In 1888, the government of Canada decided to invite skilled Chinese men to work in a gold rush and the Canadian Pacific Railway to reduce the cost of labor wages and to make these projects affordable.
[2] Although these immigrants were earning a higher compensation in Canada compared to that in China, they experienced exclusion and occupational inequality.
Even though the issue of racial exclusion is currently desensitized, there are workers who encounter violence and abuse in their working environment, a majority of which are women.
[4] Filipino overseas workers have earned the title of "migrant heroism" for sacrificing their family lives and normalizing migration remittance-sending to their motherland.
[6] The open employment for middle-class women catalyzes the growing use of domestic workers for household cleaning and childcare.
In contrast, recent human capital theories maintain that the wage penalties associated with working in female-dominated occupations result from different requirements in specialized training and that the effect is indirect.
[9] Women face discrimination in the workplace, such as the “glass ceiling,” although female participation in the labor market has increased markedly during the past twenty years.
[13] In late 2003, Norway passed a law that advocated for forty per cent of representation of gender public board companies.
In addition to outmoded institutional structures, conscious and unconscious biases play a substantial role in hindering the promotion of women within the labor force.
[14] Additionally, the difficulty of achieving senior and executive level positions is due to the practice of utilizing "male" characteristics as the standard expectation when assessing, hiring, and promoting women workers.
Researches have found that improvements within firm value, financial performance, economic growth, innovation, and philanthropy has been due to the inclusion of women leadership within companies.
Women make up 40.9% of the American workforce, and they are CEOs of some of the largest companies such as PepsiCo, Archer Daniels Midland, and W. L. Gore & Associates.
Surprisingly, feminization of the workplace has been driven by the relentless drive of the service sector and the equal decline of manufacturing.
[11] According to the American Association of University Women, young boys' and girls' capabilities and interests in science, mathematics and engineering are equally well established; however, most girls begin to lose their interest in their high school years because of the gap in gender representation in both science and engineering.
[18] In the last 25 years, increasing involvement of women and minorities has prevented a severe shortage of science and engineering workers; but if current rates of gender and ethnic participation in these bachelor's degree programmes do not change, the number of qualified workers will soon be inadequate to meet the science, technology, and engineering needs of society.
[20] There are a variety of factors that contribute to this discrepancy such as lack of female role models, gender stereotypes, and sexism in hiring.
Researchers argue that specialties within the medical field for women are influenced by personal affairs that include family commitments, work-life balance, and sense of selflessness.
[23] Additionally, researchers claim that women are deterred from pursuing certain clinical specialties due to difficulties of indirect discrimination such as a male dominated work culture, gender stereotypes, and unsocial hours.
[21] In the life sciences, women are earning more doctorates than men, but only one-third are hired as assistant professors after completing their PhD.
The passage of Title IX sparked the increase in women participating in sports throughout high school and college in the United States.
In addition to administrative positions, women coaches have seen a significant decline in count after Title IX was passed.
In primary school, the proportion of female teachers exceeds 60% in all OECD countries apart Saudi Arabia and Turkey.