IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v43y2019i2p295-310..html

Why women do not ask: gender differences in fairness perceptions of own wages and subsequent wage growth

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Pfeifer
  • Gesine Stephan

Abstract

This article analyses gender differences in fairness perceptions of own wages and subsequent wage growth. The main finding is that women perceive their wage more often as fair if controls for hourly wage rates, individual and job-related characteristics are taken into account. Furthermore, the gender difference is more pronounced for married than for single women. This points to the fact that social norms, gender roles and gender identity are at least partly responsible for the gap in fairness perceptions. Further analysis shows that individuals, who perceive their wage as unfair, experience larger wage growth in subsequent years. An explanation would be that a wage perceived as unfair triggers negotiations for a better wage or induces individuals to search for better-paid work. Thus, differences in fair own wage perceptions can contribute to explain the nowadays still persistent gender wage gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Pfeifer & Gesine Stephan, 2019. "Why women do not ask: gender differences in fairness perceptions of own wages and subsequent wage growth," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 43(2), pages 295-310.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:43:y:2019:i:2:p:295-310.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bey035
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ricardo Pagan & Miguel Ángel Malo, 2021. "Performance Appraisal and Job Satisfaction for Workers Without and With Disabilities by Gender," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(3), pages 1011-1039, February.
    2. Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Matthaei, Eva Kristina, 2020. "Gender discriminatory taxes, fairness perception, and labor supply," Discussion Papers 2020/6, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    3. Schröder, Carsten & König, Johannes & Fedorets, Alexandra & Goebel, Jan & Grabka, Markus M. & Lüthen, Holger & Metzing, Maria & Schikora, Felicitas & Liebig, Stefan, 2020. "The economic research potentials of the German Socio-Economic Panel study," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 21(3), pages 335-371.
    4. Anne‐Sophie Bruno & Nathalie Greenan & Jeremy Tanguy, 2021. "Does the Gender Mix Influence Collective Bargaining on Gender Equality? Evidence from France," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 479-520, October.
    5. Laura Luekemann & Anja-Kristin Abendroth, 2018. "Women in the German Workplace: What Facilitates or Constrains Their Claims-Making for Career Advancement?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-34, October.
    6. Strauß, Susanne & Brüggemann, Ole & Lang, Julia, 2024. "Who perceives lower wages for women to be fair? How perceptions of the fairness of men's and women's wages vary by firm and workplace characteristics," Working Papers 29, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".
    7. Eleni Yitbarek & Nicky Nicholls & Michelle Pleace, 2025. "Do opinions on fair salaries vary with gender in South Africa?," ERSA Working Paper Series, Economic Research Southern Africa, vol. 0.
    8. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Eva Matthaei, 2022. "Gender Discriminatory Taxes, Fairness Perception, and Labor Supply," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 156-207.
    9. Claudia Roethlisberger & Franziska Gassmann & Wim Groot & Bruno Martorano, 2023. "The contribution of personality traits and social norms to the gender pay gap: A systematic literature review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 377-408, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing
    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines

    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:cambje:v:43:y:2019:i:2:p:295-310.. 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://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.