Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

This investigation that was made by the administrative board would represent men in the same industry that this dispute grew out of, and labor and the people in the community, so that they would bring some knowledge to bear on this complaint brought before them. As I say, this has been worked before. This isn't new. This isn't something someone has just thought up on the spur of the moment. We have operated under this set of rules before.

Mr. McCONNELL. You see, you don't have the phrase in the Fair Labor Standards Act, "affecting commerce" like you have in here. That opens up a lot more fields. That takes you pretty well over the United States, community after community.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. The Labor Department estimates that this bill would cover about 6,000,000 women.

Mr. McCONNELL. Who estimates that?

Mrs. DOUGLAS. The Labor Department, that this bill would cover about 6,000,000 women.

Mr. McCONNELL. Based on the phrase "affecting commerce"?
Mrs. DOUGLAS. Yes.

Mr. McCONNELL. That is not the same as the Fair Labor Standards Act, that phrase is not in there.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. All I am saying is that the administrative procedures are the same.

Mr. MCCONNELL. I don't want to prolong this. I will ask other questions later. I really appreciate your coming here, Mrs. Douglas. You filled in for Mrs. Smith, and we are sorry that she could not be here also.

Are there any other questions?

Mr. MADDEN. I have one to ask.

Do you think, Mrs. Douglas, that in plants under unionization, the inequality of pay between the women and male employees is very marked?

Mrs. DOUGLAS. Well, the unions are for this bill, at least that is my understanding. They testified for this bill last time.

Mr. MADDEN. Yes.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. I have not read their testimony, but they must have evidence to show that women are paid less and, therefore, it acts as a pressure to lower men's wages.

Mr. MADDEN. Now, during wartime in some of the war industries, there were women working side by side with men.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. One out of three.

Mr. MADDEN. It is my thought that in closed shops the women were receiving the same pay as the men on assignments where they were working side by side.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. As I say, Mr. Madden, it is very hard for me to answer that question specifically. I know from what I have studied here and from the charts and information I have obtained from the Labor Department, as I see the picture it is this: We went into the war and we ourselves tried to rectify this situation because we took positive action. We went into these plants at the invitation of management many times; sometimes at the invitation of labor; sometimes at the invitation of the National War Labor Board.

We went in and helped classify jobs at that time so we could tell whether or not-where they were not classified-women were being

paid the same as men. Of course, where you were doing your big war jobs, many of them were unionized, many of them were closed shops, but you had a positive program.

Now, going a little bit further on this job classification and evaluation technique, I think it is well to remember that the United States Employment Service had an occupational-research program before the war. It studied the proper classification of jobs under this program hoping when people applied for a job they could place the proper man or woman in the proper job.

Before the war they got out a dictionary of occupational titles which classified 17,000 jobs.

The Labor Department has studied job classifications all the time. It is basic as part of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' current program in which straight-time hourly earnings are collected on an occupational basis.

It is almost impossible when they are making up their statistics, to find out what the straight-time hourly earnings are, how they vary, unless they know what the occupations are.

Mr. McCONNELL. This is not so difficult to work out in certain types of industries, but when you get into that phrase "affecting commerce," you are going so far afield I don't know whether it is administratively possible to have a job classification for the entire United States. That is what I am getting at.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. Evidently, the Labor Department thinks this is not a handicap. We have different parts of our Government now busily occupied in job classification, as well as industry and as well as the labor unions.

As I understand it, the basis of wage negotiations in great part rests on job classification.

Mr. McCONNELL. In general principle, it sounds very creditable and rates merit. You could say that as to men. All people ought to receive equal pay for equal quality and quantity of work.

That is

a very nice phrase. But, when we get into the different angles of it here, the difficulties have to be worked out, if you are going to have a bill. That is why I am probing as to some of these questions. It is in no way an intent to embarrass anyone, but just a practical way to get at the solution of this matter, if you can solve it.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. That is right.

