Emotional Labour and Gendered Occupational Segregation

Emotional labour is a common phenomenon, especially in service industries. Broadly speaking, emotional labour means that an individual at the workplace displays positive or organisationally-acceptable emotions regardless of their true emotional state (Hochschild, 1983). When interacting with customers, for instance, a customer service employee is required to treat customers with empathy, kindness, and calmness irrespective of how the employee is feeling or how the customer behaves or talks. Portraying negative emotions such as anger, frustration, and hostility would potentially injure the reputation of the organisation or negatively affect customer confidence in the organisation. Fundamentally, emotional labour means that while at work, the experience and articulation of feelings should be separated in the sense that one is expected to display the desired emotions, not the emotions they are actually experiencing (Ward and McMurray, 2016).

Does emotional labour mean that service organisations must consider employees with the ability to manage their emotions? And if they have to, what kind or nature of employees are these? A closer look at many service organisations reveals that most jobs, especially those that involve interacting with customers, are occupied by women. Airline, hospitality, and customer service jobs provide good examples. For instance, a call made to a customer service hotline is more likely to be answered by a woman than a man. Similarly, airlines are more likely to employ women in frontline and flight attendant positions. The same trend is replicated in hospitality organisations such as restaurants and hotels, where majority of the waiting and customer service tend to be women. In essence, there tends to be noticeable gender-based segregation when it comes to service work. Such segregation persists even with tremendous legislative advancements such as the Equality Act, which prohibit workplace discrimination on the basis of gender and other protected characteristics.

This raises an important question: why do service organisations prefer a certain gender over another when it comes to certain jobs? Though contention remains, it has been established that women tend to be better emotional labourers than men (Taylor and Tyler, 2000; Meier, Mastracci and Wilson, 2006; Pilcher, 2007; European Commission, 2009; Pruitt, 2012; Baruah and Patrick, 2014). Therefore, for roles that require emotional labour, service organisations are likely to select women. With reference to literature and my personal experiences as an employee, I discuss how emotional labour in the service sector has promoted gendered occupational segregation. The paper has two major sections. First, I provide a review of literature relating to emotional labour and gender-based occupational segregation. In light of the literature, I then present my own experiences as an employee in the hospitality industry.

The concept of emotional labour is originally credited to Arlie Russell Hochschild, who described it in her 1983 influential book The Managed Heart: Commercialisation of Human Feeling. Based on a thorough observation of flight attendants, Hochschild (1983) defined emotional labour as the process of managing one's feelings and emotions to portray a publicly acceptable facial or bodily display. Simply, instead of showing one's intrinsic or true emotions, one projects their emotions in a way that resonates with the underlying rules of conduct. Emotional labour is essentially about impression or appearance management (Pilcher, 2007). At work, for example, organisations require employees to constantly demonstrate composure and compassion when serving or interacting with customers. One is expected to show such positive emotions regardless of their real emotional state (Williams, 2013). In other words, whether one is experiencing positive or negative emotions, they are required to always show positive emotions. For instance, irrespective of how difficult or stubborn a customer is, employees are expected to empathise with such customers. For any organisation, such positive emotions constitute part of the organisationally-acceptable behaviours as far as employee-customer interactions are concerned.

Emotional labour occurs in two major ways: surface acting and deep acting (Hochschild, 1983). Surface acting essentially entails faking emotions (showing feelings that are in reality not experienced) or hiding emotions (concealing feelings that if portrayed would not be appropriate in a given situation such as when serving customers). This means that the individual is aware of the separation between the emotions they display at the workplace and their true character or personality. Deep acting, on the other hand, involves aligning one's real emotions with organisationally-desirable emotions. Dissimilar to surface acting, deep acting does not really involve creating false emotions: instead, an individual unconsciously engages in temporary acts aimed at generating the emotions appropriate to a given situation. All the same, though quite different, both deep acting and surface acting generally entail projecting untrue emotions. Indeed, both types of emotional labour can be likened to the notion of emotional intelligence (Ghalandari et al., 2012). Emotional intelligence is about awareness of other people's emotions and acting on the basis of those emotions. Similarly, emotional labour involves controlling one's emotions to conform to the expected rules of behaviour. Nonetheless, this is not to say that the terms emotional labour and emotional intelligence can be utilised interchangeably.

Though emotional labour may occur in any organisational context, it tends to be more concentrated in service industries (Kinman, 2009). In service industries, there is often a great deal of interaction between employees and customers. From airlines to hotels and hospitals, employee-customer interaction is an important part of day-to-day work. Whether it is selling tickets, checking in passengers, answering customer queries, receiving guests, or examining patients, service workers interact with customers on a daily basis. This means that the fulfilment of service roles requires both physical and emotional effort. Service workers must constantly display the expected emotions, in large part, to safeguard the image of their organisation. Indeed, for service organisations, how employees behave when interacting with customers can have significant implications on the organisation (Taylor and Tyler, 2000). A service organisation with employees who constantly display calmness and empathy towards customers is more likely to inspire greater confidence in customers than one with employees who show negative emotions towards customers (Hochschild, 1983).

