Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697735936726.pdf (Georgia)
Center for Social Sciences REPORT PAPER OF THE STUDY „GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET“ Nani Bendelani, Pirjo Turk, Mariam Amashukeli, Lili Khechuashvili, 1 The research was funded by USAID in scope of the project "Promoting gender equality in employment" Tbilisi 2014 Authors Nani Bendeliani, the research leader cooperates with the Center for Social Sciences since 2007.

She is a CSS alumnus, graduate of MA program in International Relations in 2005.
She obtained the MA degree in Development Studies specialized on economics of development from the Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam in 2011.

She was appointed as Interim Director of CSS Gender Equality Research Program in 2012 overseeing all research projects being implemented in GE program at CSS.

Nani also works as research fellow of Education and Development Research Program implementing different research activities.
From Fall 2013 Nani is involved as a consultant in TSU strategic development working group.

Pirjo Turk, senior researcher is a gender equality expert.

Since 2010 she worked as an analyst of labour and social policy in Estonia, Praxis Center for Policy Studies.

After moving to Georgia, she has continued to work with different projects for Praxis as a fellow researcher.

Since March 2014 she joined Centre for Social Sciences as a senior researcher.
She has graduated the Estonian Institute of Humanities in 2003 and was awarded a bachelor’s degree in sociology.

From 2005 to 2009 she studied at the University of Helsinki and graduated the Master’s programme in sociology in 2009.

She has complemented her studies of sociology also at the New York University.

Mrs Turk’s fields of research are gender equality, sociology of the family, masculinity studies, reconciliation of work and family life, youth studies, and subcultures.
She also works as a gender equality consultant for organisations and businesses and received a special training for that from the Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs.

Mariam Amashukeli, junior researcher cooperates with CSS since 2012.

She represents Gender Equality and Applied Social Research programs at CSS.

Ms. Amashukeli holds BA in Sociology (2005-2009, TSU) and MA in Anthropology-Interdisciplinary Research (2009-2011, TSU).
Her current research interests are mostly focused on gender stereotypes, sexual harassment, national identity and Europeanization issues.

Since February 2014 Ms. Amashukeli leads her own research and policy oriented organization - ‘Social Change Supporters’.

Lili Khechuashvili, PhD in Psychology is faculty member at TSU from 2005 and leads courses in undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate levels of study.
Dr. Khechuashvili’s research experience involves research in psychology, media and social research.

Her current professional and research interests consist of narrative identity, posttraumatic growth and psychological well-being issues.
Lili is cooperating with CSS since 2004 in different projects including Graduate Programs at FSPS, TSU leading Research Methods Training Module course for TSU PhD students, Media monitoring projects, translation projects, administration of CSS online journal Caucasus Social Science Review.

From 2013 she is actively involved in CSS Applied Social Research Program and its activities.
2 Abstract The current study „Gender discrimination in Georgian labour market“ focuses on gender, based on social constructionist theory, which claimes that gender is socially constructed and the gender differences are not based on person’s biology.

Gender discrimination is defined as a situation, where one person is treated differently due to person’s gender, race, age, sexual orientation, etc.
The study focused on the areas of gender inequality and discrimination in employment pointed out in various international studies, researches and theories.

More specifically the study concentrated on categories where gender discrimination in labour market mostly occurs: recruitment, training and promotion, firing, wages, benefits, equality of treatment and (gender and sexual) harassment.
In order to find out, if Georgian labour market faces gender discrimination in above proposed categories, a representative survey was conducted in all over Georgia.

1364 people active in labour market (who defined themselves as employed formally or informally) were interviewed for the survey.

The present study has depicted the inequality among the average salary distribution among man and women regardless the similar educational attainments.
Women’s average salary ranges between the 251-400 GEL whereas in man’s case the average salary is between 401-700 GEL.

Educational level does not affect man’s salary (except PhD degree), while women should have an undergraduate or graduate degree to earn the average salary of man with secondary education.

The unequal average salaries can be influences by the fact that more man (65%) work for the private sector, whereas women are working in private and public sectors in equal shares (47% respectively).
Horizontal and vertical segregation also contributes to wage inequality - the study has found the evidence of both horizontal and vertical segregation in Georgia.

Vertical segregation is manifested by the fact that 65% of respondents reported having a male manager, whereas 31% reported having female direct manager.
Horizontal segregation is reflected in findings that 79% of employees at human health and social work sector and 78% of employees at education sector are women, whereas 96% of employees in construction sector, 91% of employees in transportation and storage sector and 47% of employees at public administration and defence, compulsory social security sector are man.
It is noteworthy that membership in trade unions is rather low (13%) and 27% of total average of employed population do not have valid contracts with their employer, although slightly more women than man are members of trade unions.

Implying that there is risk of increasing the non-contract employment, already presented in high proportion on Georgian labour market.
Instead, the opportunity of encouraging the trade unions to act as supporters for the labour rights and equal rights can be used to improve the situation.
Chapter on discrimination in recruitment process has found out that only half of the respondents have participated in a job interview, 44% of the respondents mostly uses their social capital (friends, family 3 and acquaintances) as a channel for finding a job and 63% have found their current job through friends, family and acquaintances, shows that the principal of equality is not always prevalent in recruitment processes.
Although such recruitment practices are less expensive and in a way might seem more safe (as a worker already knows the qualification of the recommended person), it can also reproduce gender- based work division, as women have more contacts among women and men with men, the recommendation-based recruitment strengthens segregation.

Based on the survey, it can be concluded, that in job interview asking questions about private life, is regarded normal practice.
Over 65% of men and women had been asked questions about their marital status and over 40% questions about the number of children.

Such questions don’t refer to person’s qualifications and thus can be source for discrimination.

Age discrimination is prevailing problem in Georgian labour market.

The respondents, who had experienced turn-down from the job they applied for, reported as a reason for turn-down mostly their age.
Also in advertisements with discriminating criteria the age as a limiting condition for applying was mostly mentioned.

There is significant gender differences in training opportunities, but men are the ones who have had the opportunities to go to trainings much less than women (41% vs 59%).

The reason for such difference is probably mostly conditioned by the labour market segregation.

Also, men and women have had quite equal opportunities for the career promotion as well as pay wise promotion.
The gender disparity exists in benefits and other wage components - 66% of men (who have been eligible for bonuses/compensations) have got bonuses, while among women this indicator is almost twice lower with 34%.

Also 60% of men have got premias, while the same experience has been for 41% of women (who responded that they have been rewarded compensations/benefits by their employer).
The significant finding regarding benefits was that there is also a wide gender gap regarding the health insurance – 67% of men and just 33% of women claimed, they have health insurance provided by their employer.

Regardless the fact that national health insurance exists in Georgia, the private health insurance often provides better or extra coverage of health-related expenses.
Many gender differences regarding bonuses, benefits and compensations can most probably be explained also by the gender segregation in Georgian labour market, however the gender gap in regards of bonuses,premias and compensations was significantly wide, which may refer also to the gender discrimination.
Although, the majority of survey respondents, both women and men report they have not experienced difficulties related to the unfair treatment at their workplaces, the research findings show there are certain number of interviewees exposed to discrimination on the labour market.
And as the results show, the employed women tend to be more vulnerable and exposed to the work-related discrimination compared to men and especially, when it comes to the salary issue, including the payment for extra working hours, e.g.

almost every fifth women have experienced unequal treatment salary wise.
However, the question arises whether there is such low rate discrimination at the Georgian labour market or some other factors like as employed citizens’ low awareness of their labour rights affect strongly the data distribution.

The principle that equal work deserves equal pay whatever gender the employee is, seems not to be adopted by majority.
Only 53% of women and 42% of men found that such 4 situation where the co-workers doing the same job on the same position are paid differently is considered to be discrimination.

If this principle is not regarded a basic right for everyone, it is difficult to struggle with the gender pay gap and overall inequality in the labour market.
Despite the fact that approximately 3% of the respondents claimed that they have been harassed in their workplace, based on the more specific questions with descriptions of different harassing situations, the share can be regarded higher.

Although on one hand some situations are not regarded harassing by the employees, on the other hand people may not think of such unpleasant situations as harassment.
Regarding questions were different situations of harassing behaviour were described, men felt such situations in most cases least unpleasant than women.

But also men chose more often the answer “Can’t imagine”.

This refers to the fact, that women are more vulnerable and potential victims of harassment.

Harassment is still regarded as a situation, which should be dealt with alone.
The share of men and women who responded to the harassment chapter in the questionnaire was rather low and comparison between men and women is therefore difficult to proceed.

Also as written in the beginning of the chapter, women felt uncomfortable responding to such questions in their home environment, where their husbands were near.
5 Table of Contents Authors .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Table of figures ............................................................................................................................................. 7 1.
2.

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Literature review on discrimination at workplace .............................................................................. 10 2.1.

Overview of the researches and surveys related to gender equality in Georgia ....................... 10 2.2.
Employment background ............................................................................................................ 13 2.3.

Recruitment ................................................................................................................................ 14 2.4.

Training, promotion and firing .................................................................................................... 16 2.5.
Wage components ...................................................................................................................... 17 2.6.

Equality of treatment .................................................................................................................. 17 2.7.
Harassment in workplace............................................................................................................ 18 The motives of harassers .................................................................................................................... 19 Outcomes of sexual harassment: ........................................................................................................ 21 Types of harassment ........................................................................................................................... 22 3.
Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 22 Testing the questionaries .................................................................................................................... 23 The field work ..................................................................................................................................... 24 4.
Analysis of the study ........................................................................................................................... 25 4.1.

Background of the respondents ..................................................... Error!

Bookmark not defined.


Demographic background of the respondents ................................................................................... 25 Employment background of the respondents .................................................................................... 29 4.2.
Recruitment ................................................................................................................................ 33 Summary of the recruitment .............................................................................................................. 37 4.3.
Training, promotion and firing .................................................................................................... 38 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 40 4.4.
Wage components ...................................................................................................................... 40 Summary of wage components .......................................................................................................... 43 4.5.
Equality of treatment .................................................................................................................. 43 6 Summary of equality of treatment ..................................................................................................... 45 4.6.
Harassment ................................................................................................................................. 46 Summary of the harassment ............................................................................................................... 49 5.

Further recommendations .................................................................................................................. 50 5.1.
Recommendations for policy making ......................................................................................... 50 5.2.

Recommendations for further studies ........................................... Error!

Bookmark not defined.


References .................................................................................................................................................. 52 Appendixes .................................................................................................................................................. 57 Appendix 1.

Focus group interviews with the employees ...................................................................... 57 Appendix 2.
Questionnaire (in English) ................................................................................................... 60 Appendix 3.

Questionnaire (in Georgian) ................................................................................................. 7 Appendix 4.

Questionnaire manual (in Georgian) .................................................................................... 7 Table of figures Table 1.
Distribution of population 16 years and older according to status of economic activity (%) ....... 11 Table 2.

Age and Gender Distribution ......................................................................................................... 25 Table 3.

What is the highest level of education you have attained?

.......................................................... 26 Table 4.

What is the average range of your spouse's salary (net)?
............................................................ 29 Table 5.

Employment Status .......................................................................... Error!

Bookmark not defined.

Table 6.

Do you have more than one employer?

....................................................................................... 29 Table 7.

Do you have a valid contract with your employer(s)?

.................................................................. 30 Table 8.
How many hours do you work in average in a week?

*percentages of working women and man are different, therefore, the total does not represent the average of man and women ............................ 30 Table 9.

Do you work full time or part time (among your main employer)?..............................................

30 Table 10.

Would you like to work full-time?

............................................................................................... 30 Table 11.
Do you work for a public or a private employer?

....................................................................... 31 Table 12.

Do you go to work in the same city/town/village where you live?

............................................ 31 Table 13.

Are you or have you ever been a member of a trade union or similar organization?

If yes: is that currently or only previously?

............................................................................................................... 31 Table 14.
Among your colleagues are there mostly women or men?

........................................................ 32 Table 15.

In your work do you cooperate/collaborate (for example with co-partners, clients, patients, students, etc) more with men or women?

................................................................................................. 32 Table 16.

Would you like to have more women or men?

.......................................................................... 32 Table 17.
What is the gender of your direct manager?

.............................................................................. 32 Table 18.

How many times you have been in job interview?

(% among those who have been in a job interview) .................................................................................................................................................... 34 7 Table 19.

In a job interview have you been asked questions concerning your:.
(% among those who have been in a job interview) ............................................................................................................................... 35 Table 20.

Please specify what was the formal reason?

(% among those who had got feedback why they were turned down) ...................................................................................................................................... 35 Table 21.
When looking for a job, have you experienced, that the job advertisement you were interested in, had some criteria not related to potential workers’ skills, education, experience, etc.

....................... 36 Table 22.

Please specify, what were the criterias?

(% of those who have seen discriminating advertisements) .......................................................................................................................................... 36 Table 23.
What channels have you used the most for finding a job?

......................................................... 36 Table 24.

For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?.

37 Table 25.

For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?

(% of employees working in public or private sector) ...................................................................................... 37 Table 26.

Why didn’t you apply?


(% of those who did not apply for the higher/other position offered by their employer during last 2 years) ............................................................................................................. 39 Table 27.

How many times have you got any premias/bonuses during last year?

.................................... 42 Table 28.

If you think about your company/organization where you are working, do you agree or disagree with the assertions?
..................................................................................................................... 42 Table 29.

Do you feel that your current employer has ever treated you unrightfully in following matters?

% of those who answered "yes" .................................................................................................................. 44 Table 30.

Have your extra working tasks been compensated?


.................................................................. 44 Table 31.

Below are listed some labour market situations, please assess what do you think about such situations ..................................................................................................................................................... 45 Figure 1.

The Average Monthly Nominal Salary of Women and Man in Georgia, 2011-2013 (GEL) .......... 11 Figure 2.
Economically Inactive women and man in Georgia, 2009-2013 (%) ........................................... 12 Figure 3.

Average Salary Distribution.......................................................................................................... 26 Figure 4.

Women's educational level and average range of salary ............................................................ 27 Figure 5.
Men's educational level and average range of salary .................................................................. 28 Figure 6.

What are the compensations/benefits?

...................................................................................... 41 8 1.

Introduction The current study „Gender equality in employment“ focuses on gender, based on social constructionist theory.
According to the social constructionist theory gender is socially constructed and the gender differences are not based on person’s biology.

Gender is not only socialized into our personalities, it also sets the parameters for interaction expectations and is built into our social institutions (Lorber 1994, Risman 1998, Blair-Loy 2003).

People’s preferences are socially constructed through labour market, but also through family and other social institutions (Bettio, Verashchagina 2009).
The situation of men and women in labour market reflects the situation of gender equality in society.

In every society gender inequality reveals itself within the labour market (Vainu et al.

2010).

Gender stereotypes and attitudes prevalent in societies influence women’s and men’s position in everyday life and labour market.

For instance, what is regarded as appropriate and desirable in boys’ and girls’ upbringings is later replicated as the gender-segregated labour market.
Moreover, the division of domestic chores and the double burden that women face has an effect on women’s ambitions and ability to have a career.

Furthermore the prevalence of sexual harassment and attitudes toward prostitution clearly reflect the gendered power relations in a society.

In addition to the former, domestic violence has also had an impact on people’s physical and mental health and coping.

It also influences violence victims’ capability to work at and cope with a job.
Thus the dominant gender stereotypes and attitudes have a direct or indirect impact on a persons’ self-actualisation in their work life.

The characteristics and the way of working is a significant part of person’s identity and the income earned by working is one of the most important guaranties in order to avoid poverty and to manage with basic needs of life.

If the gender is socially structured, also work and working are part of creating femininity and masculinity.
In every sphere of life, people and institutions create femininity, masculinity and gender-based power-relations by their everyday behaviour and practices (Butler 1990, West et al.

1991).

This is also relevant in work life.

Thus it is important to study the attitude of work, work and family life reconciliation, working conditions, what is the position of men and women in work life, what are the differences in positions occupied by men and women.
Gender inequality in labour market does not impair only women, but it has an influence also towards men, who seem in better situation in labour market than women.

For example the gender segregation (occupational as well as sectorial) may limit the possibilities of men and women, who might not have the possibility to implement their potential in occupations they would like.
The economic recession had a greater impact on men’s unemployment as the financial crises hit more the construction and real estate sector, which are male-dominated.

Unequal treatment in case of working conditions is something women have to deal with in their everyday working life.

The situations where women can experience unequal treatment are gender- based discrimination as well as gender and sex-based harassment in workplace (see the paragraph below).
Discrimination can influence women’s position in labour market, segregation in education and labour market and also gender pay gap.

Gender discrimination is a situation, where one person is treated differently due to person’s gender, race, age, sexual orientation, etc.

In labour market this could lead to 9 a situation, where women and men working in same position, with the same productivity, earn different salary or where recruitment of people with same skills and experience, depends on gender.
The main purpose of the study „Gender equality in employment" is to find out: (i) (ii) the main focal points of gender discrimination in Georgian labour market; the awareness and the main risk groups of gender equality and discrimination among employers; In order to study the above proposed, the study will focus on the areas of gender inequality and discrimination in employment pointed out in various international studies, researches and theories.
The more detailed topics studied in the survey will be: recruitment, training and promotion, firing, wages, benefits, equality of treatment and (gender and sexual) harassment.

Based on various literatures about gender discrimination in employment, in the mentioned categories gender discrimination may take place mostly.
There will be a survey conducted among employees which will include sections concentrating on recruitment, training and promotion, firing, wages, benefits, equality of treatment and (gender and sexual) harassment.

In the following paragraphs the fields are more explicated and also hypothesis are raised.

The conducted survey aims to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

2.

Literature review on discrimination at workplace 2.1.
Overview of the researches and surveys related to gender equality in Georgia Gender inequality in labour market and income in Georgia is overwhelmingly clear by examining the disparities in average salaries and labour market participation of man and women.

Horizontal and vertical segregation is suggested by the existing data, but it is insufficient to draw the definite conclusions on this regard.
The further research and representative evidence is needed in the areas of gender-related sexual harassment, discrimination in hiring and firing, bonuses and benefits and work-life reconciliation.

The Georgian Bureau of Statistics annually provides the gender-disaggregated data on market participation, average salaries and average educational attainment.
According to official statistics, the average salary of women is falls behind that of man – in 2013 man’s average monthly nominal salary has constituted GEL 920, although the same indicator for women is GEL585 (see also Figure 1).

Respectively, women have earned on average the 63% of man’s salary in 2013, 60% in 2012 and 2011 (Georgian Bureau of Statistics).

Women’s unemployment is lower than men’s unemployment – 12% for women in 2013 and 17% for man (see also Table 1).
However, the level of economic activity is significantly higher for man, implying that the higher amounts of men are employed or looking for a job than women.

According to official data, 43% of women were economically inactive in 2013, for man, the same indicator stands as 23% (see also Figure 3).

The disparity in economic activity among man and women is observed over time in 2009-2013 the level of economic inactivity of women exceeds that of man at least for 20 percentage points (Figure 3).
The difference is partially caused by the higher life expectancy of 10 women in comparison with man in Georgia, but nerveless, 20 p.p.

is very high difference in level of economic activity for the county with the enrolment rates in primary secondary and tertiary education equal for the both genders or are exceeded by the women ((Georgian Bureau of Statistics).

Average Women Man 771 636 460 860 920 773 585 713 518 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 2011 2012 2013 Figure 1.
The Average Monthly Nominal Salary of Women and Man in Georgia, 2011-2013 (GEL) Average Unemployment Economically Active Employment Women Unemployment Economically Active Employment Man Unemployment Economically Active Employment Table 1.
Distribution of population 16 years and older according to status of economic activity (%) 11 46% 44% 44% 43% 43% Women Man 25% 25% 23% 22% 23% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure 2.

Economically Inactive women and man in Georgia, 2009-2013 (%) The causes of gender difference in salaries are rather understudied in Georgia.
Sepashvili (2011) attributes the differences among women’s and men’s earning to horizontal and vertical segregation – by interviewing the unrepresentative sample of man and women and comparing the average salaries female and male dominated sectors of economy, it was concluded that two main factors causing the unequal average wages are as follows: lower salaries in female dominated sectors such as education, health and social care and services (hotels and restaurants) and underrepresentation of women on highly paid managerial positions.
The same study has inquired the perceptions towards female employment and found out that majority considers women and man are paid equally in Georgia and lower position of women on career ladder is attributed to incompetence (ibid).

According the 2014 Global Gender Gap report 34% of legislators, senior officials and managers are women in Georgia (WEF 2014).
In the same report the wage equality from similar work is derived from the average salary gap, indicating to the lack of available data on equal pay (ibid).

Another area directly related to labor market inequalities is work-life reconciliation and attitudes towards gender equality and women’s employment.
UNDP (2013) survey has depicted that traditional attitudes towards gender roles are prevailing in Georgia: the function of women is confined to childcare and household chores and man are expected to provide for family.

Regardless the fact that 30% of the main breadwinners in households are women, it is generally perceived as undesirable situation and is preferable for women not to work at all, or to do less demanding, “female” work.
The traditional gender roles lead to the fact that the household and care work is the primary duty of women – no representative time-use data exist in Georgia, but preliminary estimates indicate that women perform 13 times more housework than man in Georgia (Sepashvili 2011).

Traditional stereotypes and lack of time makes it difficult for women to compete at equal level to man in labor market of Georgia.

12 2.2.
12 2.2.

Employment background Hypothesis 1: Georgian labour market faces high rate of gender segregation (vertical as well as horizontal), where the occupations and fields are dominated by one gender (women as teachers, men in construction) In last decades there have been remarkable changes in the attitudes of work and working among men and women.

A century ago women didn’t participate in the labour market (in paid jobs) at all, thus working in a paid job was found rather masculine.
Nowadays women have been active in labour market, they have often better education level than the men and women may have better skills, despite the fact that the working position of women is often lower than men’s.

Also the gender pay gap prevailing all over the world proves the inequality in labour market.

There are various reasons for the gender wage gap – from the differences in human capital to unequal treatment in employment market.
According to the human capital theory through life-time people invest to their skills, knowledge, education and experience, which form his/her human capital (Becker 1964).

In other words human capital is a collection of qualifications which are collected throughout life and which increase the value of the employee.

Based on the human capital theory the investments to human capital are different among men and women and therefore also the wages and productivity vary.
However this theory was more accurate half a century ago, when women’s participation in the employment market was rather low, women were less educated and focused on home chores.

(Anspal et al.

2009) The differences between the wages of men and women is often caused by the gender segregation of the labour market.
Meaning that women and men work in different sectors of activity and occupations and as the average wages in male-dominated sectors and occupations are usually higher than in female- dominated sectors, the segregation has a fundamental impact on the pay gap.

For example such sectors where women predominate is education, health care and other social services.

