A relational perspective comparison of workplace discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries

Abstract

Research on discrimination and inequality has seen a significant increase in workplace religious discrimination toward Muslims. However, it is not well understood how macro-societal, meso-organizational and micro-individual factors contribute to workplace discrimination toward Muslims. Using a systematic literature review (SLR), this study analyses 134 articles to frame a comparative lens of discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries. This study reveals different discrimination patterns in both country types. In Muslim-minority countries, only the macro-societal level factors are consistently linked to blatant discrimination form while the other two levels (meso-organizational and micro-individual) contribute towards a mixture of blatant and subtle discrimination incidents. Meanwhile, Muslim-majority countries' discrimination cases specifically occur towards women in subtle manners at each level. The different discrimination patterns in the two country types also leads to other notions such as the logic of in-group discrimination toward Muslim women in Muslim-majority countries and the repositioning of gender and religious identities.

Keywords

Muslim workplace work discrimination relational perspective

Introduction

Following the proliferation of workplace diversity issues, the workplace discrimination topic has caught many management scholars' attention (Deitch et al., 2003). This paper focuses on religious discrimination discourse, particularly toward Muslims or people with Islamic beliefs. This topic is stimulating due to several reasons. First, concurrently, Islam is the world’s fastest-growing (Lipka and Hackett, 2017) and one of the most marginalized religions (Pemberton and Takhar, 2021). Second, many studies (e.g. Masci, 2019; Scheitle and Ecklund, 2020) report discrimination cases against Muslims. Third, the discrimination against Muslims in the extant literature covers the complete type of discrimination varieties: formal and interpersonal (Ghumman and Ryan, 2013; King and Ahmad, 2010); subtle and blatant (Hendriks and Van Ewijk, 2017; Pasha-Zaidi, 2015); direct and indirect (Baldi, 2018; Golesorkhi, 2017).

This paper mainly compares discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-majority and Muslim-minority countries. Past discrimination literature has put equal focus on discrimination cases toward numerically smaller (minority) groups (e.g. Karlsen and Nazroo, 2002; Nora and Cabrera, 1996) and numerically larger (majority) groups (e.g. Gaertner and Insko, 2000; Mummendey et al., 1992). However, particularly for religious discrimination, most studies concerning discrimination toward Muslims only focus on discrimination cases in which Muslims are the minority (e.g. Ghumman and Ryan, 2013; King and Ahmad, 2010). This disproportion creates a gap of knowledge surrounding the differences in discrimination cases toward Muslims while they bear the minority and majority statuses.

Triggering the choice of this particular comparative frame was the author’s initial observation after reading several papers on discrimination toward Muslims. The authors noticed that a few papers (e.g. Afiouni, 2014; Vidyasagar and Rea, 2004) discuss discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-majority countries. This initial observation revived the notion of ‘intergroup discrimination’ (initially coined by Tajfel in 1970 and further popularized by other researchers, such as Leonardelli and Brewer, 2001) as an arguably more complex discrimination phenomenon than discrimination cases against minorities (Brewer and Kramer, 1985).

Discrimination exists everywhere regardless of whether a country is Muslim-minority or Muslim-majority. Nevertheless, according to Social Identity Theory (SIT), discrimination will likely happen toward out-group rather than toward in-group (Tajfel, 1970). That postulation makes the author’s initial discovery somewhat unique as it seemingly portrays the inconsistency of SIT, where discrimination toward Muslims also happened in Muslim-majority countries, toward those supposedly perceived as an in-group. Considering that the discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-majority countries restrictedly applies to particular identity (sub) groups, this paper also potentially rejuvenates further the understanding of identity that commonly lies as the basis of discrimination.

Consequently, the author applies a multilevel analysis approach to better depict the factors contributing to workplace discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries. Scholars (e.g. Hannah and Lester, 2009; Héliot et al., 2020) increasingly encourage the use of multilevel analysis to better understand the contexts that influence the dynamic within the workplace. Through a multilevel perspective, a paper might probe into a holistic understanding of the relationships among factors within various levels (macro-societal, meso-organizational, and micro-individual) that create discrimination toward Muslims (Al Ariss and Syed, 2011; Ali et al., 2017). A multilevel perspective will also be helpful to generate similarities and differences in the comparison of discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries.

Additionally, such a unique comparative framing also echoes previous studies’ approaches to contrasting Muslim-majority and Muslim-minority countries on workplace discrimination issues (e.g. Al Ariss and Sidani, 2016; Spierings, 2014a). While scholars (e.g. Gebert et al., 2014; Richardson, 2014) argue that creating universal diversity management guidelines is nearly impossible, a review involving many published articles might convey some hints of how religious employees (particularly Muslims) should be managed in different contexts. These hints are arguably important for being the basis of future religious diversity management discourses. This spirit aligns with the growing scholarly attention (e.g. Cohen and Barbour, 2017; Dolansky and Alon, 2008) to put more effort into examining the way religious diversity in the workplace should be managed, while still taking cultural and demographic factors into account (Gelb and Longacre, 2012; Syed et al., 2017).

In so doing, this paper will also provide argumentations about making sense of discrimination cases toward Muslims in Muslim-majority countries. Furthermore, the paper will present an overview of ‘identity’ term comprehension, following the confusion upon irregular in-group discrimination cases. This identity discourse is relevant with many studies' (e.g. Eckes et al., 2005; Latif et al., 2018) recommendation that a simple categorization of ‘Muslim’ as an identity is excessively stereotypical, simplifies reality, is precarious to articulate particular subgroups' characteristics and is inadequate to depict the existent religious discrimination toward Muslims. From a broader perspective, this paper contributes to cross-cultural management discourse by analyzing the multifaceted religion-based discrimination cases in different cultural contexts.

Finally, this paper addresses two main questions: 1) What factors at various levels constitute workplace discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries? and 2) How do these factors at various levels interrelate to one another to shape workplace discrimination toward Muslims?

Literature review

Workplace Discrimination

The United Nations (Principle 6 UN Global Compact, n.d.) defined discrimination in the workplace as “treating people differently or less favorably because of characteristics that are not related to their merit or the inherent requirements of the job.” The characteristics commonly act as the basis of discrimination include race, color, religion, sex, and migration status. The use of the ‘discrimination’ term continuously goes hand in hand with ‘stereotype’ and ‘prejudice’ terms. Cheung et al. (2016) clarify the use of these intertwined terms, explaining that discrimination is a behavioral display resulted from biased perceptions (stereotypes) and attitudes (prejudice). From the author’s reading on the collected and filtered articles, the author notices several pairs of religion-based discrimination forms, which are subtle-blatant (Van Laer and Janssens, 2011), formal-interpersonal (Ghumman and Ryan, 2013), and direct-indirect (Ball and Haque, 2003).

The aforementioned discrimination form pairs are fundamentally connected one to another. Subtle form connects to interpersonal and indirect forms of discrimination as these three share common features like being unconsciously exercised, vague, and taking place in day-to-day encounters (Park et al., 2009). On the other hand, blatant, formal, and direct discrimination forms share similar attributes such as being visibly and straightforwardly exercised (Van Laer and Janssens, 2011). Nevertheless, on further investigations, each discrimination form within similar discrimination groups also has distinct characteristics. Hence, the mixture of two seemingly contrasting forms of discrimination might happen in the same cases, like subtle yet formal or blatant but indirect discrimination (Lindsey et al., 2015). For the sake of simplification, in the following sections, the author will only use ‘subtle’ and ‘blatant’ terms to describe incidences belonging to each particular discrimination grouping, as mentioned earlier.

The extant discrimination literature has seen a growing focus towards subtle discrimination rather than blatant discrimination (for an overview, see, for example, Deitch et al., 2003; Van Laer and Janssens, 2011). Scholars (e.g. Brief et al., 2000; Cortina, 2008) capture this growing trend and promote the use of ‘modern discrimination’ to further denote the subtle, vague, and unconscious behaviors that discriminate particular individuals. Although subtle discrimination seems trivial, scholars (e.g. Deitch et al., 2003; Jones et al., 2016) suggest that the consequences of subtle discrimination are at least as significant, if not more significant than overt discrimination.

Discrimination toward Muslims in the workplace

Religion is among the protected classes, or the identities frequently contribute to workplace discrimination (Cheung et al., 2016). Religion as an identity has several distinctive natures compared to other identities that potentially trigger workplace discrimination. Among the uniqueness of religion as an identity highlighted by Ghumman et al. (2013) are that religion is concealable and based on belief values. While it is true that religion is concealable in general, such a feature does not apply to those who have to show their religion in public. Despite several views of hijab as an obligation, the foremost argumentation is that Muslim women have to wear a hijab in front of non-mahram (a person with whom marriage is generally permissible), hence makes them among those who are required to show their religion publicly. Furthermore, Muslim as a belief system is oftentimes perceived wrongly which subsequently provokes discrimination toward them. Based on the depictions of hostility, violence and untrustworthy prejudice of events conducted by particular Muslim groups, there will be a negative evaluation toward Muslims in general (Sides and Gross, 2013).

As briefly mentioned in the introduction, religious discrimination can happen everywhere toward members of all other religious, not restricted to Muslims. Social identity theory suggests that discrimination typically occurs toward those who belong to other group identification (out-group) rather than toward those who belong to the same group (in-group) (Tajfel, 1970, 1974). That explains religious discrimination that commonly targets religious minorities (Akbaba, 2009; Fox, 2000). Following SIT’s logic, discrimination starts with the classification and categorization of surrounding individuals, then the in-group and out-group categories appear (Tajfel and Turner, 1986). Ashforth and Mael (1989) argue that social classification sets out two functions, first to cognitively segment and order the surrounding environment and second to enable individuals to locate themselves in the social setting. Such classification will augment individual differences, which in turn demystify the line between minority and majority. Hence, seeing the reports of discrimination toward religious minorities like non-Muslim in Muslim-majority countries (Akbaba, 2009; Fox, 2013) or toward Muslims in Muslim-minority countries (Ali et al., 2015; Salahshour and Boamah, 2020) are rather unsurprising.

Discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-majority countries

While the discrimination case toward Muslims in Muslim-minority countries can be easily understood, the claim that Muslims' discrimination also exists in Muslim-majority countries requires a deeper analysis. The discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-majority countries mainly happens against particular sub-identities, such as workplace discrimination toward Muslim women (e.g. Afiouni, 2014). The problem is deeply rooted in the conception of modesty as being taught by Islamic teachings, which has been multifariously translated and transformed in practices (Syed, 2010). Originally designated as the protective establishment for Muslim women, Muslim women’s modesty grows as a dogma that negatively stigmatizes working Muslim women. The logic behind this stigmatization is similar to what Saguy (2013) describes in the growing negative stigma for obese individuals. The negative stigma was started with the campaign that fat is a threat to an individual’s health; hence, the government declares its commitment to reduce obesity. The continuous campaign against obesity elicits a negative accusation that an obese person is irresponsible and weak, and this eventually results in weight-based discrimination (Lamont et al., 2014).

The same is true for working Muslim women. Where the instilled ideal image of Muslim women is represented by those staying at home, those working potentially incur negative stigmatization. Nevertheless, such stigma is not entirely justifiable as in general, Islam does not prohibit women from working (Predelli, 2004; Syed, 2008a). In addition, there are several cases where women ‘must’ work, like the case where they are a single parent or where particular occupations such as midwifery will deem more suitable to be filled by women rather than men. Working Muslim women are also expected to obey various religious tenets at work, like regulated interaction with male co-workers and to cover all of their body parts except for the hands and face (Bouma et al., 2003).

While the common assumption tends to fault Islamic teachings as the source of systemic inequities toward women (Masood, 2019), the literature arduously proves that Islam acts as the sole factor contributing to workplace gender inequality. Mostafa (2003) found no significant differences between Egyptian Muslims and non-Muslims regarding the views of women who work. The finding provides an assumption that local cultures rather than religion are the more substantial factor generating workplace inequality for women. Elamin and Omair’s (2010) study in Saudi Arabia, where Islam originated, also found that other factors besides religion like age, education level, marital and employment status influence the views of working women. Furthermore, other scholars (e.g. Hendriks and Van Ewijk, 2017; Korotayev et al., 2015) argue that culture instead of religion primarily drives the patriarchal value. Nevertheless, the data shows that Muslim-majority countries' gender labor participation gap is generally higher than those unaffected by Islamic values (World Economic Forum, 2021).

The author suggests that workplace discrimination toward Muslim women can still be categorized as religion-based discrimination cases. Islam perceives male and female gender as ‘equal but different’ where each gender has different economic and societal tasks (Metcalfe, 2006). Consequently, societies that adhere to Islamic principles likely cultivate gendered cultures and practices in daily and organizational lives (Arifeen and Gatrell, 2020; Hutchings et al., 2012). In conclusion, what is seen as ‘gender discrimination'¹ toward Muslim women in Muslim society today is inseparable from the religious tenets. Hence, to label it religion-based discrimination is supposedly justifiable.

Beyond discrimination toward Muslim women, similar argumentations also apply to other discrimination cases targeting Muslims in Muslim-majority countries. If the bias manifests due to religious reasons, the author argues that it is a part of religion-based discrimination.

Method

This paper employs a literature review method to see the field from a comprehensive outlook. Snyder (2019) suggests that literature review methodology enables researchers to fuse evidence from many interdisciplinary studies, potentially developing theoretical and practical understanding of the topic. A literature review will also answer the calls from researchers in this field (e.g. Masood, 2019; Naseem and Adnan, 2019; Sav, 2019) to consider various factors contributing to workplace discrimination toward Muslims. The author searched for the literature until the end of October 2020, hence relevant articles published after that period are not included in this study.

This study collected initial 1055 articles from the combination of keywords and title searches in the Scopus database through ‘Publish or Perish 7^′ software. The chosen keywords for the searches represent three areas comprise the research’s topic, which is ‘the main object’ (keywords: Islam; Muslim), ‘the context’ (keywords: work; workplace; employment; career; job), and ‘the main issue’ (keywords: struggle; challenge; problem; discrimination). Through the first screening, the number of papers decreased to 472. Over the final screening stage, 134 papers were sorted and deemed relevant to the research topic. This number is close to the mean number of article size (139) in typical systematic literature review studies in the management field (Hiebl, 2021).

Inclusion-exclusion criteria

This study’s inclusion and exclusion procedures started early from the use of Scopus' journal database as the pool of potential articles. By only selecting the articles published in a Scopus-indexed journal, the pieces of literature fulfill several criteria such as being written in English and peer-reviewed. During the literature gathering processes, the author encountered articles from various fields such as organizational behavior, political science, medicine, and education. The author conducted two screening stages which are title screening and abstract screening. Title screening was used to filter the articles based on the title; an article whose title is not related to the management field was excluded. Among the excluded articles focus on the thought or work of Muslim figures, history, geopolitics in the Middle East, Africa and other Muslim-majority countries or regions, to mention a few.

The second screening stage is abstract screening, which was done in particular for those articles whose title looks related to the management domain, yet the author was not convinced whether the nuance of management as written in the title was relevant to this study’s aims. Among the articles being excluded from the abstract screening stage are those discussing discrimination, yet that focus on the youth. Such articles were excluded since the main objective of this study is to generate an understanding of discrimination toward Muslim workers, not those currently unemployed or just about to enter the productive working age. To give a more apparent portrayal of the exclusion decision, the author summarized the argumentations in Table 1. The author only types the excluded articles’ titles on the table and does not cite them to not overload the reference list. The readers may read the mentioned article in Table 1 independently to better understand the author’s perspective on excluding these articles.

Table 1.

Excluded articles.

Elimination stage	Representative article’s titles
Stage 1 Title screening Main exclusion criterion: Unrelated to management field	African american Women’s experiences around conversion to islam
	Islam(s) in context: Orientalism and the anthropology of muslim societies and cultures
	Egyptian views of ottoman rule: Five historians and their works, 1820–1920
	A judeo- arab- muslim continuum: Edmond amran El Maleh’s poetics of fragments
	Debating the caliphate: Islam and nation in the work of rashid rida and abul kalam azad
	Showing One’s colours: The political work of elections in post-war Sri Lanka
	Frames of time: Periodization and universals in the works of abdallah Laroui
	Prevention and control of tuberculosis in workplaces: How knowledgeable are the workers in Bangladesh?
	British muslim experiences in English first-class cricket
	Geographies of subjectivity, pan-islam and muslim separatism: Muhammadl iqbal and selfhood
Stage 2 Abstract screening Main exclusion criteria: - related to management field yet the focus is not on discrimination - focus on discrimination yet the setting is not in the workplace	Human resource development, motivation and islam
	Islamic work ethic: A critical review
	Muslim youth in Britain: Acculturation, radicalization, and implications for social work practice/training
	Does assimilation work? Sociocultural determinants of labour market participation of European muslims
	Experiential careers: The routinization and de-routinization of religious life
	Unwanted and Unwelcome: Sexual harassment in the malaysian workplace
	Resisting islamophobia: A young muslim Male’s experience in a U.S. Public high School
	Culture, religion, ethnicity and the meaning of work: Jews and muslims in the israeli context
	Personal and professional reflections on islam, social work, and social welfare in the USA
	To work for change: Normativity, feminism, and islam

Among the final 134 articles, 104 focus on Muslim-minority countries, 27 focus on Muslim-majority countries, and three articles compare both country types. Although 134 collected papers center on general work and employment struggles for Muslims, and not all papers directly mentioned the case of workplace discrimination, the author persists in including all papers in the analysis. All workplace struggles in the filtered papers are tied to employees' identity, and the workplace struggle based on identity is closely related to the discourse of inequality and discrimination (Acker, 2006; Amis et al., 2020). This approach is also pertinent with other researchers' suggestion that future research needs to further explore the areas that may contribute to Muslim’s carrier barriers beyond those in the form of overt discrimination (Arifeen, 2020; Koburtay et al., 2020; Tariq and Syed, 2018). Tables 2 and 3 show the articles being included in this study.

Table 2.

The reviewed articles with Muslim-minority countries setting.

Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country
Brah (1993)	The UK	Van Laer and Janssens (2011)	Belgium	Connor and Koenig (2015)	European countries	Nagra (2018)	Canada
Basit (1996)	The UK	Rabby and Rodgers (2011)	The USA	Ali et al. (2015)	The USA	Warren (2018)	The UK
Alkhazraji et al. (1997)	The USA	Foroutan (2011)	Australia	Khattab and Modood (2015)	The UK	Latif et al. (2018)	Canada
Lindley (2002)	The UK	Kershen (2011)	The UK	Rashid (2016)	The UK	Baldi (2018)	European countries
Ball and Haque (2003)	The USA	O’Connor (2011)	Hong Kong	Strabac et al. (2016)	Norway	Sekerka and Yacobian (2018)	The USA
Predelli (2004)	Norway	Kinnvall and Nesbitt-Larking (2011)	Western countries	Padela et al. (2016)	The USA	Adam and Rea (2018)	Belgium
Kaushal et al. (2007)	The USA	Barkdull et al. (2011)	Western countries	Robinson (2016)	The USA	Golesorkhi (2019)	Western countries
Borooah et al. (2007)	India	Cavico and Mujtaba (2011)	The USA	Kabir (2016)	The USA	Miaari et al. (2019)	The UK
Scott and Franzmann (2007)	Australia	Khattab (2012)	The UK	Van Camp et al. (2016)	The USA	Abdelhadi (2019)	The USA
Zaheer (2007)	The USA	Fozdar (2012)	Australia	Golesorkhi (2017)	Germany	Di Stasio et al. (2019)	European countries
Casimiro et al. (2007)	Australia	Kulik (2012)	Israel	Guetto and Fellini (2017)	Italy	Malik et al. (2019)	The UK
Abranches (2007)	Portugal	Nilan (2012)	Australia	Ali et al. (2017)	Western countries	Naseem and Adnan (2019)	France
Dwyer et al. (2008)	The UK	Van Laar et al. (2013)	The Netherlands	Tariq and Syed (2017)	The UK	Agrawal et al. (2019)	The USA
Foroutan (2008a)	Australia	Golnaraghi and Mills (2013)	Canada	Ahmed et al. (2017)	The USA	Etherington (2019)	Canada and Australia
Foroutan (2008b)	Australia	Samani (2013)	Australia	Bagley and Abubaker (2017)	The UK	Sav (2019)	Australia
Padela et al. (2008)	The USA	Croucher (2013)	European countries	Hendriks and Van Ewijk (2017)	The Netherlands	Khattab et al. (2019)	Canada
Agerström and Rooth (2009)	Sweden	Ghumman and Ryan (2013)	The USA	Murray and Ali (2017)	Australia and the UK	Khattab et al. (2020)	Australia
Braakmann (2009)	Germany	Reeves et al. (2012)	The USA	Cantone and Wiener (2017)	The USA	Arifeen (2020)	The UK
Park et al. (2009)	The USA	Frégosi and Kosulu (2013)	France	Liao et al. (2017)	Taiwan	Arifeen and Gatrell (2020)	The UK
Shah and Shaikh (2010)	The UK	Lovat et al. (2013)	Australia	Scheitle and Ecklund (2017)	The US	Valfort (2020)	France
Malos (2010)	The USA	Fadil (2013)	Belgium	Abubaker and Bagley (2017)	The Netherlands and the UK	Tjønndal and Hovden (2020)	Norway
King and Ahmad (2010)	The USA	Sav et al. (2013)	Australia	Eriksson et al. (2017)	Sweden	Salahshour and Boamah (2020)	New Zealand
Adida et al. (2010)	France	Mogra (2013)	The UK	Khattab et al. (2018)	The UK	Hou et al. (2020)	China
Syed and Pio (2010)	Australia	Mir (2013)	The USA	Lindemann and Stolz (2018)	Switzerland
Sav et al. (2010)	Australia	King et al. (2014)	The USA	Chambers and Ansari (2018)	India
Ghumman and Jackson (2009)	The USA	Sav et al. (2014)	Australia	Wang (2018)	The USA
Forstenlechner and Al-Waqfi (2010)	Austria and Germany	Rootham (2015)	France	Tariq and Syed (2018)	The UK

