discrimination in the workplace essay

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Managing Technology
• Social Responsibility
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• AI & Machine Learning
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Big ideas Research Projects
• Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
• Responsible AI
• Future of the Workforce
• Future of Leadership
• All Research Projects
• AI in Action
• Most Popular
• The Truth Behind the Nursing Crisis
• Work/23: The Big Shift
• Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
• Measuring Culture

The spring 2024 issue’s special report looks at how to take advantage of market opportunities in the digital space, and provides advice on building culture and friendships at work; maximizing the benefits of LLMs, corporate venture capital initiatives, and innovation contests; and scaling automation and digital health platform.

• Past Issues
• Upcoming Events
• Video Archive
• Me, Myself, and AI
• Three Big Points

Confronting the Uncomfortable Reality of Workplace Discrimination

The U.S. is finally addressing racism in law enforcement. While we’re at it, let’s tackle workplace discrimination as well.

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• Leading Change
• Analytics & Business Intelligence
• Organizational Behavior

Widespread protests have filled the streets in every U.S. state and around the world almost daily since George Floyd’s murder at the hands of Minneapolis police late in May. As the Black Lives Matter movement reminds us — and as the murders of Floyd, Rayshard Brooks, Breonna Taylor, and too many others have made painfully obvious — Black people often experience a harsher standard of treatment at the hands of the police than White people do. The sheer number and variety of people now speaking out on social media against discrimination and police brutality, and organizing and attending diverse protests worldwide, suggest that the push toward greater accountability and racial equality in law enforcement is gaining momentum. We could not be happier about this development — but we can’t stop there.

Our research involves a different form of racial discrimination, one that directly affects almost every facet of Black American lives. Workplace discrimination — employers’ tendency to value White employees over Black employees — has had devastating consequences for generations of Black Americans. We know some of the solutions, but we need the social will to implement them.

Get Updates on Transformative Leadership

Evidence-based resources that can help you lead your team more effectively, delivered to your inbox monthly.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

Privacy Policy

The list of discriminatory workplace practices is long and backed by research . Applicants with White-sounding names are more likely to receive calls back from potential employers than those with Black-sounding names. 1 Studies have shown that darker-skinned applicants face distinctive disadvantages when applying for jobs compared with lighter-skinned applicants. 2 One study even found that a White applicant with a criminal record received more interest from employers than a Black applicant with no record — an injustice compounded by the racial discrimination of law enforcement, which has increased the likelihood that Black Americans will have a criminal record. 3

Systemic discrimination doesn’t stop once someone has landed a job. Racial bias affects negotiations over starting pay, future wages, and upward mobility. In short, Black employees start off making less money than their White colleagues, a disparity that compounds over time. Black employees also receive promotions less often. 4

A third significant blow comes when economic times are tough, as they are now. Many Black Americans believe they are the “last hired and first fired,” and it appears that there is some truth to that.

About the Authors

Derek R. Avery is the C.T. Bauer Chair of Inclusive Leadership at the Bauer College of Business at the University of Houston. Enrica N. Ruggs ( @enruggs ) is an assistant professor of management and director of the Center for Workplace Diversity and Inclusion at the Fogelman College of Business and Economics at the University of Memphis.

1. M. Bertrand and S. Mullainathan, “Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination,” The American Economic Review 94, no. 4 (September 2004): 991-1013.

2. M.S. Harrison and K.M. Thomas, “The Hidden Prejudice in Selection: A Research Investigation on Skin Color Bias,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 39, no. 1 (January 2009): 134-168.

3. D. Pager, “The Mark of a Criminal Record,” American Journal of Sociology 108, no. 5 (March 2003): 937-975.

4. D.R. Avery, S.D. Volpone, and O. Holmes IV, “Racial Discrimination in Organizations,” ch. 7 in “The Oxford Handbook of Workplace Discrimination,” eds. A.J. Colella and E.B. King (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018).

5. K.A. Couch and R. Fairlie, “Last Hired, First Fired? Black-White Unemployment and the Business Cycle,” Demography 47, no. 1 (February 2010): 227-247; and K.A. Couch, R. Fairlie, and H. Xu, “Racial Differences in Labor Market Transitions and the Great Recession,” in “Transitions Through the Labor Market,” eds. S.W. Polachek and K. Tatsiramos (Somerville, Massachusetts: Emerald Publishing, 2018), 1-54.

6. D.A. Thomas, “Diversity as Strategy,” Harvard Business Review 82, no. 9 (September 2004): 98-108.

7. A. Luksyte, E. Waite, D.R. Avery, et al., “Held to a Different Standard: Racial Differences in the Impact of Lateness on Advancement Opportunity,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 86, no. 2 (April 2013): 142-165.

8. A.N. Smith, M.B. Watkins, J.J. Ladge, et al., “Making the Invisible Visible: Paradoxical Effects of Intersectional Invisibility on the Career Experiences of Executive Black Women,” Academy of Management Journal 62, no. 6 (December 2019): 1705-1734.

9. K.P. Jones, C.I. Peddie, V.L. Gilrane, et al., “Not So Subtle: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Correlates of Subtle and Overt Discrimination,” Journal of Management 42, no. 6 (September 2016): 1588-1613.

10. A.M. Czopp, M.J. Monteith, and A.Y. Mark, “Standing Up for a Change: Reducing Bias Through Interpersonal Confrontation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90, no. 5 (May 2006): 784-803.

11. D. Chrobot-Mason, B.R. Ragins, and F. Linnehan, “Second Hand Smoke: Ambient Racial Harassment at Work,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 28, no. 5 (2013): 470-491.

More Like This

Add a comment cancel reply.

You must sign in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account : Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comments (3)

Brittany granberry, shirley engelmeier.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Discrimination — Discrimination in the Workplace

Discrimination in The Workplace

• Categories: Discrimination Social Justice Women's Rights

About this sample

Words: 653 |

Published: Mar 16, 2024

Words: 653 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Racial discrimination, gender discrimination, other forms of discrimination.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 911 words

3 pages / 1583 words

2 pages / 1081 words

2 pages / 1131 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Discrimination

In Raymond Carver's short story "Cathedral," the author effectively uses an unlikely scenario - a casual interaction between the narrator and a blind man - to comment on racial discrimination, prejudices, and stereotypes. The [...]

Media exposure influences attitudes and behaviors towards out-groups. Barlow and Sibley (2018) suggest that the media can promote pro-social behaviors and reduce racist behaviors. Media characters can provide viewers with [...]

Discrimination is defined as the unjust or prejudicial treatment of individuals or groups based on their race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion, or disability. It is a pervasive issue that has existed throughout history [...]

In today's competitive job market, companies often prioritize the appearance and image of their employees as a part of their brand strategy. This practice, commonly known as "going for the look," involves hiring individuals [...]

In a world where education is often taken for granted, the story of Malala Yousafzai serves as a powerful reminder of the transformative power of knowledge and courage. "I Am Malala" by Malala Yousafzai and Christina Lamb is a [...]

In a world where access to affordable health care is a pressing issue for many individuals and families, the need for comprehensive solutions has never been more urgent. As the cost of medical treatments and insurance premiums [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Book a Speaker

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus convallis sem tellus, vitae egestas felis vestibule ut.

Error message details.

Reuse Permissions

Request permission to republish or redistribute SHRM content and materials.

The Damaging Effects of Workplace Racism

How to protect workers of color from racial trauma

​Two Black men who worked at a paper plant in McClellan, Calif., experienced racial harassment from co-workers and a supervisor. The company must now pay up.

Paper manufacturers Packaging Corporation of America Central California Corrugated LLC (PCA) and Schwarz Partners LP, which owned the manufacturing plant, will pay $385,000 and implement preventive measures to settle the racial harassment lawsuit.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed the lawsuit.

"This case should be a strong reminder that all employers have a duty to act quickly to stop harassment and hate speech in the workplace," EEOC San Francisco District Director Nancy Sienko said in a statement .

According to the EEOC's suit:

• Co-workers and a shift supervisor commonly broadcasted racial slurs over the facility's radio system.
• Black employees were taunted with graffiti of swastikas and a makeshift noose.
• A shift leader drew a Confederate flag inscribed with the phrase "long live the Confederacy" on a workstation.

The company's HR department closed the investigation due to insufficient evidence without interviewing the alleged harassers, the EEOC stated.

Per the settlement, the defendants are required to:

• Pay $385,000 in lost wages and emotional distress damages to the two former employees.
• Revamp company policies and train employees on preventing and reporting racial harassment.
• Implement policies and procedures to facilitate the prompt and thorough investigation of any future complaints of discrimination or harassment.

"As our nation continues to [deal] with lingering racial discrimination, we appreciate that these employers agreed to promptly settle this matter and to provide significant relief," Sienko added.

How Can Racism Influence Workplace Productivity?

Peter Spanos, an attorney with Taylor English Duma LLP in Atlanta, said the lawsuit against PCA and Schwarz illustrates the serious consequences that can occur if employers do not investigate and act upon harassment in the workplace.

"It dramatizes why it is important for companies to provide preventive education and training for its supervisory and management personnel," Spanos explained. "It also illustrates how unnecessary comments and other talk in the workplace can be unlawful harassment."

A 2021 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) revealed that more than 2 in 5 Black workers (42 percent) feel they faced race- or ethnicity-based unfair treatment at work in the past five years.

[SHRM resource hub page: Overcoming Workplace Bias ]

Nika White, a Greenville, S.C.-based anti-racist activist who runs her own diversity and inclusion consulting company, explained that racial microaggressions are particularly problematic in workplaces.

"Numerous workers are encountering subtle microaggressions that leave them feeling confused, hurt, angry and deflated without anyone to talk to because the 'aggression' seems small," she said. "Those seemingly small interactions that come from stereotyping and assumptions have a lasting physical and mental impact but are harder to identify and recognize, especially when workplaces exhibit institutional racism by not having policies and processes to prohibit and punish racism."

