Maternal wall

Last updated

The maternal wall is a term referring to stereotypes and various forms of discrimination encountered by working mothers and mothers seeking employment. Women hit the maternal wall when they encounter workplace discrimination because of past, present, or future pregnancies or because they have taken one or more maternity leaves. [1] Women may also be discriminated against when they opt for part-time or flexible work schedules. [1] Maternal wall discrimination is not limited to childcare responsibilities. [2] Both men and women with caregiving responsibilities, such as taking care of a sick parents or spouse, may also result in maternal wall discrimination. [2] As such, maternal wall discrimination is also described as family responsibilities discrimination. [3] [4] [5] Research suggests that the maternal wall is cemented by employer stereotypes and gender expectations.

Contents

History

The first major maternal wall case, Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp., appeared before the United States Supreme Court in 1971. [6] Since then, the number of Family Responsibilities Discrimination lawsuits increased steadily, with a steep jump in the 1990s. This coincided with the growing wage disparity between mothers and non-mothers. To explain this phenomenon, the term "maternal wall" emerged from academe in the 1990s. [6]

Causes

Psychological theories

Expectation states theory

Expectation states theory says that categorical distinctions made between individuals become status characteristics when common cultural stereotypes attach greater status and competence with one category versus another. [7] [8] According to expectation states theory, women will be categorized as mothers when they give some behavioral indicator that they are a primary caretaker, such as becoming pregnant. [9] Additionally, since motherhood characteristics overlap with stereotypes about women, the indicator may be something as simple as their gender. A woman's status as a mother will be in conflict with the image of an ideal worker (dedication to her children vs. committed to the job) and so motherhood will be judged as a status characteristic that is relevant to the worker's job performance. A worker's role as a mother will strongly bias expectations for their competence compared to nonmothers. [8]

Role congruity theory

Eagly and Karau (2002) proposed that prejudice can arise when the perception of members of a social group do not meet the requirements of that social group. [10] Role incongruity, the degree to which stereotypes do not match one's perception, can result in discrimination. With respect to the workplace, employees are expected to take the role of the "ideal worker", an employee who is available and dedicated to their job 24/7. [3] Mothers and individuals with caregiving responsibilities do not fit the "ideal worker" schema.

Stereotype content model

The stereotype content model (SCM) is a psychological theory that differentiates stereotypes among two dimensions: warmth and competence. [11] Stereotyped groups can be evaluated in four combinations of warmth by competence in terms of being low or high on either trait. The combination of these dimensions will elicit different types of emotions from others. [12] According to the SCM, mothers are stereotyped as high in warmth, but low in competence. Groups who are viewed as high in warmth, but low in competence elicit feelings of pity and a paternalistic response which may result in discrimination. [11]

Economic theories

Economic theories suggest that occupational and lifestyle choices explain the motherhood penalty. [3] The maternal wall is regarded as a self-imposed barrier, where women expecting motherhood self-select into occupations that require lower levels of skill and education because they anticipate less participation in the labor force over their lifetime. Furthermore, women who choose "home-time" and choose to take leave from the workforce are statistically less likely to achieve higher-earning professional and managerial positions. [13] The argument follows that women are not fully committed to the labor force, thus explaining wage differentials. Similarly, this lack of commitment may explain the motherhood penalty in terms of performance. Economist Gary Becker follows a "work-effort" hypothesis, which suggests that employed mothers do not perform as well as men because of their choices, such as refusing to "work odd hours or take jobs requiring much travel". [14] Alternatively, employers may use statistical discrimination, in which employers use average estimates of productivity to predict the productivity of certain groups. As such, mothers may receive lower wages due to lower estimates of productivity. [15] Other economic perspectives include the taste model, in which employers may find it distasteful to employ mothers. [15]


The motherhood penalty also posits that since childcare and household tasks are not paid labor, women's earning potential is limited [16] This is especially true of single mothers and women who rely on child support payments from absent partners. This reliance means that earning potential is beyond the control of the mother. The combination of low skill jobs, part-time work for flexible hours and lower participation rates in the workforce makes mothers vulnerable to higher poverty rates. Social welfare programs have successfully been implemented in several countries, including Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. [16] These programs help to ease the negative impact of the motherhood penalty.

