[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-78
THE GENDER WAGE GAP:
BREAKING THROUGH STALLED PROGRESS
=======================================================================
VIRTUAL HEARING
before the
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE
of the
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 9, 2021
__________
Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-211 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE
[Created pursuant to Sec. 5(a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress]
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SENATE
Donald S. Beyer Jr., Virginia, Martin Heinrich, New Mexico, Vice
Chairman Chairman
David Trone, Maryland Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota
Joyce Beatty, Ohio Margaret Wood Hassan, New
Mark Pocan, Wisconsin Hampshire
Scott Peters, California Mark Kelly, Arizona
Sharice L. Davids, Kansas Raphael G. Warnock, Georgia
David Schweikert, Arizona Mike Lee, Utah, Ranking Member
Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington Tom Cotton, Arkansas
Jodey C. Arrington, Texas Rob Portman, Ohio
Ron Estes, Kansas Bill Cassidy, M.D., Louisiana
Ted Cruz, Texas
Tamara L. Fucile, Executive Director
Vanessa Brown Calder, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Opening Statements of Members
Hon. Donald Beyer Jr., Chairman, a U.S. Representative from the
Commonwealth of Virginia....................................... 1
Hon. Mike Lee, Ranking Member, a U.S. Senator from Utah.......... 3
Witnesses
Dr. Michele Holder, Associate Professor of Economics, John Jay
College, City University of New York, New York, NY............. 6
Dr. Marlene Kim, Professor of Economics, University of
Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA............................... 9
Ms. Ai-jen Poo, Co-Founder and Executive Director, National
Domestic Workers Alliance, New York, NY........................ 10
Mrs. Romina Boccia, Managing Director, Stonebrick, LLC, Salt Lake
City, UT....................................................... 12
Submissions for the Record
Prepared statement of Hon. Donald Beyer Jr., Chairman, a U.S.
Representative from the Commonwealth of Virginia............... 34
Prepared statement of Hon. Mike Lee, Ranking Member, a U.S.
Senator from Utah.............................................. 35
Prepared statement of Dr. Michele Holder, Associate Professor of
Economics, John Jay College, City University of New York, New
York, NY....................................................... 37
Prepared statement of Dr. Marlene Kim, Professor of Economics,
University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA................. 42
Prepared statement of Ms. Ai-jen Poo, Co-Founder and Executive
Director, National Domestic Workers Alliance, New York, NY..... 53
Prepared statement of Mrs. Romina Boccia, Managing Director,
Stonebrick, LLC, Salt Lake City, UT............................ 62
THE GENDER WAGE GAP:
BREAKING THROUGH STALLED PROGRESS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 2021
United States Congress,
Joint Economic Committee,
Washington, DC.
The WebEx virtual hearing was convened, pursuant to notice,
at 2:30 p.m., before the Joint Economic Committee, Hon. Donald
S. Beyer Jr., Chairman, presiding.
Representatives present: Beyer, Schweikert, Estes, Pocan,
Arrington, and Peters.
Senators present: Lee, Heinrich, Klobuchar, Cruz, Warnock,
Kelly, and Hassan.
Staff present: Melanie Ackerman, Vanessa Brown Calder,
Tamara Fucile, Colleen J. Healy, Liz Hipple, Jeremy Johnson,
Adam Michel, Alexander Schunk, Jackie Varas, and Emily Volk.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD BEYER JR., CHAIRMAN, A U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Chairman Beyer. This hearing will come to order. I would
like to welcome everyone to today's hearing focused on the
gender wage gap.
I want to thank each of our distinguished witnesses for
sharing their expertise today. We have an all-star panel, and I
am excited to hear what they say.
I would ask at the beginning that all of us work to respect
our five-minute clock so we can get through all this this
afternoon. So thank you for your consciousness.
Today on the eve of the 58th anniversary of the passage of
the Equal Pay Act, American women on average still earn just 82
percent of what men earn. This translates to $10,000 less in
median earnings each year. And while we have made improvements
in narrowing that gap over the last 50 years, progress toward
closing it has actually slowed and even stalled in recent
decades as policy has failed to support women as workers and
ensure that equal work is rewarded with equal pay.
And not only that, but the top line number does not give us
the full picture. Black women earn only 63 percent, Native
American women 60 percent, and Latina women only 55 percent of
what White men earn.
This failure to close the gender wage gap is not just an
issue for the women experiencing this pay gap, it is also an
issue for their families and for our whole economy.
Women's earnings are a crucial component of families'
economic security. Two-thirds of mothers are either the primary
breadwinner or co-breadwinner in their families. And the
Institute for Women's Policy Research estimates that if working
women received equal pay with comparable men--that is, men of
the same age, the same education, who work the same hours, and
who live in similar regions--you know, they are apples to
apples, then poverty for working women would be reduced by more
than 40 percent.
This is an issue for our whole economy because women's lost
wages translate into lost GDP, 2.8 percent of GDP to be
specific, or even more specific $541 billion per year.
Therefore, if long-term economic growth is our goal--as it
should be--then closing the gender wage gap is not just a moral
imperative, it is an economic one.
If we are to properly address this persistent wage gap,
first we have to understand it. So let us look at the root
causes.
First, economists estimate that half of the gender wage gap
is still caused by differences in the types of industries and
occupations that women and men work in. For example, men are
over-represented in jobs like construction and software
development, and women are over-represented in jobs such as
administrative assistants and cashiers.
But while some point to this as evidence that the gender
wage gap is due to women making different choices about their
careers, the reality is that even within the same industry and
the same occupations, women are still paid less than men. As an
example, research finds that up to 68 percent of the gender pay
gap could be closed if men and women were paid equally within
occupations--that is, men and women received equal pay for
equal work.
And explanations of the gap that point to individual
characteristics or choices only account for part of the
problem. When you add up all the measurable explanations for
the gender gap, including differences in occupation and
industry, or accounting for education and length of work
experience, 38 percent of the gender wage gap remains
``unexplained,'' which many economists attribute to
discrimination.
Finally, when seeking to understand the gender wage gap, we
cannot ignore the role played by our economy's devaluation of
the work that has traditionally been done by women,
particularly women of color. Care work is among some of the
lowest paid work in our economy. The Bureau of Labor Statistics
estimates that the median pay for home health and personal care
aides is $27,080 a year, which is barely above the poverty
level for a family of four. Perhaps not coincidentally, women
of color make up a disproportionate share of care workers. For
example, Black women are 13 percent of the U.S. workforce, but
28 percent of health care workers.
Addressing the gender wage gap will also require a multi-
faceted approach. No single policy is going to close it, but
there are many policies that will help narrow it.
Raising wages in low-paying occupations that tend to be
dominated by women would provide the greatest benefit to the
women in these jobs, while also benefiting all workers. An
important way we can do this is by strengthening the minimum
wage and improving workers' bargaining power such as through
legislation like the Raise the Wage and PRO Acts.
Gender and racial discrimination are the second largest
driver of the gender pay gap. Therefore, policies that address
the ongoing role of discrimination in the labor market will be
absolutely necessary to make a meaningful difference in the pay
gap. The Paycheck Fairness Act is one example of a policy that
would make it easier for women to challenge pay discrimination.
And finally, we also need policies that help keep women
connected to the labor market and moving up the career ladder,
such as paid leave and affordable childcare. We cannot make
progress toward narrowing the gender pay gap if we do not make
it sustainable for women to remain in the workforce through
policies like the Building an Economy for Families Act, the
FAMILY Act, or the Child Care for Working Families Act, which
are aimed at ensuring that all workers are able to take the
time they need to care for their families and make sure their
children are receiving quality care while they are at work.
And this is why I so look forward to the testimony of our
witnesses. So now let me turn it over to Senator Lee from the
Great State of Utah for his opening statement.
Senator Lee, the floor is yours.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Beyer appears in the
Submissions for the Record on page 34.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE, RANKING MEMBER, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Lee. Thank so much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
convening today's hearing on this topic.
Women make unique and invaluable contributions to our
families, our communities, and to our workplaces. Thankfully,
these opportunities for women in the workplace have grown
tremendously over time.
The female labor force participation rate has doubled over
the last 50 years. And American women have not simply joined
the workforce, but they have excelled and they have become
leaders within it. In fact, the United States has a higher
share of female managers than almost every other OECD nation.
I myself am fortunate to benefit from the skills and the
expertise of my female chief of staff, female legislative
director, female chief counsel, and female staff director here
on the Joint Economic Committee. So I am personally grateful
for the fruits of women's economic progress and freedom. I am
also the father of an unbelievably gifted and intellectually
curious daughter. For this and so many other reasons, fairly
valuing women's important contributions is particularly
important to me.
The gender pay gap is the topic that brings us here today,
and the pay gap is frequently a focal point in conversations
about women's labor market experiences. Although the pay gap
can tell us some things about women's experiences at work, we
know that--like many metrics--the pay gap has limitations. If
as a society we truly care about supporting and empowering
women, then it is crucial that we understand what those
limitations are, and what this measure can tell us, and what it
does not tell us.
For example, although the pay gap indicates that the
average man and the average woman earn different amounts, the
headline number does not necessarily tell us why this is the
case. We know that industry, occupation, years of service,
educational attainment, geographic location, and family
decisions all matter greatly when it comes to pay. Some of
these characteristics vary for the average man and the average
woman and contribute in significant ways to the pay gap.
One of the largest drivers of the pay gap seems to be that
men and women work in different industries and in different
occupations. Care taking responsibilities also play an outsized
role--before the birth of their first child, women make the
same on average as men. But afterward, working mothers'
earnings tend to diverge from working fathers' earnings,
reflecting on average fewer hours worked and other changes.
Although some of women's decisions regarding their
education, occupation, industry, and engagement with the labor
force may be influenced by cultural pressures and expectations,
that is analytically distinct from a conclusion as to whether,
or to what extent or in what way employers are discriminating
on the basis of gender.
Still, women cannot make as many decisions as they should
be able to make when it comes to their work life. And
government policy needs to get out of the way and allow
employers to provide the flexibility that working mothers say
they want.
A path forward, I believe, lies in policymakers at the
Federal, state, and local level removing the government
barriers that currently limit choice and opportunity for women.
Reforming regulations that get in the way of flexible work can
greatly increase opportunity. This type of reform would help
all workers, but especially working women who surveys indicate
prioritize flexibility in order to care for their families.
Passing the Working Families Flexibility Act would be a
step in the right direction to help women and other workers.
For decades, Federal labor laws have unfairly restricted
working parents in the private sector from choosing either
traditional overtime pay or paid time off as compensation for
overtime hours worked, even while granting a special exemption
for government employees. The Working Families Flexibility Act
would correct this disparity to give the same opportunity to
all working moms and dads.
