Women and Public Service

Barriers, Challenges and Opportunities

Mohamad G. Alkadry, Leslie E Tower

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9780765631022
• eBook ISBN: 9781317451907
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Nationalism & Patriotism
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book tackles the challenges that women face in the workplace generally and in the public sector particularly. While Women and Public Service spends time identifying and describing the problems that women faced in the past, it pays special attention to identifying possible remedies to these problems, and also surveys progress made in recent decades. The authors present the challenge of accommodating women in public sector organisations as both a fairness issue and also a human resources matter, as a fundamental prerequisite for recruiting the best and brightest talent.

Key content coverage:

• The representation of women in public organisations, including occupational, agency and position level segregation
• Issues of pay equity--legislation, equal worth measures, and the serious links between the issue of representation and equal pay
• Special issues facing women in their workplace, including institutional climate, workplace violence, sexual harassment, social costs of career progression, and family-friendly policies.

1

From Representation to Diversity: The Road Ahead

---

---

Women should be properly represented in public service organizations because that is the right thing to do, and because their presence in these organizations is critical for the success of policy implementation. This is not only a statement of principle. This chapter argues that it is rather a statement of fact. Representation in general, and representation of women and minorities in particular, has been linked to the success of policymaking and policy implementation by many scholars in the fields of public policy and public administration. It is fair for women to have equal representation because (a) women are entitled to the same political rights as men, including in competing for public service jobs, and (b) women constitute more than half of the recipients of public services.

In this chapter, we address the fundamental questions of equality, representation, and diversity. Although the answers might seem obvious to many, it is very important to articulate why the representation of women in public service organizations is critical to the ability of organizations to perform their day-to-day tasks. It is also important to tackle the issue of representation of women and the move from “passive representation” to “active representation,” to “issue representation” in the context of representative bureaucracy. In this chapter, we make a case for an effective role for women in the running of public service organizations. We also present a discussion of work-life issues, particularly as they affect women and women’s organizational life. Finally, this chapter discusses diversity and implicit bias theories.

From Diversity to Representation

What does diversity mean? Generally, diversity is respect for individuals of different characteristics such as color, race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, or way of thinking. A diverse organization mirrors the diversity in the population and provides a workplace that is friendly to different lifestyles and ideas. A diverse organization is not only a demographically diverse place in terms of sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or other characteristics. It is also a place where all ideas are respected and represented. And, it is an organization where the capability to see the world can be seen from multiple perspectives.

For many decades, popular culture has supported the idea that organizations are populated and run by the “good old boys.” The good old boys are usually people who think alike, have similar values, and often are alike in terms of race, gender, class, and ethnicity. Such an organization is homogeneous, not diverse. Conflict is minimal, but creativity in problem solving is impeded by pressure to conform.

A homogeneous workplace is associated with two fundamental problems based on arguments related to equity and consumerism: An equity-based argument charges that there is injustice in excluding segments of society because they are different. A consumerist-based argument holds that individuals of a single sex or race have a limited ability to understand and solve the complex problems of a diverse citizenry. Therefore, from a normative principled equity perspective and from a more practical consumerist perspective, organizations serve their diverse customers better if they mirror the diversity of their citizens.

The following two sections explore the equity-based argument and the consumerist-based argument for diversity. The goal of these two sections is to make the case that diversity is important not only for political reasons but also for the effective provision of services. Following these two sections, we discuss the issue of representative bureaucracy—passive and active—and how demographic representation may or may not lead to the desired diversity outcomes.

Equity-Based Arguments for Diversity

Beginning with the founding fathers of the American republic, legitimacy of the administrative state has been linked to the concept of popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty is the idea that citizens are the fundamental source of political power. Because political power is derived from “the will of the people,” or what is popular, citizens play a central role in decisions that affect them. Under this premise, the legitimacy of the political system is uncompromised as long as elected officials are making decisions on behalf of the electorate.

Under the politics–administration dichotomy advanced by Woodrow Wilson in 1887, the people exercise their rights by electing officials who in turn play a central role in making policies mandated by the citizens. Administrators focus on the efficient delivery of services, while politicians make political policy decisions. Politicians make the policy, while politicians execute and implement these policies. Over time, questions have arisen about whether the political will of the people is being adequately achieved through the election of representatives. In addition, questions have surfaced about the feasibility of separating politics from administration. Starting in the 1970s, and largely in response to the civil rights movement, administrative scholars have also looked at representation in nonelected institutions as a way to augment representation through politically elected offices.