Relationship with other concepts

Mommy track and motherhood penalty

The "mommy track" can be the result of maternal wall discrimination. For example, when employees are fired or demoted for taking maternity leave, they are being essentially forced onto the mommy track. The mommy track, motherhood penalty, and the maternal wall have similar discriminatory effects; however, the maternal wall is also applicable to individuals who are discriminated against due to caregiving responsibilities.

Work–life balance

Work–life balance describes the prioritization of work and life responsibilities. The maternal wall can manifest itself when work–life balance results in conflict. For example, increasing family responsibilities can limit employment opportunities. [2] There is a disproportionate effect for lower-paid workers with care-taking responsibilities, as they have much less control and flexibility over their schedules compared to white-collared workers. [2] For people with care-taking responsibilities, work–life balance is difficult to achieve, resulting in an increased likelihood of encountering the maternal wall.

Effects

Wage penalty for motherhood

The wage penalty for motherhood refers to the negative effect of children on wages. Research focusing on the wage gap between mothers and non-mothers in the workplace found a 4% penalty for one child and a 12% penalty for two or more children, even after controlling for differences in education, work experience, and full-time versus part-time job status. [17] By 1991, the wage gap between mothers and non-mothers surpassed the wage gap between women and men. [18] Furthermore, there is a substantial difference between the wages of mother and fathers: At the age of 30, women earn 90 percent of the wages of men, whereas mothers earn approximately 60 percent of the wages of fathers. [18] In terms of marital status, the motherhood penalty is greatest for single mothers compared to married mothers. [18] Research suggests that one third of the motherhood penalty is explained by job experience and seniority, while the remaining two thirds suggest that productivity and discrimination explain the motherhood penalty. [15] Overtime, the motherhood penalty may have serious financial consequences. Research suggests that mothers are 35% more likely to lose their homes than childless homeowners, [19] and that mothers are 65% more likely to go bankrupt than nonmothers. [20]

Research has found that mothers who use work-family policy programs can experience slower wage growth compared to those who don't. [21] In a 2004 longitudinal study that analyzed employed mothers' wage growth for 7 years post-childbirth, it was found that women who used work-family policies such as reduced working hours, remote work, childcare assistance, and flextime had slower wage growth compared to those who didn't. [21] Mothers employed in managerial or professional positions and worked reduced hours or via remote work experienced the slowest wage growth. Compared to professional/managerial employed mothers who didn't work at home, professional/managerial mothers who worked from home averaged a 27% lower gain in wages. [21]

Empirical findings

Negative competence assumptions

In a laboratory study conducted by Correll, Bernard, and Paik (2007), participants were given the resumes of a parent and non-parent with equivalent qualifications and asked to complete an employee evaluation. [22] Results indicated that mothers were rated as significantly less competent, less committed, less promotable and less likely to be recommended for management than non-mothers. [22] Furthermore, the suggested starting salaries for mothers were $11,000 (7.6%) less than for non-mothers, and only 48% of mothers were recommended for hire, compared to 87% of non-mothers. [22] In addition, the standards for mothers were much stricter; they were given significantly less time for being late, and needed a significantly higher score on the management exam in order to even be considered for hire compared to non-mothers. [22]

Compared to women without children, working mothers receive lower ratings in competence, but increased ratings in warmth. [11] However, increased ratings in warmth do not predict greater job opportunities. In an observational study, participants were less willing to hire, promote, or train working mothers compared to other groups such as childless women and men, and working fathers. [11] Additionally, for academics, superiors rated working mothers as less likely to advance in their careers compared to working fathers. [23]

Pregnancy

Other studies have investigated the effects of pregnancy in the workplace. In a laboratory study by Halpert, Wilson, and Hickman (1993), participants viewed one of two videotapes of a female manager and were then asked to rate her performance. [9] The videotape featured the same woman and the same managerial scenarios; however, in one videotape, the woman was pregnant. Performance reviews of the pregnant manager were significantly lower than the non-pregnant manager, indicating a strong pregnancy bias. [9] Another study examined the effect of pregnancy on employment, and found that pregnant women encountered more hostility when applying to traditionally masculine jobs. [24]