Racial trauma can result in symptoms similar to post-traumatic stress disorder. It can lead to mental health issues such as anxiety and depression as well as physical problems including stomachaches, headaches and a rapid heartbeat.

Racial inequities at work can also result in decreased workplace productivity.

"Not only are those directly harassed demotivated, but others who differ from the general demographic makeup of the workgroup can feel threatened, leaving them disengaged from the workplace," said Francine Gordon, a lecturer at Santa Clara University's Leavey School of Business. "In cases where problem-solving or innovation are involved, harassment can silence the targeted individual, who may have the most to offer."

Tips for Preventing Workplace Racism

Spanos said employers can take several steps to reduce or eliminate unlawful racial harassment and discrimination. He explained that companies should:

• Adopt clear and meaningful anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies.
• Periodically provide anti-harassment training to the workforce.
• Train appropriate HR personnel in how to investigate and handle discrimination complaints.
• Issue and update mission statements that emphasize the company's commitment to a workplace free from unlawful harassment and discrimination.
• Offer readily available avenues for employees to complain about alleged harassment or discriminatory treatment, including an open-door policy.
• Train supervisors to alert responsible HR personnel of harassment, even if no formal complaint is received.
• Host employee forums periodically to explore whether any discrimination or harassment is occurring.
• Take prompt and remedial action if an investigation reveals any unlawful conduct or conduct that violates company policies or mission statements.

"Both formal and informal complaints should be taken seriously," Spanos added. "Prompt and reasonably thorough investigation should be done in each instance."

Related Content

A 4-Day Workweek? AI-Fueled Efficiencies Could Make It Happen

The proliferation of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and the ensuing expected increase in productivity and efficiency, could help usher in the four-day workweek, some experts predict.

How One Company Uses Digital Tools to Boost Employee Well-Being

Learn how Marsh McLennan successfully boosts staff well-being with digital tools, improving productivity and work satisfaction for more than 20,000 employees.

Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace

​An organization run by AI is not a futuristic concept. Such technology is already a part of many workplaces and will continue to shape the labor market and HR. Here's how employers and employees can successfully manage generative AI and other AI-powered systems.

HR Daily Newsletter

New, trends and analysis, as well as breaking news alerts, to help HR professionals do their jobs better each business day.

Success title

Success caption

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: How Bias Against Women Persists in Female-Dominated Workplaces

• Amber L. Stephenson,
• Leanne M. Dzubinski

A look inside the ongoing barriers women face in law, health care, faith-based nonprofits, and higher education.

New research examines gender bias within four industries with more female than male workers — law, higher education, faith-based nonprofits, and health care. Having balanced or even greater numbers of women in an organization is not, by itself, changing women’s experiences of bias. Bias is built into the system and continues to operate even when more women than men are present. Leaders can use these findings to create gender-equitable practices and environments which reduce bias. First, replace competition with cooperation. Second, measure success by goals, not by time spent in the office or online. Third, implement equitable reward structures, and provide remote and flexible work with autonomy. Finally, increase transparency in decision making.

It’s been thought that once industries achieve gender balance, bias will decrease and gender gaps will close. Sometimes called the “ add women and stir ” approach, people tend to think that having more women present is all that’s needed to promote change. But simply adding women into a workplace does not change the organizational structures and systems that benefit men more than women . Our new research (to be published in a forthcoming issue of Personnel Review ) shows gender bias is still prevalent in gender-balanced and female-dominated industries.

• Amy Diehl , PhD is chief information officer at Wilson College and a gender equity researcher and speaker. She is coauthor of Glass Walls: Shattering the Six Gender Bias Barriers Still Holding Women Back at Work (Rowman & Littlefield). Find her on LinkedIn at Amy-Diehl , Twitter @amydiehl , and visit her website at amy-diehl.com
• AS Amber L. Stephenson , PhD is an associate professor of management and director of healthcare management programs in the David D. Reh School of Business at Clarkson University. Her research focuses on the healthcare workforce, how professional identity influences attitudes and behaviors, and how women leaders experience gender bias.
• LD Leanne M. Dzubinski , PhD is acting dean of the Cook School of Intercultural Studies and associate professor of intercultural education at Biola University, and a prominent researcher on women in leadership. She is coauthor of Glass Walls: Shattering the Six Gender Bias Barriers Still Holding Women Back at Work (Rowman & Littlefield).

Partner Center

Eurowings flight attendants; 27 April 2018. Photo by Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters

The scourge of lookism

It is time to take seriously the painful consequences of appearance discrimination in the workplace.

by Andrew Mason   + BIO

We’d be outraged if a business owner told an employee she wouldn’t receive her bonus unless she lost weight. With most jobs, our looks should be regarded as irrelevant to our suitability and remuneration. What matters is that we have the skills for the job and put them to good use. Yet appearance discrimination, or ‘lookism’, is pervasive and consequential in the workplace. Can lookism in employment ever be justified? And, when it can’t, should we legislate against it?

The first of these questions might seem to have an easy answer, namely, that lookism can be justified only when appearance is a genuine qualification for work, that is, has a real bearing on a person’s ability to do a job or do it well, such as modelling or some acting roles. But this just pushes back the problem. We must now ask: when is appearance a genuine qualification for a job? And even: should genuine qualifications always count, or can there be moral reasons for not counting them?

Much the same questions arise in relation to race and gender. There are cases when each of these can be regarded, reasonably, as a ‘genuine occupational requirement’, for example, ‘being a woman’ for a women’s refuge support worker. But it is equally clear that ‘being a man’ cannot justifiably count as a qualification for being a doctor, even if patients might be happier receiving medical advice from a man because, for sexist reasons, they rate men’s medical skills more highly. And that is so even though there’s a sense in which being a man is a genuine qualification for the job when a male doctor would be better able to minister to patients’ needs because their prejudices mean they’d trust him more and hence be more receptive to his advice. In other words, there are some genuine qualifications that it is not justifiable to count.

C onsider two cases that concern the treatment of employees in the workplace and vividly raise worries about appearance unjustifiably counting as a qualification. The first relates to a performance evaluation of an employee called Courtney at a Canadian fashion company whose manager said her looks were affecting her ability to do her job. Interviewed by the BBC in 2022, Courtney said:

He point-blank told me that he thought I was too fat to be in the position I was in. He told me he was embarrassed having me around our vendors in meetings, and that it ruined his reputation.

He then advised her to start going to the gym and avoid wearing fitted clothing. Unsurprisingly, Courtney felt shell-shocked. Subsequently, her appearance anxieties had a negative impact on her work because she was distracted by worries about what her colleagues thought of her.

Our responses to the looks of others often involve unjustified associations, whether positive or negative

The second case relates to an accusation in 2020 by the UK radio journalist Libby Purves against the BBC. Purves claimed that, for presenters on both television and radio, older women were under greater pressure than men of a similar age to appear younger, since women are judged on their looks, and part of what it is to be attractive for women is to look youthful. In an opinion piece for the Radio Times , she wrote:

Sue Barker has been binned from A Question of Sport after 23 years. She is 64. More willingly, Jenni Murray and Jane Garvey depart from Woman’s Hour , aged 70 and 56. They are replaced by Emma Barnett, a mere 35. What is this? … Are we written off as old trouts while men become revered elders, sacred patriarchs, silver foxes?

In both cases, lookism seems entangled with sex or gender discrimination, and, in the second case, with age discrimination too. This might provoke the thought that appearance discrimination is problematic only when it is entwined with some other form of discrimination, and that there is no reason to be concerned about it when it occurs on its own. But that seems clearly false. Appearance discrimination matters in its own right, and indeed operates in many of the same ways as other forms of discrimination we are committed to fighting, such as racial discrimination. Just as prejudices influence behaviour consciously and non-consciously in racial discrimination, so too they operate in conscious and non-conscious ways in lookism. Our responses to the looks of others often involve unjustified associations, whether positive or negative, between appearance features and character traits. These associations may function as implicit biases, or sometimes take the form of stereotypes that are endorsed with varying degrees of unreflectiveness.

Women especially are often seen as lazy or lacking in self-discipline if they are perceived as overweight. But even though lifestyle choices make a difference to shape, the hunger we experience and how much we weigh are largely determined by metabolism or physiology. So the idea that all or even most people with a heavier weight lack self-control is unsustainable when brought into contact with the evidence. In her book Unshrinking: How to Fight Fatphobia (2024), Kate Manne concludes that ‘fatness has a strong genetic basis … at least 70 per cent of the variance in body mass that we find in the human population is likely due to genetics.’

O f course, it is not just selectors evaluating qualifications who are prone to biases. Good looks tend to be beneficial in doing a range of jobs because of how others respond to them. Viewers may prefer to watch attractive newsreaders deliver the TV news, perhaps in part because they associate their appearance with desirable character traits, such as trustworthiness. Customers may be put off interacting with employees they regard as fat because they find their appearance unattractive or judge them to be ill-disciplined. It’s for reasons of this sort that good looks can be genuine qualifications for working in customer-facing roles, even though there is a further question about whether it’s justifiable to count them.

Qualifications that arise in this way are often referred to as ‘reaction qualifications’, meaning qualifications produced by customer reactions to employee characteristics. As a result, even selectors who do not share the customers’ biases have a reason to appoint people with their customers’ preferred features, and to reject those with features their customers dislike. In contrast, when a technical skill is a qualification for a job, its role as a qualification, and indeed its status as a skill, doesn’t generally rely on others’ reactions to it. All that matters is that it is deployed in making a product that people want or providing a service they need. For example, the skill of giving competent legal advice is a qualification for being a lawyer, regardless of how others respond to it.