Table 3.

The reviewed articles with Muslim-majority and mix countries setting.

Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country	Author(s)	Country
Youssef (1971)	Middle Eastern countries	Özbilgin et al. (2012)	Turkey and Pakistan	Afiouni (2014)	Middle Eastern countries	Koburtay et al. (2020)	Jordan
Abu-Hassan (2003)	Jordan	Ghasemi (2013)	Iran	Syed and Van Buren (2014)	Muslim-majority countries	Ghasemi (2020)	Iran
Vidyasagar and Rea (2004)	Saudi Arabia	Ali (2013)	Pakistan	Achour et al. (2015)	Malaysia	Corekcioglu (2020)	Turkey
Lunn (2006)	Malaysia	Syed and Ali (2013)	Pakistan	Korotayev et al. (2015)	Muslim-majority countries	Mix/Country comparison
Syed (2008a)	Muslim-majority countries	Grünenfelder (2013)	Pakistan	Sakai and Fauzia (2016)	Indonesia	Author(s)	Country
Syed et al. (2009)	Turkey and Pakistan	Priyatna (2013)	Indonesia	Baharudin et al. (2019)	Malaysia	Spierings (2014a)	Indonesia and Nigeria
Abisaab (2009)	Middle East	Achour et al. (2014)	Malaysia	Behzadi (2019)	Tajikistan	Pasha-Zaidi (2015)	The USA and UAE
Syed (2010)	Muslim-majority countries	Spierings (2014b)	Muslim-majority countries	Masood (2019)	Pakistan	Abdelhadi and England (2019)	47 countries

Findings

In Table 4, the author shows the compilation of the gathered themes on each level of analysis in both Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries. From a relational perspective, workplace discriminations toward Muslims are inseparable from society’s settled societal factors (Syed, 2008b). The discriminatory societal factors in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries have different nuances yet arrive at similar themes: national philosophy, law and socio-cultural issues. The meso-organizational level also shares one similarity, in that organizational philosophy and policies trigger discrimination in both Muslim-majority and Muslim-minority countries. Lastly, the micro-individual level stands as the most diverse level across country type. In Muslim-minority countries, the problems at this level mainly deal with employers or work colleagues. On the other hand, in Muslim-majority countries, work-family issues oftentimes are the main trigger of workplace discrimination.

Table 4.

The themes of workplace discrimination in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries.

Issues in Muslim-minority countries
Level	Broader themes	Issues
Macro	National philoshopy and law	State-Islam relations (e.g., Golesorkhi, 2019)
	National philoshopy and law	Law against religious practices (e.g., Rootham, 2015)
	Socio-cultural issues	Negative prejudice against muslim (e.g., Golnaraghi and Mills, 2013)
	Socio-cultural issues	Acculturation issues (e.g., Kabir, 2016)
Meso	Organizational philosophy and policies	Diversity climate and attitude (e.g., King et al., 2014)
	Organizational philosophy and policies	Organizational practices (e.g., Lovat et al., 2013)
	Informal practices	Social networking activities (e.g., Arifeen, 2020)
Micro	Intersectionality	Multiple disadvantageous identities (e.g., Ali et al., 2017)
Micro	Human capital	Lack of opportunities and competency (e.g., Casimiro et al., 2007)
Issues in Muslim-majority countries
Macro	National philoshopy and law	‘Gendered’ law (e.g., Abu-Hassan, 2003)
Macro	Socio-cultural issues	Patriarchal traditions and masculinities in the society (e.g., Priyatna, 2013)
Meso	Organizational philosophy and policies	‘Non-friendly’ working environment for women (e.g., Vidyasagar and Rea, 2004)
Meso	Organizational philosophy and policies	Work-life balance facilitation (e.g., Achour et al., 2014)
Micro	Work-family dynamics	Roles to be performed in the family (e.g., Sakai and Fauzia, 2016)
Micro	Work-family dynamics	Family discouragement (e.g., Ghasemi, 2013)

Muslim-minority countries

Macro-level issues in Muslim-minority countries revolve around conditions that do not accommodate Muslim practices and the negative sentiment toward Muslims. National philosophy and law in several Muslim-minority countries bluntly limit career opportunities for Muslims. Among the most notable examples for this is France with its Laïcité (secularity) principle that stimulates the laws to put aside religions from the workplace, which generates difficulty at work for Muslims (Rootham, 2015). Secular national philosophy affects the laws enacted in the country and influences the socio-cultural issues within the country. It makes the dominant group in France express prejudice and hostility toward the group perceived as distant from the values embraced by the nation, including Muslims (Croucher, 2013). Such a case is not restrictedly an issue in France but also in Western societies like the USA and most European countries (Golesorkhi, 2019). On the societal level, Muslims also bear negative associations linked to terrorism for men (Dwyer et al., 2008) and the oppressed and backwardness for women (Golnaraghi and Mills, 2013).

Most meso-level discriminatory problems in Muslim-minority countries come from the incongruity between organizational and Islamic practices. Studies reported that Muslims face troubles at work because of social networking activities that involve alcohol consumption (Arifeen, 2020; Scott and Franzmann, 2007; Shah and Shaikh, 2010) and difficulty to perform prayers as formally regulated by the organizations (Liao et al., 2017; Lovat et al., 2013; Sekerka and Yacobian, 2018). In addition to the challenges resulted from organizational policy and custom, Muslims in Muslim-minority countries also face discrimination from work-related stakeholders like customers, managers and co-workers. The discriminatory practices from the customers are in the form of rejection to be served by Muslim employees or negative responses to Muslim employees (Reeves et al., 2012; Robinson, 2016). Discriminatory practices from co-workers ranges from undesirability to have Muslims as work colleagues (King et al., 2014) to intimidation, harassment and biased comments and jokes (Ball and Haque, 2003; Malos, 2010). Meanwhile the issues with managers typically revolves around discriminatory hiring and HRM practices (Casimiro et al., 2007; Forstenlechner and Al-Waqfi, 2010; Ghumman and Ryan, 2013).

From a micro-individual perspective, the multiple identities deemed distant from society’s standard create a problem directly related to discrimination, identified as intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989; Khattab et al., 2018; Tariq and Syed, 2017). Among the identities that commonly accumulate discrimination toward Muslims are migrant status, race and gender (Ali et al., 2017; Murray and Ali, 2017; Tariq and Syed, 2018). Human capital also frequently becomes an issue that triggers workplace discrimination toward Muslims in Muslim-minority countries. Muslims, especially those bearing immigrant backgrounds, tend to have insufficient skills to secure employment and to advance their career progression at work (Casimiro et al., 2007). Furthermore, Muslim immigrants come from distant races compared to the locals, where these Muslims are working. James (2000) found that race moderates the relationship between human capital and career progression, indicating discrimination against a particular race.

Muslim-majority countries

In Muslim-majority countries, the discriminatory factors are somewhat biased toward male superiority, which challenges women. Researchers (e.g. Abu-Hassan, 2003; Koburtay et al., 2020; Özbilgin et al., 2012) note, even though in general most Muslim-majority countries have long promoted gender equality at work, in some parts the laws are ‘gendered’ and implicitly discriminatory for women. Nevertheless, the more significant concern lies in the socio-cultural issues such as patriarchal values and gender roles that believe Muslim women are mainly responsible for household matters (Afiouni, 2014; Lunn, 2006; Priyatna, 2013). The aforementioned socio-cultural factors influence the way Muslim women choose and advance their careers.

In Muslim-majority countries, the glass ceiling acts as the primary meso-level discrimination toward women (Ghasemi, 2013; Vidyasagar and Rea, 2004). The glass ceiling implies an invisible barrier that inhibits a particular group (typically gender group, i.e. women) from advancing to the top of the hierarchy (Cotter et al., 2001). Such a barrier is problematic as working Muslim women do not have equal chances to progress in their careers as Muslim men do. On the other hand, working Muslim women also face challenges indirectly related to discrimination. For example, Muslim women are expected to balance work and family as inspired by societal norms that assume Muslim women are mainly responsible for domestic matters. This specific condition applies for all women and it may impact their career progression (Achour et al., 2015; Özbilgin et al., 2012).

