An Assessment of Personnel Processes Pertaining to Women in a Traditionally Male Dominated Occupation: Affirmative Action Policies in Prisons and Jails

• DOI: 10.1177/003288558906900209
• Published date: 01 October 1989
• Date: 01 October 1989
• Subject Matter: Articles

An Assessment of Personnel Processes
Pertaining to Women in a Traditionally
Male Dominated Occupation: Affirmative
Action Policies in Prisons and Jails
Frances P. Bernat and Linda L. Zupan*
Introduction
It has been difficult for women to break down the sex role stereotypes which exist
in the field of corrections (Etheridge, Hale, and Hambrick, 1984; Fry and Graser, 1987;
Horne, 1985; Jacobs, 1981; Nicolai, 1981; Parisi, 1984; Pollock, 1986; Zimmer, 1986).
Jocelyn Pollock (1986) found, for example, that correctional officers’ perceptions of
women
inmates reflected traditional gender stereotypes; these inmates were thought to
be complainers, childlike, and dependent. The same officers did not view male inmates,
however, with any degree of consensus. Pollock found that the officers believed that there
should be different institutional goals and supervision styles for male and female
inmates. Generally, both male and female correctional officers preferred supervising
male inmates better than female inmates. The guards thought that the female inmates
were too demanding of them.
Women correctional officers have also been viewed stereotypically. Wardens,
male correctional officers, and inmates have been shown to believe that women make
ineffective prison guards (Horne, 1985). Horne noted that prisons are historically
resistant to change and acceptance of women guards has therefore been slow. Parisi
(1984), although hopeful of change, noted that female guards are thought to be primary
targets of physical abuse by male inmates, less capable of performing officer duties than
are men, and consequently can be underutilized in prison facilities. Nicolai (1981), while
finding that employment of women corrections officers has been increasing, also found
that female guards believe that they had to work exceptionally hard in order to overcome
beliefs held by male coworkers that women are not desirable officers. In addition to male
correctional officer fears that women guards will foster an unsafe workplace, Zimmer
(1986:155) has found that male guards dislike having female coworkers because they
disrupt their &dquo;all-male world.&dquo; This perceived disruption is founded upon a belief that
corrections involves man’s work; if women are employed in correctional positions, then
men
will loose their own sense of masculinity. In addition, it is feared that women will not
participate in any cover-ups which might arise. Zimmer concluded that male guards are
concerned that the homogeneity of the workplace culture will be threatened and male
bonds weakened.
Many of the fears expressed by male correctional officers have not been
substantiated by correctional research. Horne has found women are capable workers
and that prison security has not &dquo;deteriorated&dquo; with their employment (1985:53). Kissel
and Katsampes (1980) studied a Colorado facility and found that most of the male
Frances P. Bernat is assistant professor, Department of Criminal Justice, New
Mexico State
University, Las Cruces. Linda L. Zupan is assistant professor, Department of Crimi-
nal Justice, University at Birmingham, Alabama. This article was first presented at
the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Washington, D.C.,
March-April 1989.
64

---

inmates interviewed stated that they were not likely to be physically aggressive toward
the women correctional officers. Despite the negative views held by male coworkers,
women
guards have attempted to adjust to the prison workforce. Fry and Glaser (1987),
in their review of the organizational prison work culture, determined that although
males guard may view women negatively, women guards wanted to become integrated
into male prison facilities. According to these researchers, women want to distance
themselves from female prison employment because promotional opportunities are
greater in male prison facilities. Therefore, women have sought to work hard and prove
that they are capable, effective employees.
Although it is interesting to study the beliefs held by correctional personnel, one of
the most important issues concerning the employment of women in corrections is
whether they are used effectively. Yet, no correctional agency has performed a
systematic study on this issue. It is important to realize that studies on what people
believe should not be utilized as a basis of &dquo;unproven&dquo; fact (i.e., that women are
ineffective correctional officers because someone thinks they are ineffective). It is not
enough to merely study employee bias; we need to study the effects of such bias.
According to Chapman et al. (1983:63), correctional institutions have not &dquo;developed a
legitimate role for women employees that is comparable to that of men at the operational
level.&dquo; Employment opportunities for women in corrections needs to be assessed and,
where appropriate, corrected.
Title VII’s Relevance to Employment of Women as Correctional Officers
Women have utilized Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. Section
2000e, 1976) to improve their employment status; it is the primary tool designed to
combat sex discrimination in both the public and private sectors. The statute prohibits
both hiring and promotion practices which on their face result in discrimination on the
basis of gender (facial discrimination) and employment practices which have an impact
adversely affecting one gender as opposed to the other (discrimination with a disparate
impact). However, Title VII provides for a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ)
exception. The BFOQ exception would permit employers to implement policies which
exclude potential employees on the basis of gender when sex &dquo;is a bona fide occupational
qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or
enterprise&dquo; (42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-2(e)).
One analyst (Note, 1979) has indicated that the language of Title VII indicates that
the BFOQ exception was meant to be narrow and that a number of early case decisions
interpreted the exception as such. Nonetheless, in the only case to reach the U.S.
Supreme Court on how the BFOQ is to be applied in the field of corrections, the court
found that women could be excluded from correctional officer employment (Dothard v.
Rawlinson, 433 US
321). The court reasoned that the female litigant’s own &dquo;womanhood&dquo;
constituted a threat to the security of the Alabama maximum security prison to which
she had applied for work as a prison guard. Speaking for the majority, Justice Stewart
stated:
The essence of a correctional counselor’s job is to maintain prison security. A
woman’s relative ability to maintain order in a male, maximum-security, unclassified
penitentiary of the type Alabama now runs could be directly reduced by her
womanhood. There is a basis in fact for expecting that sex offenders who have
criminally assaulted women in the past...