In addition to the association between heavier weight and laziness or lack of self-control, people routinely make other appearance-related associations. Short men are often regarded as prickly or prone to aggression on the basis that they have inferiority complexes. Facial scarring, and other so-called ‘facial disfigurements’, are often associated with unpleasantness or nastiness – think of Hollywood villains. Again, these associations don’t stand up against the evidence. When reaction qualifications are rooted in unjustified associations, is it fair to count them? We don’t think it’s morally acceptable to count reaction qualifications when they are grounded in, say, customers’ prejudices against women or members of a particular race, so why think it’s morally acceptable to count such qualifications when they are grounded in customers’ prejudices against particular appearance features?

There’s no getting away from the fact that ignoring customer preferences would be bad for business

Even when they don’t involve prejudices or unjustified associations, customers’ perceptions about whether an assistant is good looking, and indeed the perceptions of job recruiters, are usually a product of ‘internalising’ appearance norms – that is, rules concerning how we should look – that reflect conventional aesthetic preferences. Some of these norms may have gained currency over many generations, as a result of the way that being disposed to act from them when choosing sexual partners bestows evolutionary advantages, as Nancy Etcoff argues in Survival of the Prettiest (2000). Perhaps this is true of norms that favour unblemished skin or symmetrical faces. But other appearance norms expressing aesthetic preferences emerge from practices that are specific to particular cultures, and may even be a product of differences in power and privilege. For example, the emergence of norms regarding tightly coiled hair as messy, or favouring narrow rather than broad noses, or lighter over darker skin tones, can perhaps be fully explained by the way in which they reflect and perpetuate racial hierarchies – that is, they come to be endorsed because they legitimate the power and privilege that accrues to membership in particular racial groups. Even when norms are not the product of power and privilege, their application may end up benefiting people who are already advantaged, and further disadvantaging those who are already disadvantaged. Think here of norms biased against women or the elderly, or both, such as norms that regard youthfulness as part of what it is to be an attractive woman, which Purves thinks are influencing decisions at the BBC.

But there’s no getting away from the fact that ignoring customer preferences would be bad for business. Therefore, reaction qualifications grounded in such preferences provide some credibility to recruitment decisions based on them. In contrast, when selectors but not customers are influenced by looks, then no such justification is available. We don’t know whether vendors were put off by Courtney’s appearance or whether it was only her manager who had a problem with it. But it is surely unfair to candidates when managers’ hiring (or promotion) decisions are influenced by employees’ appearance if it is not even a reaction qualification. Indeed, it is generally unfair to take into account features of a person, whether racial membership or looks, when these have absolutely nothing to do with their ability to do the job.

P rejudices and negative associations concerning various appearance features unfairly reduce the range of career opportunities for people with these features. This then contributes to an unjust distribution of resources, and may even reinforce structural injustices. According to Daniel Hamermesh’s analysis of data from the United States in Beauty Pays (2011), the overall ‘beauty premium’ for above-average-looking women, compared with below-average-looking women, is 12 per cent; for above-average-looking men, compared with below-average-looking men, it is 17 per cent. Perhaps appearance is a legitimate qualification for some jobs, such as modelling, in which case not all such inequalities will be unjust, but often lookism seems analogous to racial discrimination, and condemnable for many of the same reasons.

But there are also cases of lookism that are rather different from racial discrimination because they involve responding to chosen features of appearance, such as tattoos, hairstyles and piercings. It is tempting to say that if a person is disadvantaged by an appearance feature they’ve chosen, in full knowledge that acquiring it will affect their employment prospects, then there is no injustice. But even here, customers may be opposed to such features for no good reason, for example, when tattoos are unjustifiably associated with aggression or mental health problems. Is it fair, in a job market, to disadvantage a person by her choices when that disadvantage reflects the prejudices of selectors or customers responding negatively to features she’s chosen for herself and that may even have become part of her identity?

People may also make choices designed to improve their chances in particular job markets, for example, they may have liposuction, Botox injections or hair transplants, often to appear younger. This is especially so in visual media where, as Purves points out, part of what it is for women to be attractive is to look youthful. It would be easy to describe these interventions as chosen, but we should hesitate before doing so. Decisions to have them are often a product not only of seeking to improve one’s employment opportunities but also body-shaming practices. Indeed, as Heather Widdows argues in Perfect Me (2018), appearance norms form an ethical ideal, with those who fail to comply being regarded as not merely unattractive but morally flawed, because they are seen as failing in their duty to make the best of themselves. This ideal has become so demanding that it is oppressive to many people, especially women and younger men. When jobs are allocated in a way that rewards people who conform to these norms, then they are reinforced, and the pressures to conform to them become even greater.

Appearance features may express deeply held convictions about how one should live

Appearance features that are favoured or disfavoured in the job market may also be chosen by people in a way that reflects their own ethical commitments rather than dominant appearance norms. For example, some women choose not to wear makeup because they want to resist the idea of women as aesthetically appealing objects. As Clare Chambers writes in Intact (2022), they endorse the principle of the unmodified body – that our bodies are alright just as they are. As a resistance to body-shaming practices, people may consciously eschew body modifications and withstand the pressures placed on them by the often vicious comments they receive. Others may be committed to ethical principles derived from their religion requiring conformity to unconventional appearance norms or dress codes.

So appearance features may express deeply held convictions about how one should live. When companies have an ethos that reflects such convictions, and they discriminate in their selection practices to promote that ethos, then that often seems unobjectionable. Suppose, for example, that a company has an ethos that reflects a commitment to not wearing makeup, and requires their employees to adopt ‘a natural look’ as a condition of employment. That does not seem morally problematic in the context of a society where there is an expectation in a wide range of jobs that women should wear makeup. Yet in other cases, appearance codes may discriminate against members of a particular religion, even if they do so unintentionally. For example, a dress code forbidding employees from wearing head coverings seems morally problematic because of the way in which it disadvantages Muslim women.

Lookism in employment is therefore a mixed bag. Some cases seem to involve the same characteristic mechanisms as racial discrimination, including prejudices influencing hiring decisions, to be morally condemned for much the same reasons. Other cases seem rather different. They may differ because the appearance-related values that companies express in their hiring practices neither reflect prejudices nor deny the fundamental equality of different people. Or they may differ because the appearance features that recruiters count as reaction qualifications are unobjectionable, perhaps in part because these features are genuinely a matter of choice for job applicants.

I n cases where lookism is morally problematic, what should we do about it? Should we think of it as posing a moral problem of sufficient magnitude that there is a case for seeking to prevent it by legislation? Or is it better to tackle it without recourse to the legal system? There is evidence that lookism in employment is comparable in pervasiveness and harmfulness with other forms of discrimination, including racial discrimination. On the basis of his analysis of the data, Hamermesh maintains that, in the US:

African American men’s earnings disadvantage, adjusted for the earnings-enhancing characteristics that they bring to labour markets, is similar to the disadvantage experienced by below-average compared to above-average-looking male workers generally.

Of course, there are differences between racial discrimination and appearance discrimination that may impact upon the case for enacting legislation to prevent it, and not merely the fact that (unlike race) some appearance features are chosen. Racial membership is commonly transmitted from one generation to another, whereas the inheritance of appearance-related characteristics is less reliable. The way in which racial discrimination contributes to and reproduces structural disadvantages through practices of segregation gives rise to distinctive problems in tackling it. Nevertheless, some of the same reasons that provide a strong case for prohibiting racial discrimination also apply to appearance discrimination.

The long-term solution to the injustices of lookism involves taking measures to reduce the enormous weight ordinarily placed on appearance in our society and seeking to change appearance norms so that they become more inclusive. But given the magnitude of the problem, we should take seriously the idea that legislation also has role to play. Should we make ‘appearance’ or appearance features such as height, weight and facial differences protected characteristics, in the same way that, in countries like the UK, race, sex, sexual orientation, disability, religion and age are ‘protected characteristics’, meaning it is illegal to discriminate on their basis?

The legislation itself wouldn’t require us to make objective judgments about people’s attractiveness

Perhaps legislation against ‘indirect’ discrimination, that is, against policies and practices that unintentionally affect people with a protected characteristic in a negative way, is enough to criminalise much appearance discrimination in hiring and promotion decisions, providing an underutilised way of combatting it. Suppose that appearance norms and dress codes are biased against people with tightly coiled hair, or with darker skin tones, or with asymmetrical faces or bodies, or with wrinkly skin, or against those who see it as part of their religious duty to dress modestly, or against women who object to being required to wear makeup or heels. Then selecting people on the basis of their conformity to these norms (or their willingness to conform to them) will stand in need of justification in any legislative scheme that requires indirect discrimination on grounds of race, sex, disability, age or religion to be a proportionate means to a legitimate goal. But it is not clear that legislation against indirect discrimination is enough to deal adequately with the moral challenge posed by lookism in employment.

My proposal would be this: we make it illegal to reject a person on the basis of their appearance, or particular appearance-related features, when no plausible case can be made that these features are qualifications for the job in question – when possession of them can’t even be seen as a way of conforming to a company’s ethos or attracting its customers or clients. We could add to this the requirement that reaction qualifications, that is, qualifications that rely on the responses of customers, shouldn’t be given any weight if they rest upon customers’ prejudices about an appearance feature, where prejudices are generalisations or associations that aren’t sustained by the publicly available evidence. And we could make it a presumption that when the background culture is infused with these prejudices about a particular appearance feature, then reaction qualifications related to that feature should be regarded as illegitimate, unless evidence can be produced for thinking that customer preferences for it are unconnected to such prejudices.

