Women 'much less likely to rise up career ladder than men'

Men are still significantly more likely to rise up the career ladder than women, although the career penalty for working part-time has lessened over the last decade, according to research by the Resolution Foundation.

Men are still significantly more likely to rise up the career ladder than women, although the career penalty for working part-time has lessened over the last decade, according to research by the Resolution Foundation.

It compares earnings mobility for two groups, one born in 1958 that aged from 30 to 40 during the 1990s, and the other born in 1970 that aged from 30 to 40 during the 2000s.

The report, Snakes and Ladders, found that gender, education, geographical region, occupation, experience of unemployment and working full or part-time all have a significant, independent influence over an individual’s likelihood of experiencing both upwards and downwards earnings mobility.

Men were 51 per cent more likely to move upwards than women in the 1990s and 40 per cent more likely to move up in the 2000s. Previous research suggests the biggest drop in career progression comes after a woman has her first child.

Working part time for several years or moving from full to part-time employment carried with it a significant risk of moving downwards. Those employed part-time in the 2000s were at a 87 per cent increased risk of downward mobility compared to those who were employed full time throughout the decade. However, the penalty for switching from full- to part-time employment was less severe in the 2000s compared to the 1990s, the research found.

Having a degree also had a significant impact on social mobility. In the 2000s, those who held a degree were at least 37 per cent more likely to move up the earnings ladder than those with lower level qualifications. The Resolution Foundation says the effect of holding a degree “arguably increased with the expansion of higher education over the decades. With a greater supply of graduates, the penalty for not holding a degree also increased.”

Regional differences in mobility became more apparent in the 2000s. People in London were significantly less likely to move down than those in other regions. Individuals in the North East, North West, East Midlands and South West were at much greater risk of downward mobility than people in London in the 2000s. These differences in mobility are likely to be related to the experience of the recession in the early 1990s in different regions and subsequent strong recovery in London, says the Foundation.

Occupations have also played a role in determining who moves up and down the ladder with professionals such as lawyers and teachers much more likely to move up than those working in other occupations during the 2000s. Across both decades, jobs at the lower to middle end of the occupational scale such as builders, electricians and machine operators offered reduced opportunities for upwards mobility and an increased risk of downwards mobility.

Those who slipped into unemployment during their thirties were significantly less likely to move up the ladder and more likely to move down once they returned to the workplace in both decades, according to the research. Individuals who experienced a period of unemployment in the 2000s were 2.2 times more likely to move down the earnings ladder than those who were employed for the entire decade.





Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *