Three Key Similarities Between Alla And Helen example essay topic

The Immigrants' Working Experience For every person, different reasons exist to go out and seek employment. These reasons, however, stem from the type of government that people are ruled by. In Russia, during the period that will be discussed, a Socialist government ruled the USSR. It was under this government, that everyone was to have a job and unemployment was to be kept at a minimum. During this socialist regime, the attitudes to working will be taken from the perspectives of three related women. The first woman, Mela Krul, was born in 1932 and is the mother of Alla Veitsman and Helen Krul Zlatkin.

Alla Veitsman is the oldest sister and was born in 1954. Although her work experience under the socialist government is brief, it shows signs of the progress that women made during the middle to late 1900's. Helen Zlatkin, born in 1962, had no work experience in the former USSR, but her personal account demonstrates the types of choices that women made in order to have both family and work. Mela Krul was the only one who had extensive work experience in the USSR, but she was able to see the changes and progress that women underwent through the daily activities and choices that both of her daughters made. As these three women came to the United States of America, along with their families, they faced a democratic government where employment was not guaranteed and women did have to face the hardships of unemployment, and more importantly, inequality. It would be the values and traditions that both Alla and Helen believed in that allowed them to be successful and relatively unaffected by inequality.

In the time period that the three women lived in the USSR, society was ruled by socialism (communists did exist, but were not the majority). Under this theory of government, everyone worked; it was believed to be a disgrace if a person simply sat at home and did not participate in the labor force. The goal was to have every citizen in the USSR working; there was little focus on quality or productivity, 'Early Soviet policies rested on the assumption that genuine equality and independence for women depended on full economics participation. ' (Lapidus 168) People were encouraged to work, not to meet their potential in the workplace. In order to receive their monthly pay in rubles, the workers had a quota to meet. The workers rarely met this quota -- sometimes employees were even discouraged by their employers to meet the amount.

Workers were, of course, paid extra if they exceeded the certain amount, but the practice of 'norm-beating' was not common and was said to be punishable through the loss of one's job. If the workers continually exceeded employers' expectations, then less work would be left for others the next day. Under socialism, this would encourage competition and unemployment would develop. There was simply no competition in the labor market in the USSR during this time period -- everyone worked the minimal amount that they could. Due to this equal amount of productivity from both men and women, equal pay truly did exist for equal work.

It was hard to distinguish between a male engineer and a female engineer -- both would receive the exact same amount of pay per month. (Kuril, pages 3-4) On the one hand, the equal pay that existed for both men and women is a good characteristic of a labor market to have. But, on the other hand, the roles that men and women had to play in their families and society were not equal, and far from being the same. As all members of society, women were encouraged to work and not stay at home. Due to the fact that women were earning the same amount as men, their time became too expensive to simply stay at home. The opportunity cost of women staying at home with their families increased, and women went out into the labor force.

Through a substitution-income effect analysis, women began to substitute away from the more expensive action, staying at home, and began to work more. Although the presence of women in the household diminished, their roles did not. Women were expected to take care of their families and work outside of the home. At this point, women were expected to take on dual roles, as homemaker and industrial worker. As was said before, socialism was supposed to 'emancipate' its citizens from the troubles of competition and private property.

But this 'emancipation' only added further 'responsibilities to [women's] full load at home' (Young, page 1). Men did not help their wives in any household work or in the upbringing of their children, except for financial help. With the growing and permanent amount of women entering the labor force, the fertility rate decreased. A negative relationship between the fertility rate and labor force participation became evident in the working women. This became even more obvious since employers were not allowed to discriminate against pregnant women, only give them easier duties on account of their physical disabilities. (Lapidus 126) Women's dual roles did not allow them to have many children and still give them the appropriate amount of attention and care while having to work.

(Kuniansky 117) Women's time now began to be divided between working one part of the day, and taking care of her husband and raising their children the latter part of the day. ' Although women are now legally equal to men, male psychology has not changed. For many women, marriage means a working day equal to a man's, plus another working day at home. Men seldom view marriage as a joint venture. ' (Lapidus, page 273) The first woman, out of the three that will be written about, is Mela Krul. Mela is the only woman who truly experienced everything that socialism had to offer the women of USSR.

Mela began working when she was sixteen years old. She came from a poor, fatherless family and had to help support her widowed mother and younger sister. Mela's first job was that of a telephone operator earning 35 rubles per month. In order to become employed at this company, Mela took a six-month course that gave her the necessary skills of a telephone operator. Mela worked eight hours a day, six days a week.

