IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v68y2016i1p152-173..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lousy pay with lousy conditions: the role of occupational desegregation in explaining the UK gender pay and work intensity gaps

Author

Listed:
  • Joanne Kathryn Lindley

Abstract

The UK gender pay gap has fallen by around 7% during the 2000s. This is partly due to occupational desegregation, but largely due to a closing of the within-occupational gender pay gap. The article finds that men are more likely than women to be employed in jobs that require working to tight deadlines. These jobs are associated with higher pay, and the gender difference arises entirely as a consequence of such occupations being over-represented in male-dominated industrial sectors. However, the article also finds evidence of lower pay and higher work intensity (in terms of working at high speed) for women vis-à-vis men employed within the same occupations. These differences are not significant on labour market entry but emerge subsequently over the life cycle, most likely as a result of family-related responsibilities but also as a consequence of unexplained factors that could include gender discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanne Kathryn Lindley, 2016. "Lousy pay with lousy conditions: the role of occupational desegregation in explaining the UK gender pay and work intensity gaps," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 152-173.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:68:y:2016:i:1:p:152-173.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/oep/gpv056
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Francis Green & Alan Felstead & Duncan Gallie & Golo Henseke, 2022. "Working Still Harder," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(2), pages 458-487, March.

    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:oxecpp:v:68:y:2016:i:1:p:152-173.. 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/oep .

    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.