Is There Gender Discrimination of Women in Security Organizations, Police and Armed Forces – Case Study Example

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper “ Is There Gender Discrimination of Women in Security Organizations, Police and Armed Forces? " is an exciting example of a case study on social science. Sex discrimination lawsuits have been brought by various Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions worldwide. Gender centered discrimination faced by female security guards has documented by various authors and scholars, argues that it manifests itself as a result of employers submitting to customer liking for male security personnel, thus reallocating women security personnel to inopportune, reduced remunerating posts (Louise, 15, 2001). In addition to financial discrimination, female security guards are discriminated in administrative and superintendent positions, provision of fringe reimbursements, training and traineeship platforms as well as, categorizing, and assigning personnel (Fly, 27, 2010).

Women in Security Organisation Guards LLC, is a chief supplier of security amenities in the United Kingdom and the United States, which was engaged in gender-based discrimination, and as a result, had to pay $52, 500 to settle the accusation (Rawlings, 3, 2002). According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, gender-based discrimination prevailed in that a man and a woman who possessed similar expertise, effort, and accountability for a similar employer under alike circumstances received uneven pay.

What amounts is the real work completed, and not a position held or work labels (www. thamesvalley. police. uk). Guards LLC was charged with submitting to customer inclination for male security personnel, eventually allocating their female counterparts to lower-paying and inconvenient posts. In arriving at this settlement, the jury mutually agreed that customer inclination to be manned by workers of specific sex is certainly not a justification to participate in illegal gender discrimination in the work environment (Yates, 47, 2001).

Women in Police and Armed Forces Women endeavors to be accepted in security work doctrine traces their roots in 1883 when the metropolitan police employed a female guest to visit women prisoners on a permit and under police command, and three years well along, another visitor was appointed (Holmes, 15, 2001). As time progressed, more women were employed in these positions, but there existed significant aggression towards female visitors, for they were solitarily trained in terms of harmful effects that the vulgar language, viciousness of prisoners would have on reputable women (www. kent‐police‐museum. co. uk).

Women’ s Social and Political Union was formed in 1909, to advocate for better treatment of women in employment, which subsequently lead to Woman’ s Hour of 1910, during which parliament failed to pass the first Resolution Bill, leading to a violent clash between police and suffragettes. The eve of this clash outbreak leads to a nationwide plea for special women constables, and two women were appointed. Women’ s Police Volunteers Organisation was conceived at this time, which taught women is the deliberate and unofficial basis (www. kent‐police‐museum. co. uk).

In 1919, the Sex Disqualification Removal Act was enacted, which provided women with official ways of entry into security professions. Women police security officers’ conditions slightly improved, though there was no pressure on employee women. Numerous key sections of the legislature have been approved since then, which make it illegal to discriminate against women ways such as pay, status, responsibilities among others as their male counterparts (www. bawp. org). Conclusion A study by the police foundation argues that in law enforcement and security are effective in that they accomplish like results when countering violent law-breaking situations, are appreciated by residents considerably as their male counterparts, have decent turnout records as men, and are less probable to participate in unprofessional conducts (Holmes, 17, 2001).  

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us