Surname). 1. Name. Program. Supervisor’s Name. 24 Febru

Added on - 30 Sep 2019

  • 3


  • 1447


  • 55


  • 0


Showing pages 1 of 3
(Surname)1NameProgramSupervisor’s Name24 February 2017Case Analysis 2Unjust Discrimination in San Jose JobsThe fact that San Jose jobs filled mostly by men paid more than those filled mostly bywomen did not constitute unjust discrimination and arguments of the city council, the workersunions, and other stakeholders justify this. The first and most interesting concept in evaluatingthe judgment is the reason for the gender-based dominance of the jobs. Why do women dominatesome jobs while men dominate others? Do employers restrict some jobs to a gender? Do womenand men prefer some jobs to others? Does disparity emerged after the complainants get intoemployment or before. These questions identify the economic concept of demand and supply aswell as the moral concept of autonomy. On the concept of demand and supply, scarcity in supplyis expected to increase payable salaries for any job, and this is then likely to attract allemployees. Females could choose to boycott the lowly paying jobs and trigger a higher pay dueto lower demand. Similarly, organizations cannot force women to assume the highly paying jobsbecause that would breach the moral concepts of autonomy. Consequently, being in lowly payingjobs was a choice of the female gender and not a discrimination of the employer.A closer analysis of the Hay’s rating also undermines the concept of unjustdiscrimination, based on gender. Hay identifies four determinants of the rating but fails to indexthe rating. Its rating assumes that knowhow, problem-solving, accountability and workingconditions have equivalent contributions to determination of salaries. Working conditions,however and from Hay’s rating, seems to be more significant to salary determination. All of thefemale dominated jobs, except senior chemist, have a working condition rating of zero while allmale dominated jobs have working condition ratings of at least seven. For women who arewilling to risk the working condition of a high rating, their salaries are comparable to those ofmen. The consistency of the council’s salaries with those of nearby councils and privateemployers support the concept of unbiased approach to pays. Considering this together with theconcept of autonomy, women seems to choose jobs whose conditions are less risky and thisdecision, rather than the decision of employers, explains the pay difference.The approach to negotiation in which the workers prioritize a general increment ratherthan comparable pay adjustment also undermines significance of bias against women to thestrike. Similarly, Hay, in its research, focused on data from employees than from the council toindicate bias in the entire campaign. These suggest that women choose their jobs, autonomously,and their choice determine their pay, not an unjust discrimination.Hay Associates’ Method of Establishing Comparability of JobsHay’s method of establishing the comparability of jobs is not adequate because of theirdata collection approach and an aspect of their data analysis approach. Triangulation eliminatesbias that a single source would induce and even though Hay tried to use it, the application is notadequate. Collecting data from the employees and the employer was a good strategy but relyingon employees only in assigning points to job categories induced possible bias towardsemployees. The employees, through influence of the need to advocate for new pays and throughtheir union that initiated the research with the aim of demanding for new packages, could rate thejobs to have match lowly paid female jobs with highly paying male jobs. Giving low points formale dominated jobs and high points for female dominated jobs could achieve the bias. The