Legislation

The majority of maternal wall lawsuits are filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment. Title VII did not have a clause about pregnancy until it was amended in 1978 to include the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. [25] The act states that "an employer may not discriminate against and employee on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions; and women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions must be treated the same as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work. [26] " Due to limitations in the original clause, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) created clarifying guidelines in 2014 called the Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Guidelines. This outlines the coverage, access to benefits, disparate treatment, disparate impact, disability status and best practices. [26] This legislation ensures that pregnant workers are compensated at the same rate as they were prior to becoming pregnant, which helps to avoid wage penalties.

Court cases

Successful maternal wall cases must demonstrate that employees are discriminated not because of their sex, but because of their sex role. As such, men can also be discriminated against when they occupy a caregiving and traditionally female sex role. The majority of maternal wall lawsuits are filed under Title VII, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment. Maternal wall cases also fall under the umbrella of Family Responsibilities Discrimination, which is employment discrimination against workers who have caregiving responsibilities, such as pregnant women, mothers and fathers of young children and employees with aging parents. Family Responsibility Discrimination cases have risen dramatically since the 1970s: In the 1970s, only 8 cases were filed, whereas 358 cases were filed between 2000 and 2005. Investigations of these lawsuits show that most involve overt discrimination, and that 92% of the plaintiffs are women. The win rate of Family Responsibilities Discrimination lawsuits is more than 50%, whereas traditional discrimination lawsuits have a win rate of roughly 20%.

Possible organizational solutions

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mother</span> Female parent

A mother is the female parent of a child. A woman may be considered a mother by virtue of having given birth, by raising a child who may or may not be her biological offspring, or by supplying her ovum for fertilisation in the case of gestational surrogacy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parental leave</span> Time taken off to care for a new child

Parental leave, or family leave, is an employee benefit available in almost all countries. The term "parental leave" may include maternity, paternity, and adoption leave; or may be used distinctively from "maternity leave" and "paternity leave" to describe separate family leave available to either parent to care for small children. In some countries and jurisdictions, "family leave" also includes leave provided to care for ill family members. Often, the minimum benefits and eligibility requirements are stipulated by law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993</span> US labor law

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) is a United States labor law requiring covered employers to provide employees with job-protected, unpaid leave for qualified medical and family reasons. The FMLA was a major part of President Bill Clinton's first-term domestic agenda, and he signed it into law on February 5, 1993. The FMLA is administered by the Wage and Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor.

Pregnancy discrimination is a type of employment discrimination that occurs when expectant women are fired, not hired, or otherwise discriminated against due to their pregnancy or intention to become pregnant. Common forms of pregnancy discrimination include not being hired due to visible pregnancy or likelihood of becoming pregnant, being fired after informing an employer of one's pregnancy, being fired after maternity leave, and receiving a pay dock due to pregnancy. Pregnancy discrimination may also take the form of denying reasonable accommodations to workers based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women prohibits dismissal on the grounds of maternity or pregnancy and ensures right to maternity leave or comparable social benefits. The Maternity Protection Convention C 183 proclaims adequate protection for pregnancy as well. Though women have some protection in the United States because of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, it has not completely curbed the incidence of pregnancy discrimination. The Equal Rights Amendment could ensure more robust sex equality ensuring that women and men could both work and have children at the same time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pregnancy Discrimination Act</span> 1978 US federal law

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of 1978 is a United States federal statute. It amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to "prohibit sex discrimination on the basis of pregnancy."

Employment discrimination is a form of illegal discrimination in the workplace based on legally protected characteristics. In the U.S., federal anti-discrimination law prohibits discrimination by employers against employees based on age, race, gender, sex, religion, national origin, and physical or mental disability. State and local laws often protect additional characteristics such as marital status, veteran status and caregiver/familial status. Earnings differentials or occupational differentiation—where differences in pay come from differences in qualifications or responsibilities—should not be confused with employment discrimination. Discrimination can be intended and involve disparate treatment of a group or be unintended, yet create disparate impact for a group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender pay gap in the United States</span> Overview of the gender pay gap in the United States of America

The gender pay gap in the United States is a measure between the earnings of male and females in the workforce. When calculating the pay gap, non-adjusted versus adjusted pay gap is utilized. The adjusted pay gap takes into consideration the differences in hours worked, occupations chosen, education and job experience, whereas the non-adjusted pay gap is the overall difference of gross hourly earnings of males and females in the United States. The non-adjusted average female annual salary is around 80% of the average male salary, compared to 95% for the adjusted average salary.

