A few weeks ago, we posted an article about some of the differences between men and women in the job economy. While there are many factors in play when it comes to this age old discussion (well decades old anyway…) one recently surfaced in terms of how men and women may view the economy differently.
Randstadt recently conducted a survey of over 3000 workers and the findings, while over all very positive (over half of U.S. workers anticipate job market turnaround) also found that men and women are responding to the turnaround a little differently.
For example, 51% of men are more likely to think the bad economy is what affected their career plans, while only 41% of women feel that way. Perhaps the men have good reason to feel that way, as the recent recession saw males lose their jobs at such rapid rates, some dubbed it a “mancession”. As the economy recovers, men are getting jobs faster but this study suggests that may be because women are more picky.
When it comes to getting another job, should they lose their gig, women are a little more worried about finding that next ideal job and ladies are slightly more likely than men to say they wouldn’t accept a new gig unless it was close to an ideal fit.
Another interesting study showed that men and women tend to handle work issues differently too.
Women in the study who felt they were not appreciated at their job, or were not appropriately rewarded for their efforts, had an increased risk of depression, compared with women who felt they were rewarded appropriately, the study showed. No such link was found in men.
However, men suffered higher rates of depression than women when there was a great deal of strain in their work, the article goes on to state. But it’s not all bad news:
The unemployment rate for men was 8.2 percent in April, down from a high of 11.2 percent in late 2009. For women, the unemployment rate was 8 percent in April, down from a high of 9 percent in late 2010. It’s not really a race, although news reports from the campaign trail might have you believe differently. Consider this analysis from the Wall Street Journal:
The number of employed U.S. male workers was 67.4 million in March, down 3.3 million since the recession started in December 2007, and 57,000 jobs fewer than when the Obama administration began, according to the Labor Department’s monthly survey of employers. At its recent low in February 2010, employment of men was 64.7 million.
The number of employed female workers was 65.4 million in March, 1.8 million below the level in December 2007 and 683,000 less than in January 2009. Employment of women bottomed at 64.6 million in September 2010.
The truth is, there is a bit of cycle to every recession. Male dominated industries like construction tend to be the first to eliminate jobs when the economy weakens, while female dominated industries like healthcare, education and administration stay around a little longer but tend to have a slightly slower comeback.
No one knows for sure why women are getting jobs at a slower rate than men this time around. It could be the public sector, which has seen a net loss, is dominated by women. The Financial Times reports that men are seeing gains in fields that traditionally employed more women like retail and education.
And then there’s the pesky wage factor, despite differing reports, the US Census continues to report that women, despite outnumbering men on campus, are still paid less than men who have the same education. Women earned 78.2 of what men earned in median salary in 2009, according to the U.S. Census.