1. MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems Pay Discrimination The Male/Female Pay Gap - 1950s-1970s: 59% - 1999: 74% Possible Explanations for the Pay Gap 1. The “Crowding Hypothesis” 2. Institutional Barriers: (a) access discrimination; (b) Glass ceilings 3. Work-Family Conflicts: (a) Inflexible work schedules; (b)unfriendly family employment practices. 4. Job stereotyping

2. MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems Pay Discrimination and Comparable Worth Relevant Laws: (a) EPA; (b) Title 7 CRA, disparate treatment (applies); disparate impact (rarely used) Key Court Cases 1. Lemons vs. City & County of Denver (1980) 2. Gunther vs. City of Washington (1981) 3. AFSCME vs. State of Washington (1985) Comparable Worth Laws State laws in a few states (WA, MN, MI) covers public employees. Canada - Provincial laws for CW private ees

3. MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems Comparable Worth Provisions of a Comparable Worth law 1. One JE plan used for ALL jobs. Same JE factors applied to each job. Exception: Union contract 2. Each job classified by gender representation. a. Male dominated jobs: Males > 70% b. Female “ “ : Females > 60% 3. Match female & male jobs according to JE points. 4. Where pay gaps, females raised to male pay level. 5. Equalize pay scales over 3-5 year period. 6. About 1% pay budget used to reduce inequities.