Equal Pay Act of 1963 - Thesis Example

Equal Pay Act of 1963 This paper attempts to show the reasons behind the passing of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and its impact on American society. It considers the effectiveness of this law from different perspectives and the manner through which the government and employers have tried to implement it in the workplace. There is also a discussion of the different ways that the Equal Pay Act has not been effective in bringing about equal pay in the workplace as well as the loopholes that have brought about this ineffectiveness. Finally, there has been a discussion of some the laws that have been passed to correct the loopholes within the Equal Pay Acts to ensure that it is more effective. Introduction The Equal Pay Act was signed into law by President John Kennedy on 1963 and it sought to bring about an end to the pay disparities based on sex that were prevalent in the United States at the time. The passing of this law was done because of the belief that sex discrimination went against the constitution of the United States because it depressed the living standards of employees because equal pay was needed to ensure that they were capable of not only increasing the efficiency of these individuals but also their health. Furthermore, it was believed that wage disparities brought about a situation where there was no maximal use of available labor. In addition, it was found that pay disparities based on sex often led to considerable labor disputes which were detrimental to commerce because they interfered with commercial activities (Bhasker and Kleiner, 1998). There was concern that as a result of women getting paid less than their male counterparts, there would develop a situation where commercial activities, mainly the free flow of goods and services, would end up being disrupted. Finally, it was believed that the lack of equality in pay constituted the development of unfair competition and this situation had to be corrected to ensure that all individuals in American society had equal opportunities when employed. The signing into law of the Equal Pay Act was one of the numerous steps which have been taken over several decades to ensure that there is gender equality in the workplace. In order to eliminate the pay gap, new legislation must be created and passed, specifying equal pay requirements and employers need to implement this legislation in order to correct their pay practices. . History Origins of legislation Before the passage of the Equal Pay Act, women had faced pay discrimination for many years and this was despite women forming a significant part of the American workforce. Since independence, women were considered to be individuals who were not prominent in society and the common idea was that they belonged in the home. It was mainly men who were directly involved in not only economic activities, but also provided the labor necessary to ensure that the American economy rose to prominence. However, this situation changed during the World Wars, when, as a result of many men joining the fight against American enemies, women for the first time came to gain prominence in the labor market. However, despite having become highly relied on for labor, women faced pay discrimination and this was based on gender bias where it was believed that women could not perform as much work as men could. This bias, reinforced by the common association of women with weakness, allowed for their being paid less than their male counterparts, even though they performed the same amount of work. Before 1963, women were paid slightly more than half of what was earned by men and this form of discrimination was widespread across the nation. One would suggest that by ensuring that women were paid less and kept in the margins, they would not end up being a threat to men in the job market. The entry of women into the job market must have been considered a threat by men who were well established within it because for the most part, men were still considered to be the principal breadwinners in the average American families. The entry of women in the job market brought about unwelcome competition and this might have been a reason for ensuring that women were discouraged from taking up jobs through being given lesser pay. However, this attempt was defeated because instead of being discouraged, even more women entered the job market and by the early 1960s, women formed slightly less than half of the workforce in the United States. Therefore, it was essential for the government to take steps to ensure that the continued pay discrimination against one half of the labor force was brought to an end; hence the passing of the Equal Pay Act by Congress. Purpose The Equal Pay Act was enacted to ensure that all men and women win the workforce would be guaranteed equal pay for equal work. It was further enacted to make sure that individuals in the workplace, especially women, were not discriminated against as a result of their sex when being paid and this ensured that the government recognized the value of women in the labor market. This law was further augmented a year later through the passage and signing into law of the Civil Rights Act; with the intention of making sure that women would no longer be victims of pay discrimination based on their color, race, or religion (Cicmanec and Kleiner, 2002). This law came about because with the increasing number of women in the labor market, especially during the Second World War, the government realized that women were increasingly filling in the jobs that had previously been reserved for men in American society. The realization of the contributions of women in the labor market by the War Labor Board made the latter