The 'pipeline fallacy' and gender inequality in higher education employment

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Some writers reflecting on the continued low representation of women in management and non-traditional professions have posited a process of slow, long term change which will produce gender equality in the future as a result of recent changes of practice. This view (explicitly or implicitly) entails the notion of a ‘pipeline’ through which changes work their way through the system. This model is misleading. While equal employment opportunity initiatives may have a delayed impact, the pipeline fallacy obscures the need for active intervention in dynamic employment processes which continue to favour men over women. The pipeline fallacy diverts attention from systemic gender inequities to individual categories of blameworthy individuals. One example of ‘the blamed’ is older male employees who are sometimes portrayed as blocking the career entry or advancement of younger women. Attacks on this group of employees are often disguised attacks on conditions of employment. An examination of higher education employment data provides no evidence that male tenure blocks the opportunities of women although women continue to gain lower rewards in terms of tenure and seniority. The data suggest that the appointment and promotion practices which have favoured men are continuing.</jats:p>