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

It can be inferred from the passage that application of "other mandates" (see highlighted text) would be unlikely to result in an outcome satisfactory to the female employees in which of the following situations?

I: males employed as long-distance truck drivers for a furniture company make $3.50 more per hour than do females with comparable job experience employed in the same capacity.

II: women working in the office of a cement company contend that their jobs are as demanding and valuable as those of the men working outside in the cement factory, but the women are paid much less per hour.

III: a law firm employs both male and female paralegals with the same educational and career backgrounds, but the same salary for male paralegals is $5,000 more than female paralegals.


I only

II only

III only

I and II only

I and III only

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

此讲解的内容由AI生成，还未经人工审阅，仅供参考。

正确答案是 E. I 和 III。
根据文章，可以推测，更具有针对性的政策，如比较价值法，可以有效地减少或消除男女工资差异。因此，符合文章中强调的其他政策的应用不太可能产生对女性员工满意的结果。在I、II和III的情况中，男性和女性的职位不同，所以应该使用比较价值法来减少或消除工资差距。因此，答案是E，即I和III。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

Prep2008E1-RC