Sexism in Trade Professions

[Kay]

Kate Harding over at Broadsheet asks why more women don't take up trade professions, presumably work like an electrician or plummer. These professions don't require a lot of costly education, she reasons, and the earning power is often on par or higher than other white-collar work. Some women already in the professions are trying to encourage younger women to take up the toolbox.

But I think that Harding forgets that there are plenty of women that already work in trades -- it's just that those trades are very gendered. The standard non-college career for a number of young women I went to high school, for instance, was hair dresser and not auto mechanic. Furthermore, the amount of sexual harassment that most women experience in blue-collar male-dominated professions serves as severe discouragement. For those who saw North Country, I don't think I have to remind you how terrible it was for women driving trucks in the iron ore mines of Minnesota. (Although the movie was set in the 1980s, such harassment still exists.) The problems with women entering high-end blue collar technical trade professions is more about systemic cultural sexism and gendered roles than it is about women just not realizing how lucrative trade work can be.

I don't disagree with Harding that women entering trade professions would be a great step toward gender equality generally, and probably earn those women a lot more than white-collar jobs as an assistant (or even a manager). What would help is first what these truck mechanics Harding points to are already doing, mentoring young women in non-traditional fields. Secondly, unions that represent those industries need to not only be free of sexism themselves, but aggressively pursue lawsuits that would discourage sexual harassment. This is happening with some larger trade unions already, but it's not as wide as it should be. Maybe then Harding's instructions to take up the toolbox rather than the curling iron will be a reality.

Comments

pet peeve-it's "plumber"

Posted by jeffreyw | May 29, 2008 12:51 PM

There's actually a great organization, Nontraditional Employment for Women (NEW), that's doing exactly this---they give free classes to show women how to enter the unionized trade professions, provide them with some training, and then help get them spaces in the apprentice programs of the trade industries. It was through NEW that my wife went into construction, where she's now working her way up the ranks as an electrician---she's still pretty low on the totem pole, and therefore the salary, but she's moving up fast, and the rewards are definitely visible on the horizon.

Surprisingly, she's had relatively (relatively!) little harassment, though our NYC environment might have something to do with it. If anything, she actually gets less trouble than other apprentices--- razzing-the-new-kid is a deep habit in the trades, but people are actually a little more nervous about treating a woman the way they would a guy. Which is definitely not to say there's no harassment, or that she isn't sometime denied opportunities because of misguided chivalry or sexism, just that there's a lot less than you might expect. Equally important, when something does happen---including inadvertent problems, like male employees changing clothes on site and forgetting that there's a lady present who might not want to see their naked ass---there's generally a lot of people rushing to shut it down.

Posted by That Fuzzy Bastard | May 29, 2008 12:51 PM

There's actually a great organization, Nontraditional Employment for Women (NEW), that's doing exactly this---they give free classes to show women how to enter the unionized trade professions, provide them with some training, and then help get them spaces in the apprentice programs of the trade industries. It was through NEW that my wife went into construction, where she's now working her way up the ranks as an electrician---she's still pretty low on the totem pole, and therefore the salary, but she's moving up fast, and the rewards are definitely visible on the horizon.

Surprisingly, she's had relatively (relatively!) little harassment, though our NYC environment might have something to do with it. If anything, she actually gets less trouble than other apprentices--- razzing-the-new-kid is a deep habit in the trades, but people are actually a little more nervous about treating a woman the way they would a guy. Which is definitely not to say there's no harassment, or that she isn't sometime denied opportunities because of misguided chivalry or sexism, just that there's a lot less than you might expect. Equally important, when something does happen---including inadvertent problems, like male employees changing clothes on site and forgetting that there's a lady present who might not want to see their naked ass---there's generally a lot of people rushing to shut it down.

Posted by That Fuzzy Bastard | May 29, 2008 12:58 PM

In fact both electricians and plumbers are highly skilled occupations that require a great deal of training.

One issue I seldom addressed is the degree to which the system to train young people (not just women) for such professions has been in decline for years. When I worked at Stanford facilities there was a union organizing campaign, barely beaten back by the Condi Rice inspired union busters, which left the shop supervisors very conflicted -- "I don't want to have to deal with a union steward every time I turn around, but it sure would be nice to get them in here to access to their training programs."

Posted by Gene O'Grady | May 29, 2008 1:18 PM

I think you miss a key point in what Kate was saying. Her piece was not all about gender, it was also about encouraging people in this country to re-examine the ways in which we classify success. She posited that not everyone, male or female, wants to or cares to receive a liberal arts degree and use that as a way to make money and pursue a career.

As a nation, we should take a vested interest in preparing young men and women to enter the working world in whatever capacity they choose. So many of the trade and manufacturing jobs in this country require a sophisticated skill set -- that many would go to school to attain and then work in the appropriate industry.

To focus Kate's topic purely on gender, I suppose reinforces the whole Broadsheet thing, but the idea is so much more broad, no pun intended, than that...I hope I live to see the day that we rethink education as a country and work toward vocational and trade schools that carry as much cache as the Ivory Tower.

