Search results

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals experience institutionalized prejudice within society and in their working lives. This prejudice increases the stress that these individuals experience within the workplace. Thus, in this chapter, we outline the mechanisms of LGB-workplace stress, detailing the antecedents, outcomes, and strategies to remediate this form of stress. We first outline theoretical conceptualizations of workplace stress before explaining how sexual orientation minorities experience additional workplace stressors due to their specific, stigmatized identities. Then, we explain how the stressors of formal discrimination, interpersonal discrimination, stigma consciousness, internalized heterosexism, concealment, and social isolation each contribute to workplace stress and ultimately health and workplace outcomes. Finally, we discuss several strategies that organizations, stigmatized individuals, and allies can engage in to prevent and cope with each of these LGB-related workplace stressors. In so doing, this chapter encourages researchers and practitioners to continue to develop more comprehensive and effective strategies to combat the negative outcomes experienced by these and all other stigmatized employees, thereby promoting more healthy and inclusive organizations.

The “Social Determinants of Health” construct is well-entrenched in the way that both health care providers and researchers think about the effects of social conditions on health. Although there are a number of theories that fall under this rubric for the social production of health and illness, the core of this construct is the idea that social stratification leads to health disparity. In this chapter we show how such a mechanism might work for relating social stratification and job stress.

We used the pooled 2002, 2006, 2010 Quality of Work Life modules of the General Social Survey to test a model of the relationships between gender, age, education, and nativity with “bad jobs” and indicators of health status.

Findings show that social status is positively associated with job quality and with health in turn. Lower social status characteristics are related to bad jobs and poorer health.

Health disparities are thus “explained” by the consequences of social status for occupation and job quality, thereby depicting exactly how health disparities arise in normal social life. The theory and results underscore the importance of explicitly modeling social status factors in explanations of health disparities.

It is common to relate health disparities to social status but it is not common to show the mechanisms whereby social status actually produces health disparities. Addressing health disparities means addressing the consequences of social inequalities for normal activities of social life such as work. Improving job quality would be a health “treatment” that addresses health disparities.

This chapter demonstrates the value of explicitly tracing the consequences of status differences on differences in social context such as work conditions and then health. In the study of health disparities this is not often done. In this chapter we show how social inequality leads to occupational and job quality differences that, in turn, lead to health differences.

Organizational approaches to racial inequality have provided contextual insight into a host of traditional stratification outcomes (e.g., hiring, earnings, authority). This chapter extends the organizational approach by drawing on the health-stress framework to explore how organizational context affects experiential and health-related outcomes – discrimination, social support, and psychological distress. Drawing on a sample of Black workers in the United States, we examine the relationship between workplace racial composition and psychological distress, as well as two potential mediators – racial discrimination and workplace social support. Our findings reveal that psychological distress is similar for Black workers in token (<25% Black coworkers), tilted other race (25–49.99% Black coworkers), and tilted same race (50–74.99% Black coworkers) job contexts. Workers in Black-dominated jobs (>75% Black coworkers), however, experience significantly less psychological distress than other compositional thresholds, net of individual, job, and workplace characteristics. This relationship is not explained by either racial discrimination experiences or supervisor and coworker social support. This finding suggests that researchers need to theorize and examine other protective factors stemming from coworker racial similarity.

This study examined whether life satisfaction varied among women who occupy different motherhood statuses, and if these variations were influenced by differences in women’s internalization of cultural motherhood norms. We distinguished among women as biological mothers, stepmothers, and “double mothers,” who were both biological and stepmothers. We also included two groups of women without children: voluntary childfree and involuntary childless women.

Data were drawn from the National Study of Fertility Barriers and analyzed using OLS regression.

Biological mothers reported greater life satisfaction than women in other motherhood statuses. Accounting for the internalization of motherhood norms, double mothers had significantly lower life satisfaction compared to biological mothers, but voluntary childfree women had significantly greater life satisfaction. More detailed analyses indicated that internalization of cultural norms only appears to influence the life satisfaction of women with biological children.

The results suggest that it may not simply be motherhood that affects women’s well-being, but rather that women’s internalization of motherhood ideals, particularly when it corresponds with their motherhood status, significantly impacts well-being. Limitations of this study include small cell sizes for some categories of women where additional distinctions may have been useful, such as lesbian or adoptive mothers. Future work should incorporate diverse family forms and expand on the newly named category “double mothers.”

