GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT CIA - SEMESTER VI

MIND THE GAP?

Tracing the rising gender wage gap along the professional ladder and across the social
landscape in India

Authors:

Natasha Bhide 024

Richa Rebello 073
Sharon Ann Robson 077

ABSTRACT

This paper attempts to capture the differences in wages for men and women across the professional
ladder and socioeconomic landscape in the Indian economy. By looking at factors like caste, religion
and marital status, while controlling for other explained factors in wage differentials like education
and occupation, the paper uses an econometric model with a series of multivariate regressions, one
for each occupation from the occupational hierarchy constructed by the authors to find evidence for
the Glass Ceiling and the Sticky Floor. The second half of the paper analyses the gender wage gap
and discusses the possible reasons for its U shaped movement. The paper concludes with a brief
acknowledgement of the limitations of the study.

INTRODUCTION

The Indian labour market are been historically afflicted with a gender wage gap, conventionally defined as the
difference between the wages of men and women, at the same age, level of education and years of experience.
However, women from economically backward classes and religious minority groups suffer significantly larger
wage discrimination than other women workers (Sengupta and Das, 2014) and the incidence and implication of
discrimination becomes far more serious when these factors, hardly apparent at a cursory glance, are accounted
for. Furthermore, the gap has been observed to widen over the wage distribution at the level of college/tertiary
education (Llorens, 2005), thereby materializing into stagnation for women at the top of the professional ladder
relative to men, all other factors held constant. This phenomenon is called a glass ceiling. On the other hand, at
lower levels of education, the wage gap is wider at the bottom than at the top, possibly withholding women from
progress relative to their productivity, materializing into what is known as a sticky floor. This paper attempts to
examine and capture the differences in the wages of men and women in urban as well as rural areas, across the
public and private sector, as a result of the complex interplay of socioeconomic factors in a developing economy
like India. It also aims to verify the existence of a glass ceiling and sticky floor in the context of the Indian
economy.

Hypothesis

The wage gap between men and women is larger at both ends of the spectrum of educational qualification and
occupational hierarchy, demonstrating a U shaped movement along the professional ladder.

Objectives
● To identify and study the explained and unexplained dimensions of the wage gap.
● To show the differences in the wage gap for the 3 sectors viz. Agriculture, Manufacturing and Services.

1
 ● To compare urban and rural wage gap data to show the exacerbation of the problem in rural areas and
thus underline one of the reasons for increased migration of women.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Blau and Kahn (1996) in their paper “Wage structure and gender earnings differentials: An international
comparison” use microdata to analyse the international difference in the gender pay gap among the sample of
ten industrialized nations focusing on the role of the wage structure and institutions in influencing the gender
gap. They use data from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) 1985-89, among other sources like
the Class Structure Class Consciousness (CSCC), Income Distribution Survey (IDS) and Bank of Italy (BI) in a
framework of the decomposition method of Juhl et al. (1991). They find that the US gender gap is higher than in
most other countries. In contrast, Sweden and Australia have the lowest gap in the sample. They conclude that
the brunt of the gap is borne by those in the lower rungs of the wage ladder and that the institutional setting of a
country plays an important role in wage structuring, and therefore wage determination.

Myck and Paull (2004) in a paper titled “The role of employment experience in explaining the gender wage
gap” examine the role played by labour market experience in explaining the narrowing gender wage gap by
assessing the relationships between male and female levels of experience and relative wages in the US and the
UK from 1978 to 2000. The estimation procedure is based on pseudo panels created from cross-sectional data
(Current Population Survey (CPS) for the US and Family Expenditure Survey (FES) for the UK), while possible
biases from unobserved heterogeneity and the endogeneity of experience are addressed by using an “imputed”
measure of experience based on grouped data and by estimating the wage regressions in first differences. The
authors find that differences in levels of experience explain 39% and 37% of the gender wage gap in the US and
UK respectively. While the gender wage gap has reduced, the effect of increase in relative female wages cannot
be attributed to increase in their experience, despite an increase in the average female experience relative to
male experience.

Weichselbaumer and Winter-Ebmer (2005) in a paper titled “A meta-analysis of the international gender wage
gap” put forth a quantitative review of existing empirical literature on gender wage differentials in the context
of differences in methodology, data, time periods and countries. The study carried out by weighting quality
indicators shows that data restrictions contribute the most to wage differentials. While the global wage
differential is seen to be declining with better endowment of female labourers, a misspecification of the wage
equation could significantly distort the calculated gender wage gap.

Arulampalam, Booth and Bryan (2007) in a paper titled “Is There a Glass Ceiling over Europe? Exploring the
Gender Pay Gap across the Wage Distribution” analyse gender wage gaps by sector across the wage
distribution in eleven countries in the European Union using harmonized data from the European Community
Household Panel for the years 1995-2001 and a quantile regression framework. By calculating the part of the
gap accruing to differential returns between men and women after controlling for the effects of individual
characteristics, they conclude that the gender wage gap varies significantly across countries and between the
public and private sectors of countries. They also observed that the gap typically widens at the top and bottom of
the distribution, demonstrating a glass ceiling and sticky floor phenomenon respectively. They attribute the gap
in part to differences in childcare provisions and wage setting institutions across the EU economies.

Dolado, de la Rica and Llorens (2008) in a paper titled “Ceilings or Floors? Gender Wage Gaps by Education
in Spain” study the gender wage gap throughout the wage distribution in Spain using data from the European
Community Household Panel in a quantile regression and panel data model. The authors find that while for
highly educated workers, the gap increases along the distribution and proves the existence of a glass ceiling, for
less educated workers the gap in fact reduces. This phenomenon, novel to Spain’s relatively flatter gender wage
gap distribution, has been termed the floor pattern and reveals an interesting composition effect. The low rates

2
of less educated female labour force participation results in statistical discrimination exercised by employers of
such economies.

Mahajan and Ramaswami (2017) in a paper titled “Caste, Female labour supply and gender wage gap in India :
Boserup Revisited” (2017) look at the spatial variation in male and female agricultural wages in India and find
that gender wage differentials are the largest in South India, otherwise known to be a matriarchal society,
possibly due to greater female labour force participation. The paper uses data from the Employment and
Unemployment survey of 2004-05 undertaken by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). The findings
show that differences in female labor supply explain 55% of the difference in gender wage differential between
northern and southern states of India.

Smith (2012) in his paper titled “Money, Benefits and Power: A Test of the Glass Ceiling and Glass Escalator
Hypotheses” explores how social factors inequality in wages and benefits among workers at different levels of
an organizational hierarchy. The paper uses cross sectional data from the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality
(MCSUI) collected through a survey between 1992-94 in Atlanta, Boston and Los Angeles. The paper finds that
the gender wage gap does not increase with movement up the hierarchy, in fact relative inequality is seen to
remain constant at higher and lower levels of authority. However, in nontraditional work settings where white
males report to minority and female supervisors, there is evidence that a glass ceiling stifles women and
minorities while a glass escalator helps white men.

Christofides, Polycarpou and Vrachimis (2013) in their paper “Gender Wage Gaps, ‘Sticky Floors’ and ‘Glass
Ceilings’ in Europe” attempt to understand the gender wage gap across 26 European countries using data from
the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions, 2007. They find that definition and size of the
gender wage gap varies considerably across countries using a Quantile Regression and establish the presence of
a glass ceiling and sticky floor phenomenon using the Oaxaca and Ransom approach to decompose the average
wage difference between gender. They find that generous policies concerning the reconciliation of work and
family life reduce the mean and median unexplained wage gap, the effects of which appear to hold only at the
top of the distribution.

Gillespie (2014) in her paper “Unequal Pay : The Role of Gender” advocates the existence of gender wage gap
and emphasises on the existence of a ‘glass ceiling’ based on a study that revealed only 5% of board members
and 3% of CEOs in Fortune 500 companies were women. The author uses a survey and personal interview
method to substantiate her study and suggests that companies introduce quotas and conduct annual salary audits
to ensure equal and fair representation and compensation.

Sengupta and Das (2014) in their paper titled “Gender Wage Discrimination across Social and Religious
Groups in India ” study gender wage differences by establishing that it is not productivity differences between
males and females, but discrimination based on a complex interplay of socioeconomic factors like gender, caste,
religion and social groups, that contributes to the gender wage gap and exclusion of women from the Indian
labour market. The authors use unit level data on employment in India from the 50th and 66th round survey
conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), and estimate wage equations using Heckman’s
selection model with two-step estimation (Heckit) techniques with pooled data of two independent samples
taken from the two rounds. Furthermore, they establish a significant rise in the gender wage gap during the first
decade of the post reforms period.

Singhari (2015) in her paper titled “Is there a Glass Ceiling or Sticky Floor in India? Examining the Wage Gap
across the Wage Distribution” analyzes gender, caste and religion based discrimination in regular and casual
labor market in India. The authors use data from the employment and unemployment survey in 2004-05 (61st
round) and 2011-12 (68th round) of the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO), India. The Blinder-
Oaxaca and Machado Mata Melly decomposition methods are used to decompose the wage gap at the different
quantiles of wage distribution along with mean. The paper establishes a declining trend in gender wage gap

3
from 2004-05 to 2011-12, however with increasing wage discrimination against caste and religious minorities,
particularly at the upper end of the distribution. Occupational segregation in the casual labour market furthers
the incidence of exclusion of socially disadvantaged groups.

Das, Jain-Chandra, Kochhar and Kumar (2015) in their paper “Women workers in India : Why so few among so
many” examine the determinants of the low female labour force participation using data from the National
Sample Survey (NSS) on Employment and Unemployment, in the years 1993-94, 1999-2000, 2004-05, 2009-10
and 2011-12. The authors conclude that there is a significant gap between the labour force participation rates of
Indian men and women and that India has the lowest female labour participation among all the emerging
economies in the world. The gap has also being increasing since the mid 2000s and the authors suggest higher
social spending on education.

METHODOLOGY

The paper uses unit level data from the Employment and Unemployment 68th round of the survey conducted by
the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) between July 2011 - June 2012. The econometric model remains
simple yet exhaustive by encompassing a series of linear multivariate regression models one for each occupation
within an occupational hierarchy constructed by the authors for the purpose of representation of the professional
ladder across the employment landscape within the urban as well as rural sector of the economy. This aims to
aid the demonstration of the gender wage gap not only within occupations, but also across them and highlight
the glass ceiling and the sticky floor phenomenon. The study is restricted to regular wage labour in order to
maintain uniformity of analysis, and looks at the labourforce from the age of 15-59 years.

The regression equation is as follows:

Dependent Variable: Wages

Independent Variables:

Level of Education Not literate (base)

Primary Schooling (PS1)
This is the highest level of education attained by a Secondary Schooling (SS1)
given individual. High School (HS1)
Graduate (G1)
Post Graduate (PG1)
Other Educational Qualifications (not relevant to the
focus of the analysis)

Gender Male (base)

Female (F1)

Caste General (base)

Scheduled Castes (SC1)
Scheduled Tribes (ST1)
Other Backward Classes (OBC1)

Religion Hindu (base)

Muslim (Mus1)
Christian (Chris1)

4
 Other Religious Minorities (not relevant to the focus
of the analysis)

Marital Status Unmarried (base) - Includes never married,

divorced, widowers and widows.
Married (Married1)

Sector of the Economy Urban (base)

Rural (rural1)

Industry Agriculture (base)

Manufacturing (Manu1)
Services (Services1)

The occupations under consideration are:

● Directors and Chief Executives

● Architects, Engineers and Related Professionals
● Secondary Education Teaching Professionals
● Business Professionals
● Numerical Clerks
● Garbage Collector and Related Labourers

(These occupations have been coded for using 3 digit codes sourced from the National Industrial Classification,
2004 schedule.)

This paper studies the gender wage gap within a given occupation using education as the explained factor
contributing to differences in productivity and credentials between individuals and socioeconomic factors such
as gender, caste, religion and marital status to identify the unexplained reasons for the same between otherwise
similar individuals with differences in individual characteristics, thereby attempting to quantify the extent of
discrimination in employment. All the independent variables are therefore dummy variables for the
quantification of otherwise qualitative factors.
Due to unavailability of data, the number of years of experience has not been accounted for in their contribution
to differences in productivity, and this remains a significant limitation of this model. Furthermore, the inability
to code for all possible occupations as per the NIC, 2004 favoured the adoption of this model to maintain
uniformity of analysis, as against the Oaxaca Blinder model proposed in the abstract stage of the research.

The wage gap has been calculated in the following manner:

For instance:

Expected value of wage for a male SC = (Yi | ST1=0, SC1=1, OBC1=0, Mus1=0, Chris1=0, OMin1=0,
female1=0, rural1=0, PS1=0, SS1=0, HS1, G1=0, PG1=0, OtherEdu1=0, Married1=0, Manu1=0, Agri1=0,
Services1=0) = 𝛽 2
Expected value of wage for a female SC = (Yi | ST1=0, SC1=1, OBC1=0, Mus1=0, Chris1=0, OMin1=0,
female1=1, rural1=0, PS1=0, SS1=0, HS1, G1=0, PG1=0, OtherEdu1=0, Married1=0, Manu1=0, Agri1=0,
Services1=0) = 𝛽 2 + 𝛽 7

