Equal pay for equal work - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Beno1000 (talk | contribs) at 19:28, 8 September 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:28, 8 September 2009 by Beno1000 (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Template:Unencyclopedic

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (July 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Equal pay for equal work is the concept that individuals doing the same work should receive the same remuneration regardless of their sex, race, sexuality, nationality or anything else.

It is most commonly used in a context of sexual discrimination, as equal pay for women. Equal Pay does not simply relate to basic salary but also to the full range of benefits, non salary payments, bonuses and allowances that are paid.

Criticism

The principle reasons that men get paid more than women is salary negotiation. Men are four times more likely than women to negotiate a higher salary, amounting to approximately $500,000 USD in lost revenue by age 60 for the average women. In addition, when women do negotiate their salaries, they are more pessimistic and negotiate an average of 30% less than men. Source:

Many noble ideas are either difficult or impossible to implement in free societies. Unfree societies point up their successes in this area (using labels like "Social Justice," and so forth) however when government controls prices, wages, industry, and the media these claims are easily made. Advocates of Equal Pay are quick to broadcast the disparity between women's pay and men's pay, but there are valid cultural reasons for it which have little to do with discriminatory sentiment or conduct. In any case, government actions to correct gender pay disparity, such as investigations of pay discrimination which compel employers to justify compensation to workers, serve to interfere with the substantially benevolent system of voluntary exchange.

The fundamental issue is that the employer is the owner of the job, not the government or the employee. The employer negotiates the job and pays according to performance, not according to job duties. Substantially similar job duties can be and are usually compensated differently because of performance rather than degrees and years of experience. A private business would not want to lose its best performers by compensating them less and can ill afford paying its lower performers higher because the overall productivity will decline. There is no need for government intervention because the two parties (employer/employee) are negotiating at will and the competition does not allow for substantial inequities.

This criticism, however, ignores the fact that the Equal Pay Act in United States specifically controls experience and merit. A plaintiff must prove that: 1. different wages are paid to employees of the opposite sex; 2. the employees perform substantially equal work on jobs requiring equal skill, effort and responsibility; and 3. the jobs are performed under similar working conditions.

There are also specific affirmative defenses to the criticism above that government is forcing employers to pay less qualified workers the same as superior workers. The EPA’s four affirmative defenses allows unequal pay for equal work when the wages are set "pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) ... any other factor other than sex" If an employer can prove that a pay differential exists because of one of these factors, there is no liability.

Equal pay has also been criticised as focusing too much on women. The pay gap between ethnic minorities (Black and Asian) and white workers is often much higher than that of women and men, this is partictularly true in the UK.

Advocates

Chairman Mao Tse-tung (1955): "Men and women must receive equal pay for equal work in production."

The U.S. Democratic Party (2008): "When women still earn 76 cents for every dollar that a man earns, it doesn’t just hurt women; it hurts families and children. We will pass the 'Lilly Ledbetter' Act, which will make it easier to combat pay discrimination; we will pass the Fair Pay Act; and we will modernize the Equal Pay Act." (The 2008 Democratic Party Platform, p. 17) See: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

References

http://www.womendontask.com/stats.html
See Corning Glass Works v. Brennan, 417 U.S. 188, 203 fn. 24 (stating that jobs need to be substantially equal fall within the EPA); Fallon v. State of Illinois, 882 F.2d 1206, 1208 (7th Cir. 1989)(enumerating the elements of a prima facie case under the EPA).
http://www.totaljobs.com/Contents/Editorial/EqualPay.html
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:xgVNGEOCqo0J:www.amicustheunion.org/docs/National%2520Young%2520Members%2520Conference%2520Report.doc+ethnic+equal+pay&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/salary-survey-reveals-17-ethnic-pay-gap

External links

Ledbetter v Goodyear Supreme Court Opinion

Template:Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

v t e Substantive human rights
What is considered a human right is in some cases controversial; not all the topics listed are universally accepted as human rights
Civil and political	Equality before the law Freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention Freedom of assembly Freedom of association Cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment Freedom from discrimination Freedom of information Freedom of movement Freedom of religion Freedom from slavery Freedom of speech Freedom of thought Freedom from torture Legal aid LGBT rights Liberty Nationality Personhood Presumption of innocence Right of asylum Right to die Right to a fair trial Right to family life Right to keep and bear arms Right to life Right to petition Right to privacy Right to protest Right to refuse medical treatment Right to resist Right of self-defense Right to truth Security of person Suffrage right to be a candidate Right to homeland
Economic, social and cultural	Digital rights Equal pay for equal work Fair remuneration Labor rights Right to an adequate standard of living Right to clothing Right to development Right to education Right to food Right to health Right to a healthy environment Right to housing Right to Internet access Right to property Right to public participation Right of reply Right to rest and leisure Right of return Right to science and culture Right to social security Right to water Right to work
Sexual and reproductive	Abortion Family planning Freedom from involuntary female genital mutilation Intersex human rights LGBT rights Sexual and reproductive health Right to sexuality

Categories: