Dad is rewarded – mom is punished

For men, parentage has little effect on their wage-level. But married men, on average, earn more than unmarried men.

”The Male Marital Wage premium” and ”the Motherhood Wage penalty” are among the most important finds in the project, "Inclusion of women, ethnic minorities and the elderly in occupational life. Hirings, positions, wages and career courses." Sociologists Trond Petersen and Geir Høgsnes have looked at official statistics on wages for men and women in relation to information on gender, education, children, marital status, country of birth and estimated work experience. According to Høgsnes, the large selection and the method provide completely new information on what causes wage differentiation.

For example: that married men earn more than unmarried men is not a result of the actual marriage, as previously believed.

– One has previously thought that these men became better workers because they had wives to iron their shirts and prepare their lunches. However, our findings show that the married men on average have higher wages even before they get married, as well as after a divorce. This suggests that the cause of the wage–marriage connection is that the same kind of quality that ensures high wages also increases the likelihood of getting married, says Høgsnes, who stresses that this only counts for men.

Women's punishment

Even though marriage has little effect on what a woman earns, having children has a clearly negative effect. Motherhood's wage penalty may be the greatest hindrance for equality in occupational life, according to Høgsnes. The problem is tightly connected with parental leave and part-time work by women when the children are young.

– As long as most mothers take almost all of the parental leave, the wage differences are essentially legislated in the parental leave arrangement, as having children entails loss of work experience and of professional relationships for women, while it does not do the same for men. The time outside of occupational life decreases the mothers’ chances of promotion, and thereby of higher salaries, he explains. In addition, a lot of Norwegian women work part time when they have young children.

Not discrimination

Høgsnes and his colleagues think that their findings show that the public debate puts too much emphasis on direct wage discrimination as the cause for wage differentiation.

– Given that they work in the same position, in the same business, meaning the same employer, mothers and non-mothers, unmarried and married, and men and women receive approximately the same pay. There is little that suggests that the employers discriminate, clarifies Høgsnes.

The differences in pay is primarily a result of differences in positions.

– It is still mostly men who become leaders, while women end up further down the ladder. Mothers have a decreased likelihood of promotions compared to women without children, while more married than unmarried men have management positions, says Høgsnes.

– If one is going to work towards gender equality, one has to properly define the problem. If one presupposes that cruel employers are the cause of wage inequality, the policies are bound to be mistaken, he adds.

Mothers have less to offer

– But is it not possible that the employers discriminate when they chose who to promote?

– It is certainly possible that some have prejudices against mothers and unmarried men, and are therefore less likely to promote them. The material does not give us a foundation to answer this.

Høgsnes thinks that it is just as probable that objective performance evaluations are responsible for women coming off worse.

– It is clear that one can sacrifice less for one's work if one has primary care for children. The kindergartens have the same opening hours that shops had thirty years ago, and that makes it difficult to be a constantly present manager, something that many businesses demand.

– How can one achieve greater equality in this area?

– A more equitable division of parental leave would probably have an effect. But then perhaps some other goods would be lost.

– Like what?

– The solution that provides equality on a macro level is not necessarily the best for each individual family. I think it is relatively rare that the division of labor comes about by the man saying: "Now you will take the whole leave and work part-time, so that I can go and work overtime." The spouses discuss and come to an agreement. It would be problematic if the state were to overrun this, claims Høgsnes.

Some positive development

– But isn’t mild pressure in the private sphere sometimes necessary to achieve political goals?

– Do not forget that drastic changes have already occurred in this field. Our numbers go from 1980 to 1997, and in this period women's employment became increasingly similar to that of the men. Unlike the past, it is now rare that women leave the workforce permanently when they have children. Women's part-time work was also drastically reduced during the 18-year period we researched. Even though the wage gap between women and men is still large, there are a lot of positive developments in different areas.

– The family politics have also brought results. Won't more of the same, such as obligatory division of parental leave, solve the problem of equal pay?

– Again; there is a limit on where the government should get involved. Regardless, motherhood's wage penalty is just one part of the problem. The most important explanation for wage differences is the gender-divided labor market, and the most effective solution would be to increase the wage level of typical women's work in the governmental sector, asserts Høgsnes.