During this time period, workers were only allowed one day-off, Sunday. Mela, along with her female co-workers, earned the exact same wage as men and worked the exact same amount of hours per day. Even though the socialist government did not encourage workers to exceed expectations, thus encouraging competition, valuable workers were recognized and were given an extra 10 rubles every six months. Mela worked as a telephone operator for eight years.

During this time period, she was barely able to support her family -- her mother's wage helped the family purchase the necessities such as food and clothes. During this eight-year period, Mela got married and became pregnant at the age of 22. Mela's employer did not offer any benefits except for maternity leave and sick days. At this point, maternity leave included one month before the baby was due and one month after the child was born, for a total of eight weeks. All eight weeks were entirely paid for by the employer. The employer also paid its female employees three full days if a child became ill.

These three days were paid for 100%; the employer did not pay for any extra sick days that had to been taken by the worker. Mela's employer also gave benefits to workers who stayed more than five years at the workplace. If a worker became sick, all expenses (medicine, hospital care if needed, and wages) would be paid for by the employer -- this would only be available to those who worked more than five years. Since Mela was married and her husband had a job, she stayed out of the labor force for thirteen years, raising her first child and giving birth to her second one. After the thirteen-year period that Mela did not work, she went back into the labor force. This time, however, Mela was 34 years old and she needed a higher wage rate to support her family.

Mela changed occupations and became a nurse. In order to obtain a position as a nurse, Mela took courses for one year and began to work in a hospital. The nursing position paid 65 rubles per month. Mela worked eight hours day and had two days off (Saturday and Sunday), however, in this position. Once again, regular overtime during the day was not permitted. If workers, however, worked the holidays established by the government, they would receive an extra ten rubles per month for the extra time worked.

It is difficult to measure whether or not Mela received the same amount of pay as men in her new position, since all of the nurses were in fact women. The benefits of the nursing position increased slightly. In regards to maternity leave, women were allowed two months before the child was born and two months afterwards, for a total of sixteen weeks. All sixteen weeks were completely paid for by the employer. The sick leave that was offered remained the same, three days would be fully paid for by the employer. Mela Krul was born in 1932.

This year of birth places Mela in the third cohort described by Claudia Goldin. This cohort wanted a family and then a job. The only reason that Mela joined the work force at the age of 16, was that her mother could not support the family alone. A job is exactly what Mela needed to first support her mother and younger sister, and then later to help support her two young children and husband. Both of Mela's positions, telephone operator and nurse, were jobs, not careers. For both positions, Mela did not need an extensive amount of education in order to obtain the two jobs.

As a young women, Mela finished eight years of school (all children began to attend school at the age of seven in the USSR) and began to work in order to support her family. As soon as Mela gave birth to her first daughter, Alla, she immediately dropped out of the labor force. Family became the priority now. Mela stayed at home and raised Alla until she was thirteen years old. When Alla was thirteen, her younger sister, Helen, was five years old. Mela felt confident enough to go back into the labor force since Alla began to take care of her younger sister.

Mela's nursing position, which lasted for approximately twelve years, was also just a 'job' in her eyes. The whole family leaving for America in 1979 later interrupted this job. A distinction must be made at this point. Mela Krul fits the model established by Claudia Goldin's article only in a sense that Mela fits a cohort that saw a family as much more important than a job. The workplace was seen as a place to simply earn a wage and support one's family, not to pursue goals and a career. But Mela does not fit the other characteristics of the third cohort in a sense that her education is not as extensive enough as other women who were in this cohort.

Mela did not attend college in order to meet a husband -- she did not go to a university in order to earn her 'Mrs. ' degree. Mela married a man who was an apprentice for a shoemaker in the USSR. When Mela came here with her family, she no longer worked. Family continued to be much more important to her than a job. When Mela arrived in this country, she began to take care of her grandchildren, while her husband worked.

The wage rates or gaps that existed between men and women were not important to her since she completely left the labor market upon her arrival to the United States; her time became valuable in the house, not in the workplace. Claudia Goldin's article does not include the hardships that immigrant women faced. The only link that Mela Krul has with the women that Goldin speaks of is her birth year and having family as her highest priority. Mela worked because she faced the hardships and shortages that a socialist government had to offer. Mela's two daughters will be the ones possibly affected by inequality in wage rates in the United States. Mela's oldest daughter was Alla Veitsman.

Alla finished ten years of school and attended college, The University of Leningrad, at the age of eighteen. Alla attended night classes in hopes of becoming an economist for one of the researcher centers near the city of Kiev, the family's hometown. While Alla was going to her night classes, she was also working for a food wholesale company in the morning. Alla's job was keeping track of all the food purchased by the grocery stores.

At this job, she earned seventy rubles a month, worked eight hours a day for five days a week. The same conditions existed for her as for her mother -- overtime was not encouraged and the same amount of maternity and sick leave was given to the female workers. Alla worked at the wholesale company for five years until her only daughter, Marianna, was born in 1977. Once her daughter was born, Alla left the labor force to take care of her child.

Alla's husband worked and was able to support the family. The three of them lived with Alla's parents, for a total of six people (including Alla's younger sister) living in a two bedroom apartment. Alla's life was also interrupted by their departure to America in 1979. Once the family had arrived in America, Alla began to work for a label factory in 1980. She did not pursue any more education once in America because, as an immigrant woman, money and a home became the most important priorities.

As Alla began to work at the factory, her mother took care of her only child until she was six years old. Alla worked in the factory until 1995, for a total of 15 years, until she made a career change and became a manicurist. During her tenure at the factory, Alla was a quality inspector. The factory did have job segregation. The position of quality inspector had both men and women, but mostly men had the positions in which heavy machinery had to be operated. Both men and women earned the same amount of pay, but since men operated the heavy machinery, those men were able to earn more.

Upper level managers were also mostly male. For the first time in the lives of the three women, benefits, other than maternity leave, became important. Alla earned paid vacation time, which increased as her years at the factory increased, sick leave, and personal days off -- all of which were paid for by the company. Alla no longer needed maternity leave since she only had one child.

What did become important to her was insurance. Alla's husband was self-employed and the family could not afford insurance. Alla stayed with the factory for fifteen years, because they offered a cheap family insurance plan for all of its workers. Another benefit to having this job was the fact that Alla was home by 3: 15 during the week -- just in time to see her daughter come home from elementary school. As Alla's daughter became older, Alla no longer needed to be home by 3: 15 to see her child come home from school. As the daughter became more independent, Alla was able to switch jobs, learn new skills, and become a manicurist.

Alla took courses that lasted for six months and now works at Marshall Field's Beauty Salon. It is here that job segregation is completely obvious. A majority of the beauty salon is female, with the exception of a few male hairdressers. Alla still receives the same vacation and personal benefits, but the insurance plan has become costlier. The family can now afford this since their income has risen.

With her daughter in college, Alla no longer has the need to be home at a certain time -- there are days when Alla must work until 7 o'clock in the evening in Downtown, Chicago. Alla's birth year, 1954, places in the fourth cohort in Claudia Goldin's article. This cohort was supposed to desire a career and then a family. More women went to college and obtained degrees. But since women in this cohort actually wanted a career and not just a job, marital instability and lower fertility rates became evident during this time period.

Women in this cohort were just not able to handle both a demanding career and a family. Although Alla's birth year places her in this cohort, Alla actually wanted a family and a job, then later a family and a career. Alla's work at the factory was simply seen as just a job that offered desirable benefits for an immigrant family. Alla's present occupation as a manicurist is seen as a career. During both time periods, as a quality inspector and later as a manicurist, Alla's family was still her first priority. Alla also did not achieve the level of education that women in this cohort did.

Alla's participation in the labor force can be seen as a 'need' to acquire more things and achieve a higher standard of living. As discussed by Barbara Bergmann in her article, 'The Economic Impetus Behind Women's Emergence' women had a 'need' to participate in the labor force. Alla found herself needing more goods and services that just her husband's income could provide. During the period between 1969 to 1981, an increasing amount of women entered the labor force due to the inflationary economy that people faced. As Alla joined the labor force in 1980, the inflation was one of the key factors bringing her into the labor market. With women's wages rising, Alla's time became too valuable to stay at home.

As was the case with her mother, the opportunity cost of Alla staying at home had risen -- but for different reasons. Mela could not stay at home because she was living under a socialist regime where equality was found through working; she also had to help support a poor family. Alla, on the other hand, had to take advantage of the rising wages that women were experiencing. With her mother taking care of the daughter, Alla had no reason to stay at home and lose the wages that were available to her.

As the wages were rising, marginal product increased through the improvement in technology and the increase in capital stock, especially in the label factory. In Bergmann's article, the suitable-jobs theory also poses as an explanation for Alla to enter the labor force. Along with her new skills and education of a manicurist, this position can be seen as being suitable for Alla and must be filled by a woman, rather than a man. Alla's younger sister, Helen, had even less experience under the socialist regime in the USSR. Helen attended eight years of school and later began to attend a technical school (a. k. a.

