Arthur Shenfield examines the pay comparability procedures used in Britain for government employees.
Henry Tombari, an assistant professor at California State University (Hayward), takes a critical look at the federal compensation system and its use of the comparability measure.
The authors of this article examine the extent to which publicly-owned or quasi-public firms differ from private concerns in the compensation packages they offer their workers. They found that regulated firms are guided by the same incentives as public firms.
As state governments grapple with burgeoning budget deficits, it becomes vital for them to take a cold, practical look at the pay and compensation packages offered to thier often unionized work force in order to better judge union leaders demands for increased benfits. The Public Affairs Institute of New Jersey has compared the relative compensation of public sector with that of private sector workers in that state and has published its results in State Government Employee Compensation in Perspective.
In 1989, the 101st Congress was poised to pass legislation that would raise the current minimum wage from $3.35 to $4.65 an hour by 1992. The authors of The Ripple Effect of the Proposed Minimum Wage Increase examined the impact that such a raise would have on the American economy. Among their findings were that it will result in a sizeable degree of disemployment, as jobs are lost resulting from a 2.11 percent cumulative rise in the United States labor costs.
Compares the median income of states and found that, as a comparable measure of well being, it was a very limited indicator of the relative prosperity of workers in different states.
In Comparable Worth: The Labor Theory of Value and Worse, Dr. Charles W. Baird sees a Pandora's box of horrors poised to spring the moment that the principle is put into practice. Three major reasons for concern are: the impossibility of assessing the comparable value of different occupational categories, the chaos of implementation of the theory would invite by its need for central economic planning and its enormous cost to taxpayers. A free market economist, Dr. Baird contends that the difference between the salaries of female/male dominated occupations is not the result of a conspiracy by employers to supress women, but the outgrowth of comprenhensible market forces. If the marketplace is left alone, he believes that the inequity will soon be redressed as more women enter the greater variety of professions - some traditionally male dominated - that they are, after all, free to enter.