By providing a more nuanced approach to categorizing motherhood status, including identifying double mothers, stepmothers-only, and two groups of childless women, the study added detail that has been overlooked in previous work on well-being.

In this chapter I argue that the distance research in international business studies is at a turning point, not in terms of its popularity, nor the quantity of articles published, but rather, in terms of the types of issues that are explored. Past distance research has largely been conducted at the level of the firm and/or the market – that is, linking national-level measures of distance with specific firm behaviors and outcomes. However, the seminal paper by Shenkar (2001) represents a shift in focus that is only just beginning to gain traction. This shift involves stepping back and beginning to unpack the black box we call ‘distance’ by exploring the micro-level mechanisms involved. In essence, it is about digging deeper in multiple aspects, to understand when, why and how distance matters in the international business (IB) context. These are issues that until now have typically been neglected. A metaphor borrowed from the social psychology literature, known as Coleman’s Boat, is used as a vehicle to explain the key issues involved in this shift and the opportunities for future research.

This paper explores four works of contemporary fiction to illuminate formal and informal regulation of sex. The paper’s co-authors frame analysis with the story of their creation of a transdisciplinary course, entitled “Regulating Sex: Historical and Cultural Encounters,” in which students mined literature for social critique, became immersed in the study of law and its limits, and developed increased sensitivity to power, its uses, and abuses. The paper demonstrates the value theoretically and pedagogically of third-wave feminisms, wild zones, and contact zones as analytic constructs and contends that including sex and sexualities in conversations transforms personal experience, education, society, and culture, including law.

Purpose – This chapter examines the electoral coalition and leadership style of Columbus’ Mayor Michael Coleman.Design/methodology/approach – An analysis of State of the City addresses, in-depth interviews, and an analysis of scholarly publications and news stories was conducted.Findings – The first Black mayor of Columbus, Ohio, Michael Coleman was elected by forging an electoral coalition between the city’s majority White and minority Black community. Once in office, Coleman was faced with the challenge of creating a governing coalition that addressed the downtown development interests of his White constituency and the community redevelopment needs of Black residents. While he has favored economic development, Coleman has delivered some noteworthy benefits to the Black community, especially in terms of neighborhood revitalization and community redevelopment. Given the challenge of balancing such divergent interests, Coleman’s accomplishments are noteworthy. Nevertheless, he has been unable to facilitate significant upward mobility of the Black community, and Blacks continue to remain underrepresented in government. This chapter explores the role of racial politics in Coleman’s elections and his policy focus once elected. Attention is also paid to the Coleman administration’s efforts to improve the socioeconomic situation of Blacks. We argue that Coleman’s leadership fits within the “universalized interest approach,” taking advantage of compromises between seemingly polarized parties to produce mutual, if qualified, benefits. In this way, Coleman has placated those with power, ensuring a long tenure as mayor and an extended window of opportunity with which to create change in Columbus.Practical implications – This chapter sheds light on how a minority mayor can come to power in a majority White city today.Originality/value – This is the first analysis of Michael Coleman’s leadership and provides a valuable example of the possibilities and limitations faced by a Black mayor in a majority White city.

The chapter intervenes in the debate among scholars of legal impact about the extent to which law can change society. Reformers, aims are frustrated when targets of law respond with resistance to court decisions, especially where mechanisms to enforce case law are weak (Hall, 2010; Klarman, 2006; Rosenberg, 1991). Even when law’s targets abide by a law, however, other important studies have demonstrated that organizations can leverage ambiguous language to craft policies in compliance that further their aims (Barnes & Burke, 2006; Edelman, 2016; Lipson, 2001). This chapter examines a case in which a state constitutional provision banning affirmative action was written in relatively unambiguous language and one of its targets announced its intention to comply. Through extensive interviews with University officials, this chapter examines the University of Michigan’s use of financial, technological, and political resources to follow the language of the law while still blunting its impact. These findings suggest that to understand law’s impact on society, we need to reconceive compliance and not only take the clarity of the law and its enforcement mechanisms into account but also attend to the goals, resources, and practices of the groups it targets.