Therefore, proportionate difference of wages between males and females:

5
x=log (wageF) - log (wageM) = log (wageF / wageM) = ( wageF - wageM )/ wageM

e^x= percentage points by which males earn higher or lower than females

QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS

The regression run for each of the following occupational categories presented the following findings:

1. Directors and Chief Executives (high level)

1.1: Regression Output for the occupation Directors and Chief Executives

1.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation ‘Directors and Chief Executives’
Occupation: Directors and Chief Executives

Caste Religion Marital Status Education Sector Industry

SC Muslim Married Post Graduate Rural Manufacturing

Male Male Male Male Male Male

-0.28 1.69 -0.46

-1.02 0.58 0.58

Female Female Female Female Female Female

-1.35 0-.61 0.25 1.44 -0.79 0.25

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation:

6
SC males earn 112.8% more than SC females for an occupation at the top of the organizational hierarchy at the
post of a Directors and Chief Executive. At the given post, Muslim males earned 71% more than their female
counterparts and married men earn 143% more than married women, as was expected from literature on the
topic. Men with a postgraduate degree earned a shocking 101% over and above their female counterparts.
Similarly, males in rural areas earned 79% more and those in the manufacturing industry earned 143% more
than their female counterparts.

2. Architects, Engineers and Related Professionals

2.1: Regression Output for the occupation Architects, Engineers and Related Professionals

2.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation Architects, Engineers and Related
Professionals

Occupation: Architects, Engineers and Related Professionals

Caste Religion Marital Status Education Sector Industry

SC Muslim Married Post Graduate Rural Manufacturing

Male Male Male Male Male Male

0.02 0.14 0.49 0.53 0.07 0.12

Female Female Female Female Female- Female

0.09 0.2 0.43 0.51 0.09 0.10

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation:

The gender wage gap in the occupation of Architects, Engineers and Related Professionals was skewed in the
favour of SC males with 52% higher wages than females belonging to the same social group. Whereas Muslim
males earned 86% more than their female counterparts, married men receive a massive 105% more. This may
be due to the social perception of such jobs being more suitable for men, which naturally discourages females
from joining them. Postgraduate males earned 101% more than their female counterparts in this occupation.

7
Males in the rural sector earned 89% over and above females within the rural economy whereas males in
manufacturing earned a surplus wage of 108% over females.

3. Secondary Education Teaching Professionals

3.1: Regression Output for the occupation Secondary Education Teaching Professionals

3.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation Secondary Education Teaching
Professionals

Occupation: Secondary Education Teaching Professionals

Caste Religion Marital Status Education Sector Industry

SC Muslim Married Post Graduate Rural Manufacturing

Male Male Male Male Male Male

-0.07 -0.05 0.52 0.52 -0.03 0.37

Female Female Female Female Female Female

-0.37 -0.42 0.15 0.15 -0.4 0.066

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation

Professionals engaged in secondary schooling and teaching realize a relatively narrower wage gap as compared
to the other occupations. SC male teachers receive wages 48% more than SC female teachers. Muslim males in
a similar position earned 39% over and above their female counterparts. On the other hand, married males earn

8
69% more in comparison to married females, as secondary school teachers. The wage margin was skewed in the
favour of males in rural areas by 32%. Postgraduate males earned a huge whopping 169% in wages more than
women with the same qualifications.

4. Business Professionals

4.1: Regression Output for the occupation Business Professionals

4.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation Business Professionals

Occupation: Business Professionals

Caste Religion Marital Education Sector Industry

Status

SC Muslim Married Post Rural Manufacturing

Graduate

Male Male Male Male- Male- Male-

-0.046 0.50 0.50 1.08 -2.66 -0.01

Female Female Female Female Femal Female

-0.356 0.27 0.27 0.84 e -0.24
-0.49

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation:

SC males working as business professionals received a 41% higher wage than SC females. Muslim males in a
similar position earned 130% over and above their female counterparts and so did married men in comparison to
married females. Men with a postgraduate degree earned 111% more wages than their female counterparts.
Relatively, the margin for males in rural areas was a more modest 25%.