to urge employers to make adjustments to the pay that they gave women. The intention of this move was to help women earn the same as their male counterparts but while the pay disparity may have been addressed, it was not enacted by the government during and in the decade after the war. The 1950s saw the introduction of several bills, aimed at ensuring that the pay discrimination against women was brought to an end, were introduced in Congress but these attempts did not succeed and instead, they were rejected. However, in 1963, the Equal Pay Act was passed and this was closely followed the next year by the Civil Rights Bill; and both of these were designed to ensure that the rights of women in the workplace were not only respected, but also that they would be recognized as being equal to men. Among the provisions of this law was that it made it became an offense for employers to pay their employees at different rates based on their sex and that pay had to be given to employees on an equal basis (Bhasker and Kleiner, 1998). It recognized that both sexes had equal rights in the workplace and that neither could be placed over the other in matters of pay unless the system of payment was either based on seniority, merit, or the quantity of production. In this way, it became a requirement for employers to ensure that all employees were provided with equal pay without there being any form of discrimination based on sex; this law becoming the first step in the long campaign to achieve pay equality for women in the workplace. Impact Effectiveness The Equal Pay Act has had some impact in the pay that women receive in the workplace, having ensured an increase from 59% of men’s earnings to slightly over 20% in the first decade of the twenty first century (Cooper, 2014). However, in spite this significant increase, the ultimate goal of this legislation has not been achieved because although women are earning more, they are yet to receive equal earnings to their male counterparts. One of the reasons why the Equal Pay Act has not achieved its goals is as a result of the unwillingness of a significant number of employers to recognize the worth of women in the workplace (Bhasker and Kleiner, 1998). Furthermore, there have been significant problems with implementation because for the most part, this piece of legislation did not make exact specifications concerning what job types were covered. The ability of this legislation to be effective was quite limited because it allowed employers to ensure that they not only determined their own pay structure, according to their own discretion, but that they determined who within their organizations could be given higher pay than others. This situation led to the continued discrimination against women because they were not able to protect their own interests when it came to pay within the workplace because the loopholes in the Equal Pay Act were too many to be fought against. However, despite this weakness within the law, there were instances where it proved to be effective especially in cases where employers chose to increase the pay that women received. Some employers even went as far as ensuring that female employees received the same pay as their male counterparts; as seen in the McDonald’s Corporation where all employees at the same level receive equal pay. Effectiveness In its first decade, this law did not have such a great impact because when it was enacted, it did not cover such individuals as administrators, professionals as well as executives. However, this deficiency was remedied through the Education Amendments of 1972 which ensured that these individuals were also covered. The ability of this legislation to ensure that the pay of members of both sexes, especially women, were made equal in the workplace made it possible for the development of a greater realization that women were also an important part of the American workforce (Kennedy, et al., 2009). Even though the equal pay has yet to be achieved, it should be noted that women have become more prominent in the job sector and this is in no small way due to the Equal Pay Act. That this legislation has continued to be influential to this day is because it has been used as a basis upon which other legislation concerning similar issues have been founded. The realization of the importance of women in the economy also made it possible for a significant number of them to receive promotions because in addition to unequal pay, women were also discriminated against when it came to receiving promotions in the workplace. The Equal Pay Act, in addition to the Civil Rights Act that was passed a year later, allowed for a measure of protection to be accorded to those women who worked in diverse sectors of the economy; helping these individuals to become a part of the competitive work environment without necessarily being intimidated by the amount of earnings that they were likely to receive. Continued pay disparity between men and women Attempts to ensure that some of the weaknesses of the Equal Pay Act are remedied have been made over the years and among the most prominent of these was the Paycheck Fairness Act (Cooper, 2014). This bill was introduced in Congress by Senator Hillary Clinton in a bid to make sure that the fourth affirmative defense of the Equal Pay Act was amended in such a way that it provided for only bona fide factors apart from gender that serve legitimate business interests. However, despite this attempt, it should be noted that a study that was commissioned by the Bush administration two years later cautioned against the radical enforcement of this law because to do so would end up hurting business interests and this would eventually have a negative impact on the economy. It recommended