To what extent should “equal pay” apply?
Question:
Feminists claim “equal pay” as one of their goals. Based on my understanding of the feminist definition of “equal pay”, two people who work at the same company doing the same job should receive the same pay. If that pay is not the same, then one could sue. So take the following scenario:
Bob and Mary have both worked at WidgetCo, a manufacturer for widgets. They both started working at the company as widget makers at the same time, and so have been employed for 15 years there each. Each year, the employees are subject to a review that results in a possible percentage pay raise based largely on performance. Each employee began by making the same amount of money ($ 10/hour). However, in the first three years, Bob’s mother was ill, so he worked very, very hard to pay her medical bills, whereas Mary, being young and vivacious, underperformed because she liked staying out late at night clubs. Consequently, in the first 3 years, Bob earned a whopping 15% raise in each of those years, whereas Mary only earned a 2% raise. In the following 12 years, each employee performed equally well and received a 4% raise each year.
Due to compounding, Bob now makes $ 24.35/hour, whereas Mary only makes $ 16.99/hour. Since these two employees now perform equally well and have the same job at the same company, would Mary have adequate grounds to sue WidgetCo for discrimination?
FYI: WidgetCo’s corporate office suffered significant fire damage in 1998. While they took care to backup contracts, tax records and other records of important legal significance, they did not back up employee reviews. Unfortunately, the employee reviews from the first three years were destroyed due to matters outside of WidgetCo’s control.
Answer:
Equal pay has nothing to do with performance or bonuses based on merit. The base wages and perks for the job must be the same for both men and women. If raises not tied to a merit increase are given, such as a cost of living increase, both men and women should get the same. If Bob gets a merit bonus because he did good work and Mary didn’t get one because she’s a slacker, that’s not in violation of the equal pay act if both were given the same opportunity to earn a merit increase. But she can’t be excluded from bonuses because she’s a woman. If Mary can show that she didn’t receive the same pay or offered the same perks as Bob because she is a woman, yes, she can sue.
The Equal Pay Act requires that men and women in the same workplace be given equal pay for equal work. The jobs need not be identical, but they must be substantially equal. Job content (not job titles) determines whether jobs are substantially equal. All forms of pay are covered by this law, including salary, overtime pay, bonuses, stock options, profit sharing and bonus plans, life insurance, vacation and holiday pay, cleaning or gasoline allowances, hotel accommodations, reimbursement for travel expenses, and benefits. If there is an inequality in wages between men and women, employers may not reduce the wages of either sex to equalize their pay.
An individual alleging a violation of the EPA may go directly to court and is not required to file an EEOC charge beforehand. The time limit for filing an EPA charge with the EEOC and the time limit for going to court are the same: within two years of the alleged unlawful compensation practice or, in the case of a willful violation, within three years. The filing of an EEOC charge under the EPA does not extend the time frame for going to court.
