GENDER EQUALITY: PAY EQUITY AND EMPLOYMENT EQUITY

 

Jun. 13, 2003. 08:11 PM

Ontario agrees to $414M pay equity deal

FROM CANADIAN PRESS

The provincial government will pay up to $414 million in pay-equity funding after reaching a settlement with representatives for about 100,000 women who said they have been underpaid for years.

A charter application was launched by four applicants and five unions, which represent workers in more than 2,300 public sector workplaces, including nursing homes and health-care facilities.

"This has been a long, slow and grinding fight for justice," said Leah Casselman, president of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union. "The payouts that will soon go to a huge number of underpaid workers, most of them women, make the fight worthwhile."

The settlement covers both unionized and non-unionized workers in mostly female workplaces, where there are no male job classes to compare for pay equity purposes.

The applicants claimed that the Ontario government was knowingly perpetuating sex discrimination by failing to provide the necessary funding to eliminate pay inequities in the workplace.

After two years of court proceedings, the application was successfully settled through a mediation process.

Estimates are that, on average, the workers will reach full pay equity by 2011, after phasing in adjustments of one per cent of payroll per year.

As well as OPSEU, the unions included in the charter application are the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the Ontario Nurses' Association, the Service Employees International Union, and the United Steelworkers of America.

 

 

 

 

PAY EQUITY AND EMPLOYMENT EQUITY

 

A NUMBER OF STRATEGIES HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO ACHIEVE GREATER GENDER EQUALITY IN THE LABOUR MARKET.

 

SINCE THE 1980'S THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, SOME PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS, AND A NUMBER OF PRIVATE COMPANIES HAVE IMPLEMENTED PAY EQUITY AND EMPLOYMENT EQUITY POLICIES. {*PRO-ACTIVE STATEGIES TO ACCOMMODATE DIFFERENCES}

 

1)       PAY EQUITY ATTEMPTS TO RAISE THE VALUE OF THE WORK TRADITIONALLY PERFORMED BY WOMEN.

 

PAY EQUITY IS SOMETIMES CALLED COMPARABLE WORTH, AND IT REFLECTS THE BELIEF THAT WAGES OUGHT TO REFLECT THE WORTH OF A JOB, NOT THE GENDER OR RACE OF THE WORKER.

 

LEGISLATION: REQUIRES THAT SPECIFIC KINDS OF JOBS BE EXAMINED FOR DETERMINING (A) SEX SEGREGATION, AND (B) JOB VALUE WITHIN WORKPLACES.

 

HOW CAN THE COMPARABLE WORTH OF DIFFERENT JOBS BE DETERMINED(?)

ONE WAY IS TO COMPARE THE ACTUAL WORK OF WOMEN'S AND MEN'S  JOBS AND SEE IF THERE IS A DISPARITY IN THE SALARIES PAID FOR EACH. TO DO THIS, ANALYSTS BREAK A JOB INTO COMPONENTS – SUCH AS THE EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND SKILLS REQUIRED, THE EXTENT OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR OTHER'S WORK, AND WORK CONDITIONS – AND THEN ALLOCATE POINTS FOR EACH.

 

FOR PAY EQUITY TO EXIST, MEN AND WOMEN IN OCCUPATIONS THAT RECEIVE THE SAME NUMBER OF POINTS SHOULD BE PAID THE SAME.

 

IN SHORT, PAY EQUITY PROMOTES THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY FOR WORK OF EQUAL VALUE. {*EQUALITY OF CONDITIONS}

 

 

2)       EMPLOYMENT EQUITY STRATEGIES FOCUS ON WAYS TO MOVE WOMEN INTO HIGHER-PAYING JOBS TRADITIONALLY HELD BY MEN – BY:

 

ELIMINATING THE BARRIERS TO AND THE EFFECTS OF DISCRIMINATION, TO FULLY OPEN THE COMPETITION FOR JOB OPPORTUNITIES TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED HISTORICALLY.

 

A)               ELIMINATE SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION.

B)               REMEDY THE EFFECTS OF PAST DISCRIMINATION.

C)               ACHIEVE A REPRESENTATIVE WORKFORCE.

 

THAT TARGET GROUPS FOR EMPLOYMENT EQUITY {AND “STATISTICAL EQUALITY” NOT MERELY “EQUAL TREATMENT”} ARE VISIBLE MINORITIES, PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, ABORIGINAL PEOPLE AND WOMEN.

 

IN COMPARISON TO PAY EQUITY, WHICH ADDRESSES WAGE ISSUES ONLY, /// EMPLOYMENT EQUITY COVERS A RANGE OF EMPLOYMENT ISSUES SUCH AS RECRUITMENT, SELECTION, TRAINING, DEVELOPMENT, AND PROMOTION.

