The Male‐Female Comparable Worth Debate: Alternative Economics Perspectives on an Issue That Cuts Across the Social Sciences

. Writers and speakers on the “comparable worth” or “pay equity” issue refer to “the economic view” but there is no such consensus. Three major paradigms exist in labor economics, the neoclassical, the “radical” or Marxian or Neomarxian, and the institutional Each differs in philosophical orientation, employs different analytical methods, and leads to different policy implications. On the issue of pay equity for women their views are contrasted; differences center on how successfully the market extends full options of choice. The analysis indicates that incremental advances in the direction of pay equity are to be expected, given present incentives in the private sector and less economic constraints in the public sector, provided women continue economic, legal, and political pressure. Surveying The Literature on the comparable worth or pay equity debate, one often encounters reference to the economic view. In reality however, three major paradigms exist in labor economics today; the prevailing neoclassical paradigm, the radical or Marxian view, and the institutional approach. While the three can be viewed as sharing common objectives (to describe, to predict, and to prescribe) they approach issues from different philosophical frameworks, employ different analytical tools, and lead to very different policy implications. Examining the pay equity issue from the perspectives of the three paradigms suggests different insights into the issue than that usually labelled the economic view.