Reviewed by Sara C. Benesh, Department of Political Science, University of New Orleans. There was a time when we heard much, both in scholarly and public debate, about between-gender wage inequality. However, it seems that with the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the courts' interpretations thereof, the issue is now largely dead. It is assumed that courts no longer tolerate within-job inequality. Therefore, no longer is it permissible to pay a man and woman different salaries for performing the exact same job.
Women do have legal redress when it comes to within-job pay discrimination.
There simply is no legal remedy. This was not always the case, however. Early in the pay equity movement, there was some indication that the courts did in fact perceive between-job wage differences to be actionable. Because judges accepted the market at face value and accepted with it the notion that pay differences stemmed from those market differences and had little to do with employer discrimination, the courts have closed the door to much pay equity litigation. The authors of this book challenge the assertion that differences in pay between men and women are wholly market driven and attempt to advance a new theory of gender pay inequality that includes market effects and efficiency concerns but that also looks to organizational practices that tend to contribute to pay differentials.