The Equal Pay Act of 1963 The 1960s was a decade that came with many changes. It is more notably known as the Sixties. The 1960s came with plenty of political and cultural changes. This era came with plenty of political leaders that wanted to change the unfairness in which people were treated. These changes were seen in the way people dressed, the music people were listening to, the drugs they were now doing, and the desire of equality; it was the counterculture of what everyone was used to. This time period was also known for its wars and the impact that they had on the workforce and the roles of men and women. During this time, the Vietnam War was a few years in. With World War II having just ended, there was also a shift in what men and women were now doing on a daily basis. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA) calls for several things. At the beginning, this document states its initial intent of prohibiting all gender discrimination in the workforce.
…show more content…
It then proceeds to describe the five main points of why the Equal Pay Act of 1963 intended to be passed. These five points are aimed towards any, “industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce of wage differentials based on sex” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). This document highlighted the issues with these industries that chose to discriminate based on sex. These issues were that these industries depressed “wages and living standards for employees necessary for their health and efficiency”; it also prevented “the maximum utilization of the available labor resources”, which is defended by the fact that many of the jobs in the 1960s were gender specific (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). Employers even made it a point that “male candidates would be paid more than their female counterparts” in order to assure that men would be hired (Everything You Need to Know about the Equal Pay Act). Due to the fact that industries would discriminate based on the sex of the person, it brought the act to its decision to discuss the third point; the disputing that would happen in the workplace which ended up “burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). The disturbance that this sex discrimination and unequal pay also called for the burdening of, “commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). Ultimately, this also surfaced the last of the five points: the fact that there was “an unfair method of competition” in the industries (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). The document explains how there should not be any sex-based discrimination in the workplace because it then transfers over to the pay the employees receive. Any sex related discrimination, whether it was employee-to-employee or employer-to-employee, was a part of this. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 stated that pay was to be the same for both men and women who had the same job in the same establishment because it took the equal amount of effort and ability from both sexes. Working under the same conditions meant that employees should be paid an equal amount unless there was a legitimate type of system that the company had. An employer would only be able to give higher pay to the opposite sex if the circumstances were that of any type of seniority or merit system that the workplace upholds. There could also be a difference in pay to opposite sexes if there was a type of system that required that their earnings be based on the amount and quality of the product. Any other exception to this act would have to be based on any circumstance that is not related to the sex of the employee. When the act was finally “enacted”, it was to take full effect a year from that date unless there had been previous agreement. It would then take effect two years after those previous agreement terms had been terminated. This act has been an important aspect of understanding the sixties because of the fact that it resembles just how
It then proceeds to describe the five main points of why the Equal Pay Act of 1963 intended to be passed. These five points are aimed towards any, “industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce of wage differentials based on sex” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). This document highlighted the issues with these industries that chose to discriminate based on sex. These issues were that these industries depressed “wages and living standards for employees necessary for their health and efficiency”; it also prevented “the maximum utilization of the available labor resources”, which is defended by the fact that many of the jobs in the 1960s were gender specific (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). Employers even made it a point that “male candidates would be paid more than their female counterparts” in order to assure that men would be hired (Everything You Need to Know about the Equal Pay Act). Due to the fact that industries would discriminate based on the sex of the person, it brought the act to its decision to discuss the third point; the disputing that would happen in the workplace which ended up “burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). The disturbance that this sex discrimination and unequal pay also called for the burdening of, “commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce” (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). Ultimately, this also surfaced the last of the five points: the fact that there was “an unfair method of competition” in the industries (Equal Pay Act of 1963; June 10, 1963). The document explains how there should not be any sex-based discrimination in the workplace because it then transfers over to the pay the employees receive. Any sex related discrimination, whether it was employee-to-employee or employer-to-employee, was a part of this. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 stated that pay was to be the same for both men and women who had the same job in the same establishment because it took the equal amount of effort and ability from both sexes. Working under the same conditions meant that employees should be paid an equal amount unless there was a legitimate type of system that the company had. An employer would only be able to give higher pay to the opposite sex if the circumstances were that of any type of seniority or merit system that the workplace upholds. There could also be a difference in pay to opposite sexes if there was a type of system that required that their earnings be based on the amount and quality of the product. Any other exception to this act would have to be based on any circumstance that is not related to the sex of the employee. When the act was finally “enacted”, it was to take full effect a year from that date unless there had been previous agreement. It would then take effect two years after those previous agreement terms had been terminated. This act has been an important aspect of understanding the sixties because of the fact that it resembles just how