In addition to passing the Working Families Flexibility
Act, policymakers should reform home-based business zoning,
which stifles entrepreneurship. While home-based businesses
have multiplied in recent decades--currently making up half of
all businesses--many remain ``underground'' since they are
illegal under current law. An incredible 17 percent of Black
women and 10 percent of White women are entrepreneurs, and so
regulatory reform to ease these burdensome rules will be
especially helpful in clearing the path for their success.
Occupational licensing laws also constitute a major barrier
to work, and reform is necessary to eliminate onerous
requirements for jobs that can be done with little risk to
workers and those they serve.
Another area in need of reform is childcare. There are many
unnecessary regulations that drive up the cost of care. Some
laws impose unnecessary education requirements on daycare
workers, or sometimes they increase staff-to-child ratios,
making it far more difficult and expensive for families to
afford care, and preventing some women from working at all.
Passing the Child Care Worker Opportunity Act would help
address this issue for working moms and childcare workers in
the Washington, D.C., area.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention the
Paycheck Fairness Act, which yesterday the Senate voted not to
take up. If we care about women's long-term success, it seems
important that we consider the unintentional impacts that this
bill would likely have, and how it may result in more rigid
compensation structures that could translate into less
flexibility in the workplace, and fewer of the work
arrangements that women and many men value.
In addition to reforming regulatory barriers, recent
history tells us that growth in opportunities for female
workers translates to higher wages, new jobs, and a narrowing
of the pay gap. Just in the years before the pandemic, pro-
growth policies like lower taxes and regulatory reforms helped
sustain a strong labor market for American workers. Women, and
especially women of color, benefited the most. They experienced
some of the fastest job growth and largest wage gains on
record.
Rebuilding after the pandemic will be challenging, but we
know that markets, supported by common-sense policies, are the
best way to support female workers and allow them to build on
their decades of progress in the workplace.
As we seek to empower women in the workplace, it is
essential that we support these pro-growth policies and protect
workplace flexibility. I am hopeful that today's hearing will
help us better understand how to meet women's and working
mothers' needs, and how to develop policies that empower them
to continue building on their many achievements.
I look forward to hearing the insights of our witnesses on
this important topic. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ranking Member Lee appears in
the Submissions for the Record on page 35.]
Chairman Beyer. Senator Lee, thank you very much.
I would now like to introduce our four distinguished
witnesses.
Dr. Michele Holder will be an Associate Professor of
Economics at the John Jay College of the City University of New
York starting this August. Previously, she has worked
professionally as an economist for a decade in both the
nonprofit and government sectors. Her research focuses on the
Black community and women of color in the American labor
market. Her research into the gender wage gap includes work on
the double gap that Black women face. Dr. Holder received her
Master's and Doctoral Degrees in Economics from the New School
for Social Research, and a Bachelor's Degree in Economics from
Purdue University.
Dr. Marlene Kim is a Professor of Economics at the
University of Massachusetts, Boston, She specializes in race
and gender discrimination and employment, especially the
intersection of the two, and the working poor. Her work has
been published widely in journals and books, including editing
Race and Economic Opportunity in the 21st Century. She is a
recipient of the First Rhonda Williams Prize for her work on
race and gender discrimination. Dr. Kim holds a Ph.D. in
Economics and a B.A. in Economics and English from the
University of California, Berkeley.
Ai-jen Poo is the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the
National Domestic Workers Alliance, a nonprofit organization
working to bring quality work, dignity, and fairness to the
growing number of workers who care and clean in our homes, the
majority of whom are immigrants and women of color. She is a
leading expert in the care economy, and how it is increasingly
defining the future of work. Ms. Poo has been recognized among
courts in the world's 50 greatest leaders, and Time's 100 Most
Influential People in the World and has received numerous
awards, including the MacArthur Fellowship. She has a B.A. from
Columbia University, and honorary doctorates from Smith
College, The New School and the City University of New York.
And finally, we have Mrs. Romina Boccia. She is the
Managing Director of Stonebrick LLC. She was previously the
Director of the Grover & Herman Center for the Federal budget
at the Heritage Foundation, where she oversaw production of the
Foundation's annual Federal budget plan. She also previously
served as a policy analyst at the Independents Women's Forum.
Mrs. Boccia's research has focused on government spending and
the national debt. She received her Bachelor's and Master's
Degrees in Economics from George Mason University.
Dr. Holder, let's begin with your testimony, and then we
will continue in the order in which each of you was introduced.
Dr. Holder, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF DR. MICHELE HOLDER, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF
ECONOMICS, JOHN JAY COLLEGE, CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, NEW
YORK, NY
Dr. Holder. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman Beyer. Good
afternoon to you, to Senator Lee, and Distinguished Members of
the Joint Economic Committee.
Thank you for the opportunity today to discuss the gender
wage gap. As Chairman Beyer noted, my name is Dr. Michele
Holder. I am an Associate Professor of Economics at John Jay
College, City University of New York, as of August of this
year.
I am a labor economist by training, and my research does
focus on the position and status of the Black community and
women in the American labor market. In my remarks today, I will
discuss the impact of the gender wage gap on Black women in the
U.S. To do so, I will largely draw on original quantitative
research I conducted last year on Black women and the gender
wage gap in the economic report The ``Double Gap'' and the
Bottom Line: African American Women's Wage Gap and Corporate
Profits, which I prepared for the Roosevelt Institute in New
York City.
The gender wage gap is typically a straightforward
comparison of the average or median full-time wages or earnings
of all working men in the U.S. to the average or median full-
time wages or earnings of all working women in the U.S.
However, the gender wage gap formulation masks complex
factors that play a role in the gap, including occupational
crowding based on gender, gender socialization, employer bias,
historical exclusionary practices on the part of unions, the
so-called motherhood penalty, and human capital disparities.
One prominent narrative that has been advanced regarding
the gender wage gap is that it is not due to discriminatory
treatment on the part of employers in this country. Instead,
the fault lies primarily with women due to voluntary choices we
make.
While I do not dispute that women are clearly capable of
making informed choices about their careers, what I hope to
show is that even when women seemingly do all the things that
should result in equitable pay, there are long-held practices
in American work life that leave women vulnerable to unequal
pay.
If we were to rank median or average annual pay in the U.S.
by race and gender, women of color, including Black women,
would be at the very bottom of the that rank. Black women earn
the least due to the effects of both the, what is called the
racial wage gap, meaning overall Black Americans on average
earn less than White Americans in the U.S. This is what is
called the racial wage gap. As well as the gender wage gap. I
term this dual effect the ``double gap'' in wages of Black
women.
According to the National Partnership for Women and
Families, Black women earn 61 cents for every dollar non-
Hispanic White men earn. The takeaway here is that the gender
wage gap has the largest absolute negative impact on the
individual earnings of women of color, as Chairman Beyer noted
in his opening statement.
In original research I conducted using descriptive as well
as regression analyses, most of the important factors that
could contribute to the earnings differential between Black
women and non-Hispanic White men such as educational attainment
or years of work experience, have been taken into account or
controlled for, which means that I compare full-time working
Black women and full-time working non-Hispanic White men with
similar educational attainment, similar work experience, and
many other commonalities with regard to skill sets. Thus, I
compare, as Chairman Beyer noted, apples to apples in this
analysis of the wage gap between Black women and White men.
What I found in my research is that, with few exceptions,
non-Hispanic White men earn considerably more than Black women
in almost all 22 major occupational categories, and almost all
77 minor occupational categories. You all will note that I am
comparing Black women to non-Hispanic White men because if we
ranked the median or annual earnings by workers according to
race and gender, non-Hispanic White men would be at the top of
that rank, and Black women would be at the bottom of that rank
along with Native American women and Latinas.
For an individual Black female worker, the annual earnings
gap does range. It can be as low as $5,000 in some low-wage
occupations, or it can be as high as $50- to $75,000, this is
per-year, in high-wage occupations. These are annual gap
amounts, annual differentials.
More and less on average I found that in 2019, which was
the year of my research, the annual gap in earnings between
Black women and non-Hispanic White men ranged between $10,000
to $20,000 per year for a typical Black female worker in the
U.S.
In the aggregate, I estimate that the wages Black women in
the U.S. what I term ``involuntarily forfeit'' due to the
combination of both the racial and wage gaps, amounts to
approximately $50 billion per year--a large and reoccurring
annual loss to the Black community.
Several factors can contribute to the gender wage gap faced
by Black women. Those factors include Black women's
historically subordinate position in the American labor market.
The role of networks, differences in college completion rates
between Black and White Americans. There is still a large
educational attainment gap between Blacks and Whites at the
level of college completion.
Over 35 percent of non-Hispanic Whites have a college
degree, compared to 25 percent of Blacks. The use of prior
earnings history in determining earnings or wages, in 2018 the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case of Rizzo v. Avena, which
was subsequently vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court on a
technicality, the common practice of requesting previous salary
histories from job applicants was found to be discriminatory
against women, the lack of wages earnings transparency in the
American workforce, and in our American culture, and
discrimination and bias on the part of employers.
These policy approaches, I believe, have the potential to
narrow the gender wage gap for Black women in particular.
First, passage of state and/or Federal laws would prohibit
employers from requesting previous salary histories from job
applicants.
Second--sorry, rolling--passage of state and/or Federal
laws requiring pay transparency in the private sector.
Economist Marlene Kim, who is also testifying today, has found
that in states where pay secrecy practices are banned, the
gender wage gap is lower among highly educated women.
Number three, revision of the EEO-1 form to include
compensation data. This form, required to be submitted
regularly by employers, already reports the demographic and
occupational makeup of most workers in the U.S.--demographic,
occupational, and gender. And this data is used by the EEOC to
support civil rights enforcement. Under Former President Obama,
an Executive Order implemented a revision to the form to
include compensation data. Unfortunately, this revision was
jettisoned under Former President Trump's administration.
I, and other advocates such as Joceline Frye at the Center
for American Progress, call for this revision to be
reimplemented.
Number four, the likelihood of acquiring student debt is a
disincentive to attending college. Making tuition free at
community and public colleges throughout the U.S. would
incentivize more Black women to complete their bachelor's
degrees, raising this group's median education attainment
level, which will likely lead to a narrowing of the wage gap
this group encounters.
And, finally, raise the Federal minimum wage. The majority
of minimum wage earners in the U.S. are women, and
proportionately more Black women earn the minimum wage than
Black men. Economist Marlene Kim, again who is testifying
today, has found a small but positive effect on the gender wage
gap, meaning that it narrows, that would occur by raising the
minimum wage. I believe I am out of time.
Chairman Beyer. Yes, Dr. Holder. Thank you very much. Let's
move on because we just have your conclusion left, but thank
you very much. It restates it all very well. So we have it in
writing, also. Thank you, Dr. Holder, very much.