that further studies concerning the reasons for continued pay discrepancies be developed in order for a better understanding of why women earned less could be made. An example of the findings made by this commission that supported men’s continued higher wages when compared to women was that in the United States, men still formed a majority of those individuals who were engaged in the in blue collar jobs. The latter jobs normally require cash payments for any overtime work that was conducted and because women are often exempted from undertaking overtime by legislation, they end up earning less than their male counterparts; leading to a situation where it is difficult for them to reach equal pay. This commission ended up stating that despite the need for more studies to be conducted concerning other factors apart from discrimination that led to unequal pay between the sexes in the workplace, there was no need for any radical changes to be made to the Equal Pay Act. It was believed that to do so would have a negative effect on the labor force since radical changes often brought about undesirable results. It was recommended that not changes be made to the law because a significant factor behind the discrepancies in wages between male and female workers was based on personal decisions or choices rather than on any conscious attempt to discriminate female employees (Broyles, 2009). One would suggest that for the most part, men were often willing to work longer hours than their female counterparts and this was mainly as a result of women having other responsibilities outside the workplace; such as having to cater for the needs of their families, among others. Therefore, the wage gap between men and women in the workplace, according to the commission, was not to be used as a basis upon which corrective action towards the Equal Pay Act was to be undertaken and it promoted a more calculated approach to this issue. The diversities of factors that brought about pay differences had to be carefully studied because this was the only way through which a more balanced conclusion could be made concerning how best to fix the pay gap between men and women could be achieved. However, despite the recommendations made by this commission, especially the need to be cautious before taking any corrective action, there continued to be calls for the reform of the Equal Pay Act. These calls for change culminated in the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act being signed into law by President Obama in 2009. This law was meant to ensure that all individuals in the workplace earned the same and that any form of unequal pay was a violation of the law and those found doing such violations could be prosecuted. The signing into law of the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act can be considered to have been the culmination of a process that began with the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and while the process of ensuring equal pay is still ongoing, it should be noted that it has had a massive impact on the manner through which the people in the workplace are paid; allowing for more equality than ever before. Loopholes Weakness in the legislation While the Equal Pay Act of 1963 can be considered to have been one of the most significant laws concerning pay equality in the twentieth century, it had a number of loopholes which reduced its effectiveness. The major intention of this law was to ensure that all employees in the United States were given equal pay irrespective of sex (Kennedy, et al., 2009). It was meant to fix the pay discrimination that had been practiced against women for many decades despite their having done as much work as their male counterparts. The loopholes in the law allowed for employers to choose to ignore the requirement that they had to provide their employees with equal pay because for the most part, it provided these individuals with a way out of ensuring that they did not have to pay women employees the same as their counterparts. One of the weaknesses of this law was that it did not provide checks that would have ensured that employers were encouraged to give equal pay for all their employees irrespective of sex. It should be noted that the lack of incentives for employers ensured that women continued to be discriminated against in the workplace in matters concerning pay, with many of them not receiving recognition that they deserved for performing the same amount of work as their male counterparts. Furthermore, this law did not protect those employees who not only questioned the pay practices of their employers, but also disclosed their own pay; allowing for the possibility of retaliation from employers in the process (Cicmanec and Kleiner, 2002). Another loophole is that it did not address the matter concerning pay secrecy, which ensured that few employees were able to realize that they were victims of pay discrimination. These loopholes have led to a situation where the law’s impact has not had the far reaching effects that it was intended to have and instead, the equal pay progress has been so slow that currently, few women in the United States have been able to achieve equal pay to men for doing the same work. Legislation to ensure equal pay In the years since the passage of the Equal Pay Act, there have been calls from not only different legislators but also a significant number of women and rights activists for the numerous loopholes in this law to be covered. While this law was welcomed by a majority of women employees when it was passed in 1963, its effectiveness has over the years come to be questioned because it has not been able to guarantee that the efforts of women in the workforce are recognized through their being