 

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ALSO ADDRESSES ISSUES PERTAINING TO CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT SUCH AS COMPENSATION, LAYOFFS, AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION, ETC. ====> EX: NEWER CONTRACT WORKERS LAID OFF FIRST {SENORITY RULE}

 

THE 1986 EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT COVERS ONLY EMPLOYERS WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING FEDERAL CROWN CORPORATIONS, BANKS, AND COMPANIES THAT HAVE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.

 

THIS REPRESENTS ONLY ABOUT 11 PERCENT OF THE CANADIAN LABOUR FORCE.

 

ALTHOUGH THESE POLICIES REPRESENT A START IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, MALE RESISTANCE AND POOR REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT HAVE RESULTED IN MINIMAL PROGRESS TOWARD GENDERED EMPLOYMENT EQUITY.

 

STATEGIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PAY EQUITY AND EMPLOYMENT EQUITY:

PAY EQUITY IS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING JOB-CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES FREE OF GENDER-BIAS =====> EMPLOYMENT EQUITY IS A STRATEGY FOR ELIMINATING SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION

UNLIKE PAY EQUITY, WHICH IS DIRECTED AT IMPROVING THE WAGES OF THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK IN TRADITIONALLY FEMALE ROLES, EMPLOYMENT EQUITY IS CONCERNED WITH REDISTRIBUTION OF INDIVIDUAL WORKERS AMONG JOBS =====> SO PAY EQUITY ATTEMPTS TO “ALLIEVIATE THE WAGE GAP IN A SEX-SEGREGATED LABOUR FORCE” =====> WHILE EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ATTEMPTS TO DE-SEGREGATE THE LABOUR FORCE

PAY EQUITY DOES NOT CHALLENGE THE MARKET DETERMINATION OF WAGES, IT CHALLENGES THE FAILURE OF THE MARKET TO APPLY THE SAME CRITERIA TO MALE-DOMINATED AN FEMALE-DOMINATED JOBS ====> FOR THIS REASON, SOME FEMINISTS HAVE REJECTED PAY EQUITY BECAUSE IT FAILS TO CONFRONT THE MARKET DIRECTLY.

 

{SOME} RESULTS AND CONTRADITIONS OF PAY EQUITY:

PAY EQUITY IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW FEMINIST ACTIVISTS AND OTHERS HAVE USED THE LAW TO TRANSFORM SOCIAL RELATIONS. IT HAS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED WAGES FOR MANY WOMEN IN A WAY NO OTHER APPROACH HAS ACHIEVED. BUT THE TRANSFOMATIVE PROCESS AND THE RESULTS ARE CONTRADICTORY.

TRANSFORMATIVE RESULTS:

1)       IT HAS ENCOURAGED MANY WOMEN TO REASSESS THEIR WORK, TO EXAMINE THE KINDS OF SKILL, EFFORT, RESPONSIILITIES, AND WORKING CONDITIONS INVOLVED IN THEIR JOBS, AND TO DEMAND RECOGNITION.

2)       IT HAS REFLECTED AND PROMOTED SOME POWER SHIFTS WITHIN UNIONS AND WORKPLACES AND WITHIN SOCIETY AS A WHOLE AS WOMEN’S WORK WAS REGARDED IN A NEW AND MORE VALUED WAY.

3)       IT CHALLENGED SOME OLD HIERARCHIES IN WORKPLACES AND UNIONS.

 

RESISTANCE:

1)       DIFFERENCES IN WAGES AMONG WOMEN HAVE INCREASED (ARMSTONG AND CORNISH, 1997).

2)       EMPLOYERS HAVE BECOME MUCH MORE SKILLED AT USING THE LAW TO RESIST.

3)       MORE AND MORE THE “LIMITED” SUCCESSES OF SOME GROUPS IN WORKING TOWARDS PAY EQUITY IS DEFINED AS A PROBLEM SOLVED – AND THERE ARE DEMANDS TO MOVE ON TO “OTHER ISSUES.”

4)       WOMEN’S VICTORIES ARE UNDERMINED BY NEW STATEGIES SUCH AS CONTRACTING-OUT AND A REFUSAL TO FUND.

5)       {IN SOME CASES} THE FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND OR PROMOTE PAT EQUITY HAS LED TO A REINFORCEMENT OF OLD HIERARCHIES AND TO TOO MUCH FOCUS ON “LEGAL PROCESSES, RATHER THAN STRATEGIES FOR CHANGE.”

 

CONCLUSIONS:

COMBINDED WITH A NEW {NEO-LIBERALISM} EMPHASIS ON MARKET FORCES AND DEREGULATION, PAY EQUITY WAS DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT IN THE FACE OF MOUNTING RESISTANCE ===è AT THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, SUCH LEGISLATION IS NOW OFTEN THE ONLY PROTECTION WOMEN HAVE AGAINST THE PRESSURES OF EFFICENCY, WHICH ARE DEFINED SOLELY IN TERMS OF PROFITS AND MARKETS ===è ESPECIALLY IN SUCH TIME, ANY HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION HAS TO BE DEFENDED AND EXTENDED AS A COUNTER TO MARKET FORCES.