Equal Pay for Comparable Worth: A Policy for Eliminating the Undervaluation of Women’s Work

The issue of equal pay for comparable worth has received a great deal of attention over the past few years. Employees of the City of San Jose struck over the issue and won in July of 1981. During the same year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sex-based wage discrimination suits could be filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act even though no member of the opposite sex held an equal but higher paying job. The House Subcommittee on Compensation and Employee Benefits conducted hearings on the issue in the fall of 1982. Numerous states across the country have passed legislation recognizing the importance of equal pay for comparable worth. As the issue has gained momentum, so has a hotly contested debate over the validity of equal pay for comparable worth. Proponents of equal pay for comparable worth argue that firms should compensate equally jobs of comparable worth and that failure to do so constitutes discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In the City of San Jose, for example, the Hay Associates found that chemists and librarians performed jobs requiring comparable levels of skill, effort, and responsibility.1 It is argued by advocates of comparable worth that such jobs should be paid comparably. Furthermore, it is claimed that firms