The primary purpose of this study is to examine issues raised against the use of evaluation as a mechanism for ensuring the attainment of the objective of comparable worth.
The significance of this study lies in the fact that wage discrimination against female dominated jobs has been practiced in this country for a long time. Such discrimination contradicts the egalitarian posture that America attempts to project on the rest of the world. Thus, any efforts aimed at removing this sore spot on the American body politic is not only significant but also a step in the right direction.
The major findings of this study are that critics of job evaluation raise issues relevant to its reliability, validity, choice of factors, weighting of factors and job analysis. In spite of these criticisms, the advocates of comparable worth maintained that job evaluation is still useful to assess job content and worth.
This study principally relied on secondary data such as books, journals, and reports.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:auctr.edu/oai:digitalcommons.auctr.edu:dissertations-3201 |
| Date | 01 July 1989 |
| Creators | Storms-Houston, Tyene |
| Publisher | DigitalCommons@Robert W. Woodruff Library, Atlanta University Center |
| Source Sets | Atlanta University Center |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | ETD Collection for Robert W. Woodruff Library, Atlanta University Center |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds