Gender Equity - equality for men and women in career of logistics management

An Analysis of the Federal Logistics Management Career Field

Since the term was popularized in the 1980s, the glass ceiling has become a significant concept in the American workplace. The metaphor is an apt description of a reality in which women and minorities tend to be overrepresented at the lower levels of an organization yet underrepresented at more senior levels.

When the Civil Rights Act of 1991 established the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, its mission was to assess the barriers hindering "the advancement of women and minorities to management and decision-making positions" and make recommendations toward bringing down such barriers. [1]

This article assesses the progress made in one area of the Federal Government since 1991--specifically, the federal government's logistics management career field--and changes in gender composition, not just for the logistics field as a whole but also the changes, by gender, in its managerial ranks. [2]

Workplace discrimination based on gender has long been a national issue and was addressed in the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and in Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964. [3] But by the mid-1980s, it was apparent that despite social, demographic, and legal changes, patterns of discrimination in the work force still existed, especially as related to upward mobility for women. [4] Hymowitz and Schellhardt used the term glass ceiling to describe this discrimination in 1986:

Even those few women who rose steadily through the ranks eventually crashed into an invisible barrier. The executive suite seemed within their grasp, but they just couldn't break through the glass ceiling. [5]

Research on this glass ceiling demonstrated that it can be subtle yet systematic. [6] Further, the precise characteristics of the barriers change from organization to organization and from level to level within a given organization (for example, glass ceiling barriers to entry- and midlevel management are different than the barriers to more senior leadership positions). As a result, women must adopt different strategies to gain promotion to different levels of the organization. [7]

One particular aspect of gender discrimination is pay. Many studies cite data describing gender-based pay differentials; [8] others use statistics similar to those of the Department of Labor, in which women's hourly earnings in 1999 were only 76.5 percent of men's. [9] Some authors, though, question the validity of a gender-based differential in compensation. Some suggest little or no gap exists when pay is adjusted for years of employment, hours worked, education level, and other factors. [10] Others contend that business necessity is the most significant destroyer of glass ceilings; in high-tech industries, heavy competition for a limited technical talent pool tends to equalize opportunity and reduce pay inequity. [11]

Women tend to adopt a variety of techniques to counter glass-ceiling effects. Some of these strategies include the pursuit of difficult assignments, enhanced use of mentoring, and acceptance of the need to outperform male counterparts. [12] Faced with the need to make these adaptations, many women opt out of corporate bureaucracies in favor of entrepreneurial ventures and part-time work. [13]

Issues of gender equity affect all sectors of the economy, including the government. From 1950 to 1990, the proportional representation of women in government and not-for-profit sectors rose dramatically. [14] While high-profile female government appointees like Madeleine Albright and Janet Reno were visible icons of women's progress, glass-ceiling issues are no less prevalent in government than in business. The field of logistics management is similarly affected.

The Federal Work Force

The federal work force of the 1990s reflected national trends in that federal career fields typically displayed disproportionately high numbers of women in low ranks and disproportionately low numbers of women at more senior levels. For example, in 1990, the year prior to the establishment of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, only 6.2 percent of federally employed women were at or above the level of upper middle management (General Schedule [GS]-13 and above). However, male representation was more than four times as high, with nearly 28 percent of all federally employed males located in the GS-13 and above category. [15]

Faced with this stark imbalance, the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission recommended that government lead by example:

Government at all levels must be a leader in the quest to make equal opportunity a reality for minorities and women. The commission recommends that all government agencies, as employers, increase their efforts to eliminate internal glass ceilings by examining their practices for promoting qualified minorities and women to senior management and decision-making positions. [16]

The Federal Government's Logistics Management Career Field

The vast majority of federally employed logisticians work within the Civil Service General Schedule. The General Schedule is the basic pay schedule for most white-collar jobs in the federal government, covering about 72 percent of the civilian employees. This pay schedule consists of 15 grades, designated GS-1 through GS-15, with ten rates of pay for each grade. [17] The GS system is divided into five categories of work, including professional, administrative, technical, clerical, and other. [18] The federal government considers logistics management (GS-0346) to be an administrative career field, along with positions like program management (GS-0340), financial management (GS-0505), and management and program analysis (GS-0343). [19]

The grades GS-7 through GS-12 are lower level management positions, roughly analogous to lieutenants and captains in the Army or Air Force. GS-13, -14, and -15 are upper level management, equivalent to majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels. Above GS-15 are even higher level positions, the Senior Executive Service: SESs are the equivalent of generals. [20]