Work–family conflict occurs when an individual experiences incompatible demands between work and family roles, causing participation in both roles to become more difficult. This imbalance creates conflict at the work-life interface.

Pregnant patients rights refers to the choices and legal rights available to a woman experiencing pregnancy or childbirth. Specifically those under medical care within a medical establishment or those under the care of a medical professional regardless of location.

Gender inequality is the social phenomenon in which men and women are not treated equally. The treatment may arise from distinctions regarding biology, psychology, or cultural norms prevalent in the society. Some of these distinctions are empirically grounded, while others appear to be social constructs. While current policies around the world cause inequality among individuals, it is women who are most affected. Gender inequality weakens women in many areas such as health, education, and business life. Studies show the different experiences of genders across many domains including education, life expectancy, personality, interests, family life, careers, and political affiliation. Gender inequality is experienced differently across different cultures and also affects non-binary people.

Occupational inequality is the unequal treatment of people based on gender, sexuality, height, weight, accent, or race in the workplace. When researchers study trends in occupational inequality they usually focus on distribution or allocation pattern of groups across occupations, for example, the distribution of men compared to women in a certain occupation. Secondly, they focus on the link between occupation and income, for example, comparing the income of whites with blacks in the same occupation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupational sexism</span>

Occupational sexism is discrimination based on a person's sex that occurs in a place of employment.

Equal Rights Advocates (ERA) is an American non-profit gender justice/women's rights organization that was founded in 1974. ERA is a legal and advocacy organization dedicated to advancing rights and opportunities for women, girls, and people of all gender identities through legal cases and policy advocacy.

Women's work is often assumed to be solely the realm of women, and it is associated with specific stereotypical jobs that have been associated with the feminine sex throughout history. It is most commonly used in reference to the unpaid labor that a mother or wife performs in the home and family.

A working parent is a father or a mother who engages in a work life. Contrary to the popular belief that work equates to efforts aside from parents' duties as a childcare provider and homemaker, it is thought that housewives or househusbands count as working parents. The variations of family structures include, but are not limited to, heterosexual couples where the father is the breadwinner and the mother keeps her duties focused within the home, homosexual parents who take on a range of work and home styles, single working mothers, and single working fathers. There are also married parents who are dual-earners, in which both parents provide income to support their family. Throughout the 20th century, family work structures experienced significant changes. This was shown by the range of work opportunities each parent was able to take and was expected to do, to fluctuations in wages, benefits, and time available to spend with children. These family structures sometimes raise much concern about gender inequalities. Within the institution of gender, there are defined gender roles that society expects of mothers and fathers that are reflected by events and expectations in the home and at work.

Work–family balance in the United States refers to the specific issues that arise when men and women in the United States attempt to balance their occupational lives with their family lives. This differs from work–life balance in the United States: while work–life balance may refer to the health and living issues that arise from work, work–family balance refers specifically to how work and families intersect and influence each other. Work–family balance in the U.S. differs significantly for families of different social class.

The motherhood penalty is a term coined by sociologists who argue that in the workplace, working mothers encounter disadvantages in pay, perceived competence, and benefits relative to childless women. Specifically, women may suffer a per-child wage penalty, resulting in a pay gap between non-mothers and mothers that is larger than the gap between men and women. Mothers may also suffer worse job-site evaluations indicating that they are less committed to their jobs, less dependable, and less authoritative than non-mothers. Thus, mothers may experience disadvantages in terms of hiring, pay, and daily job experience. The motherhood penalty is not limited to one simple cause but can rather be linked to many theories and societal perceptions. However, one prominent theory that can be consistently linked to this penalty is the work-effort theory. It is also based on the mother's intersectionality. There are many effects developed from the motherhood penalty including wage, hiring, and promotion penalties. These effects are not limited to the United States and have been documented in over a dozen other industrialized nations including Japan, South Korea, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Poland, and Australia. The penalty has not shown any signs of declining over time.

