Essay Sample on Glass Ceiling

Glass ceiling refers to the conditions whereby an invisible barrier is used to block the womens upward mobility in the job places. This situation has been there for years in many countries of the world despite the fact that many organizations were trying to stop this from taking place. In the United States alone, women many feminists and organizations are in place to try to eliminate this from happening for many years. Good enough, the glass ceiling has been reduced and is completely no more in some of the big companies in the United States of America. However, there are some companies, which practice this unethical event, and women do not get the opportunity to hold top managerial positions in such companies (Qu, 2017). The practitioners of this culture have the feeling and believe in the ideologies that prove that women are not worthy enough to hold sensitive positions in whichever organization that they are serving. This paper describes the reasons why this practice came into existence. The paper also explains the various strategies that have been used to eliminate the practice in the United States of America. The paper finally justifies whether this unethical practice in business is a reality or it is a myth and should be avoided at all costs.

A feminist while expressing how women were being mistreated in the corporate world of America first used the metaphor, the glass ceiling in 1987. This practice is believed to have two major origins. One, it was based on the persistent failing of women to reach the top corporate levels as compared to men who reached theirs easily with a little opportunity given. This fact drove business analysts into a conclusion that women are not as able as men are and hence do not deserve top jobs in companies. Glass ceiling might have also originated from the traditional beliefs that men are the heads and women should follow the orders. People believing in this ideology have always done anything possible to stop women from being chairpersons and CEOs of companies that they operate (Gugushvili, 2017).

Despite barring women from getting the chances to lead organizations, the glass ceiling has prevented women from rising economically. Here, the glass ceiling aspect is evident where men and women at the same positional ranks get different pays. Women are paid relatively low amounts of salaries even if they have all the qualifications and are serving the same roles as men in the various companies that they work for. Glass ceiling is, therefore, the greatest enemy to the development of women in the corporate world.

Many strategies have been developed over the years to help reduce the instances of this occurring in the United States of America. I the early 1990s, the U.S government came up with a body called Glass Ceiling Commission. The 21-member commission had three different strategies that they used to eliminate this practice in the American companies. First, the commission came up with a compensation program for women who have suffered this unethical practice. This was done through ensuring that the wages paid to men and women are based on the position and skills and not sex. The second strategy that this commission came up with was training women. This was after realizing that women do not get equal training opportunities as men and hence cannot get top positions that require highly skilled personnel to handle. The commission also ordered filling women into managerial positions in companies and making them part of the company decision-making teams in companies (Kelsoe, 2017). This strategy was meant to help in the realization of the womens abilities when given chances. Since then, the number of women breaking through this glass ceiling has increased greatly. Many women are today coming out with excellent performances in the corporate society in the United States of America. Alongside men, women chairpersons and CEOs are performing great and displaying high integrity in the way they are handling their issues to do with companies that they work.

Worker performance analyses show that women are doing great in leadership positions. The decisions that they make concerning companies operations are also good and lead companies to great levels of success (Ganguly, 2017). The skills that women get in training are also same as for the men and hence can handle any position in a corporate world. When it comes to making wealth, many women have managed to save good amounts of money from their jobs and are just as good as men in the management of their money. This confirms that stereotyping is what has been misleading individuals and companies to make unfair judgments against women and minority groups. Consistency in womens high performances in the corporate society has proved that women are able and only need to be treated with fairness to rise to the high levels of performances in the business world as well as personal development. The ideologies that are in support of considering women as poor performers in the corporate world are therefore not justified. They should be considered as myths and should not be used against the women. It should, therefore, be understood that glass ceiling is an unethical business practice and hence an offense in the corporate society.

References

Qu, Z., & Zhao, Z. (2017). Glass ceiling effect in urban China: Wage inequality of rural-urban migrants during 20022007. China Economic Review, 42, 118-144.

Gugushvili, A., Bukodi, E., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (2017). The Direct Effect of Social Origins on Social Mobility Chances:Glass Floors and Glass Ceilings in Britain. European Sociological Review, 33(2), 305-316.

Kelsoe, G., & Haynes, B. F. (2017). What Are the Primary Limitations in B-Cell Affinity Maturation, and How Much Affinity Maturation Can We Drive with Vaccination? Breaking through Immunitys Glass Ceiling. Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, a029397.

Ganguly, A., Rao, J., & Dutta, S. (2017). Glass Ceiling: Virtual Reality or Mythical Truth? A Study with Reference to Select Companies Listed on BSE 30. IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 16(4), 46-58.