given equal pay. Among the failures of this law was that it failed to protect those employees who disclosed their wages from the wrath of their employers. Moreover, it has been noted that as a result of the numerous loopholes, employers have been able to get away with pay discrimination in the workplace; with women being the major victims of such circumstances. The calls for the reform of this legislation have come about mainly as a result of the realization that the progress towards equal pay has been too slow, with the average wages of women in the United States being some 20% less than those of men. Furthermore, it has been realized that women of color, mainly African American and Latina women have tended to earn even less than their white counterparts, earning 38% and 42% less respectively (Kennedy, et al., 2009). Such large gaps in the pay of women, in spite of their being half of the workforce, have brought about a sense of outrage because these individuals perform the same tasks in the workplace as men. The pay discrimination against women has also come to be noticed across fields, as the jobs that are dominated by women yet require the same skill sets as those of men have offered the former lower wages. The need for amendments to the Equal Pay Act have been found to be necessary because they would guarantee that women not only receive equal pay, but also that equal pay be received in circumstances where jobs are equivalent to one another. Economic Consequences Greater participation of women in the economy Before the passage of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, women were major participants in the American economy with a significant number of them being employed in various sectors. While this may have been the case, it should be noted that before 1963, the United States was still in transition from a situation where women were more commonly associated with not working and taking care of their families to that of the working woman. As has been seen above, women’s active participation in the economy was seen as a threat within many male dominated sectors and steps were often taken to ensure that they were discouraged from taking up jobs (Broyles, 2009). The stereotype of women as being weak individuals who could not perform the same amount of work as men was also dominant during this period and it ensured that women were given lesser pay than men. However, with the passage of the Equal Pay Act, women were encouraged to take up more jobs within the economy and this ensured that they not only came to male up half of the workforce, but also encouraged women to get into male dominated professions. This law, because of its promise of ensuring that both sexes were treated equally in the workplace, encouraged women to seek out jobs in the hope that they would soon be enjoying the same wages as their male counterparts. Women becoming actively involved in the economy, despite the failure of this law to safeguard their interests in matters pertaining to wages, became an aspect of life in the United States as women ended up being recognized as an essential part of the nation’s workforce. This recognition ensured that women ended up increasingly playing an active role in the organizations for which they worked, with an unprecedented number of them taking up managerial positions; a situation that was rare before the passage of the Equal Pay Act. Recognition of women’s rights in the workplace In addition, despite the Equal Pay Act not being as effective as it was intended, it led to the recognition of the rights of women in the workplace. It was one of the legislations that brought into sharp focus the reality of discrimination that took place against women in their places of work almost on a daily basis. Women were often discriminated against because of their sex and their contributions in the workplace were hardly ever recognized because for the most part, these individuals were prejudiced in such a way that they were considered to be weak who could not be able to have the same status as men (Broyles, 2009). This circumstance was reflected in the massive pay gap that occurred between men and women who not only did the same amount of work, but also over the same work period. The fact that information about wages tended to be kept private with most company policies being against employee disclosing their wage information to one another, most women were not even aware that they were victims of pay discrimination. However, with the coming of the Equal Pay Act, most women working in different sectors of the economy came to realize that they were being discriminated against and it led to a situation where a significant number sought to ensure that their right to equal pay was respected. However, not all organizations accepted the right of women to equal pay and these often only made small increases to the wages earned by women. While the increases tended to be small, they were a step towards achieving wage parity and this allowed for the development of confidence among women employees that they would eventually be able to earn the same as men. The increasing confidence of women in the workplace as a result of having higher wages than before also allowed for the creation of a better work environment which ensured that women were able to participate in work at almost an equal footing as men. Additional Legislation The Paycheck Fairness Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Among the most recent attempts to ensure that the loopholes within the Equal Pay Act of 1963 are covered are the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. These legislations were developed because the Equal Pay Act contained a loophole which ensured that employers could state