Equal Pay Act
The Equal Pay Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act (1938) with the intent to end the disparity in wages between men and women. The amendment argued that sex discrimination depressed wages and living standards for employees, hindered full employment, caused labor disputes that in turn affected commerce, and violated free and fair competition. The crucial part of the amendment: “No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs[,] the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex…”
Commentary
Cry Wolf Quotes
[Consider] the possible impact of this bill upon efforts to equalize wages in plants employing mostly women and relatively few men. If there is a wage differential between men and women that cannot be justified under the restrictive standards of this bill and the wages of the male employees cannot be reduced, a plant could run into serious financial difficulty if it were forced to increase the pay of all female employees to the level of the few male members.
The principle of equal pay for equal work performance within the wage structure of business establishments is sound. Pay for individuals, allowable within the company’s wage structure, is soundly based when work performance, irrespective of age, sex, or other personal factors is considered.
The retailing industry has long recognized the importance of its women employees. It is natural in this business employing such a preponderance of female employees, that their importance be recognized in many ways—not the least of which is their right to earn coequal salaries with men in the same positions. In fact, there are many jobs in retailing which are better adapted to women employees—and experience has shown are much better performed by them than men. Thus, a policy of paying the rate for the job, without regard to the sex of the worker, is generally reflected in women’s pay checks in the retailing industry.
You can’t really blame the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for instance, for opposing the bill, chivalrous at heart as its members may be. For in addition to the possibility of added costs, there’s this problem: It’s a rare woman, we gather, who doesn’t think she is discriminated against on payday.