So now we will hear from Dr. Kim, from the University of
Massachusetts, Boston.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Holder appears in the
Submissions for the Record on page 37.]
STATEMENT OF DR. MARLENE KIM, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS,
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, BOSTON, MA
Dr. Kim. Chairman Beyer, Ranking Member Mike Lee, and
Members of the Joint Committee, thank you for inviting me to
this very important hearing. I am Marlene Kim, a Professor of
Economics at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, and I
have been studying the gender wage gap for 30 years.
As my written testimony has shown, we have made great
progress in reducing the gender wage gap from women earning 65
percent of men to the low 80s today. But progress has stalled
for over a decade. Why?
Unconscious biases remain against women. Women with the
same qualifications are less likely to be hired, trained,
mentored, promoted, and compensated at the same rate as men.
Homophily bias explains this. People like to associate with
people who are similar to them, so they hire, train, mentor,
and promote people who are like them, including by gender and
race. This Bias directly enters the pay setting process so that
occupations held by women are underpaid compared to occupations
held by men, simply because women perform this work.
This occurs in two different ways. First, before gender
discrimination was illegal, companies explicitly underpaid
predominantly female occupations, and they never remedied this.
For example, personnel analysts in the State of California's
civil service asked policymakers: Should any difference in pay
because of sex be made? And they recommended that occupations
filled mostly by women be paid less, such as in clerical work.
They underpaid predominantly female occupations 22 to 36
percent less, and some of this underpayment continues today.
Research shows that this underpayment of predominantly female
occupations was also performed all over the U.S. and all over
the world.
Second, when establishing compensation systems, companies
perform job evaluations to identify occupations with greater
value to the firms and pay these more. The problem is that
employers usually have separate job evaluations for
occupational groups, such as a job evaluation for managers, a
separate one for clerical and administrative assistants, and
another separate one for engineers. And with occupational
segregation--that women and men work in different occupational
groups--having different job evaluations by occupational groups
means that employers are only comparing predominantly female
occupations to other women's occupations in their job
evaluations. And predominantly male occupations with other male
occupations in those job evaluations. This results in the
underpayment of women's jobs becoming embedded in the pay
structures.
But jobs of comparable value to employers should be paid
the same. Therefore, employers should re-evaluate their job
evaluations and use only one job evaluation for all of their
jobs, so that women's and men's occupations are evaluated in
the same way and with consistent criteria. And jobs of
comparable value to employers are paid the same.
If you do this, women's earnings increase, and you
eliminate half of poverty. This is not a far-fetched idea. It
has been implemented in Australia, in the public sector in
Minnesota, and in cities and school districts across the United
States.
So I recommend that jobs in the Federal sector, and jobs
with Federal contractors, be re-evaluated in this way. In
addition, since women are less likely to be hired, trained, and
promoted, additional remedies are needed. We need greater
enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and affirmative action.
We need to require diversity, sexual harassment, and gender-
free bias training in the Federal Government, and for
government contractors.
It would be great to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. This
would eliminate pay secrecy, which would reduce the gender wage
gap. It would also help with collecting more detailed data on
Federal contractors, so you can discover if the pay of women
and men and people of color within occupations differs. And, if
their hiring and promotion rates differ. And if it is not
already there, we should also require more detailed
occupational categories in the same EEO-1 form that Dr. Holder
mentioned so that we can evaluate if companies are hiring,
training, and promoting women and people of color in their
respective numbers.
To conclude, the gender wage gap has stalled, but it can be
fixed, and you can make a difference in this. I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Kim appears in the
Submissions for the Record on page 42.]
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Dr. Kim, very much. I will next
hear from Ai-jen Poo, who is the Executive Director of the
National Domestic Workers Alliance. And, Ms. Poo, one thing I
have always been impressed with is these are the jobs most
difficult to turn over to robots. I would love to hear what you
have to say.
STATEMENT OF MS. AI-JEN POO, CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL DOMESTIC WORKERS ALLIANCE, NEW YORK, NY
Ms. Poo. That is right, there is not yet an algorithm for
empathy. Thank you so much, Chairman Beyer, and Ranking Member
Lee, and the Members of the Committee. It is truly an honor for
me to have the opportunity to testify on how we break through
the gender wage gap.
As Chairman Beyer said, I am the Executive Director of the
National Domestic Workers Alliance. Founded in 2007, we are the
home for the 2.2 million domestic workers who work as nannies,
home care workers, and house cleaners in private home settings,
providing care and cleaning services. Our community includes
over 250,000 domestic workers in all 50 states, working to
achieve economic security and opportunity.
Domestic work is the work that makes everything else
possible in our lives. It ensures that we have the ability to
go to work and participate in our society and in our economy,
knowing that our homes and our families are in good care. It
has always been essential work, and yet it has always been
devaluated and underpaid.
The racial and gender wage gap in our economy are apparent
here in the way that this entire workforce, a workforce that is
90 percent women, majority women of color, and a third
immigrant, have been devaluated, underpaid, and excluded from
the framework of our law and policy.
The work of care and cleaning has always been associated
with women. The fact that we have never adequately valued the
care economy means that the whole bowl of work that has fallen
on the shoulders of unpaid women family members, and underpaid
women of color professionals, is invisible.
During the New Deal Era, Congress enacted the Fair Labor
Standards Act to raise wages in the National Labor Relations
Act to guarantee employees the right to form unions. However,
domestic workers were excluded from these signature New Deal
laws as a result of racism. Seven members of Congress refused
to support the labor law provisions of the New Deal if they
covered domestic workers and also farm workers who were largely
Black workers at the time.
That has resulted in the reality that most domestic workers
work incredibly hard and still cannot make ends meet. They are
much more likely than other workers to be living in poverty.
The typical domestic worker is paid $12 an hour, or 39.8
percent less than a typical nondomestic worker who is paid
$19.97 an hour. The average annual income of the domestic
worker is less than $16,000 per year, as compared to that of
$39,000 for nondomestic workers.
They do not have job security, a clear work agreement,
access to benefits, or health care. So the workers that we
count on to care for us and our families struggle to take care
of themselves and their own families doing this work.
The fact that we still refer to this profession as
``help,'' as opposed to the skilled profession that it is, is a
reflection of how we have devalued this workforce. With the
American Jobs and Family Plan we can and must address this. We
can ensure that home care workers earn a living wage, and we
can ensure that this workforce has access to the childcare and
the paid family and medical leave they need to sustain them in
their work and care for the people they love.
For example, the proposed investment in Medicaid Home and
Community-Based Services and President Biden's American Jobs
Plan, would be transformative to addressing the gender pay gap
in at least two ways.
First, there is the direct benefit of creating good jobs
for the home care workforce. There is a huge demand for this
work, and wages are shockingly low. So we have high rates of
turnover, and home care deserts across the country. As Chairman
Beyer said, these are jobs that cannot be automated and cannot
be outsourced. This investment is the single highest impact way
for us to create good jobs that will go to women and women of
color.
Second, there is the benefit to the unpaid family caregiver
that relies on this workforce. There are 42 million caregivers
who work full-time and provide care to an aging loved one, or a
loved one with a disability, who are also majority women. This
care enables them to work, to have the real option to return to
work. And this is particularly important in light of the nearly
5 million women who have been pushed entirely out of the
workforce in the pandemic because of caregiving challenges.
Putting this essential workforce that was excluded from the
New Deal because of racism and sexism at the forefront of the
largest jobs plan since World War II is a profound opportunity
to address the gender pay gap, one that we must do for this
workforce and for all of us.
Thank you, Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Poo appears in the
Submissions for the Record on page 53.]
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Ms. Poo, very much. And finally,
we will hear from Romina Boccia from the Stonebrick LLC.
STATEMENT OF MRS. ROMINA BOCCIA, MANAGING DIRECTOR, STONEBRICK
LLC, SALT LAKE CITY, UT
Mrs. Boccia. Chairman Beyer, Ranking Member Lee, and
Distinguished Members of the Committee, good afternoon. Thank
you for inviting me.
My name is Romina Boccia, and I am a first-generation
immigrant and naturalized American citizen. And I believe in
the American dream that ours is a country that provides
opportunity for all to make something of themselves with hard
work, a little help, and some luck.
I was raised by a single mom with a physical disability and
mental health problems. We were on welfare for most of my
childhood years. I started working to help support our family
when I was only 11 years old, and I have been working ever
since. I was even a home care worker caring for individuals
with disabilities before going to college.
As a woman who today is the sole breadwinner in her family,
I personally know how important it is for women to be treated
equally in the workplace. I believe everyone, regardless of
their gender, should be able to earn their worth based on the
value they add, and not be subject to unfair discrimination. I
also know that neither men nor women necessarily earn what they
are worth automatically.
We earn what we negotiate. Both market factors outside of
our control such as a recession, and factors at least partially
within our control such as skill level, affect our negotiating
power.
On both the employer and the employee's side, it matters
greatly what alternatives we have available. I have studied the
gender wage gap for more than 10 years. It is one of the most
misleading policy issues today. Your constituents assume that
when we talk about the gender wage gap it is evidence of
discrimination and we do so by comparing apples and apples, men
and women working under the same conditions in the same jobs
putting in the same hours. That is not the case.
The gender wage gap in fact compares apples and oranges.
Because when you divide the median wage of all full-time
working women by the median wage of all full-time working men,
without adjusting for important factors that explain obvious
differences in earnings, you inevitably arrive at a highly
misleading statistic.
Earnings are primarily a function of productivity. Only
after accounting for explanatory factors can we reasonably
discern whether the gender wage gap is a useful signal alerting
us to a problem, or a function of men and women making
different choices.
Some of those important factors include hours worked. And
BLS data clearly shows that women work on average 10 percent
fewer hours than men. This holds true even in highly regulated
work environments that leave little room for discrimination we
find the gender wage gap.
For example, a study examining the earnings of male and
female bus and train operators in Massachusetts identified that
women earn 89 percent of what men earn, concluding that--and I
quote--``while having the same choice set in the workplace,
women and men make different choices.'' End quote.
In particular, women chose to work only half as many
overtime hours as men, and take an average of 17.5 days of
unpaid leave compared with men. If women worked more hours than
men, at least in this particular setting, we would expect them
to earn more than men.
There is some hopeful news as well, though. Young women
today are earning more university degrees, everything from
bachelor degrees than men, and we actually observe a gender
wage gap in diverse and major metropolitan areas among college-
educated childless women. This changes once women have children
and begin to reduce their hours, or take more time off from
work for caregiving. Women are more likely to interrupt their
careers for caregiving, primarily for childcare but also for
elder care.
