Analysis of Gender Disparity in the American Workforce

This report investigates gender disparity in the American workforce, examining employment opportunities and promotion rates for women compared to men. The study utilizes secondary data from the General Social Survey, employing descriptive and inferential statistical methods to analyze the data. The research includes a survey of 1974 American men and women, exploring the likelihood of women obtaining jobs and promotions relative to men. The findings reveal that while a majority of respondents acknowledge the presence of women in the workforce, they also suggest that men are often favored in hiring and promotion decisions. The study concludes that despite some improvements, gender inequality persists, with recommendations emphasizing the importance of considering women for employment and promotions and prioritizing education and performance over gender. The research also suggests that age should be considered for a balanced workforce.

WOMEN IN THE WORKFORCE AS COMPARED TO MEN
Introduction
From history there has been evidence of gender disparity in employments opportunities with men
acquiring high position in society than women. Women have been traditionally been associated
with home position. This has been improving as time goes by but this stereotype is still among
the society. With introduction of formal education females has tried to push their way in much
position in the society; however gender disparity in employment is there in many organizations.
Job opportunities are affected by different factors such as level of education, experience level,
age and gender. In recent research to identify cause-effect relation between education level in
women and job opportunities, researchers have done study to identify if as the women increase
their education up to PHD level is there likelihood of obtaining a job. Women representation job
opportunities are still lower both in management level, education position and many other
sectors. When starting the difference between the two genders is small it then accumulates with
time with many disadvantages to female, (Schuster & Finkelstein, 2006).
In science technology and mathematics there is large disparity in position by gender, female are
few as compared to male. In teaching position female are more as compared to men, (Larivière et
al, 2013). There is evidence that gender affect job position with many females held in right
position and male in higher position. Also previous studies have identified gender difference in
research with high number of male holding those positions, (Hango, 2013).
This job significance disparity by gender is one of contemporary issues that need immediate
solution as they are main challenges facing the society. Many people have said that this needs to
be addressed in order for the society to attain job equality. This has been a burning issue mainly
among female as they see themselves underrepresented in various positions, (Prpić, 2002).
Research hypothesis
The main research problem of this study is
Do women have fewer opportunities in the workforce than men? The study tries to identify if
there is gender disparity in job employments in USA. If men are more likely to be employed as
compared to women?
The research hypotheses are:
The null hypothesis: woman has higher likelihood to obtain a job or promotion in the workforce
when competing with other men for the same job or promotion.
Alternative hypothesis: Women do not have higher likelihood to obtain a job or promotion in
the workforce when competing with other men for the same job or promotion.

Research Design
The researcher adopted secondary data sources. Secondary data is useful in defining the sample
and identifying the population, (Alderman & Salem, 2010). The data were obtained from General
Social Survey which is an organization that conducts social survey in USA and provides many
scholars, policy makers and politicians with necessary information (GSS, 2017). Initial the study
adopted descriptive survey to obtain quantitative and qualitative data. The study carried out a
quantitative design where both descriptive and inferential analysis was used. Data was collected
from typical American men and women, through face to face interview, interview through the
phone and computer assisted interviews surveys, (Kothari, 2004).
Sampling technique
The population under study is the American men and women. The participants of the researcher
American men and women who are current working adults or searching for employment in the
workforce from all races that Hispanic, Indian , Asian, Jewish, Arabs, White and Black.
Currently living in United States of America and can speak, read or write in English to be able to
fully participates in the survey. The sampling technique that was used was stratified sampling
technique because the population was heterogeneous in nature. The American population which
is composed off different nationality and race, but the target was working class and those looking
for opportunities. The target population consisted of two groups that are male and female. First
the population was divided into two. Then simple random sampling was used to select those who
participated in the sample. This method allowed the sample to be representative of the population
and enable each individual in the target population to have equal chance to be in the sample thus
eliminating researcher’s bias. A sample of 1974 was selected who fully participated in the
research, (Neuman, 2014).
Data analysis method
The methods of data analysis utilized in this study were inferential and descriptive statistics. The
data that was obtained was quantitative in nature making it possible to compute various statistical
analysis and inferences (Perry & Perry, 2014).Descriptive statistics are used to describe the
distribution of data and summary of the sample under study. They organize, summarize and
present data in way which is simple to understand and to make conclusion. The most commonly
used descriptive statistics are measure of central tendency that is mean, mode and median which
shows the location where most observations falls, measure of dispersion such as variance, range
and quartiles which show how observed variables differs from the means and frequency charts
and diagrams. Inferential statistics are used to make inferences of the population from the
sample. It makes use of sample instead of population to make conclusion about the data and

support insights that were made using descriptive statistics. Inferential statistics include
probability distribution such as normal and exponential distributions, test of hypothesis such as t-
test and analysis of variance (ANOVA), correlation analysis and regression analysis such as
multiple and linear regression analysis, (DeSaro, 2011). Also non parametric tests such as rank
correlations and Kruskal Wallis test. Inferential statistics are probabilistic in nature thus they are
not 100% sure and has margin of error that is significance level, (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003).
Variables Description
The study consisted of both independent variables and dependent variables, gender1 which
represents the dependent variable while the independent variable was opportunity of a woman to
get a promotion or a job opportunity. In SPSS we had gender as nominal variable.
Data analysis and Discussion
Descriptive analysis
The total number of the respondents that participated in the study was one thousand nine hundred
and seventy four. Most of the respondents were males who were one thousand and one hundred
while there were eight hundred women. In the bar graph below, males are more than women.
Statistical interpretation
The bar graph below shows that most males are in the working force. Those who are working in
America that is per study are males since them more in the professional ground as compared to
the women. Women are also in the work force but are less as compared to males. Those who are
seeking opportunities as well as promotion in the work place is in greater proportion are the
males to that of the females.

The frequency of females and females were represented in the table below. 57.3% of the
respondents were males while 42.7% were females. Most of the respondents were males as
compared as females.
The frequency table below indicates the percentage of the respondents that were if they were in a
position to promote a member of staff they would promote a female or a males. Most of the
respondents were likely to offer these chance, 14.9% were in a way likely to offer these
opportunity to a woman. 67.5% of the respondents tend to think that this is inappropriate since a
promotion or opportunity should be due to performance and efficiency and not gender.
Opportunity offered due to performance and efficiency then these will increase the output.

The bar graph below is a graphical representation of woman to get a job or promotion.

Statistical Interpretation
In the respondents one hundred thirty four which is 6% said that very likely don’t to offer an
opportunity, 134 of the respondents think that gender can be equalized in the field. 294 of the
respondent gave the opinion that somewhat likely a woman wont be offered an a job or
promotion if they were competing for that chance with a male. One hundred and thirty three of
the respondents said that somewhat unlikely for a woman getting an opportunity to get the job or
a promotion in the place of work. Sixty of the respondents gave very unlikely for a woman to get
the offer compared to that of the males.
Most of the respondents in the sample selected which accounted for one thousand and three
hundred and fifty three decided that they had no opinion on these since they termed the question
as inappropriate.
Statistical interpretation

The frequency table above estimates the gender inequality in the workforce. The table indicates
clear depiction of the landscape in the workforce between males and females. 57.3% of the
respondents agree with that women have a less opportunity in the workforce as compared to
42.7% don’t agree that women have less opportunity. Most of the employers tend to promote
males as compared to the females in the workforce.
The frequency table above shows the relationship what causes the gender inequality in the
workforce between the males and females. The factor of consideration at this level was do
women and males have the same potentiality in the workforce. What prevents the women the
workforce to have a less chance of obtaining good jobs as well as promotion in there places of
work. 89% of the respondents believe that females in the work place cannot compete for an
opportunity in the workplace compared to the males which is 10% of the respondents.
Inferential analysis
H0: Women are not less likely to get hired for a better paying job or receive a promotion when
competing with men
H1: Women are less likely to get hired for a better paying job or receive a promotion when
competing with men
A crosstab below shows the likelihood of an occurrence of a female being given a job as well as
promotion in the job. Most of the respondents in the table tend to think that the promotion and
job creation will favor more males compared to females.

The table below indicates the significance difference between the gender and the opportunity of
a woman in the sample selected to be selected for a job or promotion in that task. The p-value
which is 0.165 which is less than 0.05 thus we fail to reject the null hypothesis women are not
less likely to get hired for a better paying job or receive a promotion when competing with men
and thus we conclude that women are less likely to get hired paying job or receive promotion in

job market. Despite the test of hypothesis most of the women the job market still do not
experience gender inequality.
The analysis above indicates that the gender of the respondents is not in any way related with
acquiring of a promotion at work of place as well as getting a job.
Recommendation and conclusion
The research conclusions shows that
1. The research in the study found that most of the employer or the respondents have the
power they would hire male as compared to females since both have equal chances.
2. Most of the respondents fully disagree the issue of gender inequality in the workforce.
The study recommends that when hiring more members of staff then they should consider
females since they are easy to instruct and hardworking in their responsibility. The level of
education should be given a priority in the performance as well as hiring job members and
promoting them at work place. The education level should highly upraise, since it’s the only way
to improve efficiency. The age factor should have a balance in them.

References
Alderman A. & Salem B. (2010). Survey design. Plastic Reconstruction Surgery, vol 4, pg 9.
Desaro S. (2011). A Students guide to conceptual side of inferential statistics.
Hango D. (2013) Gender differences in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and
computer science (STEM) programs at university. Ottawa: Statistics Canada
Http://www.gss.norc.org (November 17, 2017)
Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology Methods and Techniques New Age International.
New Delhi: (P) Limited, Publishers
Larivière V, Vignola E, Villeneuve C, GeÂlinas P, Gingras Y. (2011) Sex differences in research
funding, productivity and impact: an analysis of Quebec university professors. Scientometrics.
87(3): 483±98.
Neuman, W. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 7th
Edition. UK: Pearson Education Limited
Schuster H, Finkelstein J. (2006) The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Academic Work
and Careers. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Prpić K. (2002) Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics. Vol 55(1): pg
27±58.
Perry, J. & Perry, E. (2014). Contemporary Society: An Introduction to Social Science, 12th
Edition. Singapore: Pearson Education, Inc.
Tashakkori & Teddlie C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & research. Thousands
Oaks, CA: Sage.