Some may be sceptical about whether legislation against lookism could be effective, with good reasons. Part of the problem with legislation in this area is that there is likely to be resistance to making use of it – who wants to admit that others regard them as unattractive? Furthermore, appearance discrimination can be hard to detect and monitor. The legislation itself wouldn’t require us to make objective judgments about people’s attractiveness. We just have to know that selectors have been influenced by the candidates’ appearance, or by the particular appearance features they possess, when these have nothing to do with their ability to do the job. But we do need to be able to monitor different companies to see whether there is any reason to think that they aren’t complying with the legislation. With race and gender, we can examine percentages in the workforce or selected through the appointment process. But how can we do that in relation to an attractive appearance?

There is a surprisingly large amount of intersubjective agreement concerning judgments of attractiveness, and it may well be enough to collect the data required for monitoring purposes. So I think that the objections to legislation against appearance discrimination are not insuperable. It is feasible, and no less desirable than other forms of antidiscrimination legislation. But perhaps the main function of legislation against appearance discrimination would be to send out a message to employers, and society more generally, that lookism is unacceptable, and to give companies a reason to examine their practices and reform them if they encourage lookism or give it too much space in which to operate. We might even regard it as good practice for recruitment interviewees to be behind a screen, as is sometimes done when auditioning musicians. In the context of employment at least, we should combat what Francesca Minerva calls the ‘invisible discrimination’ that takes place right before our eyes. We’ve been too complacent about lookism at the workplace for too long.

Design and fashion

Sitting on the art

Given its intimacy with the body and deep play on form and function, furniture is a ripely ambiguous artform of its own

Emma Crichton Miller

Learning to be happier

In order to help improve my students’ mental health, I offered a course on the science of happiness. It worked – but why?

Consciousness and altered states

How perforated squares of trippy blotter paper allowed outlaw chemists and wizard-alchemists to dose the world with LSD

Last hours of an organ donor

In the liminal time when the brain is dead but organs are kept alive, there is an urgent tenderness to medical care

Ronald W Dworkin

The environment

We need to find a way for human societies to prosper while the planet heals. So far we can’t even think clearly about it

Ville Lähde

Archaeology

Why make art in the dark?

New research transports us back to the shadowy firelight of ancient caves, imagining the minds and feelings of the artists

Izzy Wisher

Discrimination Problem in the Workplace

Introduction.

It is necessary to mention that discrimination in the workplace is a topic that has been actively discussed by scholars over the last few years and has drawn the attention of many researchers. The concept may be defined as unfair treatment of individuals based on the color of their skin, gender, age, disability, and other factors. Organizations that promote ethnic diversity have to deal with numerous challenges because some individuals are reluctant to cooperate and accept other traditions.

Maternal discrimination is a crucial issue because it limits the possibilities for personal and professional development. Unfair treatment at work also leads to a broad range of other complications such as worsened mood at home and depression. The primary argument is that the situation has improved in recent years, but discrimination in the workplace is still a critical problem because its impact may be subtle and can affect the life of a person in the long-term if a company does not consider preventive measures.

It is imperative to understand that an employer is not the only person that may treat people unfairly. Many individuals are not aware of which statements or words are appropriate, and could discriminate against others even if it is not intentional. A well-developed set of policies that includes the description of unacceptable behavior could help to avoid such issues (Robinson, 2013).

Another aspect that needs to be highlighted is that some minority groups may be biased towards each other, and it complicates the integration when individuals think that their presence is not appreciated. Possible communication problems may reduce the efficiency of operations, and job satisfaction levels are lowered if the environment in the organization is not supportive. Therefore, firms should devote much more attention to the promotion of tolerance and education of workers on this subject matter.

Maternal discrimination is particularly problematic because employers believe that performance levels of mothers are reduced significantly, and they are too worried about their children most of the time. One of the problems that should not be disregarded is that higher-ups appreciate if individuals overwork and are always available. On the other hand, a mother can be occupied because they have a broad range of responsibilities.

Moreover, many supervisors think that females are more likely to leave the job, and the company may waste money on training and education of such employees. However, such beliefs are mostly based on assumptions and do not reflect the actual situation. It is against the law to discriminate against people because of economic reasons most of the time, but an employer can provide such information to justify his or her actions in some cases.

The utilization of such techniques as performance management systems may be incredibly helpful when a firm is trying to prevent discrimination. The approach may minimize bias because employers would make decisions based on the comparison of available data. Endurance is the technique that mothers use in such situations most of the time, but it is ineffective in the long-term and does not facilitate changes in the workplace (Crowley, 2013). Overall, many companies undervalue mothers and their capabilities, and it leads to discriminatory behavior.

Complications associated with workplace discrimination also should be mentioned. For instance, it is noted that such experiences also have a direct impact on families of some individuals. Their children are more likely to abuse substances, and it frequently leads to psychological problems. One of the studies has shown that prejudice affects the way individuals perceive their children at home, and they are less likely to see positive behaviors because of dramatic changes in mood (Gassman‐Pines, 2015).

Parents understand that they should not get angry, and it is not their fault. However, the impact of inequity is so dramatic that it is impossible to manage emotions. Individuals may feel helpless in such situations because it is hard to prove unfair treatment, and they may be afraid that complaints would affect their employment status. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the management team to ensure that such instances are avoided. An anonymous reporting system may be established, and professionals can monitor the behavior of individuals that are suspected.

In summary, it is possible to state that modern society has made enormous progress when it comes to the reduction of discrimination in the workplace, but numerous instances of unfair treatment indicate that the problem still was not solved. Nevertheless, many companies have access to necessary resources and have developed efficient strategies that help them to minimize injustice. The understanding of associated terms is crucial because an employer may apply the knowledge in the workplace and come up with appropriate solutions (Abben, Brown, Graupmann, Mockler, & Fernandes, 2013).

This topic is incredibly important because many firms disregard the need to monitor the behavior of their workers, and it leads to severe consequences. Future research on this subject matter is necessary, and it would be reasonable to explore other dimensions of this problem. For example, it would be beneficial to evaluate the relationship between productivity and discrimination and the impact it has on decisions related to career.

Abben, D., Brown, S., Graupmann, V., Mockler, S., & Fernandes, G. (2013). Drawing on Social Psychology Literature to Understand and Reduce Workplace Discrimination. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6 (4), 476-479.

Crowley, J. (2013). Perceiving and responding to maternal workplace discrimination in the United States. Women’s Studies International Forum, 40 (1), 192-202.

Gassman‐Pines, A. (2015). Effects of Mexican Immigrant Parents’ Daily Workplace Discrimination on Child Behavior and Family Functioning. Child Development, 86 (4), 1175-1190.

Robinson, D. A. (2013). Workplace discrimination prevention manual: Tips for executives, managers, and students to increase productivity and reduce litigation . Bloomington, IN: Archway Publishing.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, January 18). Discrimination Problem in the Workplace. https://studycorgi.com/discrimination-problem-in-the-workplace/

"Discrimination Problem in the Workplace." StudyCorgi , 18 Jan. 2021, studycorgi.com/discrimination-problem-in-the-workplace/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Discrimination Problem in the Workplace'. 18 January.

1. StudyCorgi . "Discrimination Problem in the Workplace." January 18, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/discrimination-problem-in-the-workplace/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Discrimination Problem in the Workplace." January 18, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/discrimination-problem-in-the-workplace/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "Discrimination Problem in the Workplace." January 18, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/discrimination-problem-in-the-workplace/.

This paper, “Discrimination Problem in the Workplace”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: April 23, 2021 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Essays About Discrimination: Top 5 Examples and 8 Prompts

You must know how to connect with your readers to write essays about discrimination effectively; read on for our top essay examples, including prompts that will help you write.

Discrimination comes in many forms and still happens to many individuals or groups today. It occurs when there’s a distinction or bias against someone because of their age, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.

Discrimination can happen to anyone wherever and whenever they are. Unfortunately, it’s a problem that society is yet to solve entirely. Here are five in-depth examples of this theme’s subcategories to guide you in creating your essays about discrimination.

1. Essay On Discrimination For Students In Easy Words by Prateek

2. personal discrimination experience by naomi nakatani, 3. prejudice and discrimination by william anderson, 4. socioeconomic class discrimination in luca by krystal ibarra, 5. the new way of discrimination by writer bill, 1. my discrimination experience, 2. what can i do to stop discrimination, 3. discrimination in my community, 4. the cost of discrimination, 5. examples of discrimination, 6. discrimination in sports: segregating men and women, 7. how to stop my discrimination against others, 8. what should groups do to fight discrimination.

“In the current education system, the condition of education and its promotion of equality is very important. The education system should be a good place for each and every student. It must be on the basis of equal opportunities for each student in every country. It must be free of discrimination.”

Prateek starts his essay by telling the story of a student having difficulty getting admitted to a college because of high fees. He then poses the question of how the student will be able to get an education when he can’t have the opportunity to do so in the first place. He goes on to discuss UNESCO’s objectives against discrimination. 

Further in the essay, the author defines discrimination and cites instances when it happens. Prateek also compares past and present discrimination, ending the piece by saying it should stop and everyone deserves to be treated fairly.

“I thought that there is no discrimination before I actually had discrimination… I think we must treat everyone equally even though people speak different languages or have different colors of skin.”

In her short essay, Nakatani shares the experiences that made her feel discriminated against when she visited the US. She includes a fellow guest saying she and her mother can’t use the shared pool in a hotel they stay in because they are Japanese and getting cheated of her money when she bought from a small shop because she can’t speak English very well.

“Whether intentional or not, prejudice and discrimination ensure the continuance of inequality in the United States. Even subconsciously, we are furthering inequality through our actions and reactions to others… Because these forces are universally present in our daily lives, the way we use them or reject them will determine how they affect us.”

Anderson explains the direct relationship between prejudice and discrimination. He also gives examples of these occurrences in the past (blacks and whites segregation) and modern times (sexism, racism, etc.)

He delves into society’s fault for playing the “blame game” and choosing to ignore each other’s perspectives, leading to stereotypes. He also talks about affirmative action committees that serve to protect minorities.

