Horizontal occupational segregation

Date and country of first publication

1990
United kingdom

Definition

At its current state, this definition has been generated by a Large Language Model (LLM) so far without review by an independent researcher or a member of the curating team of segregation experts that keep the Segregation Wiki online. While we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee its reliability, completeness and timeliness. Please use this content with caution and verify information as needed. Also, feel free to improve on the definition as you see fit, including the use of references and other informational resources. We value your input in enhancing the quality and accuracy of the definitions of segregation forms collectively offered in the Segregation Wiki ©.

Horizontal occupational segregation refers to the separation of men and women into different types of jobs within an organization or industry. This type of segregation occurs when men and women are disproportionately represented in certain types of roles based on their gender. For example, women may be more likely to work in administrative roles or in the caring professions, while men may be more likely to work in technical or managerial roles.

Horizontal occupational segregation can lead to unequal opportunities for career advancement, lower pay for women, and perpetuate gender stereotypes in the workforce. Efforts to address horizontal occupational segregation include promoting diversity and equality in hiring practices, providing training and development opportunities to break down gender stereotypes, and implementing policies to encourage gender balance in all types of roles within an organization.

Further reading

Siltanen J. (1990) "Social Change and the Measurement of Occupational Segregation by Sex: An Assessment of the Sex Ratio Index", Work Employment & Society, 4(1), pp. 1-29. . DOI: [htttp://doi.org/10.1177/0950017090004001002 10.1177/0950017090004001002]

Newell A.; Reilly B. (1996) "The gender wage gap in Russia: Some empirical evidence", Labour Economics, 3(3), pp. 337-356. . DOI: [htttp://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(96)00016-4 10.1016/S0927-5371(96)00016-4]