THE CONVERSION OF INTERESTS TO PRINCIPLES: THE CASE OF COMPARABLE WORTH

MYRON LIEBERMAN

DOI: 10.2190/BM49-0YBW-UU7A-GM15

Abstract

"Comparable worth" is first viewed from two broad perspectives. The first is the tendency for bureaucracies to expand or at least maintain their existence, even when their initial raison d' tre no longer exists. Secondly, civil rights organizations have often been disappointed by the results of anti-discrimination legislation. When this happens, their emphasis often shifts from the elimination of discrimination to equality in outcomes. Both to these tendencies are reflected in the campaign for comparable worth. The major argument for comparable worth is outlined briefly, asserting that employment opportunities for women have been restricted to a narrow range of low-paying occupations. Primarily for this reason, labor markets continue to reflect discrimination against women, and their wages continue to lag substantially behind the wages of males. After presenting this argument, the article addresses the critical issue: To what extent are male/female wage differentials due to nondiscriminatory factors, such as the tendency for female workers to withdraw from labor markets in order to devote more time to childbearing and childrearing? Relying mainly upon BLS data, the analysis asserts that most of the differentials are due to nondiscriminatory factors. It then goes on to identify some of the practical problems associated with comparable worth, as well as the likelihood that some of its effects may be contrary to the goals of its supporters.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.