The paper “ Lifelong Processes of Career Aspirations for Women and Career Development” is a meaningful example of the literature review on human resources. During certain times throughout history, working women were even viewed as negligent mothers. The society, their colleagues at work, and their bosses did not take them seriously. A career to a woman was a challenge given that she had family responsibilities ahead of her. The main duty for a woman was to be a wife, a mother, and in addition, fulfilling professional responsibilities after the family.
If a woman put her career first, she would even feel guilty or selfish. Because both work and family demands were simultaneous to a woman, such demands had a significant impact on her career. As a result, achieving a professional career became even more difficult for a woman as compared to men. This made them enter into the workforce in lower-paying jobs; lower status as well as remaining clustered in conventional careers that were limited (Tinklin, Croxford, Ducklin, & Frame, 2005). Traditional female low paying careers reflected the persistent attitudes of the society in regard to occupational roles for men and women.
As the career choices for women were restricted, they were lagging behind in regard to earnings when compared to males with equivalent levels of education, experience as well as the number of years employed. Such a discrepancy in income was partially brought by the difference between the traditional occupation for men and women. For instance, women rarely ventured into engineering or science jobs as such occupations were traditionally considered men’ s. Such factors that led to such classification of traditional occupations include unwelcoming environment especially when men dominated, lack of awareness about various options that are non-traditional, turn turnover for women are high and less seniority in regard to given occupations.
Such factors have greatly contributed to unevenness or gaps in terms of earning between men and women.
Atkinson, AB 2002, “A Critique of the Transatlantic Consensus on Rising Income Inequality”, World Economy, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 433‐452
Brewer, M, Sibieta, L, Wren‐Lewis, L 2008, Racing Away? Income Inequality and the Evolution of High Incomes. IFS Briefing note 76, London: Institute of Fiscal Studies www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn76.pdf
Connolly, S & Gregory, M 2008, “Moving Down: Women’s Part‐time Work and Occupational Change in Britain 1991–2001”, The Economic Journal, vol. 118, pp. 52–76.
Crompton, R & Lyonette, C 2008, Family, Class and Gender Strategies in Mother’s Employment and Childcare, Paper presented at GENET conference Gender, Class, Employment and Family/ City University, London, 27‐28 March
Crompton, R, & Lyonette, C 2011, “Women's Career Success and Work-life Adaptations in the Accountancy and Medical Professions in Britain”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 231-254
Dyhouse, C (2006) Students: A Gendered History London: Routledge
EHRC 2008, Sex and Power, Fifth report London Equalities and Human Rights Commission,http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/Documents/EHRC/SexandPo wer/Sex_and_Power_2008.pdf
Epstein, C 2006, “Border Crossings: The Constraints of Time Norms in Transgressions of Gender and Professional Roles”, in Cynthia. Epstein and Arne Kalleberg (eds), Fighting for Time (New York: Russell Sage Foundation) 317‐340
Graham, JW, & Smith, SA 2005, “Gender differences in employment and earnings in science and engineering in the U.S.”, Economics of Education Review, vol. 24, pp. 341-354.
Himmelweit, S 2007, “The Prospects for Caring: Economic Theory and Policy Analysis”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 581‐599
Himmelweit, S, & Sigala, M 2004, “Choice and the Relationship Between Identities and Behaviour for Mothers with Pre‐School Children: Some Implications for Policy from a UK Study”, Journal of Social Policy vol. 33, no. 3, pp.455‐478.
Krugman, P 2002, “For Richer, New York Times”, www.pkarchive.org/economy/ForRicher.html (accessed January 2013)
La Valle, I and Smith, R 2009, “Good Quality Childcare for All? Progress towards Universal Provision”, National Institute Economic Review, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 75‐82
Lewis, J and Giullari, S 2005, “The Adult Worker Model Family, Gender Equality and Care: The Search for New Policy Principles and the Possibilities and Problems of a Capabilities Approach”, Economy and Society, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 76‐104
Manning, A, & Petrongolo, B 2008, “The Part‐Time Pay Penalty for Women in Britain”, The Economic Journal, vol. 118, pp. 28–51.
Miller, I & Hayward R 2006, “New Jobs, Old Occupational Stereotypes: Gender and Jobs in the New Economy”, Journal of Education and Work vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 67‐94
National Statistics (2009) Employment Database www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/expodata/files/8555368652.csv (accessed January, 2013)
OECD 2007, OECD Family Database www.oecd.org/els/social/family/database (accessed January 2013)
Paull, G 2008, “Children and Women’s Work Hours”, Economic Journal vol.118, vol. 526, pp. 8‐27
Perrons, D 2004, Equity and Representation in the New Economy, in J. Kelly and P. Willman (eds) Union Organization and Activity, London: Routledge
Purcell, K, Elias, P, Davies, R, & Wilton, N 2005, The Class of ʹ99: A Study of the Early Labour Market Experience of Recent Graduates, DfES Research Report, Sheffield.
Research Works 2001, Perceptions of Social Work and Social Care. Report of findings. Prepared for Central Office of Information for the Department of Health, London: Research Works
Rubery, J, Grimshaw, D, & Figueiredo, H 2005, “How to Close the Gender Pay Gap in Europe: Towards the Gender Mainstreaming of Pay Policy”, Industrial Relations Journal vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 184‐213
Sigle‐Rushton, W, & Perrons, D 2006, Employment Transitions over the Life Cycle: A Statistical Analysis. Equal Opportunities Commission Working Paper No. 64. Manchester: EOC.
Social Trends 2008, “Social Trends: London Statistical Office” (on line data www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=13675
Tinklin, T, Croxford, L, Ducklin, A, & Frame, B 2005, “Gender attitudes to work and family roles: The views of young people at the millennium”, Gender & Education, vol. 17, pp. 129-142.