IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v15y2022i1p1-45_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Job analysis and job classification for addressing pay inequality in organizations: Adjusting our methods within a shifting legal landscape

Author

Listed:
  • Strah, Nicole
  • Rupp, Deborah E.
  • Morris, Scott B.

Abstract

Pay inequality remains a pervasive problem within the workforce. However, it can be challenging for even well-meaning and responsible organizations to effectively assess which jobs should be considered equivalent and paid the same based on both legal criteria (which have shifted over time and differ across specific statutes and jurisdictions) and scientific evidence (which continues to amass). This paper intends to initiate a solution-focused discussion on how organizations can proactively categorize jobs so that pay decisions that are made about men and women are both legally defensible and fair. We propose that integrating the job analysis/job classification literature and the pay discrimination literature (e.g., legal opinions given by courts) will inform this discussion. We first review federal and state legislation and court opinions that have set legal standards for identifying pay discrimination. We then review the relevance of job analysis/job classification for systematically defining and categorizing jobs, highlighting the legal issues that should be but (to the best of our knowledge) have not been considered when undertaking such processes. Our intention is for this article to spark dialogue among researchers and practitioners regarding the identification of methods with which organizations can strive to meet equal pay standards and goals, applying both legal and scientific perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Strah, Nicole & Rupp, Deborah E. & Morris, Scott B., 2022. "Job analysis and job classification for addressing pay inequality in organizations: Adjusting our methods within a shifting legal landscape," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-45, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:1-45_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942621000948/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:inorps:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:1-45_1. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    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.