Culture and gender socializations play a role in who takes
on these caregiving responsibilities that are so important for
households and families. And some countries have tried to take
more aggressive measures to equalize leave policies, but public
policy is a blunt tool when it comes to what is best referred
to as a choice gap.
There is also the important role that benefits play. Women
are more likely than men to work in industries that provide
more of their compensation in the form of benefits, including
in government, education, and nonprofit organizations. Non-cash
benefits such as health coverage and paid leave are not taken
into account when we look at the broad gender wage gap.
We should first diagnose the problem accurately to
determine whether public policy is the right tool to address
it, or whether there is a problem to address at all. In
everything we do, we should also consider the unintended
consequences, not merely the intended outcomes of our policy
prescription.
Government mandates or increasing liability for employment
that the Paycheck Fairness Act would do are most likely to
backfire on the very same people those policies are intended to
help. The best thing the policymakers can do is to expand
choices and create the regulatory conditions that allow our
economy to thrive, creating more opportunities for workers,
which expands the number and quality of jobs available to them,
and increases the negotiating power.
I refer the committee to my written testimony for an
analysis of various policy proposals to address the gender wage
gap, and welcome any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Boccia appears in the
Submissions for the Record on page 62.]
Chairman Beyer. Mrs. Boccia, thank you very much.
Now that we are finished with the official testimony, we
will begin our questioning. I get to go first. And I want to
leverage, first off, my friend Senator Lee's pointing out about
his remarkable daughter, which I very much appreciate. I am
talking about my remarkable grandmother only because she was
charged by Frances Perkins to standing up to the Bureau of
Labor Standards. So it was fun many years later to see her come
back around for all of you. All the way to the Director of our
Joint Economic Committee and staff, our Executive Director is
Tamara Fucile, another strong woman, leading us in the right
direction.
I have been a boss and an employer in the private sector
for 45 years. I am having trouble with this notion of how
diminished workplace flexibility is somehow an unreasonable
cost for paying women their fair share.
Ms. Poo, can you talk to me, number one, about all the
benefits that those care workers are getting, the health care
benefits, and the paid sick leave, and all those other things?
Is this real, at all?
Ms. Poo. It certainly is not real in the domestic work
context. Eighty-two percent of domestic workers came into the
pandemic without a single paid sick day. And so what we saw was
just dramatic losses in jobs and income immediately, as the
stay-at-home orders came down because that work is, by
definition, work that has to be done in person. It cannot be
done remotely.
And very few domestic workers had access to health care.
Only one in 10. So we have a situation where workers are
piecing it together in order to survive and do not have access
to benefits or a safety net.
Chairman Beyer. Let me push on one thing. Ms. Boccia, you
pointed out that in a perfect economic world our wages are
determined by our productivity, by our contribution to society.
Is there any reason to think that somebody sitting behind a
desk on Wall Street is making a greater contribution, or is
working harder, is more productive than somebody taking care of
a child, or somebody with Alzheimer's?
Ms. Poo. What I see when I see home care workers and
domestic workers at work is essential work that is about
meeting the fundamental human needs of our loved ones across
their life spans. I cannot think of a more valuable job than
nurturing the human potential of our children, or supporting
the independence and dignity of a person with disabilities to
be able to live a full and whole life in the community, or the
dignity and quality of life of our aging parents and
grandparents who have given us our quality of life.
So I think it is incredibly fundamental and valuable work,
and certainly as valuable as people who sit behind a desk on
Wall Street.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you. Again, Mrs. Boccia had mentioned
about some of the pay differential may be because we make
different choices.
Dr. Holder, do you see people who were raised in poverty,
after 400 years of discrimination, having the same choices
available to them as my children, or Senator Lee's children?
Dr. Holder. It may appear superficially that all women,
regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, have the same
places. But in reality, when we talk about class differences,
income differences, the likelihood is that because the poverty
rate occurs in the Black community, the types of colleges that
young Black adults go to may not be as prestigious as the ones
that young White adults go to, and that would be the same for
young Black women and young White women.
So we have free choice, but within a system that is
inherently inequitable and has been historically so. And that
is what limits our choices.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you very much.
Dr. Kim, you talk about pay transparency. I have always
been impressed with the idea that where there is real pay
transparency in the Federal Government, in the military, there
is the smallest amount of wage differentiation between the men
and the women. What is wrong with taking that pay transparency
idea throughout our greater economy?
Dr. Kim. I think it is a great idea to do that. Many
countries have a lot more pay transparency than we do, and
people certainly should not be fired for asking how much people
earn who are in similar jobs, and that is what the Paycheck
Fairness Act was about.
Chairman Beyer. One of the things I think that Mrs. Boccia
mentioned was that employers first look to external equity as
they try to set pay rates. So the second they looked to
internal equity, it is the internal equity that seemed to be
lacking.
I am very grateful for all of your comments, they were
terrific. And I would like to move on to last year's Chair of
the Joint Economic Committee and a future chair, I am sure,
Senator Lee the floor is yours.
Senator Lee. Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman.
Mrs. Boccia, I would like to start with you. You shared
some of your personal story with us as part of your testimony.
I know that in addition to overcoming a whole lot of obstacles
as a first-generation immigrant, you graduated in economics, a
somewhat male-dominated field, and then went on to lead an
economic research department at a major think tank here in our
Nation's capital. Can you tell us a little bit more about your
experience as a professional woman? Tell us a little bit about
how you see both the opportunity and the challenges that
professional women face?
Mrs. Boccia. Thank you, Senator Lee. I think I want to play
off of women today, and I employed a woman while I was at the
Heritage Foundation. And some of the women I employed who had
also several children were some of the most productive
employees that I had. And so I do not believe there is anything
in gender that would explain pay differences, other than
different choices and the different experiences that we have.
And one thing that we do find is that women find
flexibility incredibly important. And in my personal
experience, I have found that you have to not only work really
hard, but you also have to negotiate your worth. And that is
something where women do not always advocate for themselves
most effectively, which is why I have made it part of my
mission to be a mentor to young women to help them understand
the power that they have in the workplace if they work hard, if
they study, if they educate themselves they can increase their
bargaining power. And, how they can negotiate not just their
wages but also the conditions under which they work, including
flexibility. And some of the examples we heard about the
Federal Government and a unionized environment, those are
exactly the kinds of rigid environments that do not allow for
those differences between men and women and the flexibility
that the different genders value in different ways because of
childcare responsibilities.
And so many of the proposals that we heard, like the
Paycheck Fairness Act, would impose more of those rigid
structures. And we have seen even pay transparency in countries
like Denmark. Yes, it has led to a narrowing of the gender wage
gap, but at the cost of productivity, and at the cost of higher
wages for everyone, men and women, who were made worse off as a
result of this law.
So from my personal experience, and also from the research
that I have done, I believe that men and women get compensated
fairly if they advocate for themselves, and if the economy
provides them with enough options so that if you work for an
employer who does not recognize your worth, you have the option
to find alternative employment. And entrepreneurship is such a
key ingredient to that, ultimately.
Senator Lee. Thank you. That is helpful. Now in the
testimony you gave to the Republican Policy Committee working
back in 2016, I believe, you described some differences in what
men and women value and look for and seek out. For example, you
noted some findings from a Pew Research study that found that
70 percent of working mothers in the United States say that
they value flexibility in their employment, compared to about
50 percent of men who said the same thing.
You also noted that men value a high-paying career, in many
cases more than women do. From your perspective, what was
that--does that tell us anything about whether that is
acceptable for men and women to have different preferences
about their work lives than men?
Mrs. Boccia. I think we should celebrate and respect those
differences that they clearly have. Women do, especially
working mothers, value flexibility much more highly. And they
also value the ability to work part-time much more highly. And
men, in part our society has imposed this on men. Socialization
and culture have made it such that we expect men to provide for
the family, even though we now have many female breadwinners,
as well. And those preferences clearly play a role in men, for
example, choosing higher risk occupations that reward them for
taking those risks and doing unpleasant jobs like working on
oil rigs, and in construction, more likely so than women with
higher pay. And women have chosen more mission-driven work, and
often that means a nonprofit. And then care-taking jobs where
wages tend to not be as high, or some of their compensation
comes in the form of benefits. None of that is taken into
account when we look at the gender wage gap.
Senator Lee. What does it tell us? When you look at
statistics indicating that when you compare average women's
earnings to average men's earnings over the course of their
career? They find that women's earnings are similar to or even
greater than men's earnings before parenthood, but then that
changes after the birth of their first child. What does that
tell us?
Mrs. Boccia. It tells us very clearly that when men and
women have similar preferences early on in their careers, just
coming out of college for example, we especially see young
women, college-educated in major metropolitan areas now, out-
earning men sometimes by two digits. And once women have
children, they are more likely to reduce their hours and that
is reflected in their earnings because they work fewer hours.
They might even step down from a higher-responsibility job to
taking on something that allows them to spend more time with
their children. All of that has an impact.
But when men and women choose the same pathways, we find
that those discrepancies disappear. Again, preferences also
need to be taken into account in terms of the industries that
women choose.
Senator Lee. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I see my
time has expired.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Senator Lee, very much. We will
now move on I believe to Senator Heinrich. But in passing, I
just want to point out that Denmark was just rated the second
happiest country in the world by Gallup. So they seem to be
doing some things pretty well.
Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you for that, Chairman.
Dr. Holder, I wanted to ask you about this idea that you
would almost believe from some of the conversation here that
you cannot do statistically valid research in this area because
there are all these hidden choices being made; that you cannot
get to an apples-to-apples comparison.
You do a lot of research in this area. Obviously you have
to control for different variables. Can you talk to us about
your view of what an apples-to-apples comparison looks like?
Dr. Holder. I sure thank you for that question. As an
economist, I am trained in techniques which will, when I am
trying to compare outcomes between two groups, I can control
for certain variables that might influence the outcome.
So, for example, in my research where I compared Black
working women, full-time working women, and non-Hispanic White
full-time working men, some of the variables that--economic
lingo, forgive me for that--but some of the variables that
would contribute to a gender wage gap would include things like
age, work experience, educational attainment, whether they are
married, whether the worker is married, whether the worker has
children. Whether the worker has small children. Where does the
worker live?
So in my research, I use several methodologies which
control for the very thing that would contribute to the gender
wage gap. And even given that, I still find a differential
between, in my research, White full-time working men and Black
full-time working women that cannot be explained by having
children, that cannot be explained by a difference in
educational attainment, that cannot be explained by work
experience, length of work experience. All of those things have
been taken into account. And what I still find is that after
all of those contributing factors which might explain why a
White male would earn more than a Black female in the same
occupation, given the same characteristics, I have taken that
into account.