Men are more often occupied in sectors such as real estate, construction, information technology, forestry etc.
One reason for the labour market gender segregation is also the concentration of women and men in different educational fields.

Women and men make different educational choices and thus the segregation starts already in higher education level.

Various studies about gender segregation of labour market have also shown that male wages exceed women’s wages partially because men tend to study fields which would later ensure a higher income (Anspal et al.

2009).
2009).

In addition the career path of men leads more often to executive positions than in case of women.

The concentration of men in different occupational levels is called vertical segregation and women’s and men’s concentration into different labour market sectors is called horizontal segregation (Bettio 2002).
One of the hypothesis raised in the beginning of the current paragraph, is that the employment situation (including working conditions) is better in big towns than in smaller towns and countryside.

This hypothesis is based on the assumption that there are fewer employers in the rural areas than in big towns and Tbilisi.

Monopsony is a form of labour market, where is one buyer and many sellers (analogous to monopoly, which can be described with opposite characteristics).
In labour market context monopsony means a 13 condition where is one employer and a larger amount of employees.

In such case the employer may pay a lower salary than generally the salaries in such labour market sector are.

According to Robinson (1933, referred through Heinze ja Wolf 2006) the less sensitive the employees are about the salary offered, the lower salary is paid by the employer.
Robinson assumed also that the elastics of the female employment is generally smaller than in case of men due to the domestic chores and child care responsibilities.

Women are willing to work with lower salary, if the work enables them to be closer to their home and take care of the domestic chores and children.

Men don’t feel such responsibility about the domestic chores and as breadwinners are willing to work in longer distances if better salary is paid by employers in further distance.
Thus the monopsonistic employer may pay female employees less as the short distance is more important criteria for women than for men.

Monopsonistic discrimination is a situation when women are paid less than men despite the fact that their productivity is the same as their male counterparts.

(Heinze ja Wolf 2006) 2.3.

Recruitment Hypothesis 1: Male-dominated enterprises use more networking when hiring (meaning their friends and acquaintances) than female-dominated enterprises.
Hypothesis 2: During the recruitment process women are more often asked questions about their private life (marital status, number of children and plans to have children) than men.

Hypothesis 3: Social networking is a widely used channel when finding a job.

Recruitment is a decisive process in human resource policies which aim to treat potential workers equally and not to discriminate anyone.
If in recruitment process gender equality is not kept in mind, the process can reproduce gender segregation of labour market.

Thus recruitment depends on the human resource practices of the organization as well as the decision makers will to be open minded in regards of hiring new people.

For example employers often use social ties of other workers as a recruitment practice as it is more inexpensive and safer as a worker already knows the qualification of the recommended person.
Also employers tend to think that this method is more effective.

However recommendations based recruitment can reproduce gender-based work division.

As women have more contacts among women and men with men, the recommendation-based recruitment strengthens segregation.

(Anspal et al.
(Anspal et al.

2009) In explaining the existence of vertical segregation, the theory of glass ceiling states that despite the general increase of women’s employment, the amount of women in decision making occupations and executive positions is limited.

The “glass ceiling” presents the invisible barriers, which obstruct women and other minorities to get promoted career and/or salary wise in labour force (Weyer 2007).
This concept does not represent a situation where progression is hindered by the person’s own limited capability for working in a senior position, but artificially or invisibly created obstacles for women as a group (Morrison et al.

1987).

The existence of a glass ceiling provides a situation where the share of men in senior position jobs is higher.

An expression of the glass ceiling is also a greater difference between the wages of highly-paid men and highly-paid women.
Another term expressing the unequal treatment of women in employment market, is glass lift.

The term stands for a situation where in female- 14 dominated job men are treated in favour by managers, colleagues and clients.

Thus the opportunities of men to improve their career in their organization are better than among the female colleagues.

According to Williams (1989, 1995) male nurses, male elementary school teachers, male librarians, male social workers, etc.
are potential “riders” of the glass lift – meaning that compared to their female counterparts, they have much better chances to make career in their field.

Thus the occupations, which are mostly occupied by women, can be seen as a “diving board” for men, but as an obstacle for women, who are career-oriented.

(Hultin 2003) Various surveys have proved also, that in job interview women are more often asked questions about their marital status, number of children and intentions to have children.
In many cases this is relevant also in case when such questions in job interviews are forbidden by law.

A gender equality monitoring conducted in Estonia (Vainu et al.

2010) showed that over half (52%) of the employees were asked such questions, whereas in case of men only 39% had experienced questions regarding their family life.

The monitoring also showed, that questions about marital status have mostly been asked from respondents aged 30-39 years.
Questions about the number and age of children have been asked mostly (65%) from women aged 20-39.

In many studies it has been referred, that the structure of an organization which is more bureaucratic leaves less possibilities for the employer to make inconsiderate decisions, which are based on preferences.
Using bureaucracy should make decision-making impersonal, formalize and standardize the practices of the organization, and bring out the objective and controllable criteria evaluating productivity (Baron et al.

2007).

Various studies have also proved that formal rules and policies influence women’s career and choices.
For example Cross and Linehan (2006) found that the main obstacles women face in career path is being left out from informal networks, lack of transparent promotion- systems and difficulties in work and family life reconciliation.

They also found, that in majority’s eyes in case of male managers being married was an advantage, but in case of female manager, it was seen as a disadvantage.
It was substantiated with arguments, that if man is married, he will have support from home and he can be fully committed to work, but in case of women, there is need to take care of the home chores and thus female managers are willing to give up their career more easily.
In recruitment process the job candidates often do not have complete information about the job offered (for example working conditions and requirements), thus it is difficult for the employers to get full information about the skills and character of the potential worker (Boeri et al.

2008).

This could lead the employer to use information based on candidates’ group (for example gender, nationality) average qualifications for evaluating the productivity.
For example a prejudice that women are better caretakers and men better managers.

Women’s discrimination in employment market can often be influenced by the differences in working experience of women and men.

Since it is predominantly women who due to family obligations (raising children, etc) can be inactive from labour market for a certain period, their average length of working experience is shorter than for men.
Studies carried out on this topic have demonstrated that it is in particular career breaks at the beginning of the career that are one of the main reasons determining wage differences between women and men.

This can lead to employers fear that women of child- 15 bearing age are more likely to drop out of working life for some period, which may influence their recruitment, promotion and also training options.

The third hypothesis stated that social networking is a widely used channel when finding a job.
During the last decade the concept of social capital developed from a concept into a large field of research.

The theory is widely used: from studies about families and youth behaviour problems, public health, economic development to democracy and governance.

In general we can say that social capital is always about relationships.

Kwon et al.
Kwon et al.

2014 state that social capital researches have mainly concentrated on the horizontal structuring of societies and organizations and less attention has paid to their vertical construction.

In 1960s Domhoff reported that the extensive social ties and social bonding that consolidated a “ruling class” in the United States (Domhoff, 1967 referred through Kwon et al.

2014).

Thus social capital can be regarded as privileges and benefits arising from social relations, which may cause inequality.
Based on the study by Davis, Yoo, and Baker (2003) the network of corporate board memberships in US found that the average director was connected to 16 other directors, but a few had interlock ties to as many as 100.

Such findings refer to advantages of such social ties and which may lead to inequalities known as the Matthew effect (Merton, 1968).

The effect is about high-status people benefiting from networks more than their lower-status counterparts.
For example, the relation between using networks to find a job and job quality is stronger for high socioeconomic status workers than for low socioeconomic status workers (Ioannides et al.

2004) and as there are more men in decision making positions, the ties give stronger privileges for men than for women (Åberg et al., 2011).

As described at the beginning of the chapter, recruitment based on social networks can reproduce gender-based work division.
As women have more contacts among women and men with men, the recommendation-based recruitment strengthens segregation.

(Anspal et al.

2009) 2.4.

Training, promotion and firing Hypothesis 1: Men have better opportunities for job promotion career wise as well as pay wise Hypothesis 2: For various reasons (care responsibilities, “glass ceiling”, etc) women cannot participate in trainings as frequently as men.
Hypothesis 3: Women get fired more often due to care responsibilities and thus experience more often discrimination.

There are many explanations why there are less women in executive positions, why there is „glass ceiling“ in organization’s vertical hierarchy (Oakley 2000).

One of the explanations focuses on organizational practices and policies, which have an impact on men and women’s different career.
This is because often organizations prefer (especially in case of executive positions) in recruitment and promoting process men instead of women.

The other theory explaining the lack of female in executive positions concentrates on cultural reasons, which arise from stereotypes, division of power, preferred management styles, the psychodynamics of women and men.

Trainings are important personnel practices, which aim to improve the skills of a worker and can help employees in their career paths.
It can be said that the decisions about investing to employee’s human capital are done also by employers through trainings.

If an organization 16 prefers to invest rather to train men than women (because the risk of woman leaving is higher), it leads to men’s higher level of human capital.

Donlevy et al.
Donlevy et al.

2008 finds that it is important to ensure that women have equal opportunities for access to training and to promotions as it is the preliminary step to facilitating equal opportunities for career development for women, and to fighting against glass ceilings and walls.

In many organizations trainings take place in weekends or not in work environment.
Although this can be positive for the training results, often it is not easy for women to arrange child-care when trainings take place in irregular time or venue.

Such details may also influence women’s career opportunities.

2.5.
2.5.

Benefits and other Wage components Hypothesis 1: Men get bonuses more often than women Hypothesis 2: Men have more benefits/compensations provided by their employer The differences between the average wages of men and women remain in the entire world in favour of men, despite the fact that women’s educational levels are higher and women start their career in same age.
Despite the fact that average gender pay gap does not mean a difference in wages for the same job, or for work of equal value, gender pay gap is an indicator of gender equality in society.

The reasons for wage differences among men and women can be caused by direct or indirect discrimination.

One of the reasons why there is a wide gap in between the wages of men and women is that women lack self-confidence when negotiating the amount of their salary (Rõõm et al.

2004).
2004).

In case of confidentiality provision in employee’s contract, it is difficult to know the salaries of colleagues in same position.

According to a gender pay gap study conducted in Estonia (Kallaste et al.

2010) the gender pay gap is wider in organizations where there are no wage systems and wages determined based on wage negotiations between employer and employee.
Also there is prove that in case of collective negotiations by trade unions, the organizations wages are more equal (Elvira et al 2001).

2.6.

Equality of treatment Hypothesis 1: Women prefer not be on maternity leave because they fear to lose their job Hypothesis 2: Men can face discrimination by the employer if they need to be on sick leave with their child.
Hypothesis 3: Women experience more unequal treatment in workplace than men 17 Inequality of treatment due to ones gender is regarded as a situation where one person is treated or would be treated worse than another because of his/her gender.

Inequality of treatment may be prevalent in situations such as division of work, wage negotiations, working conditions, etc.

Gender equality means equal rights, obligations, liability and opportunities for men and women.
Gender inequality conversely, is rather widespread, despite the fact that men and women have legally- enshrined equal rights, obligations, liabilities and opportunities.

The gender pay gap, higher poverty rates among women and fewer women in the ranks of decision makers are evidence of this disparity.

Nevertheless, men’s rights, obligations, liabilities and opportunities are restricted in several areas of life (for instance in family life).
This is in turn a reason behind men’s lower health levels and quality of life indicators.

Social constructionism theory states that gender is socially constructed and differences are not based on biology.

The same principle also applies to women’s parenting abilities, which have been regarded as biological, but are actually products of society (Lorber 1998).
Gender is not only socialized into our personalities it also sets the parameters for interaction expectations and is built into our social institutions (Risman 1998).

As described in previous chapters, according to different studies, women are asked more often questions about their care responsibilities.

This referrers to a stereotype that women are not as involved workers as men, because of the need to take care of children and also elderly parents or relatives.
Such stereotypes may create a situation where women feel more threatened in work situations than men.

Various studies have also shown that stereotypes are prevalent also in case of men.

For example in case of man asking for a time off due to wish to be on paternity leave or a need to take a child to a doctor or being at home with a sick child.

2.7.

Harassment in workplace Hypothesis 1: Women report a significantly higher incidence of sexual harassment.
Hypothesis 2: The awareness of the concept of sexual and gender harassment is rather low There are many definitions for gender and sexual harassment.

One definition by Wynne et al.

1997, (cited in Di Martino et al, 2003) is that harassment are cases, where people are mistreated, threatened or insulted in work-related situations, which can directly or indirectly endanger their safety, well-being and health.

Gender and/or sexual harassment can be regarded as direct discrimination.
According to Fitzgerald (1993) sexual harassment in labour market has existed since women have been in employment.

However this standpoint is limiting as it leaves out the harassment of sexual-minorities, but also it refers that only men are motivated to sexually harass.

Based on various literatures, it is likely that also women harass sexually others (Magley et al.

1999; U.S.

Merit Systems Protection Board, 1995; Waldo et al.

1998).
1998).

In addition to the concepts of harassment, there are various other concepts like bullying, mobbing, harassment, psychological harassment, abusive behaviour, emotional abuse and workplace aggression 18 which make it even more confusing (Milczarek 2010).

Thus on the same time there exists many concepts, definitions and classifications, which are furnished differently by several disciplines (Biin et al.

2014).
2014).

Claybourn (2010) states that during the last 20 years, various terms have been used interchangeably to refer to, the same phenomenon, and the absence of an agreed-upon definition is challenging for the development of this topic.

Brodsky published a book “The Harassed Worker” in 1976 and this can be regarded as one of the earliest publishing focusing on workplace harassment.
In the book Brodsky described a situations of the claims filed with the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board and the Nevada Industrial Commission.

The claims involved the problematic behaviour of one employee by another and clearly referred that various forms of harassment were common problems in employment situations.

After “The Harassed Worker” published in 1976, little attention was paid to harassment until the 1990s when studies of bullying at work (Einarsen et al.
1994) and mobbing (Leymann, 1990) were studied by several European researchers.

A definition by Wynne et al.

1997 is that harassment are cases, where people are mistreated, threatened or insulted in work-related situations, which can directly or indirectly endanger their safety, well-being and health.

Gender and/or sexual harassment can be regarded as direct discrimination.

U.S.
U.S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) defines sexual harassment as “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.” Berdahl (2007) “conceptualizes sex-based harassment as behavior that derogates an individual based on sex”.
Claybourn (2011) defines “the term ‘workplace harassment’ as problematic interpersonal workplace interactions in which one or more employees feel themselves to have been victimized by one or more other employees”.

Harassment generally is repeated or persistent behaviour that provokes, pressures, frightens, humiliates, intimidates, or demeans a person (Adams & Bray, 1992; Brodsky, 1976; Einarsen, 2000).
In international theories and practices, two types of sexual harassment in workplace is discerned (Biin et al.

2014): 1. quid pro quo, where a.

Proposals and hints with sexual nature are directly or indirectly prerequisite when hiring a person or b.

Approval or rejection of sexual harassment is a subject/cause for making work-related decisions (promotion, division of work tasks, etc) 2.
Hostile environment, which comprises such behaviours like jokes with sexual nature, comments and touching, which disturbs person’s ability to work by creating a hostile and humiliating working environment.

The motives of harassers Berdahl (2007) finds that sex-based harassment is conditioned by the harasser’s desire to protect or enhance his or her own sex-based status.
Thus it should be viewed as harassment that is driven by sex, more specifically as behaviour that derogates, demeans, or humiliates an individual based on that individual’s sex.

It is a desire which stems from the system of gender hierarchy, which stratifies social status by sex.

This theory explains currently identified forms of sexual harassment and predicts others, including nonsexual harassment between women.
Berdahl (2007) claims also, that the discourse of sex- 19 based harassment has focused on behaviors of a sexual nature, but this has created the understanding that sexual harassers are motivated by a desire for sexual expression and satisfaction.

However the common understanding is that most harassment derogates and rejects victims based on sex rather than solicits sexual relations with them (cf.

Fitzgerald et al.

1988; Schultz, 1998).


Men who value male dominance are potentially more the ones to sexually harass (Pryor, 1987), and those who don’t endorse male dominance are more likely to be victims of harassment (Dall’Ara et al.

1999; Maass et al.

2003).

This suggests that sexual harassment is driven by men’s desire to dominate women rather than sexual desire.
Berdahl’s (2007) perspective expands the limits of sexual harassment as a treatment or behaviour between men as harassers and women as victims of sexual harassment, it discusses why women might harass others based on sex, why men might be harassed based on sex, and what these different forms of harassment might look like.

Hammond et al.
Hammond et al.

2011 find that the behaviour of potential harassers is an outcome of a culture, family upbringing, or abusive history that has developed that person callous and insensitive to the feelings and rights of others.

There are people who harass and discriminate against others to fulfil an inner desire for power and control.

Others do so because they are afraid of their own inadequacy or weaknesses.

Harassment stems from intolerance for those different than the potential harasser.
Transcripts from recent sexual harassment trials show tendencies on the part of the perpetrators of harassment to be explicitly unpleasant and despicable (Hammond et al.

2011).

Harassers are often driven by a desire to exert power and control over others for their own self- aggrandizement and personal gain (Glendinning, 2001).

Sexual harassment is often described as outcome of hierarchical relations at workplace.

Hammond et al.
Hammond et al.

2011 find that people with power positions and authority tend to abuse and misuse that power.

Snyder et al.
Snyder et al.

2010 found in their study “Social organization and social ties: Their effects on sexual harassment victimization in the workplace” that potential victims of sexual harassment in work environments were employees who characterized their workplaces as having less productivity, less administrative support, poorer time management, and lower quality relations between management and employees.
Also Tangri, Burt, and Johnson (1982) found that workplace relations (between co- workers and management) is a relevant characteristic in case of sexual harassment.

Also Aquino (2000) suggested that social ties between co-workers and management are an important indicator in case of sexual harassment as employees who experienced a tense work environment with high levels of co- worker conflict were at higher risk for experiencing sexual harassment.
Likewise other workplace characteristics such as low productivity, poor time management, and inadequate administrative support increased the risk to be sexually harassed.

There were no significant gender differences across models suggesting that the predictors of sexual harassment are similar for men and women.

Further, Fitzgerald et al.

1997 found on that the climate of the workplace culture has a significant antecedent to sexual harassment.
More specifically, the organizational climate of the workplace has an impact on sexual harassment occurrence which affects the outcomes of job satisfaction and the physical and mental health of employees.

Chamberlain, Crowley, Tope, and Hodson (2008) stated that organizational factors have an impact on the occurrence of sexual harassment in a 20 workplace.

For example according to their study work environments with job insecurity and anonymity had a higher prevalence of sexual harassment.
Theories of sexual harassment also suggest that traditionally male-dominated occupations have a tendency to experience higher levels of sexual harassment.

The gendered nature of work is the most commonly studied workplace characteristic in relation to the sexual harassment (Willness et al.

2007).

The concept of gender is correlated to the concept of sexual harassment.

Mueller et al.
Mueller et al.

2001 finds that women may be regarded as a threat to the traditional male power structure in workplace, which may lead to hostile work environment for women.

Ellis et al.

1991 reported that in case of gender segregated work places (where majority of the workers represent one gender), the risk of sexual harassment is higher.
Outcomes of sexual harassment: Although among different organizational psychology studies harassment has not been studied to the same extent as workplace behaviour (Claybourn 2010), it is claimed to be equally likely to influence organizations and their employees.

Various studies have indicated that employee satisfaction, work characteristics and employee behaviour are interrelated (Bacharach et al.

1992; Griffin, 2001; Gunter et al.

1996; Hemingway et al.

1999; Kacmar et al., 1999; O’Connor et al.


2001).

Fitzgerald et al.

1997 state that the victims of sexual harassment may get physical and psychological difficulties.

For the organization it can cause expenditures due to higher levels of absenteeism, higher levels of turnover, more intentions to quit, higher levels of illness (both physical and psychological) and reduced productivity of the employees.

It can also cause legal problems for organizations (Claybourn 2010; Faley et al.

1999; Miller et al.
1999; Miller et al.

1999) and bad image (Donlevy et al.

2008).

Baron and Neuman (1996) reported in their research, that organizational changes have a negative impact on the occurrence of workplace aggression.

More specifically they found that increased staff diversity, changes in management, pay cuts/freezes and increased use of part-time employees were in correlation to the levels of aggression experienced by employees.
As a result Baron and Neuman suggested that instability in organizations affects levels of aggression.

Claybourn (2010) investigated work-place harassment through Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), which indicates that the way humans think and behave is influenced by their social environment.

The purpose of Claybourn’s study was to find out the correlation among work characteristics, satisfaction, moral disengagement and workplace harassment.
The study showed that there was a close relation between job satisfaction and the work characteristics.

For example employees’ feelings of how they are treated by their organization, how co-workers interact with each other, whether their interpersonal needs are being fulfilled in the workplace and, their satisfaction with the job, are closely related to each other.
An interesting finding of Claybourn (2010) was that those employees who were more likely to justify their own injurious behaviours towards others reported being subjected to more negative behaviours by others.

Also research conducted in earlier years has found that there have been more harassment cases 21 in organizations where employees felt dissatisfied with their work environment (e.g.

Appelberg et al.

1991; Einarsen and Skogstad, 1996; Einarsen et al., 1994; Vartia, 1996; Zapf et al., 1996).
Claybourn’s study (2010) indicated that employees who had been accused of committing harassment reported being subjected to the highest levels of negative behaviours from others and had the highest tendencies for moral disengagement.

This could be explained by the assumption that some employees well-being was threatened as they had been subjected to negative treatment, and had prepared lowered their threshold for moral themselves to accept the necessity to harm others (i.e.
disengagement) as a way of dealing with the threat.

Types of harassment The most common form of sexual harassment is gender harassment, which includes sexual and sexist comments, jokes, and materials that alienate and demean victims based on sex rather than solicit sexual relations with them (e.g., Fitzgerald et al.

1988; Fitzgerald et al.

1997; Fitzgerald, et al.

1999; Franke, 1997; Schultz, 1998; U.S.

Merit Systems Protection Board, 1981, 1988, 1995; Waldo et al.

1998).
1998).

Berdahl (2007) describes sex-based harassment as “acts, comments, or materials that derogate an individual in sex-based ways, such as sexually objectifying and subordinating women”.

In her view it may also involve seemingly sex-neutral acts, such as repeated provocation, silencing, exclusion, or sabotage that are experienced by an individual because of sex.

Although sex-based harassment was originally described as a sexual act and later it has been conceptualized as an act of male dominance.
According to Berdahl (2007) it is an attempt to protect social status in a system that bases this status on sex, which explaines various forms of sex based harassment, including same-sex and other-sex harassment, harassment committed by men as well as by women.

A recent study “Sexual Harassment Versus Workplace Romance: Social Media Spillover and Textual Harassment in the Workplace” by Mainiero et al.

