Equal pay for equal work. Just what does it mean? Frankly, unless you are doing piece work, I have no idea. What I do know is when an employer hires you, the employer takes into account one’s education, certificates, experience, and physical ability, if applicable. Over time, the employer will note if you have a superior ability to deal with fellow employees and customers and learn quickly. Over time, the employer will note if you have attributes to develop into a leader. All of these attributes would normally be rewarded with extra pay. To discount the above would only promote mediocracy.
To take equal pay for equal work to its logical conclusion, let’s assume that a 2,000-square-foot home rents for $1,500 a month in Stockton. Then, a 2,000 square-foot home in Beverly Hills should rent for the same. If you can’t accept the latter nonsense, then equal pay for equal work should also sound foolish to you.
Philip Mordaunt
San Luis Obispo
This article appears in Dec 26, 2019 – Jan 5, 2020.
Your “example” is a canard. Given its federalist and republican roots, as well as its enormous physical size, no one in the U.S. argues for equality in pay and rents regardless of locale. For example, a national minimum wage is a minimum, a bottom line; it’s not intended to standardize rates across the entire nation. That said, within states, and certainly counties (Including state-border-straddling counties and cities) equal pay for equal work is fair, just and anchored by rule-of-law. (Unsurprisingly, racism and misogyny are nurtured by our society’s acquiescence to unfair wages.) For starters – which unfortunately really can’t be a starter because it has been blocked for decades – the United States should incorporate the Equal Rights Amendment into its Constitution. It’s way overdue.