“Something important to point out is that there is prejudice when it comes to people of lower class or economic standing, there are stereotypes that label them as untrustworthy, lazy, and even dangerous. This thought is fed by the just-world phenomenon, that of low economic status are uneducated, lazy, and are more likely to be substance abusers, and thus get what they deserve.”

Ibarra recounts how she discovered Pixar’s Luca and shares what she thought of the animation, focusing on how the film encapsulates socioeconomic discrimination in its settings. She then discusses the characters and their relationships with the protagonist. Finally, Ibarra notes how the movie alluded to flawed characters, such as having a smaller boat, mismatched or recycled kitchen furniture, and no shoes. 

The other cast even taunts Luca, saying he smells and gets his clothes from a dead person. These are typical things marginalized communities experience in real life. At the end of her essay, Ibarra points out how society is dogmatic against the lower class, thinking they are abusers. In Luca, the wealthy antagonist is shown to be violent and lazy.

“Even though the problem of discrimination has calmed down, it still happens… From these past experiences, we can realize that solutions to tough problems come in tough ways.”

The author introduces people who called out discrimination, such as Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Barbara Henry – the only teacher who decided to teach Ruby Bridges, despite her skin color. 

He then moves on to mention the variations of present-day discrimination. He uses Donald Trump and the border he wants to build to keep the Hispanics out as an example. Finally, Bill ends the essay by telling the readers those who discriminate against others are bullies who want to get a reaction out of their victims. 

Do you get intimidated when you need to write an essay? Don’t be! If writing an essay makes you nervous, do it step by step. To start, write a simple 5 paragraph essay .

Prompts on Essays About Discrimination

Below are writing prompts that can inspire you on what to focus on when writing your discrimination essay:

Have you had to go through an aggressor who disliked you because you’re you? Write an essay about this incident, how it happened, what you felt during the episode, and what you did afterward. You can also include how it affected the way you interact with people. For example, did you try to tone down a part of yourself or change how you speak to avoid conflict?

List ways on how you can participate in lessening incidents of discrimination. Your list can include calling out biases, reporting to proper authorities, or spreading awareness of what discrimination is.

Is there an ongoing prejudice you observe in your school, subdivision, etc.? If other people in your community go through this unjust treatment, you can interview them and incorporate their thoughts on the matter.

Tackle what victims of discrimination have to go through daily. You can also talk about how it affected their life in the long run, such as having low self-esteem that limited their potential and opportunities and being frightened of getting involved with other individuals who may be bigots.

For this prompt, you can choose a subtopic to zero in on, like Workplace Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, and others. Then, add sample situations to demonstrate the unfairness better.

What are your thoughts on the different game rules for men and women? Do you believe these rules are just? Cite news incidents to make your essay more credible. For example, you can mention the incident where the Norwegian women’s beach handball team got fined for wearing tops and shorts instead of bikinis.

Since we learn to discriminate because of the society we grew up in, it’s only normal to be biased unintentionally. When you catch yourself having these partialities, what do you do? How do you train yourself not to discriminate against others?

Focus on an area of discrimination and suggest methods to lessen its instances. To give you an idea, you can concentrate on Workplace Discrimination, starting from its hiring process. You can propose that applicants are chosen based on their skills, so the company can implement a hiring procedure where applicants should go through written tests first before personal interviews.

If you instead want to focus on topics that include people from all walks of life, talk about diversity. Here’s an excellent guide on how to write an essay about diversity .

Maria Caballero is a freelance writer who has been writing since high school. She believes that to be a writer doesn't only refer to excellent syntax and semantics but also knowing how to weave words together to communicate to any reader effectively.

View all posts

Discrimination against Women in the Workplace

How it works

Various studies report that inequality still persists despite women making great milestones in the place of work (Bach, 2018). A recent survey conducted by Social Institutions and Gender Index (2018) shows that women discrimination in the United States is much higher when compared to discrimination against women in Australia, Colombia, regions of Eastern Europe, and Western Europe (Bach, 2018). The report by Social Institutions and Gender Index also highlighted the existing gender compensation differences in US, as well as the perseverance of an unconscious gender discrimination (Bach, 2018).

These findings are attributed to female underrepresentation in the workplace. According to research, close to 42 percent of working women in US have reported experiencing discrimination on work due to their gender (Parker & Funk, 2017). This highlights the disparity in gender discrimination, simply observing the sheer size of reportings relative to harassment reports by men provide concrete evidence. In 2017, Pew Research Center undertook a survey to investigate women’s experiences with regards to discrimination at work; According to the Pew Research Center findings, women report a wide range of personal experiences, stretching all the way from receiving less pay than male colleagues for performing similar work to being denied the opportunity to take on crucial work assignments (Parker & Funk, 2017). More studies conducted among working adults show that females are almost twice (42% women compared to 22% males) as likely as males to report they have faced one or more of various forms of gender discrimination on the job (Gough & Noonan 2013).

While some countries including the United States has put into place anti-discrimination laws to curb cases of gender and sexual discrimination, societal roles, rules, and practices instruct and motivate men to devalue or value women (Wolfe, 2019). Women are constantly subjected to unfair behavior for instance being told “you run like a girl” has somehow become a common thing to say. But the question is where did the idea that women or girls some how do things “poorly” compared to boys or men. It is ridiculous that women who are competent and skilled may be left out of consideration in promotions because they are perceived to have a chance of getting pregnant (Wolfe, 2019). Nevertheless, a job may be given to a man who is less competent simply because he is a man. The most rampant form of gender discrimination encountered by women is pay or income inequality. 25% of employed women in US report they have been paid less compared to a male counterpart doing the same work (Parker & Funk, 2017). Research reveals that only 5% of working men report to have received less pay than a female colleague. As reported by the US Census Bureau, women earn 20% less than what men earn (Bach, 2018). In comparison to men, women are about four times (23% of working females versus 6% of employed males) more likely to report they have been handled in a manner that demonstrates that they are less skilled because of their gender (Parker & Funk, 2017).

Although pay gap is considered as the main form of gender discrimination, there are also notable gaps on other areas. 15 percent of employed women report they have earned little support from senior managers compared to a male who was performing similar task. In contrast, only 7% of employed males say to have experienced similar encounter. Working women are twice (10% of working women versus 5% men) as likely as men to report that they have not been shortlisted for the most valuable job assignments as result of their gender (Plickert & Sterling, 2017). Considering the arguments presented above, this paper hypothesized that women are more discriminated in the workplace because of their gender. Furthermore, the paper theorized that women are discriminated against in the workplace not because of their performance level, but because of the existing societal roles, norms and rules. In fact, some of females have made significant achievement in terms of education, management, leadership, and other aspects of life. Perhaps if we continue to shed light on the discrimination of women in the workplace eventually things will improve.

According to Gough and Noonan (2013), the belief that females are less dedicated and motivated in their careers is among the most cited explanations for ongoing women discrimination in work. Several researchers and scholars hold the view that stereotyped stigmas lead to women getting less challenging responsibilities than their male colleagues (Plickert & Sterling, 2017). The act of assigning less challenging tasks to women hinders career growth and development in females. Focusing on social roles and gender stereotypes, spreads discrimination into the workplace. Masculine customs demonstrated in the performance of high risk assignments and hard work still dictate many blue collar workplaces. The demand to demonstrate masculinity assumes a diverse form among workers (Thornton, 2016). In high-ranked occupations such as legal firms, the symbol of masculinity is propagated by professionals performing tasks for long hours to exhibit commitment in the place of work (Thornton, 2016).

Women, in particular mothers, encounter gender stereotypes concerning being less dedicated to their job, inability to meet a job assignment and underrated in their performance despite performing just as well as the opposite sex. According to the US labor force, an ideal employee is defined as a person who works weekly for 40 hours and overtime, has no or little to no time to bare and raise children, and is regularly available to the employer (Plickert & Sterling, 2017). Going by this definition alone is proof to conclude that women face difficulties in undertaking and meeting the expectations that are important to the firm. The notion that women are less committed to work may commence once women marry. This is in line with the supposition that women will get pregnant the moment they marry. Plickert and Sterling (2017) argue that when women come back from maternity leave, they start to experience differential treatment in the workplace. For example, the moment women return from family leave, their work commitment is questioned and they may be passed over for vital job promotions or assignments. Women are treated in a manner that assumes they have become less skilled because of giving birth.

Studies by Sloan (2012), and Budig and Hodges (2010) point out that it is presumed the moment women birth kids, they can no longer be dedicated to both job and family. Nonetheless, the researchers (Sloan (2012); and Budig and Hodges (2010) reveal that it is job experiences and not societal or gender obligations that determine dedication to a job. Taking into account the variations in insights of cultural “ideal job” requirements of mothers and fathers, females are not expected to be full time employees. Within the context of men, full-time job time tables and families are seen as compatible commitments (Sloan, 2012). On the other hand, an identical combination for females is considered as competing dedications (Sloan, 2012). Generally, the biased perceptions of performance and commitment promote women discrimination in the workplace.

Another explanation proposed for the persisting women discrimination in places of work is the differences by education. Among working females, the proportion of women reporting to have witnessed workplace sexual abuse is approximately the same across, educational, partisan, racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds (Parker & Funk, 2017). However, research shows that the situation is much different when it comes to specific types of discrimination in the workplace. Research has identified significant variations among women that are deeply ingrained mostly in their education level (Sloan, 2012). Females with a University degree or higher education level report to experience discrimination within a scale that is at a considerably higher rates compared to females with lower education levels. 57% of employed women with postgraduate degree report they have faced some form of workplace gender discrimination (Parker & Funk, 2017). This number is relatively higher compared to 40% of women with bachelor’s degree and 39% of women who never completed college reporting similar experiences (Parker & Funk, 2017).

