Analysis-- Written December 2015


The Glass Ceiling: Myth or Reality?
‘The glass ceiling’. One of the most debated subjects in the history of the United States, this phrase refers to the often invisible barrier encountered by women and other minorities in their climb towards success. “The glass ceiling is generally viewed as a set of impediments and/or barriers to career advancement for women and people of color,” says a multi-authored chapter in the 2014 issue of New Directions for Institutional Research (p.39). “It is most commonly used,” the authors of the Introduction to The Glass Ceiling in the 21st Century comment, “to refer to the phenomenon whereby men dominate the upper echelons of management” (p. 5). This “phenomenon,” as they call it, is argued using three main platforms: the gender-wage differential, the percentage of female fortune 500 executives, and the ability of a woman to balance her family life and her career. Though the glass ceiling does exist, it has drastically changed since the term was first coined. The success of a woman no longer depends entirely on bias, but also on her personal choices and priorities—and whether or not she is prepared to break her own glass.
Susan M. Kochanowski opens her article, entitled “Women in Leadership: Persistent Problems or Progress?” with this statement: “In the world of work, there is a scarcity of women in top leadership” (par. 1). She describes the progress women have made in the workplace, but points out that despite this progress, women are still in the minority. Though 40% of the managerial positions in the United States are held by women, the percentage of women holding executive positions in Fortune 500 companies sits at a mere 15.7%. In comparison to where women began in the battle for equality, 15.7% is a miracle—in 1997, a female doorwoman at a hotel was a noteworthy phenomenon. In fact, Sheila Connors was the first one, and her picture appeared in the paper—shortly followed by an appeal to the media to keep her job when “one top hotel official began worrying about how guests might react to the sight of a woman summoning taxis and hefting luggage” (Weiss, p. 59). Despite the progress, however, 15.7% remains an alarmingly inconsequential number for those climbing towards the success that lies beyond the Glass Ceiling.
There are multiple examples, also, of the wage gap between male and female employees in any given company. In “Are We There Yet?”, the three authors address the wage gap and give straightforward statistics, telling us that though it is not the same threat it was in history, it still affects women today. A woman and a man doing the exact same work may earn different wages, independent of the quality of their work and their home life. “Motherhood has long been the explanation for the persistent pay gap,” write the three journalists, “yet… women who haven’t had children still make 77 cents on the male dollar.” The ratio of female cents to the male dollar has changed over time and from company to company, however, there is still discrepancy. That 77 cents quickly accumulates negative numbers; by the end of the year, it’s a substantial difference. 77 cents to a dollar means 77 dollars to one hundred, and $770 to one thousand—a substantial difference that negatively affects a great deal of families in the US.
It’s not only the US that is being affected, either. Other countries are debating the issue as well—using data from 60 different countries, the Asian Economic Journal tackles the question of the gender-wage gap, dividing their analysis into four sections: The origin of gender-wage differentials, the conceptual framework of the issue, a description of the available data, and a discussion of the results of this research. They divide the discrimination into two categories: glass ceilings and sticky floors. Glass ceilings refer to the difficulty arising, not in gaining employment, but in reaching the top of the corporate ladder, while sticky floors refer to an inability to even begin the climb. Their eventual analysis is this: “In Asian countries we typically see sticky floors, while in… the USA (at least for the private sector,) glass ceilings are present” (Fang and Sakellario, p. 234). The United States wage gap, then, is at least partially discriminatory towards women—or at least provides a substantial challenge for them in reaching leadership positions.
However, the glass ceiling is not made up entirely of prejudice. On her blog, The Working Mother, Stacey Hawley reminds us that many of the statistics that concern people are caused by the unwillingness of women to give up their dreams of motherhood and the responsibilities and comforts associated with those dreams. Marty Nemko’s comments support this claim, stating, “In the privacy of my office, many capable, highly educated women… admit that what they’d really like is to work part-time if at all… so they can have ample time for home, family, friends, etc.” (par. 10). Nemko continues, “If she wants a moderate workweek… she cannot fair-mindedly aspire to the boardroom.”
An additional question a number of women find themselves asking is, why do women earn such a markedly lower wage than their male counterparts? Nemko addresses this question, stating, “A key reason men earn more than women is number of hours worked” (par. 7). Nemko discusses the substantial differences between the work ethics of differing genders. Men in general are simply more willing to work more hours. He refers to a study done by Dr. Warren Farrell, in which Farrell interviewed “a number of senior executive women”. In reference to these interviews, Nemko says, “Each one stated that crucial to their success was their willingness to work longer than most women are” (par. 7) In the following paragraphs, he describes the mentality of a great many women in relation to work: they aren’t comfortable working long hours, and wish to have time to stay home and pursue other hobbies. He goes on to explain how all the issues in question tie in to this key theme: Men have more time for their careers than women, and a woman wishing to be successful will have to match that.
In her book The Glass Ceiling: A Look at Women in the Workforce, Ann Weiss gives many substantial examples of women throughout history and their battles with the glass ceiling. As mentioned, Sheila Connors was the first female ‘bellboy’, but she was not the only one—in 1982, Brenda Berkman went to court for her right to become a firefighter. In 1981, Jane Perlov joined the New York City police department, becoming a chief detective in 1997. Each of these women fought for her right to hold these positions, and each of these women hit a barrier… the glass ceiling.
This barrier is seen throughout the history of women’s careers. The authors of “Are We There Yet?” give some examples from their company, a magazine called Newsweek. Women in the company began as ‘dollies’—coffee carriers and message deliverers—before they started getting restless in 1969. It was women like them who began the fight for women’s rights, and yet, even in 2009, the year prior to the writing of this article, only six of Newsweek’s cover stories were written by women. “There’s no denying that we’re enjoying many of the spoils of those women’s victories,” the women admit, “…we have… a law that promises equal pay for equal work. Yet the fact that such a law is necessary makes the point: equality is still a myth” (par. 15).
The claim that equality is a myth is a bold one; however, it is supported by a number of data groups. In the aforementioned New Directions article, the authors explore multiple types of cross-sectional data about the glass ceiling. Analyzing a number of sources, they find that, though the data available is insufficient to provide proof of a glass ceiling, it lends itself strongly to the idea. In their concluding statement, they say: “We have summarized the findings here… as examples of how analysis in causal-comparative research tradition can ‘examine relationships and make predictions in the presence of nonmanipulated categorical variables’” (Jackson, O’Callaghan, Adserias, p. 44). Statistics are limited in this issue more so than others, but the personal experience of a great many minorities provides substantial evidence to support the glass ceiling.
Despite widespread evidence that women in the workforce continue to experience inequality, Ben Shapiro argues that the glass ceiling is largely a myth. Referring to the US government’s unexplainable pay gap, he says, “If I could hire a fully qualified woman to do the same work as a man for 93 cents on the dollar, why wouldn’t I do that?” (par.10). His argument is valid: Why wouldn’t one take the least expensive route? It would make sense, in a business mindset, to hire an equally qualified worker for a cheaper pay; however, the simple fact that women are paid 93 cents to the dollar challenges his position and raises the question: If that is so, why are women still statistically in the minority?
Shapiro also mentions a number of female CEO’s in fortune 500 companies, insinuating that their places as CEO prove that the glass ceiling has been shattered. However, he fails to bring up the number of CEO’s who are not female—after all, there are five hundred companies on the list, not just eight—and that’s the number of companies he mentions. If the glass ceiling were a myth and the hiring of women depended on such basic statistics as the difference in expense, it follows that women would be hired in at least equal numbers as men, yet we still don’t see that happening.
Shapiro isn’t the only one who believes the glass ceiling is a myth. Kavita Nair, PhD, says that in her experience, the glass ceiling has never made an appearance. “I haven’t encountered it.” She said in an interview, “If it exists, I am sure it has a great view of the horizon” (“India Inc.’s Rising Women Leaders”). But Nair is only one woman. Though her experience was fairly painless according to her statement, countless other women have experienced the opposite. Statistics alone provide evidence that Nair is in the minority; the additional evidence from countless personal stories make it painfully evident. Some examples are given in Ann Weiss’s book, The Glass Ceiling: A Look at Women in the Workforce.  Weiss discusses stories of success, of failure, of compromise…but no matter the story, they all contain a common theme: difficulty.
Additionally, Veerle Draulans gives some insight on thicknesses of the glass ceiling; some areas and companies’ glass ceilings are very thin, while others are nearly impenetrable (p. 70-71). This gives some insight into the differences in experience from woman to woman, supporting the idea that different women approach different barriers. Each barrier exists—the simple explanation is that they exist differently from situation to situation, woman to woman.
The glass ceiling is a difficult barrier to overcome for a great many people. Though many people do not experience it, statistics, studies and stories remind us that the gender-wage gap, percentages of female CEO’s, and the effect motherhood has on career are real and oppressive. The great majority of women are still faced with a choice—be a mother and homemaker, or have a hard-earned, successful career. The ceiling is thinner now in many places, but not yet shattered; and it is up to individuals to shatter it.













