Women’s Work

What the women of China earn， what they deserve， and what theyre missing

“?半邊天”遭遇“天花板”：實現(xiàn)職場性別平等，從改變社會觀念開始

Guidelines， laws， statutes， policy statements—the structure for female equality in the workplace is there. But is it working？ China suffers many of the same ethical and practical tribulations of gender equality in the office as elsewhere in the world， but the Chinese workplace is a very special monster. As China builds for a century of success， the concept of equal pay for equal work for women seems to take a back seat， and trumping traditional gender roles can be difficult， especially in a newly-urbanized economy that hasnt quite settled. And， of course， beyond the question of discrimination is one of harassment; changing laws mean nothing when minds remain stubbornly stagnant. The 21st century economy has been defined by the “Chinese miracle”， and the women who shaped it want whats due.

Invoice： 1/2 Sky

If youre a woman in China， statistically， you earn about two-thirds of the pay your male peers get—that is， if you live in a city. In the countryside that proportion drops to just over half. Those figures come from a survey by the All China Womens Federation， though one has to wonder about figures from an organization which has been pilloried by some academics for perpetuating the “l(fā)eftover woman” trope （that any woman in her late 20s is reaching a marriage use-by date）.

All of this illustrates the point that at both an institutional and individual level China remains very much a mans world—and this is very apparent in workplaces. However， the ways in which gender issues affect salaries can be complicated.

First and foremost， when calculating salary differences， it is important to consider the jobs themselves. While a company may point to the fact its female workforce receives a salary calculated by the same standards as the male employees， it may overlook the number of women in well-paid roles. The World Economic Forums Global Gender Gap report in 2015 found that only 18 percent of Chinese companies have women in top management roles.

There are， of course， industries in which women are well represented. A 2015 International Labor Organization （ILO） report focused on the Asia Pacific found that in China women had come to dominate four service sectors： hotels and catering， financial intermediation， education， and health and social welfare.

But are these really the areas women should feel lucky to dominate？

“The analysis of average earnings by occupation and sector suggests a stronger likelihood on the existence of a gender pay gap，” the report notes. “In hotels and catering services and the health， social securities， and social welfare sectors—two of the four female-dominated sectors in 2012—the average （annual） earnings for business service personnel lay below average at 29，500 RMB and 37，600 RMB in 2013.” For reference， the national average was 45，100 RMB.

No doubt， things are in many ways better than they were in the past. Chinas urbanization process is an economic boon to most. But it would seem the benefits of this societal transition havent been spread evenly. The ILO report noted that “while the move out of agricultural work may have resulted in some improvements in the earnings of women and men， women tend to dominate in the lowest-paying occupations.”

As Lü Pin， a feminist media commentator and activist points out， these kinds of gender discrepancies are difficult because they go beyond any easily identifiable root causes. “For those of us trying to make change， I dont think pinning down the cause is the most important thing. Were concerned with how to stop these [inequalities] from happening.”

“With regard to the pay disparity， its definitely linked to basic gender-based discrimination， but institutions can make rules to prevent discrimination， that goes without question. In other countries they also have such rules， and they have to consider many factors，” Lü says.

Despite the fact that Chinas constitution specifically prohibits gender discrimination in hiring， the nuts and bolts of this policy prove difficult to implement and often result in misguided policies designed to “protect” women which instead exclude them.

The extent to which discrimination is responsible for the persistent gender pay gap is contentious. Many scholars agree discrimination plays a role， but it is incredibly difficult to make any concrete assertions from the available data. Some reports say it is the overwhelming cause， others downplay its significance.

Worryingly， there are reasons to think the situation might be getting worse.

The ILO report states that despite some legislative achievements， “in recent years， there appears to be a re-emergence of gender stereotypes related to womens and mens roles in early capitalist or market economy societies， i.e. men as breadwinners and women as caregivers.”

This is supported by plenty of casual observations. Simply by opening a newspaper or pulling up an employment-wanted section of a website， anyone can come across a wide array of advertisements for jobs that specifically request men or women for positions that ought to have no gender requirement. For years the proportion of advertisements specifying male applicants had been on the decrease， but in 2010 that trend bottomed out and it started to rise once again. The ILO report notes that its particularly pronounced for new graduates and corresponds with a tougher job market， which most economists are predicting for China over the coming few years.

