Why do ''feminine'' jobs pay a lot less?

[Annie11111]

First being almost all male, second all female :

Engineer vs teacher - both require degrees
Plumber vs hairdresser - both trades
Construction worker vs cleaner - both manual work

Probably others as well.

I think with 'nurturing' jobs like teaching or healthcare, which are usually seen as more female, they are often seen as 'vocations' rather than jobs which someone has had to work very hard to qualify in. You hear this all the time in discussions about teachers' strikes - lots of people think teachers should be expected to martyr themselves and to keep quiet about crap pay and conditions because its a 'vocation' and 'won't somebody think of the children?!' Whereas I can't imagine anyone expecting an engineer or a doctor to put the job before their own wellbeing.

I think that 'nurturing' is seen as an inherent part of being female, that women are 'hardwired' (loathe that word) to want to take care of people, which again undermines the hard work of people in those sorts of jobs. Same with your example of construction v cleaning - I think lots of people would consider that construction requires some skills and hard work, whereas cleaning is just something that women do naturally. I've heard people describe cleaning as 'skivvying' - I've never heard anyone describe a male labourer or construction worker the same way.

Would be interested to hear other people's thoughts

What are your thoughts, Annie?

Hairdressers and plumbers - let's say a woman's standard cut is £50 in the south east. A plumber's typical job is probably more lucrative but they have to fund parts and are less likely to be "fully booked" than hairdressers, who have clients coming in on fairly regular schedules. A hairdresser, I believe, tends to rent a chair in a salon so is paying rent and receptionist etc out of his/her earnings (btw, though the majority of hairdressers may be women, I don't think it's "almost all") - the two business models are entirely different.

Yes, tell us what you think "Annie"

I would not pay a construction worker and a cleaner the same. The level of skill and physical effort is not comparable.

Because society teaches women to be submissive and take what they can get. And because ''feminine'' jobs are seen as easy and of low value or importance.

And the jobs are very different even within construction (self employed builder doing a loft conversion vs someone constructing the Shard in a massive team)

First being almost all male, second all female

None of the jobs you quote as ALL FEMALE are all female.

I used to work in IT for a multinational. Opposite our building was a hospital. Nurses probably need at least as much training as my techy job needed, if not a lot more. If they screw up, someone might die. If I screwed up, at worst, the company would lose some money - possibly in the millions or more, but nonetheless, it is money, not human lives.

A lot of it is down to money, and people hiring people like them.

I just forgot another almost.

What does "almost all" mean to you, for reference?

Its a lot to do with market forces. Jobs that generate money for the company will always come with a higher salary then those that don't.

Teachers, nurses, carers and cleaners don't generate a penny for anybody. In many cases women seem more drawn to these jobs than men.

There are other factors too but this is s significant one that can not be ignored.

Is it the same sort of thing as a "more or less ban"?

engineers and doctors both require degrees - not sure of the gender split and pay comparables there.

AICM makes good points though.

9

Is it the same sort of thing as a "more or less ban"?

I wish I could edit it but I can't because this forum seems to have been created with software used in 1996 (and I'm being generous). Can we please discuss the issue instead of clinging on to ad hominems and straw men? And the France ban is not legally a ban but an absolute pain in the ass for all involved, obviously made so to discourage it. Kind of ironic to hear this on a feminist forum since women are not actually banned from being PM or CEO but things aren't exactly made easy for them , are they? Should we call it a male paternity glass ceiling then?

Hey Cap, I read about your new possible job. PE teacher, I assume?

There have been cases recently where council jobs were reevaluated. It was found that the more traditionally male jobs such as bin collectors were being paid an awful lot more than the more traditionally female jobs of cleaners despite the jobs being comparable in the skills required. The cleaners got a pay rise and back pay. I think the argument for the bin men having been paid more was that they needed more money to support their families

I think the more interesting question is why are the top of the profession always men. Cooking is female and low paid until men do it and are 'chefs and restauranters' hairdressing is female and low paid until men do it and are 'celeb hairdressers'
Healing the sick is low paid and for women until it is surgery and men do it.

I don't see a profession distinction, just a hierarchy with men at the top. Now, what is it they call that again...?

Does it rhyme with hierarchy, Think?

That's a good point. I can't think of a famous female hairdresser off the top of my head.

I've just been talking to dh about this, BiggerYellowTaxi. He's noticed that his Union seem to spend far more time on the pay and working conditions of a traditionally male workforce (telecomms engineers) while neglecting the far more numerous; more likely to be female; and shat on from on high re pay & conditions call centre workforce.

This (imo) has long been a failure of the traditional Labour movement who seem to be wedded to the idea of working man = family breadwinner. An idea which is outdated. The Unions were highly complicit in trying to undermine the "equal pay for equal work" local authority actions.

When Agenda for Change came in in the NHS a similar thing was found re: wildly differing pay rates for "seamstresses" compared to male dominated skilled jobs.

Also cf the decline in perceived prestige in some jobs as they moved from male to female dominated:

Teachers, librarians, secretaries are examples.

You assume wrong.

Funny that.

It's just a stopgap until I go and become a male and get my mans masters degree so I can do my mans job. I'm assuming my vagina will seal over as I fill in the UCAS form.