2013 stated that “textual harassment" is on the rise.
Textual harassment is regarded as sending offensive or inappropriate text messages to coworkers (Baldas, 2009; Hunton et al.

2009; Parker-Pope, 2011).

Nowadays textual harassment has more channels as the usage of social media technologies (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, blogs, Instagram, Foursquare) is increasing.

From the perspective of workplace harassment social media involves various risks associated with personal and professional connectivity, privacy, and intimacy.
Even if the behaviours take place outside the work environment, there are problematic aspects which social media creates.

Mainiero et al.

2013 finds that this topic needs to be further studied and specified more in academic and legal discussions for future accountability and action on the part of human resource professionals, business ethicists, and legal scholars.

3.
3.

Methodology To study the gender discrimination in workplace, the representative survey has been conducted in entire Georgia [excluding the separated territories of the South Ossetia and Abkhazia].

The survey has included the individuals who reported themselves as employed formally or informally in urban areas of Georgia.

It has not included the self-employed individuals or employed individuals residing in the rural 22 areas.
Totally, 1364 full interviews were collected, reflecting the specified target group with the 95% confidence interval.

One of the main challenges of survey-based study on work-place discrimination is the definition of employment.
The discrepancy among the official employment rate and reported employment depicted by the independent public opinion surveys is caused by the methodological difference – independent surveys simply ask individuals if they are employed or not, the National Statistics Bureau defines employment as at least one-hour paid work in certain time period.
The difference among the official and independent statistics is caused mostly by disregarding the self-employment or arbitrary work as an employment by the respondents.

The present study aims at depicting the gender discrimination at workplace, therefore relatively stable job should be the case to count it as an employment.
Self- employment is not the part of the present study for several reasons: most importantly, this is the first comprehensive study of work-related discrimination in Georgia therefore, to maintain the focus and quality of the study it has been narrowed down to the type of employment where discrimination is the most likely to happen; Secondly, the legal definition of discrimination in Georgia includes the “the behavior or creation of conditions” that caused the discrimination - it should include the subject of discrimination most likely the employer or colleague/s.
Based on described arguments, the reported employment [excluding the unemployment] has been considered as a valid measure for this study.

The survey has been conducted in households.

The sampling scheme was based on household data of 2010 Self-Governance Elections by National Statistics of Georgia.

The claster sampling method has been applyed – the electoral units (clusters) were identified in urban areas.

On average 5 interviews were supposed to be conducted in each electoral unit.
In the selected clusters one randomly selected starting address was given to the interviewer who was also instructed to select every 5th household in specific direction.

In case of three unsuccessful visits to a specific household, the latter will be excluded from the survey without substitution by a neighboring household.

Interviewing will be continued with the next 5th houseehold.
In each hoshold the inteviwer inquired about employed members of the houshold and continued inteviwing after identifing the employed person or persons.

In case of more than one employed person per houshold respondent were identified within a selected household (if needed) via Kish grid.

If nobody in the hosihold met the above-specified criterias of employment the interviwers were moving to the next 5th houhold.
In rural areas self-employment in agriculture is prevalent and salary-based employment is very low – after adoption of the sampling method based on houshold data the rural areas have been dismissed beacuse of infeasibility of collecting the represntative data on this subject.
Testing the questionaries In scope of preparatory work [5-20 May, 2014] before starting the main survey [employees] CSS conducted two focus-groups with employed women and men separately [16 respondents overall] in order to get the deeper insight for elaborating the final survey questionnaire.
During the focus group discussions the topics related to hiring and firing procedures, wages, promotion and benefits, opportunities for professional development and workplace harassment have been addressed (see also Appendix 1.

Focus group interviews with the employees).

23 The focus group discussions were followed by the pilot survey with sample of 40 respondents.

The data for pilot survey were collected in Tbilisi, Telavi and Batumi cities.
Based on pilot fieldwork evaluation and received feedback from the partner organizations, CSS research team designed the final version of the questionnaire composed from eight thematic parts [see also 24 Appendix 2.

Questionnaire].

The pilot survey has significantly contributed to final question choices and question phrasing.

The field work Prior to main field work, the sampling selection scheme was developed and the field managers have distributed the locations and tasks.
Interviewers’ training was arranged in Early June and 35 interviewers were trained and given detailed instructions.

Besides, written questionnaire manual [see also 25 Appendix 3.

Questionnaire (in Georgian) Appendix 4.

Questionnaire manual] with all necessary background information was distributed among interviewers.

The field work took 10 working days (16 – 27 June, 2014).

Field went without major complications and problems.

26 4.
26 4.

Analysis of the study The analysis of the survey is organized through the main areas of research and hypothesis described the conceptual part of the paper: employment background, recruitment, training and promotion, benefits and other wage components, equality of treatment and sexual harassment.

Each section analysis the gender-disaggregated data compares and explains the position of man and women in Georgia’s labour market.
The sections are followed by summaries depicting the main findings of each section in relation to hypothesis stated in the literature review.

4.1.

Employment Background This section covers the demographic variables of the study, average salary distribution and employment Background.
Employment background of the respondents includes the variables on number of employers, formal and informal employment, number of working hours, full and part-time work, sectors of employment, stability of contract, travel to work, membership to trade unions, horizontal and vertical segregation.

Demographic background of the respondents comprises the variables on the age, settlement type and education of respondents.
According to the gender distribution among the survey population 48% are women and 55% are men.

The majority of respondents are Georgians (91%) and Orthodox (91%).

The results show the respondents aged 18-25 and 56+ are the least represented at the Georgian labour market.

It is quite expected as people from 18-25 age group are mostly students whereas the citizens over 56 usually are self-employed or unemployed (National Statistics Office of Georgia, 2014).
(See Table 2) Age Gender female male 13% 27% 31% 13% 11% 5% 18-25 10% 26-35 23% 36-45 26% 46-55 21% 56-65 13% 65+ 7% TOTAL 12% 25% 29% 17% 12% 6% Table 2.

Age and Gender Distribution As the target group of presented survey were only employed people nationwide residing in urban areas, a bit more than a half of the research population (51%) were surveyed in Tbilisi and its outskirts and almost another half (47%) in towns .
Only 2% of interviews were conducted in villages – these are the outskirts of towns, allowing the residents to work in urban settlements.

15 is the number of years being in formal education for the majority (24%) of interviewees.

24% of respondents are with higher, 5-years diploma earned in soviet times – the first level of higher education system existing before introduction of three step higher education in Georgia (BA, MA, PhD).

and 21% hold a Bachelor degree.


Slightly more women outpace men in holding Master and PhD degrees.

(See Table 3) 27 The highest level of education Gender female Male Pre-primary education Secondary school level 0% 8% Vocational education on the basis of secondary education 14% BA student MA student PhD student Higher vocational education Bachelor degree Master’s degree PhD Soviet education 5% 3% 1% 6% 20% 11% 3% 27% Table 3.

What is the highest level of education you have attained?
2% 16% 11% 6% 1% 1% 8% 22% 7% 3% 21% 68% of survey participants are married.

And the greatest number of married people falls again under 26- 45 age category.

Hence, the respondents belonging to 26-45 age category are the most employed and married at the same time.

Those respondents never been married are the young adults aged 18-25.

Among the widowed interviewees the majority are women (11%) over 56 years.
In most cases (26%) there are the 4-member families including the children and respondents themselves.

When it comes to the salary distribution, the average salary for the majority of employed female respondents (33%) varies between 251-400 GEL whereas in men’s case the average salary ranges between 401-700 GEL.

(See Figure 3) What is the average range of your salary (net)?
35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 33% 30% 19% 19% 20% 7% 23% 7% 6% 2% 8% 1% 5% 4% 2% 1% 3% 2% 5% 4% up to 130 GEL 130-250 GEL 251-400 GEL 401-700 GEL 701-1000 GEL 1001-1300 GEL 1301-2000 GEL more than 2000 GEL I can't answer refuse to answer female male Figure 3.
Average Salary Distribution Based on the human capital theory (see also 2.2), educational level is one component of the human capital, which should be in linear correlation with range of salary – the higher the educational level, the higher the salary should be.

When looking at the correlation of the educational level and average range of salary, in general the higher education level does not guarantee a higher range of salary neither in case of women or men.
Among women, who have a degree in bachelor or masters level, there is a higher share of women whose average salary is between 401-700 GEL.

In all other educational levels, there are mostly women, whose average salary range is 251-400 GEL.

Among men, the average range of 28 salary is 401-700GEL despite the educational level.

Only in case of PhD degree, the share of men, whose range of salary is 1001-1300GEL, is higher (24%).
The average range of salary is much lower among women than men, while the share of women and men with the higher educational level is quite the same (see also Table 3).

In general we can say that among men, except PhD level, the higher educational level doesn’t influence the higher range of salary.

Among women, they need to have at least bachelor, masters or PhD level education in order to get the average salary of men with secondary educational level (see also Figure 4 and Figure 5).
This situation may refer to gender discrimination, but can be caused also by the educational segregation, where young women and men specialize in different subject fields.

For example the average salary among highly educated social workers is lower than the average salary of highly educated engineers.
Female 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Up to 130 GEL 130-250 GEL 251-400 GEL 401-700 GEL 701-1000 GEL 1001-1300 GEL Secondary school level Secondary vocational education Higher vocational education Bachelor degree Master’s degree PhD Figure 4.
Women's educational level and average range of salary 29 Male 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Up to 130 GEL 130-250 GEL 251-400 GEL 401-700 GEL 701-1000 GEL 1001-1300 GEL 1301-2000 GEL more than 2000 GEL Secondary school level Secondary vocational education Higher vocational education Bachelor degree Master’s degree PhD Figure 5.
Men's educational level and average range of salary The data on earnings of the majority of employed population’s spouses/partners has indirectly supported the average earnings indicators in this study: 9% of women [spouses/partners of employed man], the higherst percentage among the employed categores, has salary within the range of 251-400 GEL, whears the salary of man [spouses/partners of employed women] falls within the range of 251-400 GEL (7%) and 401-700 GEL (7%).
Out of those respondents who report to have a spouse without any paid job mostly are men (41%).

In contrary to male interviewees only 18% of women mentioned that their spouses do not work.

39% of working women do not have spouse, although from working man only 26% report the same, whereas 41% of man have the sposes that don’t work.
This suggests several associations: it can be more difficult for women to combine the work or family care responsibilities, employers might deliberately discriminate against married women or women don’t follow with their carieers after mariage.
The study of social attituds (UNDP 2013) has demonstrated that women are responsibly for the vast majority of household-related tasks and female employment is not as encouraged as male employment according to social attitudes, so the combination of factors might be contributing to the observation that large part of working women don’t have spouse, while significant part of married women with working husbends do not have job.

This is the subject of further research to draw the definite concusions.
(See Table 4) Spouse/partenr’s Average Salary Distribution Gender 30 I don't have a spouse He/she doesn't work on daily basis Retired I don't know up to 130 GEL 130-250 GEL 251-400 GEL 401-700 GEL 701-1000 GEL 1001-1300 GEL 1301-2000 GEL more than 2000 GEL difficult to answer refuse to answer Female 39% 18% 6% 3% 3% 0% 3% 4% 7% 7% 1% 3% 0% 0% 3% Male 26% 41% 3% 3% 1% 1% 3% 9% 5% 4% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1% Table 4.

What is the average range of your spouse's salary (net)?
In terms of validity and stability of the contract no considerable gender-related differences were discouvered, however, there is the gender disparity in full and part-time work.

On average, 13% of employees have more than one employer and 27% of all employees do not obtain the valid contract with the employer (see also Table 5).

The gender differences in terms of having the valid contracts or number of employers are insignificant (see Table 6).
Slight disparity is observed in relation to stability of the employment – 21% of man reports having the contracts for unlimited time, wears 15% of women enjoy the same privilege.

However there is considerable difference in full-time and part-time work – 5% of man and 15% of women work part-time (see also Table 7).
However, we can’t conclude that women choose to work part-time because of work-life balance, as 60% of part-time working women would like to have a full-time job (9% of employed female population).

Number of average hours worked by man and women are different – it stands 39 hours from women and 46 hours for man, but as noted above, majority of women desire to have the possibility work for more hours – it is not always women’s choice to work less, according to this data (see Table 9).
Do you have more than one employer?

Yes No Table 5.

Do you have more than one employer?

Do you have a valid contract with your employer(s)?

Yes Yes, with one/some of my employers (in case of having many jobs) No Gender Male 11% 89% Gender Male 70% Female 14% 86% Total Average 13% 87% Female Total Average 72% 71% 2% 29% 3% 25% 2% 27% 31 Table 6.

Do you have a valid contract with your employer(s)?

Is your contract unlimited?

Yes Table 7.1.


Unlimited Contracts Gender Male 21% Female Total Average 15% 18% How many hours do you work in average in a week?

Female Male 39 46 Total Table 7.

How many hours do you work in average in a week?

*percentages of working women and man are different, therefore, the total does not represent the average of man and women 42 Do you work full time or part time (among your main employer)?
full time part time work in sheets Gender Male 86% 5% 7% Female 79% 15% 4% Total Average 83% 10% 6% Other Table 8.

Do you work full time or part time (among your main employer)?

2% 2% 2% Would you like to work full-time?

Male Female Gender Yes No 3% 4% Not relevant Table 9.

Would you like to work full-time?

93% 9% 6% 84% Total Average 6% 5% 89% The significant gender-related difference is depicted in terms of employment in public and private sector.
Employed women are evenly distributed among the public and private sectors – 47% of women work in private sector and the same percentage works in public sector.

In case of man, almost two thirds of employees work in private sector (61%), and 35% work for public sector.

This can be explained by the fact that large portion of female-dominated employment sectors such as education and healthcare are public.

The gender-related difference is also observed in trade union membership.
Generally, membership in trade unions is very low for entire population (13%), but slightly more women than man are members of trade unions (17% of employed women VS 9% of employed man).

Do you work for a public or a private employer?

private sector public sector NGO Other Gender Male 61% 35% 1% 3% Female Total Average 47% 47% 2% 4% 54% 41% 2% 3% 32 Table 10.

Do you work for a public or a private employer?

Do you go to work in the same city/town/village where you live?
Yes Gender Male 88% Female Total Average 93% 90% No Table 11.

Do you go to work in the same city/town/village where you live?

10% 12% 7% Are you or have you ever been a member of a trade union or similar organization?

If yes: is that currently or only previously?

Yes, currently Yes, previously but not currently Gender Male 9% 18% Female 17% 28% Total Average 13% 23% No, never Table 12.

Are you or have you ever been a member of a trade union or similar organization?
If yes: is that currently or only previously?

64% 55% 73% Hypothesis on labour market in Georgia facing high rate of gender segregation (vertical as well as horizontal), where the occupations and fields are dominated by one gender was supported by the analysis of the study.

The horizontal segregation manifested in high percentages of man and women working mostly with the colleagues of the same gender - 69% of women work mostly with women and 66% of man work mostly with man (see Table 13).
This argument is further supported by the fact that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations tend to cooperate with the partner organizations and clients of the same gender – this stands for 33% of female dominated organizations and 45% of male dominated organizations (see Table 14).
Horizontal segregation is related to the social attitudes on traditional male and female roles deeply rooted in Georgian society (UNDP 2013), because 77% of employed population takes the horizontal segregation for granted – they like as it is or don’t care (see Table 15).

It is noteworthy that 7% of man would like to have more female colleagues, but think that they can’t do the job, although none of the interviewed women think that man can’t do their job.
Vertical segregation is supported by the observation that on average 65% if respondents reported having the male manager and 31% reported having female manager (see Table 16).

This number is close to Global Gender Gap Report data on female managers and legislators in Georgia – 34% (WEF 2014).
13% of male respondents say that they have a female manager and 51% of women reports having a male manager - implying that even in female-dominated organizations managerial positions are likely to be occupied by the man.

The same argument is supported by the social stereotypes existing in Georgia - 58% of general population think that man are better business leaders thank women (UNDP 2013, p. 42).

Among your colleagues are there mostly women or men?
Gender Male Female Total Average I work alone / I don’t have colleagues Mostly women Mostly men 2% 15% 66% 5% 69% 13% 4% 41% 41% 33 Approximately same amount of men and women 14% 12% 1% I don't know Table 13.

Among your colleagues are there mostly women or men?

3% 13% 2% do your work you In cooperate/collaborate (for example with co-partners, clients, patients, students, etc) more with men or women?

with women with men Gender Male 8% 45% Female 33% 9% Total Average 19% 28% Both men and women Table 14.
In your work do you cooperate/collaborate (for example with co-partners, clients, patients, students, etc) more with men or women?

53% 59% 47% The study has found the evidence of horizontal segregation in Georgia that is supported also by the data on male and female dominated field of occupation.

Figure 5.1 depicts the all employment sectors occupying at least 5% or more of total average of employed population.
It demonstrates that 79% of employees at human health and social work sector and 78% of employees at education sector are women, whereas 96% of employees in construction sector, 91% of employees in transportation and storage sector and 47% of employees at public administration and defence, compulsory social security sector are man.

Relatively female dominated is also finance and insurance sector (64% of women VS 36% of man) and manufacturing sector is relatively male dominated (67% man 33% women).
Administrative support and services sector as well as retile and wholesale trade almost equally occupy man and women.

Would you like to have more women or men?

Yes, I would like to have more women among my colleagues Yes, I would like to have more men among my colleagues I would like, but men/women couldn’t do the work No I like it as it is I don't care Other Table 15.

Would you like to have more women or men?


Gender Male Female Total Average 8% 6% 7% 8% 15% 12% 7% 27% 48% 1% 0% 25% 53% 1% 4% 26% 51% 1% What is the gender of your direct manager?

Male Female Gender Male 82% 13% I don't have one Table 16.

What is the gender of your direct manager?
5% Female 47% 51% 2% Total Average 65% 31% 3% 34 96% 91% 67% 33% g n i r u t c a f u n a m female male 4% n o i t c u r t s n o C 53% 47% e d a r t l i a t e r d n a e a s e o h W l l 64% 50% 36% 50% 74% 78% 79% 26% 22% 21 ; 9% e g a r o t s d n a n o i t a t r o p s n a r T Figure 5.1.
Percentage of Female and Male Workers in Different Sectors of Employment [It includes the sectors occupying at least 5% of total average of employers or more] 4.2.

Summary of Employment Background The present study has depicted the inequality among the average salary distribution among man and women regardless the similar educational attainments.

Women’s average salary ranges between the 251-400 GEL whereas in man’s case the average salary is between 401-700 GEL.
Educational level does not affect man’s salary (except PhD degree), while women should have an undergraduate or graduate degree to earn the average salary of man with secondary education.

The unequal average salaries can be influences by the fact that more man (65%) work for the private sector, whereas women are working in private and public sectors in equal shares (47% respectively).
Horizontal and vertical segregation also contributes to wage inequality - the study has found the evidence of both horizontal and vertical segregation in Georgia.

Vertical segregation is manifested by the fact that 65% of respondents reported having a male manager, whereas 31% reported having female direct manager.
Horizontal segregation is reflected in findings that 79% of employees at human health and social work sector and 78% of employees at education sector are women, whereas 96% of employees in construction sector, 91% of employees in transportation and storage sector and 47% of employees at public administration and defence, compulsory social security sector are man.
This explains the disparity among the women’s and men’s educational attainment and average salary, because the health, social security and education in Georgia are represented by mostly public organizations with lower average salaries, however, the tertiary education is needed to work for the most professions in these fields.
In contrary, transportation, 35 storage and construction sectors include more private organizations and secondary level of educational attainment is sufficient for the majority of professions.

Additionally, as survey has shown, majority of man and women work with the people of same gender in their organization and at some extent they also cooperate with the people of same gender outside of their organizations.
It can be concluded that besides the special measures in anti-discrimination law and labour law against gender-related segregation, education, especially school education should be targeted to offset the effect of social stereotypes.

It is noteworthy that membership in trade unions is rather low (13%) and 27% of total average of employed population do not have valid contracts with their employer, although slightly more women than man are members of trade unions.
Implying that there is risk of increasing the non-contract employment, already presented in high proportion on Georgian labour market.

Instead, the opportunity of encouraging the trade unions to act as supporters for the labour rights and equal rights can be used to improve the situation.

4.3.

Recruitment A litte bit more than a half (52%) of the respondents had participated in a job interview and the rest 48% stated that they have never been in a job interview.
Gender-wise the results did not have much difference.

Among those who have been in a job interview, 46% of the respondents had been in a job interview 2-4 times, 25% had had this experience only once.

The frequency of job interviews among women was higher.

30% of men and 21% of women who had been in job interview had that experience only once.

Whereas 52% of women had been 2-4 times in a job interview and among men the same frequency had been 40%.
(see Table 17) Frequency of the job interviews Once 30% 2-4 times 40% 5-7 times 14% 8-10 times 4% More than 10 times 8% 5% don't remember Table 17.

How many times you have been in job interview?

(% among those who have been in a job interview) female male Total average 21% 52% 12% 5% 6% 4% 25% 46% 13% 5% 7% 4% In a job interview 64% of women and 67% of men (who have been in a job interview) have asked about their marital status.
The number of children has been asked more often from women (43%) than men, but the share of men who have been asked such question is still unpredictably high with its 39%.

Less rare, but still more than every fifth respondent who has been in a job interview, has been asked about their plans to get married.

20% of women and 16% of men have been asked about their plans to have children.
Surprisingly in a job interview men and women have experienced questions concerning their private life quite the same amount (see Table 18).

However such questions are most often a base for discriminating and thus are prohibited to ask in a job interview in many welfare countries.

36 In a job interview have you been asked questions concerning: Female Male Your marital status 67% Your plans to get married The number of children Your plans to have children Doctoral proof that you are not pregnant Table 18.
In a job interview have you been asked questions concerning your:.

(% among those who have been in a job interview) 21% 20% 23% 16% 39% 43% 64% 6% 71% of the respondents have never been turned down for a job they applied for and 29% of women and 30% of men have experienced that the job they applied for was turned down.

There are no significant gender differences in such experiences.

Among those, who have been turned down a job, 71% did not get any feedback why they did not get the job they applied for.
As a feedback 20% of women and 17% of men were told that they were turned down because of their age.

30% of men lacked experience – this reason for turn-down is twice higher than among women, who marked this as a reason for not getting the job in 14% cases.

Gender differences were notable also in case of salary expectations – 2% of women and 6% of men were not hired because of too high salary expectations.
12% of women also reported that they were turned down because of the lack of their skills, while compared to men only 2% marked that as a reason for turn-down.