And in fact, in my research I use three different
methodologies, and the final methodology is actually a really
sophisticated one that pairs White men and Black women with
very similar characteristics in the same occupations, and there
is still a differential in pay that cannot be ascribed to
anything else but bias treatment.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Dr. Holder. Ms. Poo, I want to
ask you. We heard one of our panelist question is there a
problem here at all? I would love to get your perspective on
that. And then the issue of, if only women were better
negotiators all of this might go away.
Ms. Poo. Two things. On the negotiation side in the
domestic work context, there is no job security, no clear
agreements or contracts, and therefore in attempting to
negotiate for something as simple as a sick day, you risk
losing your job. And so what we hear time and time again is
pervasive fear of asking for something as simple as an
afternoon off to go to your child's PTO meeting, to a race, an
annual race. And people will not do it because they will risk
losing their jobs. They lack the power to negotiate in the
workplace.
And secondly, this idea that women are choosing lower-paid
work because of benefits and other forms of compensation, that
is just simply not true for this entire sector of care work.
Wages are low, and benefits are virtually nonexistent.
Senator Heinrich. And in your view would the Paycheck
Fairness Act make these inherent discrepancies better, or
worse, for women in these positions?
Ms. Poo. I think it would make them better.
Senator Heinrich. Transparency seems to be a fundamental
issue here, Dr. Kim. Do you think that there is power, and even
power with respect to negotiation, in that transparency?
Dr. Kim. Absolutely. If you know what other people are
being paid, you can negotiate better. But I want to say
something about that, as well. If women try to negotiate, often
they are fired because they are seen as too aggressive. So
women are really viewed and treated differently than men. It is
not that we do not negotiate as well as men. And also, you
know, when you find women start out equal to men, five years
later, they are not. And it is not because they have kids, it
is because they are not trained or promoted or mentored. So
again, different treatment is another big, big explanation.
And finally, I just wanted to add to the earlier discussion
that, like Dr. Holder said, there are controls for hours
worked, for productivity, even preferences, and you still find
a gender wage gap. It is really different treatment with subtle
biases, and the government should have policies to stop this
kind of discrimination--that cannot continue.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you for holding this hearing,
Chairman Beyer. I really appreciate it.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Senator, very much. Now let me
recognize my friend from Arizona, Congressman Schweikert.
[Pause.]
Representative Schweikert. Alright, I assume we can hear me
now. Sorry about that. And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am actually fascinated with this subject. And, Don, you
and I should have a side conversation, because I think we are
actually in both the witnesses that have been chosen, and some
of the narrow cast, we have missed some of the point, some of
the generational changes that are happening. But also, I fear
we should be talking about the working poor even more, and some
of the dynamics there, because of the bleeding effect.
And so I want to walk through just a couple quick
questions. Doctor--and forgive me if I mispronounce the name,
Boccia--help me there?
[Pause.]
Chairman Beyer. I think it is Boccia.
We lost your audio again.
Representative Schweikert. Okay, am I back at all?
Mrs. Boccia. Yes.
Representative Schweikert. Can you hear me now?
Mrs. Boccia. Yes.
Representative Schweikert. Alright, sorry about that. I am
having to do this on an iPhone because my iPad crashed on me,
believe it or not, so we are doing a little juggling here.
I sat down with an ASU grad student. She was a quant, which
is rather neat, and we were actually talking about adjustments,
And this would be interesting also for Dr. Holder, and she was
actually fixated on the number of adjustments that you would
make, and looking for adjustments that were not traditionally
in the literature of the subject.
And one I still remember is driving distances. Males being
willing to drive further distances for the similar position.
And then she actually tried to build a level of confidence. For
those of us in the political world, we would consider your
polling variant. There is no question of her final numbers.
There was an income differential between males and females.
I was surprised how small it was. So if I came to you and
asked you to build these tables, how many different adjustments
would you look to, you know, by that term centeris paribus, the
differentials between males and females, and trying to create
that ultimate adjustment.
You know, she was up to I think approaching 60 different
adjustments, what should the literature actually have?
Mrs. Boccia. I think this is a very interesting question,
and I do not have a numeric answer for you. But what I do know
is that there are unexplained factors that we have not yet been
able to measure. And I applaud the student that you just talked
with about this, trying to explain more of those. We also found
a very similar result in looking at Uber drivers, male and
female Uber drivers. And some of the explanatory factors there
were how late those drivers were willing to drive. Men were
more likely to drive at night when there was surge pricing.
They were more likely to drive longer distances, and they had a
longer experience, more tenure as Uber drivers, all of which
raised their pay.
So there are unexplained factors. And even during the Obama
Administration, the Labor Department did a very extensive study
and identified that between 3 and 5 percent was unexplained
after accounting for simple factors. And then you can get more
complicated. But we have not yet found a comprehensive step of
measures that we should be considering.
Representative Schweikert. And we have the tyranny of the
clock. Dr. Holder, if you ever--I have actually had--and
forgive me for not being disciplined enough--I have been
reading some of your, because I know you have worked very hard
in trying to model all this, I may send--with your
permissions--I may send you a couple of notes with some geeky
stuff asking how you would adjust this. I was a failed person
who thought he could do statistics.
Ms. Poo. I actually have one quick one with my last couple
of minutes here. Thank you for representing the workers you do.
But my understanding, we have been looking at the numbers of
what happens particularly to the working poor, also in the
professions you are looking at, and what we were seeing was
population dynamics.
If you have lots of workers with very moderate to low skill
sets vying for jobs in certain urban areas, we saw a wage
depression, a deflation. If we look at 2018-19 when there was a
tremendous demand in our economy for those with what we will
call moderate skill sets--and I am trying to find the nice way
to say those things--we saw dramatic increases. I mean, think
of African-American women in 2019, and 2018 the chart just
blows off the chart. I have an intense concern with what is
happening with immigration right now, particularly being from
Arizona.
Do you see a suppression of workers' wages in the skill set
you represent when you add potentially a million folks to the
U.S. economy with similar skill sets?
Ms. Poo. Well what I can say is that there is a huge
demand, for example, for personal care for the growing aging
population. We have 10,000 Baby Boomers turning 65 per day, and
people living longer than ever before. Ninety percent of
Americans, according to----
Representative Schweikert. But that is actually not--we
understand the population side, 10,300 a day turning 65. But it
is still a dynamic of scarcity, you know, that moves the value
of that labor. When you are in those categories, you are
selling your labor. And when you add dramatic population
increases with similar skill sets, you devalue their labor.
We have some great charts and statistics. I have been
looking at this over the last decade. My latest math is it is
going to take seven years for the working poor just to get the
income back up for just what has happened so far in the last
fiscal year at our borders.
Ms. Poo. I think what I was trying to say----
Representative Schweikert. I say we do not hear more of
that.
Ms. Poo. Well what I was trying to say is that we have such
a huge demand for elder care in the home and communities that
it does not actually according to your logic, make sense that
the average annual income is $18,000 per year for this
workforce.
Representative Schweikert. Oh, no. No, I am with you. I
believe this is a population that is underpaid. I am just
also--I have a fixation on working poor, what we do to make
them less poor. And almost all the proposals do not actually
help that population. They sound great on a brochure, but there
is no math that says they help the working poor.
Chairman Beyer. I am going----
Representative Schweikert. And with that, Mr. Beyer, thank
you. I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. This has become a bigger discussion. But
now let me recognize the Senator from Minnesota, Senator
Klobuchar.
Senator Klobuchar. Well thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I know she was introduced at the beginning, but I wanted to
particularly congratulate Tamara Fucile. She used to work for
me many, many years ago, and I know she will do a fantastic job
for you as staff director.
I wanted to start with Dr. Holder. There you are. And I
think one of the things this pandemic has shed such a big
magnifying glass on is just the difficulty for so many parents
of balancing everything. And I always have this image of moms
balancing their toddlers on their knees, and their laptops, and
their desk is dad teaching their second graders how to use the
mute button, which they do better than any of our Senators,
honestly.
And so my question is, I did this Marshall Plan for moms,
which of course part of this is paid leave. And we really have
not done enough in this area in Congress, and we have this
possibility coming up in the next few months. Can you talk
about how a paid leave policy could have helped during the
pandemic, but also how it would help in the future to help
address the gender wage gap?
Dr. Holder. Well thank you, Senator Klobuchar. It is a
pleasure to answer a question from you about the gender wage
gap.
I did spend a lot of time last year writing and talking
about how working mothers in particular were affected by the
pandemic. And one of the issues was the inability of some women
who were required to work on-site, their inability to actually
do that because their children were learning remotely. They
were doing school from home.
And so inevitably, some women who were primarily single
parents were unable to fulfill the expectations of their jobs
because they had to be home to take care of their children.
So a paid leave policy. And might I just add, more
affordable childcare availability will be such a benefit to
working women. When we think about the fact that a third of
women who work in this country are mothers, and so we need to
do everything we can to support these workers.
And I would not necessarily limit that to working women. I
would say if a dad was a single parent and had caregiving
responsibilities, these types of policies would benefit him as
well. So I feel in this country we have not paid enough
attention to the needs of working parents. And I think that the
pandemic really exposed what their vulnerabilities are, what
their needs are, and what is required so they can be full
participants in the American work life. And, absolutely, paid
leave would go very, very far in helping working parents, as
well as affordable childcare.
Senator Klobuchar. Very good. Thank you for that great
answer. Ms. Poo, this kind of plays off what Dr. Holder was
talking about here on the childcare issue. I mean we know,
again another big magnifying glass during the pandemic, about
the issue of childcare. And actually Senator Sullivan and I
have a bipartisan bill on helping to train more workers and
trying to address the shortage of affordable childcare.
And so part of this is training, but a lot of it is wages
to try to attract people to this occupation. So it is the
double whammy. There is not enough childcare, and then we do
not have enough people working in it, and then if they are not
paid enough we are not going to get them to work in it.
And so could you talk about--there are literal childcare
deserts in some of the rural areas of my state where we would
actually be able to add jobs as employers out there. Could you
talk, Ms. Poo, about some policy solutions we should consider
when it comes to increased pay for domestic workers, how we do
that while still making childcare affordable? And the same kind
of chicken-and-egg thing in the wages, making it affordable,
and then also making sure we have the supply?
Ms. Poo. Absolutely. Thank you so much, Senator Klobuchar,
for your leadership on so many of these issues that are about
equity and opportunity for women.
There is a whole series of investments that we need to make
in making childcare, quality childcare much more affordable and
accessible to American families. And the American Families Plan
that the President has put forward, and some parts of the
American Jobs Plan, begin to make those investments. And I know
there are a number of childcare bills in Congress that are
about making childcare much more affordable and accessible. And
I think that childcare funding at the Federal level should also
be tied to rate cutting, and assurance that we are also raising
the wages for childcare workers.
