Pomeroy Emily.Pdf (1.440Mb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Occupational Prestige of Canadian Professions in the New Economy by Emily Anne Pomeroy A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in Sociology Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2008 © Emily Pomeroy 2008 I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ______________________________ Emily Pomeroy ii Abstract Canadian professions have, paradoxically, lost prestige at least in a relative sense, despite being the prototype for the expanding new economy. The early 1990s saw a transition from the old economy to a new economy emphasizing a highly educated and knowledge-focused workforce that values flexibility, innovation and risk. Professions exemplify the knowledge- intensive and education-centered traits emerging in the new economy particularly well. This research examines factors that influenced changes in the prestige ratings of professions during the 40-year period between 1965 and 2005. Occupational prestige and census data collected in 2005 are used to measure the impact of changes in education, income, and the gender composition of professions on the prestige levels. Abbott‟s “professional purity” thesis is also used to examine the effects of people-complex versus data-complex practices on prestige ratings. The influence of rater characteristics is also examined in terms of prestige allocation to professions. Finally, using a lawyer survey, the prestige associated with areas within the legal profession is examined in a study of internal stratification. Professions experienced a relative gain in occupational prestige over this 40 year period; however, professions did not gain as much in comparison to all occupations. In predicting 2005 occupational prestige between 1965 and 2005, the change in income, data and people-complex tasks, gender of incumbents, and the gender of the rater all impact the prestige that professions receive. Women‟s increase in numerical representation within professions increases the 2005 prestige ratings of professions. In predicting 2005 prestige, female raters attributed significantly more and male respondents attributed significantly less prestige to professions. Gender significantly predicted the level of law an individual practiced and the distribution of gender across specializations also suggests that the legal specializations where many women work are less prestigious than men‟s specializations. iii Acknowledgements My sincere thanks go to Dr. John Goyder for introducing me to, and inspiring an interest in, the influence of the socially-defined amidst seemingly objective measures. Dr. Goyder challenged me academically and continued his support as I challenged myself outside of academia. I appreciate his on-going guidance and encouragement. Thank you to Dr. Jean McKenzie Leiper for her insight into and passion for women in law, as well as for her confidence in me. I would also like to thank Dr. Robert Hiscott for his attention to detail on the topic of professions that is by no means simplistic. I would also like to thank Ilona Kosa and Luanne McGuinley for taking such good care of me in the most important ways. I would also like to thank Beth Bower for helping me to become more aware and to relax into being me. Thank you to Tara Knott for always challenging my thinking and having confidence in me. I would finally like to thank my family for their encouragement and faith in me regardless of geography. iv Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The New Economy ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Prestige as a Key Measure ........................................................................................................ 5 1.3 The Prestige of Professions ....................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 10 2. Contextualizing the Research, Part I: Occupational Prestige and Professions ................ 12 2.1 Evolution of Occupational Prestige: Ranking Organization ................................................... 12 2.1.1 Theoretical Shift: the Occupational Incumbent and Influence of Gender ..................... 20 2.1.2 The 21st Century: a Return to Prestige Ratings Irrespective of Occupation Incumbents ............................................................................................................................................... 30 2.2 New Economy and Technology .............................................................................................. 33 2.2.1 Requirements of the New Economy .............................................................................. 33 2.2.2 Technology: the Inequality Divide ................................................................................ 35 2.2.3 Technology: The Gender Divide ................................................................................... 39 2.2.4 Technology: Occupational Prestige ............................................................................... 40 2.3 Professions .............................................................................................................................. 42 2.3.1 Professionalization ......................................................................................................... 42 2.3.2 Credentialism and Training ............................................................................................ 43 2.3.3 Definition of a Profession .............................................................................................. 46 2.3.4 Occupationally Controlled Labour Market .................................................................... 50 2.3.5 Internal Stratification and Specialization ....................................................................... 52 2.4 Losing Professional Status ...................................................................................................... 55 3. Contextualizing the Research, Part II: Gender and Occupational Prestige ..................... 58 3.1 Gender and Occupational Prestige .......................................................................................... 58 3.1.1 Feminization of Professions ........................................................................................... 59 3.1.2 Gendered Skills: Nature versus Nurture ........................................................................ 62 3.1.3 Data vs. People-complex Professions ............................................................................ 65 3.1.4 Sex Segregation and Internal Stratification ................................................................... 66 3.3 Hypotheses .............................................................................................................................. 70 4. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 72 4.1 Methodological Orientation .................................................................................................... 73 4.2 Included Professions ............................................................................................................... 74 4.2.1 NOC Code Description .................................................................................................. 74 4.2.2 Commentary on Included Professions ........................................................................... 80 4.3 Commentary: Consistency among Rater Response ................................................................ 87 4.4 Prelude to Formal Analysis: Cognitive Interview Findings ................................................... 89 4.4.1 Public Perception ........................................................................................................... 89 4.4.2 Occupational Prestige .................................................................................................... 91 4.4.3 Social Standing .............................................................................................................. 92 4.5 Data Sets ................................................................................................................................. 94 4.5.1 Occupational Prestige Survey (Title Level Analysis) .................................................... 94 4.5.2 KWMAS: Kitchener-Waterloo Metropolitan Area Survey (Individual-Level Analysis) ............................................................................................................................................... 96 v 4.5.3 Chicago Lawyers Survey Series .................................................................................... 97 4.6 Data Transformation ............................................................................................................