The percentage of women, who marked as a reason the education (either the level of education was too low/high or the vocation/subject where education received wasn't right), was slightly higher than among men (accordingly 8% and 6%).
(see also Table 19) 0% 0% 0% Male 6% Female 2% The reason for turn down Too high expectations for salary For being pregnant Due to my gender Due to my age Due to my care respondibilities Due to my plans to have children Due to the lack of experience Due to the lack of my skills Due to my education (for example the level of education was too low/high or the vocation/subject where education received wasn't right) Due to my difference of opinions Due to my sexual orientation Due to my marital status Due to my appearance Table 19.
Please specify what was the formal reason?

(% among those who had got feedback why they were turned down) 17% 0% 12% 14% 20% 30% 0% 2% 2% 8% 0% 4% 4% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 2% 6% The respondents were also asked, if they have had experience with discriminating job advertisements.

For example the job advertisement had some criteria not related to potential workers’ skills, education, experience, etc.
Every fourth respondent (25%) have seen job advertisements with criteria not related to the skills, education, or experience related to the requirements of the occupation (see also Table 20).

female male Total average Yes 27% 22% 25% 37 No 73% Table 20.

When looking for a job, have you experienced, that the job advertisement you were interested in, had some criteria not related to potential workers’ skills, education, experience, etc.
78% 76% The respondents had mostly experienced age-related discrimination.

Three-fourths (75%) of respondents, who had seen job advertisements with discriminating content, had seen advertisements where the required age was mentioned.

Among all respondents 19% had seen such age-discriminating advertisements, which means that almost every fifth person in Georgian labour market has had experience with age-discriminating advertisements.
21% of men had also seen advertisements where only women can apply, whereas 9% of women had only seen such advertisements.

14% of women and 20% of men had also seen job advertisement, which stated that only men can apply.

Please specify, what were the criterias?

Female Male Total average Only woman can apply Only men can apply Only people in certain age can apply Table 21.

Please specify, what were the criterias?


(% of those who have seen discriminating advertisements) 20% 17% 73% 75% 21% 15% 77% 14% 9% The most common channel for finding a job is through friends, family or acquaintances.

47% of the men and 40% of the women who had participated in the survey, claimed that this is the mostly used channel for them to find a job.

It is also noteworthy, that networking through friends, family and acquaintances in that sense is more common among men than women.
This maybe caused by the fact that there are more women working in public sector, which is more regulated and protected in regards of discrimination.

The second most popular way for finding a job was through internet recruitment sites.

38% of women had used such channels and 33% (every third male respondent) had used internet recruitment sites in order to find a job.
Newspaper message boards are less common channels for finding a job and around every tenth (11%) respondents have had newspaper message board as a mostly used channel when looking for a job.

Recruitment companies are the least popular way for job seeking.

What channels have you used the most for finding a job?

1.

Internet recruitment sites Female Male Total Yes No 62% 38% Yes No 67% 33% Yes No 65% 35% 2.

Friends/family/acquaintances 3.

Newspaper message board 4.

Recruitment companies Table 22.


What channels have you used the most for finding a job?

10% 3% 40% 60% 47% 53% 44% 56% 90% 11% 89% 11% 89% 97% 3% 97% 3% 97% In order to be even more specific about the recruitment practices in Georgia, we asked respondents how (through which channels) they have found their current job.

The reality shows, that networking and using the social capital is even more prevailing.
Despite the fact, that people use also other channels for finding a job (see paragraph above), in reality far more than half, 63% have found their jobs through friends, family and acquaintances.

This refers to the circumstances that social capital is more important than the human capital (defined as the skills, knowledge and experience of individual employees within 38 the organization) in recruitment process.
Only every tenth respondent had found his/her job through internet recruitment site and around 6% had been promoted in their organization/company and got to the current position that way.

(see also Table 23) For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?

1.

I was promoted in my company/organization 2.

Internet recruitment sites 3.

Friends/family/acquaintances 4.

Newspaper message board 5.

Recruitment companies Table 23.


For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?
Male Yes No Total Female Yes No Yes No As public sector is more regulated and recruiting people should be more transparent, the results of the question “For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?” were also analysed from the perspective on the sector where the respondents worked.
The data proves that in private sector there are more people (74%) who have found their current job through friends, family and acquaintances, but the share of employees who have found their job like that in public sector, is also remarkably high with 54%.

Unfortunately the survey did not have a question about the length of working in the current job, but the data refers to corruptive recruitment system.
9% of the public sector respondents have been promoted in their organization, whereas in private sector 4% had got their current job by promotion.

Private sector employees find their jobs more often through internet recruitment sites than the public sector workers (accordingly 12% versus 7%).

(see also Table 24) For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?

1.

I was promoted in my company/organization 2.

Internet recruitment sites 3.


Friends/family/acquaintances 4.

Newspaper message board 5.

Recruitment companies 6.

Other TOTAL: Table 24.

For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?
(% of employees working in public or private sector) private sector 4% public sector 9% 100% 100% 71% 54% 12% 28% 11% 7% 2% 3% 0% 1% Summary of the recruitment As claimed in the Literature review, recruitment is a decisive process in human resource policies which aim to treat potential workers equally and not to discriminate anyone.

The main purpose of the chapter was to find out, if people have experienced discrimination in recruitment process.
The fact, that only half of the respondents have participated in a job interview, 44% of the respondents mostly uses their social capital (friends, family and acquaintances) as a channel for finding a job and 63% have found their current job through friends, family and acquaintances, shows that the principal of equality is not always 39 prevalent in recruitment processes.
Finding a job through social capital is a wide-spread practice in many countries, especially within the increase of social media increase.

However the social capital can be a channel of job advertising, but should lead to transparent job recruitment processes.

The fact, that so few have never been in a job interview, may refer that the recruitment processes are not always systematic.
This situation may not harm only the discriminated potential employees, but can influence also the employers effectiveness as the employees are not hired based on the best qualifications, but rather recommendations.
Although such recruitment practices are less expensive and in a way might seem more safe (as a worker already knows the qualification of the recommended person), it can also reproduce gender-based work division, as women have more contacts among women and men with men, the recommendation-based recruitment strengthens segregation.

Based on the survey, it can be concluded, that in job interview asking questions about private life, is regarded normal practice.
Over 65% of men and women had been asked questions about their marital status and over 40% questions about the number of children.

Such questions don’t refer to person’s qualifications and thus can be source for discrimination.

The chapter also showed that age discrimination is prevailing problem in Georgian labour market.

The respondents who had experienced turn-down from the job they applied for, reported as a reason for turn-down mostly their age.
Also in advertisements with discriminating criteria the age as a limiting condition for applying was mostly mentioned.

4.4.

Training, promotion and firing Approximately 31% of Georgian men and women have experienced promotion in their current job, which refers to the fact, that Georgians tend to work in the same organization for long time.

82% of the respondents, who had been promoted in their current job, were offered the higher position, 11% applied for the job or promotion.
15% of women and 13% of men have had opportunities to apply for a higher/other position offered by their employer during last 2 years.

However only 10% of those who had the opportunity applied for the position available.

One of the main reasons for not applying was that the respondents were not interested in that position - 30% of the respondents (who didn’t apply for a higher/other position offered) named that as a main reason.
Also in case of women 12% did not apply because of their care responsibilities.

In case of men this reason was the least selected (2%).

The same amount of men and women (11%) felt that they would not meet the expectations for the job.

It is noteworthy, that 15% of men selected the variable “Too much responsibility in the job”, while the percentage of women choosing this variable, was 9%.
These are interesting findings and in a way disprove the stereotype, that men are more venturesome and take more risks.

(see also Table 25) Why didn’t you apply?

Female Yes No Male Yes No I felt I would not meet the expectations for the job Due to my care responsibilities 11% 86% 11% 88% 12% 86% 2% 98% 40 I was not interested in that position Too much responsibility in the job Table 25.

Why didn’t you apply?


(% of those who did not apply for the higher/other position offered by their employer during last 2 years) 88% 67% 69% 31% 30% 84% 15% 9% The employees were also asked if they have felt that their employer has provided them with enough work tasks, which would help them to prove themselves to the employer and help them to get promoted career-wise.
Although more than half (56%) have felt that their employer has provided them with enough work tasks, almost third (32%) of the respondents feel that they have not gotten the chance to prove themselves through such work tasks.

Among male employees (34%) this feeling is slightly more prevalent than among female employees (31%).

60% of the employees who responded to the survey have been promoted pay wise.

Among men and women there are no significant differences.
37% of women and 32% of men claimed that the initiative for the promotion was by employer as it was a general pay rise for all of the employees.

Although the general pay rise has been the most frequent reason for all of the respondents, the percentage was 5 p.p higher in case of women.

This may be reasoned by the fact that women work more often in the public sector, where wage promotion is more coordinated and the human resource policies more regulated.
In case of male employees the wage promotion was more often initiated by their manager - 23% of the man and 17% of the women chose the answer “It was my manager’s initiative”.

Only 2% of female and 3% of male respondents have asked for promotion themselves.

The majority - 79% of those who had not been promoted pay-wise in their current work, had not asked for a promotion either.

More than every fifth (21%) person who had not been promoted pay-wise, had asked for promotion.
The percentage of women who had asked for a promotion was slightly higher than in case of men.

The respondents were also asked if they have had training opportunities provided by their current employer.

It is remarkable that much more women have had training opportunities than men - 59% of women and 41% of men have participated in training.

Majority of the respondents who had got such chance to participate in the training, also went to the training.
14% of the women and 10% of men would like to participate in training, but their employer does not provide trainings for the employees.

Significantly 27% of men claimed that there are no trainings in their field and thus they cannot participate in a training.

In case of women only 15% answered that “there are no trainings in the field they are working at”.
This refers again to the labour market segregation, which has been described also in previous chapters – the sectors as well as fields of work are segregated by women’s and men’s jobs and areas.

The survey covered also questions about the experience of firing.

The survey results demonstrate the majority of respondents (86%), both women and men have never been fired.

Only 13% reported having such an experience.


4% of survey participants said they know only one co-worker who got fired because 41 of pregnancy and 3% know more than one co-worker with the same experience.

There are no gender differences in this regard.

As the share of respondents who have experienced or know someone who has been fired is small, the results are not representative.
Summary The hypothesis for this section were, that:  Men have better opportunities for career promotion as well as pay wise  For various reasons (care responsibilities, “glass ceiling”, etc) women cannot participate in trainings as frequently as men.

This chapter did not find proof for the hypothesis raised in literature review.

According to the results men and women have had quite equal opportunities for the career promotion as well as pay wise promotion.
31% of women and 32% of men have been promoted career wise and 60% of the employees (men and women) who responded to the survey had been promoted pay wise.

There is significant gender differences in training opportunities, but men are the ones who have had the opportunities to go to trainings much less than women (41% vs 59%).

The reason for such difference is probably mostly conditioned by the labour market segregation.
Women work more in public sector and in such sectors, were employers organize trainings.

4.5.

Benefits and Other wage Components As the differences between the average wages of men and women remain in the entire world in favour of men, the study focused also on the wage components, compensations and benefits.
Based on the focus group interviews, such benefits are bonuses, premias, business trips, lunch and free transportation provided by the employer, trainings, health compensations for personal car usage, usage of mobile phone, etc.
insurance, The survey results show, that there are more employees, who don’t get any additional benefiits from their employer - 61% of survey participants have not received any kind of extra reimbursement or benefits and the rest 40% of respondents have been provided by some type of compensations at their workplace.

In general premia is the most frequently (56%) reported compensation among those interviewees who have ever been rewarded.
Usage of mobile phones (38%) and health insurance (38%) are the mostly reported work-related benefits after the premiums.

According to survey data 32% of respondents have been remunerated by bonuses.

Trainings are also mentioned as one of the benefits provided by the interviewees’ employers (28%).

It is worth noting, that trainings are the only type of benefit gained by slightly more female survey respondents (53%) compared with males (47%).
Also the previous chapter (4.4) describing the trainings, showed that women have participated more in trainings.

However it is significant to note that all of the 42 other compensations/benefiits described in the survey, are more often provided to men.

Men have more often the compensations for car usage (either using a personal car or a company’s car).
If the compensation of car usage could refer again to the segregation and the fact, that men work more often in occupations and sectors (transportation, logistics) where mobility is more required, attention should be drawn on the data indicating that health insurance is more available for employed men than for women (SeeFigure 6).

Such data refers to larger problems of gender equality and may refer also to gender discrimination.
It is also remarkable, that there are large differences in case of financial benefits (bonuses and premias).

66% of men (who have been eligible for bonuses/compensations) have got bonuses, while among women this indicator is almost twice lower with 34%.

Also 60% of men have got premias, while the same experience has been for 41% of women (who responded that they have been rewarded compensations/benefits).
There are also gender differences in the percentages of men and women who get free lunch and free transportation to work.
(see Figure 6) Gender Distribution of Benefits at Workplace Bonus 34% Premia 41% 66% 60% 32% 56% Business trips 47% 53% 6% Trainings 53% 47% 28% Female Male Total Health insuarance 33% 67% 38% Lunch provided by the employer Free transportation to work Compansation of using perosnal car Possibility to use company's car 40% 36% 15% 23% 60% 21% 64% 85% 6% 7% 77% 16% Usage of mobile phone 35% 64% 38% Mobile phone 47% 53% 7% Figure 6.

What are the compensations/benefits?


43 According to the research data the majority of survey participants have received neither premia (62%) nor bonus (81%) during the last year.

Almost 18% of interviewees reported the reception of premias and 8% of bonuses only once during the last year.

Slightly more employed men outpace women in receiving bonuses and premiums 3 times and more during the last year.
Overall, it is observed there are no significant gender differences in distribution of financial rewards during the last year.

(See Table 26) Premia Female Male Total Female Male Total 65% Bonus 62% 81% 60% none once twice 8% three times or more 9% Table 26.

How many times have you got any premias/bonuses during last year?
11% 18% 10% 17% 19% 12% 10% 85% 78% 6% 8% 7% 5% 8% 2% 8% 4% 7% As for the fair wages, overall 56% of survey participants do not believe their workload is paid sufficiently: 66% of employed women and 48% of men share the same position.
When it comes to the gender sensitive questions regarding equal opportunities for pay-wise and carrier-wise promotion, equal distribution of remunerations and work-related benefits between women and men, the vast majority of interviewees, both females and males agree there is no gender discrimination observed (See Table 27).
It is interesting to note, that men and women agree almost equally with the assertions “Men and women have equal opportunities for compensations/ benefits” and „Men and women have equal opportunities for bonuses".

However the previous paragraphs showed, that in reality men and women have large gaps in regards of having dfferent bonuses/premias provided by their employers.
This may refer to the fact, that men and women do not talk about different bonuses and compensations to each other and thus do not perceive inequality in those matters.
Disagree Female Male Total Female Male Total 66% Agree 48% 39% 31% 56% 47% 16% 62% 11% 53% 16% 10% 16% The amount of my salary is fair The way my employer promotes employees is fair Men and women have equal opportunities for promotion Men and women, who make the same job (who are employed in same position) get paid equally Men and women have equal opportunities for wage increase Men and women have equal opportunities for compensations/ benefits Men and women have equal opportunities for bonuses Table 27.
If you think about your company/organization where you are working, do you agree or disagree with the assertions?

64 % 66% 11% 63% 58% 61% 63% 66% 75% 61% 70% 67% 70% 65% 60% 62% 66% 7% 6% 7% 7% 7% 6% 9% 6% 6% 5% 8% 6% 44 Summary of Benefits and Other Wage Components This chapter proved the hypothesis stated in the literature review chapter about wage components, that there are great differences among men and women in regards of bonuses, benefits and compensations.
According to the hypothesis men get bonuses more often than women and men have more benefits/compensations provided by their employer.

66% of men (who have been eligible for bonuses/compensations) have got bonuses, while among women this indicator is almost twice lower with 34%.

Also 60% of men have got premias, while the same experience has been for 41% of women (who responded that they have been rewarded compensations/benefits by their employer).
The significant finding regarding benefits was that there is also a wide gender gap regarding the health insurance – 67% of men and just 33% of women claimed, they have health insurance provided by their employer.

Regardless the fact that national health insurance exists in Georgia, the private health inssuaranse often provides better or extra coverage of helth-related exspences.
Many gender differences regarding bonuses, benefits and compensations can most probably be explained also by the gender segregation in Georgian labour market.

Women work more in public sector than in private sector.

As private sector works for profit, bonuses and premias are most probably more paid than in public sector, where good work results are not always rewarded by premias/bonuses.

Also the usage of car (either personal or company provided car) is a benefit, which male employees can enjoy more.
This can also be caused by more men working in sectors, where mobility is more required.

However the gender gap in regards of bonuses,premias and compensations was significantly wide, which may refer also to the gender discrimination.

4.6.

Equality of treatment The majority of female (83%) as well as male (80%) respondents reported that their absence from the workplace due the child’s or close family member’s illness will be taken understandingly by their managers.
The same is said regarding the co-workers by 87% of female and 86% of male respondents.

Nor the need of parental leave caused any problems for the survey participants (20%) at their workplaces: 38% of women outlined that their decision on parental leave has been taken positively by the employers and only 2% mentioned that their leave did not last as long as they wanted.
When it comes to men’s parental leave, 80% of interviewed male respondents said the issue concerning parental leave is not relevant for them.

The respondents were asked if they have been treated unrightfully in some work-related situations by their employers.

Although in most situations the greater part of survey participants had not experienced unequal treatment, there were certain situations were remarkably large share of interviewees faced injustice.
It should be emphasized that women have experienced more inequality.

According to the data, 19% of the respondents felt that they have been treated unrightfully due to the salary.

More female respondents (22%) referred to the salary problem in comparison to male respondents (15%).

12% reported unfair conduct according to the division of work-related tasks and slightly more women (15%) than men (10%) responded in this respect.
10% of the respondents claimed that they have encountered problems related to the working hours.

Significantly more female respondents had 45 experienced such problems (12%) compared to men (7%).

Also considerably more women (11%) experienced injustice when planning vacation.

7% out of the interviewees mentioned about the unfair treatment in recruitment process and most of them are women.
(See Table 28) Female Male 10% 15% 15% 22% 8% Division of work-related tasks Salary wise In providing facilities and equipment for work When planning vacation In compiling work schedule Providing trainings In recruitment process Working hours Table 28.

Do you feel that your current employer has ever treated you unrightfully in following matters?
% of those who answered "yes" 11% 7% 4% 8% 12% 7% 4% 3% 6% 7% 9% When it comes to the workload, 50% of survey participants said they were told to work over-time while the other half of respondents reported not having such an experience.

However, slightly more men (53%) outpace women (47%) out of those interviewees with over-time working hours.
The majority of those respondents working over-time reported they have never been paid for their extra workload (57%) and slightly more women (60%) than men (55%) have been exposed to this type of discrimination.

(See Table 29) Always In most cases Sometimes Never Female 22% 6% 12% 60% 27% Male Table 29.

Have your extra working tasks been compensated?


55% 11% 7% In order to have a clear picture about the interviewees’ attitudes towards and awareness of workplace discrimination the survey participants were asked to assess some of labour market related situations.

According to the data (see Table 3) it might be assumed that there is no remarkable borderline between understandings of discriminatory conduct and treatment causing sort of unpleasant feelings.
As the results show both, women (12%) and men (11%) think that the least discriminating is if woman is asked about her marital status or number of children at job interview.

Hence, 35% of female and male respondents consider it to be just an unpleasant experience and the majority reported it to be totally acceptable treatment to a woman seeking for a job.

In case of female interviewees firing of pregnant employee is considered to be the most discriminating treatment (64%).
Also, the majority of male respondents (50%) think this is discrimination.

However it is remarkable, that there is a 14p.p difference and for women this is more discriminating than for men.

This difference of opinion might be due to the fact that such situation as firing of pregnant employee concerns mainly women.
46 Most of the situations describing women’s direct discrimination due to their gender is perceived almost similarly by female and male survey participants, though it is expected women are more gender sensitive.

For instance, slightly more women (44%) outpace men (38%) at assessing the situation as discrimination when the employer decides not to send the female employee for a week to training because of her little child, though the woman was willing to go.
Besides, the same number of women (44%) and little bit more men (47%) report such treatment towards employed woman is unpleasant rather than discriminating.

It is significant that in the situation where gender is not emphasized and the condition described as the co-workers doing the same job on the same position are paid differently is considered to be discrimination only by 53% of women and by 42% of men.
Slightly more men (47%) think this is just the unpleasant occasion whereas 36% of women think the same.

It means that the elementary principle that equal work deserves equal pay is not considered as a basic human right.

For example in Estonia, 92% of the population supports the principal that men and women should receive same amount of salary for same (amount and kind of) work.
(see also Table 30) Female This is acceptable This is unpleasant This is discrimination Don’t Know Male This is acceptable This is unpleasant This is discrimination Don’t Know job 2% 7% 4% 5% 3% 12% 48% 64% 53% 35% 36% 31% 46% 35% 41% 11% 50% (marital interview the In employer asks woman questions about private life status, number of children, etc).
The employer will fire an employee after hearing about her pregnancy Employees who are in the same position (and make the same kind of work) paid get differently (by the same employer) The employer decides not to send the female employee for a week to a abroad, because the woman has little child (although the woman would want to go) An employer doesn’t an want educated female mechanic, assuming that have doesn’t she technical skills Table 30.
Below are listed some labour market situations, please assess what do you think about such situations training 38% 42% 36% 14% 47% 46% 44% 44% 11% 39% 31% 48% hire 5% 8% 4% 7% 4% 7% to 8% 5% 5% 12% 14% Summary of equality of treatment Although, the majority of survey respondents, both women and men report they have not experienced difficulties related to the unfair treatment at their workplaces, the research findings show there are certain number of interviewees exposed to discrimination on the labour market.
And as the results 47 show, the employed women tend to be more vulnerable and exposed to the work-related discrimination compared to men and especially, when it comes to the salary issue, including the payment for extra working hours, e.g.

almost every fifth women have experienced unequal treatment salary wise.

is perceived According to the responses even to take the paternity positively/understandingly by their employers.
Thus, the hypothesis that men might be more exposed to discriminatory practice by the employer if they need to be on paternity or sick leave with their family members is ignored.

leave or sick leave However, the question arises whether there is such low rate discrimination at the Georgian labour market or some other factors like as employed citizens’ low awareness of their labour rights affect strongly the data distribution.
The principle that equal work deserves equal pay whatever gender the employee is, seems not to be adopted by majority.

Only 53% of women and 42% of men found that such situation where the co-workers doing the same job on the same position are paid differently is considered to be discrimination.

If this principle is not regarded a basic right for everyone, it is difficult to struggle with the gender pay gap and overall inequality in the labour market.

4.7.
4.7.

Harassment In order to find out if the people active in Georgian labour market have had experience with harassing situations, many such situations were described to the respondents and asked, if someone has behaved like that.