About 29% of women having postgraduate degree claim they have encountered recurrent discrimination on the job as result of their gender, in relation to 18% of women with bachelor’s degree and 12% of women with lower level of education (Parker & Funk, 2017). Likewise, 27% of employed women with postgraduate degree are more likely than their counterparts with lower levels of education (11% of women with bachelor’s degree and 13% of women with less education) to report they have received less backing from senior managers compared to a male performing the same job assignment (Parker & Funk, 2017). Studies have found that feeling alienated at work, as well as being passed over for work training or promotion closely follow the same pattern (Thornton, 2016).

From the perspective of wages, employed women with bachelor’s degree or higher education are much more probable compared to women with less education to report they have received being paid a lower wage than a man who did. Statistically, 30% of women with bachelor’s degree or more compared to about 21% of women with less education argue they have received less pay than a male in the same rank (Parker & Funk, 2017). Overall, research shows that women with greater family earnings are nearly equally probable to have faced one or more form of gender-oriented discrimination in the workplace (Parker & Funk, 2017).

Race and ethnicity have also been given as explanations for perpetuation of gender discrimination at work. An estimated 53% of working black women report they have encountered at least one form of gender discrimination in the workplace (Parker & Funk, 2017). In contrast, only 40% of White and 40% of Hispanic have said they have experienced gender discrimination at work (Parker & Funk, 2017). Studies reveal that 29% of employed black women compared with 9% of Hispanic and 8% of Whites have reported to have been passed over for most vital job tasks because of their gender (Parker & Funk, 2017).

In conclusion, women have made significant advances in terms of work experiences and education. In fact, some women have partaken in various industries that are male dominated and have emerged successful. However, recent studies show that women continue to experience different forms of gender discrimination in the workplace (Parker & Funk (2017); Gough & Noonan (2013)). Women are nearly three times more likely than men to claim they have encountered frequent small insults at job due to their gender orientation. Women have reported to have experienced various forms of gender discrimination including training opportunities, equal pay, and promotions (Parker & Funk, 2017). Societal norms, education levels, and ethnicity and race have been cited as some of the factors fueling women discrimination in the workplace (Thornton, 2016).

• Bach, N. (2018). American Women Face More Discrimination than Europeans, Report Finds. Accessed from http://fortune.com/2018/12/07/gender-discrimination-us-oecd-report/
• Budig, M. J., & Hodges, M. J. (2010). Differences in disadvantage: Variation in the motherhood penalty across white women’s earnings distribution. American Sociological Review, 75(5), 705-728.
• Gough, M., & Noonan, M. (2013). A review of the motherhood wage penalty in the United States. Sociology Compass, 7(4), 328-342.
• Parker, K., & Funk, C. (2017). Gender discrimination comes in many forms for today’s working women. Pew Research Center, December, 14.
• Plickert, G., & Sterling, J. (2017). Gender Still Matters: Effects of Workplace Discrimination on Employment Schedules of Young Professionals. Laws, 6(4), 28.
• Thornton, M. (2016). Work/life or work/work? Corporate legal practice in the twenty-first century. International journal of the legal profession, 23(1), 13-39.
• Wolfe, L. (2019). Corporations Sued for Gender Discrimination Against Women and Men. Accessed from https://www.thebalancecareers.com/gender-discrimination-against-women-and-men-3515719

Cite this page

Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace. (2021, Feb 24). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/

"Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace." PapersOwl.com , 24 Feb 2021, https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/ [Accessed: 16 May. 2024]

"Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace." PapersOwl.com, Feb 24, 2021. Accessed May 16, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/

"Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace," PapersOwl.com , 24-Feb-2021. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/. [Accessed: 16-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Discrimination Against Women in the Workplace . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/discrimination-against-women-in-the-workplace/ [Accessed: 16-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Knowledge Base
• Popular Essay Topics

Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay

• Author Kimberly Ball
• Category Popular Essay Topics

Disclaimer: This paper has been submitted by a student. This is not a sample of the work written by professional academic writers.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of StudySaurus.

Introduction

Gender discrimination remains a global issue of great concern within society and in the workplace environment. Discrimination at the workplace has several disadvantages such as low productivity and increased level of demoralization. Discrimination in the workplace remains a contentious issue of great concern that organizations should learn to address (Christy and Brad 12). Many people have argued that favoring specific individuals or communities within the workplace will enhance productivity while other people have an opinion that it greatly affects organizational performance. It is true that women, unlike men, continue to undergo unfair discrimination and unlawful discrimination in the workplace. Some people have argued that discrimination of women over certain activities are essential for the overall performance of the firm while other people also think that gender discrimination is a total violation of work ethics and labor laws (Jennings, para.19). The discussion is an argumentative essay that seeks to provide reasons against and reasons for gender discrimination in the workplace.

The Argument Against Women Discrimination in the Workplace

Increase in Productivity

It is important that the organization treat both men and women the same in the workplace. Offering them equal services in most cases tends to motivate them as they work towards the realization of the organizational success. Treating workers with respect improves their sense of satisfactorily as well as making them happy. However, they display a good image of the company even to the outsiders (Dipboye and Colella 13). Besides, it attracts more inventors to the company with the aim of achieving the set goals.

Additionally, On the other hand, any form of workers discrimination creates rivalry and hatred among employees. Consequently, it adversely affects the performance of the firm (Shih, Young, and Bucher, 145). It is vital for a company to show dignity to their employees for continuous productivity. More so, the company should develop laws that protect the employees’ welfare to reduce job harassment.

Business enterprises should improve in eliminating gender discrimination in the place of work. They should consider women’s rights as well as gender equality. It has effects on transgender and bisexual people thus affecting how they interact with their colleagues (Ghumman and Ryan 677). Companies should enact measures to stop and prevent discrimination to avoid lowering output productivity.

Gender biasing can result in mental illness such as tremor due to outside pressure from the people around (Wolfe 31). The victims usually develop depression and anxiety due to emotional loneliness. They can also engage in the use of drug substances, which has adverse outcomes such as affecting work capabilities and health complications. Mental health problems also affect the company’s managers due to unstable workers who produce low quality work.

It also creates conflicts between employees leading to increased hatred. Discrimination always brings harassment as some people receive favors while others are ill-treated. It develops disunity and divides employees as both sides have followers. As a result, job performance reduces due to office dramas and arguments.

However, conflicts in the workplace always lead to negative results as output production is affected. The organization should enact measures to stop gender biasing to create a peaceful working environment (Christy and Brad, 31). They should ensure that all workers regardless of gender are treated equally without any form of nuisance. It will make each worker appreciate another person as they work towards achieving the company’s goals.

Gender inequality in a workplace lowers company morale as most of the employees engage in worthless activities. The employees working morale is significantly affected due to the division between employees. The clients to are concerned as they receive ill treatments from the employees (Wolfe 4). It displays a lousy company image to the public hence lowering the number of potential clients. Therefore, companies should eliminate any form of gender discrimination to ensure they meet the target market. Adopting diversity in the workplace and managing it more efficiently ensures firms are ready to achieve their goals and target on top of attracting a wider range of potential employees.

Moreover, discriminating workers and hostility to them compromises their productivity level. Therefore, it is advisable that for the new firm venturing in the market to uphold fair treatment free from any form of discrimination as well as teamwork and the employee’s diversification to see the firm achieving its operational goals and policies (Rhode, para.10). On the other hand, some organization might decide to discriminate women given that research shows that women in most cases tend to register a lower level of productivity based on the manner and the nature of a job (Dipboye and Colella 17). It, therefore, indicates that discrimination has both the good and its negative effect on the overall performance of the business.

Women contribute to the company’s productivity as many works hard to keep their families. Many are single parents hence they ensure that they provide needs to people concerned. Increase in workers conflict has an impact in the office productivity due to reducing in work enthusiasm. To generate better produce any organization should ensure that there is peaceful coexistence between workers and their seniors.

It will increase the employee’s comfortability and enjoyment when attending to their duties. It also leads to a rise in the worker’s sense of belonging as they feel the need to perform their tasks (De Hart and Dayton, 16). Moreover, women biasing lower the companies productivity permanent measures should be enacted to curb the issue.

Arguments for the Need for Women Discrimination

Nature of Certain Work Types

Many organizations can decide to discriminate women based on the nature of certain jobs. Some job types only require the service of the man and not women. Additionally, some research shows that women have a lower rate of productivity and offering them a chance might not have the value that the organization needs for the realization of its major objective and even demands towards the realization of its goals (Denissen and Saguy 388). The management will decide not to employ women given that they also tend to be slow in the manner that they carry out their activities.

Some Job Types only Require Men and not Women

Certain jobs that require a lot of energy may not favor women at the workplace. Therefore, it will force the organization to look for the men and not women. For example, a construction firm will mainly prefer working with men and not women. Men are known to produce quality job as compared with women. Women are known not to like working under pressure or in certain conditions.

Women Tend to have many Excuses with Limited Flexibility as Compared to Men

It will be difficult for the women gender to work in places that seem to be of hardship as compared to men. Most women prefer working places that seems close to their homes and family so that they can give or attend to their family needs. It, therefore, shows that most organization will find it easy to avoid recruiting women in the workplace based on the numerous challenges. For instance, the moment that the firm decides to give a woman two months of  pregnancy leave, the firm will be facing employee and productivity challenges. Considering the above factors altogether, it will then be possible for the firm to discriminate women at the workplace.

Gender discrimination remains an issue of great concern. Based on my argument and reasoning, I take a point that women discrimination has many challenges in life as compared to the benefits. Discriminating women within organizations are harmful to the business performance given that it tends to demoralize the ability of the employees to deliver their level best to enhance productivity. Treating employees on an equal basis gives them a sense of belonging. Workers feel motivated when frequently involved in the decision-making process and into the daily operations. The primary goal of every firm is to work towards increasing profit realization through employee’s productivity, and most of the male counterpart will feel discouraged when women receive unfair treatment. However, in some cases, reasons such as low productivity might make it a better reason to discriminate against women in the workplace. Women tend to have a lower rate of workplace flexibility as compared to men, and that makes it a better reason for discriminating them.

