IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v39y2001i1p94-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hierarchical Theory of Occupational Segregation and Wage Discrimination

Author

Listed:
  • Baldwin, Marjorie L
  • Butler, Richard J
  • Johnson, William G

Abstract

Becker's model of discrimination is extended to the case where men exhibit distastes for working under female managers. The distribution of women in the resulting occupational hierarchy depends on the number of women in lower occupations, the wages of male workers in lower occupations, and male distastes for female management. Thus, there exists an occupational sorting function, related to wages, which determines the occupational distribution of women. We integrate this sorting function into a standard wage equation to derive a new decomposition of male-female wage differentials and apply it to a sample of insurance industry workers from the 1988 CPS. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Baldwin, Marjorie L & Butler, Richard J & Johnson, William G, 2001. "A Hierarchical Theory of Occupational Segregation and Wage Discrimination," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(1), pages 94-110, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:39:y:2001:i:1:p:94-110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christian Pfeifer & Tatjana Sohr, 2009. "Analysing the Gender Wage Gap (GWG) Using Personnel Records," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 23(2), pages 257-282, June.
    2. Michael Ransom & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2005. "Intrafirm Mobility and Sex Differences in Pay," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(2), pages 219-237, January.
    3. Sergio Scicchitano, 2014. "The gender wage gap among Spanish managers," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(3), pages 327-344, May.
    4. Nicole M. Fortin & Michael Huberman, 2002. "Occupational Gender Segregation and Women's Wages in Canada: An Historical Perspective," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 28(s1), pages 11-39, May.
    5. Zafar Mueen Nasir, 2005. "An Analysis of Occupational Choice in Pakistan: A Multinomial Approach," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 44(1), pages 57-79.
    6. Jung, SeEun & Choe, Chung & Oaxaca, Ronald L., 2018. "Gender wage gaps and risky vs. secure employment: An experimental analysis," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 112-121.
    7. Tominc Polona & Šebjan Urban & Širec Karin, 2017. "Perceived Gender Equality in Managerial Positions in Organizations," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 50(2), pages 132-149, May.
    8. Gabrielle Wanzenried, 2008. "How feminine is corporate America? A recent overview," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 6(2), pages 185-209, June.
    9. Marco Biagetti & Sergio Scicchitano, 2016. "Are women in supervisory positions more discriminated against? A multinomial approach," Working Papers 2, Department of the Treasury, Ministry of the Economy and of Finance.
    10. Dina Shatnawi & Ronald Oaxaca & Michael Ransom, 2014. "Movin’ on up: Hierarchical occupational segmentation and gender wage gaps," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 12(3), pages 315-338, September.
    11. Coelho, Danilo & Fernandes, Marcelo & Foguel, Miguel N., 2014. "Foreign capital and gender differences in promotions: evidence from large Brazilian manufacturing firms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 123276, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Orraca Romano, Pedro Paulo, 2016. "Essays on development and labour economics for Mexico," Economics PhD Theses 0816, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Danilo Coelho & Marcelo Fernandes & Miguel Nathan Foguel, 2007. "Foreign Capital And Gender Differences In Promotions: Evidence From The Brazilian Transformation Industry," Anais do XXXV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 35th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 167, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    14. Anastasia Semykina & Susan J. Linz, 2013. "Job Satisfaction and Perceived Gender Equality in Advanced Promotion Opportunities: An Empirical Investigation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 591-619, November.
    15. Anjan Ray Chaudhury & Dipankar Das & Sreemanta Sarkar, 2023. "Complementarity in Demand-side Variables and Educational Participation," Papers 2303.04647, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    16. Danilo Coelho & Marcelo Fernandes e Miguel N. Foguel, 2009. "Capital Estrangeiro e Diferenciais de Gênero nas Promoções: Evidências da Indústria de Transformação Brasileira," Discussion Papers 1447, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    17. Anjan Ray Chaudhury & Madhabendra Sinha, 2020. "Does Education Produce Identical Labour Market Outcomes for All? A Study on India," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 14(3), pages 309-331, August.
    18. Sergio Scicchitano, 2015. "Exploring the gender wage gap in the managerial labour market:a counterfactual decomposition analysis," Working Papers 2, Department of the Treasury, Ministry of the Economy and of Finance.
    19. Dina Shatnawi & Ronald Oaxaca & Michael Ransom, 2011. "Applying Fixed Effects to Hierarchical Segregation Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 588-592, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:39:y:2001:i:1:p:94-110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.