|
Article Excerpt
IT IS A WELL-KNOWN FACT THAT OCCUPATIONS in which women are disproportionately represented are not typically as well remunerated as those dominated by men (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1992; Cohen and Huffman, 2003; Kazanjian, 1993). Many attribute this pay differential to the overall devaluation of women's work (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1992; 1994; Cancian and Oliker, 2000; Ungerson, 2000). Care workers are particularly prone to this inequity because their work is commonly perceived as being a natural activity for women. Accordingly, it is assumed that little training or skill is required in order to meet the needs of the young, the sick, the disabled, and the elderly (Cancian and Oliker, 2000).
The devaluing of care work is not only a reflection of prevailing gender ideology, it is a representation of power as well. That is, skill is largely defined and negotiated in the paid labour force, which is largely dominated by men (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1994). This structure has inevitably resulted in low wages for the primarily female workers who are paid to provide care to others. (1) This situation is most starkly exemplified by the reality facing over 300,000 child-care workers who in Canada earn only slightly higher than minimum wage (Doherty, Lero, Goelman, Tougas and LaGrange, 2001: 73). Making a better living from caregiving is critically important to these women, but is also relevant to other care providers.
Several strategies have been employed either implicitly or explicitly by female care provider groups in order to improve their working conditions and raise the level of their wages to professional standards. These tactics include: increasing the credentials necessary to enter practice; organizing and unionizing; seeking pay equity through a variety of means; and seeking public funding for their services. While many scholars have investigated the process and effects of these strategies on the remunerative arrangements and working environment of nurses (Armstrong, Choiniere and Day, 1993; Baumgart and Larsen, 1988; Mennemeyer and Gaumer, 1983; Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, 2000; Schreiber and Nemetz, 2000; Schumacher and Hirsch, 1997; Ventura, 1999), there has been very little similar research done on other female care providers such as midwives (Bourgeault, 2006) and child-care workers (Doherty, Lero, Goelman, Tougas and LaGrange, 2001) and none from a comparative perspective. It is important to explicitly examine the impact of these strategies comparatively across occupations in order to assess how robust the arguments largely based on the case of nursing are.
In this paper, we undertake a comparative examination of the effectiveness of the four aforementioned strategies in achieving better remuneration within three female-dominated, caregiving occupations: nursing, midwifery and child care. We situate this analysis within the theoretical context of Anne Witz' (1992) work on female professional projects--specifically, the direction and effectiveness of the social closure strategies employed. We begin with a review of the literature on both the value of women's work and the strategies used to improve women's wages. We then present the employment and effectiveness of the four strategies for nursing, midwifery and child care, respectively, by drawing upon an analysis of primary and secondary source documents and information garnered by researchers in these fields. What will be revealed is that the success of these strategies in helping improve the remuneration of care providers is most pronounced when used in combination. Indeed, the strategies of increasing entry credentials to practice and unionization are critical to building the case for public funding and pay equity.
Valuing Women's Care Work
As alluded to above, the level of remuneration for women's work is a reflection of social ideologies of worth, as well as an expression of employers' power and the strength of (predominantly) male unions (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1994). Using data gathered from the National Organizations Study (NOS), Cohen and Huffman (2003) examine occupational segregation and the devaluation of women's work across various labour markets in the United States, including the non-profit, government, corporate, and entrepreneurial sectors. Their findings highlight how organizations tend to perpetuate gender inequality by underrewarding skills associated with women's work (e.g., nurturance). This trend is particularly noted when women are disproportionately represented within particular job categories and it continues to persist even after controlling for occupational skills and educational requirements. Care work is illustrative in this regard.
The devaluation of care work is largely tied to its association with women's work in the private sphere and to the perception that it is a natural, feminine activity requiring minimal skill and training (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1992; Boyd, 1997; Cancian and Oliker, 2000; Williams, 2001). Further, the sacralization of care work in the home and the conceptualization of home as a haven in a heartless capitalist world, thus moving it far away from any social or financial recognition, engendered resistance to putting a monetary value on the emotional-affective aspects of care work (Williams, 2001). As a result, the labour of care workers is often deemed unskilled or semi-skilled because the expertise needed to perform this work is discounted (Armstrong and Armstrong, 1990). Nursing aides, for example, earn less than janitors, and child-care workers less than parking lot attendants (Cancian and Oliker, 2000; Doherty, Lero, Goelman, Tougas and LaGrange, 2001; Glenn, 2000). By way of contrast, the largely male occupations recognized for their scientific and technical knowledge are more lucratively rewarded (Cancian and Oliker, 2000).
In a recent review of literature on the costs of caring, England and Folbre (1999) offer several possible explanations for the devaluation of paid care. The first is the inherent gender bias associated with this type of work. Paying for care also depends on how much people in power (state, decision makers, voters, charitable donors) are concerned about these services and how strongly they believe that such work is deserving of adequate remuneration. They also point out that female care providers may tolerate discrimination because of the intrinsic rewards of their work, such as providing comfort to others in need. Scheyett (1990), for example, argues that a tradition of "caring disguised as 'natural' virtue and duty, is [clearly] a form of oppression for women because it is non-optional, unrecognized, un-rewarded labour that limits women's choices and opportunities" (34). This inequity is likely to continue as long as caring is invisible, underpaid and relegated to those who lack social, political and economic power and status.
Strategies to Improve Remuneration for Women's Care Work
In examining the issue of the gendered wage differential, the literature has not simply dealt with the reasons why women's occupations are low paying, but also some ways in which this can be addressed. A frequently mentioned strategy is increasing the credentials necessary to enter practice, or what is referred to as credentialism. Credentials can take the form of a certificate or licence to practice, but these are often based on a minimum level of education and training. Though the pursuit of greater credentials can have many finalities, it is noted as a key feature of professionalism (Barber, 1963; Goode, 1969; Greenwood, 1957; Wilensky, 1964), and thus it is anticipated that with increasing levels of education will come professional status and financial rewards.
Another strategy commonly used to improve pay and working conditions is collective organization. Like higher education, the establishment of an organization or association is considered to be a key feature of professionalism (Barber, 1963; Goode, 1969; Greenwood, 1957; Larson, 1977; Wilensky, 1964) and studies of professionalization often...
|