What I see is that we end up losing some of our best care
workers and care providers and early childhood educators to
other low-wage service jobs because they simply cannot make
ends meet doing this work, despite the fact that they see it as
their calling.
So raising the wages, improving access to benefits would be
huge for this workforce.
Senator Klobuchar. Right. Exactly. And I would think
figuring out how to fund some of it so that you can still have
it be affordable.
Ms. Poo. Exactly.
Senator Klobuchar. Alright, thank you very much. And thank
you, Mr. Chairman. I just went a little bit over my time.
Chairman Beyer. That is okay, Senator----
Senator Klobuchar. We need to allow others to go. Alright,
thank you.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you very much. I now recognize the
Senator from Texas, Senator Cruz, if you are with us. Thanks,
Senator, the floor is yours.
Senator Cruz. I am here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
to each of the witnesses here today. I want to address my
initial question to Mrs. Boccia.
Yesterday, the Senate voted on the Paycheck Fairness Act.
And existing Federal law prohibits sex-based wage
discrimination, quite rightly, but proponents of this bill say
that it is necessary to close what they call the gender wage
gap.
You had previously written about the Paycheck Fairness Act,
and the gender wage gap. Can you please explain in your
judgment what are the real causes of the wage disparity, and
whether that disparity is caused primarily by discrimination?
Mrs. Boccia. Thank you, Senator Cruz. I have been writing
about the Paycheck Fairness Act and the gender wage gap for
over a decade. And I am very concerned by the provisions in the
law that they would not in fact help women, but they would have
the exact opposite effect.
However, there are several provisions that would be
welcomed by trial lawyers, including unlimited liability and
the potential for unlimited punitive damages that could be
imposed on employers even if we do not have evidence the
differentials between what women and men get paid is due to
discrimination, but due to a variety of explanatory factors.
And that is where other provisions of the Paycheck Fairness
Act, including some that seem innocuous like the Department of
Labor collecting data based on what people get paid, based on
their race and gender, and other protected factors. It may seem
like that kind of transparency would not be an issue, but what
we have found is that it seems to indicate that there is a
problem where there is not necessarily one unless we have more
data that explains where those differences come from.
And what we find is that, when we account for measurable
explanatory factors, the gender wage gap all but disappears.
And even the small, unexplained gap is not necessarily due to
discrimination but due to a variety of factors that we are not
measuring.
That is not to say that there is not a single individual in
our economy that at times suffers discrimination due to bias or
other factors, and there we already have legal protections in
place. We do not need the Paycheck Fairness Act. I think it
would do more harm than good. But more importantly, the math,
because lawsuits I do not think are a good option. It is a very
lengthy option, a very time-consuming option, a very tough
option. And, that an affordable option for many workers that
feel the best opportunities we can provide is to have a strong
economy that allows for entrepreneurship, so that individuals,
especially women, benefit greatly from being able to run their
own businesses, set their own hours, so they can make the work-
life balance that works best for them.
But also for men, entrepreneurship is key to create jobs in
our economy. And that is where we should focus instead of
increasing liability on employers, which would most likely
result in lower pay for both men and women as employers have to
recoup the cost of the higher insurance that the Paycheck
Fairness Act would impose on them.
Senator Cruz. So, Mrs. Boccia, one thing you said that was
particularly troubling is you said in your expert judgment this
legislation, if it were passed into law, would harm women and
decrease the employment options for women in the workplace.
Can you explain that, please?
Mrs. Boccia. Yes. I think one of the very first things it
would do is it would encourage employers to adopt more rigid
pay structures. So the private sector would look more closely
to unionized work environments, a comparative worth regime is
another way of looking at it. Because so many of the
differences that we cannot easily explain in the wages between
men and women that arise from things such as different
negotiation tactics, women choosing to work fewer hours,
different hours, requesting more flexibility, and for employers
to make that available is so important. Those things would go
away first because it is hard for employers to potentially
explain that those are not business necessities, and they could
be subject to undue lawsuits that would be very costly.
I also think it could potentially hurt women's potential to
be hired in the first place because it would make us a greater
statistical liability for the employer due to those factors.
So I think it would hurt women's ability to participate in
the workforce, and would also hurt their ability to negotiate
the kinds of working conditions, including reduced hours, more
flexibility, working from home occasionally, that is so
important to them.
Senator Cruz. Well, thank you. Now, look, I do agree that
we should be concerned about wage growth. And we actually saw
under the previous Administration with Republican-controlled
majorities in both Houses, a staggering record of record-low
unemployment, the lowest unemployment in half a century, the
lowest unemployment for African Americans ever recorded, the
lowest unemployment for Hispanics ever recorded, the lowest
unemployment for Asian Americans ever recorded.
We also saw women in poverty decreasing by $1.5 million.
And compared to President Obama's second term, we saw wage
growth growing 60 percent faster for women than it did under
President Obama's second term. Mrs. Boccia, what policies
implemented by President Trump and the Republican Congress
contributed to that record low unemployment and that wage
growth that the women saw across the country?
Mrs. Boccia. The most vulnerable populations, including
working women, and also minorities and individuals with
disabilities benefit most from a booming economy. And one of
the major policies implemented by the Trump Administration was
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. I think that has had an impact, but
it was also a huge regulatory reduction in the burden that
employers were facing, that entrepreneurs were facing.
Regulation and red tape is a huge burden for workers, and
employers, and the Trump Administration reduced that
significantly when we saw such a strong economy.
Senator Cruz. Very good. Thank you.
Chairman Beyer. Senator, thank you very much. Let's now
move on to our new Senator from Georgia, Senator and Reverend
Warnock. The floor is yours.
Senator Warnock. Thank you so very much, Chairman Beyer. A
Bureau of Labor statistics study found that working women,
particularly women of color, have been disproportionately
affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, a pandemic that is now being
called sheath session, as more than 11 million women lost their
jobs and accounted for 55 percent of all job losses in April.
Even in my home State of Georgia, we have seen increased
job loss among women, with women filing 15 percent more of
unemployment claims than men between April and November of
2020. Further, state budget cuts and furloughs have
disproportionately impacted women. This disparity will cause
long-term damage and have consequences beyond our economy,
spilling into housing, instability, food insecurity, and the
well-being of our children.
This sheath session, combined with the already large racial
wage gap that Black and Brown women suffer from a double gap
which you have written about, Dr. Holder, has proven disastrous
for future wage growth for Black and Brown women. So
disparities, and the history of disparities adds layer upon
layer upon layer of disparities.
Dr. Holder, in your testimony you mentioned prohibiting
employers from requesting previous salary history as a possible
solution. Why would this be a good policy for women in Georgia,
and all across the country?
Dr. Holder. Thank you, Senator and Reverend Warnock. It is
a pleasure to answer a question from you on this issue. So the
issue of--or why prohibiting employers from requesting previous
salary histories would contribute to narrowing the gender wage
gap, let me explain it this way.
We do know that there is a gender wage gap. We may disagree
on what the contributing factors are. If you have two
applicants for a job, one a man and one a woman with similar
characteristics, similar education attainment, similar work
history, similar age, perhaps they are both parents, perhaps
they are not. The issue is, because of the gender wage gap the
likelihood that the female applicant's salary history will show
a history of much lower earnings than the male applicant is
simply why requesting previous salary histories has a disparate
impact on female applicants for jobs.
Women are simply--we earn on average less than men. We know
that. And so if you have two candidates that are similarly
qualified, a man and a woman, and you look at their salary
histories that they supply as requested, the likelihood is the
female candidate will have a salary history that shows lower
wages than the male applicant.
Senator Warnock. So being underpaid rather than skill and
experience becomes a basis for being underpaid, and underpaid
in the past, underpaid in the future.
Ms. Kim, or Dr. Kim I should say, or Ms. Poo, either of you
want to add to this?
Thank you so much----
Dr. Kim. I agree.
Ms. Poo. I do, as well. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Warnock. Thank you very much. You know, we are all
waiting with baited breath each month when these job numbers
come out. But just to get the job numbers alone does not tell
the whole story. We should ask what these numbers look like for
women. And are these jobs providing equitable and liveable
wages for women. What do these numbers look like for women of
color? Which is why yesterday I was deeply disappointed that
our colleagues on the other side were unwilling to even have a
real debate about this, about the wage gap and the Paycheck
Fairness Act, that we could not have an honest debate. I
thought that was what we are here for. About how to unleash an
economy that is fair, transparent, and equitable.
So we have got to work together to do what we can to get
equal pay in this country. I'm sorry, Dr. Kim.
Dr. Kim. Yes, I agree with you. I only found out about that
vote at the beginning of this meeting. But I do want to say
that transparency and accountability has shown to reduce the
wage gap because employers look at their practices and make
sure they are not discriminatory. So it could be a positive
thing to have transparency and accountability. But thank you.
Senator Warnock. I thank all of you. Thank you for your
work in this space. Thank you, Brother Chairman.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Senator Warnock, very much.
Yesterday's vote was disappointing, but it goes back to the
fundamentally anti-democratic character of the filibuster,
which is not included in our Constitution and never intended by
our Founding Fathers.
So with that, let me turn to my dear friend from Wichita
and fellow Ways and Means Committee member, Mr. Estes.
Representative Estes. Well thank you, Chairman Beyer, and
thank you to all of our witnesses for joining us today.
You know, America is known as the Land of Opportunity. For
centuries, men and women have flocked to the country because of
the freedoms allowed them and opportunity for a better life,
and ability to provide for their families. When it comes to
earning a living, both men and women make decisions about their
employment. They look at the job opportunities and choose
careers and industries based on their priorities and values.
Some Americans prioritize flexibility in the workplace.
Others reject jobs that are dangerous. And some want to ensure
they have the ability to reach their earnings potential.
As we talk today about the gender pay gap, we should not
consider these numbers in a vacuum, nor should we assume we
know all the factors an individual may choose as a priority.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that women worked 10
percent fewer hours than men in 2020. A Harvard study further
concluded that women have greater demand for workplace
flexibility and lower demand for overtime hours to work than
men. Some estimates have the pay gap at 3 to 5 percent after
accounting for these real-world factors, and even just a 2
percent controlled pay gap in a recent report from
PayScale.com.
As we consider the best policies for our country, we need
to include all of the data and not just look at a particular
political narrative.
With that in mind, and considering a much smaller adjusted
pay gap, I would encourage my colleagues to seek solutions that
promote economic growth for men and women. Legislation like the
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) in 2017 focused on expanding
opportunities for all Americans, helping families keep more of
their hard-earned money, grow an economy like we have never
seen before, and encourage entrepreneurialship and innovation.
