Brinck Kerr

A National Study of Gender-Based Occupational Segregation in Municipal Bureaucracies: Persistence of Glass Walls?

Affirmative action policies and voluntary hiring decisions have increased the presence of women at all levels of government (Eribes, et al., 1989; Kelly, et al., 1991; Bullard and Wright, 1993; Stivers, 1993; Crum and Naff, 1997). Still, strong evidence exists that women continue to find it difficult to break into male-dominated fields despite nearly three decades of affirmative action policies (Leonard, 1989; Lewis and Nice, 1994; Newman, 1994; Tomoskavic-Devey, Kalleberg, and Cook, 1996). A preponderance of studies in the literature on the employment distribution of women and men and the integration of women into governmental managerial ranks provide evidence that women face both glass walls and glass ceilings at the federal and state levels (Lewis and Emmert, 1986; Pfeffer and Davis-Blake, 1987; Baron and Newman, 1989; Kellough, 1990; Bullard and Wright, 1993; Guy, 1993; Cornwell and Kellough, 1994; Lewis and Nice, 1994; Naff, 1994; Newman, 1994; Ruccucci and Saidel, 1997). Though some discussion of ceiling issues is necessary to provide a context for our analysis, this article will primarily concern itself with the wall phenomenon. The glass wall metaphor describes occupational segregation attributed to employment barriers that restrict the access of women to certain types of jobs (or agencies) or that trap them within certain types of jobs (or agencies). Glass walls are likely to persist when: (1) organizational cultures create impediments to change; and/or (2) skills necessary to perform jobs in a given agency are not highly valued elsewhere. The potential for female employment opportunities at the municipal level is considerable. Not only is there a large number of jobs in city governments, but many jobs are close to home and educational opportunities. Even when these employment opportunities contribute to the hiring of large numbers of women by municipal governments, the advancement of women into the more prestigious municipal policymaking positions is a different matter (Slack, 1987; Ballard and Lawn-Day, 1992). Although employment opportunities for women are more numerous at the local level than either the state or federal level, systematic or large-scale studies at this level of government have been scarce. The lack of access to comparative data on cities has resulted in a dearth of empirical studies on gender-based occupational segregation and salary disparities at the municipal level. Greater attention needs to be devoted to evaluating the extent and nature of glass walls in municipal governments (Radin, 1980; Rinehart, 1991). Research which tends to focus on what Frederickson (1990) calls block equality paints the most optimistic picture of female or minority employment patterns (Furchtgott-Roth and Stolba, 1996). The findings in this body of research are derived using highly aggregated data. Aggregation can obscure the fact that females are underrepresented in the best paying or most influential positions in an agency and can hide gender segregation that may exist among government agencies. Segmented equality shifts the focus of analysis to gender representation in various types of jobs (or at different organizational levels) and within functional (or policy) areas in municipal governments (Frederickson, 1990). This latter approach is more likely to identify gender-based differences in employment and salary patterns. We use the latter approach, segmented equality/inequality, to study municipal employment. We examine gender distributions in administrative and professional jobs.(1) Administrative and professional positions are the most desirable ones in city governments; they confer status and authority, are relatively well-paying, and in many cases, allow bureaucrats to significantly influence policymaking and its implementation. We also examine gender-based employment patterns in discrete functional policy areas or tasks within municipal bureaucracies to determine if policy outputs are associated with the extent and nature of glass walls. …

