Unequal pay for women - Women’s Equality Day

 

Should more be done by the government to address unequal pay for women?

In a time when discrimination and wage disparity are both heavily debated, the question
arises of whether the government should be more actively involved in bridging the gender pay gap

Rise of the Issue

The question of whether government enforcement of equal pay programs reduces economic

inequality or just intrudes illegally into private industry and other rights is frequently debated in Congress and among the voters.

The gender wage gap initially became a problem during the Second World War, when women rushed to factories and other sectors to replace responsibilities left vacant by males who were called to active duty. Even though they offered the same levels of expertise and output as their male counterparts, women employees were paid much less than men in comparable positions. Since then, several laws have been implemented to eliminate the gender pay gap and other income inequities, but today's average compensation for women is still lower than that of males. According to the Census Bureau, women received 83 cents for every dollar paid to similarly placed men as of the most recent statistics in 2020.

While the majority of Americans favor attempts to achieve pay fairness, there are differing views on how to do so and, in particular, how active the government should be in doing so.

Issue Timeline

1870

Wyoming Becomes First State Allowing Women Voters

Wyoming Territory enacted a women’s suffrage law in 1869, and conditioned its Statehood on Wyoming women keeping the right to vote.

1920

19th Amendment Guarantees All Women’s Voting Rights

The Constitutional amendment opens electoral polls to women in all States.

1940-1945

Second World War Injects Women into Workforce

As men entered extended military service, women assumed factory and other workplace roles critical to successful war production.

1963-1964

Congress Addresses Discrimination in Employment and Pay

The Equal Pay Act amends 1938’s Fair Labor Standards Act to forbid unequal pay for comparable work, while Title VII of 1964’s Civil Rights Act forbids sex-based discrimination in workplaces.

1986

Supreme Court Recognizes Discriminatorily Hostile Work Environments

A unified Court finds Title VII of the Civil Rights Act allows "hostile workplace environment" sexual harassment claims, including for non-economic harms.

2009

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act Passes

Addressing a split Supreme Court opinion, Congress expands filing deadlines for pay discrimination cases and facilitates claims for unequal pay.

Micro Issues

1. Rights to Contract

   Businesses have a duty to owners and shareholders to maximize profits, which frequently goes against and is not guided by egalitarian goals. Government inspectors are in a stronger position to protect employee rights since businesses are bound by their fiduciary obligations.

2. Costs to Taxpayers

   Government enforcement costs are criticized by opponents as unnecessary spending, while supporters argue that costs are essential to eliminate the country's long history of pay inequality.

3. Government Powers

   When company self-policing normally suffices, critics claim that employment rules encourage governments to go beyond their constitutionally limited authority. Supporters assert that the only people who can shield employee liberty from company profit goals are government officials.

Pro Arguments

• Government enforcement ensures that businesses respect employee rights.

  Businesses have a fiduciary obligation of profit to owners and shareholders that does not take equitable aims into consideration and occasionally outright contradicts them. Government inspectors are better positioned to defend employee rights since companies cannot avoid their fiduciary commitments.

• Regulations against wage disparity help to level uneven bargaining powers between employee and employer.

  Individuals who employ typically have greater power over resources than those who apply for jobs, including access to open positions. Employees are given a minimal negotiating stance by restrictions on salary discrepancies.

• Wage protections help to remedy prior sex discrimination.

  Since they were historically prohibited from working, women have received lower pay than their male colleagues for doing identical labor. With the help of statutory requirements and administrative scrutiny, this salary difference, one aspect of historical discrimination against women, is being reduced.

• Assurances that similar work earns similar pay improves employee morale, and strengthens business performance.

  Employees who are guaranteed fair remuneration for comparable labor perform better than their underpaid coworkers. An increase in employee performance frequently results in an increase in corporate performance.

• Wage fairness elevates traditionally underpaid minority communities, relieving poverty and other economic disparities.

  Following attempts to achieve wage equality, minorities who had previously been restricted to lower-paying occupations and pay scales saw an increase in compensation. This is crucial for minority women, who suffer the consequences of economic inequality disproportionately.

Con Arguments

1. Government interference impedes natural and corporate persons’ rights to contracts.

   Employers and employees must freely negotiate risks and rewards in a free economic system without government restrictions. The rights of parties to negotiate and enter into contracts with others are restricted by laws enforcing wage equity.

2. Wage laws intrude into protected commercial and other associations.

   The First Amendment safeguards people's freedom of association, including who one may associate with and how. The privileges held by these associations are lessened if businesses are required to achieve certain financial standards.

3. Workplace regulations chill free speech.

   The idea that money is speech was established by the case Citizens United. People are compelled to adhere to government-mandated speech via forced pay and workplace behavior.

4. Wage discrimination laws impact otherwise market-controlled employee costs.

   A “Fair wage” requirements drive up costs for some employers. These added labor costs reduce the private enterprise’s profitability.

5. Equal pay record-keeping adds to operational costs and burden.

   The increase in production costs caused by requiring companies to participate in wage fairness initiatives and maintain data about them harms growth and profitability.

 Related Articles

Women’s Equality Day