Posted by CHoward | May 29, 2008 1:32 PM

I think you miss a key point in what Kate was saying. Her piece was not all about gender, it was also about encouraging people in this country to re-examine the ways in which we classify success. She posited that not everyone, male or female, wants to or cares to receive a liberal arts degree and use that as a way to make money and pursue a career.

As a nation, we should take a vested interest in preparing young men and women to enter the working world in whatever capacity they choose. So many of the trade and manufacturing jobs in this country require a sophisticated skill set -- that many would go to school to attain and then work in the appropriate industry.

To focus Kate's topic purely on gender, I suppose reinforces the whole Broadsheet thing, but the idea is so much more broad, no pun intended, than that...I hope I live to see the day that we rethink education as a country and work toward vocational and trade schools that carry as much cache as the Ivory Tower.

Posted by CHoward | May 29, 2008 1:35 PM

Congratulations. You've just finished implying that workers in blue-collar industries are sexist chauvinist pigs. And then you wonder why loyalty to the Democratic Party among working class Americans is bleeding faster than a bull at a Spanish corrida. The Democratic Party needs to focus more on the real problems of blue collar industrial workers, men and women both, and less time on the imagined woes of upper middle class "second wave feminists" or whatver.

The silliness of social liberals never ceases to impress me.

Posted by Hector | May 29, 2008 3:37 PM

"The problems with women entering high-end blue collar technical trade professions is more about systemic cultural sexism and gendered roles "

Err, not just trades. Take a gander at this article about the experience of one tech entrepreneur who transistioned from male to female, and noted:

“There is a really irritating perception that women aren’t good at technology. From a very personal perspective, and without wanting to sound arrogant, I’ve become more attractive, and it has become increasing difficult to establish credibility with male colleagues on technical and complex business areas. Once I’ve established credibility it’s OK – but sometimes it’s really hard. It’s something I’ve experienced in an unusual way in a short time span.”

"Ms Craig-Wood occasionally likes to answer calls to Memset’s technical support line and says at least a third of the male callers ask to be transferred to a man: “It makes me laugh – it’s outrageous sexism.”

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ca861e9c-1fc3-11dd-9216-000077b07658,s01=1.html?nclick_check=1

Posted by Sock Puppet of the Great Satan | May 29, 2008 4:02 PM

"Skilled trades." And the apprenticeship model -- even in its modern reduced form -- does create a certain resistance to female participation. That said, trades can be more meritocratic in gender terms than the professions, because 'doing your time'

I'd be interested in the German example here, which has traditionally separated 'academic' from trades/engineering learners at a relatively early age.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 29, 2008 4:13 PM

Hector, I've seen you write some insipid comments around these parts before, but that one sets a whole new standard for inanity.

Kay did not "imply that workers in blue-collar industries are sexist pigs." She implied that sexist attitudes and highly gendered roles are prevalent in some blue collar trades. This is roughly as groundbreaking and controversial as implying that water is wet.

It is far more demeaning and condescending to imply, as you do, that plumbers and electricians are noble savages who can't be expected to meet the same minimum workplace behavior standards as office workers. They aren't, and they can.

And it is vastly more condescending to state directly, as you do, that cultural barriers to entry into professions that pay well are not a "real problem" for blue-collar women. I suppose you base this proclamation on your wealth of experience as a female steamfitter?

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | May 29, 2008 4:19 PM

"Kate Harding over at Broadsheet asks why more women don't take up trade professions, presumably work like an electrician or plummer."

Perhaps because, on average, women aren't interested enough in becoming a plumber to know how to spell the word?

Posted by Steve Sailer | May 29, 2008 4:32 PM

Sailer, don't be such an ass. That's far fewer typos per paragraph than Matt Y's rate.

I expect most people 30 years ago would have laughed at the notion that there would be a women's professional basketball league. For God's sake, man, close the browser window, change out of your pajamas, step outside the basement where all those clipped Rushton and Jensen articles are slowly turning yellow, and go get some fresh air. The world has turned a few times since 1963.

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | May 29, 2008 4:55 PM

If you want more American women to enter blue collar trades, then the obviously logical thing to do is to cut down on illegal immigration by foreign men looking for blue collar work.

Posted by Steve Sailer | May 29, 2008 5:01 PM

Sure, illegal immigration is a problem in the unskilled trades, but we're talking about skilled and licensed tradesmen. The obviously logical thing to do is for the trade unions to actively discourage locker room antics and old-boy privileges in their workplaces.