Works Cited
Barreto, Manuela, Michelle K. Ryan, Michael T. Schmitt. Introduction. The Glass Ceiling in the 21st Century: Understanding Barriers to Gender Equality. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association, 2009. 3-18. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Bennett, Jessica, Jesse Ellison, and Sarah Ball. “Are We There Yet?” Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2014, 2011. 716-723. Print.

Draulans, Veerle. “The Glass Ceiling: Reality or Myth? A Gender Analysis of Leadership.” Ethical Perspectives 10.1 (2003): 66-77. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Fang, Zheng, Chris Sakellario. “Glass Ceilings and Sticky Floors: Evidence from Southeast Asia and an International Update”. Asian Economic Journal 29.3 (2013): 215-232. Web. 16 Nov. 2015

Hawley, Stacey, “The Glass Ceiling: Myth or Reality? The Working Mother 2 Aug. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

 

Jackson, Jerlando F. L., Elizabeth M. O’Callaghan, Ryan P. Adserias. “Approximating Glass Ceiling Effects Using Cross-Sectional Data.” New Directions for Institutional Research 2013.159 (2014): 37-47. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.


Kochanowski, Susan M. “Women in Leadership: Persistent Problems or Progress?” Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2014, 2011. 716-723. Print.

Nemko, Marty. “The Real Reason So Few Women Are in the Boardroom. Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2014, 2011. 716-723. Print.

Shapiro, Ben. “The Glass Ceiling Myth: It Isn’t Sexism, It’s Reality—For the Most Part.” FrontPageMag.com. Front Page Magazine, 5 Feb. 2012. Web. November 16, 2015.

Weiss, Ann E. The Glass Ceiling: A Look at Women in the Workforce. Brookfield, Conn: Lerner Publishing Group, 1999. web.b.ebscohost.com. Web.

India Inc's Rising Women Leaders 2015: For Vodafone’s Kavita Nair, the Glass Ceiling Does Not Exist! ET Bureau. Mar 27, 2015. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.



Comments

Popular Posts