Sex-Based Occupational Segregation in U.S. State Bureaucracies, 1987-97

Introduction The literature on the distribution of women and men in public-sector jobs and the integration of women into government managerial ranks is replete with evidence that women often face glass walls, especially in certain types of agencies (Lewis and Emmert 1986; Pfeifer and Davis-Blake 1987; Kellough 1989, 1990; Guy and Duerst-Lahti 1992; Bullard and Wright 1993; Cornwell and Kellough 1994; Guy 1994; Lewis and Nice 1994; Naif 1994; Newman 1994; Riccucci and Saidel 1997). The glass wall metaphor refers to occupational segregation attributed to barriers that restrict womens access to certain types of jobs (or agencies) or to factors that concentrate women within certain types of jobs (or agencies). Glass walls are likely to persist when (1) the agency and its clientele do not engage in efforts to remove impediments to change; and/or (2) skills necessary to perform jobs in a given agency are not highly valued outside the agency. Large-scale studies of sex-based occupational segregation have been conducted on U.S. federal government (Rosenbloom 1977; Lewis and Emmert 1986; Kellough 1989, 1990) and municipal government workforces (Miller, Kerr, and Reid 1999), but the lack of access to comparative public employment data on states has resulted in a dearth of generalizable empirical studies on employment in state-level bureaucracies. Numerous studies employ summary data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions (EEOC) Job Patterns for Minorities and Women In State and Local Government (Cayer and Sigelman 1980; Moore and Mazey 1986; Sigelman and Dometrius 1986; Lewis and Nice 1994; Dometrius and Sigelman 1997). (1) Many other studies are based on samples drawn from one state or just a few states (Bayes 1989; Rehfuss 1986; Hale, Kelly, and Burgess 1989; Kelly et al. 1991; Duerst-Lahti and Johnson 1992; Guy 1992; Newman 1994). The data employed by Bullard and Wright (1993) and Riccucci and Saidel (1997) are limited to agency heads from across the 50 states and gubernatorial appointees from nearly all 50 states, respectively. Previous research on the distribution of state jobs provides some useful conceptual and analytic frameworks, but findings from these studies provide little basis for generalizing about the employment patterns of career administrative and professional personnel. In this article, we examine the distribution of women and men in state-level administrative and professional positions by agency type and over time in each of the 50 states to determine whether agency missions are associated with the extent and nature of glass walls. We are interested in the following questions: (1) what is the distribution of female and male administrators and professionals in various functional areas in state governments (police, corrections, natural resources/parks, highways, public welfare, etc.); and (2) is the underrepresentation and/or overrepresentation of female or male administrators and professionals in various functional areas related to the agency missions in those functional areas? These questions are important for several reasons. Greater access to quality jobs, including public-sector managerial positions, promotes the economic, social, and political progress of women, and it may result in longterm benefits through altered socialization processes (Kanter 1977; MacManus 1981; Tolleson-Rinehart 1991; Guy and Duerst-Lahti 1992). Greater representation for women among managerial personnel is also likely to result in changes in management styles and leadership processes, perhaps making them more innovative and democratic (Tolleson-Rinehart 1991; Duerst-Lahti and Johnson 1992; Stivers 1993). The increased presence of women is also likely to have a distinctive impact on policy outputs (Mezey 1978; Stewart 1980; Stanwick and Kleeman 1983; Welch 1985; Gelb and Palley 1996; Carroll, Dodson, and Mandel 1991; Dodson and Carroll 1991; Tolleson-Rinehart 1991; Thomas 1994; but see Donahue 1997; Ford and Dolan 1999). …

Sex-Based Glass Ceilings in U.S. State-Level Bureaucracies, 1987-1997

This study employed a national data set obtained from the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to answer two questions. Are women adequately represented in the top-level positions in state bureaucracies and are impediments that women might encounter in reaching the highest level administrative posts related to the policy missions and/or organizational characteristics of these agencies? The authors found that (a) women are underrepresented in top-level administrative and professional positions in distributive and regulatory agencies, suggesting the continued presence of glass ceilings in such agencies; (b) women are better represented among administrative and especially professional cadres in redistributive agencies, however their full representation at the uppermost administrative levels remains an unrealized goal; and (c) women are less well represented in higher paying positions (in proportion to their numbers in the agency) in agencies with higher salaries.

School Performance Measurement : Politics and Equity

Growing political pressure for increased efficiency in government has led many to support the use of performance measurement schemes. Such schemes are never neutral and frequently influence the allocation of resources and power. The increased use of performance measures in the public sector raises questions regarding the fairness of the measures and the justness of the accompanying sanctions and rewards. Focusing on public schools, this study demonstrates the need to assess governmental performance measurement schemes for their impact on equity. Three measurement schemes (No Child Left Behind, value added, and adjusted performance measures) are evaluated and compared regarding their impact on majority African American public schools in the state of Arkansas.

A Study of the Advancement of Women in Municipal Government Bureaucracies: Persistence of Glass Ceilings?

Abstract If womens advancement to the highest-level decision-making positions in governmental bureaucracies is to be enhanced, a better understanding of the continued impediments to such progress is essential. This study employs a large, previously underutilized national data set obtained from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to answer two questions. To what extent are women represented in the top-level administrative positions in municipal governments? And, are the impediments to women reaching the highest-level administrative posts in municipal governments related to the policy outputs and/or organizational cultures of these agencies? We find that (1) the underrepresentation of women in top-level administrative positions in distributive and regulatory agencies is pervasive across cities, suggesting that women continue to be confronted by the presence of glass ceilings in such agencies; and (2) even though women are well-represented among administrative cadres in redistributive agencies in many cities, their full representation at the uppermost administrative levels is still an elusive goal.