Meanwhile, at the micro-individual level, the issues are encircled in work-family dynamics. As there is a relatively clear division between the tasks performed by males and females (where females will mainly be responsible for household matters), female career or work-related matters tend to be adjusted accordingly (Achour et al., 2014; Sakai and Fauzia, 2016). Acker (2006, p. 445–446) suggests that the condition where women ‘must make adaptations to the expectation that interfere with family responsibilities and with which they are uncomfortable’ belongs to the masculine-stereotyped job behavior pattern. Such practices will create inequality regimes which are closely related to discrimination practices.

Discussions

Driven by the two main questions mentioned in the introduction, the discussion section will focus on comparing each level of discrimination pattern in Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries and will review the cases of workplace inequality in Muslim-majority countries against Muslim women.

Pattern comparisons

The probe on each level shows that all factors in Muslim-majority countries led to a subtle form of discrimination. Starting from the ambiguous interpretation of the law, solid male domination within societal norms, non-friendly working environment for Muslim women, lack of work-life balance facilitation to the enhancement of women’s role indirectly pushed Muslim women aside from equal workplace competition. The cases are somewhat different in Muslim-minority countries where a mixture of both subtle and blatant discrimination was exercised toward Muslims. There is a particular exception for the macro-societal level, which strongly associated with the blatant form of discrimination. To understand these different patterns, one has to look more closely at each country’s general characteristics.

Almost all of the Muslim-minority countries being evaluated in this study belong to the Western category. Henrich et al. (2010) popularized the WEIRD term, which stands for Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic, to characterize western societies. The democratic value highly endorsed in the WEIRD countries, mixed with the secular value embraced by the Western society, lead to the vigorous enforcement of freedom of speech which frequently disregards the sacred value of religion. Henceforth, the exchange between freedom of speech and blasphemy arises as a heated public debate, contrasting WEIRD and non-WEIRD (commonly Muslim society’s, if the case is related to Islam) perspectives (Green, 2014; Peterson, 2007). This principle also might explain the forthright manner of hatred toward Muslims shown by right-wing politicians in Western society.

In contrast to the values embedded in Western society, Muslim-majority countries are often reckoned as uneasy with democratic values (Karatnycky, 2002). The Islamic tenets were often not deliberately practiced within Muslim-majority countries, hence creating paradoxes and gaps between the teaching and the actuality, such as the actualization of gender equality and freedom principles in Islamic countries (Rowley and Smith, 2009; Syed et al., 2009). The relatively minimum democracy value leaves the pre-established practices largely uncontested. Such a condition is relevant to the modern form of discrimination argued by Deitch et al. (2003). The discrimination perpetrators commonly buttress their prejudiced view on non-racially based argumentations, which in this case lean on religious pretext or societal customs. The same is true for meso-level variables in Muslim-majority countries, where workplace facilities and the environment are not set to accommodate the specific needs of women employees. Probably such inconsideration is not due to an ill-intentioned mindset, but more on account of a taken-for-granted belief that the workplace is an arena for men.

Similar logic partly applies to Muslim-minority countries' meso-level factors. The taken-for-granted rationale says the workplace should be a secular sphere, which means that Muslim’s concerns at work (e.g. to conduct prayer, avoid alcohol, eat halal) will likely be overlooked. In addition to that, there are also few meso-level cases in Muslim-minority countries that apply blatant discrimination toward Muslims. Van Laer and Janssens (2011) conceptualize blatant discrimination as overt, deliberate, identifiable and commonly can be confronted on legal grounds. Several researchers (e.g. Cavico and Mujtaba, 2011; Malos, 2010) remark that some discrimination cases toward Muslims in Muslim-minority countries ended in court, indicating its blatant form. This applies to both meso and micro discrimination in Muslim-minority countries. Blatant forms of discrimination are typically settled under legal jurisdiction.

The last pattern discourse concerns the subtle discrimination as triggered by micro-individual factors. Though the discriminations in both country types are categorized under the same subtle term, on further elaboration the cases between the two country types are fundamentally different. Bobbitt-Zeher (2011) differentiates stereotyping cases (that eventually transformed into discrimination) into two categories which are descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes. Descriptive stereotypes relate to the belief that the stereotyped party does not have the necessary characteristics, traits, and skills to perform well at work. Meanwhile, the prescriptive stereotype, particularly in cases involving women, believes that a woman is supposed to be a wife and a mother before a worker, making her less invested in work. In Muslim-majority countries, the cases tend to be prescriptive rather than descriptive, backed by religious tenets that justify the claim. In Muslim-minority countries, the cases are more varied. Generally, Muslims bear descriptive stereotyping as potentially bad workers (Bagley and Abubaker, 2017; Salahshour and Boamah, 2020). In a more specific intersecting identity case like Muslim women, Migrant Muslims and Black Muslims, they tend to be stereotyped prescriptively, that a woman should not work, that the job is for the native, or that White employees should be prioritized over Black employees.

Due to many identities embedded within an individual, the micro-level perspective of religious discrimination transforms into a complex phenomenon. Acker (2006) portrays this by stating that focusing on one identity to understand discrimination and inequality practices obscures and oversimplifies the realities.

Gender as the sub-identity of religion

The intergroup discrimination findings in this paper are appropriate to the previous scholars' argumentations. Kanter (1977) states that women’s presence in what was perceived as the male sectors will further encourage male domination within the workplace. In most Muslim-majority countries where the values promote men instead of women as the breadwinner, the threat of workplace discrimination toward women is evident. Furthermore, Bobbitt-Zeher (2011) posits that gender discrimination should be understood as a process linked to the larger structure. Besides the beliefs of gender roles, sex composition in the workplace and organizational policies also contribute to workplace gender discrimination (Bobbitt-Zeher, 2011). From the World Economic Forum’s report (2021), Muslim-majority countries (particularly the Middle East region) hold the largest gender employment gap, making workplace sex composition dominated by males. In addition, as the findings at the meso-level show, organizational policies in Muslim-majority countries generally do not consider female workers' needs, resultantly hindering their career progression. These factors simultaneously facilitate workplace discrimination toward women in Muslim-majority countries.

Optimal Distinctiveness Theory (Brewer, 1991) may help to illuminate the confusion that arises from what was perceived as intergroup discrimination (Muslim women being discriminated against in Muslim-majority countries). The theory suggests that an individual is in the position to manage both social and personal identities hence an optimal distinctiveness can be achieved. Related to the focus of this study, a woman may belong to ‘Muslim’ at the societal level. However, inwardly, this particular woman holds many other identities like her occupation, her daily activities, her interests, and off course, her gender.

Eckes et al. (2005) found that both females and males favor in-group identity over own-gender identity. While their study was not tested within the religious context, the author presumes there is a high possibility that similar studies on religion versus gender identities comparison may generate similar findings to Eckes et al. (2005). The proposition is based on the unique nature of religion mentioned in the earlier section. As a belief system, religion supposedly regulates all aspects of living, including the role and perception of genders. To date, the literature presents discourses to converge both religious and gender identity within one frame, where particularly for Islam, the term ‘Islamic feminism’ has been widely discussed (for example, see Moghadam, 2002; Seedat, 2013). Nevertheless, one can only assume until empirical studies have been done.

Limitations

This study bears several limitations. Among the most notable would be the decision to define ‘discrimination’ broadly, which means that papers which do not directly mention workplace discrimination toward Muslims might also be included in this study. As argued earlier, the author asserts that the narrow definition of ‘discrimination’ potentially overlooks relevant studies and impedes the systematic literature review to synthesize the available knowledge on the field. One could also argue that the chosen keywords might not thoroughly portray discrimination cases toward Muslims. For instance, these keywords’ combinations fail to capture religious heterogeneity within Islam, which often leads to discrimination (for a detailed review, see Syed and Ali, 2021). The author suggests that future studies incorporate more keywords combinations while still focusing on workplace discrimination to cover more comprehensive societal phenomena.

In addition, the author did not distinguish Muslims based on each denomination and each geographical location. For instance, this study included papers from both Sunni-majority countries (like Indonesia and Pakistan) and Shia-majority countries (Iran). This paper also fused the analysis regardless of geographical location. More careful framing of denomination and geographical location potentially results in a more thorough discourse. That is due to the unique characteristics held by each Muslim denomination (Sunni-Shia) and Muslim living practices on each geographical location (i.e. Africa – Southeast Asia, or Europe – America).

Conclusion

To comprehensively understand religious workplace discrimination, one needs to consider various societal, organizational, and individual factors. This study portrayed the different discrimination patterns and triggering factors in two settings: Muslim-minority and Muslim-majority countries. In Muslim-minority countries, discrimination tends to be exercised blatantly at the macro-societal level and assorted between subtle and blatant at the meso-organizational and micro-individual levels. Meanwhile, discrimination cases in Muslim-majority countries tend to be subtly performed and aimed at Muslim women in particular. In addition, this paper suggests that future studies involving identity better specify the investigated identity as clearly as possible. That is due to the different circumstances each unique identity has. For instance, Muslim women and men face different challenges at work.

Admittedly, there may be alternate explanations for this study’s findings. For example, other scholars might argue that human capital or work-family dynamics should not be considered discriminatory factors as these relate to the merit or the essential requirements of the job. However, the author argued against this idea using broader discrimination demarcations, where the factors directly or indirectly inhibit particular group members from advancing their careers as part of discriminatory factors. Finally, scholars might also consider extending the ‘gender discrimination’ discourse using a comparative lens between Islamic and Western or non-Islamic perspectives. There might be different interpretations among the two perspectives, inter alia, what one perspective perceives as discriminatory practices could be interpreted by the other perspective as managing roles responsibly.

ORCID iD

Jaya Addin Linando https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6271-1869

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This paper is a part of the author’s doctoral study which was conducted with the funding from Indonesian Directorate General of Resources for Science Technology and Higher Education under BPPLN Dikti Program. The author expresses his gratitude toward these mentioned names for their valuable input on this paper’s development: 1) Prof. Wolfgang Mayrhofer; 2) The members of IVM institute, WU Vienna; 3) The convenors, the discussants (Prof. Rashedur Chowdhury and Dr. Penelope Muzanenhamo) and the members of Sub-theme 27, 37^th EGOS Colloquim 2021; 4) The anonymous reviewers and Prof. Terence Jackson.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Pusat Pengembangan Manajemen (PPM) UII.