Was this material helpful?

Related essays, about studysaurus, community. knowledge. success..

StudySaurus is run by two uni-students that still get a kick out of learning new things. We hope to share these experiences with you.

Ideas ,  concepts ,  tutorials,   essay papers  – everything we would’ve liked to have known, seen or heard during our high-school & UNI years, we want to bring to YOU.

Privacy & Cookies Policy Terms and Conditions DMCA Request

Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay

In the gender discrimination at workplace essay below, you will discover the different forms of bias and judgement present at places of work in the USA and Saudi Arabia.

Introduction

Gender discrimination in the workplace continues to be a disturbing problem to various women in USA and the rest of the world as well. It is considered to be quite widespread and virtually every woman must have suffered from one form of discrimination or another due to her gender.

Even in the current age, women still experience discrimination in their places of work and despite having similar skills as their male counterparts; they still can earn a two third of what the men can earn irrespective of their qualification and experience which might be same as or more than that of men.

Gender discrimination in the work place is the favoring of one gender against the other in terms of recruitment, job assignment, and termination of employment, compensation and promotion.

Discrimination in the work place may be intentional or unintentional and might be prompted by prejudice or ignorance. Women and men are always subjected to different treatment in the work place; in some circumstances, men may be treated more than women while in some other cases women are treated better than men.

Despite the fact that both men and women joint the work place with predetermined gender differences which is used as a basis for the preferential treatment they receive, it is in rare circumstances that gender differences in the treatment of both men and women is associated with preexisting perceptions (Bell, McLaughlin & Sequeira 67).

This essay will document gender bias and gender discrimination in the context of social and physical and the social confines of the work place that is experienced at work in the context of United States of America and Saudi Arabia.

Traditionally, gender discrimination emphasized sex discrimination and the two were used synonymously. The most powerful form of discrimination in a work place is when a particular group is adversely affected by the procedures that are followed in making decision or during work place practices.

It might be agreed that work practices may not be intentioned to discriminate against any group, but they might have the impact of offering fewer opportunities to either gender (Mayer 1).

Gender discrimination, sexual harassment and glass ceiling

There is a relationship between gender discrimination, glass ceiling and sexual harassment and all the three are hindrance to women occupying executive or managerial positions.

There are three main forms of gender discrimination, namely: overt discrimination, sexual discrimination and glass ceiling. All the three negatively impact on the status of women.

Women have been the victims of gender discrimination in various business organizations in the United States of America despite efforts of numerous legislations and strong feminist activists to combat it.

Overt Discrimination

This is understood as the use of gender as a parameter for making employment related decisions. This form of discrimination was the objective of Title VII in the USA which formed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

This Act prohibited all forms of sex-based discrimination in matters of employment like hiring, promotion and firing. Examples of over discrimination are the refusal by employees to hire women or the practice of paying women low wages due to their gender.

Over discrimination has led to occupational sex segregation in the Saudi Arabia. The stereotyping of particular job as for women or men are evident in the US where women makeup the majority of nurses, flight attendance and secretaries which are characterized by low pay, short career ladder and low status while men make up the majority of pilots, physicians and executives.

In the USA, women are considered to occupy low organizational status and low organizational status and power (Gregory 209).

Sexual Harassment

This is another form of gender discrimination and manifests itself in employment based discrimination. There are two guidelines that define the illegality of sex harassment, these are: quid pro quo and hostile environment harassment.

Quid pro quo involves the inducing of a woman through employment so as to receive sexual factors or compliance. It is the coercive form of quid pro quo that is considered as gender discrimination.

Most of this form of gender discrimination is perpetuated by managers and supervisors of an organization. Hostile harassment on the other and is witnessed when sexual favors can interfere with employees’ work performance or when sexual behavior is used to create an intimidating work environment. Sexual harassment is considered as a tool for occupational sex segregation.

Glass Ceiling

This is considered as a fundamental factor that hinders women from accessing employment and status. Glass ceiling affects women in an organization.

Glass ceiling are understood as those invisible man-made barriers which hinder women from progressing beyond certain levels. In the US for example, it is estimated that women make up 30 percent of managers but only 5 percent make up the executive managers.

These factors are linked to gender stereotypes. It is difficult to eradicate glass ceiling by use of legislation (Bell, McLaughlin and Sequeira 70).

Gender Discrimination in the United States of America

Gender discrimination in the United States of America is an ancient phenomenon since it assumes the dimension of discrimination against women which is global.

Just like in other various parts of the world, gender discrimination is ripe in the USA. It is global knowledge that the position of women is marginalized in the society in various aspects of production.

Women are guaranteed limited access to education, they lack power to own property, they have limited exposure to education and training facilities and they have limited opportunities for employment than men.

The reluctance of the USA to ratify the Convention on the Elimination on All Forms of Discrimination against Women which was adopted by the United Nations is a clear indication of how deeply entrenched gender discrimination is in the USA.

However despite the inability of the USA to ratify the CEDAW, they have enacted legislations and numerous statutes which are aimed at safeguarding of women from all forms of discrimination and particularly in the working environment.

Previously, it was the duty of the states to define the kind of employment that women were entitled to do. All aspects of discrimination in the USA was taken care by the Title VII but despite of this, and in spite of the fact that women are gaining entry into the labor force, there still exists inequalities in wage structure.

Gender discrimination is experienced when one gender is given preference or is treated less than the other gender. Women on several occasions are given little preference than men because of their sex.

Wage equality and sexual harassment are the predominant forms of gender discrimination. Despite various regulations to promote equality, there are still some cases of discrimination in work place.

Women do not measure up to men in various aspects of employment particularly regarding income, the rate or frequency of employment and the range of occupation. Glass ceiling exists to prevent women from being discriminated upon (Bell, McLaughlin and Sequeira 69).

Gender discrimination in the work place is a common phenomenon in the United States of America. Women find it difficult to secure employment as compared to men.

This is associated with the snaky behavior of women in the USA. There are existent laws that provide for protection against any discrimination in their workplace.

This however has not prevented employees from facing various forms of harassment and discrimination in employment based gender.

In the USA, sex discrimination rare its ugly face in various forms and the common form of gender discrimination id the exclusion of women from the labor market just because of the fact that they are women.

It involves the association of particular jobs as for men only of for women only or by application of the glass ceiling rule that defines how far women should go in the corporate or government ladder (Dipboye and Colella 174).

The most widespread form of gender discrimination is sexual harassment. This happens when an employer connects the job status of the employee to their sexual suggestion.

This is totally contrary to laws of employment which prohibit the subjecting of women to sexually charged or hostile work place environment.

Sexual harassment includes posting on obscene photos that can offend fellow workers, slur on the appearance of the fellow workers or making derogatory comments in respect to women’s pregnancy (Brayton 1).

The prohibition of gender discrimination under title VII was considered as relieve for all women and a new dawn of seeking inequality in the work place but still the practice is widespread.

It is estimated that in the USA, the female gender are still occupied with jobs that are deemed to be typically for women like secretaries, administration scale workers as well as sales clerks.

According to the women’s policy research institute in Washington, for every $75 cent that a lady earns, a man earns $1. Gender discrimination has been implemented by some multinational companies operating in the USA and which claim that they are protecting certain bilateral treaty provision that gives them leeway to employ staff of their own choice. This might be a recipe for discrimination (Mayer 1).

In the USA women suffer from gender discrimination in a various work place spheres like hiring, promotion and salary. In terms of hiring, few women find employment as compared to the population of women who graduate from College.

With regards to promotion, women occupy lower positions. Women are not represented in the top hierarchy of various organizations and the problem is not due to the fact they are not adequately trained but because they are discriminated because of their gender. Salary wise, women often make little money that the one made by their male counterparts (Isaacs 1).

Gender Discrimination in Saudi Arabia Work Place

In the case of Saudi Arabia, their current policies and programs are geared towards the emancipation of women in the labor market. Despite the efforts by the government to ameliorate the position of women in the spheres of employment, women are still the minority in the work place and it is estimated that they make approximately 15 percent of the population in the labor force.

The marginalization of women in the work place is linked to the existing legislative, social, occupational and educational constraints that hinder the participation of Saudi women in the labor market.

Gender based discrimination in Saudi Arabia is evident in the statistics of job population; men occupy approximately 85 percent of the labor force.

Women in Saudi Arabia account for the large group of the unemployed population. Gender discrimination in the Saudi work force market has its roots in the country’s education system which fails to prepare women for managerial positions and other competitive roles in the society.

Saudi laws guarantee that a woman is entitled to work but the same laws specify the environment that women should apply their labor and this is considered a form of sex segregation where women are placed in certain positions that are considered feminine in nature and are less fit for men. In the private sector for example, women have access to narrow range of jobs mainly in private business and banks (AlMunajjed 4).

Though Saudi Arabia has made significant progress in combating discrimination in the work place, the progress has never been even and specifically in areas like women in paid employment and their treatment of migrant workers.

Women in the Saudi Arabia are experiencing difficulties in their entry into the labor force. It is estimated that the rate of women participation the workforce in Saudi Arabia has been on the rise.

Women are a minority in occupying jobs in the managerial positions and they experience restriction in their choice for labor market and employment. Women experience a lot of harassment in the work place and they also suffer from offensive comments.

Violence, discrimination and segregation are some of the common practices that affect woman in Saudi Arabia and it is deeply rooted in the Muslim tradition and the rigid social stratification structure which insubordinates women and makes them to appear impure or inferior to men.

Gender discrimination has made it hard for Saudi women to secure employment, to secure better training or to get equal pay for their work done. There is also widespread discrimination against women in terms of hiring and recruitment.

