Equal Pay for Equal Work

By:Tara DeVore

Hardas BhullarBob Doran

Introduction

Imagine being paid 76% of what the person working right next to you makes. You know that your jobs are nearly, if not completely identical, and yet he is still paid more, simply because of his gender. Sexual biased payment is against the law, but is still being regularly implemented by businesses in America today.

Background

• Title Equal Pay Act of 1964 requires that men and women be paid the same amount of money for the same amount of work, when in the same establishment.

• According to this act, the jobs do not need to be identical, but substantially equivalent to each other.

• This Act also prevents employers from compensating differently on the basis of sex.

Background: Continued

• Men are four times likely to negotiate a higher salary than women. Eventually this amounts to approximately $500,000 USD in lost revenue by age 60 for the average women.

• Due to this wage gap, women receive $300 Billion less than men every year in total across America ( in the year 2008).

The Central Problem

• The fact that women are being paid much less that a man of the same job and same ability has not only become a problem in America, but it is a problem worldwide as well.

Secondary Problem

• Marianne Stanley, a coach at the University of Southern California, was being paid a substantial amount less that that of a male colleague, Coach Raveling. They had the same jobs, and were both coaches of basketball at the university, but he was being paid roughly $50,000 more a year than her.

Marianne Stanley

• Marianne Stanley attended Immaculata university and played basketball there.

• In 1978 Marianne Stanley became the head coach of basketball at Old Dominion University, with a record of 296-59. At ODU her team won three national championships.

Analysis of Literature

• Our first source described the Civil Rights Pay Act of 1964, as well as the Equal Pay Act of 1963; while also describing discrimination in sex-segregated jobs.

• Our second resource described situations and factors that play into the likelihood of a woman experiencing sexism in their everyday life.

• Our final resource paid attention to pay inversions at universities, which is where a person with low qualifications is hired for the same salary as a more experienced individual

Quotes• Source One: “The requirement of the equal pay for equal work under Title

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963 has not eliminated sex-based discrimination in compensation…” (Equal Pay, comparable work, and job evaluation 657)

• Source Two: “when different type of discrimination were tallied, unwanted sexual attention (38%) and unfair treatment (37%) were most common, followed by sexist comments (25%).” (Ayres 454)

• Source Three: “A recent American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business study shows that new PhD's hired by member schools received an average of $92,500 compared to $87,500 for assistant professors and $88,800 for associate professors.” (Glassman 326)

Alternative Solutions

• Solution 1:Providing tax breaks or other incentives to business that are shown to provide their workers regardless of sex, equal pay for equal work.

• Solution 2: make an amendment to the ‘Equal Pay Act’ stating that businesses within a certain state will have to make the percentage of their workforce proportional to the gender ratio of that states population.

• Solution 3: our last solution is to raise women's pay approximately 5% per year over the course of 5 years, which will raise their salary to fulfill the 24% that they are currently being underpaid.

Evaluating Alternative Solutions

• Overall the tax break incentive seems to show the most possibility and may be the easiest to implement, while also effectively raising women's salary nationwide.

Tax Break Incentive Program

Pros ConsCompanies would be more likely to implement Fair Pay

Would cost the government a small amount of money from taxes

Companies would have more to pay their women since the have less to pay in taxes Companies may choose not to join this programCmpanies would have more incentive to hire and equal # of women and pay women equal wages.

Women in companies not in the program would still be affected by unequal pay

Conclusion

• To allow our plan to work, the tax break incentive, the government would first have to endorse this plan, and then put it into effect. It is likely that a large congressional and senate hearing and voting's would be required to pass this type of program. If passed, the program should go into effect immediately.

Conclusion continued

• We feel this solution will work well since it is easiest to put into effect, and will provide businesses with a way to lower their taxes, while paying their female workers a better salary.

• If our solution had previously been around it is likely that Marianne Stanley would have been paid an equal amount as Coach Ravelings, since the university would have had better reason to pay her equally.