Note

References

Abdelhadi

(2019) The Hijab and Muslim women’s employment in the United States. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 61: 26–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.rssm.2019.01.006.

Abdelhadi

England

(2019) Do values explain the low employment levels of Muslim women around the world? A within‐ and between‐country analysis. The British Journal of Sociology 70(4): 1510–1538. DOI: 10.1111/1468-4446.12486.

Abisaab

(2009) Arab Women and Work: The Interrelation Between Orientalism and Historiography. Hawwa 7(2): 164–198. DOI: 10.1163/156920709X12511890014621.

Abranches

(2007) Muslim women in Portugal: Strategies of Identity (re)Construction. Lusotopie 14(1): 239–254. Brill. DOI: 10.1163/17683084-01401012.

Abubaker

Bagley

(2017) Methodology of Correspondence Testing for Employment Discrimination Involving Ethnic Minority Applications: Dutch and English Case Studies of Muslim Applicants for Employment. Social Sciences 6(4): 112. DOI: 10.3390/socsci6040112.

Abu-Hassan

(2003) The Laws Governing The Work Of Women In Muslim Countries Today: The Jordanian Case. Hawwa 1(3): 351–377. DOI: 10.1163/156920803322765173.

Achour

Grine

Roslan Mohd Nor

(2014) Work–family conflict and coping strategies: Qualitative study of Muslim female academicians in Malaysia. Mental Health, Religion & Culture 17(10): 1002–1014. DOI: 10.1080/13674676.2014.994201.

Achour

Mohd Nor

Mohd Yusoff MYZ (2015) Work–Family Demands and Subjective Well-being among Female Academicians: The Role of Muslim Religiosity. Review of Religious Research 57(3): 419–433. DOI: 10.1007/s13644-015-0221-6.

Acker

(2006) Inequality Regimes. Gender & Society 20(4): 441–464. DOI: 10.1177/0891243206289499.

10.

Adam

Rea

(2018) The three “i”s of workplace accommodation of Muslim religious practices: instrumental, internal, and informal. Ethnic and Racial Studies 41(15): 2711–2730. DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2017.1409430.

11.

Adida

Laitin

Valfort

M-A

(2010) Identifying barriers to Muslim integration in France. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(52): 22384–22390. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1015550107.

12.

Afiouni

(2014) Women’s careers in the Arab Middle East: Understanding institutional constraints to the boundaryless career view. Career Development International Yehuda Baruch, Professor Françoise

(ed.) 19(3): 314–336. DOI: 10.1108/CDI-05-2013-0061.

13.

Agerström

Rooth

(2009) Implicit prejudice and ethnic minorities: Arab Muslims in Sweden. In: Constant

(ed), International Journal of Manpower 30(1/2), pp. 43–55. DOI: 10.1108/01437720910948384.

14.

Agrawal

Yusuf

Pasha

, et al. (2019) Interpersonal stranger violence and American Muslims: an exploratory study of lived experiences and coping strategies. Global Bioethics 30(1): 28–42. DOI: 10.1080/11287462.2019.1683934.

15.

Ahmed

Amer

Killawi

(2017) The ecosystems perspective in social work: Implications for culturally competent practice with American Muslims. Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Social Thought 36(1–2): 48–72. DOI: 10.1080/15426432.2017.1311245.

16.

Akbaba

(2009) Who Discriminates More? Comparing Religious Discrimination in Western Democracies, Asia and the Middle East. Civil Wars 11(3): 321–358. DOI: 10.1080/13698240903157578.

17.

Al Ariss

Sidani

(2016) Understanding religious diversity: Implications from Lebanon and France. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 23(3), pp. 467–480. DOI: 10.1108/CCSM-02-2015-0020.

18.

Al Ariss

Syed

(2011) Capital Mobilization of Skilled Migrants: A Relational Perspective: Capital Mobilization of Skilled Migrants. British Journal of Management 22(2): 286–304. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2010.00734.x.

19.

Ali

(2013) A multi-level perspective on equal employment opportunity for women in Pakistan. In: Syed

(ed),Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 32(3), pp. 289–309. DOI: 10.1108/EDI-12-2012-0110.

20.

Ali

Malik

Pereira

, et al. (2017) A relational understanding of work-life balance of Muslim migrant women in the west: future research agenda. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 28(8): 1163–1181. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1166784.

21.

Ali

Yamada

Mahmood

(2015) Relationships of the Practice of Hijab, Workplace Discrimination, Social Class, Job Stress, and Job Satisfaction Among Muslim American Women. Journal of Employment Counseling 52(4): 146–157. DOI: 10.1002/joec.12020.

22.

Alkhazraji

Gardner

Martin

, et al. (1997) The acculturation of immigrants to U.S. organizations: The case of Muslim employees. Management Communication Quarterly: McQ 11(2): 217–265. Thousand Oaks, United States: SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

23.

Al‐Lail

HRJ

(1996) Muslim women between tradition and modernity: the Islamic perspective. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 16(1): 99–110. Routledge. DOI: 10.1080/13602009608716330.

24.

Amis

Mair

Munir

(2020) The Organizational Reproduction of Inequality. Academy of Management Annals 14(1): 195–230. DOI: 10.5465/annals.2017.0033.

25.

Arifeen

(2020) British Muslim women’s experience of the networking practice of happy hours. Employee Relations: The International Journal 42(3): 646–661. DOI: 10.1108/ER-04-2018-0110.

26.

Arifeen

Gatrell

(2020) Those Glass Chains that Bind You: How British Muslim Women Professionals Experience Career, Faith and Family. British Journal of Management 31(1): 221–236. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12387.

27.

Ashforth

Mael

(1989) Social Identity Theory and the Organization. NY: Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, p. 10510. Academy of Management Review. DOI: 10.5465/amr.1989.4278999.

28.

Bagley

Abubaker

(2017) Muslim Woman Seeking Work: An English Case Study with a Dutch Comparison, of Discrimination and Achievement. Social Sciences 6(1): 17. DOI: 10.3390/socsci6010017.

29.

Baharudin

Sumari

Yusop

, et al. (2019) An Exploratory Study of Mental Health Among Muslim Creative Media Workers. Malaysian Journal of Medicine and Health Sciences 7.

30.

Baldi

(2018) Re-conceptualizing Equality in the Work Place: A Reading of the Latest CJEU’s Opinions over the Practice of Veiling. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 7(2): 296–312. DOI: 10.1093/ojlr/rwy028.

31.

Ball

Haque

(2003) Diversity in Religious Practice: Implications of Islamic Values in the Public Workplace. Public Personnel Management 32(3): 315–330. DOI: 10.1177/009102600303200301.

32.

Barkdull

Khaja

Queiro-Tajalli

, et al. (2011) Experiences of Muslims in Four Western Countries Post—9/11. Affilia 26(2): 139–153. DOI: 10.1177/0886109911405491.

33.

Basit

(1996) ‘I’d hate to be just a housewife’: Career aspirations of British Muslim girls. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling 24(2): 227–242. DOI: 10.1080/03069889608260411.

34.

Behzadi

(2019) Women miners’ exclusion and Muslim masculinities in Tajikistan: A feminist political ecology of honor and shame. Geoforum 100: 144–152. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.01.001.

35.

Bobbitt-Zeher

(2011) Gender Discrimination at Work: Connecting Gender Stereotypes, Institutional Policies, and Gender Composition of Workplace. Gender & Society 25(6): 764–786. SAGE Publications Inc. DOI: 10.1177/0891243211424741.

36.

Borooah

Dubey

Iyer

(2007) The Effectiveness of Jobs Reservation: Caste, Religion and Economic Status in India. Development and Change 38(3): 423–445. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00418.x.

37.

Bouma

Haidar

Nyland

, et al. (2003) Work, Religious Diversity and Islam. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 41(1): 51–61. DOI: 10.1177/1038411103041001022.

38.

Braakmann

(2009) The Impact of September 11th, 2001 on the Employment Prospects of Arabs and Muslims in the German Labor Market. Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik) 229(1): 2–21. De Gruyter.

39.

Brah

(1993) ‘Race’ and ‘culture’ in the gendering of labour markets: South Asian young Muslim women and the labour market. New Community 19(3): 441–458. DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.1993.9976376.

40.

Brewer

(1991) The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17(5): 475–482. SAGE Publications Inc. DOI: 10.1177/0146167291175001.

41.

Brewer

Kramer

(1985) The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology 36: 219–243. US: Annual Reviews. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ps.36.020185.001251.

42.

Brief

Dietz

Cohen

, et al. (2000) Just Doing Business: Modern Racism and Obedience to Authority as Explanations for Employment Discrimination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 81(1): 72–97. DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2867.

43.

Cantone

Wiener

(2017) Religion at work: Evaluating hostile work environment religious discrimination claims. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 23(3): 351–366. DOI: 10.1037/law0000132.

44.

Casimiro

Hancock

Northcote

(2007) Isolation and Insecurity: Resettlement Issues Among Muslim Refugee Women in Perth, Western Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues 42(1): 55–69. DOI: 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2007.tb00039.x.

45.

Cavico

Mujtaba

(2011) Employment discrimination and Muslims in the USA. J. for Global Business Advancement 4(3): 279. DOI: 10.1504/JGBA.2011.043279.

46.

Chambers

Ansari

(2018) Ghar Mein Kām Hai (There is Work in the House): When Female Factory Workers become ‘Coopted Domestic Labour. Journal of South Asian Development 13(2): 141–163. DOI: 10.1177/0973174118782506.

47.

Cheung

King

Lindsey

, et al. (2016) Understanding and Reducing Workplace Discrimination. In: Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 101–152. DOI: 10.1108/S0742-730120160000034010.

48.

Cohen

Barbour

(2017) Understanding Religious Diversity in Management. Rutgers Business Review 2(1). Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3012254 (accessed on 8 July 2022).

49.

Connor

Koenig

(2015) Explaining the Muslim employment gap in Western Europe: Individual-level effects and ethno-religious penalties. Social Science Research 49: 191–201. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.08.001.

50.

Corekcioglu

(2020) Unveiling the effects of a headscarf ban: Evidence from municipal jobs in Turkey. Journal of Comparative Economics 10. DOI: 10.1016/j.jce.2020.09.004.