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | May 29, 2008 5:16 PM

Speaking as a plumber, I feel it's necessary to enlighten you all with a few facts about my profession. First of all, one myth that I've run into often on these boards is the $80-100K a year plumber. No one is making anywhere that much unless they are the owner of the contracting company, and usually by that point they don't actually go out on the jobs (i.e. they are essentially a white collar office manager). Second, plumbing isn't easy. Until you've put in about five years in the trade(and often not then) you are simply no damn good. Plumbing skills may be simple tricks when taken individually, but there are about ten thousand of them, and learning them takes time, especially if the boss doesn't care to invest any time or money in training their personnel (and of course none of them do). So outside the union system a plumber must be essentially self-educated at his own expense, oftentimes must buy his own tools, and in the right-to-work states use his own truck (paying for gas, insurance, etc out of a static wage). Furthermore, many contractors use temp labor to exempt themselves from their obligation to provide even a nominal commitment to their employees' health care or retirement (remember, a working plumber is usually pretty used up by the age of 60-bad knees, arthritis, badly-healed broken bones, etc.) And of course the Mexicans are filling up a lot of the "helper" type jobs that used to be a young person's path into the profession, so I'm afraid I can't look at the idea of any further influx of unskilled, wage-diluting, accommodation-demanding, physically weaker individuals into the profession with perfect open-minded equanimity.

Posted by vivisfugue | May 29, 2008 5:42 PM

And of course the Mexicans are filling up a lot of the "helper" type jobs that used to be a young person's path into the profession, so I'm afraid I can't look at the idea of any further influx of unskilled, wage-diluting, accommodation-demanding, physically weaker individuals into the profession with perfect open-minded equanimity.
Posted by vivisfugue

Far more urgent than getting feminists into physically tough blue collar trades so they can be a 2nd-wage earner in a family - is getting black males displaced by Latin trades labor back into the game so that they become marriagable and can support the kids they father...rather than us taxpayers.
The legal and illegal immigrant mass invasion has displaced blacks from those "step-up" the jobs rung ladder, careers. In some cases, completely, in industries black males once had growing numbers and fairly well-paying, steady jobs. As masons, plumbers, roofers, meat packers, truckers, construction. In some cities, blacks are replaced entirely outside the government jobs from the trades, with 25-40% unemployment levels in male blacks aged 18-35 in some communities.

Worse, instead of the Gov't jobs sector really helping out the black community, black males lose out to black females in jobs as well as being the targets of welfare largess. Females who get their hiring manager "two-fer" bomus points and are perceived as more stable, if not as undemanding and productive as black males. Look in a gov't office. Chances are high that black female employees will outnumber black men in all positions, while still more government employees are paid to provide daycare or afterschool sitting sevices for the kids of such women until they return after 5 o'clock - as the undesired, "useless biologicals" hang on corners without hope or prospects.....

Posted by chris ford | May 29, 2008 6:50 PM

Chris, don't help.

Posted by Vivisfugue | May 29, 2008 8:16 PM

I'm a union cement mason. Very few women have the strength to screed concrete for 8 hours. It's back breaking work.

With all of the "diversity" nowadays, where will white-Christian heterosexual males be able to work?

I was working a job at a big Pharmaceutical company's office complex. I went to lunch at their cafeteria. Walking by the auditorium I noticed a sign that said ... "White men: Learn how diversity can be beneficial for you." What a joke.

In the cafeteria, there were very few white men. Most looked to be from the Indian sub-continent.

White men lose out on affirmitive action, govt jobs, and minoritiy owned construction companies get dibs on contracts. Now white men will be fighting for construction jobs.

Where will my sons work? Probably the US Army. Lotsa pale faces getting killed over there.

Posted by del | May 30, 2008 12:42 AM

In my experience, electrians are probably the most forward moving on providing equal opportunity to women, I have some guesses on why this would be, but no facts. (There's an old electrician joke, "Do you know why electricians are closest to God? Because only God and electricans can make light.")

Plumbers, carpenters, ironworkers, masons, laborers, remain discriminatory trades, in my experience. To suggest the problem of sexism or racism within the trades is because of illegal immigrants is preposterous. There are lots of locals have not been affected by "illegals" that are as sexist and as racist as those that have.

Why don't more women going into the trades? They are often overtly and covertly discouraged. If they depend on a union hall for jobs, they are often given the least desirable jobs (farthest away, worst working conditions, worst boss, most dangerous), shorter term jobs, or sent to hiring agents who suddenly have no openings (but find them when a white guy shows up). Many women and men of color in the trades find reliable work only on the few federally funded jobs that mandate affirmative hiring. They end up all competing for a very small slice of the constuction pie. For carpenters, this is often highway and bridge construction or repair, that involves form work in the elements (in the winter until 30 degrees - concrete will continue to cure if properly covered) 8 feet from dangerous traffic or hanging from harnesses under bridges over water, while the "cushy" long-term inside work is farmed out to white guys with a lot of senority or young white guys with none ("del" and his sons feel entitled to these jobs as part of their white male legacy, and by in large, they get them.) For many women in the trades, unless an older white guy takes you under his wing, your life is hard unrelenting slogging, that never lets up, no matter if you've been in the trade for 3 years or 30.

Posted by Tumblina | May 31, 2008 4:57 AM