What seems important here is the notion of risk. The culture of this
hotel, and the hotel industry in particular, centres on trying to reproduce a
sense of homeliness in what is essentially an economic transaction. Part of that
culture therefore involves reproducing the ethos of the home and its division of
labour as is exemplified by women making the beds and performing cleaning
tasks. Women as traditional carers are automatically considered to be
“qualified” for such roles. A hotel, however, also needs to be sold to its
consuming public, in particular its male business travellers or conference
delegates. Consequently it is assumed that some of the female employees must
fulfil the glamour role, displaying their sexuality, e.g. receptionists, sales and
marketing staff. The culture of the industry continually demands that women
behave in what are stereotypically female roles, both as carers and as sales
staff. Such roles are perceived as crucial for economic and organizational
survival; for example, the selling of rooms is arguably the most profitable
aspect of the business[33].
Within such an organizational culture where the gender expectations are very
clear, the costs of not fitting in are great. As the female kitchen porter and chef
described, the only way for them to survive is to be like one of the boys. A
chambermaid refusing to mother clients or a receptionist refusing to flirt would
be perceived as incompetent. By rebelling against the norms of gender roles not
only would one feel uncomfortable, but also undoubtedly job prospects would be
at risk. It appears therefore that, to be considered effective at work, efficiency and
ability alone are insufficient for female employees. In addition women must adopt
imposed organizational values which utilize their sexuality and make demands
on their behaviour to be appropriately feminine. As Adkins[52] argues, women
have to work heterosexually. In her studies, women who refused to “exchange”
sexual labour or refused to be sexually attractive were dismissed. Choosing to
ignore such demands renders women incompetent if not inefficient at work. In the
current economic climate challenging such a position is a risk many people
cannot afford to take.
Locating such gendered requirements as criteria for employment within the
arena of strategic human resource management clearly points to a contradiction.
The evidence we have provided highlighting the issues surrounding the
employment of women within the hotel industry indicates that, for this
organization to achieve business success, it is perceived that the female staff must
adopt certain behaviours in the course of their occupational life. It is accepted
that women will look and behave in specific ways associated with their job and
deemed as appropriate for their sex. Thus the human resource strategy, if it is to
be linked to an overall corporate strategy, as both American and European
academics suggest it should[21,22], may well ensure that both males and females
are represented to the customers in a very “gendered” way in order to fulfil the
requirements of the post and meet the expectations of the customers, e.g.
chambermaids mothering male guests. In other words, the gendered nature of
many of the occupations within the hotel industry is virtually a direct
requirement in order to satisfy effective execution of the tasks associated with