51.

Cortina

(2008) Unseen Injustice: Incivility as Modern Discrimination in Organizations. Academy of Management Review 33(1): 55–75. DOI: 10.5465/amr.2008.27745097.

52.

Cotter

Hermsen

Ovadia

, et al. (2001) The Glass Ceiling Effect. Social Forces 80(2): 655–681. Oxford University Press.

53.

Crenshaw

(1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In: Chi

Legal

(eds), Feminist Legal Theory. Routledge, pp. 57–80.

54.

Croucher

(2013) Integrated Threat Theory and Acceptance of Immigrant Assimilation: An Analysis of Muslim Immigration in Western Europe. Communication Monographs 80(1): 46–62. DOI: 10.1080/03637751.2012.739704.

55.

Deitch

Barsky

Butz

, et al. (2003) Subtle Yet Significant: The Existence and Impact of Everyday Racial Discrimination in the Workplace. Human Relations 56(11): 1299–1324. DOI: 10.1177/00187267035611002.

56.

Di Stasio

Lancee

Veit

, et al. (2019) Muslim by default or religious discrimination? Results from a cross-national field experiment on hiring discrimination. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 45: 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2019.1622826.

57.

Dolansky

Alon

(2008) Religious freedom, religious diversity, and Japanese foreign direct investment. Research in International Business and Finance 22(1): 29–39. DOI: 10.1016/j.ribaf.2006.11.003.

58.

Dwyer

Shah

Sanghera

(2008) ‘From cricket lover to terror suspect’ – challenging representations of young British Muslim men. Gender, Place & Culture 15(2): 117–136. DOI: 10.1080/09663690701863208.

59.

Eckes

Trautner

Behrendt

(2005) Gender Subgroups and Intergroup Perception: Adolescents’ Views of Own-Gender and Other-Gender Groups. The Journal of Social Psychology 145(1): 85–112. DOI: 10.3200/SOCP.145.1.85-112.

60.

Elamin

Omair

(2010) Males’ attitudes towards working females in Saudi Arabia. In: Budhwar

Mellahi

(eds), Personnel Review. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 746–766. 39(6). DOI: 10.1108/00483481011075594.

61.

Eriksson

Johansson

Langenskiöld

(2017) What is the right profile for getting a job? A stated choice experiment of the recruitment process. Empirical Economics 53(2): 803–826. DOI: 10.1007/s00181-016-1133-1.

62.

Etherington

(2019) Religion as a Workplace Issue: A Narrative Inquiry of Two People—One Muslim and the Other Christian. SAGE Open 9(3): 215824401986272. DOI: 10.1177/2158244019862729.

63.

Fadil

(2013) Performing the salat [Islamic prayers] at work: Secular and pious Muslims negotiating the contours of the public in Belgium. Ethnicities 13(6): 729–750. DOI: 10.1177/1468796812471129.

64.

Foroutan

(2008a) Employment Differentials of Second-Generation Muslim Immigrants: Assimilation and Discrimination Hypotheses. Immigrants & Minorities 26(3): 219–241. DOI: 10.1080/02619280802528452.

65.

Foroutan

(2008b) Women’s employment, religion and multiculturalism: Socio-demographic emphasis. Journal of Population Research 25(1): 63–90. DOI: 10.1007/BF03031941.

66.

Foroutan

(2011) Ethnic and Religious Discrimination? A Multicultural Analysis of Muslim Minorities in the West. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 31(3): 327–338. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2011.599541.

67.

Forstenlechner

Al-Waqfi

(2010) A job interview for Mo, but none for Mohammed”: Religious discrimination against immigrants in Austria and Germany. In: Budhwar

(ed), Personnel Review, pp. 767–784. 39(6). DOI: 10.1108/00483481011075602.

68.

Fox

(2000) Religious Causes of Discrimination against Ethno-Religious Minorities. International Studies Quarterly 44(3): 423–450. [International Studies Association, Wiley].

69.

Fox

(2013) Religious Discrimination against Religious Minorities in Middle Eastern Muslim States. Civil Wars 15(4): 454–470. DOI: 10.1080/13698249.2013.853413.

70.

Fozdar

(2012) Social cohesion and skilled Muslim refugees in Australia: Employment, social capital and discrimination. Journal of Sociology 48(2): 167–186. DOI: 10.1177/1440783311413482.

71.

Frégosi

Kosulu

(2013) Religion and religious discrimination in the French workplace: Increasing tensions, heated debates, perceptions of labour unionists and pragmatic best practices. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 13(2–3): 194–213. DOI: 10.1177/1358229113493693.

72.

Gaertner

Insko

(2000) Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm: Categorization, reciprocation, or fear? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79(1): 77–94. US: American Psychological Association. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.77.

73.

Gebert

Boerner

Kearney

, et al. (2014) Expressing religious identities in the workplace: Analyzing a neglected diversity dimension. Human Relations 67(5): 543–563. SAGE Publications Ltd DOI: 10.1177/0018726713496830.

74.

Gelb

Longacre

(2012) Acknowledging religious diversity: Opportunities and challenges. Business Horizons 55(5): 509–518. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2012.06.001.

75.

Ghasemi

(2013) Women’s Experiences of Work in the Iranian Broadcast Media (IRIB): Motivations, challenges, and achievements. Feminist Media Studies 13(5): 840–849. DOI: 10.1080/14680777.2013.838367.

76.

Ghasemi

(2020) Negotiating Challenges and Aspirations in a Gendered Work Environment: The Voices of Women Working in the Iranian Broadcasting Media. Journal of Social Issues 76(3): 577–603. DOI: 10.1111/josi.12397.

77.

Ghumman

Jackson

(2009) The downside of religious attire: The Muslim headscarf and expectations of obtaining employment. Journal of Organizational Behavior 31(1): 4–23. DOI: 10.1002/job.601.

78.

Ghumman

Ryan

(2013) Not welcome here: Discrimination towards women who wear the Muslim headscarf. Human Relations 66(5): 671–698. DOI: 10.1177/0018726712469540.

79.

Ghumman

Ryan

Barclay

, et al. (2013) Religious Discrimination in the Workplace: A Review and Examination of Current and Future Trends. Journal of Business and Psychology 28(4): 439–454. DOI: 10.1007/s10869-013-9290-0.

80.

Golesorkhi

L-Z

(2017) Unveiling Structural Challenges: The Headscarf and Employment Integration in Germany. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 37(2): 164–182. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2017.1345101.

81.

Golesorkhi

L-Z

(2019) Islamic Garb in Public Employment in Europe and the US—From Integration to Accommodation to Anti-Discrimination. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 39(4): 551–568. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2019.1700589.

82.

Golnaraghi

Mills

(2013) Unveiling the myth of the Muslim woman: a postcolonial critique. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 32(2): 157–172. DOI: 10.1108/02610151311324398.

83.

Green

(2014) Between Blasphemy and Critique: Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech. In: Guiora

Marshall

Shea

, et al. (eds),Journal of Law and Religion, 29(1), pp. 176–196. Cambridge University Press.

84.

Grünenfelder

(2013) Negotiating Gender Relations: Muslim Women and Formal Employment in Pakistan’s Rural Development Sector. Gender, Work & Organization 20(6): 599–615. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2012.00609.x.

85.

Guetto

Fellini

(2017) Immigrant Women’s Employment Patterns. Disentangling the Effects of Ethnic Origin, Religious Affiliation and Religiosity. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia. 4/2017. DOI: 10.1423/88812.

86.

Hannah

Lester

(2009) A multilevel approach to building and learning organizations. The Leadership Quarterly 20: 34–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.11.003.

87.

Héliot

Gleibs

Coyle

, et al. (2020) Religious identity in the workplace: A systematic review, research agenda, and practical implications. Human Resource Management 59(2): 153–173. DOI: 10.1002/hrm.21983.

88.

Hendriks

van Ewijk

(2017) To have voice and choice: Turkish and Moroccan Dutch professionals in social work. International Social Work 60(3): 720–732. DOI: 10.1177/0020872816651705.

89.

Henrich

Heine

Norenzayan

(2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33: 61–135. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.

90.

Hiebl

MRW

(2021) Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research. In: Organizational Research Methods. SAGE Publications Inc, p. 1094428120986851. DOI: 10.1177/1094428120986851.

91.

Hou

Liu

Crabtree

(2020) Anti-muslim bias in the Chinese labor market. Journal of Comparative Economics 48(2): 235–250. DOI: 10.1016/j.jce.2019.12.001.

92.

Hutchings

Lirio

Metcalfe

(2012) Gender, globalisation and development: a re-evaluation of the nature of women’s global work. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 23(9): 1763–1787. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2011.610336.

93.

James

(2000) Race-related differences in promotions and support: Underlying effects of human and social capital. US, Organization Science 11(5), pp. 493–508. Institute for Operations Research & the Management Sciences (INFORMS). DOI: 10.1287/orsc.11.5.493.15202.

94.

Jones

Peddie

Gilrane

, et al. (2016) Not So Subtle: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Correlates of Subtle and Overt Discrimination. Journal of Management 42(6): 1588–1613. SAGE Publications Inc. DOI: 10.1177/0149206313506466.

95.

Kabir

(2016) The Road to a Transcultural America: The Case of American Muslim Girls. Journal of Intercultural Studies 37(3): 250–264. DOI: 10.1080/07256868.2016.1163532.

96.

Kanter

(1977) Men and Women of the Corporation - Book - Faculty & Research - Harvard Business School. Available at: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=10807 (accessed on 26 January 2021).

97.

Karatnycky

(2002) Muslim Countries and the Democracy Gap. Journal of Democracy 13(1): 99–112. Johns Hopkins University Press. DOI: 10.1353/jod.2002.0009.

98.

Karlsen

Nazroo

(2002) Relation Between Racial Discrimination, Social Class, and Health Among Ethnic Minority Groups. American Journal of Public Health 92(4): 624–631. American Public Health Association. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.92.4.624.

99.

Kaushal

Kaestner

Reimers

(2007) Labor Market Effects of September 11^th on Arab and Muslim Residents of the United States. Journal of Human Resources 42(2): 275–308. DOI: 10.3368/jhr.XLII.2.275.

100.

Kershen

(2011) Jewish and Muslim Married Women Don’t Work: Immigrant Wives and Home-Work in the Late Nineteenth and Late Twentieth Centuries. Home Cultures 8(2): 119–132. DOI: 10.2752/175174211X12961586699649.

101.

Khattab

(2012) ‘Winners’ and ‘losers’: the impact of education, ethnicity and gender on Muslims in the British labour market. Work, Employment and Society 26(4): 556–573. DOI: 10.1177/0950017012448225.

102.

Khattab

Modood

(2015) Both Ethnic and Religious: Explaining Employment Penalties Across 14 Ethno-Religious Groups in the United Kingdom: BLACK AND MUSLIM LABOR PENALTIES. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 54(3): 501–522. DOI: 10.1111/jssr.12220.

103.

Khattab

Johnston

Manley

(2018) Human capital, family structure and religiosity shaping British Muslim women’s labour market participation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 44(9): 1541–1559. DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2017.1334541.

104.

Khattab

Miaari

Mohamed-Ali

, et al. (2019) Muslim women in the Canadian labor market: Between ethnic exclusion and religious discrimination. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 61: 52–64. DOI: 10.1016/j.rssm.2018.11.006.

105.

Khattab

Daoud

Qaysiya

, et al. (2020) Human Capital and Labour Market Performance of Muslim Women in Australia. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 40(3): 410–428. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2020.1813989.

106.

King

Ahmad

(2010) An Experimental Field Study of Interpersonal Discrimination Toward Muslim Job Applicants. Personnel Psychology 63(4): 881–906. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01199.x.

107.

King

McKay

Stewart

(2014) Religious bias and stigma: attitudes toward working with a Muslim co-worker. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion 11(2): 98–122. DOI: 10.1080/14766086.2013.801319.

108.

Kinnvall

Nesbitt-Larking

(2011) Global insecurity and citizenship strategies: Young Muslims in the West. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 12(3): 271–290. DOI: 10.1080/1600910X.2011.619344.

109.

Koburtay

Syed

Haloub

(2020) Implications of Religion, Culture, and Legislation for Gender Equality at Work: Qualitative Insights from Jordan. Journal of Business Ethics 164(3): 421–436. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-4036-6.

110.

Korotayev

Issaev

Shishkina

(2015) Female Labor Force Participation Rate, Islam, and Arab Culture in Cross-Cultural Perspective. Cross-Cultural Research 49(1): 3–19. DOI: 10.1177/1069397114536126.

111.

Kulik

(2012) The Impact of Resources on Women’s Strategies for Coping With Work–Home Conflict: Does Sociocultural Context Matter? Journal of Family Social Work 15(3): 217–234. DOI: 10.1080/10522158.2012.676612.

112.

Lamont

Beljean

Clair

(2014) What is missing? Cultural processes and causal pathways to inequality. Socio-Economic Review 12(3): 573–608. DOI: 10.1093/ser/mwu011.

113.

Latif

Cukier

Gagnon

, et al. (2018) The diversity of professional Canadian Muslim women: Faith, agency, and ‘performing’ identity. Journal of Management & Organization 24(5): 612–633. DOI: 10.1017/jmo.2018.18.

114.

Leonardelli

Brewer

(2001) Minority and Majority Discrimination: When and Why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 37(6): 468–485. DOI: 10.1006/jesp.2001.1475.

115.

Liao

Soltani

Wang

W-Y

, et al. (2017) The dynamics of workplace relationships in a diverse internationally staffed organisation: a qualitative ethnographic assessment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 28(8): 1182–1211. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1166788.

116.

Lindemann

Stolz

(2018) The Muslim Employment Gap, Human Capital, and Ethno-Religious Penalties: Evidence from Switzerland. Social Inclusion 6(2): 151–161. DOI: 10.17645/si.v6i2.1395.

117.

Lindley

(2002) Race or religion? The impact of religion on the employment and earnings of Britain’s ethnic communities. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 28(3): 427–442. DOI: 10.1080/13691830220146536.

118.

Lindsey

King

Cheung

, et al. (2015) When do women respond against discrimination? Exploring factors of subtlety, form, and focus. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 45(12): 649–661. DOI: 10.1111/jasp.12326.

119.

Lipka

Hackett

(2017) Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group. In: Pew Research Center. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/ (accessed on 23 October 2020).

120.

Lovat

Nilan

Hosseini

SAH

, et al. (2013) Australian Muslim Jobseekers: Equal Employment Opportunity and Equity in the Labor Market. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 33(4): 435–450. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2013.866346.

121.

Lunn

(2006) Becoming an Academic Woman: Islam, Religious Identity and Career. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 12(2): 33–63. DOI: 10.1080/12259276.2006.11666008.

122.

Malik

Qureshi

Abdul-Razakq

, et al. (2019) ‘ I decided not to go into surgery due to dress code ’: a cross-sectional study within the UK investigating experiences of female Muslim medical health professionals on bare below the elbows (BBE) policy and wearing headscarves (hijabs) in theatre. BMJ Open 9(3): e019954. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019954.

123.

Malos

(2010) Post-9/11 Backlash in the Workplace: Employer Liability for Discrimination against Arab- and Muslim- Americans Based on Religion or National Origin. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 22(4): 297–310. DOI: 10.1007/s10672-009-9132-4.

124.

Masci

(2019) Many Americans see religious discrimination in U.S. – especially against Muslims. In: Pew Research Center. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/17/many-americans-see-religious-discrimination-in-u-s-especially-against-muslims/ (accessed on 10 January 2021).

125.

Masood

(2019) Doing gender, modestly: Conceptualizing workplace experiences of Pakistani women doctors. Gender, Work & Organization 26(2): 214–228. DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12308.

126.

Metcalfe

(2006) Exploring cultural dimensions of gender and management in the Middle East. Thunderbird International Business Review 48(1): 93–107. DOI: 10.1002/tie.20087.

127.

Miaari

Khattab

Johnston

(2019) Religion and ethnicity at work: a study of British Muslim women’s labour market performance. Quality & Quantity 53(1): 19–47. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-018-0721-x.

128.

Mir

(2013) Religion as a coping mechanism for global labor: Lessons from the South Asian Shia Muslim diaspora in the US. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal Syed J (ed.) 32(3): 325–337. DOI: 10.1108/EDI-12-2012-0111.

129.

Moghadam

(2002) Islamic Feminism and Its Discontents: Toward a Resolution of the Debate. Signs 27(4): 1135–1171. The University of Chicago Press. DOI: 10.1086/339639.

130.

Mogra

(2013) A Faith Dimension on the Landscape of Teachers: Muslim Teachers on Recruitment, Retention and Career Advancement. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 38(7). DOI: 10.14221/ajte.2013v38n7.2.

131.

Mostafa

(2003) Attitudes towards women who work in Egypt. Women in Management Review 18(5): 252–266. MCB UP Ltd DOI: 10.1108/09649420310485096.

132.

Mummendey

Simon

Dietze

, et al. (1992) Categorization is not enough: Intergroup discrimination in negative outcome allocation. Netherlands, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 28(2), pp. 125–144. Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/0022-1031(92)90035-I.

133.

Murray

Ali

(2017) Agency and coping strategies for ethnic and gendered minorities at work. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 28(8): 1236–1260. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1166787.

134.

Nagra

(2018) Cultural Explanations of Patriarchy, Race, and Everyday Lives: Marginalizing and “Othering” Muslim Women in Canada. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 38(2): 263–279. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2018.1466488.

135.

Naseem

Adnan

(2019) Being a second generation Muslim woman in the French labour market. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 61: 79–93. DOI: 10.1016/j.rssm.2019.02.003.

136.

Nilan

(2012) Young, Muslim and looking for a job in Australia. Youth Studies Australia 31(1): 48–60. Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

137.

Nora

Cabrera

(1996) The Role of Perceptions of Prejudice and Discrimination on the Adjustment of Minority Students to College. The Journal of Higher Education 67(2): 119–148. Ohio State University Press. DOI: 10.2307/2943977.

138.

O’Connor

(2011) Everyday Hybridity and Hong Kong’s Muslim Youth. Visual Anthropology 24(1–2): 203–225. DOI: 10.1080/08949468.2011.528337.

139.

Özbilgin

Syed

Ali

, et al. (2012) International Transfer of Policies and Practices of Gender Equality in Employment to and among Muslim Majority Countries: International Transfer of Gender Equality in Employment. Gender, Work & Organization 19(4): 345–369. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00515.x.

140.

Padela

Shanawani

Greenlaw

, et al. (2008) The perceived role of Islam in immigrant Muslim medical practice within the USA: an exploratory qualitative study. Journal of Medical Ethics 34(5): 365–369. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2007.021345.

141.

Padela

Adam

Ahmad

, et al. (2016) Religious identity and workplace discrimination: A national survey of American Muslim physicians. AJOB Empirical Bioethics 7(3): 149–159. DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2015.1111271.

142.

Park

Malachi

Sternin

, et al. (2009) Subtle Bias Against Muslim Job Applicants in Personnel Decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 39(9): 2174–2190. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00520.x.

143.

Pasha-Zaidi

(2015) Judging by Appearances: Perceived Discrimination among South Asian Muslim Women in the US and the UAE. Journal of International Women’s Studies 16(2): 29.

144.

Pemberton

Takhar

(2021) A critical technocultural discourse analysis of Muslim fashion bloggers in France: charting ‘restorative technoscapes. Journal of Marketing Management 37(5–6): 1–30. DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2020.1868551.

145.

Peterson

(2007) Making global news: “Freedom of speech” and “Muslim rage” in U.S. journalism. Contemporary Islam 1(3): 247–264. DOI: 10.1007/s11562-007-0021-z.

146.

Predelli

(2004) Interpreting Gender in Islam: A Case Study of Immigrant Muslim Women in Oslo, Norway. Gender & Society 18(4): 473–493. DOI: 10.1177/0891243204265138.

147.

Principle 6 UN Global Compact (n.d.). Available at: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles/principle-6 (accessed on 9 June 2021).

148.

