Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Gender, Class and Power pp 1–17Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2530 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter makes the case for the book’s research: over 40 years after the UK passed the Equal Pay Act 1970, the gender pay gap (GPG) is still widespread and particularly significant in the British printing industry. The researcher’s former role as equality policy adviser (EPA) for the Graphical, Paper and Media Union (GPMU) drove the research design, with a view to comprehensively identifying barriers in work organisation and pay processes that prevent women in printing achieving equal pay. Utilising both historical and contemporary analysis, the importance of power relations and access to power resources is captured in the model that she adapted and expanded, based on Bradley (Gender and Power in the Workplace, Macmillan Press, 1999), and which is applied to analyse barriers to equality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this book ‘communications’ is a loose term denoting recognisable groups of workers such as those in publishing or information technology. However, this work is also being undertaken by customers through desktop publishing, as is made clear in Chap. 5.

References

  • Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: A Theory of Gendered Organizations. Gender and Society, 4(2), 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acker, J. (1998). The Future of ‘Gender and Organizations’: Connections and Boundaries. Gender, Work and Organization, 5(4), 195–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acker, J. (2006). Inequality Regimes: Gender, Class, and Race in Organizations. Gender and Society, 20(4), 441–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, H. (1996). Fractured Identities: Changing Patterns of Inequality. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, H. (1999). Gender and Power in the Workplace. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, H. (2007). Gender. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundock, C. J. (1958). The National Union of Printing, Bookbinding and Paper Workers. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, C. (1983). Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colgan, F., & Ledwith, S. (1996). Sisters Organising – Women and Their Trade Unions. In S. Ledwith & F. Colgan (Eds.), Women in Organisations. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, P. H. (1990). Black Feminist Thought, Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D., Knights, D., & Collinson, M. (1990). Managing to Discriminate. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and Power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, C., Garnsey, E., & Rubery, J. (1984). Payment Structures and Smaller Firms: Women’s Employment in Segmented Labour Markets. Research Paper No. 48. London: Department of Employment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 12–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickens, L. (1997). Gender, Race and Employment Equality in Britain: Inadequate Strategies and the Role of Industrial Relations Actors. Industrial Relations Journal, 28(4), 282–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R., Reich, M., & Gordon, D. (1975). Labor Market Segmentation. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, S. (1970). The Dialectic of Sex. London: The Women’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, D., & Williams, L. (2010). The Past, Present and Future of Workplace Equality Agendas: Problems of Intersectionality in Theory and Practice. In P. Blyton, E. Heery, & P. Turnbull (Eds.), Reassessing the Employment Relationship. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2008). From Redistribution to Recognition: Dilemmas of Justice in a “Postsocialist” Age. In K. Olson (Ed.), Adding Insult to Injury: Nancy Fraser Debates Her Critics. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gennard, J., & Bain, P. (1995). SOGAT: A History of the Society of Graphical and Allied Trades. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfried, H. (1993). Notes Towards the Development of a Liberatory Research Project. In K. Forrester & C. Thorne (Eds.), Trade Unions and Social Research. Aldershot: Avebury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. G. (1987). Feminism and Methodology. Indiana: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann, H. (1981). The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More Progressive Union. In L. Sargent (Ed.), Women and Revolution: A Discussion of the Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism. Boston: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, G. (1997). The Industrial Relations of Appraisal: The Case of Teachers. Industrial Relations Journal, 28(3), 206–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hesse-Biber, S., & Yaiser, M. (2004). Feminist Perspectives on Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holgate, J., Hebson, G., & McBride, A. (2006). Why Gender and ‘Difference’ Matters: A Critical Appraisal of Industrial Relations Research. Industrial Relations Journal, 37(4), 310–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledwith, S. (1991). Sweet Talk, Soft Deals? – Gender and Workplace Industrial Relations. Working Papers in Economics, Business and Management No. 35. London: Polytechnic of North London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledwith, S., & Colgan, F. (2002). Tackling Gender, Diversity and Trade Union Democracy. In F. Colgan & S. Ledwith (Eds.), Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledwith, S., & Hansen, L. L. (2013). Gendering and Diversifying Trade Union Leadership. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledwith, S., Hayes, M., Joyce, P., & Gulati, A. (1985). Women in SOGAT ’82: Report of a Research Project into the Role of Women in the Union Carried Out by an Independent Research Team from the Polytechnic of North London. Essex: SOGAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letherby, G. (2003). Feminist Theory in Research and Practice. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lown, J. (1983). Not So Much a Factory, More a Form of Patriarchy: Gender and Class During Industrialisation. In E. Gamarnikow et al. (Eds.), Gender, Class and Work. London: Heinemann Educational Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A Radical View. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McBride, A. (2001). Gender Democracy in Trade Unions. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall, L. (2005). The Complexity of Intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millet, K. (1971). Sexual Politics. London: Virago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musson, A. E. (1954). The Typographical Association. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe, A. (1996). John Gennard and Pater Bain – A History of the Society of Graphical and Allied Trades. Historical Studies in Industrial Relations, 2, 184–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe, A. (2003). The National Agreement in the Printing Industry – The Exception to Test the Rule. PhD Thesis Unpublished, Keele University, Staffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowbotham, S. (1982). The Trouble with ‘Patriarchy’. In M. Evanston (Ed.), The Woman Question. London: Fontana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2000). Feminism Facing Industrial Relations in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(2), 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walby, S. (1986). Patriarchy at Work. London: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walby, S. (1988). Gender Segregation at Work. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, R., & McKersie, R. (1965). A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yancy Martin, P. (2003). “Said and Done” Versus “Saying and Doing”: Gendering Practices and Practicing Gender at Work. Gender and Society, 17(3), 342–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Keele Management School, Keele University, Keele, UK

    Tricia Dawson

Authors
  1. Tricia Dawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dawson, T. (2018). Introduction. In: Gender, Class and Power. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58594-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation