- Подробности
-
Категория: Английский язык
Pay equity calls for equal pay for different types of work judged to be comparable through measurement of such factors as employee knowledge, skills, effort, responsibility, and working conditions. Pay equity goes beyond the idea of "equal pay for equal work" by encouraging equal pay for different (but comparable) work.
Theoretically, this doctrine sounds straightforward but it is not so simple to effect. How exactly does compare jobs in order to determine standards of table pay? Should a zookeeper be paid more than a child care worker? Does our society pay zookeepers more because we value caretaking for animals more than caretaking for children? Or do zookeepers earn more than child care workers because the former lend to be male while the latter are generally female? From a conflict perspective, women earn low wages because their labor lies within a tradition that treats them as temporary and supplementary workers, devalues women's work, and views low wages as sufficient for female workers. Efforts to address the issue of wage discrimination have resulted in legislation and increased public awareness, yet women's salaries remain far lower than those of men. The Federal Equal Pay Act of 1963, which mandates equal pay for equal work, applies to a relatively small proportion of female workers: those who perform the same job under the same roof as male coworkers.
Although sex discrimination is one obvious explanation for the lack of pay equity, other explanations are possible. Employers commonly cite the influence of labor market supply and demand on wages in various occupations. Thus far, the cours have generally been reluctant to address the issue of pay equity. However, in late 1983, federal district court judge Jack Tanner held that the state of Washington had violated the 1964 Civil Rights Act through inequitable treatment of its female employees and ordered the state to pay $838 million in raises and retroactive compensation to these women. This ruling was overturned in 1985, as an appeals court determined that an employer can follow prevailing market wages in setting salaries — even if these wages underpay women. In 1986, the state decided to avoid further appeals by settling the case for $482 million in damages. As part of the settlement, the worth of different jobs will now be measured in terms of skill, training, education, responsibility, and other factors.
In 1985, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights took up the issue of comparable worth. By a vote of 5-2, the commissioners held that "comparable worth, as a theory of discrimination, or as a remedy for discrimination, is profoundly and irretrievably flawed". The chairman, Clarence M. Pendleton, Jr., inflamed the controversy by stating that comparable worth was the "looniest idea since Looney Tunes". Nevertheless, the majority of the Civil Rights Commission acknowledged that sex-based wage discrimination is a serious matter. As a remedy, they called for strict enforcement of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and federal civil rights acts to prohibit employment discrimination against women.
The issue of pay equity is just beginning to gain public attention. In a 1986 national survey, only one-fourth of respondents stated that they had heard a "fair amount" of a "great deal" about pay equity or comparable worth. Most Americans believe the women and men should be paid equally for jobs of comparable worth. At the same time, two-thirds of respondents in the survey agreed that it is too difficult and therefore unfair to compare and evaluate jobs that are quite different (such as secretary or electrician) to see if they deserve similar compensation.
