This article investigates the structure of gender bias in the Hay system, the dominant system of job evaluation. It shows not only how the system perpetuates gender-based occupational assumptions stemming from its origins in the 1940s and 1950s, but also how it conceals these assumptions under a veneer of gender neutrality. The Hay system consistently values male-dominated management functions over nonmanagement functions more likely to be performed by women.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acker, J.
(1987). Sex bias in job evaluation: A comparable worth issue. In C. Bose & G. Spitze (Eds.), Ingredients for women's employment policy (pp. 183-196). Albany: State University of New York Press.
2.
Acker, J.
(1989). Doing comparable worth. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
3.
Acker, J.
(1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4, 139-158.
4.
Baron, J.
(1991). Organizational evidence of ascription in labor markets. In R. R. Cornwall & P. V. Wunnava (Eds.), New approaches to economic and social analyses of discrimination (pp. 113-143). New York: Praeger.
5.
Baron, J.
, Dobbin, F., & Jennings, P. D. (1986). War and peace: The evolution of modern personnel administration in U.S. industry. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 350-383.
6.
Baron, J. Jennings, P. D.
, & Dobbin, F. (1988). Mission control? The development of personnel systems in U.S. industry. American Sociological Review, 53, 497-514.
7.
Beatty, R.
, & Beatty, J. (1984). Some problems in contemporary job evaluation. In H. Remick, (Ed.), Comparable worth and wage discrimination (pp. 59-78). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
8.
Beechey, V.
(1988). Rethinking the definition of work. In J. Jenson, E. Hagen, & C. Reddy (Eds.), Feminization of the labour force (pp. 45-62). Cambridge: Polity.
9.
Beechey, V.
, & Perkins, T. (1987). A matter of hours: Women, part-time work and the labour market. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
10.
Bellak, A.
(1982). The Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method of Job Evaluation. In M. Rock (Ed.), Handbook of wage and salary administration (2nd ed., reprint). New York: McGraw-Hill.
11.
Bellak, A.
(1984). Comparable worth: A practitioner's view. In U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Ed.), Comparable worth: Issue for the 80's (Vol. 1, pp. 75-82). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
12.
Benner, P.
(1984). From novice to expert: Excellence and power in clinical nursing practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
13.
Bielby, W.
(1991). The structure and process of sex segregation. In R. R. Cornwall & P. V. Wunnava (Eds.), New approaches to economic and social analyses of discrimination (pp. 97-112). New York: Praeger.
14.
Bielby, W.
, & Baron, J. (1987). Undoing discrimination: Job integration and comparable worth. In C. Bose & G. Spitze (Eds.), Ingredients for women's employment policy (pp. 211-229). Albany: State University of New York Press.
15.
Burton, C.
(1987). Women's worth: Pay equity and job evaluation in Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
16.
Cockburn, C.
(1983). Brothers. London: Pluto Press.
17.
Cockburn, C.
(1991). In the way of women: Men's resistance to sex equality in organizations. Ithaca, New York: ILR Press.
18.
College of Nurses of Ontario
. (1989). Standards of nursing practice for registered nurses and registered nursing assistants. Toronto: Author.
19.
Game, A.
, & Pringle, R. (1983). Gender at work. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
20.
Growe, S. J.
(1991). Who cares: The crisis in Canadian nursing. Toronto: McLelland & Stewart.
21.
Haignere, L.
, & Steinberg, R. (1985). Review of Massachusetts statewide classification and compensation system for achieving comparable worth. Albany, New York: Center for Women in Government.
22.
Hay, E.
(1958). Setting salary standard for executive jobs. Personnel, 36(1), 63-72.
23.
Hay, E.
, & Purves, D. (1951). The profile method of high-level job evaluation. Personnel, 28(2), 162-170.
24.
Hay, E.
, & Purves, D. (1953). The analysis and description of high-level jobs. Personnel, 29(4), 344-354.
25.
Jacobs, J. A.
(1992). Women's entry into management: Trends in earnings, authority, and values among salaried managers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 282-301.
26.
Kessler-Harris, A.
(1990). A woman's wage: Historical meanings and social consequences. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
27.
Kim, M.
(1989). Gender bias in compensation structures: A case study of its historical basis. Journal of Social Issues, 45(4), 39-50.
28.
Melosh, B.
(1982). The physician's hand. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
29.
Patton, J. A.
, & Littlefield, C. L. (1957). Job evaluation: Text and cases. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
30.
Pay Equity Commission
. (1989). How to do pay equity comparisons (Pay Equity Implementation Series, No. 9). Toronto: Author.
31.
Remick, H.
(1979). Strategies for creating sound, bias free job evaluation plans. In Industrial Relations Counselors (Ed.), Job evaluation and EEO: The emerging issues (pp. 85-112). New York: Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc.
32.
Remick, H.
(1981). The comparable worth controversy. Public Personnel Management, 10, 371-383.
33.
Remick, H.
(1984a). Dilemmas of implementation: The case of nursing. In H. Remick (Ed.), Comparable worth and wage discrimination (pp. 90-98). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
34.
Remick, H.
(1984b). Major issues in a prior applications. In H. Remick (Ed.), Comparable worth and wage discrimination (pp. 99-117). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
35.
Reverby, S.
(1987). Ordered to care: The dilemma of American nursing, 1850-1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Riegel, J. W.
(1937). Wage determination. Ann Arbor, MI: Bureau of Industrial Relations.
37.
Schatz, R.
(1983). The electrical workers: A history of labor at General Electric and Westing-house, 1923-1960. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
38.
Schwab, D.
(1985). Job evaluation research and research needs. In H. Hartmann (Ed.), Comparable worth: New directions for research (pp. 37-52). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
39.
Scott, J.
(1986). Gender: A useful category of historical analysis. American Historical Review, 91(5).
40.
Shils, E.
(1972). Developing a perspective on job measurement. In M. Rock (Ed.), Handbook of wage and salary administration (chap. 2, pp. 3-18). New York: McGraw-Hill.
41.
Steinberg, R.
(1990). The social construction of skill: Gender, power and comparable worth. Work and Occupations, 17(4), 449-482.
42.
Steinberg, R.
(1991). Report concerning the proposed testimony of Dr. Ronnie Steinberg concerning the appropriateness of the Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method for use at St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
43.
Steinberg, R.
, & Haignere, L. (1987). Equitable compensation: Methodological criteria for comparable worth. In C. Bose & G. Spitze (Eds.), Ingredients for women's employment policy (pp. 157-182). Albany: State University of New York Press.
44.
Stinchcombe, A.
(1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142-193). Chicago: Rand McNally.
45.
Taylor, S.
(1989). The case for comparable worth. Journal of Social Issues, 45(4), 23-37.
46.
Treiman, D.
(1979). Job evaluation: An analytic review. Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences.
47.
Treiman, D.
, & Hartmann, H. (1981). Women, work and wages: Equal pay for jobs of equal value. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
48.
Werwie, D.
(1987). Sex and pay in the federal government: Using job evaluation systems to implement comparable worth. New York: Greenwood.