As questions about sexual harassment can be rather delicate and personal, the questions concerning harassment were given on a separate envelope, that the respondents could fill the questionnaire by themselves.
Despite the fact that interviewees were enabled privacy while answering to harassment related questions, the turnout was rather low.

Therefore the following chapter about harassment cannot be generalized on whole working population in Georgia.

The chapter about harassment is rather illustrative and would need further, qualitative research in order to find out how many people experience gender or sexual harassment in their workplace.

3% of the respondents have been harassed in their workplace.
96% claim that they have never experienced harassment in their workplace.

2% of the respondents have been harassed in their workplace in last 12 months.

The respondents were also asked about different situations which may be harassing and if the respondents would consider such situations unpleasant if in their workplace colleague, manager, client or someone else would behave like described in following situations.
56% of women and 52% of men would feel unpleasant, if someone would comment on their appearance or body.

On average 31% of men and women claimed that it would depend on who makes the comment.

10% of men and 7% of women stated that such situation would not be unpleasant.

The opinions differed remarkably among men and women in case of the variable someone “tells you or in the presence of you suggestive jokes of a sexual nature”.
55% of the women felt that it would be 48 unpleasant, while among men only 39% found such situation unpleasant.

Among the different situations presented to the respondents, women felt this the least harassing, unpleasant situation.

In fact almost every fourth (24%) of men found that it would not be unpleasant.

66% of women and men found that it would be unpleasant if someone would comment on their private life or marital status.
Almost every fourth (24%) of female and every fifth (20%) of male respondents found that it depends on who would be commenting their private life.

83% of the women and 69% of the men would find it unpleasant, if someone refers or calls them with a nickname of a sexual nature.

15% of men also find that the situation depends on who would behave accordingly.
Women would feel also more bothered if someone would comment their sexual life – 86% of women and 75% of men reported that a situation where someone would comment on their sexual life, would be unpleasant.

Women found also more unpleasant the situation where someone suggests to spend spare time with him/her although they have refused previously – 74% of women and 60% of men found such situation unpleasant.
Men and women (87% and 86%) agreed mostly with the proposition that the situation when someone from work leaves person’s suggestions or opinions uncountable, because the person is a man or a woman is unpleasant.
On the other hand less men and women were bothered with a situation where someone from work “gives you additional tasks, which are not related to your work, because you are a man/woman “ – 66% of the respondents found it unpleasant, 15% of the respondents thought that it depends on who asks and 13% don’t mind such situation.

Compared to women men stated more often, that they cannot imagine the situations where someone from their work would behave harassingly.
For example almost third (32%) of the male respondents claimed that they cannot imagine if someone from their work would force them to have sex with them.

The share of women who answered that they cannot imagine such situation was 23%.

The respondents were asked also what they would do, if they would have to deal with behaviour described in previous paragraph.

Most of the respondents, 72% of men and women answered that they would probably try to deal with this situation by themselves.
While 17% of the women would tell their manager, only 5% of the male respondents would react like that.

This refers to hegemonic masculinity attitude, that men have to deal with such issues themselves.

But it is also important to keep in mind, that men often couldn’t imagine such situations, thus it is probably difficult for them to find those situations problematic.
It is significant also that 10% of women answered that they would quit their job, whereas only 5% of men found that they would react like that.

28% of the respondents stated that their company/organization has internal procedure rules, which prohibit such harassing behaviour (described before) and which they could refer to in case such situation(s) would happen.

44% of the respondents answered that they don’t have such rules and 29% do not know if their company has.
49 The men and women participating in the survey were also asked if they have experienced any harassing situations in their workplace during last 12 months.

Third of the men (33%) and 27% of women answered that someone in their workplace has told in their presence suggestive jokes of a sexual nature.

18% of women and 14% of men had also experienced that someone in their workplace comments on their appearance or body.
11% of the respondents had had someone commenting on their private life or marital status.

Also every tenth respondent had been given additional tasks, which are not related to their work, but was related as a task for man or a woman (i.e moving furniture, making coffee).

10% of the men and 7% of the women had experienced also a situation where someone from their work suggested to spend their spare time with him/her although she/he had refused previously.
Majority of the women (68%) and men (80%) claimed that such situation was not unpleasant for them.

However almost third (32%) of the women found such situations to be unpleasant, while in case of men only 17% answered that such situation was unpleasant.

The respondents were also asked “Did you feel during or after the incident that it was somehow your fault?”.

19% of women and 13% of men felt that such situation was their fault.
The respondents, who had experienced any of such situations listed above, were asked about the occurrence of the most unpleasant situation described previously.

For 38% of women such situation had happened once, while for men only 8% claimed it had happened once.

31% of men and 28% of women had had such situations 2-4 times.

In case of women 9% claimed that such situation continues, while in case of men only 3% reported about the continuity.
Over half of the women (56%) have talked about the situation to someone, whereas among men 41% have told about it.

In most cases (28%) men and women talk about such situation to their friends, acquaintances and also colleagues (22%).

Interestingly men talk about such situation more often to the family member (16%) than women (12%).

7% of the women also marked, that they talk about situations to the priest, whereas men didn’t chose that option at all.
None of the respondents have told about such situation to the police or psychologist.

The respondents who had experienced such situations, but did not tell about the situation to anyone, claimed that they would have to take care of the situation themselves – 21% reported so.

In case of men that is not regarded manly and 15% of men had chosen an answer “I was ashamed”.

In case of women only 6% felt that they were ashamed.

8% of women did not tell anyone, because they were afraid of losing their job.
In case of men only 3% were afraid of that.

In case of women the person who has caused harassing situations had been mostly (25%) a male colleague who works in same position.

It is remarkable and even unpredictable, that according to the survey, male respondents claim that they have experienced harassing behaviour mostly by male manager or a colleague on a higher position.
15% of men and women (who have experienced harassing behaviour) had been harassed by their female colleague who works in same position.

Quite logically women had experienced unpleasant behaviour by male client, patient, student, or other (11%), men had had same experience from female client, patient, student, or other (10%).
50 Summary of the harassment Despite the fact that approximately 3% of the respondents claimed that they have been harassed in their workplace, based on the more specific questions with descriptions of different harassing situations, the share can be regarded higher.

Therefore it can be said, that the hypothesis stated in the literature review have found proof and the awareness of the concept of sexual and gender harassment is rather low“.
Although on one hand some situations are not regarded harassing by the employees, on the other hand people may not think of such unpleasant situations as harassment.

Regarding questions were different situations of harassing behaviour were described, men felt such situations in most cases least unpleasant than women.

But also men chose more often the answer “Can’t imagine”.

This refers to the fact, that women are more vulnerable and potential victims of harassment.
Harassment is still regarded as a situation, which should be dealt with alone.

The other hypothesis proposed in the literature review “Women report a significantly higher incidence of sexual harassment.“ cannot be proved, as the share of men and women who responded to the harassment chapter in the questionnaire was rather low and comparison between men and women is therefore difficult to proceed.
Also as written in the beginning of the chapter, women felt uncomfortable responding to such questions in their home environment, where their husbands were near.

51 5.

Further recommendations 5.1.

Recommendations for policy making  Based on the study, only every second employee in Georgia has had an experience of participating in a job interview, 44% has mostly used their friends, family and acquaintances as a channel for finding a job and 63% of the employees have found their current job the same way.
Although recruitment through social capital can be effective and it is considered to connect various forms of human capital, it can be regarded also as privileges and benefits arising from social relations, which may cause inequality.

This situation may not harm only the discriminated employees, but can influence also the employers effectiveness as the employees are not hired based on the best qualifications, but rather recommendations.
Recruitment based on recommendations can also reproduce gender-based work division, as women have more contacts among women and men with men, the recommendation-based recruitment strengthens segregation.

The recruitment process may be also recommendations based (in addition to announcing through different channels), but the job interviews and final decisions in order to hire someone, needs to be based on professional and transparent criteria (such as education, skills, experience, etc).
Therefore based on the study we recommend amending the laws (anti-discrimination as well as labour code) in order to make the recruitment processes more transparent, less discriminative and also effective.
However, with the consideration of the fact that there is 27% of non-contract based employment depicted by the present survey, we recommend to introduce the policy changes step by step, preferably for the public sector at the initial stage and for the private sector at later stage after testing the policy mechanisms and establishing the proper executive procedures in order not to increase the informal employment.
 The principle that equal work deserves equal pay no matter of gender seems not to be adopted by the Georgian majority.

Only 53% of women and 42% of men found that such situation where the co-workers doing the same job on the same position are paid differently is considered to be discrimination.

If this principle is not regarded a basic right for everyone, it is difficult to struggle with the gender pay gap and overall inequality in the labour market.
Thus we recommend rising awareness (through campaigns, trainings) of labour rights among the employees and emphasize the principle of „equal pay for equal work and work for equal value“.

 The survey has documented the overwhelming horizontal gender-related segregation in Georgia and it also suggests that the majority of managerial positions are occupied by man.
The horizontal and vertical segregation is very difficult to address at present, as it is the outcome of decades of educational, social and vocational experience of employed population.

Therefore, we recommend addressing the social attitudes on vertical and horizontal segregation, as well as gender roles in household and labour market by tackling the education system – especially schools education.
 The 47% of employed women work in public sector according to the present study and might be subject of discrimination in regards to unequal salary, benefits and other wage components and 52 lack of transparency in recruitment process.

Public sector may act as a role model in equality of treatment of employees and encored the fare work practice in entire country.
This, we recommend the equal opportunity inspector for public sector than will tackle the gender and age related discrimination and eliminate the practices of using the social capital in recruitment.

53 References Åberg, Y., Hedström, P. 2011.

Youth unemployment: A self-reinforcing process?

In P. Demeulenaere (Ed.

), Analytical sociology and social mechanisms: 201–206.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Adams, A., Bray, F. (1992).

Holding out against workplace harassment and bullying.
Personnel Management, 24(10): 48–52.

Anspal, S., Kallaste, E., Karu, M., Kraut, L. (2009).

Sooline palgalõhe: teoreetilise ja empiirilise kirjanduse ülevaade.

Uuringuraport.

Eesti Rakendusuuringute Keskus CentAR, Poliitikauuringute Keskus PRAXIS, Sotsiaalministeerium.

Appelberg, K., K. Romanov, M. Honkasalo and M. Koskenvuo (1991), ‘Interpersonal Conflicts at Work and Psychosocial Characteristics of Employees’, Social Science Medicine 32, 1051–1056.
Aquino K (2000) Structural and individual determinants of workplace victimization: The effects of hierarchal status and conflict management style.

Journal of Management 26, 171- 193.

Bacharach, S., Bamberger, P. (1992), ‘Causal Models of Role Stressor Antecedents and Consequences: The Importance of Occupational Differences’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 41, 13–34.

Baldas, T. (2009).

"Textual harassment" on the rise.

National Law Journal.


Retrieved September 2012, from http://www.hinshawlaw.com/files/Publication/le27a3d5-f6aa-4391-b86c- 936cbe570259/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/c531eb7c-cbde-4c4e-ac4c- 96294e891al2/Textual%20Harassment_NLJ.072009.pdf Baron, J.N., Hannan, M.T., Hsu, G., Koçak, Ö.

(2007).

In the Company of Women: Gender Inequality and the Logic of Bureaucracy in Start-Up Firms.

Work and Occupations, Vol.

34, No.

1, pp.

35-66.

Baron, R. A. and J. H. Neuman (1996).


‘Workplace Violence and Workplace Aggression: Evidence on Their Relative Frequency and Potential Causes’, Aggressive Behavior 22, 161–173.

Becker, G.S.

(1964).

Human Capital, Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Berdahl, JL (2007).

Harassment based on sex: protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy.

Academy of Management Review 2007, Vol.

32, No.

2, 641–658.

Bettio, F., Verashchagina, A.

(2009).


Gender segregation in the labour market: root causes, implications and policy responses in the EU.

European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Unit G. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Bettio F. (2002) The Pros and Cons of Occupational Gender Segregation in Europe," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol.

28(s1), pages 65-84, May.


Biin, H., Karu, M., Soo, K.,Lamesoo, K., Meiorg, M., Masso, M. ja Turk, P. (2014).

Sooline ja seksuaalne ahistamine töökohal.

Tallinn: Poliitikauuringute Keskus Praxis Boeri, T., van Ours, J.

(2008) The Economics of Imperfect Labor Markets, Princeton University Press, 319 p. 54 Blair-Loy, Mary (2003).

Competing devotions: Career and Family among Women Executives.

Harvard University Press, USA Brodsky, C. M. (1976).

The Harassed Worker (Lexington Books, Toronto).

Butler, J.
Butler, J.

(1990).

Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.

London & New York: Routledge.

Chamberlain L., Crowley M., Tope D., Hodson R. (2008).

Sexual harassment in organizational context.

Work and Occupations 35, 262-295.

Claybourn, M (2010).

Relationships Between Moral Disengagement, Work Characteristics and Workplace Harassment.

Journal of Business Ethics (2011) 100:283–301 Cross, C., Linehan, M. (2006).
Barriers in Advancing Female Careers in the High-tech Sector: Empirical Evidence from Ireland, Women in Management Rewievs, Vol.

21, No.

1, pp.

28-39.

Dall’Ara, E., Maass, A.

1999.

Studying sexual harassment in the laboratory: Are egalitarian women at higher risk?

Sex Roles, 41: 681–704.

Davis, G. F., Yoo, M., & Baker, W. E. 2003.

The small world of the American corporate elite, 1982–2001.

Strategic Organization, 1: 301–326 Di Martino, V., Hoel H., Cooper C.L.
(2003) Preventing violence and harassment in the workplace.

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

Dublin: Eurofound.

Domhoff, G. W. 1967. Who rules America?

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Donlevy, V., Silvera, R. (2008).

Gender Equality in Your Company: The Recipes for Success Ministry of Social Affairs.

Einarsen, S. (2000).

Harassment and bullying at work: A review of the Scandinavian approach.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4): 379–401.


Einarsen, S., Skogstad, A.

(1996).

Bullying at work: Epidemiological findings in public and private organizations.

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2): 185–201.

Einarsen, S., B. Raknes, S. B. Matthiesen (1994).

‘Bullying and Harassment at Work and Their Relationships´to Work Environment Quality: An Exploratory Study’, European Work and Organizational Psychologist 4(4), 381–401.
Ellis S, Barak A, Pinto A (1991) Moderating effects of personal cognitions on experienced and perceived sexual harassment of women at the workplace.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology 21, 1320-1337.

Elvira, M. M., Saporta, I.

(2001).

How Does Collective Bargaining Affect Gender Pay Gap?

Work and Occupations, Vol.

28, No.

4, pp.

469-490.

Faley, R. H., Knapp, D. E., Kustis, G. A., & Dubois, C. L. Z.

(1999).

Estimating the organizational costs of sexual harassment: The case of the U.S. Army.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 13(4), 461–484.

Fitzgerald L, Drasgow F, Hulin C, Gelfand M, Magley V (1997).

Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model.

Journal of Applied Psychology 82, 578-589.

55 Fitzgerald L (1993).

Sexual harassment: Violence against women in the workplace.

American Psychologist 48, 1070-1076.

Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, A., Ormerod, A. J., & Weitzman, L. (1988).
The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32: 152–175.

Glendinning, Peter M. (2001).

Workplace bullying: curing the cancer of the American workplace.

Public Personnel Management Volume 30 No.

3 Fall 2001 p 276,277 http://www.ipma- hr.org/newsfiles/2001_3_glendinn.pdf Griffin, M. L. (2001).
‘Job Satisfaction Among Detention Officers: Assessing the Relative Contribution of Organizational Climate Variables’, Journal of Criminal Justice 29, 219–232.

Gunter, B., A. Furnham (1996).

‘Biographical and Climate Predictors of Job Satisfaction and Pride in Organization’, The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 130(2), 193–208.

Hammond, G., Kleiner, K., Kleiner, B.

(2011) Understanding And Preventing Harassment And Discrimination At Work.
California State University Heinze, A., Wolf, E. (2006) Gender Earnings Gap in German Firms: The Impact of Firm Characteristics and Institutions, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW Mannheim), Discussion Paper No.

06-020.

Hemingway, M. A., Smith, C. S. (1999).

‘Organizational Climate and Occupational Stressors as Predictors of Withdrawal Behaviours and Injuries in Nurses’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 72, 285–299.

Hultin, M., (2003).
Hultin, M., (2003).

Some Take the Glass Escalator, Some Hit the Glass Ceiling?

Career Consequences of Occupational Sex Segregation.

Work and Occupations, Vol.

30 No.

1, February 2003, pp.30-61.

Hunton, Williams, L. L. P. (2009).

New means of communication: Employee text messaging presents unique employment issues.

Available at http://www.lexology.com/hbrary/detail.aspx?g=08cdd80b- 645e-412a-b6a0-4e2cb5468fd2 Ioannides, Y. M., Loury, L. D. 2004.
Job information networks, neighborhood effects, and inequality.

Journal of Economic Literature, 42: 1056–1093.

Kacmar, K. M., D. P. Bozeman, D. S. Carlson and W. P. Anthony (1999).

‘An Examination of the Perceptions of Organizational Politics Model: Replication and Extension’, Human Relations 52(3), 383– 416.

Kallaste, E., Karu, M., Kraut, L., Turk, P. (2010).

Sooline palgalõhe Eestis: juhtumite uuringud.

Research report.
Research report.

Eesti Rakendusuuringute Keksus CentAR, Poliitikauuringute Keskus PRAXIS, Sotsiaalministeerium.

Kwon, S-W., Adler, PS.

(2014).

Social Capital: Maturation of a Field of Research.

Academy of Management Review 2014, Vol.

39, No.

4, 412–422.

Leymann, H. (1990), ‘Mobbing and Psychological Terror at Workplaces’, Violence and Victims 5(2), 119– 126.

Lorber, J.

(1998).

Gender Inequality: Feminist Theories and Politics.

Los Angeles: Roxbury.

56 Lorber, J.

(1994).

Paradoxes of Gender.


Connecticut: Yale University Press Maass, A., Cadinu, M., Guarnieri, G., Grasselli, A.

(2003).

Sexual harassment under social identity threat: The computer harassment paradigm.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85: 853–780.

Magley, Waldo, Drasgow, F., Fitzgerald, LF., (1999).

Measuring sexual harassment in the military: The Sexual Experiences.

Military Psychology, Vol 11(3), 1999, 243-263.

Mainiero, LA., Jones, KJ.

(2013).


Sexual Harassment Versus Workplace Romance: Social Media Spillover and Textual Harassment in the Workplace.

The Academy of Management Perspectives 2013, Vol.

27, No.

3,187-203.

Milczarek, M. (2010) Workplace Violence and Harassment: a European Picture.

Study report of European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.

Luxemburg Miller, R. L., Griffin, M. A., Hart, P. M. (1999).
‘Personality and Organizational Health: The Role of Conscientiousness’, Work & Stress 13(1), 7–19.

Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., Van Velsor, E., the Center for Creative Leadership.

(1987).

Breaking the glass ceiling.

New York: Addison-Wesley Mueller C., De Coster S., Estes, S. (2001).

Sexual harassment in the workplace: Unanticipated consequences of modern social control in organizations.

Work and Occupations 28, 411-446.

O’Connor, W. E. Morrison, T. G. (2001).


‘A Comparison of Situational and Dispositional Predictors of Perceptions of Organizational Politics’, The Journal of Psychology 135(3), 301–312.

Oakley, J. G. (2000) Gender-based Barriers to Senior Management Positions: Understanding the Scarcity of Female CEO’s, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.

27, pp.

321-224.

Parker-Pope, T. (2011).

Digital flirting: Easy to do and to get caught.

New York Times.
New York Times.

Retrieved July 10, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14well.html Pryor, J.

B., La Vite, C., Stoller, L. (1993).

A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: The person/situation interaction.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42: 68–83.

Risman, BJ.

(1998).


Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition New Haven: Yale University Press Rõõm, T., Kallaste, E. (2004) Naised-mehed Eesti tööturul: palgaerinevuse hinnang, Poliitika-uuringute Keskus PRAXIS, poliitikaanalüüs Nr.

8/2004 Schultz, V. (1998).

Reconceptualizing sexual harassment.

Yale Law Journal, 107: 1683–1796.

Snyder, J.A., Scherer, H.L., Fisher, B.S.

(2010) Social organization and social ties: Their effects on sexual harassment victimization in the workplace.
IOS Press Tangri S, Burt M, Johnson L (1982) Sexual harassment at work: Three explanatory models.

Journal of Social Issues 38, 33-55.

U.S.

Merit Systems Protection Board.

1995.

Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: Trends, progress, continuing challenges.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

57 U.S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2009) Sexual harassment.

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexualharassment.cfm, Posted January, 2010, Accessed June 20, 2014.
Vainu, V., Järviste, L., Biin, H. (2010).

Soolise võrdõiguslikkuse monitooring 2009.

Sotsiaalministeeriumi toimetised, 1.

Vartia, M. (1996).

‘The Sources of Bullying – Psychological Work Environment and Organizational Climate’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 5, 203–214.

Waldo, C. R., Berdhal J. L., Fitzgerald L. F. (1998) Are men sexually harassed?

If so, whom?

Law and Human Behavior, 22, 59−79.

Willness, C.R., Steel, P., Lee, K. (2007).


A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment.

Personnel Psychology, 60, 127-162.

West, C., Zimmermann, D.H., (1991).

Doing Gender.

In book Lorber, J. and Farrell, S.A. (edit) The Social Construction of Gender, London: Sage Publications, 13-37 Weyer B.

(2007) Twenty years later: explaining the persistence of the glass ceiling for women leaders.
Bringing the Men Back In: Sex Differentiation and the Devaluation of Women's Work.

Women in Management Review, Vol.

22, No.

6, 2007 pp.

482-496 Williams, C. L. (1995) Still a man’s world.

Men who do women’s work.

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Williams, C. L. (1989) Gender differences at Work: women and men in nontraditional occupations.

Berkley, CA: University of California Press; Williams Christine 1995 Still a Man’s world.

Berkley, CA: University of California.


Zapf, D., C. Knorz and M. Kulla: 1996, ‘On the Relationships Between Mobbing Factors, and Job Content, Social Work Environment and Health Outcomes’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 5, 215–238.

58 Appendixes Appendix 1.

Focus group interviews with the employees 1.

Introduction Centre of Social Sciences Georgia is conducting a research about gender discrimination in the workplace.
The aim of the study is to find out if men and women face satisfaction in their working conditions, what are the focal points in recruitment, training and promoting; if men and women have equal opportunities and are treated equally in work places.

Also if men and women face different problems in working place and does the legislation provide enough safety for employees.

The interview is confidential and any information which might link to your person won’t be used in the research.
If you don’t mind, the interview will be recorded.

2.

Warming up /background questions 2.1 Please introduce yourself and describe (in few sentences) what you are doing for living?

2.2 In general are you satisfied with your work, working conditions, colleagues?

If not, could you describe in few words why not?

2.3 Do you think men and women are generally treated equally in the labour market in Georgia?

3.

Recruitment 3.1 Please describe how did you find your job?
3.2 If you have participated in job interviews, have you experienced unexpected questions which you found irrelevant in a job interview or considering the work you applied for?

3.3 If you have participated in job interviews, have you been asked questions concerning your private life and if so, could you tell what kind of questions you were asked?

3.4.

Have you or your acquaintances/friends/family members experienced that they have been treated unequally in job recruitment process?

4.
4.

Training and promotion 4.1 How do you feel, are trainings important in your job?

(for those admitting the importance, ask if they have had the chance to attend different trainings; for those who haven’t attended trainings ask if they have felt the need to attend trainings) 4.2 In your experience are trainings available to all of the employees who need them or who want to attend them?

4.3 In general - do you feel the trainings have been helpful in your career?
4.4 What have been your experiences with promotion – if there are career opportunities in your work place, how in your opinion the promotion process works (is it transparent, equal)?

4.5 Does every potential candidate in your organization/company have the chance to apply for vacant positions?

4.6 Have you or someone you know experienced unequal treatment in promotion process?

59 5.

Firing 5.1.

5.2.

5.3.

5.4.

Have you or someone you know had experience in firing?
If yes, did you or your friend get any feedback about the firing?

How did you or your friend feel about it?

In your opinion – is firing because of care responsibilities acceptable?

6.

Wages 6.1 Do you feel that your salary is reasonable regarding the work you are doing?

6.2 Do you know your colleagues salary?

6.3 If you have had to tell your salary expectations to your employer, based on what information you ask for the salary?

6.4 How the salaries in your organization/company develop?
6.5 Are there some jobs which should be occupied mainly by men/ mainly by women?

6.6 In history men have been regarded as breadwinners – how do you feel about it?

6.7 Should men earn more than women?

6.8 Should women with care responsibilities earn less than employees without care responsibilities?

6.9 Have you or someone you know experienced inequality in regards of salary?
(For example person with higher education and/or experience has lower salary than a colleague; less salary because of being on sick leave or maternity leave, etc)?

7.

Benefits 7.1 What would be the most important benefit(s) you would like to receive (i.e health insurance, car, phone, etc)?

7.2 If your company/organization has additional benefits, are they provided equally for all workers?

Should they be available for all workers?

If they are not, what are the reasons?


7.3 Have you been asked to do excessive work, which is not regarded your work task?

How do you feel about it?

7.4 Have you felt any unequal treatment in your job – i.e working hours, planning vacation, in providing facilities and equipment for work, among benefits?

8.

Harassment 8.1 Do you feel that harassment in work place is a problem in Georgia?

8.2 In your opinion – what kind of situation in work place is harassment (how important is the frequency)?
8.3 Do you know if someone you know has experienced it?

8.4 Do you find it harassing if someone comments on your appearance or your body?

8.5 Do you find it unpleasant if someone tells in your presence some suggestive jokes of a sexual nature?

60 8.6 Do you find it unpleasant if someone comments in your presence your private life or your marital status?

8.7 If you think of some unpleasant situations (provided by your colleagues, boss, clients, etc) how people should deal with them?

61 Appendix 2.
61 Appendix 2.

Questionnaire (in English) A.

Employment background the respondent is employed the respondent is temporarily not working because of temporary illness/parental A1.

What do you do for living?

__________________________________________ 1.

2. leave/vacation/ 3.

4. the respondent is self-employed the respondent is unemployed 1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

A2.

Do you have more than one employer?

Yes No A3.

Do you have a valid contract with your employer(s)?
Yes No A3.1 How long is your current contract?

………months ……..years permanent contract A3.2.

Do you feel the contract guarantees you the work (at least until the due-date)?

Yes No, it doesn’t guarantee anything A3.3 Does your employment contract include a provision establishing the confidentiality of the amount of salary you earn?

Yes No I don’t know / I’m not sure A4.

Do you work full time or part time (among your main employer)?

62 1.

2.

1.

2.

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.


3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Full- Part- Yes No A4.1 Would you like to work full-time?

A5.

Do you go to work in the same city/town/village where you live?

A5.1 Where do you work?

A big city (Tbilisi) The suburbs or outskirts of a big city A small city or a town A country village A farm or home in the countryside A6.

Do you work for a public or a private employer?

Private employer Public employer NGO Other: ___________ A7.
What is the field of your work: Agriculture, forestry and fishing Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Water supply; sewerage, waste management and remediation activities Construction Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles Transportation and storage Accommodation and food service activities Information and communication Financial and insurance activities Real estate activities 63 13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.


6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Professional, scientific and technical activities Administrative and support service activities Public administration and defence, compulsory social security Education Human health and social work activities Other:___________________________________________________ A8.
Occupation: Legislators and senior officials Managers Professional Technicians and associate professionals Clerical support workers Service and sales workers Skilled agricultural, forestry and fishery workers Craft and related trades workers Plant and machine operators, and assemblers Elementary occupations Armed forces occupations Other:______________________________________________ A9.

Among your colleagues are there mostly women or men?
I work alone / I don’t have colleagues Mostly women Mostly men Approximately same amount of men and women A10.

Would you like to have more women or men?

Yes, I would like to have more women among my colleagues Yes, I would like to have more men among my colleagues I would like, but men/women couldn’t do the work No I like it as it is Other: …………………………………………….

A.11 In your work do you cooperate/collaborate (for example with co-partners, clients, patients, students, etc) more with men or women?

1.

2.
1.

2.

Mostly with women Mostly with men 64 3.

Both men and women A12.

What is the gender of your direct manager?

1.

2.

Male Female A13.

Are you or have you ever been a member of a trade union or similar organisation?

If yes: is that currently or only previously?

1.

2.

3.

Yes, currently Yes, previously but not currently No, never B.

Recruitment B1.

Have you ever participated in a job interview?

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

B1.1 How many times have you been in a job interview?
Once 2-4 times 5-7 times 8-10 times More than 10 times Don’t remember B1.2 In a job interview have you been asked questions concerning: Your marital status Your plans to get married The number of children Your plans to have children Doctoral proof that you are not pregnant Something else not related to your skills, education, 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. experience:________________________________ Yes 1 1 1 1 1 No 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 0 0 0 0 0 65 1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1.

2.

B2.


How did you get hired for the job you are working currently?

Through my friend/acquaintance/relative I was hired just based on my CV Other: _______________________ B3.

Have you ever been turned down for a job you applied for?

B3.1.

Did you get any feedback why you did not get the job you applied for?

ue to B3.3 B3.2.

Please specify what was the reason (and continue to B4.
): Too high expectations for salary For being pregnant Due to my gender Due to my age Due to my care responsibilities Due to my plans to have children Due to the lack of experience Due to the lack of my skills Due to my education (for example the level of education was too low/too high or the 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9. vocation/subject where education received wasn’t right) 10.

11.

12.

Due to my difference of opinions Due to my appearance Other: ___________________________________________ B3.3.
What do you think was the reason for not getting the job you applied for?

I don’t know Too high expectations for salary Due to the lack of experience Due to the lack of my skills Due to my education (for example the level of education was too low/too high or the 1.

2.

3.

4.

5. vocation/subject where education received wasn’t right) 6.

Due to my difference of opinions 66 7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.


For being pregnant Due to my gender Due to my age Due to my care responsibilities Due to my plans to have children Due to my appearance Other: ___________________________________________ B4.

When looking for a job, have you experienced, that the job advertisement you were interested in, had some criteria not related to potential workers’ skills, education, experience, etc.

(for example only women or men /people in certain age are welcome to apply) 1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.


3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

B4.1 Please specify, what were the criterias?

Only woman can apply Only men can apply Only people in certain age can apply Other:____________________ B5.

What channels have you used the most for finding a job?

Internet recruitment sites Friends/family/acquaintances Newspaper message board Recruitment companies Other: ____________________ B6.

For the job where you are working currently, what channels did you use for finding the job?
I was promoted in my company/organization Internet recruitment sites Friends/family/acquaintances Newspaper message board Recruitment companies Other: ____________________ C. Training and promotion 67 1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1.

2.

C1.

In your current work, have you been promoted career wise?

Yes No There are C1.1 How were you promoted?

C1.2.

Have you had opportunities to ran for/ apply for a higher/other position offered by your employer during last 2 years?

.
.

C1.3 Did you apply for the higher/other position available?

to C1.3.1 C1.3.1 If you did not get the applied job, what do you think was the reason?

(from this question, continue to C2.)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

My skills My gender (for example the person was told this is not a job for women/men) The employer had a personal preference There was a better candidate My age The educational level Lack of experience I don’t know Other:…………………………… C1.3.2.

Why didn’t you apply?


I felt I would not meet the expectations for the job (lack of skills, education, 1. experience, etc) 2.

Due to my care responsibilities 68 3.

4.

5.

I was not interested in that position Too much responsibility in the job Other, please specify: ________________________________ C2.

Do you feel that your employer has provided you enough work tasks, which would help you to prove yourself to the employer and help to get promoted career-wise?

Yes No Other:______________________ C3.


In your current work, have you been promoted pay wise?

C3.1 1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1.

Mine, I asked for promotion 2.

It was general pay rise for all of the employees 3.

It was my manager’s initiative 4.

Other: _______________________________ C3.2 Have you asked for promotion?

1.

Yes 2.

No C4.

Have you had opportunities provided by your current employer to participate in training?

1.

2.

Yes No C4.1.

Have you gone to the training(s)?

1.

2.


Yes No next section D C4.1.1.

Why didn’t you go to the training?

(Continue to section D) 69 I did not want to The time of the training wasn’t convenient for me I was not allowed by my employer, please specify, 1.

2.

3. why:__________________________________________________________ 4.

5.

I missed it Other:_________________________________________________________ C4.2.

Would you have liked to participate in a training?

1.

2.

3.

4.
1.

2.

3.

4.

Yes, but my employer doesn’t provide trainings for employees Yes, but my employer didn’t let/offer me go to the training No, there are no trainings in our field No D. Firing D1.

Have you ever been fired?

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3. section E. D1.1 Have you been fired during last 2 years?

D1.2 Did you get any warnings that you might get fired?
Yes No I don’t think so D1.3 Did you get any feedback why you were fired (if the person has been fired more than once during last 2 years, he/she should think of the last case)?

1.

2.

D1.3.1 Please specify, what was the reason behind firing you (based on the employer’s feedback)?

70 Bankruptcy of the company My age My gender (for example the employer thought I can’t accomplish some tasks, 1.

2.

3. because I’m not strong enough, as a woman/man I don’t have these skills, etc) 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


11.

My ethnic origin Disagreements with the employer I didn’t fulfil the expectations of the employer I got pregnant Having children My position was made redundant /eliminated My appearance Other: _________________________ D1.3.2 Do you believe that it was the actual reason?

1.

2.

D1.3.3.

In your opinion, what do you think was the reason behind firing you (if you have been fired more than once, think of the last time)?
Bankruptcy of the company My age My gender (for example the employer thought I can’t accomplish some tasks, 1.

2.

3. because I’m not strong enough, as a woman/man I don’t have these skills, etc) 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.


My ethnic origin Disagreements with the employer I didn’t fulfil the expectations of the employer I got pregnant Having children My position was made redundant /eliminated My appearance Other: _________________________ D1.4 If you felt that firing you was unreasonable, did you contact/appeal to anyone or any institution?

1.

2.

3.

4.
1.

2.

3.

4.

I don’t think the firing was unreasonable No, I did not contact/appeal to anyone or any institution Yes, I appealed to organization board Yes, I contacted/appealed to trade union 71 5.

Yes, I appealed /contacted________________________________________ E. Wages E1.

Do you have any additional compensation, benefits provided by your employer (such as mobile phone, car, etc)?

1.

2.

Continue to E2.

Continue to E1.1 E1.1 What are the compensations/benefits?

/multiple choice question/ 1.

2.


3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10. mobile phone provided by the employer usage of mobile phone (the employer compensates certain amount of costs) possibility to use company’s car compensation of using personal car free transportation to work lunch or other course of food provided by the employer health insurance trainings going abroad / business trips to foreign countries something else, please specify:_________________________ E2.

Have you got any bonuses during last year?


Yes No 1.

2.

E3.

If you think about your company/organization where you are working, do you agree or disagree with the following assertions: 1.

The amount of my salary is fair Strongly agree 4 2.

The way my employer promotes employees is fair 3.

Men and women have equal opportunities for promotion 4.

Men and women, who make the same job (who are employed in same position) get paid equally 5.
Men and women have equal opportunities 4 4 4 4 Agree Disagre e Strongly disagree 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 I don’t know 0 0 0 0 0 72 for wage increase 6.

Men and women have equal opportunities for compensations/ benefits 7.

Men and women have equal opportunities for bonuses F. Equality of treatment 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 F1.

If you have had to be absent from your work due to your child’s or close family member’s illness, how has it been taken in your workplace?

understandingly neutral Negatively 1.


Manager(s) 2.

Colleagues 5 5 4 4 3 3 I don’t know 2 2 The question is not relevant 1 1 F2.

Do you feel that your current employer has ever treated you unrightfully in following matters: In providing facilities and equipment for work In compiling work schedule (in case of working in shifts) 1.

Division of work-related tasks 2.

Salary wise 3.

4.

When planning vacation 5.

6.

Providing trainings 7.

8.


Working hours In recruitment process Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F3.

Have you been asked to work over-time?

1.

Yes  continue to question F3.1 2.

No  continue to question F4.

F3.1 If you answered ”yes” to the previous question, have those tasks been compensated?

In most cases 1.

Yes, always 2.

3.

Sometimes 4.

Never F4.


If you have wanted to be or you have been on parental leave, how your employer (any employer from the past if you have not got children when working with the current employer) has taken it?

73 I couldn’t be on parental leave as long as I wanted I have got fired because of that 1.

The question is irrelevant 2.

Positively 3.

4.

5.

When returning from parental leave I had to start working in lower position 6.
When returning from parental leave I got promoted 7.

When returning from parental leave I could work only part time (although I would have liked to work full time) I quitted my job on my own will 8.

9.

Other answer, please specify: ______________________________ F5.
Below are listed some labour market situations, please assess what do you think about such situations: This is acceptable This is unpleasant This is discrimination I don’t know In job interview the employer asks from woman questions about private life (marital status, number of children, etc).
The employer will fire an employee after hearing about her pregnancy Employees who are in the same position (and make the same kind of work) get paid differently (by the same employer) The employer decides not to send the female employee for a week to a training abroad, because the woman has little child (although the woman would want to go) An employer doesn’t want to hire an educated female mechanic, assuming that she doesn’t have technical skills 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 G. Harassment in workplace G1.
Have you ever been harassed in your workplace?

1.

Yes  continue to question G2.

2.

No  continue to question G3.

74 3.

4.

I don’t know  continue to question G3.

I don’t want to answer  continue to question G3.

G2.

Have you been harassed in your workplace in last 12 months?

1.

Yes 2.

No 3.

4.

I don’t know I don’t want to answer The following questions are based on situations, which may have happened with you in your workplace or while you were working.
Please read the questions and answer as honestly as possible.

The responses of the study will be generalized and no one will know your answers.

75 G3.

Would you consider it unpleasant if someone in your workplace (colleague, manager, client or someone else, who you deal with when working) would behave like listed in the following table?
Yes, definitely it would be unpleasant Yes, it would rather be unpleasant No, it would rather not be unpleasant No, it would definitely not be unpleasant 1. comments on your appearance or your body 2. tells you or in the presence of you suggestive jokes of a sexual nature 3. comments on your private life or your marital status 4. refers to you or calls you with a nickname of a sexual nature?
5. comments your sexual life 6. suggests you to spend your spare time with him/her although you have refused previously 7. uses obscene gestures or sounds when talking to you 8. sends you mail or text messages of sexual nature 9. sends you personal mail It depends who would behave like that 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS or text messages (unrelated to your work), which makes you feel uncomfortabl e 10. touches your intimate parts of body (i.e your bottom, breasts, etc) 11. touches you on purpose from other body parts (i.e hand, shoulder, back) in a situation where touching is unnecessary 12. proposes to have sex with him/her 13. forces to have sex with him/her 14. refuses to give you responsibility or work- related tasks because you are a man/woman 15. gives you additional tasks, which are not related to your work, because you are a man/woman Page 1 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS (i.e moving furniture, making coffee) 16.
Leaves your suggestions or opinions uncountable, because you are a man/woman G4.

If you would have to deal with such behaviour (listed in previous question), what would you do?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.


I don’t know I would probably try to deal with the situation myself I would probably tell my manager I would probably tell the police I would probably tell to my colleagues I would probably not do anything I would tell the trade union representatives I would quit the job I would do something else, please specify: ___________________________ G5.
Does your organization/company have any internal procedure rules, which prohibit such behaviour (listed before) and which you could refer to in case such situation(s) would happen to you?

1.

Yes 2.

No 3.

I don’t know G6.

In last 12 months has someone in your workplace (colleague, manager, client or someone else, who you deal with when working) done something from the following list?
1. commented on your appearance or your body 2. told to you or in the presence of you suggestive jokes of a sexual nature 3. commented on your private life or your marital status 4. referred to you or called you with a nickname of a sexual nature 5. commented your sexual life?
6. suggested you to spend your spare time with him/her although you have refused previously Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 No 2 2 2 2 2 2 Page 2 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS (or asked you to come on a date) 7. used obscene gestures or sounds when talking to you 8.

Sent you mail or text messages of sexual nature 9.

Sent you personal mail or text messages (unrelated to your work), which made you feel uncomfortable 10.

Touched your intimate parts of body (i.e your bottom, breasts, etc) 11.
Touched you on purpose from other body parts (i.e hand, shoulder, back) in a situation where touching was unnecessary 12.

Proposed to have sex with him/her 13.

Forced to have sex with him/her 14.

Refused to give you responsibility or work- related tasks because you are a man/woman 15.

Given you additional tasks, which are not related to your work, because you are a man/woman (i.e moving furniture, making coffee) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16.
Left your suggestions or opinions uncountable, 1 because you are a man/woman 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 G7.

If you answered “yes” to any of those questions, was this situation unpleasant for you?

1.

Yes 2.

No  Continue with a question G5.

G7.1 Did you feel during or after the incident that it was somehow your fault?

1.

Yes 2.

No 3.

I don’t know G7.2 Please think of the most unpleasant situation listed in question G6 which has happened to you during last 12 months.
How many times these situations have occurred in last 12 months?

1.

Once 2.

Two to four times 3.

Five or more times 4.

The situation continues 5.

I don’t know Page 3 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS G7.3 Have you talked about this situation to anyone?

1.

Yes  continue to G7.3.1 2.

No  continue to G7.3.2 G7.3.1.

To whom you told about this situation?

1.

Friend, aquintance 2.

Colleague 3.

Family member 4.

Police 5.

My manager 6.

Priest 7.


Some one else, please specify: ______________________________ G7.3.2.

Why didn’t you tell about this situation?

I was ashamed 1.

2.

Because I’m afraid of losing my job 3.

4.

5.

Other: ____________________ I did not want to I think I have to take care of it myself G7.4 If you think of the most unpleasant situation listed in question G6 which has happened to you during last 12 months.

Who behaved like that with you?

1.


Male manager or a colleague on a higher position 2.

Female manager or a colleague on a higher position 3.

Male colleague who works in same position 4.

Female colleague who works in same position 5.

Male colleague on a lower position 6.

Female colleague on a lower position 7.

Male client, patient, student, or other 8.

Female client, patient, student, or other 9.

Male corporate (cooperation) partner, who is not from your company or institution 10.
Female corporate (cooperation) partner, who is not from your company or institution 11.

Someone else, please specify who ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… H. 1.

2.

Demographic background H1.

Gender: Female Male Page 4 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS H2.

Age: 18 – 25 26 – 35 36 – 45 46 – 55 56 – 65 65 + H3.

Place of residence: A big city (only Tbilisi) The suburbs or outskirts of a big city A small city or a town A country village A farm or home in the countryside H4.
How many years (full-time equivalent) have you been in formal education?

…………… years I have no formal schooling tus?

H4.1.

What is the highest level of education that you have attained?

Pre-primary education Secondary school level Vocational education on the basis of secondary education Vocational higher education Bachelor degree Master’s degree PhD Other ….. 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

H5.

What is your current legal marital status?


Married Separated from my spouse/civil partner (but still legally married/still legally in a civil partnership) Partnership Divorced from spouse/legally separated from my civil partner Widowed/my civil partner died I have never been married/never been in a partnership H6.

What is the average range of your salary (before taxes and other deductions)?

Up to GEL 130 GEL 130 – 250 GEL 251 – 400 Page 5 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

1.

2.
GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS GEL 401 – 700 GEL 701 – 1000 GEL 1001- 1300 GEL 1301 – 2000 More than GEL 2000 N/A H7.

What is the average range of your spouse’s/partner’s salary (before taxes and other deductions)?
I don’t have a spouse/partner I don’t know Up to GEL 130 GEL 130 – 250 GEL 251 – 400 GEL 401 – 700 GEL 701 – 1000 GEL 1001- 1300 GEL 1301 – 2000 More than GEL 2000 N/A H8.

Including yourself, how many people – including children – usually live in your household?

Number 1.

Adults of 18 years and older 2.

Children between 7-17 years of age 3.

Children up to the age of 6 4.

This makes a total of how many people?

Thank you for answering!


Page 6 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS Appendix 3.

Questionnaire (in Georgian) Appendix 4.
Questionnaire manual (in Georgian) გენდერული დისკრიმინაციის კვლევა შრომით ურთიერთობებში ინტერვიუერის გზამკვლევი სოციალურ მეცნიერებათა ცენტრი Page 7 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS სარჩევი თბილისი 2014 Authors .......................................................................................................................................................................2 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................................3 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................................6 Table of figures ...........................................................................................................................................................7 1.
2.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................9 Literature review on discrimination at workplace .......................................................................................... 10 2.1.

Overview of the researches and surveys related to gender equality in Georgia .................................... 10 2.2.
Employment background ........................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.

Recruitment ............................................................................................................................................. 14 2.4.

Training, promotion and firing ................................................................................................................ 16 2.5.
Wage components ................................................................................................................................... 17 2.6.

Equality of treatment .............................................................................................................................. 17 2.7.

Harassment in workplace ........................................................................................................................ 18 3.
Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.

Analysis of the study ........................................................................................................................................ 25 4.1.

Background of the respondents .................................................................. Error!

Bookmark not defined.

4.2.


Recruitment ............................................................................................................................................. 33 4.3.