For quite some time， there have been reasons to cast doubt on the assumption that economic development would automatically mean improvements in womens rights. In 2011， the All China Womens Federation released the results of a large survey conducted alongside Chinas bureau of statistics. In the section on gender attitudes， there were some encouraging findings： 83 percent agreed that women were just as capable as men， and 88 percent believed that men should shoulder some of the housework. 86 percent felt that there needed to be proactive moves to encourage gender equity.

But then， notably， 61 percent of men and 54 percent of women felt that “the field for men is in public and the domain for women is within the household.”

This result is particularly concerning when measured against the results of that question when it was asked ten years earlier. Compared to a decade earlier， 7.7 percent more men in 2011 believed that a womans place is in the home， and the number of women expressing that same view had increased by 4.4 percent.

As Chinas population ages and society finds itself lacking in young labor—the one-child policy having already fallen by the wayside—it seems likely that pressures on women to give birth and care for the elderly will increase， with a corresponding impact on their earning potential.

One concluding thought to keep independent-minded Chinese women up late at night： will Chinese attitudes toward career-focused “l(fā)eftover women” become more or less forgiving when jobs for men are scarcer and the economy demands more babies？ The answer， hopefully， is not as simple as it sounds.

- David Dawson

Hidden Harassment

In Our Time， journalist Susan Brownmillers memoir of the early American feminist movement， recounts a surreal period when society was becoming aware of sexual harassment but stopped just short of giving it a name. A Cornell University seminar， where female attendees shared personal experiences of unwanted sexual advances at work， ended with an eerie realization that “to a person， every one of us…h(huán)ad experienced something like this at some point…And none of us had told anyone before.”

Later， the attendees tried to draft an appeal for an ex-staff member who was being denied unemployment benefits because she was embarrassed and at a loss to describe the experience that caused her to quit： “We wanted something that embraced a full range of subtle and unsubtle persistent behaviors…Sexual harassment！ Instantly we agreed. Thats what it was.”

These lessons from a 1970s American classroom find strange resonance in the legal and activist landscape of workplace sexual harassment in China. Outlawed—though only against women—in 2005， sexual harassment is stated by Chinese national and provincial regulation as something employers need to “take necessary measures to prevent and stop” or else be liable for penalties and fines. However， most of these regulations lack a clear definition of what constitutes either “sexual harassment” or “necessary measures”.

In a survey in 2008 of workers in Beijing， Guangzhou， and Hangzhou by Beijings Maple Womens Psychological Counseling Center， around 95 percent of respondents of both sexes had heard of the term “性騷擾” （sexual harassment）. According to the survey report， the term entered the Chinese lexicon from the West in the 1990s and is considered a synonym for an older term， “耍流氓” （hooliganism）， which was actually a crime in China between 1979 and 1997.

The survey results reveal uneven understandings in the definition of sexual harassment. While over 70 percent of respondents agreed with the statement that the victims feeling of discomfort is equally important as the actions of the perpetrator in determining whether sexual harassment has taken place， 25 percent did not agree. More than 90 percent of respondents agreed that “l(fā)anguage” and “[physical] actions” could constitute sexual harassment， but only 60 percent of men and 68 percent of women considered “attitude” and “media”， such as sharing lewd photos and text messages， to be sexual harassment.

Around 30 percent of women and 40 percent of men who have met with sexual harassment have done nothing in response， with half of this sample believing that to take action was “to make a big deal out of nothing”.

The lack of a clear definition has led to confusion for both employee and employer on what behaviors are not acceptable and could be brought to the attention of employers or other authorities. A 2009 survey of four enterprises by NGO Women Watch China showed that only 34.4 percent had filed a complaint against the companys human resources department， but that 50 percent filed complaints in cases of “serious harassment”. The news media also highlights cases of sexual assault and rape when discussing sexual harassment and potential steps for employees to take， creating further confusion on whether more subtle or infrequent sexual behaviors could also be brought to employers attention.

Admittedly， the news media might be hamstrung by the fact that complaints about more subtle forms of sexual harassment dont tend to make it to the courts， much less the attention of the public. In court cases where an employee has sued the employer for failing to stop sexual harassment， or punishing the employee for making a complaint， it falls to the victim to prove the harassment. The first successful example of such a case in Guangdong Province， in which a worker named Liu Yan （alias， also known as Ms. A or Lu） sued a Guangzhou tire company for dismissing her after she complained about harassment from a supervisor， took place in 2009. “It was actually more like a case of sexual assault，” said Geoffrey Crothall， communication director of the Hong Kong-based China Labour Bulletin. “It happened at an office party， and someone actually took a photograph of the harassment and assault in progress.”