Determinants of Female Employment Patterns in U.S. Cities: A Time-Series Analysis

Employment data from 23 U.S. cities over nine years is used to explore the proposition that women in high-level political and administrative positions increase the female share of the better-paying, more desirable municipal government jobs. The authors find that female administrators increase the female share of professional and protective service positions. Elected women do not affect female job share when data are aggregated across all job functions, but female mayors do increase the female share of administrative positions in financial administration departments. They recommend that researchers disaggregate equal employment opportunity data by job function as well as job category.

The Changing Face of Urban Bureaucracy Is There Interethnic Competition for Municipal Government Jobs

The authors examine changes over time in 65 multiethnic U.S. cities to test hypotheses about (1) job distribution among ethnic groups and (2) interethnic employment competition. Compared to blacks and non-Latino whites, Latinos experience the lowest levels of representation in both managerial and nonmanagerial jobs. The authors uncover patterns of competition between blacks and Latinos for managerial positions, but the majority of observed competition is between traditionally disadvantaged ethnic groups and non-Latino whites. Competition between blacks and Latinos for managerial jobs is most likely to occur in departments with redistributive policy commitments. The authors find a pervasive pattern of Latino gains and black losses for nonmanagerial positions, but they argue that the pattern should not be interpreted as evidence for interethnic employment competition.

Descriptive Representation by Gender and Race/Ethnicity in Municipal Bureaucracies: Change in US Multiethnic Cities, 1987–2001

We explore the extent of employment inequalities between Latinas, African American women, and white (non-Latina) women (and their coethnics) in public sector managerial positions in multiethnic US cities. Our analysis of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) data from 1987 and 2001 indicates that all groups of women suffer from underrepresentation at the administrator level, especially in agencies that have regulatory and distributive policy commitments, but that Latinas and African American women show the lowest levels of representation. Moreover, Latinas and African American women are substantially underrepresented among professional workforces in almost all municipal departments; however, white (non-Latina) women achieve parity in many cities. Among pairs of coethnics (e.g. African American females versus African American males), we find that males are usually better represented than females, but even in multiethnic cities large disparities remain between white males and all other groups in the ability to claim and retain the most prestigious municipal government positions. We are concerned that the continuing lack of progress made by members of traditionally disadvantaged groups may further compromise the representativeness and legitimacy of bureaucracies in many multiethnic cites—and may also present a serious barrier to addressing important public policy challenges in these cities.

A Social Metamorphosis: Constructing Drug Addicts From the Poor

The worthiness of welfare recipients has long been questioned. However, their stereotypic depictions have changed throughout the decades. In 1996, The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) authorized drug testing welfare recipients and denial of benefits for testing positive. The subsequent proliferation of drug testing policy proposals in states across the United States raises questions regarding the portrayal of the drug testing target population. We examined state legislators’ public discourse, proponent and opponent, in the welfare drug testing debate, to assess the social construction of welfare recipients. Proponent discursive statements outnumbered opponent statements nearly 5:1. Proponent discourse was overtly derogatory toward and disparaging of welfare recipients. Opponent discourse was generally more sympathetic and supportive of the target population. However, not all opponents were against welfare drug testing in principle or practice. The analysis demonstrates a strong negative construction of welfare recipients as deviants, and indeed as drug abusers.

When Does Politics Matter? A Reexamination of the Determinants of African-American and Latino Municipal Employment Patterns

We develop a revised theory of political influence that addresses the relationship between minority political representation and administrative-level municipal employment patterns among African-Americans and Latinos in U.S. cities. We conduct pooled time-series analysis on employment data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for years 1987 through 2001. We find that the dynamics of political representation are different for African-Americans and Latinos. Cities with African-American mayors or city managers tend to have more African-Americans serving in administrative positions in municipal agencies. Although this mayoral/city manager effect is not found for Latino employment, more Latino council members lead to more Latino administrators. We also find that African-American employment gains resulting from political representation are more likely to occur in agencies that have the most policy relevance for African-Americans, yet this is not the case for Latino employment. Our results suggest strongly that political processes—conceptualized as the relationship between political leadership and administrative-level hiring and retention—work differently for African-Americans than they do for Latinos.