Training, promotion and firing ................................................................................................................ 38 4.4.

Wage components ................................................................................................................................... 40 4.5.
Equality of treatment .............................................................................................................................. 43 4.6.

Harassment .............................................................................................................................................. 46 5.

Further recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 50 5.1.
Recommendations for policy making ...................................................................................................... 50 5.2.

Recommendations for further studies ........................................................ Error!

Bookmark not defined.


References ............................................................................................................................................................... 52 Appendixes .............................................................................................................................................................. 57 Appendix 1.
Focus group interviews with the employees .................................................................................. 57 Page 8 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS Appendix 3.

Questionnaire .................................................................................................................................. 60 Appendix 2.
Questionnaire manual ........................................................................................................................7 Page 9 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS ზოგადი ინფორმაცია და ინსტრუქციები კვლევისმოკლეაღწერა მიზანი: კვლევა მიზნად ისახავს საქართველოს შრომის ბაზარზე არსებულ სამუშაო ადგილებზე გენდერული დისკრიმინაციის კვლევას.

შერჩევა: 1100 დასაქმებული რესპონდენტი მთელი ქვეყნის მასშტაბით.
შერჩევის მეთოდი:ოთხსაფეხურიანისტრატიფიცირებულიკლასტერული შერჩევა, ბიჯი 5. კითხვარისმოკლეაღწერა კითხვარი რამდენიმე ნაწილისგან შედგება: I ნაწილი: თავფურცელი, ინსტრუქცია II ნაწილი: კითხვარის რვა ბლოკი.

თითოეული ბლოკი შეეხება სამუშაო ადგილისა და სამსახურეობრივი ურთიერთობების შესახებ სხვადასხვა ასპექტს და მოიცავს უპირატესად დახურული კითხვებისა და ფილტრების ერთობლიობას.

ბოლო ბლოკი დემოგრაფიული ინფორმაციის მისაღებად არის მოწოდებული.
დასაქმება სამსახურში მიღება კვალიფიკაციის ამაღლება და დაწინაურება ამჟამინდელ სამსახურში სამსახურიდან გათავისუფლება ხელფასი თანასწორი მოპყრობა შევიწროვება სამსახურში დემოგრაფიული მონაცემები III ნაწილი: კითხვარის G ბლოკის ნაწილი, რომელიც კონვერტშია მოთავსებული.

ზოგადი ინსტრუქციები კითხვარის შევსებისას დაიცავით შემდეგი წესები: ყველგან, სადაც ხელით არის ჩასაწერი ტექსტი, გარკვევით ჩაწეროთ, რათა ჩანაწერი იკითხებოდეს.

როგორც არ უნდა გეჩქარებოდეთ, შეეცადეთ, გარჩევადი იყოს თქვენი ხელნაწერი.
არ დაგავიწყდეთ კონვერტში G7 და G8 კითხვების პასუხების ჩადება და იმისდა მიხედვით, თქვენ წაუკითხეთ ისინი რესპონდენტს თუ მან თავად წაიკითხა, კონვერტის ღიად დატოვება ან დალუქვა.

Page 10 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS არ დაგავიწყდეთ კონვერტისთვის იგივე ნომრის დაწერა, რაც დააწერეთ კითხვარს თავფურცლის ზედა მარცხენა კუთხეში.

დარწმუნდით, რომ ყველა საჭირო პასუხი შემოხაზული გაქვთ და ყველა საჭირო ინფორმაცია დაფიქსირებული.

დარწმუნდით, რომ ფილტრის კითხვებს სწორად იყენებთ.


კვლევის ბიჯი, განურჩევლად ლოკალიზაციისა, არის ხუთი (5).

თუ რესპონდენტი არ დაგხვდათ ადგილზე, კიდევ ორჯერ ბრუნდებით იგივე მისამართზე და თუ მესამე ჯერზეც არ დაგხვდათ იგი სახლში, შეთანხმებული ბიჯის (5) შესატყვისად გადადიხართ შემდეგ რესპონდენტზე.

თუ რესპონდენტმა რაიმე მიზეზით უარი გითხრათ კვლევაში მონაწილეობაზე, ამას უარების ფურცელზე აფიქსირებთ.
I ნაწილი: თავფურცელი და ინსტრუქცია კითხვარის თავფურცელი შეიცავს რამდენიმე გრაფას, რომელიც უნდა შეავსოთ და/ან წაუკითხოთ რესპონდენტს.

ფურცლის ზედა ნაწილში მოცემულია კითხვარის ნომერი და კითხვარის კოდი შეტანისას.

ეს უკანასკნელი თქვენ არ გეხებათ, თუმცა ნომრავთ კითხვარებს და რიცხვს წერთ „კითხვარის ნომერის“ ქვეშ მოცემულ ხაზზე.

ამ ხაზის ქვემოთ მოცემულია ფორმატი, როგორც უნდა ჩაწეროთ ნომერი (NN-NN).
პირველ ორ პოზიციაზე იწერება თქვენი კოდი, რომელიც მოგენიჭათ კვლევის წერტილების განაწილებისას (ეს ნომერი წერია ფურცელზე, რომელიც კითხვართან და სხვა დოკუმენტებთან ერთად გადმოგეცათ და რომელზეც თქვენი სამიზნე წერტილებია აღწერილი).

მეორე ორ პოზიციაზე წერთ კითხვარის რიგით ნომერს, რომელსაც თანმიმდევრულად ანიჭებთ თქვენთვის განკუთვნილ კითხვარებს.
მაგალითად, თუ თქვენი კოდია 11, უკვე შევსებული გაქვთ 15 კითხვარი და ავსებთ მე-16-ს, მაშინ ამ კითხვარის ნომერი იქნება 11-16. რესპონდენტს აცნობთ კვლევის დასახელებას და უკითხავთ ინსტრუქციას.

თავფურცელზე ავსებთ ღია გრაფებს, კერძოდ: თქვენი სახელი, გვარი და კოდი; შერჩევის რეგიონი, პუნქტის დასახელება და წერტილის მისამართი.

ასევე, აფიქსირებთ ინტერვიუს დაწყებისა და დასრულების დროებს (ფორმატი მითითებულია იქვე).

ბოლოს, აფიქსირებთ ინტერვიუს ჩატარების თარიღს (ფორმატი მითითებულია იქვე).
Page 11 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS II ნაწილი: კითხვარის რვა ბლოკი დასაქმება A1.

დასაქმებისსტატუსი ამ კითხვით, ფაქტობრივად, ირჩევთ რესპონდენტს.

თუ შერჩევის წერტილში შეხვედრილი ადამიანი პირველ ან მეორე პასუხს იძლევა, მაშინ ის თქვენი რესპონდენტია.

თუ მისი პასუხია მესამე ან მეოთხე, ეკითხებით, სხვა ვინ ცხოვრობს ამ მისამართზე, ვინც მუშაობს.

აქვე უკონკრეტებთ, რომ მუშაობაში არ იგულისხმება მაინცდამაინც კონტრაქტით მუშაობა.
დასაქმებულობა ამ კვლევის კონტექსტში გულისხმობს, რომ ადამიანი რაღაც სამუშაოს შესრულებაში მეორე ადამიანისგან ან ორგანიზაციისგან იღებს ანაზღაურებას.

კვლევიდან გამოირიცხებიან მხოლოდ ის ადამიანები, რომლებიც არ აკმაყოფილებენ ამ მოთხოვნას, ანუ არ მუშაობენ საერთოდ ან თვითდასაქმებულები არიან.

ამასთან, თუ ადამიანი საქართველოში ცხოვრობს და დაგხვდათ მისამართზე და, ამასთან, საზღვარგარეთ მუშაობს, მაშინ ის არ არის თქვენი რესპონდენტი, რადგან კვლევა საქართველოს შრომით ბაზარს შეეხება.
პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

A2.

გყავთთუარაერთზემეტიდამსაქმებელი?

თუ ადამიანი ერთზე მეტ სამსახურში მუშაობს, მაშინ პასუხობს „დიახ“ და თუ მხოლოდ ერთი სამსახური აქვს, მისი პასუხი უნდა იყოს „არა“.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

A3.

გაქვთთუარაგაფორმებულიშრომითიხელშეკრულებათქვენსდამსაქმებელთან/დამსაქმებლებთან?

ამ კითხვით არკვევთ, ხელშეკრულების საფუძველზე მუშაობს ადამიანი თუ ზეპირი შეთანხმების.
თუ რესპონდენტს აქვს ხელმოწერილი კონტრაქტი (პირველი პასუხი), მაშინ გადადიხართ A.3.1 კითხვაზე.

თუ რესპონდენტს ერთზე მეტ დამსაქმებელთან აქვს ხელმოწერილი კონტრაქტი, ანალოგიურად გადადიხართ A.3.1 კითხვაზე.

თუ რესპონდენტი კონტრაქტის გარეშე მუშაობს, მაშინ შემდეგი (A4)კითხვიდან აგრძელებთ.
Page 12 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS A3.1.თქვენიამჟამინდელიშრომითიხელშეკრულებისხანგრძლივობაა(თუ ერთზე მეტი დამსაქმებელი ჰყავს, იმ დამსაქმებლის შესახებ პასუხობს, რომელთანაც უფრო მეტ ანაზღაურებას იღებს) მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ რამდენიმე დამსაქმებლის შემთხვევაში ამ კითხვაში იმ დამსაქმებლის შესახებ არის კითხვა, რომელთანაც რესპონდენტი მეტ ანაზღაურებას იღებს, თუ ის თვლის, რომ სამსახურის ძირითადობის განმსაზღვრელი მისთვის არ არის ანაზღაურება, მაშინ საკუთარი კრიტერიუმების მიხედვით განსაზღვრავს ძირითად სამსახურს და ისე უპასუხებს კითხვას.
რა რიცხვსაც გეუბნებათ, პირდაპირ წერთ, არაფერს უკითხავთ წინასწარ.

A3.2.

როგორფიქრობთ, არისთუარადადებულიშრომითიხელშეკრულებათქვენიდასაქმებულობისგარანტი?

(მოქმედებისბოლოდღემდემაინც)?

A3.3.არისთუარათქვენსშრომითხელშეკრულებაშიდებულება, რომლისმიხედვითაცთქვენიანაზღაურებისოდენობაკონფიდენციალურია?

A4.

საშუალოდრამდენსაათსმუშაობთკვირაში?

შესაძლოა, რესპონდენტმა ზუსტად არ იცოდეს, რამდენ საათს მუშაობს ზუსტად, თუმცა საშუალოდ უნდა დაითვალოს და ის რიცხვი გითხრათ.

A4.1.
A4.1.

სრულგანაკვეთზემუშაობთთუნახევარზე(თქვენსძირითადსამსახურში)?

თუ რესპონდენტი კვირაში მინიმუმ 41 საათს მუშაობს, მაშინ თვლით, რომ სრულ განაკვეთზე მუშაობს და არ გადახვალთ A4.2 კითხვაზე, პირდაპირ A5-დან გააგრძელებთ.

ამ კითხვაზე პასუხების გაცემისას აუცილებლად უნდა გაითვალისწინოთ და არ დაგავიწყდეთ კონკრეტული სამსახურების სპეციფიკის გათვალისწინება, მაგალითად, უმაღლესი განათლების დაწესებულებები (უნივერსიტეტები), სამედიცინო და ტრანსპორტის სფერო.
მაგალითად, უნივერსიტეტში აკადემიურ პერსონალს შეიძლება კვირაში 12 საათი ჰქონდეს სამუშაო, თუმცა სრულ განაკვეთზე იყოს, რადგან აკადემიური პერსონალის საქმიანობა არ გულისხმობს მხოლოდ საკონტაქტო საათებს.

A4.2.ისურვებდითთუარასრულგანაკვეთზემუშაობას?

A5.

მუშაობთთუარაიმავექალაქში/სოფელში, სადაცცხოვრობთ?

რესპონდენტი იმავე დასახლების პუნქტში შეიძლება მუშაობდეს, რომელშიც ცხოვრობს ან სხვაგან უწევდეს სიარული.

მაგალითად, რუსთავში მცხოვრები მუშაობდეს თბილისში, ან თბილისში მცხოვრები მუშაობდეს კოჯორში.
თუ იმავე პუნქტში მუშაობს რესპონდენტი, სადაც ცხოვრობს, A6 კითხვაზე გადადიხართ, თუ სხვაგან უწევს სიარული, მაშინ A5.1 კითხვით აგრძელებთ.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

A5.1.თქვენისამსახური მდებარეობს A6.

რომელსექტორშიმუშაობთ?

Page 13 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS თუ რესპონდენტი ვერ ახერხებს სექტორის იდენტიფიცირებას, ეხმარებით გარკვევაში და ისე აფიქსირებთ შესატყვის პასუხს.
პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

A7.

თქვენისაქმიანობისსფეროა A8.

რასსაქმიანობთ?

A7 და A8 კითხვები შეეხება რესპონდენტის საქმიანობას.

A7-ით ვარკვევთ, რა სფეროში საქმიანობს ადამიანი, ხოლო A8-ით, კონკრეტულად რას აკეთებს.

მაგალითად, შესაძლოა, რესპონდენტი მუშაობდეს განათლების სფეროში (A7) და მისი საქმიანობა სკოლის ბუღალტერიის წარმოება იყოს (A8) ანუ ბუღალტრად მუშაობდეს.
ამრიგად, შესაძლებელია, ამ ორ კითხვაზე პასუხები არ შეეხებოდეს ერთსა და იმავე პროფესიას და/ან საქმიანობას.

შემდეგ ოთხ კითხვაში (A9-A12) პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

A9.

თქვენსთანამშრომლებსშორისუმრავლესობაქალიათუკაცი?

A10.

ისურვებდითთუარაუფრომეტიქალიანკაცითანამშრომლისყოლას?

A.11.თქვენისამუშაოსშესრულებაუფრომეტადქალებთანთანამშრომლობასითვალისწინებს/მოითხოვ სთუკაცებთან?

(მაგ: თანამშრომლები, პაციენტები,კლიენტები, სტუდენტებიდასხვ.)

A12.
A12.

თქვენიუშუალოხელმძღვანელი/მენეჯერი?

ამ კითხვაში „უშუალო მენეჯერად“ ითვლება ის ადამიანი, რომელთანაც ანგარიშვალდებულია რესპონდენტი.

A13.ამჟამადხართთუარა,ანროდესმეყოფილხართთუარაპროფკავშირისანმსგავსიორგანიზაციისწევრ ი?

შესაძლოა, რესპონდენტი არ იყო/არის პროფკავშირის წევრი, მაგრამ იყო/არის რომელიმე პროფესიული გაერთიანების, ასოციაციის წევრი, მაგალითად, ეკონომისტთა ასოციაციის წევრი.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

სამსახურშიმიღება B1.


ზოგადადყოფილხართთუარაგასაუბრებაზეპოტენციურდამსაქმებელთან?

ეს კითხვა არ შეეხება ამჟამინდელ ან მხოლოდ რომელიმე კონკრეტულ სამსახურს.

გვაინტერესებსრესპონდენტისგასაუბრებაზეყოფნისგამოცდილება.

ამიტომ უკონკრეტებთ, რომ ზოგადად პასუხობს, განურჩევლად იმისა, გასაუბრების შედეგად აიყვანეს ამა თუ იმ სამსახურში თუ არა.

ეს, ასევე, შეეხება კითხვებს B1.1.

და B1.2.

Page 14 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS B1.1.

რამდენჯერყოფილხართგასაუბრებაზეპოტენციურდამსაქმებელთან?
პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

B1.2.გასაუბრებაზედაუსვამთთუარათქვენთვისკითხვებიისეთითემებისშესახებ, როგორიცაა: ცხრილში მოცემულ ხუთივე დებულებას უკითხავთ მამაკაცებს, ხოლო მეხუთე დებულებას არ ვუკითხავთ მამაკაცებს და პირდაპირ აღნიშნავთ „შეუსაბამოა“.

თუ რესპონდენტი აღნიშნავს, რომ აქ ჩამოთვლილებისგან განსხვავებული კითხვა დაუსვამთ მისთვის, იწერთ კატეგორიაში „სხვა“ (6).

აქ უკითხავთ დებულებებს და თავად პასუხობს, თქვენ ინიშნავთ შესატყვის გრაფაში.

B2.
B2.

როგორდასაქმდითიმსამსახურში, სადაცამჟამადმუშაობთ?

ეს კითხვა კონკრეტულად შეეხება იმ სამსახურს, რომელშიც ინტერვიუს მომენტში მუშაობს რესპონდენტი.

თუ მას ერთზე მეტი სამსახური აქვს, მაშინ პასუხობს ძირითადი (იხ.

კითხვა A3.1) სამსახურის შესახებ.

უკითხავთ ვარიანტებს და რესპონდენტი გპასუხობთ.

B3.

როდესმემიგიღიათთუარაუარისამსახურშიაყვანაზე?

ეს კითხვა შეეხება ზოგადად გამოცდილებას და არა რომელიმე ერთ კონკრეტულ სამსახურს, მაგალითად, ამჟამინდელს B3.1.
მიგიღიათთუარაახსნა-განმარტება, თურატომარაგიყვანესსამსახურში?

B3.2.

გთხოვთ, მიუთითოთ, რაიყოოფიციალურიმიზეზი,რისგამოცარაგიყვანეს სამსახურში?

(გადადითკითხვაზეB4) (შეგიძლიათ ორი ან სამი პასუხი შემოხაზოთ) აქ რესპონდენტი ასახელებს იმ მიზეზს, რომელიც პოტენციურმა დამსაქმებელმა ოფიციალურად აცნობა, როგორც მისი კანდიდატურის დაწუნების და სამსახურში არ აყვანის მიზეზი.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

B3.3.

თქვენიაზრით, რაიყორეალური მიზეზი, რისგამოცარაგიყვანესსამსახურში?
ამ კითხვაზე კი გვპასუხობს იმ, მისი აზრით, რეალური მიზეზების შესახებ, რომელიც საფუძვლად დაედო მისი კანდიდატურის უარყოფას.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

B4.

გთხოვთ,გაიხსენოთ, გინახავთთუარათქვენთვისსაინტერესოსამსახურისთაობაზეგანცხადებაშიკანდიდატებისშერჩევისი სეთიკრიტერიუმები, Page 15 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS რომლებიცარუკავშირდებოდაპოტენციურიდასაქმებულისპროფესიულუნარებს, გამოცდილებას, განათლებასდაა.შ.
(მაგ.,მხოლოდქალებსანკაცებს/მხოლოდგარკვეულიასაკისადამიანებსშეუძლიათკ ონკურსშიმონაწილეობა) აქ საუბარია ისეთ კრიტერიუმებზე, რომლებიც არანაირად არ განაპირობებს და/ან არ აისახება კანდიდატის მიერ შესრულებული სამუშაოს ხარისხზე, მაგალითად, თუ პროფესორის ვაკანსიაა გამოცხადებული, მოთხოვნილი იყო თუ არა, რომ მხოლოდ მამაკაცების აპლიკაციები იქნებოდა განხილული.

B4.1.გთხოვთ, აღნიშნოთ, სამსახურშიაყვანისრომელიკრიტერიუმიიყომითითებული.
უკითხავთ ვარიანტებს და თუ რაიმე ისეთს ამბობს, რაც ჩამონათვალში არ არის მოცემული, წერთ „სხვაში“ B5.

სამსახურისმოსაძებნად, მეტწილად, რასაშუალებასმიმართავთ?

როგორც ტექსტიდანაც ჩანს, ეს კითხვა რომელიმე კონკრეტულ სამსახურს კი არ შეეხება, არამედ ინფორმაციის იმ არხებს, რომელთა საშუალებითაც რესპონდენტი, საჭიროების შემთხვევაში, ეძებს სამსახურს.

B6.

საიდანშეიტყვეთიმპოზიციაზეარსებულივაკანსიისშესახებ, რომელზეცამჟამად მუშაობთ?
ეს კითხვა კი, წინა კითხვისგან განსხვავებით, სწორედ ამჟამინდელი სამსახურის მოძიების არხებს შეეხება.

ის არ უნდა აგერიოთ B2 კითხვაში, რადგან B2-ში ვიგებთ, როგორ დაიკავა ამჟამინდელი პოზიცია, ხოლო B6-ში ვარკვევთ, როგორ შეიტყო, რომ ამ პოზიციაზე ვაკანსია იყო გამოცხადებული.

კვალიფიკაციისამაღლებადადაწინაურებაამჟამინდელსამსახურში ეს ბლოკი მთლიანად იმ სამსახურს შეეხება, რომელშიც რესპონდენტი ინტერვიუს მსვლელობის დროს მუშაობს.
თუ მას ერთზე მეტი სამსახური აქვს, მაშინ იმ სამსახურის შესახებ გაძლევთ პასუხებს, რომელსაც თავად თვლის ძირითადად (იხ.

კითხვა A3.1).

C1.

პროფესიულადდაწინაურებულხართთუარასამსახურში, რომელშიცამჟამადმუშაობთ?

C1.1.როგორმოხდათქვენიპროფესიულიდაწინაურება?

(გადადით კითხვაზე C2) C1.2.

გქონიათთუარასამსახურშიპროფესიულიდაწინაურებისშესაძლებლობა (უფრომაღალანსხვაპოზიციაზე)?

C1.3.გამოთქვითთუარაპროფესიულიდაწინაურებისსურვილი?

C1.3.1.

თუარდაგაწინაურეს, როგორფიქრობთ, რაიყოსუარისთქმისმიზეზი?
(შეგიძლიათ ორი ან სამი ვარიანტი შემოხაზოთ) (გადადითკითხვაზეC2) აქ გვაინტერესებს ის ფორმალური მიზეზი, რომელიც რესპონდენტს ოფიციალურად აცნობა დამსაქმებელმა.

რესპონდენტს შეუძლია რამდენიმე პასუხი მოგცეთ, თუმცა შეეცადეთ, პასუხების რაოდენობა არ იყოს დიდი, მაქსიმუმ სამი პასუხი.

C1.3.2.რატომარგამოთქვითპროფესიულიდაწინაურებისსურვილი?
(შეგიძლიათ ორი ან სამი პასუხი შემოხაზოთ) Page 16 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS ამ კითხვაზე პასუხი არის ის მიზეზები, რის გამოც რესპონდენტმა თავად შეიკავა დაწინაურების სურვილის გამოთქმისგან თავი.

აქაც შესაძლებელია ორი ან სამი პასუხის შემოხაზვა.

C2.როგორფიქრობთ, თქვენიდამსაქმებელიგაძლევდათისეთდავალებებს, რომლისშესრულებაცთქვენსშესაძლებლობებსკარგადგამოავლენდადადაგეხმარებოდათპროფესიუ ლდაწინაურებაში?

