Paid Employment and the Changing System of Gender Relations: A Cross-National Comparison

Abstract

Equality with men in the world of paid work has been a major feminist objective. Given that work in the `public' sphere has historically been shaped on the assumption that the `worker' will be male, then national employment systems which facilitate masculine employment patterns (i.e. full-time work and unbroken employment careers) might be expected to be more likely to generate gender equality. This paper compares women's employment in France (where `masculine' careers for women are common) and Britain (where part-time work and broken employment careers are more likely) at the macro, meso (occupational), and micro (individual) levels. The two occupations studied are finance and pharmacy. The evidence presented suggests that there are considerable similarities between women in the two countries at the occupational and individual level, despite national variations. In the light of this evidence, structural and individual explanations of women's employment behaviour are examined, and the continuing significance of structural constraint on the patterning of gender relations is emphasised.

Constructing a career: women architects at work

“…The topic of women's orientations and commitment to their career has generated an abundance of literature throughout the 1990s, principally by Hakim (1996Hakim ( , 1998Hakim ( , 2000 but with additional contributions and responses by a variety of others (Crompton and Le Feuvre, 1996;Caven, 1999;Crompton and Harris, 1998;Ginn et al, 1996;Bruegel, 1996;Walsh, 1999;Procter and Padfield, 1999). Hakim (2000) has identified three distinct preferences held by women regarding their career: 'home-centred', 'adaptive' and 'work-centred'.…”

Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’ in women's careers

“…It is not just from the masculine perspective that women and their work are attacked, women too perpetuate negative images with Coward (1992) accusing women of 'colluding' with men to maintain the gender imbalance; Crompton and Le Feuvre (1996) argue that women who work part-time are less committed than those who work full-time;…”

“…The critics of Hakim's work focus on institutional and structural disadvantages experienced by women as explaining women's orientations towards their careers (Crompton and Le Feuvre 1996;Crompton and Harris 1998;Ginn et al 1996;Bruegel 1996;McRae 2003aMcRae , 2003b. Crompton and Harris (1998) suggest that women do make choices about their level of involvement in the labour market but that "women's employment behaviour is a reflection of the way in which women actively construct their work-life biographies in terms of their historically available opportunities and constraints" (Crompton and Harris 1998:119).…”

“…They do this by adopting work patterns which allow them to maximise both their employment careers and family life (Walsh 1999;Meiksins and Whalley 1998;Tilly 1996). Hakim's critics have largely overlooked this fact preferring instead to focus on lack of institutional childcare as a major constraint upon women's employment (Crompton and Harris 1998;Crompton and Le Feuvre 1996;Ginn et al 1996;Bruegel 1996). This ultimately means that children are seen as a barrier to a career whilst the reality is that many women want to pursue both a career and motherhood, expecting both to be equally rewarding (Meiksins and Whalley 1998;Procter and Padfield 1999;Walsh 1999).…”

“…Hakim's (1996Hakim's ( , 1998Hakim's ( , 2001Hakim's ( , 2002Hakim's ( , 2003 contention that women have differing orientations to work challenged many of these assumptions and became the subject of much derision from her critics (Crompton and Le Feuvre, 1996;Crompton and Harris, 1998;Ginn et al, 1996;Bruegel, 1996;Walsh, 1999;Procter and Padfield, 1999;McRae 2003aMcRae , 2003b. The only area of common ground appears to be that McRae (2003aMcRae ( , 2003b concurs that most sociological theory is inadequate at explaining women's employment decisions.…”