Gender, technology and jobs

Men have traditionally gained more than women from access to technologies at work which bring prestige, job security, more satisfying work and higher pay. Typically female jobs have centred on technologies, if they have at all, which tend towards routine and possibly deskilled work. Typing is a prime example. It is possible that this is changing through computerization, which is extensive but also equally distributed by gender. Does the wage premium, which use of a computer has been found to confer on users, benefit women sufficiently to suggest some sort of equalization through technology, or possibly even a female advantage? This is tested using data from four European countries. There is no across‐the‐board benefit from the use of computers. For both men and women it depends on the nature of their occupation. Some, more routine usages of computers are associated with a negative outcome. However, this occupational balance itself varies by gender.     

The diversification of inequality

We examine intersectionality on the basis of increasingly complex interactions between gender and ethnic groups, which we argue derive from the growing diversity of these groups. While we critique the concept of superdiversity, we suggest that increased diversity leads to a ‘diversification of inequality’. This is characterised by an increasing incidence of inequality through the growth in migration and of the size and variety of ethnic minorities, and by a weakening of specific inequalities. We demonstrate this using the Labour Force Survey and conclude that there is a clear diversification of inequality but also that ethnicity is a more potent source of inequality than gender. Diversity also increases the reach of inequality through producing and increasing the number of intersections.     

Graduate density,gender, and employment

The expansion of higher education is often viewed as reflecting increased demand for skills, whether related to technological change or the growing complexity of the economy. It is also linked to widening pay differentials between the poorly and highly educated. There are reasons, however, to question these associations. Even if demand for graduates is growing the supply of graduates might as a result of the status derived from having a degree still exceed this. The demand for graduates itself need not be wholly tied in with upgrading of the labour force. Graduates could be part of a more flexible workforce who increasingly undertake non-graduate work, thus downgrading their labour-market position. LFS (Labour Force Survey) and BHPS (British Household Panel Study) data are used to show that there has been no major shift in the distribution of graduates in the British labour market, that career starts are increasingly at a lower status point, and that there is a negative effect of graduate density on wages. There are also redistributional effects. There has been a large increase in the social demand for higher education by women, and they have gained from this expansion while men have lost out. In addition, graduate density is positive for non-graduates, who gain from the reduced rewards accruing to graduates. The results call into question the simple idea of a trend towards a demand for increasing levels of skills and qualifications. More attention should be paid to the distribution of skills and to complex interactions within this.