Essay The Glass Ceiling

Helen Norton, “the Director of Legal and Public Policy for the National Partnership for Women and Families,” says, “Less than 5% of senior managers in Fortune 1000 companies are women and minorities, according to the fact-finding report issued by the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission in 1995” (Leporini). It was stated that “women comprise 46% of the total workforce, and minorities comprise 21%” (Leporini). The commission pushed the “corporate affirmative action as a tool” (Leporini). This helped, “fully utilize a diverse labor force and maintain a competitive presence in the global economy”

According to a research journal presented by David Cotter and three of this colleges from various universities they believe that four criterion must be meet in order to determine that the glass ceiling exists. They call do not call these discriminations but rather inequalities, and their first inequality that must be met is "A gender or racial difference that is not explained by other job-relevant characteristics of the employee" (Cottter 657). Essentially this means that the glass ceiling is measured as a residual difference based upon race after you take into consideration education, experience, abilities, motivation, and other job-relevant characteristics. They state in their research that yes this is a factor however extensive research cannot be conducting on this ideology because it constitutes pin pointing every relevant characteristic to a job which can be al most impossible.

In the recent years, many women have made progress in obtaining jobs as CEO’s of major companies, hold seats on the board of directors, and many other high profile positions however, the percentage of women and minorities that hold these positions are very low in comparison to males hence, the glass ceiling remains. The term Glass Ceiling is the “unseen, yet unbreachable barrier that keeps minorities and women from rising to the upper rings of the corporate ladder, regardless of their qualifications or achievements” (Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995). Stereotypes and biases have created an image that women are not capable of effectively filling the role of managerial jobs. In 1995, Glass Ceiling Commission noted that women filled only 3 to

Too many companies have yet to grasp the case for change, however, and still lack both commitment and a program of action (2015, Barton et al.). This glaring lack of recognition within organizations of sexual discrimination and disparity has its roots in a much deeper cultural

This article reveals the disparities in the workplace due to gender stereotypes favoring men over women in executive positions. Women have a much more difficult path to obtain executive positions, and maintain them. This article helps by showing the number of high-level women in fortune 500 companies. U.S. Department of Labor indicates that women occupy more positions in executive and managerial roles. However, with closer examination of Fortune 500 companies, only two women occupy the position of CEO opposed to their

Within any organization there is a chain of command. Someone always out ranks someone else. In today’s workplace, issue like discrimination, harassment, and racism, are subjects that we as employees don’t want to believe are happening, and more so, hope they never happen to us. Over the past couple of decades, America has come a long way to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity for progression. Unfortunately, for those of us who are not naive enough to believe that this is always true, issues like these do happen. The glass ceiling, for example, refers to a level within the managerial hierarchy

Violet, a caucasian female, speaks about how her family taught her about gender. She says that her parents always encouraged her to do everything she wanted to do. So,when she saw that she was good at math and science, she thought that math and science could be something that she continued to study. However, when it came to college major decision, she thought about her future family, and especially her future kids. She did not want a job that was too demanding and would take her away from her family in the future. Even as an eighteen year old college freshman, she thought of these factors while deciding her major. Violet did not end up majoring in any of the disciplines in the STEM field (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics). Although, she continued taking science classes, she ended up majoring in film and human rights. Even then, she continued thinking about what she wanted to do in the future. She is interested in

The concept of glass ceiling emphasizes situations in which individuals (typically females and other minorities) are unable to advance and attain a higher management level position in their professions, due to invisible barriers and subtle biases in the workplace. The imperceptible nature of glass ceiling highlights such partialities, as it occurs because of the “culture” of a workplace rather than explicit discrimination. Thus, glass ceiling may not be a matter of simply one’s race, but more so the kind of “comfort, chemistry, relationships and collaborations” (Kimmel and Holler 2011) that exist in the workplace. While there may be many reasons to why glass ceiling occurs, it is primarily due to the unconscious effort by members of a company to maintain the existing atmosphere of a workplace.

Women from birth are looked at as inferior to men. As a society we label babies by the color of their blanket when they are born. Boys are given blue as girls are given pink blankets. This from the start separates the two genders. As boys grow they are given action figures and are taught to play rough games, and girls are given dolls and taught to play nice. These differences continue to cause a gap between the two genders.

The glass ceiling starts to form itself very early on. From the moment a woman enters the work force after college, she is faced with much discrimination and unjust belief that she will not be able to do as well of a job than a man. A man and a woman, who both have the same education and training for a job, will have a considerable gap in their yearly income. In a first year job, a man will make approximately $14,619 compared to a woman who will make only $12,201. That is a pay gap of 17%(Gender Pay 1). There is no reason why there should be any gap in their incomes during the first year of their jobs. They have both had the same formal education and both have the same qualifications necessary for the job, yet

Failing to recruit the best talent is another disadvantage the glass ceiling can have on an organization. “The absence of individuals from minority groups at the top is a clear signal that a glass ceiling probably exists…This is a real turn-off for top minority candidates because they want to make it to the top, but they know there still are plenty of places where glass ceiling can stop them, So the best and brightest often look elsewhere” (Harris, 1994, p. 5). A high achiever that happens to be a woman and/or minority does not want to get stuck at a company that doesn’t embrace growth amongst all employees. “Companies are losing the advantage of great workers with great experience, great energy…” (Quish, 2006, p. 1). The gap in equality prevents companies from obtaining the best candidates for the job, and lead candidates into the arms of their competitors.

The glass ceiling has been defined as “an invisible barrier analogous to subtle male discrimination, which was as hard to pin down as it was effective in limiting women.”(Steiner 666) While overt

While the corporate environment has significantly progressed in terms of incorporating women and minorities into the work face, the glass ceiling still poses a threat in the environment for women. Fortune magazine periodically ranks and publishes a list of America’s largest companies. Crampton (1999) reports that among the Fortune 50 companies, only 1.3% of corporate officers were women, while 1.7% were among the Fortune 500 (Daily 1999). Among two-hundred of America’s largest companies, women hold less than a quarter of executive jobs and less than five percent of the vice-presidents are women (Daily 1999). In the past ten years no more than two women have served as CEO’s for a Fortune 500 company (Daily 1999). The number of women who serve on the boards for these major corporations comprise a relatively modest percentage of all board members (Daily 1999). Discrimination against women still plays a large part in enforcing the artificial barrier. Crampton (1999) reported that a recent study found that 79% of the CEO’s believed that prejudice and stereotypes are among the most identifiable barriers to women’s advancements. Crampton (1999) reported that discrimination can occur in forms of organizational structure policies, informal networks, and cultures that are so male-dominated that they become barriers for women to rise in the organization.

Even though numbers are slowly rising in the United States, there are still more men in executive positions than women. According to one survey, female workers only made up 43% of legislators, senior managers, and senior officials whereas male workers made up 57%. In congress, congresswomen make up only 17% of representation compared to congressmen making up 83% (Ferrante, 2011, p. 312). Gender stratification is one explanation for the tremendous gap. Ferrante (2011) describes gender stratification as the unequal distribution of opportunities and resources amongst male and female employees. (p. 311) For example, male workers have an increased opportunity to receive a promotion than a female worker. According to Tinsley (2013), women are more likely to receive executive positions when a company is doing well, rather than when a company is suffering. Some companies stereotype that women workers will leave the workforce soon to bear children, limiting their chances of achieving executive status (Ferrante, 2011, p. 316).

One of the primary challenges is that female employees in a number of our branch offices have informally complained that our organization has more men than women in management positions. We can describe this challenge is workforce diversity which means that organizations are becoming more heterogeneous in terms of gender, age, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation (Robbins & Judge, 2010). In this challenge, it is clearly that female employees less than men employees entering senior management. Despite significant investment in diversity programs female representation in top management remains stubbornly low over the last decade. ASX Top 200 Female CEOs 1.3-3.4% and Board directors 8.1-12.3%. ASX Top 500 Female CEOs 2.4% and Board Directors 9.2% (ABS, 2014). Studies have evidence that there is no significant difference (if any, must say) will affect the job performance between men and women. For example, men and women in problem solving, analytical aspects, the driving force of competition, motivation, social skills, learning ability did not show significant discrepancies. Although many psychological studies have found that women are more willing to comply with authority, and men are more aggressive than women