IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v4y1985i4p595-600.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some Neglected Policy Implications Of Comparable Worth

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra E. Gleason
  • Collette Moser

Abstract

Comparable worth, the lkivil rights issue of the eighties, is based on the notion that women in traditional female occupations such as nursing make, on average, wages 20 percent lower than men In traditionally male occupations such as truck drivers despite the fact that both jobs are of equal value to the employer. The question is who will bear the cost; employers who implement comparable worth will bear the cost, but if pay inequities continue, women will. The cost can be mitigated if comparable worth is implemented incrementally. The problem cannot be solved by women shifting to male dominated occupations, for that would cost more than comparable worth. Comparable worth would help the women who work full time but are still below poverty and, while it would cost employers, taxpayers would realize a savings of $186 million. If the employer is a public agency, the taxpayer burden remains constant.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra E. Gleason & Collette Moser, 1985. "Some Neglected Policy Implications Of Comparable Worth," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 4(4), pages 595-600, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:4:y:1985:i:4:p:595-600
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1985.tb00307.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1985.tb00307.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1985.tb00307.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:4:y:1985:i:4:p:595-600. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.