Does emotional labour impact individuals and the workplace in any way? This is a topic that has increasingly attracted scholarly attention. For individuals, some scholars have examined the implications of emotional labour on mental health, arguing that emotional labour may negatively affect one's psychological wellbeing as it entails falsifying feelings or hiding one's true feelings (Williams, 2013; Baruah and Patrick, 2014). Nonetheless, the impact of emotional labour on employee's wellbeing is beyond the scope of this paper. Emotional labour's impact on the workplace is a particularly interesting area of inquiry. More specifically, emotional labour has affected the workplace by influencing how organisations make employment decisions. In the service sector, it is not difficult to see how one gender dominates certain jobs (Huppatz, 2012). From hospitality firms and airlines to schools, women and men tend to perform different roles, with most frontline and interactive jobs such as cashiering, reception, checking-in, cleaning, and teaching being undertaken by women.

According to Pilcher (2007), interactive service work tends to be significantly gendered-segregated in the sense that most service organisations disproportionately select women for roles that require emotional labour. This segregation is basically denoted as gendered occupational segregation. It is a form of workplace segregation where an employer shows preference for a certain gender for some jobs (Pruitt, 2012). In service organisations in the UK and elsewhere, gendered occupational segregation is not an unfamiliar phenomenon (European Commission, 2009). For instance, women have historically comprised a significant majority of waiting staff in bars, restaurants, and hotels. Also, majority of flight attendant as well as sheltered housing warden jobs have traditionally been reserved for women.

So, how exactly does emotional labour promote gendered occupational segregation? Baruah and Patrick (2014) offer a valuable explanation, arguing that female employees are more likely to employ emotional labour compared to male employees. This is because women are inherently perceived to be more 'caring' than men (Pilcher, 2007). It is also believed that women tend to be better than men in building rapport with others as well as interpersonal interactions (Meier, Mastracci and Wilson, 2006; European Commission, 2009). These beliefs are generally informed by social norms and stereotypes, which tend to classify jobs as either feminine or masculine (Pruitt, 2012). Accordingly, as service organisations generally prefer employees who can consistently project certain positive emotions, they are likely to employ women, especially in roles that involve substantial interaction with customers (Taylor and Tyler, 2000). Further, empirical evidence has shown that women are often expected to perform emotional labour in a sexualised fashion, such as portraying heterosexuality openly or 'flirting' with male customers (Pilcher, 2007). Therefore, for jobs that require sexualised physical appearances, service organisations are likely to go for women than women.

Though gender-based segregation is evident in service organisations, this does not necessarily mean that men working in these organisations are not expected to performed emotional labour. There are expectations for men to perform emotional labour, but the expectations tend to be much lower compared to women (Pilcher, 2007). Also, men may be expected to sexualise their roles at the workplace, but not as much as women.

While there is evidence of gendered occupational segregation in service work, some critics have argued that though emotional labour is gendered, the segregation does not necessarily involve negative consequences for those expected to perform emotional labour (Pilcher, 2007). Further, performing emotional labour does not necessarily render the performer powerless (Ward and McMurray, 2016). There could be some truth in these assertions as some emotional labourers may (or appear to) derive pleasure from emotional labour. For instance, a female customer service employee may find 'flirting' with male customers pleasurable. However, this is not to say that expecting female employees to perform emotional labour in a sexualised manner makes them happy with their jobs. For some, the expectation may be an emotional burden. Also, the fact that emotional labour may be pleasurable does not necessarily mean that the pleasure derived may outweigh the associated pain or burden (Huppatz, 2012). Elsewhere, it is argued that emotional labour, as a skill or ability, is evident in not only women, but also men (Ward and McMurray, 2016). As such, it is quite inappropriate to feminise certain jobs.

It is further argued that gendered occupational segregation occurs not necessarily because of emotional labour expectations, but because of men's attitudes towards female dominated jobs (Pruitt, 2012). Indeed, broadly speaking, most men do not desire to work in fields they associate with femininity. For example, it may be quite difficult for most men to seek or apply for flight attendant jobs as they perceive such jobs to be innately feminine. Therefore, it may not always be that employers in the service sector deliberately ignore males for certain jobs -- men's beliefs about those jobs also play a crucial role in widening the segregation (Huppatz, 2012). Even so, it is hard to ignore the fact that emotional labour expectations are fundamentally created by employers, not employees.

One of the service contexts where emotional labour is evident is the hospitality industry, an industry in which I have firsthand experience as an employee. With the desire to please, attract, and retain customers, the hospitality industry is one of the most competitive industries. Players in the industry strive to beat their competition by ensuring unparalleled service standards. Whether it is receiving guests, food quality, serving orders, in-room entertainment, or room service, hospitality firms must guarantee service excellence. In essence, service differentiation constitutes a crucial source of competitive advantage for hospitality firms.