There were 10,694 civilian logisticians employed by the federal government in FY91. Of that number, 2,868--or 26.8 percent--were women. The average GS grade of those women (11.42) was lower than that of their male counterparts (11.92). Only a relative handful of logisticians were below the grade of GS-9 [21]

Virtually all (96.3 percent) federal civilian logistics managers work for the Department of Defense. The Air Force alone employed a third (3,600) of all federal logisticians in FY91. Of those, 1,010--or 28 percent--were women. [22]

Note that these data say nothing about the gender distribution across ranks. If logistics management is like other federal career fields, one would expect to see disproportionate numbers of men in the upper ranks, with more women in the lower ranks. If the antiglass-ceiling movement has had any effect since 1991, one would also expect to see the proportion of senior men decline and the proportion of senior women rise during the 1990s.

A Look Back: Gender Distribution in Logistics Management in 1991

To better evaluate the progress made in cracking the glass ceiling, we need to begin by examining the state of the logistics career field in the early 1990s.

One measure of gender equity is, of course, salary. In the aggregate, male logistics professionals earned more money than women in the same field. The average salary for male logistics managers in FY91 was $45,300; for females, $39,300. Thus, in the aggregate, civilian women in the logistics field made about 86.7 percent of that made by their male counterparts. [23]

Since federal pay scales do not vary based on gender, the obvious cause of this disparity has to be rank. One would expect, then, to find that the logistics management career field was, in 1991, heavily dominated by men in the upper levels, with women clustered in the lower echelons. This is supported by the 1991 data. Note in Table 1 that women comprise nearly one-third of logisticians at or below the level of GS-12 but only about one-sixth of those at or above the GS-13 level.

The 1991 disparity grows even more pronounced at the most senior pay levels. Of 39 senior executive positions in the field of logistics management, the civilian equivalent of generals and admirals, only two--a little more than 5 percent-- were filled by women. [24]

The Logistics Management Career Field as of 1998

The figures from 1991 show a career field with the glass ceiling still firmly in place. The year 1991, though, marked the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the establishment of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, which operated for the next 4 years. FY98 government employment data are used to assess the progress in and following those years.

From FY91 to FY98, the size of the civilian logistician work force grew slightly, from 10,694 to 11,264. The proportion of women in the field also grew modestly, from 26.8 percent in 1991 to 29.7 percent in 1998. Also evident from the data is the fact that the gap between male and female salaries narrowed between 1991 and 1998. In 1991, women in logistics management made less than 87 percent of their male counterparts. By 1998, that had risen to nearly 90 percent.

Again, since there is no gender-based differential in federal government salary rates, the improvement in salary equity cited in Table 2 shows there has been a corresponding improvement in the number of women at higher grade levels.

The numbers in Table 3 tell an interesting story. Clearly, the logistics management field is becoming less male-dominated, with the overall percentage of women logisticians climbing from less than 27 percent to nearly 30 percent in just 7 years. And while the upper ranks of logistics managers are still overwhelmingly male, the period of time covered by this research saw women make significant inroads into upper management (GS-13 and above). From the 577 women at or above GS-13 in 1991, the number climbed 39 percent to 803 by 1998. The picture is more mixed at the most senior levels. In 1991, fewer than 6 percent of the most senior logistics management executives, those above the grade of GS-15, were women, but that changed marginally by 1998 (Table 4). Note that the total number of senior executive logisticians dropped dramatically, from 39 in 1991 to just 24 in 1998. During the same period, the proportion of females in the most senior logistics positions increased, though the number of female executives rem ained at just two. [27]

One potential concern is the effect of women's progress on their male counterparts. As the logistics field becomes more gender equitable, one might expect some adjustment issues affecting male members: greater opportunity for women will tend to be perceived as less opportunity for men. Indeed, a review of literature reveals the appearance of new vocabulary. Terms like glass cellar (hard and dirty physical labor disproportionately performed by men) and glass escalator (a secret stairway to upward mobility only available to women) seem to reveal mounting frustration on the part of men, who may not see gender changes in the workplace as affirmative action so much as they see reverse discrimination. [28]

Factors Responsible for Reducing the Impact of the Glass Ceiling

If the barrier of the glass ceiling has started to show some cracks as far as the logistics management career field is concerned, what are some of the possible reasons? A variety of sociocultural influences combined in the 1990s to improve the status of women in the federal workplace.