Parental leave in the United States is regulated by US labor law and state law. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) requires 12 weeks of unpaid leave annually for mothers of newborn or newly adopted children if they work for a company with 50 or more employees. As of October 1, 2020, the same policy has been extended to caregivers of sick family members, or a partner in direct relation to the birth of the child therefore responsible for the care of the mother. Although 12 weeks are allowed to them, on average American fathers only take 10 days off, due to financial need. Taking paternity leave is not the norm, due to lack of paternity leave allotted to fellow employees previously in the same situation since the policy change is relatively new. Beginning in 2020, California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island required paid parental leave to employees, including those a part of 50 or less employees. For the majority of US workers at companies with fewer than 50 employees, there is no legal requirement for paid or unpaid leave to care for a new child or recover from childbirth but some US states do require this.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender pay gap</span> Average difference in remuneration amounts between men and women

The gender pay gap or gender wage gap is the average difference between the remuneration for men and women who are working. Women are generally found to be paid less than men. There are two distinct numbers regarding the pay gap: non-adjusted versus adjusted pay gap. The latter typically takes into account differences in hours worked, occupations chosen, education and job experience. In the United States, for example, the non-adjusted average woman's annual salary is 79% of the average man's salary, compared to 95% for the adjusted average salary.

The Center for WorkLife Law is a non-partisan research and advocacy group housed at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, California. WorkLife Law seeks to advance gender and racial equality at work and in higher education through practical initiatives. WLL staff advocate for changes in policies that discriminate against women and people of color and create research-based, actionable tools for companies and individuals to use to address discrimination in their workplaces and schools. WLL has many initiatives and programs to target different types of discrimination, including those focused on pregnancy, breast-feeding, and caregiving discrimination. WLL was founded in 1998 and is currently led by Joan C. Williams.