Priyatna

(2013) Negotiating and Rethinking Local Culture: The Narratives of Indonesian Women Juggling Higher Education, Work, and Domestic Roles. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 19(4): 95–123. DOI: 10.1080/12259276.2013.11666167.

149.

Rabby

Rodgers

(2011) Post 9-11 U.S. Muslim Labor Market Outcomes. Atlantic Economic Journal 39(3): 273. DOI: 10.1007/s11293-011-9281-3.

150.

Rashid

(2016) Just a Girl: Thinking Intersectionally about ‘the Muslim Girl’ and Writing against Culture. Young 24(3): 255–269. DOI: 10.1177/1103308815626844.

151.

Reeves

McKinney

Azam

(2012) Muslim women’s workplace experiences: implications for strategic diversity initiatives. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 32(1): 49–67. DOI: 10.1108/02610151311305614.

152.

Richardson

(2014) Religious Diversity, Social Control, and Legal Pluralism: A Socio-Legal Analysis. In: Giordan

Pace

(eds), Religious Pluralism: Framing Religious Diversity in the Contemporary World. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 31–47. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-06623-3_3.

153.

Robinson

(2016) Hijab in the American workplace: visibility and discrimination. Culture and Religion 17(3): 332–351. DOI: 10.1080/14755610.2016.1211543.

154.

Rootham

(2015) Embodying Islam and laïcité : young French Muslim women at work. Gender, Place & Culture 22(7): 971–986. DOI: 10.1080/0966369X.2014.939150.

155.

Rowley

Smith

(2009) Islam’s Democracy Paradox: Muslims Claim to like Democracy, so Why Do They Have so Little? Public Choice 139(3/4), Springer pp. 273–299.

156.

Saguy

(2013) What’s Wrong with Fat? The War on Obesity and its Collateral Damage. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199857081.001.0001/acprof-9780199857081 (accessed on 8 June 2021).

157.

Sakai

Fauzia

(2016) Performing Muslim Womanhood: Muslim Business Women Moderating Islamic Practices in Contemporary Indonesia. Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations 27(3): 229–249. DOI: 10.1080/09596410.2015.1114243.

158.

Salahshour

Boamah

(2020) Perceived Discrimination as Experienced by Muslims in New Zealand Universities. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 40(3): 497–512. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2020.1819130.

159.

Samani

(2013) Muslim Women in the Diverse Western Australian Workplace. The International Journal of Organizational Diversity 12(4): 37–46. DOI: 10.18848/2328-6261/CGP/v12i04/40176.

160.

Sav

(2019) The role of religion in work-life interface. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 30(22): 3223–3244. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1255905.

161.

Sav

Sebar

Harris

(2010) Experiences of Australian Muslim Men in the Workplace: A Field Study of Employment Choices and Consequences. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 30(3): 409–423. DOI: 10.1080/13602004.2010.515825.

162.

Sav

Harris

Sebar

(2013) Work-life conflict and facilitation among Australian Muslim men. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 32(7): 671–687. DOI: 10.1108/EDI-07-2012-0058.

163.

Sav

Harris

Sebar

(2014) Australian Muslim men balancing work, family and religion:a positive look at a negative issue. Personnel Review 43(1): 2–18. DOI: 10.1108/PR-07-2012-0130.

164.

Scheitle

Ecklund

(2017) Examining the Effects of Exposure to Religion in the Workplace on Perceptions of Religious Discrimination. Review of Religious Research 59(1): 1–20. DOI: 10.1007/s13644-016-0278-x.

165.

Scheitle

Ecklund

(2020) Individuals’ Experiences with Religious Hostility, Discrimination, and Violence: Findings from a New National Survey. Socius 6. 2378023120967815. SAGE Publications. DOI: 10.1177/2378023120967815.

166.

Scott

Franzmann

(2007) Religious identity and ‘secular’ employment: a case study of young Muslim women graduates in the Sydney workforce. Contemporary Islam 1(3): 275–288. DOI: 10.1007/s11562-007-0026-7.

167.

Seedat

(2013) When Islam and Feminism Converge. The Muslim World 103(3): 404–420. DOI: 10.1111/muwo.12022.

168.

Sekerka

Yacobian

(2018) Fostering workplace respect in an era of anti-Muslimism and Islamophobia: A proactive approach for management. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 37(8): 813–831. DOI: 10.1108/EDI-11-2017-0265.

169.

Shah

Shaikh

(2010) Leadership progression of Muslim male teachers: interplay of ethnicity, faith and visibility. School Leadership & Management 30(1): 19–33. DOI: 10.1080/13632430903509733.

170.

Sidani

(2005) Women, work, and Islam in Arab societies. Women in Management Review 20(7): 498–512. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. DOI: 10.1108/09649420510624738.

171.

Sides

Gross

(2013) Stereotypes of Muslims and Support for the War on Terror. The Journal of Politics 75(3): 583–598. [The University of Chicago Press, Southern Political Science Association]. DOI: 10.1017/s0022381613000388.

172.

Snyder

(2019) Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research 104: 333–339. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.

173.

Spierings

(2014a) How Islam Influences Women’s Paid Non-farm Employment: Evidence from 26 Indonesian and 37 Nigerian Provinces. Review of Religious Research 56(3): 399–431. DOI: 10.1007/s13644-014-0159-0.

174.

Spierings

(2014b) The Influence of Patriarchal Norms, Institutions, and Household Composition on Women’s Employment in Twenty-Eight Muslim-Majority Countries. Feminist Economics 20(4): 87–112. DOI: 10.1080/13545701.2014.963136.

175.

Strabac

Aalberg

Jenssen

, et al. (2016) Wearing the veil: hijab, Islam and job qualifications as determinants of social attitudes towards immigrant women in Norway. Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(15): 2665–2682. DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2016.1164878.

176.

Syed

(2008a) A context-specific perspective of equal employment opportunity in Islamic societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 25(1): 135–151. DOI: 10.1007/s10490-007-9051-6.

177.

Syed

(2008b) Employment prospects for skilled migrants: A relational perspective. Human Resource Management Review 18(1): 28–45. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.12.001.

178.

Syed

(2010) An historical perspective on Islamic modesty and its implications for female employment. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal Syed J (ed.) 29(2): 150–166. DOI: 10.1108/02610151011024475.

179.

Syed

Ali

(2013) Contextual emotional labor: an exploratory of Muslim female employees in Pakistan. Gender in Management: An International Journal Pio E (ed.) 28(4): 228–246. DOI: 10.1108/GM-01-2013-0007.

180.

Syed

Ali

(2021) A Pyramid of Hate Perspective on Religious Bias, Discrimination and Violence. Journal of Business Ethics 172(1): 43–58. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04505-5.

181.

Syed

Pio

(2010) Veiled diversity? Workplace experiences of Muslim women in Australia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 27(1): 115–137. DOI: 10.1007/s10490-009-9168-x.

182.

Syed

Van Buren

(2014) Global Business Norms and Islamic Views of Women’s Employment. Business Ethics Quarterly 24(2): 251–276. DOI: 10.5840/beq201452910.

183.

Syed

Özbilgin

Torunoglu

, et al. (2009) Rescuing gender equality from the false dichotomies of secularism versus shariah in Muslim majority countries. Women’s Studies International Forum 32(2): 67–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.wsif.2009.03.007.

184.

Syed

Klarsfeld

Ngunjiri

, et al. (eds), (2017) Religious Diversity in the Workplace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316477106.

185.

Tajfel

(1970) Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination. Scientific American 223(5): 96–102. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican1170-96.

186.

Tajfel

(1974) Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information 13(2): 65–93. DOI: 10.1177/053901847401300204.

187.

Tajfel

Turner

(1986) The social-identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In: Worchel

Austin

(eds), Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishing, pp. 7–24.

188.

Tariq

Syed

(2017) Intersectionality at Work: South Asian Muslim Women’s Experiences of Employment and Leadership in the United Kingdom. Sex Roles 77(7–8): 510–522. DOI: 10.1007/s11199-017-0741-3.

189.

Tariq

Syed

(2018) An intersectional perspective on Muslim women’s issues and experiences in employment. Gender, Work & Organization 25(5): 495–513. DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12256.

190.

Tjønndal

Hovden

(2020) ‘Will God condemn me because I love boxing?’ Narratives of young female immigrant Muslim boxers in Norway. European Journal of Women’s Studies 28(4): 135050682095488. DOI: 10.1177/1350506820954885.

191.

Valfort

M-A

(2020) Anti-Muslim discrimination in France: Evidence from a field experiment. World Development 135: 105022. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105022.

192.

Van Camp

Sloan

ElBassiouny

(2016) People notice and use an applicant’s religion in job suitability evaluations. The Social Science Journal 53(4): 459–466. DOI: 10.1016/j.soscij.2016.02.006.

193.

Van Laar

Derks

Ellemers

(2013) Motivation for Education and Work in Young Muslim Women: The Importance of Value for Ingroup Domains. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 35(1): 64–74. DOI: 10.1080/01973533.2012.746609.

194.

Van Laer

Janssens

(2011) Ethnic minority professionals’ experiences with subtle discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations 64(9): 1203–1227. DOI: 10.1177/0018726711409263.

195.

Vidyasagar

Rea

(2004) Saudi women doctors: gender and careers within Wahhabic Islam and a ‘westernised’ work culture. Women’s Studies International Forum 27(3): 261–280. DOI: 10.1016/j.wsif.2004.06.008.

196.

Wang

(2018) The Impact of 9/11 on the Self-Employment Outcomes of Arab and Muslim Immigrants. International Migration Review 52(2): 430–457. DOI: 10.1111/imre.12292.

197.

Warren

(2018) Placing faith in creative labour: Muslim women and digital media work in Britain. Geoforum 97: 1–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.10.003.

198.

World Economic Forum (2021) Global Gender Gap Report 2021. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2021/digest/ (accessed on 11 June 2021).

199.

Youssef

(1971) Social Structure and the Female Labor Force: The Case of Women Workers in Muslim Middle Eastern Countries. Demography 8(4): 427. DOI: 10.2307/2060680.

200.

Zaheer

(2007) Accommodating Minority Religions Under Title VII: How Muslims Make the Case for A New Interpretation of Section 701(J). University of Illinois Law Review, p. 36. 2007(1).