Where Motherhood Matters: Understanding the Effect of State Context on the Salience of Motherhood

• In Event: 220 - Section on the Sociology of the Family Roundtables (one-hour)
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 20. Motherhood Penalties

Abstract

Existing research has demonstrated the existence of a wage disparity between mothers and non-mothers in the labor market. Additional research also suggests that there is an employment gap between mothers and non-mothers, with mothers facing barriers to paid employment. Much of this research has relied on Ridgeway and Correll’s (2004) status theory of motherhood, suggesting that employers devalue mothers because they view motherhood as mutually exclusive from paid labor. However, an emergent body of literature suggests that the salience of motherhood is not invariant but dependent on context. While not incompatible, if the salience of motherhood varies by context, there are important implications for scholars and policy makers interested in disparate labor market outcomes. Theoretically, it then indicates that it is not motherhood itself that is necessarily a detriment to women but rather the way in which its salience is constructed by employers. This paper seeks to contribute to this growing body of literature by exploring whether state level variation shapes the salience of motherhood for employers. I do so by expanding our understanding of non-wage related motherhood penalties by analyzing hiring practices through interviews with hiring managers at 27 firms in 2 states. I provide three plausible mechanisms used by hiring managers during their employment processes that may act as employment barriers to mothers: employers’ ideal expectations, the subjective assessment of family responsibilities, and the employment gap inquiry.

Author

• Elizabeth Kiester, Albright College