The gender pay gap among university professors: the role of individual and organizational determinants

This case study examines the various sources of explanation of the gender pay gap among professors at a large Canadian research university. It comprises three articles.  The first article analyzes gender differences in “market supplements” using data from a survey of professors conducted in 2000. The correspondence analysis produces a two-factor solution in which the second axis clearly opposes faculty who receive market supplement to those who do not. Gender is strongly related to this factor, with the female category on the side of the axis associated with the absence of market supplement. The results of the logistic regression confirm that field of specialization, frequency of external research contracts, faculty members’ values and attitudes towards remuneration and seniority within rank are all related to the award of market supplements, as hypothesized. However, women were still almost three times less likely than men to have been awarded market supplements after controlling for these relationships. Overall, the results suggest that within a collective bargaining context, reindividualization of the pay determination process — notably, the payment of market supplements to faculty — may reopen pay differences by gender. The second article uses administrative data for years 1997 to 2006. We estimate the respective contributions to the gender pay gap of four pay components: base pay, promotion to full professor, access to market supplements and Canada research chairs as well as the amounts received. These are characterized by various levels of formalization. This allows testing the hypothesis that the magnitude of gender differences in pay varies with the extent of formalization of pay components. We also determine how gender differences on each pay component vary according to the relative representation of female faculty members within units. We find some evidence that the magnitude of gender differences varies with the degree of formalization in remuneration practices. We also find that, other things being equal, pay is lower in units with a high proportion of females.  The last article examines the mechanisms that may lead to gender differences in access to ‘market supplements’ among professors. The process of awarding pay in excess for the amounts provided for in a collective agreement are examined based on interviews with 17 administrators at all hierarchical levels and in various academic units. Results suggest that gender differences in the likelihood of receiving an award may be related to specific features of the award process and to an unequal distribution of awards to units with strong female representation. Overall, the results show that the gender pay gap among professors at this university is not entirely accounted for by differences in the individual characteristics of male and female professors. The analysis reveals that the pay gap resides in gender differences in access to market supplements and Canada research chairs (CRCs) and, to a lesser extent, to the full professor rank. No difference is found on base pay or on the amounts of pay supplements received, whether they are “market” premiums or supplements associated to a CRC. Furthermore, pay tends to be lower in units where female representation is highest. The observed gender differences in access to market supplements could be due to organizational processes that reduce the likelihood of awards to women. There are several reasons why female faculty members are particularly disadvantaged in this award system. Gender differences in the propensity or ability to negotiate are alleged (and assumed) by some of those negotiating. More limited access to information about supplements reduces the likelihood that women will pursue them. Chairpersons, who are mostly males, may allow gender bias to influence their evaluations of faculty members, perhaps because they tend to favor others like themselves. It may also be that chairpersons from the units where women are better represented do not have access to information about market supplements or that disciplinary traditions make them reluctant to request them.

Keyphrases: Gender pay gap, University professors, Organization, Pay formalization, Pay discretion, Female representation