The years following 1991 brought a host of changes to the American political landscape and to the entire federal work force. A new President brought a new perspective regarding women in high places. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Attorney General Janet Reno became the first women ever to hold their cabinet positions, and other appointees--like Donna Shalala as Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alice Rivlin at the Office of Management and Budget, and Sheila Widnall as Secretary of the Air Force--caused one author to note that when senior staff members meet at White House meetings half the attendees are usually women. [29]

This new level of female participation is just one part of the new environment. Other factors include the growing number of women graduating from business and graduate schools. In 1970, for example, women constituted only 3.6 percent of MBAs. By 1996, that number had soared to 37.6 percent. [30] Of the 326,000 business degrees awarded in 1996-1997 by American universities, almost 149,000--approximately 46 percent--were earned by women. [31]

Additionally, the advance of women in government was aided by a variety of early retirement programs, the effect of which fell largely on the mostly male senior levels of management. This trend affects both government and the private sector. The Hudson Institute estimates that men will make up nearly 60 percent of all work force departures nationwide in the years between 1994 and 2005. [32]

Conclusions and Thoughts on Future Research

For federally employed women in the logistics management field, the news is good. The glass ceiling has in no way disappeared, but it is certainly starting to show some fractures. Wage disparity is declining, and the presence of women is increasing proportionately in upper and senior management. It is true that the disparity is still greatest at the senior executive level, where women occupy only 8.3 percent of the most senior logistics management positions. But even there, the news is encouraging: that figure represents a significant increase from 1991.

While progress toward parity is a positive development, such progress can bring its own set of challenges. As more women continue to enter the lower levels of this profession, the challenge will be to continue and even improve upon the performance of the 1990s.

Dr Baker (Lt Col, USAF, Retired) is associate professor of management at Wright State University, where he leads the MBA program in Project Management. He is also a charter member of the Defense Acquisition University's Research Integrated Product Team and a contributing editor for Project Management Network magazine.

Notes

(1.) US Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, A Solid Investment: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital, Washington DC, Nov 95, 4.

(2.) Research for this article began with an exploration of federal employment statistics. Although the titles of most documents referred to suggest the data describe the federal work force, there are interesting exceptions. For example, employees of both the federal legislative and judicial branches are not reported. Similarly, employees of certain security organizations are not reported, exempt by law for purposes of national security. Additionally, this article Omits foreign employees based overseas for two reasons. First, their numbers are quite small, and second, employment of foreign workers in foreign locations might very well be driven by cultural considerations not pertinent to this analysis. The various databases analyzed in this paper are static; that is, they provide snapshots of the federal work force at particular points in time. The federal statistics contain raw data only. All interpretations and comparisons between years are the work of the author.

(3.) Nathan Davidovich, "The Glass Ceiling: Has It Prevented Employment to Your Full Potential?" [Online] Available: http://www.cyberscribe.com/talklaw/glass.html, Mar 00. See also Jonathan S. Leonard, "Use of Enforcement Techniques in Eliminating Glass Ceiling Barriers." US Government Reports: Glass Ceiling Background Papers, [Online] Available: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/e_archive/gov_reports/glassceiling /default.html, Apr 94.

(4.) Lynn D. Burbridge, "The Glass Ceiling in Different Sectors of the Economy: Differences Between Government, Non-Profit, and For-Profit Organizations," US Government Reports: Glass Ceiling Background Papers, [Online] Available: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/e_archive/gov_reports/glassceiling /default.html, Jun 94.

(5.) Carol Hymowitz and Timothy D. Schellhardt, "The Glass Ceiling: Why Women Can't Seem to Break the Invisible Barrier That Blocks Them from the Top Jobs," The Wall Street Journal, 24 Mar 86, 1.

(6.) Debra E. Meyerson and Joyce K. Fletcher, "A Modest Manifesto for Shattering the Glass Ceiling," Harvard Business Review, Vol 78, No 1, Jan-Feb 00, 128.

(7.) "The Three Levels of the Glass Ceiling: Sorcerer's Apprentice to Through the Looking Glass," Dataline, [Online] Available: http://www.cyberwerks.com/dataline/mapping/thethree.html, Sep 91.

(8.) John E. Alessio, Julie Andrzejewski, and Laurie A. Morgan, "Unveiling the Hidden Glass Ceiling: An Analysis of the Cohort Effect Claim/Reply," American sociological Review, Vol 65, No 2, Apr 00 [Online] Available: ProQuest, 26 Aug 00.

(9.) "Women at the Millennium, Accomplishments and Challenges Ahead," US Department of Labor Women's Bureau, [Online] Available: http://www.dol.gov/dol/wb/, Mar 00. See also Randy Albelda and Chris Tilly, "Glass Ceilings and Bottomless Pits: Women's Work, Women's Poverty," Sojourner: The Women's Forum, Vol 22, No 12, Aug 97, [Online] Available: http://www.sojourner.org/archive/toc0897.html, 26 Aug 00.