References

  1. 1 2 Williams J.C.; Westfall E.S. (2006). "Deconstructing the maternal wall: Strategies for vindicating the civil rights of "carers" in the workplace". Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy. 13: 31–53.
  2. 1 2 3 4 "Enforcement guidance: Unlawful disparate treatment of workers with caregiving responsibilities (Notice No. 915.002)". U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Title VII/EPA/ADEA Division, Office of Legal Counsel. Retrieved 18 September 2013.
  3. 1 2 3 Williams J. in A. Marcus-Newhall, D.F. Halpern, S.J. Sherylle (eds.) (2008). "What psychologists need to know about family responsibilities discrimination.". The changing realities of work and family: A multidisciplinary approach. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 255–276.{{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. ↑ Dickson, Christine E. (2008). "Antecedents and Consequences of Perceived Family Responsibilities Discrimination in the Workplace". Psychologist-Manager Journal. 11: 113–140. doi:10.1080/10887150801967399.
  5. ↑ Dickson, Christine E. (2007). "Avoiding family responsibilities discrimination: EAPs can help employers understand and mitigate the risks of discrimination against workers with family responsibilities". Journal of Employee Assistance. 37 (2).
  6. 1 2 3 4 Still M.C. (2007). "Litigating the Maternal Wall: U.S. Lawsuits Charging Discrimination Against Workers with Family Responsibilities". Diversity Factor. 15: 30–35.
  7. ↑ Berger J.; Fisek H.; Norman R.; Zelditch M. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction. New York.: Elsevier.
  8. 1 2 Ridgeway C.L.; Correll S.J. (2004). "Motherhood as a Status Characteristic". Journal of Social Issues. 60 (4): 683–700. doi:10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00380.x.
  9. 1 2 3 Halpert J.A.; Wilson M.L.; Hickman J.L. (1993). "Pregnancy as a source of bias in performance appraisals". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 14 (7): 649–663. doi:10.1002/job.4030140704.
  10. ↑ Eagly A.H. & Karau S.J. (2002). "Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders". Psychological Review. 109 (3): 573–598. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.573. PMID   12088246.
  11. 1 2 3 4 Cuddy A.J.C.; Fiske S.T.; Glick P. (2004). "When Professional Become Mothers, Warmth Doesn't Cut the Ice". Journal of Social Issues. 60 (4): 701–708. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.460.4841 . doi:10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00381.x.
  12. ↑ Fiske S.T.; Cuddy A.J.C.; Glick P.; Xu J. (2002). "A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 82 (6): 878–902. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878. PMID   12051578.
  13. ↑ Polachek S.W. (1981). "Occupational self-selection: A human capital approach to sex differences in occupational structure". The Review of Economics and Statistics. 63 (1): 60–69. doi:10.2307/1924218. JSTOR   1924218.
  14. ↑ Becker G.S. (1985). "Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor". Journal of Labor Economics. 3: S33–S58. doi:10.1086/298075. S2CID   153445351.
  15. 1 2 3 Budig M.J.; England P. (2001). "The Wage Penalty for Motherhood". American Sociological Review. 66 (2): 204–225. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.512.8060 . doi:10.2307/2657415. JSTOR   2657415.
  16. 1 2 Christopher, Karen; England, Paula; Smeeding, Timothy M.; Phillips, Katherin Ross (2002). "The Gender Gap in Poverty in Modern Nations: Single Motherhood, the Market, and the State". Sociological Perspectives. 45 (3): 219–242. doi:10.1525/sop.2002.45.3.219. ISSN   0731-1214. S2CID   17574338.
  17. ↑ Waldfogel J. (1997). "The effect of children on women's wages". American Sociological Review. 62 (2): 209–217. doi:10.2307/2657300. JSTOR   2657300.
  18. 1 2 3 Waldfogel J. (1998). "Understanding the "family" gap in pay for women with children". The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 12: 137–156. doi: 10.1257/jep.12.1.137 .
  19. ↑ Warren, E.; Tyagi, A. (2003). The Two-Income Trap. New York: Basic Books.
  20. ↑ Crittenden A. (31 August 2003). "Mothers most vulnerable". The American Prospect. Retrieved 30 October 2006.
  21. 1 2 3 Glass J. (2004). "Blessing or Curse? Work-Family Policies and Mother's Wage Growth Over Time". Work and Occupations. 31 (3): 367–394. doi:10.1177/0730888404266364. S2CID   154530173.
  22. 1 2 3 4 Correll S.J.; Benard S.; Paik I. (2007). "Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?". American Journal of Sociology. 112 (5): 1297–1338. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.417.6347 . doi:10.1086/511799. S2CID   7816230.
  23. ↑ King E.B. (2008). "The effect of bias on the advancement of working mothers: Disentangling legitimate concerns from inaccurate stereotypes as predictors of advancement in academe". Human Relations. 61 (12): 1677–1711. doi:10.1177/0018726708098082. S2CID   145491564.
  24. ↑ Hebl M.R.; King E.B.; Glick P.; Singletary S.L.; Kazama S. (2007). "Hostile and benevolent reactions toward pregnant women: Complementary interpersonal punishments and rewards that maintain traditional roles". Journal of Applied Psychology. 92 (6): 1499–1511. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1499. PMID   18020792.
  25. ↑ Shaw, Mikaela (2015-12-07). "The Resurgence of the Maternal Wall: Revisiting Accommodation under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act". University of Chicago Legal Forum. 2014 (1). ISSN   0892-5593.
  26. 1 2 "Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues". US EEOC. Retrieved 2022-10-09.
  27. ↑ Yglesias, Matthew (15 July 2013). "How "Family Friendly" Policies Can Backfire". Slate. Retrieved 10 November 2013.
  28. 1 2 Eagly AH, Carli LL (2007). "Women and the labyrinth of leadership". Harvard Business Review. 85 (9): 62–71. PMID   17886484.
  29. ↑ Tamm, Marcus (2019-08-01). "Fathers' parental leave-taking, childcare involvement and labor market participation". Labour Economics. Special Issue on “European Association of Labour Economists, 30th annual conference, Lyon, France, 13-15 September 2018. 59: 184–197. doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2019.04.007. ISSN   0927-5371. S2CID   159434576.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.