Various employers have refused to accommodate the needs of women that are occasioned by their gender but which conflict with work practice for example pregnancy (International Labor Office 3).

In Saudi Arabia, gender discrimination and inequalities apply to women’s employment opportunities. Traditionally in Saudi Arabia, business and government sector are predominantly preserve of men and they were limitedly exposed to family oriented systems, in this regard, men differed from women based on their perceptions, the beliefs and the expectations of a typical Saudi Arabian work pace. Yes, gender discrimination and segregation is prevalent in Saudi Arabia but it is being slowly eliminated.

Manifestation of Gender Discrimination

Overall, gender discrimination is reflected in the following areas:.

Pay gap: there is often widespread discrimination and bias in the distribution of bonus and performances which may be related to the salary, it has been established that women are paid lower salaries than their male counterparts for similar work done.

This equality is reflected in their entire career life. Consequently, in the salary cadre women concentrate on lower jobs in their occupations.

Recruitment, conditions of services, retention and promotion: there is a lot of occupational segregation in terms of career development in Saudi Arabia and US.

It has been established that men occupy two-third of the management, professional and senior jobs. There is also a likelihood of men progressing up the career ladder faster than their female counterparts, which is a reflection of discrimination in the work place.

Recruitment: gender discrimination is also evidenced in the recruitment and the selection process. In this circumstance, men dominate highly paying jobs while women are recruited to occupy the low paying jobs.

In Saudi Arabia, informal recruitment and personal referral are the common modes of recruitment. These informal methods of recruitment have the tendency of propagating women exclusion in certain job fields.

Consequently, women are more likely to be asked questions which touch on their family background during the recruitment and this is considered an issue of gender discrimination.

Progression in career paths: women are in most circumstances trapped in lower paying jobs. Women can only be promoted to supervisory positions but their male counterparts have the likelihood of being promoted to managerial posts.

Work place culture: there are several culture issues that form the basis of gender discrimination in the work place. Networking activities and sports only place focus on male dominated sports.

These cultural issues may be stereotyping and sexist in form. This alienates women hence creating exclusionary feeling of undervaluing their participation and confidence.

The practice and culture of long working for long hours serves to discriminate against those employees who have tight family responsibility who, on several occasions are women (Equality and Human Rights Commission 9).

Theories of Gender Discrimination in the Work Place

There are various theories that are used to account for gender discrimination in the work place. There are certain cases of discrimination bias which are encouraged by the structures and practices of an organization as well as the environment and the dynamics what individuals operate.

Gender discrimination can also be depicted in the established rules of success where men are promoted or employed based on their performance while ladies secure employment or promotion based on their appearance.

There are various theories that seek to explain the prevalence of gender discrimination on the workplace. These theories are the sex plus theory, rational bias theory and the disparate treatment theory.

Sex plus theory is defined by the gender and the marital status of the employee. Gender discrimination can also be evidenced on the benefits provided by an employee to workers.

Most employees fail to factor in the fact that female employees have special sex based disabilities and health care demands like bearing children and pregnancy. This unique sex based features of women should be made so as to enable women to fully participate in the labor force and failure to address this needs can amount to discrimination (Brayton 1).

Disparate Treatment Theory

This theory holds that employers are directly accountable and are responsible for their organizational structures and the institutional practices that may enable the practice of discrimination bias in the work place.

There are situations where women managers with similar qualifications and same training and experience as their male counterparts and in similar positions earn fewer wage.

Modern organizations are slowly embracing team work which leads to the increase in the number of individuals who are charged with the art of decision making.

The increased use of team work to make decisions has heightened discrimination bias which affects the ability of women to develop or grow within the organization.

It may be hard to imagine or understand how organizational structure or the practices of institutions or the dynamics of work place can lead to gender discrimination.

There is disparate treatment theory which occurs when individuals are treated differently due to their group or association to particular group.

Examples of disparate treatment theory are: the unwillingness of employees to hire women due to their gender, the reluctance by the management of an organization to place women in career track positions, offering of small salary to an employee just because she is a woman and the asking of male like questions to female candidates during an interview.

Consequently, there is the traditional version of disparate treatment theory which defines discrimination in the work place as an individual and measurable practice.

It explains work place discrimination as intentional. According to the theory, individuals are consciously motivated to practice discrimination; it argues that discrimination is product of decision by an individual with stereotypical belief towards particular group of individuals.

Disparate treatment theory explains discrimination by unraveling the mind and the decisions of the individual actor and what motivates him to discriminate.

Various kinds of disparate treatment theory are: individual disparate treatment theory and systemic disparate treatment theory. It is important to comprehend disparate treatment theory in terms of dissimilarities as opposed to the conscious motives to discriminate for equity to be realized in the work place. There is also disparate impact theory which describes discrimination in form of consequences and not the motive (Green 94).

Rational Bias Theory

Another theory is that examines the prevalence of discrimination in the work place is the rational bias theory. Despite of numerous efforts to promote equality in the place of work, discrimination against certain groups still occurs, women have particularly bore the brunt of gender discrimination.

This results in women doing poorly than men in terms or economic strength, income and unemployment. This discrimination is reflected in their salaries where women earn less than men.

This theory predicts discrimination may be influenced by situations or circumstances whereby a demonstration of bias may attract rewards or sanctions.

According to the proponents of the theory, external pressure from the superiors can justify gender discrimination, it explains that there can be valid forms of discrimination which have basis in fact and which relies on particular stereotypes to arrive at a predictive accuracy (Larwood, Szwajkowski and Rose 9).

Sex plus Theory

This is the theory that captures all forms of gender based discrimination on account of pregnancy in the work place. The theory explains all forms of discrimination of pregnant women, it is considered out of law to terminate the contract of an employee due to pregnancy.

This theory argues that any sexual behavior in the office by an employer should be accompanied by a proof that the discrimination was not only driven by gender but by additional characteristics.

This form of discrimination holds the employers accountable when it happens that they have discriminated against women, sex plus discrimination is clearer and it happens when an employer does not discriminate against all the females and it only deals with subset or a category like Married woman.

It also covers the discrimination of women based on their marital status. This theory is used to describe a situation where an employee is categorized by the employer based on sex and another physical characteristic (Shetreet 255)

To overcome gender discrimination in the work place in Saudi Arabia, it is imperative for the government to introduce various reforms which will prepare women for competitive jobs.

This should include labor market reforms that will seek to promote gender equality as well as to create a favorable environment that can favor the participation of Saudi women in senior and managerial jobs which were traditionally preserved for men.

It is the responsibility of human resources management to enforce anti-discrimination policies in the company. This has never been the case because the organization’s management considers gender discrimination as a casual topic and hence is unable to prevent other forms of gender discrimination.

Most corporate organizations relegate the matter of gender discrimination to the periphery hence making its enforcement hard. Gender discrimination is often sustained by variables which are inherent and indigenous to the company and the company’s work environment.

There may be some circumstances where working conditions in a work environment dominated by men and work and lifestyle which is structured to fit male have the net effect of adversely impacting on the female workers. It is the corporate policies and practices of a company that sustain or eliminate the presence of gender discrimination in a work environment.

Gender discrimination in the work place needs to be addressed because it affects talent utilization in the work place as well as the quality of employee experiences.

It is imperative to understand the dynamics and other underlying issues in gender discrimination so as to prevent it. Gender discrimination is an organizational problem and it mentally and psychologically affects women who feel that they are discriminated against. This experience can lead women to have a negative perception about the organization.

Works Cited

Al Munajjed, Mona. “Women’s Employment in Saudi Arabia: A Major Challenge”. Booz Media , 2010. Web.

Bell, Myrtle., McLaughlin, Mairi and Sequeira, John. “Discrimination, harassment and the glass ceiling: Women executives as change agents”. Journal of Business Ethics 37.1 (2002): 65-76.

Brayton, Purcell. “Workplace Harassment and Employment Discrimination”. Brayton Law, 2011. Web.

Dipboye, Robert and Colella Adrienne. Discrimination at Work: the Psychological and Organizational Bases . New York, NY: Rutledge, 2005. Print.

Equality and Human Rights Commission. “Sex discrimination and gender pay gap report of the Equality and Human Rights Commission”. Equality and Human Rights Commission , 2009. Web.

Green, Tristin. “Discrimination in Workplace Dynamics: Toward a Structural Account of Disparate Treatment Theory”. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 38.1 (2003): 91-157.

Gregory, Raymond. Women and Workplace Discrimination: Overcoming Barriers to Gender Equality . Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003. Print.

International Labor Office. “Discrimination at Work in the Middle East and North Africa. International”. Labor Office , n.d. Web.

Isaacs, Ellen. “Gender discrimination in the workplace”. Isaacs-Gender Discrim , n.d. Web.

Larwood, Laurie., Szwajkowski, Eugene and Rose, Suzanna. “Sex and race relationship resulting from manager-client relationships: applying the rational choice theory of managerial discrimination”. Sex Roles 18.1 (1988): 9-29.

Mayer, Donald. “Gender discrimination”. Reference for Business , 2011. Web.

Shetreet, Simon. Women in Law . New York, NY: Kluwer Law International, 1998. Print.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, March 27). Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-discrimination-at-workplace/

"Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay." IvyPanda , 27 Mar. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/gender-discrimination-at-workplace/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay'. 27 March.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-discrimination-at-workplace/.

1. IvyPanda . "Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-discrimination-at-workplace/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-discrimination-at-workplace/.

• Gender Inequality and the Glass Ceiling
• Glass Ceiling Presentation in the Scholarly Research
• The Glass Ceiling Phenomenon Analysis
• Gender inequality in Canada
• Australian Gender Pay Inequalities and Its Reasons
• Gender and Diversity in the Workplace
• Women are paid less for equal work
• Wolof Culture and Crisis of Masculinity in It