9
5. Numerical Clerks

5.1: Regression Output for the occupation Numerical Clerks

5.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation Numerical Clerks

Occupation: Numerical Clerks

Caste Religion Marital Education Sector Industry

Status

SC Muslim Married Post Rural Manufacturing

Graduate

Male Male Male Male Male Male

-0.05 0.14 0.41 0.28 -0.18 -0.36

Female Female Female Female Female Female

-0.182 0.0085 0.28 0.18 -0.31 -0.51

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation:

At the position of a numerical clerk, a relatively lower rung in the professional ladder, SC males received a 27%
higher wage than SC females. Muslim males in a similar position earned 16% over and above their female
counterparts, a relatively lower margin compared to the former. On the other hand, married males in comparison
to married females earn 120% more wages. In a rural economy, postgraduate males working as clerks earn 79%
more than females in a similar position. The wage gap between males and females in the manufacturing sector is
86% of the post of a clerk.

10
6. Garbage Collectors and Related Labourers

6.1: Regression Output for the occupation Garbage Collectors and Related Labourers

6.2: Tabulation of expected/predicted wages for the occupation Garbage Collectors and Related
Labourers

Occupation: Garbage Collectors and Related Labourers

Caste Religion Marital Education Sector Industry

Status

SC Muslim Married Post Rural Manufacturing

Graduate

Male Male Male Male Male- Male

0.057 0.34 0.1275 0.85 -0.08 -0.075

Female Female Female Female Femal Female

-0.429 -0.14 -0.3592 0.364 e -0.56
-0.57

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

Interpretation:

Garbage collection, a profession considered to be at the bottom of the social ladder saw SC men earning wages
41% higher than SC females for the same job. Muslim males received a whopping 146% more in wages than
their female counterparts. Married males earned 62% more, a narrower gap than most other occupations for this
variable, while males with a post graduate degree earned 144 % more as compared to females.n the other hand,
married males in comparison to married females. Men in rural areas earned 42% more wages than females while
men in manufacturing earn 41% more.

11
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

The case for an increase in wages has often been made, with the view that a higher level of income is conducive
for the overall growth of the economy. Whether, however, the rise in wages occurs in an equitable manner, is a
different question altogether. Social choice, though seemingly voluntary, may often be implicitly coerced.
Those arguing against the existence of a gender wage gap often cite differences in productivity as a justification
for lower remuneration for females. However, differences in productivity on account of differences in levels of
education may well be the outcomes of premarket discrimination, the empirical proof of which is unfortunately
beyond the scope of this paper and shall not be delved into.

The quantitative working of this paper brings forth stark findings that validate the authors’ hypothesis, showing
a higher level of wages for males across all occupations and social groups within the study. The analysis of
Scheduled Caste males and females across the professional spectrum and occupational hierarchy sought to
capture the effect of gender on wages, compounded by the discrimination of belonging to a disadvantaged social
group. The results proved that at the top level of a professional hierarchy, SC males received 112.8% more than
SC females at the position of CEOs, holding all other factors such as education constant. This wage margin is
seen to fall to 52%, 41% and 27% respectively for engineers, architects and related professionals, business
professionals and office clerks. However, at the absolute bottom of the social ladder, in the position of a garbage
collection and sanitation labourer, the SC gender wage gap is seen to rise again to 41%, presenting a rather
startling reality. The movement of the gender wage gap mirrors itself at the top and the bottom of the
occupational hierarchy, the bottom most rungs of the ladder showing a much wider wage gap than the
occupational levels in the middle. This is indicative of the sticky floor phenomenon, responsible for stagnating
the occupational and financial progress of females relative to their productivity, and hindering female labour
force participation. Such behavior of wages is typically observed in occupations such as agriculture, mining and
construction work and other forms of unskilled casual labour.

A similar observation is made for the wage gap between Muslim males and females across all the occupations
included within the study.

The Movement of the Gender Wage Gap across different groups

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the Employment and Unemployment 68th round survey of the NSSO (2011-12)

We illustrate the U-shape movement of the wage gap as we move from higher to lower positions in the
occupational hierarchy, indicating that the glass ceiling exists i.e as we move up the job ladder, the wage gap

12
between males and females rises, thereby inhibiting women from attaining higher positions or receiving the
same pay as males for an equal amount of work. Similarly, at the lower rungs a high wage gap establishes the
presence of a sticky floor, often discouraging females from join or participating in the workforce due to poor
incentivization and less than proportional returns on labour. The sharpest fall and rise in the wage gap is
observed between Muslim males and females, and married males and females, indicating more severe
discrimination at the highest and lowest levels of the occupational hierarchy. Furthermore, the movement of the
wage gap is observed to be more V shaped than a theoretical U shape due to the limited number of occupations
at each level of the hierarchy constructed by the authors.