Three photographs showing Liu being manhandled by her manager， plus recordings from the meeting where she brought the incident to the companys attention， were enough to win Liu 3，000 RMB in compensation from the company. She did not get her job back， nor were the damages enough to cover her legal fees， and she was branded a “troublemaker” when applying for new jobs. Yet her case is considered one of the success stories; according to the workers surveyed by Women Watch China， most victims just choose to forbear or resign.

As for the blue collar sector and migrant workers， a 2010 study of female factory workers by Guangzhous Sunflower Center revealed that no respondent who has suffered sexual harassment have sought help from their employer， trade union， womens federation， or the police.

In the aftermath of Lius case， the city of Guangzhou also updated its “Regulations for the Protection of Womens Rights” with an outline of behaviors that counted as sexual harassment， as well as first known list in Chinese regulation of recommended actions for employers to take after receiving a complaint. It is unclear， however， whether these recommendations correctly pegged the causes of the problem： the suggestions include “removing the employee filing the complaint from under the supervisor about whom the compliant is served”， “replace wooden doors with glass doors to the offices of supervisor who is the subject of complaint”， and “encourage open-plan offices”.

These simple fixes could also make things even harder for the victim. In 2014， a plaintiff in Zhejiang Province actually lost her lawsuit against her company for severance pay they owed her after she had to resign due to sexual harassment. The court ruled that the company was not liable to pay because they handled her initial complaint as best they could—in this case， contacting police and collecting video and physical evidence， actually more of an effort than a glass door.

Around 57 percent of the Maple Centers respondents believed that having more specific laws against sexual harassment would be an effective deterrence; around 18 percent preferred to have better institutions for handling complaints， and only around seven percent recommended better education about sexual harassment as the solution. Both Guangzhou and these respondents preference to straightforward solutions over attacking the causes may be a pragmatic choice.

“Most male bosses and coworkers have absolutely no idea， for instance， that its not acceptable to make lewd comments about female workers clothing or appearance， unless its spelled out in black and white，” Crothall said. “But the authorities can make an effort to make sure they are aware what the specific disadvantages are， what isnt acceptable. Once thats done there should be penalties and employers have to be held to that standard.” - Hatty Liu

Getting?Rights Wrong

Making her closing statement at a session of the Guangzhou Intermediate Peoples Court on August 19， lawyer Lu Miaoqing outlined what she believed was the obstacle to ending gender-based inequality in the workplace in China. “I told the court， I admired my client for making this [complaint]， because rights for women have always been something we ourselves have had to push for，” Lu recounted to TWOC. “Chinas laws on the national level have always emphasized gender equality， but there needs to be a system of appropriate institutions and guidelines to realize it.”

Lus client， Gao Xiao （alias）， is the plaintiff in a gender discrimination lawsuit against Guangzhous Huishijia Restaurant， which refused to consider her application for the position of apprentice chef because she was female. According to Lu， stories like Gaos are the starting end of a series of persistent and often institutionalized gender-based barriers that follow women in China throughout their professional lives. From discriminatory hiring to sexual harassment at work， unequal pay to an unequal retirement age， gender-based employment discrimination in China today is informed by a mix of Communist legacy and traditionalist social attitudes， underwritten by contradictions between policy， regulation， and society.

According to the ILO， China as of 2014 had one of the worlds highest female labor force participation rates （LFPR） at 63.9 percent. A 2015 ILO working paper attributes Chinas high female LFPR to policies enacted during the Communist era; equal rights for men and women “in all areas” of life were enshrined in the first constitution of the Peoples Republic of China. During the Cultural Revolution， under Mao Zedongs famous slogan， “women hold up half the sky，” female LFPR rose to an estimated 90 percent in urban areas and was supported by state assistance in childcare， education， and even laundry.

In these fondly remembered heydays of egalitarianism， traditional social structures and gender roles， families lack of investment in female education disqualified women from many leadership roles in work units. Women were often assigned to lower-paying， low-skilled industries that conformed to their traditional roles in the domestic sphere： textiles， canteen， and laundries.

In the period after Chinas market reforms， competition for employment became intense， and the situation for womens employment worsened. According to a study from the Indiana University School of Law， the proportion of female workers fell to one third of the total labor force in non-agricultural sectors in the early years of the reform. Females in leadership positions acquired during the Cultural Revolution were transferred or forced to retire， and women lost jobs frequently in heavy labor sectors under the justification of “natural sex differences”. Textiles， healthcare， and other traditionally “feminine” occupations remained open to women.

