Since the late 1960s, the women's movement has been strongly associated with the advancement of women's position in the work force. In spite of antidiscrimination laws, women still earn only about 70 percent of what men do. Three strategies to further reduce the wage gap are considered in detail: affirmative action, pay equity, and policies to make it easier to combine work and family life. Questions are raised about the implications of these strategies for the future of the women's movement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Briefing Paper 1: The Wage Gap (Washington, DC: National Committee on Pay Equity, 1989), p. 3
2.
2. Ibid., p. 4.
3.
3. Joyce Gelb, Feminism and Politics: A Comparative Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), p. 215.
4.
4. Denise M. Topolnicki, “Equal Pay for Equal Work? Guess Again,”Savvy Woman, Jan. 1990, p. 31.
5.
cited in Briefing Paper 1: The Wage Gap, p. 5.
6.
Debra Renee Kaufman , “Professional Women: How Real are the Recent Gains?” in Women: A Feminist Perspective, ed. Jo Freeman (Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield, 1984).
7.
7. George Gallup, Jr., Public Opinion 1987 (Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, 1988), p. 141.
8.
8. Christopher Jenckset al., Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effects of Family and Schooling in America (New York: Harper Colophon, 1972), p. 11.
9.
9. Roberta Ann Johnson, “Affirmative Action as a Woman's Issue,”Journal of Political Science, 17:122-124 (Spring 1989).
10.
10. For the case against affirmative action, see Thomas Sowell, Preferential Policies: An International Perspective (New York: William Morrow, 1990).
11.
11. U.S., Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1989, 1989, pp. 388-389.
12.
12. For a detailed discussion of changing patterns of women's employment, see Susan Christopherson, “Labor Flexibility: Implications for Women Workers,” in Women at Work, ed. Rosalind M. Schwartz (Los Angeles: UCLA Institute of Industrial Relations, 1988), pp. 3-24.
13.
13. Shirley Chan, “Pay Equity Update: Will It Up Your Salary?”Working Woman, 14:73 (Jan. 1989).
14.
14. Mark R. Killingsworth, “Heterogeneous Preferences, Compensating Wage Differentials and Comparable Worth,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102:741 (Nov. 1987).
15.
15. George Johnson and Gary Solon, “Estimates of the Direct Effects of Comparable Worth Policy,”American Economic Review, 76:1119 (Dec. 1986).
16.
16. Killingsworth, “Heterogeneous Preferences,” p. 740.
17.
17. Johnson and Solon, “Estimates,” p. 1118.
18.
18. Killingsworth, “Heterogeneous Preferences,” p. 740.
19.
19. Chan, “Pay Equity Update,” p. 73.
20.
20. Randall Ripley and Grace A. Franklin, Congress, the Bureaucracy and Public Policy (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1970), pp. 16-18.
21.
21. Sylvia Hewlett, A Lesser Life: The Myth of Women's Liberation in America (New York: William Morrow, 1986).
22.
22. Paula England, “Socioeconomic Explanations of Job Segregation,” in Comparable Worth, ed. Remick, p. 42.
23.
23. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract, p. 131.
24.
24. Ibid., pp. 68, 62.
25.
25. Felice N. Schwartz, “Management Women and the New Facts of Life,”Harvard Business Review, 67:65 (Jan.-Feb. 1989).
26.
26. Ibid., p. 75.
27.
Arlene Rossen Cardozo , Woman at Home (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976).
28.
Shulamith Firestone , The Dialectic of Sex (New York: Bantam Books, 1970).