DeVry Technical School). Helen was only able to finish a half a year in the trade school before leaving for America. Once Helen and her family had arrived in 1979, she took classes at Truman College to learn secretarial skills. Helen completed two years at Truman College and left for California with her new husband. Once in California, Helen once again took courses, but this time to be a nurse's assistant. Helen worked in a hospital for six months until her first child, Erik, was born.

After Erik was born, the family moved back to Illinois in order for Helen's mother to take care of Erik so that Helen can obtain a full-time job. Helen was able to take advantage of her education from Truman College and obtain a position with the insurance branch of Montgomery Ward's. Helen's position includes the duties of entering insurance claims and customer service. In this department, there is little if no job segregation present. Helen's managers consist of both men and women. During her tenure at Montgomery Ward's, Helen became pregnant once again and was able to take a six week maternity leave that the company offered to its female workers.

Helen is the first woman, out of the three being discussed, who actually needed the benefits to include maternity leave. As with her older sister, Helen also had the benefits of paid vacation, personal days, and family insurance; she was also able to come home in time to see her children arrive from school. After the six weeks, Helen went back to work and her mother took care of the baby girl, Michelle. Helen is presently at the insurance branch, but has expanded her skills to those of a computer programmer. She is currently searching a new job that will require her skills and offer a larger wage rate. Although the two sisters possess different occupations, their desires for a job come from the same reasons.

Helen was born in 1962, placing her in Claudia Goldin's fifth cohort. This cohort wanted a career and a family. As Helen has expanded her skills to those of a computer programmer, she too wants a career and a family. This is exactly the same as Alla.

Alla expanded her skills to that of a manicurist and now has a career and her family. Even though both women are placed in different cohorts due to their age differences, they both desire the outcomes of the fifth cohort. Neither of the two women is satisfied with merely having a job that pays their debt, they want a satisfying career and stable family to come home to. Helen also had a need as discussed in Barbara Bergmann's article.

But Helen's need did not result from inflationary pressures, as Alla's had. Helen continually sought to increase her level of education, thus increasing her marginal productivity. From being a nurse's assistant to a member of the claims personnel and hopefully to a computer programmer, Helen is constantly increasing her level of education through knowledge of technology; Helen's human capital is increasing in order to obtain the highest wage rate that she possibly can. As Helen obtains more of the valuable skills, her time simply becomes too valuable to stay at home and her opportunity cost of being a housewife increases. There are three key similarities between Alla and Helen that encouraged both of the women to work and have a permanent presence in the labor market. First of all, both women invested in their human capital.

Although there is a gap between the amount that has been invested in Helen's capital versus Alla's, this can be due to the fact that Helen did come to America as a young adult without a family and major responsibilities. Helen had a larger opportunity to invest more in herself than Alla did. Even though the human capital theory has its faults, both women invested in their education and spent the time to search for a better job in order to receive higher wage rates. The human capital theory, if taken as truth, states that an investment in one's human capital should lead to an increase in marginal product which should lead to an increase in the wage rate ('Y Investment in H.C. Th Mp 'Y Th 'Y Wage Rate). The flaw in this theory comes in when an increase in the investment human capital does not always produce an increase marginal product; or an increase in wage rates is not always a result of an increase in marginal product. To prove the human capital theory means to prove the link between marginal product and the other two characteristics of the theory.

Both Alla and Helen have become more productive due to the fact that they invested in their human capital, and are now both experiencing an increase in wage rates. From a microeconomic standpoint, a firm should only hire an additional employee when the marginal product that the extra employee will add will benefit the firm. At the same time that Helen is in search of a computer programming position, firms all across the city are in search of knowledgeable programmers. With Helen's new knowledge of computers, she will become more productive and will add to the firm's success. In the United States, the service sector is growing rapidly.

As Alla has become a manicurist and has joined the service sector, her addition to Marshall Field's has only helped them meet the growing demand of its customers. Alla's knowledge in this field has allowed her to be more productive and add to the company's success. Both women have added to the success of their employers. Both women have received an increase in their wages. Their investment in human capital increased, marginal product increased, and their wage rates increased as a result. The theory proves to be true in this case.

Second, is the availability of the benefits that both women, especially Alla, were in search of. Although only Helen took advantage of the maternity leave that her employer offered, both women needed the insurance plans and the paid leaves that their employers offered. In Olivia S. Mitchell's article, 'Work and Family Benefits', more and more employers began to offer insurance plans, such as HMOs that were appealing to their workers. Helen had to take advantage of her maternity leave because her husband's employer did not offer paid paternity leave -- a characteristic that is consistent with the article. But both Alla and Helen had to take advantage of the insurance plans that were being offered to them. The present idea of how to define a family does not exist in either of the two women's families.

