Salary Disparity in USA

0 Comment

It is widely known that in the labor force of the United States, women are compensated less than men. According to the report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in 1997, full-time working white women had weekly salaries equal to roughly 75% of white men’s weekly salaries (Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000). The gender disparity in salary has shrunk slightly during the recent decades. In spite of this trend of lower salaries among women, investigations of salary satisfaction have discovered that women are not less discontented with their salary than men. In line with this report, when salary grade has been regulated, women have disclosed greater salary satisfaction than men (Figart, 2000). Because it is believed that salary satisfaction rests on whether salary received is equivalent to salary expected, it means that if women have lesser salary expectations, women are contented with lesser salary. Major and Konar (1984 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000) studied probable roots of gender disparities in salary expectations undergraduate and graduate students. Similar to previous empirical findings, women had lower salary expectations. The suggested explanations for these disparities in salary expectations were that females might be different from men in job value, comparison criteria, job inputs, and career directions. In relation to career direction, women and men may choose dissimilar areas of interest in school and may pursue dissimilar industrial areas and jobs (Gasser, Oliver, Tan, 1998). Milkovich and Newman (1996 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000) claim that men are more probable to pursue high-paying jobs and industries. Job inputs as a predictor of pay equity have been taken into account mostly from the point of view of equity theory. Although equity theory premises put emphasis on comparing a proportion of a person’s inputs and outputs to a related other, Jacques (1961 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000) claims that workers may develop salary expectations founded on job features only, and discount what other workers are performing. The empirical reports are varied. Hills (1980 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000) located no substantiation for the notion that people draw upon an internal, self-assessment to identify salary equity. Nevertheless, Berkowitz and colleagues (1987 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000) discovered that the satisfaction of respondents with their salaries was linked to what they believed they are ought to receive, irrespective of what other workers were paid. Major and Konar (1984 as cited in Keaveny Inderrieden, 2000), in line with this argument, propose that gender disparities in job inputs may clarify portion of the gender disparities in salary expectations. Females may have lesser job inputs and hence feel they really ought to be paid less. Adam Smith, more than two centuries ago, proposed that employees take into consideration the entirety of the disadvantages and advantages of various occupations in making choices about employment, and that a person is pulled towards those prospects that offer the highest total benefit (Gibelman, 2003). Smith stated that employers regulate salaries to correct the weaknesses and drawbacks of particular forms of employment. If an occupation is dangerous, for instance, higher salary is needed to attain a specific salary satisfaction level than when an occupation is