(10.) Laurie A. Morgan, "Glass Ceiling Effect or Cohort Effect? A Longitudinal Study of the Gender Earnings Gap for Engineers, 1982-1989," American Sociological Review, Vol 63, No 4, Aug 98. See "Is There Really Still a Gender Pay Gap?" HR Focus, Vol 77, No 6, Jun 00. Also, T. D. Stanley and Stephen B. Jarrell, "Gender Wage Discrimination Bias? A Meta Regression Analysis" Journal of Human Resources, Vol 33, No 4, Fall 98, [Online] Available: Proquest, 26 Aug 00.

(11.) "No Glass Ceiling in Hi Tech Fields," Marketing to Women, Vol 13, No 3, Mar 00, [Online] Available: OhioLINK Research Database, 8 Oct 00.

(12.) "A Modest Manifesto," 130. See Bell Rose Ragins, Bickley Townsend, and Mary Mattis, "Gender Gap in the Executive Suite: CEOs and Female Executives Report on Breaking the Glass Ceiling," Academy of Management Executive, Vol 12, No 1, Feb 98, 28.

(13.) Dorothy P. Moore and E. Holly Buttner, Women Entrepreneurs: Moving Beyond the Glass Ceiling, Thousand Oaks, California, 97, 33-4.

(14.) "The Glass Ceiling in Different Sectors of the Economy."

(15.) A Solid Investment, 35.

(16.) Ibid.

(17.) USC Title 5 [ss]5332, [Online] Available: http://www.nationalfisherman.com/mlibrary/fedlaw/fvs/5322.html, 2 Oct 00.

(18.) PERMISS--General Schedule Classification System, Air Force Personnel Center, [Online] Available: http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/permiss/civilian/c_31b.htm, 2 Oct 00.

(19.) US Office of Personnel Management, Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics, Employment and Trends as of May 2000, Washington DC, Jul 00, 77-79.

(20.) Employment and Trends as of May 2000, 95.

(21.) US Office of Personnel Management, Occupations of Federal White-Collar and Blue-Collar Workers, Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of September 1991, Washington DC, 30 Sep 91, 62-63.

(22.) Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of September 1991, 110-111.

(23.) Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of September 1991, 30.

(24.) Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of September 1991, 63.

(25.) US Office Of Personnel Management, Occupations of Federal White-Collar and Blue-Collar Workers, Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of 30 September 1997, Washington DC, Sep 98, 36.

(26.) Federal Civilian Work Force Statistics as of 30 September 1997, 57.

(27.) Ibid.

(28.) "The Glass Ceiling and Other (Less Publicized) Invisible Objects," Male View Magazine, Vol 25, No 31, Mar 99, 15.

(29.) Dick Kirschten, "Kicking Glass," Government Executive, Vol 32, No 2, Feb 00, [Online] Available: ProQuest, 26 Aug 00.

(30.) Ibid.

(31.) US Department of Education, Digest of Education Statistics, 1999, May 00, [Online] Available: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/digest99/listoftables.html, 26 Aug 00.

(32.) Richard W. Judy and Carol D'Amico, Workforce 2020 Work and Workers in the 21st Century, Indianapolis: Hudson Institute, 1998, 113.

              Federal Logistics Management Employees, FY91
        [less than or equal to] GS-12  [less than or equal to] GS-12
                   Number                            %
Male                4,936                          68.3
Female              2,291                          31.7
Total               7,227                         100.0
        [greater than or equal to] GS-13
                     Number
Male                 2,890
Female                 577
Total                3,467
        [greater than or equal to] GS-13
                       %
Male                  83.4
Female                16.6
Total                100.0
                  Mean Salary of All Federal Logistics
                        Mangement Employees [25]
              FY91     FY98
Male         $45,300  $56,300
Female       $39,300  $50,700
Women's
Salary as a   86.7%    90.0%
% of Men's
        [less than or equal to] GS-12  [less than or equal to] GS-12
                   Number                            %
  Male              5,063                          66.5
Female              2,547                          33.5
 Total              7,610                         100.0
        [greater than or equal to] GS-13
                    Number
  Male               2,851
Female                 803
 Total               3,654
        [greater than or equal to] GS-13
                       %
  Male               78.0
Female               22.0
 Total              100.0
                      Senior Logistics Management
                        Executives (Above GS-15)
        FY91          FY98
  Male    37   94.6%    22   91.7%
Female     2    5.4%     2    8.3%
 Total    39  100.0%    24  100.0%

COPYRIGHT 2000 U.S. Air Force, Logistics Management Agency
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group