More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Barbara R. Arnwine

Barbara R. Arnwine

Posted: March 29, 2010 01:18 PM

Breaking the Glass Ceiling

What's Your Reaction:

To commemorate Women's History Month, the Roosevelt Institute's New Deal 2.0 blog asked me to reflect on past accomplishments and explore today's key challenges as part of its ongoing 'Feminomics' series. Here's my take on economic injustice and women of color.

Inspired by the achievements of countless African American women, we march forward, resolute in our mission to achieve equal rights. Sojourner Truth proclaimed, "Ain't I a woman?" as she declared she could work as much as a man. Dr. Dorothy Height has fought for equal rights for African Americans and women for several decades and even encouraged President Lyndon B. Johnson to appoint African American women to positions in government. Later Shirley Chisholm fulfilled this dream and became the first black woman elected to Congress.

But Dr. Maya Angelou asserted, "achievement brings its own anticlimax." Nowhere is this truer than in the lives of women, and especially women of color, as they seek accomplishment in the face of adversity, prominence in the face of marginalization. As a result, economic justice remains as one of the most pressing legal issues for women, as they seek equal job opportunities and equal pay. These burdens are especially present as we incur a great economic recession, which created new challenges for all, but for women of color, tested their ability to navigate economic, social, political and educational status more determinately. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act directly bans employment discrimination against women and lack of access to equal pay for equal work is a clear violation of Title VII. To justify these practices with specious arguments regarding hours, occupation choice and child rearing choice are offensive. The American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (AAUW) reports that even after "[c]ontrolling for hours, occupation, parenthood and other factors normally associated with pay, college-educated women still earn less than their male peers. Both disparate treatment and disparate impact have been recognized by the courts in evaluating legitimate claims of discrimination.

The problem persists despite supposed advances we have made in societal expectations and structure. Unfortunately, unequal opportunities for women have been historically embraced and are still accepted. Until the early 1960s, newspapers published separate job listings for men and women. The struggle for African American women was even more formidable; until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, jobs specified "no Blacks need apply." Although we don't see as much evidence of such blatant discrimination in access to opportunities in the workplace today, they no doubt institutionally exist. Women still are segregated into "pink-collar" jobs that affect their wages, according to an AAUW report. Women comprise 87 percent of workers in the child care industry and 86 percent of the health aide industry. Women of color have especially endured a disproportionate lack of access to jobs in the wake of the recession, as the Center for Social Inclusion (CSI) reports that unemployment has risen faster for young women of color than for white women in the same age range. Unemployment among young black women has increased by 8.6 percent to 20.4 percent this year.

Equal access is just the tip of the iceberg; those women lucky enough to break the barrier to employment lag behind in equal pay. According to the Institute for Women's policy research, the median weekly earnings of female full-time workers in 2009 were $657, compared with male median weekly earnings of $819. Based on these data, the ratio of women's to men's median weekly earning was 80.2%. Black single mothers with children under 18 have a median net wealth of zero compared to $7,970 of wealth held by white women with children under the age of 18. This is especially troubling, as women head more than 40 percent of African American families. These wage inequities effect women prospectively as well. Their retirement, Social Security benefits, pensions, savings and other financial resources are all impacted. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, signed into law this year, is a welcome sign of progress, as it allows the statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination to reset with each new discriminatory paycheck. Women, however, continue to endure workplace inequity and we must persist in enforcing the call for justice.

Economic justice is not just a women's issue or a moral issue; it's clearly a legal one. As lawyers, we must promote opportunities and equity in the new economy; we must embrace change and not the historical precedence of gender inequities. As women, we must not allow the patronizing excuses used for decades to deny equal opportunity in the workforce to continue to stymie our progress and expectations. Women should seek to make this economy work for us rather than working for a broken economy.

*Kenneth Chandler, public policy associate, contributed to this article.

Cross-posted from New Deal 2.0.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
09:55 PM on 03/29/2010
Articles like this hurt the left. We are not the same as the right and shouldn't play the same game they do.
09:54 PM on 03/29/2010
Show me any job where men and women do the exact same task and are paid different.
11:51 PM on 03/29/2010
I would have to direct you to the studies that indicate that lower pay for measurably equal -- and better -- work, in precisely the same tasks are quite the norm, in both academics and industry. In fact, just in order to hold "a man's job" it has been found that women need to be between two to three times better qualified (years of education) and two to three times more productive. Furthermore, I suggest that if you wish to attack the methodology of those statistically sound, peer-reviewed studies, you would probably need to take it up with the authors themselves -- in those peer-reviewed journals. No, I am not going to do your research for you by looking up these studies for you, young man. Grow a pair and look them up yourself. Sheesh.
05:50 PM on 03/29/2010
I love studies like this, they claim to control for every possibility apart from discrimination, which is a pretty much impossible goal. Unfortunately women and men have different desires and different goals in life. Pretending that men and women are interchangable is ridiculous. I hate to see actual examples of discrimination, but that doen't mean the entire disparity is due to this problem.
05:02 PM on 03/29/2010
This is 2010. We have equal opportunity for all, so I'm not sure what the point of this article is.
06:06 AM on 04/11/2010
I agree with not sure what the point of this article is and I did read it, some entertainment value. But, I do not agree at all, "This is 2010, We have equal opportunity for all." Ideally the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, we think or hope exists but, truthfully in parts and places in this great country...it means nothing to those that could care less for the rights of minorities and their neglected "left behind" children...bloody tears are being shed by this Native American mother while I witness the shameful acts of some elected officials go on and on and on....Well, perhaps God led me to Huffington. Following my last prayer this is where I found myself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roy Piper
03:18 PM on 03/29/2010
I do not see how the law has any part of the topic of wealth disparity, unless discrimination is involved. And just bringing out stats is not going to change anyone's mind.