In the first of a series of articles on comparable worth, the authors responded to the question raised in the first part of the title by exploring the topic of comparable worth from a historical perspective. It presented current statistics and projected trends regarding women in the labor force. In Part II of this series, the authors discuss legislation and subsequent litigation that resulted from laws governing sex discrimination and compensation. The final article in this series addresses three major areas of disagreement on the comparable worth issue including explanations for the gender earnings gap, the economic implications of comparable worth, and measuring job value.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AaronH.J.LougyC.M.1986. The Comparable Worth Controversy.Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
2.
AbrahamY.T.FlippoE.B.1991. Human Resources/Personnel: Managing a Changing Workforce.Chicago: Commerce Clearing House, Inc.
3.
AldrichM.BucheleR.1986. The Economics of Comparable Worth.Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company.
4.
AzevedoR.E.RothL.1990. Canadian-United States experience with comparable worth: The view from Minnesota. Labor Law Journal IRRA Spring Meeting (August), 531–534.
5.
BarrettG.V.SansonettiD.M.1988. Issues concerning the use of regression analysis in salary discrimination cases. Personnel Psychology, 41 (3):503–516.
6.
BookerS.NuckollsL.C.1986. Legal and economic aspects of comparable worth. Public Personnel Management, 15 (2):189–206.
7.
CookA.H.1990. Current state of comparable worth in the United States. Labor Law Journal IRRA Spring Meeting (August), 525–531.
8.
HorriganJ.HarrimanA.1988. Comparable worth: Public sector unions and employers provide a model for implementing pay equity. Labor Law Journal, 39 (10):704–711.
9.
HutnerF.C.1986. Equal Pay for Comparable Worth: The Working Woman's Issue of the Eighties.New York: Praeger Publishers.
10.
LeeY.S.1989. Shaping judicial response to gender discrimination in employment compensation. Public Administration Review, 49 (5):420–430.
11.
LorberL.Z.KirkJ.R.SamuelsS.L.SpellmanD.J.III1985. Sex and Salary: Legal and Personnel Analysis of “Comparable Worth.”Alexandria, VA: The ASPA Foundation.
12.
LunaG.1990. Understanding gender-based wage discrimination: Legal interpretation and trends of pay equity in higher education. Journal of Law & Education, 19 (3):371–384.
13.
LutonL.S.ThompsonS.1989. Progress in comparable worth: Moving toward non-judicial determination-problems and prospects. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 9 (2):79–85.
14.
MooreM.V.AbrahamY.T.Comparable worth-is it a moot issue?Public Personnel Management, Voume 21No. 4, Winter 1992.
15.
O'NeillJ.BrienM.CunninghamJ.1989. Effects of comparable worth policy: Evidence from Washington state. The American Review, 79 (2):305–309.
16.
SargeantG.1990. Pay equity: Lagging in court, gaining at bargaining table. Trial, February: 98–100.
17.
ScheibalW.1988. AFSCME v. Washington: The continued viability of Title VII comparable worth actions. Public Personnel Management, 17 (3):315–322.
18.
U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau.1977. Brief Highlights of Major Federal Laws and Order on Sex Discrimination in Employment.Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
19.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.1987. Comparable Worth for Federal Jobs: A Wrong Turn Off the Road Toward Pay Equity and Women's Career Advancement.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
20.
WeilerP.1986. The wages of sex: The uses and limits of comparable worth. Harvard Law Review, 99 (8):1728–1807.
21.
WillbornS.L.1986. A Comparable Worth Primer.Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.
