Pankaj Sharma: Industrial Revolution mindsets in the Digital Age

A new US study underlines the point that gender pay gaps are driven most by ingrained prejudice

All it takes is a small slip to stir the hornets' nest and Satya Nadella's "advice" last month to women executives not to ask for a pay rise but have "faith in the system" did exactly that. The gender pay divide is now a well-established fact and it is equally well-known that its carries the centuries-old legacy of the Industrial Revolution when a woman was paid less on the assumption that her relative physical frailness implied less work.

The issue has been researched widely with many minds claiming to have deciphered new trends but on the ground the results, if any, can be best defined as zilch. However, recent research by a prominent women advocacy group, American Association of University Women (AAUW), has thrown up some interesting angles to this much-debated topic.

So far, a prominent view has been that the gender pay divide is an issue of the career path the woman chooses. Her preference for family and other choices were propounded as the main reasons for this, but the report titled, "The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap" breaks that and several other myths.

To begin with, it breaks the myth that males are sole bread earners for the family. The overall contribution of women's salaries in family incomes has risen significantly from 28 per cent to 64 per cent in the period 1967 to 2010, implying that women are now the chief bread earners for most American families. This growth has occurred despite the fact that, on average, a woman is paid roughly 78 per cent of what her male counterparts earn.

The study discovered that the gender pay difference in itself is not a static trend; rather, its intensity depended on the timeline. The pay divide was found to rise as both genders advance in their careers: after one year women were paid on an average 82 per cent of what their male counterparts earned; after 10 years the gap widened to 69 per cent of peer male pay. Some of this differential could be attributed to career choices (such as women going in traditional "women-oriented" professions like teaching, nursing and so on) and personal life choices, but taking all things into consideration a 13 percentage point difference still remains unexplained.

Another important aspect that the study explored was the perpetual impact on returning females in the workforce. It pointed to a "Motherhood Penalty", which in simple terms means that employers will be less likely to hire a mother over a childless female and even if they do hire one, they will offer her a significantly lower salary. The male, on the other hand, does not face such consequences after returning to the workforce after parenthood.

Another interesting aspect of the AAUW study is that the social and educational achievements increased the gender pay difference significantly among the same ethnic groups. Asian Americans - one of the most prosperous communities with higher average education levels and, thus, better financial and job prospects - have the most prominent gender pay difference.

Interestingly, even education did little to solve the issue. With every level of educational qualification the women's pay gap increased, hitting a high of 79 per cent at doctoral levels and 77 per cent at professional degree levels. Part of this can be attributed to the nature of jobs with lower differences in pay among the lower skilled jobs, yet it clearly signifies that the higher education or professional achievements of a female often goes ignored by her employer.

The differentials also persist when viewed from the perspective of age. The study states that although earnings generally increased for both male and female before hitting a plateau at the age of 65, as women grow older, the pay gap with men increases, which clearly signifies that employers view ageing females from a "deterioration" aspect, while males are viewed at maturing or significantly contributing to overall bottom lines.

So Nadella was merely unconsciously voicing a deep-rooted prejudice when he made his comment. But, one can imagine if this is the situation in the US, the Indian context will surely be no better.

The writer is a global expert on diversity, gender issues, workplace sexual harassment and compliance