other reasons apart from sex discrimination as being behind women getting lesser pay. The fact that most employers could site such reasons as merit and the amount of work done, ensured that they could not be challenged in court by their female employees for pay discrimination (Cooper, 2014). This situation allowed them to get away with pay discrimination while at the same time reducing the ability of the Equal Pay Act to protect the interests of women in the workplace. Therefore, the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act were designed to ensure that employers were deterred from practicing wage discrimination by showing beyond doubt that the reason they give for handing lesser wages to women employees is valid. Furthermore, the employer has to show that giving lesser wages is related to job performance and it is based on business necessity rather than open discrimination based on the sex of the employee. These legislations was also aimed at ensuring that employers were prevented from taking any punitive action towards their employees for sharing wage information because this was a means of ensuring that instances of pay discrimination were discovered and addressed (Lyons, 2013). In addition, these Acts would allow for employees to seek unlimited compensatory and punitive charges from their employers in cases where wage discrimination based on sex took place and this was designed to act as a deterrent to employers to ensure that they gave equal wages to all their employees irrespective of sex. They were to further ensure that wage discrimination was brought to the same level as other forms of workplace discrimination such as those on race, religion and ethnicity; allowing for the recognition of equal pay as an employee rights issue. While these laws have been more forceful in ensuring that the wage differences based on gender are brought to an end, they have not gone far enough. This is because they have not made it mandatory for employers to give all their employees equal pay. One would even go as far as to say that the existing legislation, namely the Equal Pay Act, the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act have not gone far enough to ensure that the contributions of women in the workplace are recognized and compensated accordingly (Lyons, 2013). Instead, they seem to have chosen to take a middle ground where the individuals who developed them sought to please both the employers and employees. All of these laws have loopholes through which employers can get out of paying equal wages and new laws have to be developed to address these deficiencies. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act has also come under intense criticism for bringing about a situation where employees can bring seek damages for decisions that were made many years before under different managers; creating the potential of raising the scope of damages to levels that most businesses cannot afford. New equal pay laws have to be developed to that require employers to keep all records of employee wages while at the same time ensuring that they make regular reviews of wages awarded to make sure that discrepancies are realized early and fixed (Cicmanec and Kleiner, 2002). The new laws should go as far as making it illegal for employers to deny their employees equal pay based on gender because this is the only way through which wage equality can be achieved in the United States. Without tough legislation that covers the loopholes that have been realized in current laws, it is more likely than not that the debate concerning equal pay will continue for many years to come. Conclusion The Equal Pay Act of 1963 was the first step towards the realization of wage equality between the men and women of the United States. As the time of its being signed into law, it was considered to be a radical step towards making the work environment better for members of both sexes. However, as the years went by, it was realized that this law still had significant loopholes that had to be covered to ensure that it achieved its goals. Employers have continued to make use of loopholes in this law to continue the propagation of unequal pay in jobs despite the fact that equal work has been done. The laws which have been developed to ensure that the loopholes in the Equal Pay Act are covered, such as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act have failed in ensuring that its goals are achieved. It has therefore become essential for new, watertight laws to be enacted that will make pay discrimination in the workplace based on sex illegal. Such a move would not only force employers to end pay discrimination, but it would also ensure that all employees in the United States receive compensation equal to the work that they have done. References Bhasker, R., & Kleiner, B. H. (1998). Developments concerning the equal pay act. Equal Opportunities International, 17(3-5), 72-76. Broyles, P. (2009). The gender pay gap of STEM professions in the united states. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 29(5), 214-226. Cicmanec, A., & Kleiner, B. H. (2002). A statistical look at judicial decisions concerning employment law. Managerial Law, 44(1), 3-8. Cooper, M. A. (2014). Wage gap for women: Both sides of the story. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 24, 14-15. Kennedy, A., Nagata, E., Mushenski, B. P., & Johnson, D. L. (2009). Wage discrimination based on gender and race. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 75(2), 13-19. Lyons, S. (2013). Why the law should intervene to disrupt pay-secrecy norms: Analyzing the lilly ledbetter fair pay act through the lens of social norms. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 46(3), 361-392. Read More