久久久日韩精品一区二区三区 ,噜噜高清欧美内射短视频

本題由lindy提供

Comparable worth, as a standard applied to eliminate inequities in pay, insists that the values of certain tasks performed in

dissimilar jobs can be compared. In the last decade, this approach has become a critical social policy issue, as large numbers of private-sector firms and industries as well as federal, state, and local governmental entities have adopted comparable worth policies or begun to consider doing so.

This widespread institutional awareness of comparable worth indicates increased public awareness that pay inequities--that is, situations in which pay is not "fair" because it does not reflect the true value of a job--exist in the labor market. However, the question still remains: have the gains already made in pay equity under comparable worth principles been of a precedent-setting nature or are they mostly transitory, a function of concessions made by employers to mislead female employees into believing that they have made long-term pay equity gains?

Comparable worth pay adjustments are indeed precedent-setting. Because of the principles driving them, other mandates that can be applied to reduce or eliminate unjustified pay gaps between male and female workers have not remedied perceived pay inequities satisfactorily for the litigants in cases in which men and women hold different jobs. But whenever comparable worth principles are applied to pay schedules, perceived unjustified pay differences are eliminated. In this sense, then, comparable worth is more comprehensive than other mandates, such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer. Comparable worth, on the other hand, takes as its premise that certain tasks in dissimilar jobs may require a similar amount of training, effort, and skill; may carry similar responsibility; may be carried on in an environment having a similar impact upon the worker; and may have a similar dollar value to the employer.

According to the passage, which of the following is true

of comparable worth as a policy?

(A) Comparable worth policy decisions in pay-inequity cases have often failed to satisfy the complainants.

(B) Comparable worth policies have been applied to both public-sector and private-sector employee pay schedules.

(D) Many employers have considered comparable worth as a policy but very few have actually adopted it.

(E) Early implementations of comparable worth policies resulted in only transitory gains in pay equity.

登錄申友雷哥GMAT，查看答案及解析

視頻解析

暫無視頻解析，點(diǎn)擊獲取更多視頻內(nèi)容

文字解析

答案：

難以定位，

加之“Comparable worth”又是文章中的主題，所以只能看全篇文章了。 (A)可比價值的政策結(jié)論在支付不平等的情況下經(jīng)常滿足不了抱怨者。定位“Comparable worth, as a standard applied to eliminate inequities in pay, insists that the values of certain tasks performed in dissimilar jobs can be compared. ”。本來“可比價值”就是為了消除這個不平等而出現(xiàn)的策略，所以該選項不正確。 (B)Correct。可比價值可以應(yīng)用在公共區(qū)域和私人區(qū)域的雇員的支付計劃中。定位在“In the last decade, this approach has become a critical social policy issue, as large numbers of private-sector firms and industries as well as federal, state, and local governmental entities have adopted comparable worth policies or begun to consider doing so.”這句話中。也就是說，公用的和私人的都可以應(yīng)用“可比價值”策略。 (C)在過去的十年中，“可比價值”作為一個策略一直在被批評。文章突出了可比價值的意義，不是說可比價值不好，這個選項的內(nèi)容沒有被提到過。 (D)許多雇員都認(rèn)為“可比價值”是一個政策，但很少有人采用這個它。還是定位在選項B中的那句話，說明有很多人都在用這個政策。 (E)早期的貫徹“可比價值”這一政策的結(jié)果是在支付平等中只得到了短暫的利益。關(guān)鍵詞出現(xiàn)在第二段。但說的是這個政策究竟是開創(chuàng)了先例還是只是個暫時的，為了應(yīng)付女性的政策。所以貫徹可比價值的結(jié)果不會是只有短暫的利益。