In a juxtaposition of postgraduate males and females, it is observed that males receive a whopping 120% wage
surplus over women with the same level and years of education, highlighting a strong possibility of
discrimination based on gender. The gap showed a fluctuating movement along the occupational hierarchy,
indicating no clear trend. This could be due to the vertically constrained job opportunities for postgraduate
individuals that would seldom fall below the post of an office clerk. Higher education is also a widely used tool
for socioeconomic mobility that is likely diminish the effect of a sticky floor and catalyze progress.

The presence of a glass ceiling, an artificial and invisible barrier which implies lesser number of women at the
topmost positions and a widening gap in wages between males and females for the same amount of work, is
often a product of sexist discrimination against females, often due to a perceived lack of responsibility or
competence often on account of their disproportionate shouldering of household responsibilities or anticipation
of future liabilities arising from maternity benefits or dropping out of the labour market. On the other hand, a
sticky floor traps females into low paying, low mobility jobs not only due to the aforementioned reasons but also
the lack of education and awareness of rights that allows added exploitation by employers. The absence of
labour laws makes marginalized groups, females in this case, more vulnerable to the employer and to systemic
vices.

The presence of discriminatory obstacles discourages and lowers the female labour force participation, which
fosters the stereotypes held against them in the labour market, thereby furthering the incidence of discrimination
and forming a vicious cycle of exclusion.

CONCLUSION

This paper hypothesizes that the gender wage gap widens at the top and bottom of the occupational hierarchy in
the Indian labour market, and proves it by obtaining a V shaped plot of its movement across the professional
spectrum. Along with the establishment of a higher level of wages for males in comparison to females
throughout the occupational hierarchy and regardless of other social characteristics, it captures the presence of a
glass ceiling and sticky floor in the Indian economy. This is known to restrict the mobility of female labour due
to inherent social discrimination, and discourages their participation in the labour force. The paper also
undertakes an analysis of social factors other than gender that compound .the incidence of discrimination, and
proves that the fluctuations in wage gap between Muslim males and females tend to be more severe at each
occupational level, possibly capturing the extent of their marginalization. The gender wage gap between SC
males and females is also found to be statistically significant and has therefore been studied in depth. However,
due to unavailability of data, the number of years of experience has not been factored into the model to account
of productivity differences and this remains a significant limitation of the study. Furthermore, the V shaped plot
of the gender wage gap differs from the theoretical U shaped plot possibly due to a limited number of
occupations being studied at each level of the occupational hierarchy.

13
REFERENCES

Arulampalam, Wiji, Alison L. Booth, and Mark L. Bryan. "Is There A Glass Ceiling Over Europe? Exploring
The Gender Pay Gap Across The Wage Distribution". ILR Review 60.2 (2007): 163-186. Web.

Blau, Francine D. and Lawrence M. Kahn. "Wage Structure And Gender Earnings Differentials: An
International Comparison". Economica 63.250 (1996): S29. Web.

"Ceilings Or Floors? Gender Wage Gaps By Education In Spain". Journal of Population Economics 21.3
(2008): n. pag. Print.

Das, Sonali et al. "Women Workers In India: Why So Few Among So Many?". IMF Working Papers 15.55
(2015): 1. Web.

"Gender Wage Discrimination Across Social And Religious Groups In India". Economic&Political weekly
49.21 (2014): n. pag. Print.

"Gender Wage Gaps, ‘Sticky Floors’ And ‘Glass Ceilings’ In Europe". Labour Economics 21 (2013): n. pag.
Print.

Mahajan, Kanika and Bharat Ramaswami. "Caste, Female Labor Supply, And The Gender Wage Gap In India:
Boserup Revisited". Economic Development and Cultural Change 65.2 (2017): 339-378. Web.

Myck, Michal and Gillian Paull. "The Role Of Employment Experience In Explaining The Gender Wage Gap".
IFS Working Papers (2001): n. pag. Print.

Singhar, Smrutirekha. "Is There A Glass Ceiling Or Sticky Floor In India? Examining The Wage Gap Across
The Wage Distribution". ILPC (2017): n. pag. Print.
Smith, R. A. "Money, Benefits, And Power: A Test Of The Glass Ceiling And Glass Escalator Hypotheses". The
ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 639.1 (2012): 149-172. Web.

"Unequal Pay : The Role Of Gender". University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository (2014): n. pag. Print.

Weichselbaumer, Doris and Rudolf Winter-Ebmer. "A Meta-Analysis Of The International Gender Wage Gap".
Journal of Economic Surveys 19.3 (2005): 479-511. Web.

14