They fit the 'standard' notion of what a family should be -- biological parents living with their children. These insurance plans were the key ingredient in the benefits package that both companies had for Alla and Helen. The benefits allowed both women to continue working -- thus promoting equality between themselves and their husbands and raising their families's standard of living. An argument against having these types of 'family friendly' benefits is given by Barbara R. Bergmann in her article, 'Work-Family Policies and Equality Between Women and Men'.

Bergmann believes that these benefits deter women from achieving equality with men. Women are encouraged to leave the labor force and not participate the same amount of time as men do in the labor market. She argues that men should also be given paternity leave in order to take care of the child, and not place all of the responsibility on the woman. The benefits that are given, she believes, actually enforce the notion that women should stay at home and take care of the children and household. One assumption is made in this article -- women might not be in the labor force as long or as much as men due to their increased benefits.

For both Alla and Helen, once both women were in the United States and married, they have been in the labor force an equal amount of time as their husbands have. Alla did not even take advantage of any maternity leave offered to her. Neither Alla nor Helen take much advantage of the personal days that are offered to them. Both women take vacation days during the summer to spend time with their families -- a benefit that is offered to them and to their husbands.

Since neither Alla nor Helen has stayed out of the labor force for a long period of time, their skills for the present job do not deteriorate. On the other hand, both women have improved their skills in order to be employed in a better and more fulfilling field. Even though both sisters still have somewhat of a dual role in the family, their husbands and children take an increasing part in cleaning the house and taking care of themselves. Alla and Helen did not want these benefits so that taking care of the home and family would become easier for them, they wanted to benefits to insure the welfare of their families in the future -- an important idea that Bergmann seems to overlook. Lastly, both Alla and Helen were able to have constant participation rate in the labor force because their mother was taking care of their children in order for both daughters to either educate themselves or have a full-time job. With each child that either Alla or Helen had, Mela stayed home and watched her grandchildren as the two daughters made a living for themselves.

Helen did not have to take to an extended maternity leave since her mother took care of both Erik and Michelle. Alla began to work immediately after arriving in America because her mother took care of Marianna. Neither woman took advantage of the benefit of having paid personal leave, since Mela would take care of the children in case of sickness. In Gary Becker's article, 'The Evolution of Family', he makes the distinction between traditional families and modern families. In traditional families, the families were extremely close knit and it was the responsibility of each family member to take care of another one. The modern families were less close and it is at this point that capital and labor markets are introduced.

The three women that have been written about fit the characteristics of both types of families. Although there is less dependence on the family due to capital markets and access to education for the children, there is still a huge dependence for one another especially when it comes to raising little children. Mela raised all of her grandchildren. While she stayed at home, her husband supported her and her daughters set out to earn a living for themselves and their families. This family is modern in the sense that the task of educating the children is given to public schools and private universities; less borrowing between family members also occurs.

Both women do have fewer children in order to invest more in the children that they have. Marriage between the husbands and wives occurred out of love, not financial stability. The three families do have their own privacy and matters that are not shared with others. But it is the traditional aspects of the family that have allowed Alla and Helen to progress into a modern society. Without their mother, they would not be able to obtain a job and earn equality with their husbands. The family is still close and the cousins still take care of one another.

The search for equality has been undertaken by all women -- some have had an easier time than others have. Several models have been developed either denouncing the efforts that have been made at the workplace or promoting the progress that employers have made in their view of women and men in the workplace. But these models have missed an important aspect of people -- their family history and values. The three women that have been discussed faced the exact same hardships as any other women in the United States of America, but their determination and family values have allowed them to achieve equality quicker and not fit the models exactly. Goldin's model of five cohorts believes that women who fit into a certain age group desire these things -- but she did not take into account immigrants.

No matter when a certain immigrant woman is born, once she has arrived into the United States she wants a job and a family -- a career comes later. For an immigrant woman, it is never a question between a family or a job, you have both -- you must have a job to keep the family healthy and in need of nothing. For an immigrant woman coming from a socialist government where benefits were nonexistent, jobs in America that do offer benefits do not advocate inequality, but advocate progress and an opportunity to support one's family by fully participating in the labor market. Immigrant families never lose sight of the importance of family and the support that they can offer you. Society is constantly changing and new and better things are always improving, but the help of one's family members can never be overlooked -- some traditions promote modernization and progress. The authors of the economic models discussed try to fit people into categories without taking into account very important exceptions -- personal values will never fit into categories and will always promote equality and progress.