C3.
C3.

გაგზრდიათთუარაანაზღაურებასამსახურში, რომელშიცამჟამადმუშაობთმიუხედავად იმისა, რომ კითხვაში პირდაპირ არის მოცემული „ამჟამინდელი სამსახური“, მაინც შეახსენეთ რესპონდენტს, რომ მიმდინარე სამსახურზეა საუბარი.

თუ ერთზე მეტი სამსახური აქვს, უბრუნდებით ძირითადად წოდებულ სამსახურს (კითხვა A3.1).

C3.1.თუკი, ვისიინიციატივით?

(გადადითკითხვაზეC4) C3.2.მოგითხოვიათთუარახელფასისმომატება?

C4.

მოუციათუარათქვენსამჟამინდელდამსაქმებელსტრეინინგზედასწრებისშესაძლებლობა?
აქ იგულისხმება ნებისმიერი ტრენინგი, რომელიც რესპონდენტის ამჟამინდელი საქმიანობის რელევანტურია.

შესაძლოა, ტრენინგი მისსავე ორგანიზაციაში ტარდებოდა და/ან სხვა ორგანიზაციაში.

კითხვა შეეხება ნებისმიერ შემთხვევას, როდესაც დამსაქმებელმა საშუალება მისცა რესპონდენტს, რომ ტრენინგზე წასულიყო.

თუ რესპონდენტს ჰქონდა ტრენინგზე დასწრების შესაძლებლობა, აგრძელებთ შემდეგი კითხვით, თუ არ ჰქონია ასეთი შესაძლებლობა, გადადიხართ კითხვაზე C4.2.

C4.1.დაესწარითტრენინგ(ებ)ს?


თუ რესპონდენტი დაესწრო ტრენინგ(ებ)ს, შემდეგ ბლოკზე გადადიხართ და თუ არ დაესწრო, მაშინ აგრძელებთ შემდეგი კითხვით.

C4.1.1.

რატომარდაესწარითტრეინინგს?

(გააგრძელეთD ბლოკიდან) C4.2.

ისურვებდით ტრენინგზე დასწრებას?

სამსახურიდანგათავისუფლება D1.

როდესმეთუგაუთავისუფლებიხართსამსახურიდან?

ამ კითხვაში ზოგადად სამსახურიდან გათავისუფლების გამოცდილება გვაინტერესებს და არა რომელიმე კონკრეტული სამსახურის შემთხვევა.
თუ რესპონდენტს არ აქვს სამსახურიდან გათავისუფლების გამოცდილება ან არ სურს პასუხის გაცემა, მაშინ ამ ბლოკს მთლიანად ტოვებთ და გადადიხართ შემდეგ ბლოკზე.

თუ რესპონდენტს აქვს სამსახურიდან გათავისუფლების გამოცდილება, შემდეგი კითხვით აგრძელებთ.

D1.1.

გაუთავისუფლებიხართთუარასამსახურიდანბოლო 2 წლისგანმავლობაში?

Page 17 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS ამ კითხვით აკონკრეტებთ, გათავისუფლების ეპიზოდ(ებ)ი იყო თუ არა ბოლო ორი წლის განმავლობაში.
თუ ეს ეპიზოდ(ებ)ი ორ წელზე მეტი ხნის წინ იყო, მაშინ შემდეგ ბლოკზე გადადიხართ, ხოლო თუ ამ ორი წლის განმავლობაში იყო განურჩევლად იმისა, ერთი თუ მეტი ეპიზოდი, აგრძელებთ შემდეგი კითხვიდან.

D1.2.

გაგაფრთხილესთუარაწინასწარ, რომ, შესაძლოა, სამსახურიდანგაეთავისუფლებინეთ(თურესპონდენტიერთჯერზემეტადგაათავისუფლესბოლო 2 წლისგანმავლობაში, ბოლოშემთხვევისშესახებუნდაისაუბროს)?
კითხვის ტექსტიდანაც ნათელია, რომ თუ წინა კითხვაში რესპონდენტი მესამე ვარიანტს პასუხობს ანუ ერთ ჯერზე მეტად ჰქონდა გათავისუფლების გამოცდილება ბოლო ორი წლის განმავლობაში, ბოლო შემთხვევის შესახებ პასუხობს ამ კითხვას.

D1.3.გითხრესთუარა, რატომგაგათავისუფლესსამსახურიდან?

(თურესპონდენტიერთჯერზემეტადგაათავისუფლესბოლო 2 წლისგანმავლობაში, ბოლოშემთხვევისშესახებუნდაისაუბროს) D1.3.1.გთხოვთ, დააკონკრეტოთ, რატომგაგათავისუფლესსამსახურიდან (დამსაქმებლისნათქვამიდანგამომდინარე)(შეგიძლიათ ორი ან სამი პასუხის შემოხაზვა)?
აქ გვაინტერესებს, ფორმალურად რა მიზეზი აცნობეს რესპონდენტს, როგორც მისი სამსახურიდან დათხოვნის საფუძველი.

D1.3.2.გჯერათ, რომესრეალურიმიზეზიიყო?

თუ რესპონდენტი თვლის, რომ წინა კითხვაზე აღნიშნული პასუხი მისი გათავისუფლების რეალური მიზეზი იყო, შემდეგ ბლოკზე გადადიხართ, თუ ის თვლის, რომ ეს არ იყო რეალური მიზეზი და რაღაც სხვა, თავისი ვერსიებიც აქვს, შემდეგი კითხვით აგრძელებთ.

D1.3.3.

როგორ ფიქრობთ, რა იყო თქვენი სამსახურიდან გათავისუფლების რეალური მიზეზი(შესაძლებელია რამდენიმე პასუხის შემოხაზვა)?
D1.4.თუ თვლიდით,რომთქვენისამსახურიდანგათავისუფლებაუსაფუძვლოიყო, შეატყობინეთთუარაამისშესახებვინმეს/რომელიმეორგანიზაციასანთუგაასაჩივრეთ?

D2.

თქვენირომელიმეკოლეგაგაათავისუფლესთუარასამსახურიდანორსულობისანბავშვისგაჩენისგამოუ კანასკნელიხუთიწლისგანმავლობაში.

კითხვა არ შეეხება რომელიმე კონკრეტულ, მაგალითად, ამჟამინდელ სამსახურს.

რესპონდენტი პასუხობს ბოლო ხუთი წლის გამოცდილებიდან.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თავად გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესაბამის რიცხვს.
ხელფასი Page 18 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS E1.

გაძლევთთუარარაიმედამატებითკომპენსაციასანსარგებელსთქვენიდამსაქმებელი?

(მაგალითად, მობილურტელეფონს, მანქანასდაა.შ.)

აქ იგულისხმება ნებისმიერი რამ, რაც არ შედის ხელფასში.

E1.1.

რასახისკომპენსაციას/სარგებელსიღებთ?

(შესაძლებელია რამდენიმე პასუხის აღნიშვნა) აქ იგულისხმება ნებისმიერი სახის სარგებელი, რომელიც შეიძლება მიიღოს დასაქმებულმა კომპანიისგან/ორგანიზაციისგან.
რაც შეეხება ბონუსსა და პრემიას შორის განსხვავებას, პრემია ყოველთვის არის ფულადი დანამატი, რომელიც ხელფასის x პროცენტს შეადგენს (მაგალითად, 30 პროცენტს), ხოლო ბონუსი შეიძლება იყოს როგორც ფულადი, ისე არაფულადი ჯილდო, მაგალითად, განსაკუთრებული პირობები დაზღვევისთვის ან დამატებითი სასაუბრო დრო მობილურზე.

E2.

რამდენჯერმიიღეთრაიმესახისპრემია/ბონუსიბოლოწლისგანმავლობაში?

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

E3.
E3.

თქვენსსამსახურზეთუიფიქრებთ, ეთანხმებით თუ არ ეთანხმებითქვემოთმოცემულდებულებებს: ამ კითხვაში უკითხავთ მხოლოდ ცხრილში მოცემულ დებულებებს და თქვენვე აფიქსირებთ პასუხებს.

თანასწორიმოპყრობა F1.

ბავშვისანოჯახისწევრისავადმყოფობისგამორომმოგიწიოთსამსახურისგაცდენა, რადამოკიდებულებაექნებათ?

ცხადია, ამ კითხვას ქალებსაც უკითხავთ და მამაკაცებსაც.

თუ რომელიმე თვლის, რომ მათთვის შეუსაბამო კითხვაა, აფიქსირებთ ამ ვარიანტსაც.

აქ უკითხავთ ვარიანტებს და ისე ხაზავთ.

F2.


გაქვთთუარაგანცდა, რომთქვენიამჟამინდელიდამსაქმებელიოდესმეუსამართლოდმოგექცათ?

ამ შემთხვევაშიც თავად უკითხავთ ცხრილში მოცემულ დებულებებს და რესპონდენტი ეთანხმება ან არ ეთანხმება.

F3.

გიწევთთუარადამატებითსაათებშიმუშაობა?

კითხვა შეეხება შრომითი კონტრაქტის ან ზეპირი შეთანხმების მიხედვით განსაზღვრული სამუშაო საათების გარდა დამატებით სამუშაო საათებს.

თუ რესპონდენტი პასუხობს „დიახ“, აგრძელებთ შემდეგი კითხვით, თუ პასუხობს „არა“, გადადიხართ F4 კითხვაზე.
კითხვა ამჟამინდელ დამსაქმებელს შეეხება.

თუ ერთზე მეტი დამსაქმებელი ჰყავს, პასუხობს ძირითადი (იხ.

კითხვა A3.1) დამსაქმებლის შესახებ.

F3.1 გინაზღაურებენთუარაამსაათებშიშესრულებულსამუშაოს?

Page 19 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS F4.

თუგსურდათგასულიყავითანიყავითდეკრეტულშვებულებაში, როგორმიიღოესთქვენმადამსაქმებელმა (შეგიძლიაწარსულიდანნებისმიერიდამსაქმებლისშესახებუპასუხოთ, თუამჟამინდელსამსახურშიყოფნისასბავშვებიარგაგიჩენიათ)?
როგორც კითხვის ტექსტიდანაც ჩანს, რესპონდენტი პასუხობს ამჟამინდელი სამსახურის შესახებ, თუ კითხვა რელევანტურია, ხოლო თუ არ არის რელევანტური, მაშინ ნებისმიერი წარსული სამსახურის შესახებ საუბრობს, რომელში ყოფნის დროსაც ჰქონია მსგავსი გამოცდილება.

თუ კითხვა შეუსაბამოა, პირველივე ვარიანტს ხაზავთ.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.

თუ ჩამონათვალში არ არის რესპონდენტის მიერ დასახელებული ქცევა, წერთ „სხვა“-ში.
შევიწროვებასამსახურში ვინაიდან ეს ბლოკი ყველაზე სენზიტიურ კითხვებს მოიცავს სექსუალური შევიწროვების შესახებ სამსახურში, ის გამოყოფილია ორ ნაწილად.

პირველი ნაწილი (რომელიც ქვემოთ არის წარმოდგენილი) ჩართულია კითხვარში და თქვენ, კითხვარის დანარჩენი ბლოკების მსგავსად, უკითხავთ რესპონდენტს, ხოლო მეორე ნაწილი ანუ კითხვები G7 და G8 ცალკეა დაბეჭდილი და კონვერტშია მოთავსებული.

ბოლო ორი კითხვის შესახებ ინფორმაცია და შესაბამის ინსტრუქციები იხ.

ქვემოთ (III ნაწილი).

G1.


რასფიქრობთიმსიტუაციებისშესახებ, რომლებიცქვემოთარისწარმოდგენილი.

ეს კითხვა მიზნად ისახავს იმის გარკვევას, თუ რამდენად იცის რესპონდენტმა, რა არის დისკრიმინაცია სამუშაო ადგილზე.

თქვენ უკითხავთ თითოეულ დებულებას, უკითხავთ პასუხებს და აღნიშნავთ რესპონდენტის მიერ გაცემულ პასუხს.

G2.

გქონიათთუარასექსუალურიშევიწროვებისგამოცდილებასამსახურში?

აქ საუბარია ზოგადად აღწერილი გამოცდილების შესახებ და არა მხოლოდ ამჟამინდელ სამსახურში.
თუ რესპონდენტს ჰქონია მსგავსი გამოცდილება, აგრძელებთ შემდეგი კითხვით და აკონკრეტებთ, ეს გამოცდილება ბოლო 12 თვის განმავლობაში იყო თუ არა.

თუ რესპონდენტს არ ჰქონია მსგავსი გამოცდილება (არა, არ ვიცი) ან არ სურს პასუხის გაცემა, გადადიხართ G4 კითხვაზე.

G3.

გქონიათ თუ არა სექსუალური შევიწროვების გამოცდილება სამსახურში ბოლო 12 თვის განმავლობაში?

ამ კითხვიდან, ნებისმიერი პასუხოს შემთხვევაში გადადიხართ შემდეგ კითხვაზე.
Page 20 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS შემდეგ აცნობთ ჩარჩოში მოყვანილ ინსტრუქციას და კარგად უხსნით (რამდენჯერმე უმეორებთ საჭიროების შემთხვევაში), რომ მათი პასუხები ნამდვილად ანონიმურად დარჩება და არავინ ნახავს მონაცემების შემყვანის გარდა, რომელსაც მხოლოდ კითხვარის ნომერი ექნება და არანაირი საიდენტიფიკაციო ინფორმაცია, რომლითაც რესპონდენტი რამენაირად ამოცნობადი იქნება.

შემდეგიკითხვებიშეეხებაიმსიტუაციებს, რომლებშიცშეიძლებააღმოჩენილიყავითსამსახურშიანმუშაობისდროს.
გთხოვთ, წაიკითხოთკითხვებიდაშეძლებისდაგვარადგულწრფელადუპასუხოთ.

თქვენსმიერგაცემულიპასუხებიგანზოგადდებადაარავისეცოდინება, კონკრეტულადთქვენრაპასუხებიგაეცით.

G4.

უსიამოვნებისგანცდადაგეუფლებათთუარა, თუვინმე (კოლეგა, მენეჯერი, კლიენტიანვინმესხვა, ვისთანაცგიწევთურთიერთობამუშაობისდროს) თქვენთანსამსახურშიისემოიქცევა, როგორცქვემოთარისაღწერილი?

ამ კითხვაში კარგად ვუხსნით რესპონდენტს, რომ კითხვაში აღწერილი სიტუაციები არ შეეხება პირადად მას და მის წარსულ გამოცდილებას.
ეს არის ჰიპოთეტური სიტუაციები, რომელიც მან უნდა წარმოისახოს და ისე გიპასუხოთ.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, თვითონ გპასუხობთ და თქვენ შესაბამის რიცხვ ხაზავთ.

თუ რესპონდენტი ამბობს, რომ მისთვის შეუსაბამოა და/ან უჭირს წარმოდგენა, მაშინ პასუხს ბოლო სვეტში („მიჭირს წარმოდგენა“) აფიქსირებთ.

G5.

მსგავსსიტუაციაში (წინაკითხვაშიაღწერილ) რომაღმოჩნდეთ, რასმოიმოქმედებდით?

ამ კითხვაშიც მხოლოდ კითხვას უკითხავთ, ისმენთ პასუხს და შესაბამის ვარიანტს ხაზავს.
თუ რესპონდენტი ისეთ ქმედებას აღწერს, რაც ჩამონათვალში არ არის, აფიქსირებთ ბოლო პუნქტში.

G6.აქვსთუარათქვენსორგანიზაციას/კომპანიასრაიმესახისშინაგანაწესი, რომელიცკრძალავსასეთ (ზემოთჩამოთვლილ) ქცევებსდაშეგიძლიათგამოიყენოთ, თუმსგავსსიტუაციაშიაღმოჩნდებით?

დემოგრაფიულიმონაცემები H1.

სქესი H2.

ასაკი H3.

საცხოვრებელიადგილი H4.

სკოლიდანდაწყებული, დღემდემიღებულიგანათლებისყველასაფეხურისჩათვლით (დაწყებითიდასაშუალოსკოლა, უნივერსიტეტი, სრულიპროფესიულიგანათლება), სულრამდენიწელიისწავლეთსასწავლოდაწესებულებაში?
თუამჟამადგანათლებასიღებთ, დათვალეთდღემდედაგროვილიწლებისრაოდენობა.

H4.1.

თქვენი განათლების უმაღლესი საფეხურია Page 21 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS თუ რესპონდენტის მიერ მიღებული განათლება არ შეესაბამება ჩამოთვლილ ვარიანტებს, მაგალითად, საბჭოთა სისტემაში აქვს ნასწავლი, ჩაწერთ ბოლო გრაფაში.

თუ რესპონდენტი სტუდენტია, აფიქსირებთ მეოთხე ვარიანტს და აკონკრეტებთ, რომელი საფეხურის სტუდენტია.

H5.

ოჯახურიმდგომარეობა H6.

ეთნიკურიმიკუთვნებულობა H7.


რელიგიურობა H6 და H7 კითხვების ვარიანტებს არ უკითხავთ, ეკითხებით ღიად და ხაზავთ შესატყვის პასუხს.

H8.

გთხოვთ, მიუთითეთთქვენიპირადიხელზეასაღებითვიურიხელფასი.

H9.

გთხოვთ, მიუთითეთთქვენიმეუღლის/პარტნიორისსაშუალოხელზეასაღებიხელფასი.

H8 და H9 კითხვებში ეკითხებით დაბეგვრის შემდეგ თანხაზე ანუ იმ რაოდენობას, რომელსაც ურიცხავენ ანგარიშზე ან ხელზე აძლევენ რესპონდენტს/მის პარტნიორს.

პასუხებს არ უკითხავთ, რესპონდენტი გეუბნებათ და თქვენ ხაზავთ შესატყვის ვარიანტს.
H10.

თქვენიდაბავშვებისჩათვლით, ჩვეულებრივ, რამდენიადამიანიცხოვრობსთქვენსოჯახში?

ამ კითხვაში უკითხავთ სათითაოდ პუნქტებს და თქვენ იწერთ დასახელებულ რაოდენობებს.

III ნაწილი.

კონვერტი ამ ნაწილში წარმოდგენილი ორი კითხვა ჩადებულია კითხვარის თანდართულ კონვერტში.

G6 კითხვაზე პასუხის გაცემის შემდეგ რესპონდენტს სთავაზობთ არჩევანს.
ეუბნებით, რომ შემდეგ ორ კითხვაზე პასუხების გასაცემად მას შეუძლია: (ა) თავად წაიკითხოს კითხვები, დააფიქსიროს პასუხები, ჩადოს ფურცელი კონვერტში და დალუქული კონვერტი გადმოგცეთ და (ბ) თქვენ წაუკითხოთ ეს ორი კითხვა ისევე, როგორც წინა კითხვები წაუკითხეთ.

არჩევანი მასზეა, თუმცა დამატებით განუმარტავთ, რომ კვლევა სრულიად კონფიდენციალური და ანონიმურია და კონვერტში პასუხების მოთავსება კიდევ უფრო მეტად ანონიმურს ხდის მას იმით, რომ ინტერვიუერიც კი ვერ ხედავს მის პასუხებს.
განურჩევლად იმისა, რესპონდენტი თავად წერს პასუხებს თუ თქვენ უკითხავთ, ამ ორი კითხვის პასუხი კონვერტშია მოთავსებული.

მას შემდეგ, რაც დაასრულებთ ინტერვიუს, არ დაგავიწყდეთ, რომ კითხვარის შესაბამისი კოდი კონვერტზეც დააწეროთ.

ასევე, თუ რესპონდენტი თავად კითხულობს და წერს პასუხებს, კონვერტი დალუქული წამოიღეთ, თუ თქვენ წაუკითხავთ, მაშინ კონვერტი ღია დატოვეთ, რათა ვიცოდეთ, რომელი გზით შეივსო ეს ნაწილი.

დარწმუნდით, რომ რესპონდენტს კარგად ესმის განსხვავება G4 კითხვასა და G7 კითხვებს შორის განსხვავება.
თუ პირველში ჰიპოთეტური სიტუაციები იყო მოცემული და მისი მოსაზრებები გაინტერესებდათ, აქ მისი Page 22 GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN GEORGIAN LABOUR MARKET CSS პირადი გამოცდილების შესახებ არის კითხვები, ანუ მან საკუთარი გამოცდილება უნდა აღწეროს; ის, რაც მას გადახდა ან არ გადახდა თავს.

ინსტრუქციის მიცემის შემდეგ კარგად გადაამოწმეთ, რომ რესპონდენტმა ზუსტად გაიგო, რა უნდა გააკეთოს.

G7.
G7.

ბოლო 12 თვისგანმავლობაშივინმე (კოლეგა, მენეჯერი, კლიენტიანვინმესხვა, ვისთანაცგიწევთურთიერთობამუშაობისდროს) თქვენთანსამსახურშიმოქცეულათუარაისე, როგორცქვემოთარისაღწერილი?

თუ რესპონდენტი ერთ-ერთ დებულებას მაინც დადებითად პასუხობს, გადადის შემდეგ კითხვაზე და ბოლომდე ავსებს ბლოკს.

თუ არც ერთი „დიახ“ არ აქვს, მაშინ ასრულებს კითხვარის ამ ბლოკის შევსებას და გადადიხართ შემდეგ ბლოკზე.

G8.

იყოთუარაესსიტუაცია/სიტუაციებითქვენთვისუსიამოვნო?

G8.1.
G8.1.

გქონდათ თუ არა განცდა იმ სიტუაციაში ან მას შემდეგ, რომ ეს რაღაცნაირად თქვენი ბრალი იყო?

G8.2 გთხოვთ, გაიხსენოთ G7 კითხვაში ჩამოთვლილი სიტუაციებიდან თქვენთვის ყველაზე უსიამოვნო სიტუცია, რომელშიც აღმოჩენილხართ ბოლო 12 თვის განმავლობაში.

რამდენჯერ აღმოჩნდით ასეთ სიტუაციაში ბოლო 12 თვის განმავლობაში?

G8.3.ესაუბრეთ თუ არა ვინმეს ამ სიტუაციის შესახებ?

G8.3.1.

ვის ესაუბრეთ ამ სიტუაციის შესახებ?

Page 23 G8.3.2.

რატომ არავის ესაუბრეთ ამ სიტუაციის შესახებ?

G8.4.


თუ G7 კითხვაში ჩამოთვლილი სიტუაციებიდან თქვენთვის ყველაზე უსიამოვნო სიტუციაზე ვისაუბრებთ, რომელშიც აღმოჩენილხართ ბოლო 12 თვის განმავლობაში, ვინ მოგექცათ ასე?

(შესაძლებელია რამდენიმე ვარიანტის შემოხაზვა)