And in a short time, the TCJA over the year took the year-
to-year earnings growth for all workers that had been hovering
around 2\1/2\ percent to an average of 3 percent, and it was
peaking at 3\1/2\ percent. And on top of that, a record low
unemployment for women. So that is why the Tax Cuts and Jobs
Act resulted in record-low unemployment rates for more than 65
years.
Unfortunately, the pandemic has had consequences for all
Americans. And because of the far-reaching shutdown measures
taken by some governors and school unions refusing to let
students return to in-person classrooms, the progress made by
women through the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act did experience a
setback, and forcing school and childcare closures and we saw
women across the country reduce their work hours, or leave the
workforce entirely, to care for their children. For many, they
had no other options.
So now with the vaccinations up and the cases down, our
country is returning to normal and we need to make sure that we
focus on pro-growth economic opportunities.
Mrs. Boccia, as I mentioned, women experienced wage growth
and opportunities under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. What effect
do you think that rolling back these policies would have on
working women and their pay?
Mrs. Boccia. I think it would have very negative effects,
not just on working women but on all vulnerable populations,
and populations that have special needs. And the discussions we
are having today over new mandates, more government regulation
to address a perceived gender wage gap that has not been fully
explained, and where we do not--we cannot just ascribe it to
discrimination but many other factors are at play, the
unintended consequences are also creating uncertainty today
even if those mandates and regulations do not go into effect
immediately. Us talking about them and the political direction
that the country has taken does impose an uncertainty on
employers that makes them less likely to expand their
businesses, which means fewer job opportunities and fewer jobs
for these populations. And the more jobs that our economy can
provide, and the higher quality jobs that it can provide, the
greater negotiations our working women will have as well as
other vulnerable populations.
So that is why we should focus--and I could not agree more
with you--on exploring the pro-growth economy that provides
that certainty so that businesses will expand and create those
job opportunities for all Americans.
Representative Estes. I think the best way, obviously, to
build wealth for working women is to provide greater
opportunities, more economic choices, and to get Washington out
of the way so we can return back to the booming economy we had
before the pandemic.
I know I am really short on time. I did not know--in your
opening comments Mrs. Boccia, you made mention about you
immigrated here because of the American dream. And now that we
know the big gaps in other countries, the United States is
pretty similar to Canada, and Finland, and the UK. Are there
policies in particular--you know, it seems like there is not a
big difference, but in the United States we still have better
economic growth and better opportunity.
Mrs. Boccia. I absolutely agree with that. And I love this
country because it provides opportunities for everyone. And I
come from Germany where we have very generous paid leave
policies, and they have backfired on women in Germany. They are
spending more time out of the labor force. They have more
prolonged career interruptions, and women are less likely to be
in managerial positions. And I am very happy and privileged to
be in a managerial position as a woman, and for the
opportunities that this country has provided to me.
Representative Estes. Well, great. Thank you. And, Mr.
Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Congressman. And now let me
recognize the Senator from Arizona, Senator Kelly, for your
questions.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
having this committee hearing today.
Dr. Kim, in Arizona on average women make 84 cents for
every dollar that a man makes. And if you break that down and
compare median earnings of women and men, Black women make 63
percent of what the average White man makes. And Latinas? Just
51 percent. And that is unacceptable.
Last night we voted to consider the Paycheck Fairness Act,
which would help address this by ensuring employers cannot
compensate workers differently based on sex. Also, preventing
companies from retaliating against workers who talk about how
much money they make. And, making it illegal for employers to
ask about salary history when hiring.
So, Dr. Kim, could you speak to the impact of this
legislation in Arizona and across the United States?
Dr. Kim. I think there are a lot of very good things in
that legislation, including outlawing pay secrecy, as you said,
so you cannot be fired if you ask what other people make.
As I said earlier, accountability and transparency reduce
the gender wage gap, not only in setting pay but in performance
appraisals which gives merit pay to people, all the way down
the line. I think collecting data to see if there is a problem
is absolutely important, because--and other countries are doing
this, as well--and so I think this legislation would have been
a step forward for women, and all employees across the country,
in reducing the gender wage gap and racial wage gaps as well.
And I was very much in favor of it, and I am sorry it did
not pass. And unlike what people have been saying, you know,
part of the gender wage gap obviously is because some women may
work fewer hours, and may take time off to take care of their
families, but when you control for all of these things you will
find that women attending the same college, with the same GPA
and college major, earn less than men. And why is that?
I mean, there are these biases. I mean, if you look at a
piece--if you have a piece of artwork, and you put a woman's
name on that, and then you change it so that there is a man's
name on it, it is ranked lower in quality when a woman's name
is there.
If you have a dossier with a resume and research, and you
put a woman's name on it, they are less likely to be hired.
They are less likely to get tenure for the exact same job
history and work than men are than if you put a man's name on
that work. We cannot get any clearer than this. We are treated
differently. I do not think people mean to do that: it is just
implicit bias. And our work is undervalued. And both men and
women discriminate. Both men and women have these biases. So go
online and take an implicit bias test, and an implicit race
test. And I think in order to remedy this, we need policies to
ensure that employers are not underpaying women, and that they
are hiring, training, and promoting in their representative
numbers.
Senator Kelly. Dr. Kim, what do you think, if this
legislation or something like it was signed into law, we are
talking about 84 cents on the dollar, women compared to men, 63
cents for Black women, 51 for Latinas. What do you think those
numbers would have been if this legislation, or legislation
like it, would be signed into law?
Dr. Kim. Well, my own research finds that if you outlaw pay
secrecy, the gender wage gap goes down. And then if you enforce
nondiscrimination laws, if the agencies have more ability to
investigate discrimination or potential discrimination, I think
you get pretty close to parity. I mean, I think this would be a
really good thing to pass.
Senator Kelly. So you have seen the possibility of--I mean,
if we went from 84 cents to let's say close to, you know,
parity, that is upwards of about a 25 or so percent, actually a
little less than that, but it is a significant pay raise for
women.
Dr. Kim. Well, let me just back off. The 80 percent is
unadjusted for work hours, their occupation, everything else.
If this were passed and the minimum wage were raised, I think
we could get close to parity when you adjust for those factors.
Also, what would the wage gap be by then? I do not know, maybe
95 percent. If you do not adjust for that--well, I think we
could get close if we just--if we can, again, enforce
nondiscrimination, collect data, and make Federal contractors
accountable.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you. Thank you, Dr. Kim, and Mr.
Chairman. I apologize for going over on my time a little bit.
Thank you.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Senator, very much. And now our
grand finale is the immediate past chair of the Congressional
Progressive Caucus, your friend from Wisconsin, Congressman
Pocan.
Representative Pocan. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
and thanks for your patience. All three of my hearings today,
including one that started this morning, I was up within 10
minutes of each other. So this has been an interesting--maybe
it is lucky, that I should go to a casino this afternoon--but I
am glad to be here. Thank you. I did get the chance to hear
almost all the opening testimony in the middle of these
hearings.
Let me ask some questions specifically around minimum wage
and the gender gap, because we have the Raise the Wage Act that
passed through the House last session and again this session.
How does the Federal Minimum Wage impact the gender wage gap
specifically? And specifically also for women of color. If you
could, address those questions around the minimum wage.
Ms. Poo. Well certainly for domestic workers and care
workers who earn less than, or on average between $10 and $12
per hour, raising the minimum wage to $15 would be
transformative. And it is worth noting that two-thirds of all
minimum-wage workers are women, in fact. And women are
disproportionately concentrated in jobs where wages are low and
there are no benefits, no job security. And so raising the
minimum wage and providing that baseline of economic security
would be transformative certainly for domestic workers and care
workers, but I think across the low-wage economy for women.
Representative Pocan. Anyone else want to address that?
[No response.]
How would specifically the CHIPS wage--I mean, I have been
an employer for 32 years. I have never understood how you can,
for a couple of dollars an hour, hire someone and act almost as
if they are independent contractors because they are going to
make money on tips, And often that does not compensate for the
wage they should be making for their time, and yet they are
still basically under the direction of those jobs of the
employers even at that incredibly low wage.
Do you have any statistics on gender gap specifically
around that sub-minimum, that tipped minimum wage? Ms. Poo,
please.
Ms. Poo. Well, I should say for sure that the CHIPS minimum
wage creates a tremendous amount of vulnerability for women
workers in the workforce, in the service economy. And there is
a lot of data that Rock United, and the One Fair Wage Campaign
had generated that talks about the reliance of women on tips to
earn what should be a base wage. It leads to more
vulnerability, to sexual harassment in the workplace, and all
kinds of other problems that further exacerbate gender
inequality in the workplace.
So I think raising the minimum wage and eliminating the tip
minimum wage, and also the sub-minimum wage for people with
disabilities, so that we actually have one solid floor for
every American worker upon which to build real economic
security from I think is essential to our economic recovery.
Representative Pocan. Let me ask also another bill that we
passed for the last two sessions called the PRO Act. That was
specifically allowing people to be able to organize in a much
easier way. Right now there are an awful lot of obstacles to
people actually getting to have an election to form a union.
But there are many advantages to the employers.
If we pass the PRO Act, what kind of an effect would that
have, based on gender equity in pay?
Ms. Kim.
Dr. Kim. I will answer your first question first because I
just unmuted. I actually am looking at the minimum wage, the
effect on the wage gap, and so far I have found that if you
increase it to $14.50 an hour--I did not even do $15 an hour--
it would mean either a 5 or an 8 point decline in the gender
wage gap. So it would have an effect.
In terms of unionization, women want to be in unions, and
they are low paid, and making it easier for people to be in
unions would definitely increase the pay for workers in
increases like 10 to 30 percent, depending on where you are. It
has a huge effect. So that would be helpful, as well.
Representative Pocan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have 4
seconds that I am going to yield back.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Pocan, very much. Well that
concludes us today. I want to thank each of our witnesses for
this lively discussion. We have made important strides in
advancing the conversation about the gender wage gap, how we
value women's work, the solution to improve it.
As we discussed today, there is no single solution to close
the gender wage gap, although you do offer some very good
solutions. And I believe at least that the persistence of the
gap harms women's economic security and our economy's strength
and growth. And I believe Congress must continue to work to
narrow it and to close it.
I will say, I know--I believe my friend Mr. Estes has been
an employer, as Mr. Pocan was. When I left the family business
to run for Congress, we had 330 people over 45 years, and
always committed to equal pay. I confess I never saw a loss of
flexibility, or how it restricted choices for any of those
people.
Now with my personal staff on the Hill and the Joint
Economic Committee, more than half of those wonderful people
are women. Again, they are among the highest paid people we
have, I never again see how it restricted their choices or
flexibility.
And on comparable worth, you know there may be a downside
to comparable worth. The upside is the perception of fairness.
