The Equal Pay Act of 1963 requires that men and women be given equal pay for equal work in the same establishment

Most people agree that gender discrimination in the workplace is unfair, but many economists have criticized advocates of comparable worth. Is paying the same wages for jobs that have comparable worth mandated by the Equal Pay Act? Why don't most economists support proposals to force employers to pay their male and female employees based on comparable worth rules?

It would be hard to find anyone, economists included, who would argue against paying men and women equal pay for the same job in the same establishment. It is unfair, and illegal under the Equal Pay Act, to pay different wages to a male and a female employee who work next to each other on an assembly line doing similar tasks. A difficulty arises when the jobs performed by male and female workers are not the same, but have "comparable worth." The Equal Pay Act does not require employers to pay their male and female workers the same wages for different jobs that have comparable worth. Economists who disagree with comparable worth proposals argue that wages are determined in the market by the demand and supply for jobs that call for different skills. Mandating that jobs with different skills pay the same wages in effect argues for price controls to be used to either reduce wages that are "too high" (jobs that have traditionally been filled by males) or raise wages that are "too low" (jobs that have traditionally been filled by females) or both. Most economists believe that such controls will lead to outcomes that are less efficient than outcomes determined by markets without controls.