Comparable worth, as a standard applied to eliminate inequities in pay, insists that the values of certain tasks performed in dissimilar jobs can be compared. In the last decade, this approach has become a critical social policy issue, as large numbers of private-sector firms and industries as well as federal, state, and local governmental entities have adopted comparable worth policies or begun to consider doing so.

This widespread institutional awareness of comparable worth indicates increased public awareness that pay inequities—that is, situations in which pay is not "fair" because it does not reflect the true value of a job—exist in the labor market. However, the question still remains: have the gains already made in pay equity under comparable worth principles been of a precedent-setting nature or are they mostly transitory, a function of concessions made by employers to mislead female employees into believing that they have made long-term pay equity gains?

Comparable worth pay adjustments are indeed precedent-setting. Because of the principles driving them, other mandates that can be applied to reduce or eliminate unjustified pay gaps between male and female workers have not remedied perceived pay inequities satisfactorily for the litigants in cases in which men and women hold different jobs. But whenever comparable worth principles are applied to pay schedules, perceived unjustified pay differences are eliminated. In this sense, then, comparable worth is more comprehensive than other mandates, such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks—know-how, problem-solving, and accountability—can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer. Comparable worth, on the other hand, takes as its premise that certain tasks in dissimilar jobs may require a similar amount of training, effort, and skill; may carry similar responsibility; may be carried on in an environment having a similar impact upon the worker; and may have a similar dollar value to the employer.

第1题 第2题 第3题 第4题 第5题

According to the passage, which of the following is true of comparable worth as a policy?


Comparable worth policy decisions in pay-inequity cases have often failed to satisfy the complainants.

Comparable worth policies have been applied to both public-sector and private-sector employee pay schedules.

Comparable worth as a policy has come to be widely criticized in the past decade.

Many employers have considered comparable worth as a policy but very few have actually adopted it.

Early implementations of comparable worth policies resulted in only transitory gains in pay equity.

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

题目分析：

题目释义：

细节题目

考点：

支持主题（Supporting ideas）
旨在考察我们对文章细节的认知

这种which is true的题目比较难以定位，加之“Comparable worth”又是文章中的主题，所以只能看全篇文章了。



选项分析：

A选项：可比价值的政策结论在支付不平等的情况下经常满足不了抱怨者。定位“Comparable worth, as a standard applied to eliminate inequities in pay, insists that the values of certain tasks performed in dissimilar jobs can be compared. ”。本来“可比价值”就是为了消除这个不平等而出现的策略，所以该选项不正确。

B选项：Correct。可比价值可以应用在公共区域和私人区域的雇员的支付计划中。定位在“In the last decade, this approach has become a critical social policy issue, as large numbers of private-sector firms and industries as well as federal, state, and local governmental entities have adopted comparable worth policies or begun to consider doing so.”这句话中。也就是说，公用的和私人的都可以应用“可比价值”策略。

C选项：在过去的十年中，“可比价值”作为一个策略一直在被批评。文章突出了可比价值的意义，不是说可比价值不好，这个选项的内容没有被提到过。

D选项：许多雇员都认为“可比价值”是一个政策，但很少有人采用这个它。还是定位在选项B中的那句话，说明有很多人都在用这个政策。

E选项：早期的贯彻“可比价值”这一政策的结果是在支付平等中只得到了短暂的利益。关键词出现在第二段。但说的是这个政策究竟是开创了先例还是只是个暂时的，为了应付女性的政策。所以贯彻可比价值的结果不会是只有短暂的利益。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

Prep2007E1-RC