1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 5:
Line 5: − + − ==Progress towards equal pay in the 21st century== − − The wage gap between men and women has narrowed but is still significant. − − − − Explanations for the wage gap include the persistence of jobs done by women from an older generation, still subject to outdated attitudes. This is supported by the evidence that women under 25 who are working full-time now earn 93.2% of men's salaries, whereas older women earn less than 80%. However, this is countered by other considerations. Commentator Katha Pollitt says: − − <blockquote>Young men and women have always had earnings more compatible than those of their elders: starting salaries are generally low, and do not accurately reflect the advantages that accrue, or fail to accrue, over time as men advance and women stay in place, or as women in mostly female kinds of jobs reach the end of characteristically short career paths.</blockquote> <ref> − The Nation, April 14, 1997</ref>
give stats, leave out editorializing
Two landmark court cases, Schultz v. Wheaton Glass Co. (1970), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and Corning Glass Works v. Brennan (1974), U.S. Supreme Court tightened and refined the language of the act.
Two landmark court cases, Schultz v. Wheaton Glass Co. (1970), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and Corning Glass Works v. Brennan (1974), U.S. Supreme Court tightened and refined the language of the act.
In 1963, average wages for women were about 59% of the wages paid to men. It was 81% in 2005.<ref>http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.pdf</ref> Various explanations have been given, such as men holding higher-skilled jobs and working longer hours.
In 1963, women earned 59% of the wages normally paid to men. In 2005 matters have improved and women now earn 81% of men's wages.<ref>http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.pdf</ref>
==References==
==References==
<references/>
<references/>