To ensure service excellence, hospitality organisations mainly rely on their personnel. They seek to recruit and retain frontline employees with the ability to treat customers in an organisationally-desirable manner. As an example, it is quite difficult to notice customer service staff in a hotel or restaurant yelling at customers. This does not just happen, and it does not mean hospitality employees do not experience negative emotions like normal human beings. Instead, hotels, restaurants, and other hospitality organizations constantly look out for individuals with the ability to impress customers. Furthermore, employees in the hospitality are thoroughly trained on how to behave while interacting with customers. In other words, hospitality employees are expected to have certain facial and bodily displays while at work -- warmth, receptiveness, courtesy, and so forth. Such displays are crucial for maintaining an inviting atmosphere for customers.

In my work life, I have served as a customer attendant in a mid-sized restaurant. As I learned through the encounter, working as a frontline employee in a restaurant is a daunting task. It is an emotionally exhausting job, not a glamorous one as many people may think. Every time we walk into a hotel or restaurant, we are greeted with ever-smiling waiting or customer service staff. As waiting staff generally show positive emotions while at work, it is easy to think that their job is always cosy. The truth of the matter is that working as a waiting staff at a restaurant is not really a walk in the park. Typically, you grapple with crazy working schedules, heavy workloads, difficult customers, and tough supervisors. The physical and emotional weight of such challenges may be further compounded by non-work pressures such as family difficulties and academic work. Yet at the end of the day you are supposed to act normal. You are expected to flash that inviting smile when receiving customers, to be kind to that rude or irate customer, and to appear relaxed all the time. As Hochschild (1983: 7) puts it, one is expected to "manage their heart" or "induce or suppress feelings in order to sustain the outward countenance that produces the proper state of mind" in customers.

For the six months, I worked in the restaurant, I would say that it was a difficult encounter for me. The difficulty, in large part, stemmed from the restaurant's expectations about impression management. The restaurant had explicitly communicated rules for interacting with customers. As customer attendants, we were expected to treat customers with warmth at every stage of the service experience, irrespective of the circumstance at hand. I am certain that anyone who works or has worked in a similar position knows coming across furious, disrespectful, and abusive customers is not uncommon. Some customers will yell at you, talk to you impolitely, or even make unwanted sexual advances to you. However, most times there is nothing you can do as such instances define your emotional management abilities as a service worker. You feel infuriated. You feel angered. You feel like crushing the customer. Yet you are expected to show compassion towards such customers -- being composed is part of the job. You exchange words with the customer or frown at the customer and your job is gone. It is a tough job -- emotionally.

Gendered occupational segregation was very much evident at the restaurant -- there is no question about that. In fact, during my time at the restaurant, more than 80% of frontline employees were female. Majority of the men held kitchen or supervisory jobs such as chef and stock control. This did not just happen by chance -- in spite of receiving job applications from both male and female applicants, the management deliberately selected women for most frontline jobs. At one time, I asked my supervisor why the management preferred women over men for those jobs even at a time when workplace discrimination has become a matter of legislation. The supervisor explicitly told me that customer attendance in restaurants is not really a thing for men -- it is a girls' job. He further explained that men cannot really make a restaurant as inviting as women would. At the time, I did not have any knowledge of the notion of emotional labour. For me, it was purely gender-based discrimination, which I felt was not right.

Now that I have knowledge of emotional labour, I understand what my supervisor meant when he told me that restaurant service is more of a feminine than a masculine job. In fact, though I generally do not subscribe to gender stereotypes, the connection between gender and emotional labour was quite evident at the restaurant. During my time at the restaurant, most cases of employment dismissal as a result of customer complaints affected men. More specifically, there were more cases of men than women yelling at or talking back to rude customers. As the restaurant's customer service rules dictated that members of staff should not show negative emotions towards customers regardless of the nature of customer behaviour, it was men who faced disciplinary action in most cases. In fact, during my time at the restaurant, not a single female employee was dismissed as a result of violating the restaurant's impression management rules. During the same period, up to four male employees were dismissed. As my supervisor explained to me, female employees were more likely to remain calm even with a difficult customer. He said that the management had learned that over time, and hence preferred women over men for frontline positions.

The case of gendered occupational segregation at the restaurant confirms, to a large extent, the assertion that women tend to be better emotional labourers than men. For the restaurant, having frontline employees with the ability to control their emotions was key, hence the evident preference for women. All the same, while I believe emotional labour is important for service work, I really do not think only women can perform emotional labour jobs. Even men can undertake jobs that require emotional labour. I have severally observed male attendants in other restaurants handle difficult customers with calmness.

As explained by Pilcher (2007), the performance of emotional labour may often require some sexualisation. This was true in the restaurant I worked for. Female frontline employees had a considerably sexually-appealing dress code mandated by the management. For the restaurant, such a dress code was important for luring customers. As my supervisor explained to me during our conversation, there is nothing as enticing for a male customer as being received and served by beautiful, sexily-dressed girls. In as much as I detest such gender-based expectations of sexualisation, it is true that most bars and restaurants use this strategy to attract and keep customers, especially male customers. They know that most men are fond of joints with sexily-dressed attendants, and they deliberately seek to fulfil this desire.