Hailed by state media as a landmark regulatory achievement when it was passed in 1988， and again when it was revised in 2012， Chinas “Regulation Concerning the Labor Protection of Female Staff and Workers” is a post-Reform era example of when the progressive language of policies is overwritten by an inadequate system of implementation and by an enduring fixation on gender differences. The 2012 version of the regulations grant female workers rights such as a maternity leave of 98 days and prohibit dismissing or reducing the salary of workers during the maternity period. However， according to the UN Human Rights Council， the practice of dismissing pregnant workers remains widespread. Companies can also skirt the regulation by refusing to hire women at all or hiring only those who have already had children， while women can be forced to resign anyway due to inadequate childcare options.

The regulation entitles women to complain to the local labor department in case of violation of their rights， but according to Lu， the labor department will not typically get involved in gender discrimination disputes “where an employer-employee relationship has not been established，” such as in all cases of discriminatory hiring.

In the absence of a national-level regulatory body responsible for equal employment opportunity， local labor departments are the only institutions that can process such complaints outside of the courts. Where such a relationship does exist， the employee has little incentive to complain due to fear of losing her job or taking away time from work.

The regulations also enshrine long-held prejudices about womens suitability for certain types of work. In a section called “Sectors of Labor Forbidden to Female Workers” the regulations prohibit women from employment in mine pits， “physical labor of the fourth degree of intensity specified by the state”， or labor involving lifting more than 20 kilograms of weight more than six times an hour; lumber work， construction， and working on electrical poles are no longer closed to women as of the 2012 revision. Menstruating and pregnant women are also prohibited from work involving high altitudes and low temperatures.

According to the Southern Metropolis Dailys account of Gaos first court hearing in 2015， Gao submitted photos of herself performing physical labor in the kitchen to challenge notions that women cant handle the physical requirement of a chefs job. Gao told TWOC?that until she began her lawsuit， she had no idea that there were regulations that legally discriminated against women based on their perceived abilities. “Its like having your parents tell you what you can and cant do，” she said. “If the restaurant is concerned about the physical aspects of the job， they can say so in the ad instead of assuming women who are weaker， and I can decide for myself if Im up for it.”

Moving from physical to white-collar and intellectual work， traditional perceptions about gender can limit opportunities for women in the workplace even without help from the labor regulations， mostly through the real and perceived obligations of women in childcare and the domestic sphere. In an earlier lawsuit in 2015， Hangzhous New Oriental Cooking School compensated job applicant Huang Rong for running a “male-only” ad for a clerical position partly on the justification that the job involves travel， which women are stereotyped as being unsuited or unwilling to do due to obligations at home.

Studies from the China Academy of Science （CAS） from 2007 to 2013 indicate that females comprise about one-third of the workforce in science and technological professions nationwide， and tend to be far less successful than their male colleagues： only five percent of CAS members and 4.6 percent of chief scientists under the governments National Basic Research Program are female. Male scientists tend to also be successful in accruing grants and publication titles before the age of 36， as female scientists still tend to take on child-raising responsibilities in their homes.

To combat these societal expectations， the National Natural Science Foundation of China extended the maximum age of eligibility for female applicants of its Young Scientists Funds to 40， compared with 35 for men. The CAS is also calling for stipulations of gender equality to be written into the nations laws about science. However， so far these measures can only mitigate the effects rather than attack the root causes of gender discrimination that survived generations of revolution and are coded into the culture， often even in the laws.

These challenges are summed up by Gaos demands in the second hearing of her case this August， after coming away from the first hearing last year with 2，000 RMB in court-ordered compensation from Huishijia Restaurant. “We felt like the penalty barely scratched the surface of what it cost Gao Xiao file her lawsuit， isnt harsh enough to prevent the company from doing this again， and isnt enough to encourage other job-seekers to go to the courts in the future，” Lu Miaoqing said. “Gender discrimination is a society-wide problem in China， rooted in tradition maybe， but enabled by the disjunction between progressive policies and lack of enforcement and legal penalty.”

“Second， we want a written apology from the restaurant，” Lu said.

“Broadcasting a naturalized view on gender discrimination on the web is harmful to society， and we want that to be acknowledged before all society.”

- H.L.