Job evaluation instruments have recently been the subject of a number of critical reviews. In these reviews, job evaluation methods have been criticized for sex bias in the selection and weighting of factors. The present work investigated whether males and females differed in their ratings of importance on ten job evaluation factors and whether different weighting techniques would result in different wage structures. The results indicated that rater gender explained little of the variation in the ratings of the job evaluation factors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bass, B. M. and Barrett, G. V. (1981). People, work, and organizations (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
Blumrosen, R. G. (1979). Wage discrimination, job segregation, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 12, 397-502.
3.
Doverspike, D. and Barrett, G. V. (1984). An internal bias analysis of a job evaluation instrument. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 648-662.
4.
Mahoney, T. A. , Rosen, B., and Rynes, S. (1984). Where do compensation specialists stand on comparable worth? Compensation Review, 16(4), 27-40.
5.
McClave, J. T. and Dietrich, F. H., II. (1982). Statistics (2nd. ed.). San Francisco: Dellen.
6.
Remick, H. (1981). The comparable worth controversy. Public Personnel Management, 10, 371-383.
7.
Remick, H. (1984). Major issues in a priori applications. In. H. Remick (Ed.), Comparable worth and wage discrimination (pp. 99-117). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
8.
Treiman, D. J. (1979). Job evaluation: An analytic review. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
9.
Treiman, D. J. and Hartmann, H. (Eds.) (1981). Women, work, and wages: Equal pay for jobs of equal value. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1981.