Mr. McCONNELL. If we can't, then we have no business fooling with it.

Mrs. DOUGLAS. That is right; and the point I have made and keep repeating is that the administration of this principle, equal pay for women, is not new. We have had it before.

I would like to read this. The gentleman has made a great point of job classification. Job classification in itself is not the answer. After you have it, you need to use it fairly. Let me read part of Miss Miller's testimony. It includes a quotation from the issue of Management News, issued September 29, 1945.

Unfortunately, use of the job evaluation technique does not necessarily result in equal pay for women for comparable work. After the job is analyzed and the appropriate point rating is given to each component part, the employer, in the absence of a law, may arbitrarily apply a lower wage scale to jobs performed by

women. The description of this practice in the September 29 issue of Management News, previously referred to, graphically demonstrates that even where an employer uses a job-evaluation system, a Federal equal-pay law may be necessary to insure equal pay for women.

Now, here is the magazine, Management News, speaking:

The next step in the salary and wage administration program is achievement of external consistency.

Or, in plain words:

That is, bring the wage scale in line with the labor market in the area and in the industry for the type of work involved. It is my opinion that in most cases it is this step that has the most influence on sex differentials for jobs of equal difficulty and importance. If the type of work is such that women can be employed in all of the jobs involved, it will usually be found that the going rates in the labor market are lower for such jobs than they would be if jobs of equal difficulty and importance were filled by men.

That is what I told you about the textile industry and the service industries running at a lower rate, because only women would be working in them. [Reading:]

Please note, however, this has nothing to do with the job-evaluation step. In most companies, the fact that a woman is or can be employed to do the work does not change the difficulty and importance of rating. However, the fact that in normal labor markets women are willing to accept lower wages than men for work of similar content tends to give rise to the setting of wage rates on a basis that smacks of sex discrimination. Similarly, any group of jobs which, in normal situations, is filled mainly by women tends to lower the wage scale for the type of work in the industry and the area for all workers regardless of sex.

Here is a management paper that comes out and says, “Job classification isn't enough."

What is needed is an equal-pay law, and enforcement.

Again and again Miss Miller in her testimony showed how, even when they had job classifications in business and where there was progress in classification of jobs, that after they get through classifying a job and evaluating it, then if a woman is going to have the same job as a man they arbitrarily put her in at a lower rate or pay her less.

Mr. Chairman, the need for this law is acute. Millions of working women look to Congress for justice-justice on the job. We in Congress must act favorably on this bill if we are to protect living standards in the homes of America.

Thank you.

Mr. McCONNELL. Thank you, Mrs. Douglas.

The committee will recess until 2 p. m.

(Whereupon, at 12:10 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m. of the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

(The subcommittee reconvened at 2 p. m., pursuant to the taking of the recess.)

Mr. McCONNELL. The committee will please come to order.
There will be a slight change in the order of appearance here.
I understand it is desirable to have Mr. David Ziskind to testify first.
He will be followed by the National Federation of Business and
Professional Women's Clubs. Is Mr. Ziskind in the room?

Mr. ZISKIND. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCONNELL. Please come forward.

STATEMENT OF DAVID ZISKIND, REPRESENTING THE COMMITTEE FOR THE PROMOTION OF EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. Ziskind, give your name, address, and telephone number where you can be reached, to the reporter, and then proceed in your own way.

Mr. ZISKIND. Mr. Chairman, my name is David Ziskind and I am appearing at the request of the Committee for the Promotion of Equal Pay for Women, a group of civic organizations including the American Association of University Women, the National Consumers League, the National Federation of Business and Professional Women, trade unions, and other groups.

I have dealt with various aspects of labor relations for the past quarter of a century. In most of my work as a practicing attorney, a Government official, an arbitrator, and a teacher of labor law, I have had occasion to observe the labor problems of women workers and to help administer social legislation pertaining to women. I am therefore very happy to join other witnesses in commenting upon the equal pay bill before your committee.

Since others will testify at some length on the economic and social need for the proposed legislation, I will confine my attention to its administrative and legal aspects.

To be effective, legislation must have a heart, a brain, and teeth. The heart of H. R. 4408 lies in its prohibition of discriminatory wage rates for women. It establishes a principle of industrial relations based on human understanding and cash incentives. The brain of the bill is found in the Secretary of Labor and industry advisory committees who are given the responsibility for applying the nondiscrimination policy to industry. The teeth of the bill take the form of cease-and-desist orders, court reviews, court injunctions, and a few special enforcement provisions. In the soundness of weakness of these organs, we can judge the vitality of the proposed legislation. First, I shall consider the bill's basic prohibition of wage discrimination.

The bill finds justification for the equal-pay policy in the fact that wage discrimination against women leads to labor disputes, depresses all wage rates, and undermines living standards. Because these conditions result in the obstruction of interstate commerce and a danger to national security and the general welfare, congressional authority exists for the enactment of the bill.

The power of Congress over interstate commerce has been held sufficient to support a Federal minimum wage law and a labor relations act barring other forms of discrimination in the treatment of employees. It therefore appears quite adequate for the proposed equal-pay law.

The bill next proclaims the legislative standards to be used in ascertaining the existence of wage discrimination. It declares it an unfair wage practice for an employer to pay wages to any female employee at a rate less than the rate paid to a male employee for work of a comparable character on jobs requiring comparable skills, or for work of comparable quality and quantity on the same or similar operations. To this there is an exception. Wage differentials pursuant to a seniority or merit increase system, which does not discriminate on the basis of sex, are permitted.

These standards are clear, forthright and easily understandable. Their application to specific situations may require a knowledge of industrial practices, but there is no doubt concerning the legislative intent.

Women workers and their employees should have no difficulty in comprehending their rights and obligations under the law. To assist them in applying the policy of the law to concrete situations, the Secretary will issue official regulations and interpretations, and with the technical advice of industry committees, he may issue special industry orders. The standards set by Congress for determining equal pay, however, are sufficiently explicit and workable to enable all persons of good faith to abide by the law.

I proceed now to consider the administrative devices and procedures for the application of the equal-pay policy to industrial situations.

The Secretary of Labor is charged with the responsibility for administering the act. He is given the usual powers of appointing civil servants, including an Administrator, to execute his functions, and of utilizing local government and other unpaid services. He is authorized to make rules and regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of the act, and to conduct necessary hearings and investigations with customary subpena powers. A report of his activities is to be submitted to Congress annually. These provisions are spelled out in some detail so that the public may be fully apprised of the powers conferred and the responsibilities imposed.

In addition to these customary specifications of administrative authority, the bill provides for special industry committees to advise the Secretary on specific orders that may clarify the purpose of the act in terms of definite industrial practices and conditions. Such orders are to be issued as a means of forestalling and eliminating wage-rate discrimination based on sex.

The question of discrimination is to be viewed in terms of the realities of industrial practice. Job titles, occupational descriptions, and wage differentials can be based upon objective definitions, tests, and measurements. These are tools that can be used to carry out the policy of equal pay for women and they can be used most effectively if handled by persons who know the processes of an industry. So the bill calls for industry committees to study the problems of their industries and to recommend to the Secretary how those tools can be used to eliminate wage discrimination. After proper public hearings, the Secretary may issue orders based upon such recommendations.

The industry committees are designed to bring to the Government the benefit of practical experience that can be found nowhere else. Wisely chosen, the committees supply an expertness and an efficiency that make regulations reasonable and effective. The committees are a true expression of democracy in action and by their participation in the administration of the law they assure to the law a wide area of understanding and acceptance.

The industry committees proposed by H. R. 4408 are the same as those which have functioned with outstanding success under the Fair Labor Standards Act and numerous State minimum-wage laws.

As to the enforcement provisions of the bill, I would like to make the following observations:

« ForrigeFortsett »