Again, the gender split is pronounced, but proportionally there are significantly more male counterparts to these predominantly female roles. The total populations of the roles in this sample don’t differ too greatly from those of the first, which makes this quite a clear comparison. Our search produced no solely female populated roles, which is interesting, considering we found so many male-only populated roles. Another parallel to our first sample is the prominence of the 45-54 age bracket, which again occupies the top spot and makes up half the entire list.
Bearing all this in mind, it would be worth looking further at the prevalence of male employee-heavy roles in sectors such as Construction and Building, and the high volume of female employee-heavy roles in such sectors as Residential Care. This could explain the widely held belief that some roles are still traditionally associated with one gender or another.
Examining other criteria, such as the most common age range of employees in such roles, may well assist employers in explaining why the distributions are as they are. For example, the age at which mothers tend to return to work following maternity leave could go some way to explain the sparsity of female employees in a particular sample.
So why is this particularly pertinent in the context of Gender Pay Reporting? Whilst GPR takes a very top level view of gender pay differences, employers seeking to explain why gender pay gaps exist will require an understanding of the root causes of those gaps. The causes may well be related to the distribution of men and women in different types and levels of work. Identifying what those causes are will be the first step towards developing strategies to address them.