Influence of Public Administrators

Wilson’s (1887) politics-administration dichotomy notwithstanding, administrative organizations today play a fundamental policy role through input in legislation, rule making, and policy implementation. For years, public affairs research focused only on the administrative role in policy implementation. However, and increasingly in the past few decades, administrative scholars have been exploring the role of administrators in the legislative and rule-making scenes.

Input in Legislation. Administrators often participate in and influence legislative policy through their participation in hearings and sometimes directly in writing legislation for elected bodies. As an example, immediately following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress passed the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Act) Act of 2001. The USA PATRIOT Act was drafted almost entirely by officials of the U.S. Department of Justice. Within forty-eight hours of its introduction in committees, both houses of Congress passed the legislation without any amendments. Administrators held the expertise in the area of counterterrorism and they effectively made the policy. The administrative action might have been understandable given the circumstances surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001. While administrators do not usually influence most legislation to this extent, they tend to influence most legislation to some degree. The famous iron triangle of policymaking includes unelected public officials, interest groups/lobbyists, and elected congressional committee members. If the three groups are in agreement, legislation will likely have a smooth ride to passage.

Rule Making. Administrators play a central policy role in public policy through the process of rule making. At the federal level, rules help administrators to implement public laws passed by Congress and signed by the president. At the state and local levels, some form of rule making also takes place. These rules are very important in creating policy because administrators participate in interpreting legislative will and laws into actionable rules. After the 2010 midterm election in which Democrats lost their majority in the federal House of Representatives, many analysts and media pundits suggested that the executive branch would turn to making policy through rule making, particularly in relation to the newly passed health-care law (Patient Protections and Affordable Care Act of 2010). Soon thereafter, we witnessed a national debate about requiring insurance companies and employees to cover contraception. The administrative actions are part of the rule-making stage of policymaking. This is a testament to the importance of this rule-making stage in the process of making and implementing policy.

Policy Implementation. Administrators implement policies. Policy does not interact with citizens, but administrators do, as they implement laws and regulations. Over the years many have written about the roles of street-level bureaucrats in influencing policy through implementation. Many scholars have argued that policy is indeed made during implementation. This dates back to the famous Friedrich-Finer debate, which took place in the 1930s, about the role of discretion in policy implementation. The debate was carried forward by such scholars as Lipsky (1980) in his prominent book Street-Level Bureaucracy, in which he argues that administrative action is more responsive to the situations that administrators face in day-to-day policy implementation than it is to the policy itself. Administrators, sometimes, though not always, choose responsiveness at the expense of compliance with policy.

---

Table 1.1
Definitions of Representative Democracy and Representative Bureaucracy

Concept	Definition
Representative democracy	Founded in the concept of popular sovereignty and an important foundation in the American republic form of government, representative democracy refers to the electoral process of selecting representatives by citizens. These representatives, according to this concept, will represent the citizens in the process of making policy.
Representative bureaucracy	Founded in the realization that nonelected administrators play a major role in policymaking and implementation, representative bureaucracy refers to the representation of diverse societal groups in the administrative organizations of government. Representative bureaucracy is rooted in the post-civil rights movement era, and is also often associated with the intellectual heritage of the New Public Administration—often referred to as the Minnowbrook Conference.

---

In summary, administrative organizations play a central policy role as advisers in the legislative process, as rule makers and as implementers of policy. To remain truthful to the principles of popular sovereignty, these organizations need to be equally representative of their citizens. Thus, the concept of representative bureaucracy was born, with the explicit assumption that when administrators reflect the demographic characteristics of the people, they are more likely to serve them better. Representative bureaucracy is not a substitute for representative democracy. Rather, it is a supplement to representative democracy institutions. Table 1.1 compares representative democracy and representative bureaucracy.

The Road from Representative Democracy to Representative Bureaucracy

There are two important sociopolitical arguments for the representation of women and other historically disadvantaged groups in the labor force: diversity and equality. Founded in the concept of popular sovereignty, and an important foundation in the American republic form of government, representative democracy refers to the electoral process of selecting representatives by citizens. These repres...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Foreword, Camilla Stivers
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• 1. From Representation to Diversity: The Road Ahead
• 2. Legislation Affecting Women
• 3. Policy, the Executive Branch, and the Courts
• 4 Social Costs of Career
• 5. Segregation and Representation of Women in Public Organizations
• 6. Equal Pay
• 7. Women in Organizations: From Mentoring to Bullying
• 8. Conclusion: Barriers, Challenges, and Opportunities
• References
• Index
• About the Authors