And what we are dealing with right now is an enormous gap in
the perception of fairness between them.
So I want to thank both of our economists, Dr. Holder, Dr.
Kim, to help us understand the underlying causes of the gender
wage gap and how it has changed over time, and how deeply we
work to root it out and make sure that we really are comparing
apples to apples. And of course developing policies that can
help us ensure that women are compensated fairly for their
work.
And we did not have a chance to go into all of Senator
Cruz's comments about the best wages, which was I believe
accurate, but we look to see consistent wage growth every year
from 2010 through today, month after month after month, as we
continue to build this economy by the Democratic and Republican
Presidents.
So thank you to our advocate organizer, Ms. Poo, for
offering deep insight into one sector of work dominated by
female workers, especially women of color. And your insight
into how care work serves as an understanding for lowest-paid
and most valuable workers of our economy. They are one of the
economy's fastest growing sectors, which is really valuable
with so many policy discussions. So we need to get that right.
So thank you, Mrs. Boccia, a double George Mason graduate
in my District, for offering your perspective, and other
factors to consider on this topic. And thank you for talking
about the potential for unintended consequences that we always
have to be mindful of.
[WebEx interference.]
Dr. Kim. I am having trouble hearing.
Unidentified Voice. I am, as well.
[WebEx interference.]
Ms. Volk. I'm sorry. It seems we have lost the Congressman,
and he has finished his concluding remarks. Thank you all for
joining. Again, that is what happens with technology, but thank
you all for joining and that will conclude the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., Wednesday, June 9, 2021, the
hearing was adjourned.]
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Prepared Statement of Hon. Donald Beyer Jr., Chairman, Joint Economic
Committee
This hearing will come to order. I would like to welcome everyone
to today's hearing focused on the gender wage gap.
I want to thank each of our distinguished witnesses for sharing
their expertise today. We have an all-star panel, and I'm excited to
hear what they say.
the context
Today, on the eve of the 58th anniversary of the passage of the
Equal Pay Act, American women on average still earn just 82 percent of
what men earn. That translates to $10,000 less in median earnings each
year. And while we have made improvements in narrowing that gap over
the last 50 years, progress toward closing it has slowed and even
stalled in recent decades as policy has failed to support women as
workers and ensure that equal work is rewarded with equal pay.
And not only that, but the top line number does not give us a full
picture. Black women earn only 63 percent, Native American women 60
percent, and Latina women only 55 percent of what White men earn.
The failure to close the gender wage gap is not just an issue for
the women experiencing this pay gap, it's also an issue for their
families and for our whole economy.
Women's earnings are a crucial component of families' economic
security. Two-thirds of mothers are either the primary breadwinner or
co-breadwinner in their families. And the Institute for Women's Policy
Research estimates that if working women received equal pay with
comparable men--that is, men of the same age, with the same education,
who work the same hours, and live in similar regions--then poverty for
working women would be reduced by more than 40 percent.
This is an issue for our whole economy because women's lost wages
translate into lost GDP, 2.8 percent of GDP to be specific, or $541
billion.
Therefore, if long-term economic growth is our goal, then closing
the gender wage gap is not just a moral imperative, it is an economic
one.
the cause
If we are to properly address this persistent wage gap, we must
understand it. So, let's look at the root causes . . .
First, economists estimate that half of the gender wage gap is
still caused by differences in the types of industries and occupations
that women and men work in. For example, men are overrepresented in
jobs in construction and software development, and women are
overrepresented in jobs such as administrative assistants and cashiers.
But while some point to this as evidence that the gender wage gap
is due to women making different choices about their careers, the
reality is that even within the same industry and same occupation,
women are still paid less than men. As an example, research finds that
up to 68 percent of the gender pay gap could be closed if men and women
were paid equally within occupations--that is, men and women received
equal pay for equal work.
And explanations of the gap that point to individual
characteristics or choices only account for part of the problem. When
you add up all the measurable explanations for the gender wage gap,
including differences in occupation and industry, or accounting for
education and length of work experience, 38 percent of the gender wage
gap remains ``unexplained,'' which many economists attribute to
discrimination.
Finally, when seeking to understand the gender wage gap, we cannot
ignore the role played by our economy's de-valuation of work that has
traditionally been done by women, particularly women of color. Care
work is among some of the lowest paid work in our economy. The Bureau
of Labor Statistics estimates that the median pay for home health and
personal care aides is $27,080 a year, which is barely above the
poverty level for a family of four. Perhaps not coincidentally, women
of color make up a disproportionate share of care workers. For example,
Black women are 13 percent of the U.S. workforce, but 28 percent of
home care workers.
proposals to make progress
Addressing the gender wage gap will require a multi-faceted
approach. No single policy is going to close it, but there are many
policies that, together, will help narrow it.
Raising wages in low-paying occupations that tend to be dominated
by women would provide the greatest benefit to the women in these jobs
while also benefiting all workers. An important way we can do this is
by strengthening the minimum wage and improving workers' bargaining
power, such as through legislation like the Raise the Wage and PRO
Acts.
Gender and racial discrimination are the second largest driver of
the gender pay gap. Therefore, policies that address the ongoing role
of discrimination in the labor market will be absolutely necessary to
make a meaningful difference in the pay gap. The Paycheck Fairness Act
is one example of a policy that would make it easier for women to
challenge pay discrimination.
Finally, we also need policies that help keep women connected to
the labor market and moving up the career ladder, such as paid leave
and affordable childcare. We cannot make progress toward narrowing the
gender pay gap if we do not make it sustainable for women to remain in
the workforce through policies like the Building an Economy for
Families Act, the FAMILY Act, or the Child Care for Working Families
Act, which are aimed at ensuring that all workers are able to take the
time they need to care for their families and make sure their children
are receiving quality care while they are at work.
And this is why I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses.
Now I would like to turn it over to Senator Lee for his opening
statement.
__________
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Lee, Ranking Member, Joint Economic
Committee
Good afternoon and thank you to Chairman Beyer for convening
today's hearing on this topic.
Women make unique and invaluable contributions to our families,
communities, and workplaces. And, thankfully, the opportunities for
women in the workplace have grown tremendously over time.
The female labor force participation rate has doubled over the last
50 years. And American women have not simply joined the workforce but
they have excelled and become leaders in it. In fact, the United States
has a higher share of female managers than almost every other OECD
nation.
I myself am fortunate to benefit from the skills and expertise of
my female chief of staff, female legislative director, female chief
counsel, and female staff director here on the Joint Economic
Committee. So, I am personally grateful for the fruits of women's
economic progress and freedom. Additionally, I am the father of an
unbelievably gifted and intellectually curious daughter. For this and
many other reasons, fairly valuing women's important contributions is a
particularly important issue to me.
The gender pay gap is the topic that brings us here today, and the
pay gap is frequently a focal point in conversations about women's
labor market experiences. Although the pay gap can tell us some things
about women's experiences at work, we know that--like many metrics--the
pay gap has substantial limitations. If--as a society--we truly care
about supporting and empowering women, then it is crucial that we
understand what those limitations are, and what this measure can and
cannot tell us.
For example, although the pay gap indicates that the average man
and average woman earn different amounts, the headline number does not
tell us why this is the case. We know that industry, occupation, years
of experience, educational attainment, geographic location, and family
decisions all matter greatly for pay. Some of these characteristics
vary for the average man and average woman and contribute in
significant ways to the pay gap.
One of the largest drivers of the pay gap seems to be that men and
women work in different industries and in different occupations.
Caretaking responsibilities also play an outsized role--before the
birth of their first child, women make the same on average as men, but
afterward, working mothers' earnings diverge from working fathers'
earnings, reflecting fewer hours worked and other changes.
Although some of women's decisions regarding their education,
occupation, industry, and engagement with the labor force may be
influenced by cultural pressures and expectations, this does not
necessarily mean that employers are discriminating on the basis of
gender.
Still, women cannot make as many decisions as they should be able
to when it comes to their work life. And government policy needs to get
out of the way and allow employers to provide the flexibility that
working mothers say they want.
A path forward lies in policymakers at the Federal, state, and
local level removing the government barriers that currently limit
choice and opportunity for women. Reforming regulations that get in the
way of flexible work can greatly increase opportunity--this type of
reform would help all workers, but especially working women, who
surveys indicate prioritize flexibility in order to care for their
families.
Passing the Working Families Flexibility Act would be a step in the
right direction to help women and other workers. For decades, Federal
labor laws have unfairly restricted working parents in the private
sector from choosing either traditional overtime pay or paid time off
as compensation for overtime hours worked, while granting a special
exemption for government employees. The Working Families Flexibility
Act would correct this disparity to give that same opportunity to all
working moms and dads.
In addition to passing the Working Families Flexibility Act,
policymakers should reform home-based business zoning, which stifles
entrepreneurship. While home-based businesses have multiplied in recent
decades--currently making up half of all businesses--many remain
``underground'' since they are illegal under current law. An incredible
17% of Black women and 10% of White women are entrepreneurs, and so
regulatory reform to ease these burdensome rules would be especially
helpful in clearing the path for their success.
Occupational licensing laws also constitute a major barrier to
work, and reform is necessary to eliminate onerous requirements for
jobs that can be done with little risk to workers and those that they
serve.
Another area in need of reform is childcare--there are many
unnecessary regulations that drive up the cost of care. Some laws
impose unnecessary education requirements on daycare workers or
increase staff-to-child ratios, making it far more difficult for
families to afford care and preventing some women from working. Passing
the Child Care Worker Opportunity Act would help to address this issue
for working moms and childcare workers in the Washington, D.C., area.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention the Paycheck
Fairness Act, which yesterday the Senate voted not to take up. If we
care about women's long-term success, it seems important that we
consider the unintentional impacts that this bill would likely have,
and how it may result in more rigid compensation structures that
translate into less flexibility in the workplace and fewer of the work
arrangements that women and many men value.
In addition to reforming regulatory barriers, recent history tells
us that growth in opportunities for female workers translates to higher
wages, new jobs, and a narrowing of the pay gap. Just in the years
before the pandemic, pro-growth policies--like lower taxes and
regulatory reforms--helped sustain a strong labor market for American
workers. Women, and especially women of color, benefited the most. They
experienced some of the fastest job growth and largest wage gains on
record.
Rebuilding after the pandemic will be challenging but we know that
markets, supported by commonsense policies, are the best way to support
female workers and allow them to build on their decades of progress in
the workplace.
As we seek to empower women in the workplace, it is essential that
we support these pro-growth policies and protect workplace flexibility.
I am hopeful that today's hearing will help us better understand how to
meet women's and working mother's needs, and how to develop policies
that empower them to continue building on their many achievements.
I look forward to hearing the insights of our witnesses on this
important topic.
Thank you.
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]