Pay Segregation.

Uploaded on:
Category: Medical / Health
MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems. Pay Discrimination and Comparable Worth. Important Laws: (an) EPA; (b) Title 7 CRA, unique treatment (applies); divergent effect (once in a while used)Key Court Cases1. Lemons versus City
Slide 1

Pay Discrimination The Male/Female Pay Gap - 1950s-1970s: 59% - 1999: 74% Possible Explanations for the Pay Gap 1. The "Swarming Hypothesis" 2. Institutional Barriers: (an) entrance segregation; (b) Glass roofs 3. Work-Family Conflicts: (an) Inflexible work routines; (b)unfriendly family business hones. 4. Work stereotyping MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems

Slide 2

Pay Discrimination and Comparable Worth Relevant Laws: (an) EPA; (b) Title 7 CRA, divergent treatment (applies); dissimilar effect (once in a while utilized) Key Court Cases 1. Lemons versus City & County of Denver (1980) 2. Gunther versus City of Washington (1981) 3. AFSCME versus Condition of Washington (1985) Comparable Worth Laws State laws in a couple states (WA, MN, MI) covers open representatives. Canada - Provincial laws for CW private ees MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems

Slide 3

Comparable Worth Provisions of a Comparable Worth law 1. One JE arrangement utilized for ALL occupations. Same JE components connected to every occupation. Special case: Union contract 2. Every occupation ordered by sex representation. a. Male overwhelmed employments: Males > 70% b. Female " : Females > 60% 3. Match female & male occupations as indicated by JE focuses. 4. Where pay holes, females raised to male pay level. 5. Even out pay scales more than 3-5 year time frame. 6. Around 1% pay spending plan used to decrease imbalances. MGMT 4030 - Managing Employee Reward Systems

View more...