While no great disparities were found in the factor points earned by

- race or sex, some additional analyses were needed before a firm conclusion could be drawn. The FES system calls for grades to be determined by a conversion of the points into grade equivalents. Therefore while the total number of points separating the nonwhites and whites (73) and females and males (63) are not great enough to reach statistical significance, they may be practically significant if they cause a disproportionate number of nonwhites or females to miss the cutpoints for inclusion in the next.. higher grade level.

Tables 4 and 5 show the distribution of completed grade levels by race and sex respectively. While the data shows a tendency for white males to have. somewhat higher computed grade levels than their minority and female counterparts, these differences again did not reach statistically signi

ficant levels..

Because the sample included a large number of supervisory personnel and the classification standard covers only non-supervisory work, the examination of computed grade levels versus actual grade levels has little real meaning. However, to the extent that supervisory duties are equitably distributed, it would be expected that there would be no differences among

the subgroups on grades which are supportable solely on the basis of nonsupervisory duties. Among the racial subgroup sample, 23 of the nonwhites (26.7%) and 29 of their white male matches (33.7%) wound up with computed grade levels which were at or above their actual grade levels. In the sex subgroup sample, 22 of the females (25.6%) and 23 of their white male matches' (26.7%) grades were supportable without receiving credit for

supervision. Using the chi square test for differences in proportions it was found that in neither case was the numerical difference statistically significant.

Examination of the two sets of whole job rankings will also yield information on the equality of jobs including supervisory duties. The rankings were computed by multiplying the stack number by 20 and adding the rank within the stack. Consequently, jobs with a lower rank are stronger jobs.

Table 6 shows the mean whole job rankings assigned by classifiers and GAO managers for both samples. A similar pattern of results to the foregoing analyses can be seen. Females and minority persons have somewhat weaker jobs although, as before, the differences are not statistically

:

significant.

CONCLUSIOS

Since no significant patterns of differences were noted between white females and their male counterparts or nonwhites and white males, one may conclude that the Single Agency Series questionnaires do not support the hypothesis that nonwhites and women are not receiving similar quality' work experiences as white males. However, there is a consistent_pattern

of somewhat lower job responsibilities among nonwhites and females. While this situation has not yet reached significant levels, it warrants further

monitoring.

The methodology used here has some potential as an unobtrusive way of detecting subtle differences in assigned job responsibilities. Because the data was collected for a different purpose, it was not subject to being shaded in a particular direction. Also, since the questionnaires were

35-533 - 79 46 (Pt. 2)

reviewed and endorsed by the individual's supervisor the accuracy and validity of the data and results in enhanced. Despite these advantages, there are some drawbacks. Because the only source of information was the questionnaires, the results are not as conclusive as they might otherwise be. The classifiers indicated that some responses were not specific or detailed enough to allow them to make confident judgements.

Future studies of this issue might be incorporated into an ongoing -position classification survey program. This would retain the virtue of not concentrating attention on EEO aspects while gathering more conclusive

information.